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/)
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Nalgene vs Sigg
Oh yeah--that's right. Another conspiracy about what's bad for you.
I have been using Nalgene bottles for years--at least 6. And I drink a lot a water. I drink a liter in the morning before school, one before lunch, one after lunch before the end of the day, sometimes half a one on the way home, and one before I go to bed. Minimum of 4 liters per day. That's a lot of peein'.
Anyhow, back to the bottles.
I keep reading about this chemical Bisphenol A (or BPA) that leaches out of polycarbonate (or #7 plastics). It leaches out more at higher temps but even at room temperature, it has been shown to leach out into the solution. 2 bad things--I use(d) Nalgenes that are made of polycarbonate and so are baby bottles. The chemical is basically a synthetic version of estrogen.
As of last week, Canada is considering banning it. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080418.wbpa19/BNStory/National/ )
So what's a guy to do. Well, I've made the switch to metal bottles--aluminum and stainless steel. Sigg is a Swiss company that has been making water bottle/canteens for 100 years. The inner liner of Sigg bottles is an enamel that is baked on and is purported to not be hazardous (by both an independent German agency and the FDA). I have a couple of bottles by Sigg. I also purchased one by a company called Laken who uses and epoxy as a liner that is supposed to not leach out. Finally, Klean Kanteen produces a stainless steel water bottle this is both light, relatively speaking, and resists denting (unlike the aluminum bottles).
I hope I am not wasting my money, but I would probably be wasting in on something else, that would not help me stay healthy.
I have been using Nalgene bottles for years--at least 6. And I drink a lot a water. I drink a liter in the morning before school, one before lunch, one after lunch before the end of the day, sometimes half a one on the way home, and one before I go to bed. Minimum of 4 liters per day. That's a lot of peein'.
Anyhow, back to the bottles.
I keep reading about this chemical Bisphenol A (or BPA) that leaches out of polycarbonate (or #7 plastics). It leaches out more at higher temps but even at room temperature, it has been shown to leach out into the solution. 2 bad things--I use(d) Nalgenes that are made of polycarbonate and so are baby bottles. The chemical is basically a synthetic version of estrogen.
As of last week, Canada is considering banning it. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080418.wbpa19/BNStory/National/ )
So what's a guy to do. Well, I've made the switch to metal bottles--aluminum and stainless steel. Sigg is a Swiss company that has been making water bottle/canteens for 100 years. The inner liner of Sigg bottles is an enamel that is baked on and is purported to not be hazardous (by both an independent German agency and the FDA). I have a couple of bottles by Sigg. I also purchased one by a company called Laken who uses and epoxy as a liner that is supposed to not leach out. Finally, Klean Kanteen produces a stainless steel water bottle this is both light, relatively speaking, and resists denting (unlike the aluminum bottles).
I hope I am not wasting my money, but I would probably be wasting in on something else, that would not help me stay healthy.
Monday, March 10, 2008
A requiem for the Ostrogoths
Ok I'm going to wuss out and copy someone else's writing. But what amazing writing it is. The author is Charles Oman, and the title of the book is "Dark Ages 476-918". I first read it years ago, and am working through it again.
To set the scene a bit of history is in order. Up until ~476 there was a roman emperor in Rome or Ravenna (still in Italy). Some of them were dominated by their german generals, but a clear continuity of government could be traced back to the days of Julius Caesar. Then, in 476 one of these ambitious german generals (Odoacer) deposed the last western roman emperor (Romulus). Under Odoacer, Italy and her possessions were formally ruled by the emperor in Constantinople (Zeno) with Odoacer as his agent. In reality however, Odoacer acted as an independent soverign.
This situation eventually proved intolerable to Zeno. He lacked the strength to retake Italy with his own forces and instead turned to Theodoric, the leader of one of the neighboring bands of barbarians. Zeno made a pact with Theodoric wherein Theodoric would take his Ostrogoths into Italy and depose Odoacer. In exchange, Zeno would recognize Theodoric as his agent in Italy in Odoacer's stead.
Theodoric took his entire people into Italy and was wildly successful. He captured & killed Odoacer and defeated or recruited Odoacer's army. He distributed his Ostrogoths as rulers amongst the more populous Italians and settled down as a wise and productive king. The fatal flaw of the government he established was that the Ostrogoths were Arian Christians, a heretical sect which the orthodox italians regarded with hatred.
