Over the past year I’ve been thinking and talking a lot about community -- exploring a longing for a deeper connection to place, nature, and neighbors.
Over the past couple of weeks I’ve been thinking a lot about our economy. It seems to me that low interest has exacerbated our societal infatuation with instant gratification and our aversion to saving and building wealth. But it is not enough to identify our addiction to credit both corporately and personally, the true challenge with any addiction is breaking it.
Thinking about getting out of debt, I was initially overwhelmed by the thought of paying off our $190,000 mortgage. My wife and I can afford the monthly payments and the mortgage has a fixed rate but even paying over the monthly minimum leaves us in debt for years to come. Then I thought, if I could get $1,000 from 190 people I could pay off this mortgage. That doesn’t seem so impossible. More importantly in lead to thinking about Amish barn building and the power of a community to do what an individual cannot.
Loving our neighbors by freeing them from debt
So here is the idea. What if a group of people pooled their resources to eliminate debt and enable people to own their homes? I think this would build stronger communities by providing a mechanism for us to give and receive from our neighbors, keeping wealth local, and by encouraging people to commit to staying in the community. Here is the plan.
Form a community development association that would collect $1,000/yr dues. If we had 100 people in the association this would raise $100,000 capital. This money would be for the sole purpose of paying off mortgages starting with the CDA member who has the lowest remaining mortgage balance. If that person owed say $80,000 the CDA would give them a grant for that amount on two conditions. 1) They continue to make their mortgage payments for 1 more year but the money goes back to the CDA. 2) If they sell their house within 10 years of receiving a grant they must return 50% of the grant money to the CDA.
One plan for the incoming “mortgage payment” money and any grant refunds would be for the CDA to invest them in a local bank. The interest from this money would form an important secondary source of revenue that could cover administrative cost (so dues go 100% towards paying mortgages) and eventually augment the power of the CDA to give grants.
While all of this is up for grabs, here is how I would answer some anticipated questions.
Q. Why pay off the lowest mortgage balance since those people are paying less interest?
A. I think it is important that the CDA rewards people who a) have worked hard to lower their mortgage balance and b) buy modestly priced houses. Also it is the in the interest of the CDA to pay of multiple mortgages per year b/c that increases income for the following year from substitute mortgage payments. It also increases the number of people we can help.
Q. If the CDA pays off one mortgage per year and there are 100 members how will you ever pay off everyone’s mortgage?
A. We will not. Giving to the CDA is not an investment in the sense that you put money in and then eventually get money back out. Instead it is an investment into the lives of our neighbors helping free them from debt. It is also a tangible investment in a place. By strengthening the financial position of our neighbors and giving them an incentive to stay we can together build the churches, schools, and community organizations that add to a neighborhood’s quality of life. I also hope that we can correct an over emphasis on individualism that ultimately leads to isolation and erodes community. If we can move beyond thinking only of our financial self interest, I think investing in our neighborhood is a good investment.
Q. I can barely make my mortgage payments and can’t afford CDA membership. As a needy member of this community why should I be excluded from a CDA grant?
A. I don’t envision this as a charity in the traditional sense of helping those who can’t help themselves. Obviously such charities are needed and hopefully some of the wealth created for the community by paying off home loans will be directed to those charities. It is also not my intention that people stop giving to churches or other charities because of giving to the CDA. I realize that this program could be seen as the rich helping the rich (especially in global terms) and think the CDA must work hard to promote other forms of charitable investment in the local community and toward global needs. Ultimately I believe a community of property owners can do more than a community of debtors to promote social justice. In an economic meltdown the most vulnerable (the poor) are likely to get hurt the worst.
Q. What form of governance would the CDA have?
A. I don’t have a full answer to this question yet and would love feedback but ultimately what I’m calling a CDA is similar to a credit union and I think we could look to credit unions to provide examples of governance structures.
I posted some additional thoughts on in a facebook note.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Monday, September 1, 2008
Future me, meet Past me
So, we all procrastinate at times. We also work dilligently at times. Often, there is a sense of guilt that goes along with working or resting that is completely linked to the timeliness of when we do so. Instead of feeling guilty about procrastinating, let me propose the following outlook:
At any given instant there are 3 of me. There is past me, present me, and future me. Unfortunately, only present me can choose to effect the world... or maybe not. I like to think of doing favors for the other me's.
Present me is a little tired today, so he is going to let future me do present me a favor by doing some extra work tomorrow. On the other hand past me did a lot of work last week so that present me would be able to take some time to relax this weekend. So, a heartfelt present me thanks past me and future me for being so considerate.
Now, I'm a hard working person, so an awful lot of what I do goes to benefit future me. But present me needs to be careful here. Because any .com entrepreneur from 1999 can tell you, future me doesn't always benefit from present me's sacrifices. So, I think its important to enjoy the current moment at least as much as the future moment coming down the line.
Another important point is that present and future me need to take satisfaction from past me's highlight reel. Present me tends to be constantly looking for an entertaining time. But, maybe it makes sense to just chill and let past me have all the fun while present me has some downtime.
At any given instant there are 3 of me. There is past me, present me, and future me. Unfortunately, only present me can choose to effect the world... or maybe not. I like to think of doing favors for the other me's.
Present me is a little tired today, so he is going to let future me do present me a favor by doing some extra work tomorrow. On the other hand past me did a lot of work last week so that present me would be able to take some time to relax this weekend. So, a heartfelt present me thanks past me and future me for being so considerate.
Now, I'm a hard working person, so an awful lot of what I do goes to benefit future me. But present me needs to be careful here. Because any .com entrepreneur from 1999 can tell you, future me doesn't always benefit from present me's sacrifices. So, I think its important to enjoy the current moment at least as much as the future moment coming down the line.
Another important point is that present and future me need to take satisfaction from past me's highlight reel. Present me tends to be constantly looking for an entertaining time. But, maybe it makes sense to just chill and let past me have all the fun while present me has some downtime.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Tax Write Off
So I don't get it. Tax write off. Ok, Actually, I do get it. So, lets have a little tax 101. Class is in session:
Its like this: A company sells a product. They get revenue. They then spend some money to make more money. The difference between the 2, thats profit, and its what gets taxed. So, everything... Everything.... EVERYTHING is a write off, because its a business expense. Very few things *aren't* business expenses. Basically, you have to work pretty hard at spending company money on personal stuff for it not to be a write off. And you know what, in those cases, its called.... Embezzlement. So, its not really about taxes at all, its about being ethical with money that is only *partly* yours because most business owners answer to either stockholders, or a board, or your customers, or at the least, they you answer to future you(who by the way, we all owe something to... hmmm there's another blog post right there, )
What is tricky is that corporations get taxed twice in a way: The corp gets taxed on its profit. And then the money that gets distributed to employees gets taxed as well. So, if your a smart corporation, you jiggle things a little to minimize the corp's profit and pass it on to employees as salary, everybody's happy. Or, you can be a little bit more elitist. You can have the company make a big profit, the company gets taxed, but the stock price goes up, and the stockholders and senior management sell their stock and then pay only the capital gains tax (which is lower than personal income tax) . Aha! you say, the capital gains tax, now wasn't that lowered by Bush and Cronie Co. Yes! It was the one smart thing he did in office. Because when you sell $30 Million in stock, you don't put it in the bank to earn 2% interest. You put it back in the stock market, so the capital gains tax decrease actually encourages strong investing. Which, is probably more important to the economy than oil prices, unemployment, and interest rates combined.
We all together now? Ok, so here is the lesson: the "tax write off" as most people use the term is an entity that doesn't exist. Its based on the belief that corporations and businessmen get away with breaking the rules because the rules are written for them. This of course, is entirely incorrect. Corporations and businessmen get away with breaking the rules because they have enough money to convince the right people that the rules don't apply to them. Which, in retrospect is not really much of a distinction.
Ok, I was wrong. This post was a waste of time. I think I'll just write it off.
Its like this: A company sells a product. They get revenue. They then spend some money to make more money. The difference between the 2, thats profit, and its what gets taxed. So, everything... Everything.... EVERYTHING is a write off, because its a business expense. Very few things *aren't* business expenses. Basically, you have to work pretty hard at spending company money on personal stuff for it not to be a write off. And you know what, in those cases, its called.... Embezzlement. So, its not really about taxes at all, its about being ethical with money that is only *partly* yours because most business owners answer to either stockholders, or a board, or your customers, or at the least, they you answer to future you(who by the way, we all owe something to... hmmm there's another blog post right there, )
What is tricky is that corporations get taxed twice in a way: The corp gets taxed on its profit. And then the money that gets distributed to employees gets taxed as well. So, if your a smart corporation, you jiggle things a little to minimize the corp's profit and pass it on to employees as salary, everybody's happy. Or, you can be a little bit more elitist. You can have the company make a big profit, the company gets taxed, but the stock price goes up, and the stockholders and senior management sell their stock and then pay only the capital gains tax (which is lower than personal income tax) . Aha! you say, the capital gains tax, now wasn't that lowered by Bush and Cronie Co. Yes! It was the one smart thing he did in office. Because when you sell $30 Million in stock, you don't put it in the bank to earn 2% interest. You put it back in the stock market, so the capital gains tax decrease actually encourages strong investing. Which, is probably more important to the economy than oil prices, unemployment, and interest rates combined.
We all together now? Ok, so here is the lesson: the "tax write off" as most people use the term is an entity that doesn't exist. Its based on the belief that corporations and businessmen get away with breaking the rules because the rules are written for them. This of course, is entirely incorrect. Corporations and businessmen get away with breaking the rules because they have enough money to convince the right people that the rules don't apply to them. Which, in retrospect is not really much of a distinction.
Ok, I was wrong. This post was a waste of time. I think I'll just write it off.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Childlike Faith
Infants are cute. Many people can't resist touching them, holding them, and cooing at them. Their accomplishments are widely celebrated (frequently on Blogger); accomplishments such as rolling over, saying simple words, and waving. Pretty hard for a 35 year old to compete with. No one pays much attention to our common motor and verbal abilities.
That is how it should be and it would indicate some sad tragedy if it were any different. After all we've realized that saying, "daddy" is nothing compared to being one, or loving one, or mourning one. Life as a 35 year old is more complex, difficult, challenging, and beautiful then life at 3 months though some of the challenge and much of the beauty comes from being around those newborns.