Decades later, after Theodoric had died, a new eastern emperor (Justinian) rose to the throne. A much more energetic and aggresive ruler than his immediate predecessors, Justinian decided the time to reclaim Italy had come. He sent a series of generals and armies into Italy and after almost two decades of fighting finally wore down and defeated the Ostrogoths. Ok, we're done. Now time to let the master speak...
"So, in the autumn of 533, the few remaining Gothic garrisons laid down their arms, gathered together, and disappeared over the passes of the Alps in to the northern darkness. We have no tidings of the fate of these last survivors of the great Ostrogothic race. Whether they became the vassals of the Frank, or mingled with the Bavarians, or sought their kinsmen the Visigoths of Spain no man can tell.
So perished the Gothic kingdom, which had been erected by the genius of Theodoric, by the same fate which had smitten the pirate-realm of the Vandals seventeen years before. Both fell because the ruling race was too small to hold down the vast territory it had overrun, unless it could combine frankly and freely with the conquered Roman population. But the fatal bar of Arianism lay in each case between masters and servants, and when the orthodox armies of Constantinople appeared, nothing could restrain the Africans and Italians from opening their gates to the invader. The Ostrogoths had been wise and tolerant, the Vandals cruel and persecuting, but the end was the same in each kingdom. It was only in the measure of the resistance that the difference between Goth and Vandal appeared. Sunk in coarse luxury, and enervated by the African sun, the Vandals fell in one year before a single army. The Ostrogoths, the noblest of the Teutons, made a splendid fight for seventeen years, beat off the great Belisarius himself, and only sucummbed because the incessant fighting had drained off the whole manhood of the tribe. If Baduila could have mustered at Taginea the 100,000 men that Witiges had once led against Rome, he would never have been beaten. It is one of the saddest scenes in history when we see the well-ordered realm of Theodoric vanish away, and Italy is left and unpeopled desert, to be disputed between the savage Lombard, the faithless Frank, and the exarchs of distant Byzantium."
Word
To set the scene a bit of history is in order. Up until ~476 there was a roman emperor in Rome or Ravenna (still in Italy). Some of them were dominated by their german generals, but a clear continuity of government could be traced back to the days of Julius Caesar. Then, in 476 one of these ambitious german generals (Odoacer) deposed the last western roman emperor (Romulus). Under Odoacer, Italy and her possessions were formally ruled by the emperor in Constantinople (Zeno) with Odoacer as his agent. In reality however, Odoacer acted as an independent soverign.
This situation eventually proved intolerable to Zeno. He lacked the strength to retake Italy with his own forces and instead turned to Theodoric, the leader of one of the neighboring bands of barbarians. Zeno made a pact with Theodoric wherein Theodoric would take his Ostrogoths into Italy and depose Odoacer. In exchange, Zeno would recognize Theodoric as his agent in Italy in Odoacer's stead.
Theodoric took his entire people into Italy and was wildly successful. He captured & killed Odoacer and defeated or recruited Odoacer's army. He distributed his Ostrogoths as rulers amongst the more populous Italians and settled down as a wise and productive king. The fatal flaw of the government he established was that the Ostrogoths were Arian Christians, a heretical sect which the orthodox italians regarded with hatred.
Decades later, after Theodoric had died, a new eastern emperor (Justinian) rose to the throne. A much more energetic and aggresive ruler than his immediate predecessors, Justinian decided the time to reclaim Italy had come. He sent a series of generals and armies into Italy and after almost two decades of fighting finally wore down and defeated the Ostrogoths. Ok, we're done. Now time to let the master speak...
"So, in the autumn of 533, the few remaining Gothic garrisons laid down their arms, gathered together, and disappeared over the passes of the Alps in to the northern darkness. We have no tidings of the fate of these last survivors of the great Ostrogothic race. Whether they became the vassals of the Frank, or mingled with the Bavarians, or sought their kinsmen the Visigoths of Spain no man can tell.