I've been thinking about this as I reflect on recent messages (implicit and explicit) that I've heard at church. Messages that I interpret as questioning why all Christians can't be more like new Christians. You know the ones who are all fired up for their faith; who eagerly share it with their scores of non-Christian friends; who can't get enough Christian reading material; who in short seem so full of life. These people are contrasted with seasoned (old?) Christians who hang out with their Christian friends; who rarely speak of faith outside of worship services; who seem to be just limping along.
It seems to be that perhaps asking a veteran Christian to take on the attributes of a new Christian is similar to asking a 35 year old to act like an infant. Or put another way that our Christian life gets more complex, difficult, challenging, and (we trust) more beautiful the longer we are Christians. Making the gushing enthusiasm of the recent convert as rare in the seasoned believer as cuddly, wide-eyed cuteness of infants in older adults.
Why would this be so? Possibly because the transformations that take place at conversion while often the most dramatic changes in the life of the believer may also be the simplest to make. While it may be difficult to change sinful habits, we can at least identify sin in the external habits and take obvious if hard steps to change. God in His grace often enables this to happen (though perhaps not as often or quickly as we'd like to think). But once the obvious areas of the sinful lifestyle are more or less dealt with we discover the more difficult truth that our very nature is sinful. That changing behavior is not sufficient to deal with sin, instead we must regularly (daily? hourly?...) die to ourselves and submit to God. That the Spirit is not simply filling a void in our lives, but actually wants to transform our minds and make us into an entirely new creation.
We admire the infants gleeful shouts of "mama" and "dada" but we know that in time they will learn that some parents abandon their children, others abuse them, and most do their best to love their children despite their own imperfections. A relationship to any mother or father is a complex thing. I would suggest that a relationship with a heavenly Father also proves to be a complex thing making it much more difficult for the experienced Christian to speak glibly about that relationship (though perhaps they may learn to retain a sense of glee).
I think we also discover on our pilgrimage that the message of the Kingdom involves more then converting individuals (though that is involved) but also requires working to transform systems of darkness and injustice. That the Spirit is ultimately at work to transform the world itself into a new creation. This require difficult and serious work but work that we are uniquely gifted and called too. Work that when undertaken brings deep joy. However this work is difficult to do alone and God has generously provided other believers to work along side of us to encourage and prod us to keep up the task. Ultimately I believe this work to create Kingdom communities and to combat injustice in the world are significant witnesses to the world of the hope we have in Christ.
So what do we make of the new believers? Should we scoff at their naivete? I think we are right to celebrate their enthusiasm and admire the progress they make from darkness to light. Their desire to share their new found faith is natural and should also be encouraged. But I don't think we should idealize this time in the life of faith as the goal just as we celebrate the new life in the cute infant but recognize her goal is to progress beyond infancy. In faith, as in parenting, I think we need to be especially mindful of the often painful adolescent period that usually precedes maturity.
Isaiah 40:31 says: But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
Philip Yancey wrote that he first thought the order (fly, run, walk) was backwards but later concluded that the progression (digression?) actually describes the life of faith for many. They begin soaring to great heights but finish just trying to keep walking. (I think this was in What's so Amazing About Grace). I always thought that was curious.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Zen and the art of denying what I find uncomfortable
I've been speaking a little bit over the last few weeks with a friend of mine who is a Zen Buddhist. I really respect how well he thinks things out. I've also been really impressed with some of the concepts that are core to his belief system. Here are my thoughts about these ideas.
Be totally present in the current moment. If I am at work, be at work. Don't be thinking about running, or sailing, or dinner, or whatever. If I'm at home, be at home, don't be consumed by expectation of things that are coming down the line, or anxious about situations in life outside my control.
A technique to help being present in the moment is stillness. This is a little different from the idea behind meditation, but goes hand and hand. It can be hard to not be anxious as we go from one sphere of our lives to another, but pausing during the transitions can be very effective.
Now, this just brushes the surface of our conversations, but I've already got to rant about a couple of things.
First, there is a real problem to me adopting these ideas for myself as I have. Its not justifiable to say, well, if it works for you, than its true for you. A tendency towards relative truth or relative goodness that comes from that approach. Further, if there is some truth in this, than so be it, it can't be denied by wishful thinking or dismissal. I think that we are called to seek truth regardless of the consequences. Sizzler Salad Bar Religion: Picking and choosing things from a religion that suit me, and leaving the things that are uncomfortable. I can't think of a better way to avoid TRUTH.
Second, lets talk about the opposite approach. Taking everything that I've learned from my friend and immediately trying to fit it into my own belief system, squeezing a square peg into a round hole. Can I really grow if I'm immediately dismissing ideas that don't fit easily within my own world view?
It is dishonorable to have a conversation with a person about religion with the sole purpose of teaching them my own dogma. If I desire to share what TRUTH I have gleaned with a person (which I do! I am, after all, an evangelical Christian. ), than it is hypocritcal of me not to listen to them in return and truly consider what they have to say.
Let me describe the problem anecdotally. I was relating some of the ideas above with another friend of mine and he responded by saying: 'yes, but even though he has the apperance of deep thought, its not truly meaningful because it isn't based on scripture' What! Excuse Me! I wanted to punch him. How could I dismiss a person who is really struggling to find the truth by saying that he doesn't have any real and valid deep reasoning because his belief system is different from own.
Be totally present in the current moment. If I am at work, be at work. Don't be thinking about running, or sailing, or dinner, or whatever. If I'm at home, be at home, don't be consumed by expectation of things that are coming down the line, or anxious about situations in life outside my control.
A technique to help being present in the moment is stillness. This is a little different from the idea behind meditation, but goes hand and hand. It can be hard to not be anxious as we go from one sphere of our lives to another, but pausing during the transitions can be very effective.
Now, this just brushes the surface of our conversations, but I've already got to rant about a couple of things.
First, there is a real problem to me adopting these ideas for myself as I have. Its not justifiable to say, well, if it works for you, than its true for you. A tendency towards relative truth or relative goodness that comes from that approach. Further, if there is some truth in this, than so be it, it can't be denied by wishful thinking or dismissal. I think that we are called to seek truth regardless of the consequences. Sizzler Salad Bar Religion: Picking and choosing things from a religion that suit me, and leaving the things that are uncomfortable. I can't think of a better way to avoid TRUTH.
Second, lets talk about the opposite approach. Taking everything that I've learned from my friend and immediately trying to fit it into my own belief system, squeezing a square peg into a round hole. Can I really grow if I'm immediately dismissing ideas that don't fit easily within my own world view?
It is dishonorable to have a conversation with a person about religion with the sole purpose of teaching them my own dogma. If I desire to share what TRUTH I have gleaned with a person (which I do! I am, after all, an evangelical Christian. ), than it is hypocritcal of me not to listen to them in return and truly consider what they have to say.
Let me describe the problem anecdotally. I was relating some of the ideas above with another friend of mine and he responded by saying: 'yes, but even though he has the apperance of deep thought, its not truly meaningful because it isn't based on scripture' What! Excuse Me! I wanted to punch him. How could I dismiss a person who is really struggling to find the truth by saying that he doesn't have any real and valid deep reasoning because his belief system is different from own.
Three things that once happened
Part 1
Once upon a time, in the misty and distant past, I was a college student. One year while living in the dorms someone or other hired a hypnotist to come do a show in one of the dorm meeting rooms. I don't remember many details of the show, but certain elements stand out in my memory clear as glass. Somehow or another, I got selected along with 5-10 other people to go up on stage. I don't remember exactly what this fellow's system was; I think he mostly just told us to close our eyes and relax. In those days it took very little prompting for me to do just that.
There exist, no doubt, in this wide world different 'flavors' of the hypnotism experience, but in mine I remained lucid the entire time. It was something like a game of 'simon says'. He would say - "you are going up in an elevator" - and I/we would imagine going up in an elevator. He would say "you are flying in an airplane", and we would lean over to look out the window, seeing only the floor. It was a game of make-believe. Yet! Yet, it was more than just a game of charades. Some part of my mind or body DID respond to these experiences as though they were real. He said "it's getting very cold in here" and I shivered. Shivering is not something you can really do intentionally. (is it?) He said "it's getting very hot in here", and (I think) I started to sweat.
But the hypnotist's cord is wrapped very lightly around the subject. I was frequently though not constantly aware that I was sitting in front of a large audience who were laughing. I knew I was playing along (and felt a little guilty, thinking I was faking it). I had to make a choice to stick with the 'game'. I percieved that hypnosis is an illusion you need to put some effort into believing. At the very least, you need to stave off doubt. Once you grasp the absurdity of what you are doing, you can't just hop right in without a little bit of coaching.
Anyway, back in the last century, that's what it was like to be hypnotized
Part PI/2
An interlude (and apologies for telling you something you probably already know) the way your eyes are physically constructed, the center of your vision is pretty poor at picking out minor differences in luminosity. If you go out at night, you'll often see stars in your peripheral vision that fade from sight when you try to look at them directly. Really it is just the way your eyes are built, but I can't help but think of those stars as malicious little bastards. No doubt they are up to no good, just out of sight.
Part 2
When I was a child I believed in God because the alternative was too horrifying. By the time I had advanced to some indeterminate age between youth and my (yet-to-arrive) adulthood I had worked out a fairly decent defense for my faith. It involved rules of evidence, otherwise-inexplicable historical facts and a touch of the transcendant. That system of thought formed itself in an organic, piece by piece manner. I'd have a crisis of faith one month, read a lot, and after some time I would find that the emotional aspects of the crisis were gone. Some bits of what I had read stuck with me. After many cycles of this I had absorbed a lot of assertions, arguments and suppositions that formed this informal framework or foundation on which my faith rested.
Ironically enough, this "system of rational thought" operated best at the subconscious level. Its preferred mode of operation was to work like a low dose of penicillin, keeping the doubt at bay before it could flare up. When I would actually think through any of the individual ideas, they were rather flimsy and insubstantial. But doubt is usually a broad, diffuse force, and against such blows my spiderweb held firm.
I had a bad couple of years. It was probably the worst part of my life, and during that time a lot of once-certainties were undermined. The crisis was not originally about God, but more about my own identity and place in the world. But God got caught up in it all the same. Or, to be specific, my beliefs about God did. In a time of uncertainty you look for something firm to grasp a hold of. One by one I'd turn to each of these reasons and supports for help. I was losing hold of God and needed something to could make him grasp-able by my mind. One by one these reasons would wink out under my directed gaze. They fell individually with such force that when I looked away from them, they had lost their subtle power to encourage.
Some truths are hard to deny, others are hard to hold on to. I'm not sure which is the case here, but I'm rooting for the latter.