So perished the Gothic kingdom, which had been erected by the genius of Theodoric, by the same fate which had smitten the pirate-realm of the Vandals seventeen years before. Both fell because the ruling race was too small to hold down the vast territory it had overrun, unless it could combine frankly and freely with the conquered Roman population. But the fatal bar of Arianism lay in each case between masters and servants, and when the orthodox armies of Constantinople appeared, nothing could restrain the Africans and Italians from opening their gates to the invader. The Ostrogoths had been wise and tolerant, the Vandals cruel and persecuting, but the end was the same in each kingdom. It was only in the measure of the resistance that the difference between Goth and Vandal appeared. Sunk in coarse luxury, and enervated by the African sun, the Vandals fell in one year before a single army. The Ostrogoths, the noblest of the Teutons, made a splendid fight for seventeen years, beat off the great Belisarius himself, and only sucummbed because the incessant fighting had drained off the whole manhood of the tribe. If Baduila could have mustered at Taginea the 100,000 men that Witiges had once led against Rome, he would never have been beaten. It is one of the saddest scenes in history when we see the well-ordered realm of Theodoric vanish away, and Italy is left and unpeopled desert, to be disputed between the savage Lombard, the faithless Frank, and the exarchs of distant Byzantium."
Word
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Leaping into the fray
Time and money eh? Ok I'll bite...
The thing that impresses me about these dual deities is that they both are uber quantifiers. They allow us to take fuzzy things and assign numbers to them. With money for example allows us to compare cars ($7,995) to cabbage ($1.75). Time has a similar function allowing us to quantify a full days work, or a relationship.
As I've read, quantify things is ultimately very important to our (modern) understanding of information and ultimately knowledge, from physics to economics. To use a crude example I can tell you about a painting by telling you that it took 2 years to complete and is worth 10 million dollars. One may even extrapolate that the painter is worth 5 million a year and compare him to a mediocre starting shortstop.
But what does it mean to compare a shortstop and painter? Do we know anything meaningful about them when we know they each command $5M for a year of work (or are worth over 100 librarians)? In the end I propose that time and money are revered in our society (that exists at latitude =41.997186 and longitude=-87.66653) b/c they allow us to reduce complicated and difficult questions of value and meaning and a reality that exists of unique moments, people, and things into a simple rubric that can be readily shared. They allow us to reduce the many to one. But things like beauty or goodness that "don't have price" are usually left out of the conversation.
So why are we so uncomfortable with the uniqueness of the things that surround us? Why do we inevitably need to organize and compare things? What is the power of numbers that is so compelling and useful but also unsettling?
What are we doing?
Just started reading (listening) to a book entitled Animal, Vegetable, Miracle. I'm already ready to move out of the city or at least plant a garden and shop local.
The author starts the book by explaining that she and her family are moving from Tucson to Southern Appalachia. Her husband owns a family farm that they have visited each summer of their married life. Now they are going to live there.
She points out two things that are troubling. One is that they (I guess the state of AZ) built a 300 mile open channel from the Colorado River to Tucson. Water is now diverted for the people's consumption though they were instructed not to use the water in their fish tank as it would kill the fish. As the water moves from the Colorado to Tucson, much water evaporates and leaves muddy, more mineral-concentrated water arriving in Tucson. (So I think in Tucson, people should be encouraged to drink bottled water. )
The other is that once upon a time the Colorado would empty into the Pacific Ocean. Now it barely makes it into Mexico. We are diverting that much water for both agriculture and human consumption. Tucson was initially taking water from an underground aquifer, but after much of it was depleted and sink holes started to make their appearance, they sought other means.
It seems like we are sorta stealing. Maybe even just outright stealing. What gives us the right to do this? Why should we keep doing this? How long will we be able to keep this up? How will we ever replenish the water for the river? Is it ok if we don't? What else are we stealing?
The author starts the book by explaining that she and her family are moving from Tucson to Southern Appalachia. Her husband owns a family farm that they have visited each summer of their married life. Now they are going to live there.
She points out two things that are troubling. One is that they (I guess the state of AZ) built a 300 mile open channel from the Colorado River to Tucson. Water is now diverted for the people's consumption though they were instructed not to use the water in their fish tank as it would kill the fish. As the water moves from the Colorado to Tucson, much water evaporates and leaves muddy, more mineral-concentrated water arriving in Tucson. (So I think in Tucson, people should be encouraged to drink bottled water. )
The other is that once upon a time the Colorado would empty into the Pacific Ocean. Now it barely makes it into Mexico. We are diverting that much water for both agriculture and human consumption. Tucson was initially taking water from an underground aquifer, but after much of it was depleted and sink holes started to make their appearance, they sought other means.