A question for the philosopher studying warrant... In some systems of belief (I am including scientific theories here), each tenet of the system can be seen as making sense both individually and as an integral component of the entire system. In others, each tenet is individually weak, and it is only when woven together with its brethern that the system makes sense. In this model, each of the individual beliefs in a sense covers the weaknesses of the others. ... Is one of these systems inherently more worthy of belief? Is there such a thing as 'emergent warrant'?
Part e
Another interlude. When I play the better sort of video game I dodge bullets. Literally (in a sense). I lean about at the keyboard. I'm not sure if it helps in the game, but I'd be reluctant to just sit stock still. This is sort of the evil twin of the star thing. When looking at stars, it is your indirect faculties that percieve things more clearly than your intentional ones. When dodging bullets in a video game, your irrational self is convinced of a state of affairs which (while entertaining for spouses) is quite off the mark.
Part 3
Once upon a time I went to Las Vegas. I stayed in a hotel that was patterned off of a stylized and idealized Venice. It was surprisingly beautiful. To my miserably uneducated eyes, the statues and murals were every bit as well done as what you might see in a second-rate Italian museum or cathedral (which is still saying something). ((( This raises a question about sculpture for one thing - if an *exact* replica of Michelangelo's David is artistically less valuable than the original - where exactly is that surplus value carried? Is the original's marble somehow chemically different? Is there some spiritual element attached somehow to the original? If the two were put in a bag and shaken up so that no one could tell them apart - would the original's value be destroyed? )))
At any rate, the centerpiece of the hotel was this indoor... mall. The ceiling was roughly two stories tall and painted to look like the sky at sunset. The walls were decorated to look like Ventian streets. There was even a canal carved in the floor in which replica gondoleers paddled replica gondolas filled with authentic overweight americans. In the larger spaces the long walls of the 'piazzas' were ever so slightly curved, making them look longer than they really were. Other than the canal, which had pool-blue water, the illusion was masterful. The first time I walked into the area I was genuinely puzzled why the sun was setting. Like most people, I generally prefer ugly authenticity to beautiful artifice. But somehow, inexplicably, the illusion worked. I won't say I believed I was IN venice per se, but in some subtle way I was willing to believe I was outside, and that there was something behind all those second-story italian shutters.
I was in LV for a work conference, but made plenty of excuses to walk through the streets of las-venice. I can't put my finger on what made it appealing - partly it was admiration for the illusion and partly it was participation in the illusion.
After a few walks something in my head started to rebel. I noticed imperfections in the illusion like the modern gates leading to the docks where the gondolas landed and vents painted over with wispy clouds. I made a choice somewhere in this time. I made a choice to push out those inconvenient facts and inhale more deeply the illusion. It was as if one part of my mind was trying to protect another part of my mind.
One night my coworker and I sat down at an 'outside cafe' in the ... mall (there really is no other more accurate word for it). In Pseudo-Venice. It was great, I was sitting outside at sunset drinking wine and talking philosophy with this guy. The sky was really nice - just enough clouds to catch the color of the setting sun. I probably had pasta, and some kind of wine that's a mix of other wines (I never knew such a beast existed). By the end of dinner I hated the place. It was too unsettling - this place that never changes. You know the fear about heaven getting boring? - this place put some stock in that fear.
After that, las vegas was totally ruined for me. It wasn't just that one area, it is really the fault of the entire town - the enormous waste of energy, the lies about money and fun and respect and sex. The whole place is predicated on these lies that are individually absolutely absurd on their face. But they are also so compelling that we visitor willingly sell ourselves to them. People going to the casino know the odds are against them yet, if honest, expect to win. The hotels rip out the asthetic beauty of world architecture from context and plop it down into a desert, as though the only thing worthwhile of something like the Trebbia fountain is the color of it's fountains at night.
I went to LV expecting to be disgusted. I was impressed for the first several days - the illusions were obvious, but I had to concede they were expertly done. In the end, my dislike of LV was essentially confirmed. I can handle being lied to - that's a fair fight. But LV asks us to lie to ourselves. It looks to start a civil war between the part of us that dodges videogame bullets and the part of us that fills out a tax form. And if the city ever catches you at war with yourself, it starts chewing on you.
Part N+1
Slogans seduce
Once upon a time, in the misty and distant past, I was a college student. One year while living in the dorms someone or other hired a hypnotist to come do a show in one of the dorm meeting rooms. I don't remember many details of the show, but certain elements stand out in my memory clear as glass. Somehow or another, I got selected along with 5-10 other people to go up on stage. I don't remember exactly what this fellow's system was; I think he mostly just told us to close our eyes and relax. In those days it took very little prompting for me to do just that.
There exist, no doubt, in this wide world different 'flavors' of the hypnotism experience, but in mine I remained lucid the entire time. It was something like a game of 'simon says'. He would say - "you are going up in an elevator" - and I/we would imagine going up in an elevator. He would say "you are flying in an airplane", and we would lean over to look out the window, seeing only the floor. It was a game of make-believe. Yet! Yet, it was more than just a game of charades. Some part of my mind or body DID respond to these experiences as though they were real. He said "it's getting very cold in here" and I shivered. Shivering is not something you can really do intentionally. (is it?) He said "it's getting very hot in here", and (I think) I started to sweat.
But the hypnotist's cord is wrapped very lightly around the subject. I was frequently though not constantly aware that I was sitting in front of a large audience who were laughing. I knew I was playing along (and felt a little guilty, thinking I was faking it). I had to make a choice to stick with the 'game'. I percieved that hypnosis is an illusion you need to put some effort into believing. At the very least, you need to stave off doubt. Once you grasp the absurdity of what you are doing, you can't just hop right in without a little bit of coaching.
Anyway, back in the last century, that's what it was like to be hypnotized
Part PI/2
An interlude (and apologies for telling you something you probably already know) the way your eyes are physically constructed, the center of your vision is pretty poor at picking out minor differences in luminosity. If you go out at night, you'll often see stars in your peripheral vision that fade from sight when you try to look at them directly. Really it is just the way your eyes are built, but I can't help but think of those stars as malicious little bastards. No doubt they are up to no good, just out of sight.
Part 2
When I was a child I believed in God because the alternative was too horrifying. By the time I had advanced to some indeterminate age between youth and my (yet-to-arrive) adulthood I had worked out a fairly decent defense for my faith. It involved rules of evidence, otherwise-inexplicable historical facts and a touch of the transcendant. That system of thought formed itself in an organic, piece by piece manner. I'd have a crisis of faith one month, read a lot, and after some time I would find that the emotional aspects of the crisis were gone. Some bits of what I had read stuck with me. After many cycles of this I had absorbed a lot of assertions, arguments and suppositions that formed this informal framework or foundation on which my faith rested.
Ironically enough, this "system of rational thought" operated best at the subconscious level. Its preferred mode of operation was to work like a low dose of penicillin, keeping the doubt at bay before it could flare up. When I would actually think through any of the individual ideas, they were rather flimsy and insubstantial. But doubt is usually a broad, diffuse force, and against such blows my spiderweb held firm.
I had a bad couple of years. It was probably the worst part of my life, and during that time a lot of once-certainties were undermined. The crisis was not originally about God, but more about my own identity and place in the world. But God got caught up in it all the same. Or, to be specific, my beliefs about God did. In a time of uncertainty you look for something firm to grasp a hold of. One by one I'd turn to each of these reasons and supports for help. I was losing hold of God and needed something to could make him grasp-able by my mind. One by one these reasons would wink out under my directed gaze. They fell individually with such force that when I looked away from them, they had lost their subtle power to encourage.
Some truths are hard to deny, others are hard to hold on to. I'm not sure which is the case here, but I'm rooting for the latter.
A question for the philosopher studying warrant... In some systems of belief (I am including scientific theories here), each tenet of the system can be seen as making sense both individually and as an integral component of the entire system. In others, each tenet is individually weak, and it is only when woven together with its brethern that the system makes sense. In this model, each of the individual beliefs in a sense covers the weaknesses of the others. ... Is one of these systems inherently more worthy of belief? Is there such a thing as 'emergent warrant'?
Part e
Another interlude. When I play the better sort of video game I dodge bullets. Literally (in a sense). I lean about at the keyboard. I'm not sure if it helps in the game, but I'd be reluctant to just sit stock still. This is sort of the evil twin of the star thing. When looking at stars, it is your indirect faculties that percieve things more clearly than your intentional ones. When dodging bullets in a video game, your irrational self is convinced of a state of affairs which (while entertaining for spouses) is quite off the mark.
Part 3
Once upon a time I went to Las Vegas. I stayed in a hotel that was patterned off of a stylized and idealized Venice. It was surprisingly beautiful. To my miserably uneducated eyes, the statues and murals were every bit as well done as what you might see in a second-rate Italian museum or cathedral (which is still saying something). ((( This raises a question about sculpture for one thing - if an *exact* replica of Michelangelo's David is artistically less valuable than the original - where exactly is that surplus value carried? Is the original's marble somehow chemically different? Is there some spiritual element attached somehow to the original? If the two were put in a bag and shaken up so that no one could tell them apart - would the original's value be destroyed? )))
At any rate, the centerpiece of the hotel was this indoor... mall. The ceiling was roughly two stories tall and painted to look like the sky at sunset. The walls were decorated to look like Ventian streets. There was even a canal carved in the floor in which replica gondoleers paddled replica gondolas filled with authentic overweight americans. In the larger spaces the long walls of the 'piazzas' were ever so slightly curved, making them look longer than they really were. Other than the canal, which had pool-blue water, the illusion was masterful. The first time I walked into the area I was genuinely puzzled why the sun was setting. Like most people, I generally prefer ugly authenticity to beautiful artifice. But somehow, inexplicably, the illusion worked. I won't say I believed I was IN venice per se, but in some subtle way I was willing to believe I was outside, and that there was something behind all those second-story italian shutters.
I was in LV for a work conference, but made plenty of excuses to walk through the streets of las-venice. I can't put my finger on what made it appealing - partly it was admiration for the illusion and partly it was participation in the illusion.
After a few walks something in my head started to rebel. I noticed imperfections in the illusion like the modern gates leading to the docks where the gondolas landed and vents painted over with wispy clouds. I made a choice somewhere in this time. I made a choice to push out those inconvenient facts and inhale more deeply the illusion. It was as if one part of my mind was trying to protect another part of my mind.