It seems like we are sorta stealing. Maybe even just outright stealing. What gives us the right to do this? Why should we keep doing this? How long will we be able to keep this up? How will we ever replenish the water for the river? Is it ok if we don't? What else are we stealing?
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Double Down Post: 6 word memoirs
The idea is to write a compelling 6 word memoior ala:
Hemingway: "For sale: baby shoes, never worn."
My contribution:
But Brutus is an Honarable Man!
Some very interesting ones here:
http://smithmag.net/sixwords/
Hemingway: "For sale: baby shoes, never worn."
My contribution:
But Brutus is an Honarable Man!
Some very interesting ones here:
http://smithmag.net/sixwords/
Leap Day
I have a fascination with Calendars. One of the artifacts of working on programming languages is that you get a very familiar sense with the different ways to represent time. For example, you could say that today is 1204777693833 milliseconds since January 1 1970. This might sound weird to you if you aren't a programmer, but its actually the standard way to represent time in the language I prefer. Then you would take that number and apply a context like so:
So, from this perspective, time is defined from a certain celestial event. That event is the position of the earth relative to the sun at a time that is defined in the Gregorian calendar as January 1 1970. However, the expression of that time varies by culture, nationality, and even occupation (military vs civilian). In addition, each of us has several internal clocks running: our conception of absolute time as defined by the Gregorian calendar; our scheduling of events as they occur in the day; our internal body functions; probably about 4 or 5 primary calendars and a host of others.
But we can't be too cavalier to say that these representations of time are entirely abstract and without their own inherent relevance! Take GrubHub.com for example. Our expenses are defined on a bi monthly basis. Our revenues are defined on a daily basis. So, our revenue was up 3% for February while expenses stayed the same. Google is very similar (Daily revenue, Monthly Payroll). A 3% difference in for them is a *PROFIT* of 41 Million dollars for February. On the flip side, think about the Sears tower. They had an additional day of heating expenses, but earned only the standard monthly revenue for their tenants. That could amount to a loss in the range of about $100K
The transformation from the Julian Calendar to the Gregorian Calendar introduced the concept of 97 Leap Days every 100 years . The goal was to permanently set the vernal equinox on March 21st. This transformation was decreed and adopted by most Catholic countries the date October 5 1582 was followed by October 15 1582 (although the day of the week didn't skip!) Across most of Europe, landlords tried to charge rent for the entire month of October which lead to several peasant revolts which had to be calmed by Pope Gregory himself!
In conclusion, our subjective Calandaraization of objective celestial time has far reaching and concrete effects on our material lives.
Homework for the reader:
Ponder the relationships between the two gods of American culture in our time: money and time
(American culture in our time is defined by the culture that exists at latitude =41.997186 and longitude=-87.66653 on the WSG84 datum as of 1204777693833 milliseconds since January 1 1970 defined by the Gregorian calendar as set on 24 February 1582 by papal bull Inter gravissimas.)
- Gregorian Calendar in the American Style: March 5 2008 10:29 PM
- Gregorian Calendar in the British Military Style: 5 March 2008 22:29 PM
- Chinese Republic Era Style: Republic 97 1 28
- Mike's mental state: about an hour before bedtime, time for a blog post and 2 rounds of BF2
So, from this perspective, time is defined from a certain celestial event. That event is the position of the earth relative to the sun at a time that is defined in the Gregorian calendar as January 1 1970. However, the expression of that time varies by culture, nationality, and even occupation (military vs civilian). In addition, each of us has several internal clocks running: our conception of absolute time as defined by the Gregorian calendar; our scheduling of events as they occur in the day; our internal body functions; probably about 4 or 5 primary calendars and a host of others.
But we can't be too cavalier to say that these representations of time are entirely abstract and without their own inherent relevance! Take GrubHub.com for example. Our expenses are defined on a bi monthly basis. Our revenues are defined on a daily basis. So, our revenue was up 3% for February while expenses stayed the same. Google is very similar (Daily revenue, Monthly Payroll). A 3% difference in for them is a *PROFIT* of 41 Million dollars for February. On the flip side, think about the Sears tower. They had an additional day of heating expenses, but earned only the standard monthly revenue for their tenants. That could amount to a loss in the range of about $100K
The transformation from the Julian Calendar to the Gregorian Calendar introduced the concept of 97 Leap Days every 100 years . The goal was to permanently set the vernal equinox on March 21st. This transformation was decreed and adopted by most Catholic countries the date October 5 1582 was followed by October 15 1582 (although the day of the week didn't skip!) Across most of Europe, landlords tried to charge rent for the entire month of October which lead to several peasant revolts which had to be calmed by Pope Gregory himself!