One night my coworker and I sat down at an 'outside cafe' in the ... mall (there really is no other more accurate word for it). In Pseudo-Venice. It was great, I was sitting outside at sunset drinking wine and talking philosophy with this guy. The sky was really nice - just enough clouds to catch the color of the setting sun. I probably had pasta, and some kind of wine that's a mix of other wines (I never knew such a beast existed). By the end of dinner I hated the place. It was too unsettling - this place that never changes. You know the fear about heaven getting boring? - this place put some stock in that fear.
After that, las vegas was totally ruined for me. It wasn't just that one area, it is really the fault of the entire town - the enormous waste of energy, the lies about money and fun and respect and sex. The whole place is predicated on these lies that are individually absolutely absurd on their face. But they are also so compelling that we visitor willingly sell ourselves to them. People going to the casino know the odds are against them yet, if honest, expect to win. The hotels rip out the asthetic beauty of world architecture from context and plop it down into a desert, as though the only thing worthwhile of something like the Trebbia fountain is the color of it's fountains at night.
I went to LV expecting to be disgusted. I was impressed for the first several days - the illusions were obvious, but I had to concede they were expertly done. In the end, my dislike of LV was essentially confirmed. I can handle being lied to - that's a fair fight. But LV asks us to lie to ourselves. It looks to start a civil war between the part of us that dodges videogame bullets and the part of us that fills out a tax form. And if the city ever catches you at war with yourself, it starts chewing on you.
Part N+1
Slogans seduce
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Preference
I've been scooting about India for the last two weeks visiting my wife who is nearing completion of a year working here. We took a trip out to the country, which was great. But this trip, including our excursion has brought into focus something that I've been dwelling a lot on over the last 6 months.
I have too much Preference. With a capital P. What do I mean by that? Preference is the overarching desire to have things my way. I enjoy a bleu cheese burger, exactly so, from Moody's, I like to have a Buffalo Chicken Sandwich from Charilie's. I want to make sure I get the bulkhead seat on the window side on the 24 hour flight(s) home from India. None of these things seem so bad, but there is a really nefarious side to them.
The problem with having a preference on everything is that it reveals a really strong level of expecatation. The problem, in turn, with expecatation is that it keeps us from enjoying things outside of the level of expectation. Further, it limits the possibilty of finding out something new that we enjoy.
Take my flight home. I have travelled enough times now that I know the best way to get exactly the seat I want. When I get that seat, I'm slightly more comfortable on the trip home. However, if I don't get it, I'm disproportionately aware of my discomfort in some other, more cramped seat.
This whole problem is slightly more exasperated by this fact.... I always get my way. Say what! You do? Yes, I do. I don't have kids, I'm the CEO of my own business, I have enough resources and drive to get the things I want. Pretty much ALL THE TIME! This might sound pompous, but I think some of my closest friends would agree that even though they have fun doing things with me, we pretty much always do the things I want. I also have a high level of contentment. Part of why I get what I want a lot is that I really don't want all that much most of the time, and when I do, its within my means.
Which is what makes this concept of Preference so annoying. Its trivial! I'm content with the big things in my life, so what do I care if the burger is a little more well done than I like. So what if I am a little uncomfortable for a few hours. If I didn't dwell on these things, they wouldn't even be an issue.
I have too much Preference. With a capital P. What do I mean by that? Preference is the overarching desire to have things my way. I enjoy a bleu cheese burger, exactly so, from Moody's, I like to have a Buffalo Chicken Sandwich from Charilie's. I want to make sure I get the bulkhead seat on the window side on the 24 hour flight(s) home from India. None of these things seem so bad, but there is a really nefarious side to them.
The problem with having a preference on everything is that it reveals a really strong level of expecatation. The problem, in turn, with expecatation is that it keeps us from enjoying things outside of the level of expectation. Further, it limits the possibilty of finding out something new that we enjoy.
Take my flight home. I have travelled enough times now that I know the best way to get exactly the seat I want. When I get that seat, I'm slightly more comfortable on the trip home. However, if I don't get it, I'm disproportionately aware of my discomfort in some other, more cramped seat.
This whole problem is slightly more exasperated by this fact.... I always get my way. Say what! You do? Yes, I do. I don't have kids, I'm the CEO of my own business, I have enough resources and drive to get the things I want. Pretty much ALL THE TIME! This might sound pompous, but I think some of my closest friends would agree that even though they have fun doing things with me, we pretty much always do the things I want. I also have a high level of contentment. Part of why I get what I want a lot is that I really don't want all that much most of the time, and when I do, its within my means.
Which is what makes this concept of Preference so annoying. Its trivial! I'm content with the big things in my life, so what do I care if the burger is a little more well done than I like. So what if I am a little uncomfortable for a few hours. If I didn't dwell on these things, they wouldn't even be an issue.
Friday, April 25, 2008
More thoughts on Food
Last Saturday, I finally finished Animal, Vegetable, Miracle. I have really enjoyed this book. No I didn't read it, but I did listen to all 15 hours of the audiobook.
As a result of reading this book, I have started 3 new projects. I hope to continue at least 2 of them. Leila and I began Project 1 on April 1st. We planted seeds: tomato, pepper, onion, herbs, and lettuce. Leila agreed to these vegetables as a start. So now on our back porch we have about 100-120 little plants coming up. In May, we will transplant them to either planters that go on the patio and front porch or to the yard. I am most excited about the tomato plants. We have about 4 varieties from Early Girl (a hybrid) to Brandy (a large organic). There are also 3 types of salad greens.