In conclusion, our subjective Calandaraization of objective celestial time has far reaching and concrete effects on our material lives.
Homework for the reader:
Ponder the relationships between the two gods of American culture in our time: money and time
(American culture in our time is defined by the culture that exists at latitude =41.997186 and longitude=-87.66653 on the WSG84 datum as of 1204777693833 milliseconds since January 1 1970 defined by the Gregorian calendar as set on 24 February 1582 by papal bull Inter gravissimas.)
Monday, March 3, 2008
10 places I'd like to go before I die
I tried to limit this to places I could conceive myself actually reaching, so Mars and Tibet are out.
10. The pyramids of egypt
One of the first fortune cookies I got as a kid said something like "You will visit the pyramids before you die". Even back then I knew it was pretty good as fortune cookies go. I don't really have any idea what Egypt is like for tourists so it's kind of on the backburner for now.
9. A hill in eastern Europe overlooking the asian steppes
So much history involves people and armies passing back and forth between Europe and Asia. From the goths to the huns and mongols to napoleon and hitler and stalin. I'd like to stand on a hill in poland or the ukraine and watch the sun rise over asia
8. The Mississippi
Water that touches the Mississippi is literally four blocks from my front door. I really want to get a raft or boat or whatever and paddle down the elegantly named "north shore sanitation canal". Take that to the Chicago River, to the Illinois River, to the Mississippi. From there to New Orleans down the slow and muddy carotid artery of america.
7. Gettysburg
I went once as a kid and loved it. The land has been very well preserved - you get a real sense of continuity with the past. I want to take my kids in early July, walk the battlefield and eat peanut soup and pumpkin fritters
6. Shawnee national forest
This is supposed to be a really cool place (as far as Illinois goes). Very much unlike the parts of Illinois I'm familiar with, apparently in large part because the glaciers never reached that far south.
5. A glacier (with kids)
My grandkids probably won't have the chance to see any glaciers. I've seen them in Alaska, but I want my kids to see them too before they are gone. Seeing them in pictures just doesn't do them justice.
4. Iceland
I can't explain my fascination with iceland, but it's a place I really want to go. I'm actually ready to move there if Sally would let me. Iceland has a really interesting history - it was at once the wild west of it's day, but is also in some sense the birthplace of modern democracy. It has a very rich literary tradition even though it was something of a cultural backwater. Modern Iceland is a very progressive place with beautiful society, landscape and people
3. English countryside
I've been there once but want to go back. Driving down these tiny roads between hedges and through these little country towns. It was awesome and I want to go back.
2. The arctic circle
I'd fly to anchorage, rent us a SUV and fill it full of water, food, spare tires, fuel, shotguns, mosquito nets, tire chains, flares, GPS and a satellite phone. Then I'd drive north until I hit either Prudhoe Bay, the Arctic circle, or a pothole I couldn't work around. I'd like to confidently be the member of my gene pool to travel furthest north, and I think crossing (entering?) the arctic circle is the best way to do that. For some odd reasons of provincalism, I don't have much interest in the southern hemisphere.
1. Rome
I am ready to go back today. I liked the ancient city and the modern city. Each breath you take is full of history and humanity. Every church is a treasure trove richer than most art museum. Every street has a little mystery to conceal.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Just wondering
Unable to compose the planned blog post on the role of rhetoric in politics, I now share with you some things I'm wondering about...
Was the 1990s America's "Golden Age"?
What will ultimately be remembered as more significant in the history of our country the 2000 election or the attack of 2001?
Are libraries better served by shushing conversations or encouraging them?
Should we spend our time learning lots of different things or absorbing one thing really deeply?
Why aren't evolutionist more confident that life can adapt successfully to a warmer earth?
Why did the Romans value rhetoric so much? What is the relationship between rhetoric and cynicism? Do we undervalue the rhetorical role of our elected officials? ...
Was the 1990s America's "Golden Age"?
What will ultimately be remembered as more significant in the history of our country the 2000 election or the attack of 2001?
Are libraries better served by shushing conversations or encouraging them?
Should we spend our time learning lots of different things or absorbing one thing really deeply?