Project 2 was making hard cider. I did it and it did not turn out great. I used juice from the grocery store along with champagne yeast. It fermented but I think I should have tried using organic apple cider--the kind that isn't clear. I think I am going to try this next.
Finally Project 3--cheese making. This Sunday we are going to try to make fresh mozzarella. From there, who knows? It might turn out well or it might be disgusting. We'll have to see.
Most of these projects are a result of the book. I want to be more involved in our food.
People have had to produce their own food for thousands of years and I want to be part of the food that I am partaking of. As a boy, my dad would force us to go out to the garden to hoe the plants. I hated it. HATED IT. I also hated picking beans. And stringing them. I did however enjoy the cucumbers, tomatoes, and watermelons.
I remember the time that my dad and I were picking the green beans. We both started on different rows. He was faster. When he was about half way up his row, I started pulling up the plants by their roots as I picked the beans. (You have to pick bean plants several times and I did not want to have to return to this job again.) When he finished picking his row, he turned around and saw what I had done. He did not punish me but he did laugh. He wasn't really happy that I had pulled up the plants but he understood. I didn't pull up any more plants on anymore rows for a long time.
I guess I wrote this entry because I wanted to somehow mark the end of reading the book. I began the book walking to school in March. I listened to it as I drove to southern Illinois. I finished it running at the gym.
As a result of reading this book, I have started 3 new projects. I hope to continue at least 2 of them. Leila and I began Project 1 on April 1st. We planted seeds: tomato, pepper, onion, herbs, and lettuce. Leila agreed to these vegetables as a start. So now on our back porch we have about 100-120 little plants coming up. In May, we will transplant them to either planters that go on the patio and front porch or to the yard. I am most excited about the tomato plants. We have about 4 varieties from Early Girl (a hybrid) to Brandy (a large organic). There are also 3 types of salad greens.
Project 2 was making hard cider. I did it and it did not turn out great. I used juice from the grocery store along with champagne yeast. It fermented but I think I should have tried using organic apple cider--the kind that isn't clear. I think I am going to try this next.
Finally Project 3--cheese making. This Sunday we are going to try to make fresh mozzarella. From there, who knows? It might turn out well or it might be disgusting. We'll have to see.
Most of these projects are a result of the book. I want to be more involved in our food.
People have had to produce their own food for thousands of years and I want to be part of the food that I am partaking of. As a boy, my dad would force us to go out to the garden to hoe the plants. I hated it. HATED IT. I also hated picking beans. And stringing them. I did however enjoy the cucumbers, tomatoes, and watermelons.
I remember the time that my dad and I were picking the green beans. We both started on different rows. He was faster. When he was about half way up his row, I started pulling up the plants by their roots as I picked the beans. (You have to pick bean plants several times and I did not want to have to return to this job again.) When he finished picking his row, he turned around and saw what I had done. He did not punish me but he did laugh. He wasn't really happy that I had pulled up the plants but he understood. I didn't pull up any more plants on anymore rows for a long time.
I guess I wrote this entry because I wanted to somehow mark the end of reading the book. I began the book walking to school in March. I listened to it as I drove to southern Illinois. I finished it running at the gym.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Lament of a Bane Spider
Come closer little plump and juicy humans. Come into my web. Sting ye, I will. Roll ye in me sticky cords and sip on ye succulent juices for weeks. What's this! Juicy and angry Beastman. Get ye away. Easy this prey is. Mine it is. Get away. Web and Wound and Wind it will I. No! Mine. Kill it not so quickly. Savor, Slober and Siphon will I. Rend and Ruin and Ravage do you! Nooooo. Poor juicy dwarf. All tastyness and goodness spilling on Floor. Wasted! Wasted!
Master is displeased. Useless he says. Short is your reach and weak is your sting he says. Worthless says he. Only good for absorbing nasty blades and blocking nasty arrows with your pestilential body.
No food have I. No honor have I. No sting to break through shiny armor have I. Die do I. Too quickly. Too quickly.
Master is displeased. Useless he says. Short is your reach and weak is your sting he says. Worthless says he. Only good for absorbing nasty blades and blocking nasty arrows with your pestilential body.
No food have I. No honor have I. No sting to break through shiny armor have I. Die do I. Too quickly. Too quickly.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
The Good News
What is the "good news" that Christianity offers? Answering that question was our assignment in Dan's class at church a couple of weeks ago. I think it is a good one.
Here are some ideas that keep coming back to me.
Rest - Rest from what others think. Rest from trying so hard and failing. Rest from having to be a hero, or a saint. Rest from all the work everyone claims is so important.
Judgment - Are people really able to get away with stuff? We need judgment if we want justice. Jesus promises that the poor, the weak, the meek will have their day as will the rich, the corrupt, and the proud.
Company - Christ is a God who literally walks and talks with us. A God who is not a super hero but a peasant. A God/man who most mysteriously relives the passover identifying not most obviously as the Mosaic deliverer but with the cursed first born of Egypt condemned to death.
So why do I have a hard time proclaiming this good news, this gospel, to others? I fear that rest, judgment, and company are vegetable virtues, I understand why I should want them but alas I hard time convincing myself, let alone making a compelling case to others to partake.
I still feel my work may pay off, that I have more to lose then gain by judgment, and that I'm fine on my own. God have mercy.
(photo by Mandalynn http://www.flickr.com/photos/mandaberry/3247012/)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)