Why aren't evolutionist more confident that life can adapt successfully to a warmer earth?
Why did the Romans value rhetoric so much? What is the relationship between rhetoric and cynicism? Do we undervalue the rhetorical role of our elected officials? ...
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Why it is Better to Study the Bible in a Group Setting
Brief thought:
I think that after the many studies I have been in, it is better to study the Bible with a group of people. I am not saying that we should stop having personal Bible studies, but I am saying that maybe they should be in conjunction with a group study.
By studying with others, we are not allowed to wallow in our pessimism and doubt for long without someone having another idea just as valid as ours that contradicts it. Sometimes it's good to wallow, but usually only for for a certain period of time.
Also others are there to correct our whacked-out ideas. Likewise we are there to help others.
Studying alone allows our minds to get off track and stay off track. I do believe that the Holy Spirit is involved but what if he is involved by using others to aide us?
We need other people.
I think that after the many studies I have been in, it is better to study the Bible with a group of people. I am not saying that we should stop having personal Bible studies, but I am saying that maybe they should be in conjunction with a group study.
By studying with others, we are not allowed to wallow in our pessimism and doubt for long without someone having another idea just as valid as ours that contradicts it. Sometimes it's good to wallow, but usually only for for a certain period of time.
Also others are there to correct our whacked-out ideas. Likewise we are there to help others.
Studying alone allows our minds to get off track and stay off track. I do believe that the Holy Spirit is involved but what if he is involved by using others to aide us?
We need other people.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Snow, cold and music
I don't usually listen to music on my way to work. Well--I guess I don't really listen to music any time unless it's on a movie, or a TV show or someone else is just playing it and I happen to be there.
It's not that I don't like music. I do. It was a big part of my life from 6th grade until my second year of college. I played the tuba and trombone.
But I don't choose to listen to it on a regular basis. If it weren't for others in my life, I probably would not listen. My students enjoy listening to music when they are working on their assignments. And my wife likes listening to music.
So whatever she listens to, I usually listen to.
Anyhow, I was planning on listening to an audiobook this morning as I walked to work. I walked up the stairs to the Metra platform and as I waited, I got out my ipod, put the headphones in, and turned it on. My wife put a few songs on there for me.
Snow was coming down. It was cold. There was not much wind and the snowflakes were quite large. Cue the music.
And it was like I was transported to an emotional scene in a movie. Snowflakes dropping all around. As each snowflake landed on the platform it would immediately melt. Music was playing loudly in my headphones. No one else could hear it. I was alone. (Is this why teenagers put on headphones? To be alone and in their own world?) I was waiting for the Metra to zoom me off to school, but for those 4 minutes I was engulfed in a world where all was perfect. I was existing in a perfect world. Perfect in the sense that I felt it was perfect.
Sometimes I think that emotions are what life is about. I know this is not true. But sometimes I feel like I don't feel anything. I want to feel.
This morning on that platform, life was good. Great. Perfect. I was standing outside with snow coming down on me, cold, and listening to a song.
It's not that I don't like music. I do. It was a big part of my life from 6th grade until my second year of college. I played the tuba and trombone.
But I don't choose to listen to it on a regular basis. If it weren't for others in my life, I probably would not listen. My students enjoy listening to music when they are working on their assignments. And my wife likes listening to music.
So whatever she listens to, I usually listen to.
Anyhow, I was planning on listening to an audiobook this morning as I walked to work. I walked up the stairs to the Metra platform and as I waited, I got out my ipod, put the headphones in, and turned it on. My wife put a few songs on there for me.
Snow was coming down. It was cold. There was not much wind and the snowflakes were quite large. Cue the music.
And it was like I was transported to an emotional scene in a movie. Snowflakes dropping all around. As each snowflake landed on the platform it would immediately melt. Music was playing loudly in my headphones. No one else could hear it. I was alone. (Is this why teenagers put on headphones? To be alone and in their own world?) I was waiting for the Metra to zoom me off to school, but for those 4 minutes I was engulfed in a world where all was perfect. I was existing in a perfect world. Perfect in the sense that I felt it was perfect.
Sometimes I think that emotions are what life is about. I know this is not true. But sometimes I feel like I don't feel anything. I want to feel.
This morning on that platform, life was good. Great. Perfect. I was standing outside with snow coming down on me, cold, and listening to a song.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)