Archive for the ‘Philosophical’ Category

Your mind, what is it – really?

Sunday, January 27th, 2008

We very often think that ‘our mind’ is all the chatter and thought we experience in our heads. But, a simple bit of introspection can reveal a deeper truth.

Sit quietly in a place without distractions and watch what’s happening inside your mind.

Buddha mindNow, conceive of your mind as a bowl and this bowl is the container and the thoughts are the things in the container.

If you try, as meditation masters suggest, you can after some effort, suppress your thoughts and experience passages of time in which your inner environment is nothing but silence.

At first, it will be quite difficult and even the shortest span of quiet will be greeted by a thought breaking the spell and saying, “Wow, it is really quiet in here”.

But, if you persevere, eventually you will be able to maintain the quiet spaces for periods of greater length.

The key thing to note and consider is this. The mind is still there once you’ve quieted it. The mind that remains is simply awareness without content. This is what the mind really is.

If you doubt this assertion and you think the mind should rightly be considered the thoughts, then remember the image of the bowl and ask yourself if the thoughts could exists without the bowl that encloses them?

The answer is no. The bowl remains, whether it is filled with the chatter of thoughts or not. It is the thoughts that can be added or subtracted from the awareness that the mind is. Not the reverse.

Most of us believe we are the mind’s chatter but it isn’t so. At core, we are the undifferentiated awareness that underlies the chatter.

There’s great peace in your world when you begin to gain some facility in knowing this difference. You can develop the ability to see your mind as a tool or a calculator and you can learn to turn it on when you need it and leave it off most of the rest of the time.

It’s your life and it is just a skill that takes a bit of practice. Why not take it up and give yourself some peace?

It’s an opportunity that’s right in front of you, free. And that’s a good deal cheaper than that next self-help book you want to buy to glance at briefly and the set on your bookshelf with your collection of such books to impress your friends.  As if knowledge could be owned rather than lived.

Dakota Indians’ tribal wisdom

Sunday, December 9th, 2007

Dakota Indians’ tribal wisdom says that when you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.

However in many large organizations (e.g. the civil service, government, local government and some companies), more advanced strategies are often employed.

These Include:

Buying a bigger stronger whip

Changing riders

Appointing a committee to study the horse.

Arranging to visit other countries to see how other cultures ride horses.

Lowering the standards so that the dead horses can be accommodated.

Reclassifying the dead horse as living impaired.

Hiring outside contractors to ride the dead horse.

Harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed.

Providing additional funding and/or training to increase the dead horse’s performance

Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders could improve the dead horse’s performance.

Declaring that because the dead horse does not have to be fed it is less costly and therefore contributes more substantially to the “bottom line” than do living horses.

Rewriting the expected performance requirements for all horses.

And of course the favourite

Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory or managerial position.

Letters passing in the night as Rome burns

Tuesday, September 11th, 2007

M.,

Thanks for your input. I value your intelligence and your comments a lot.

I think you’ve reminded me about “Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.” concept again from a sense of compassion because you view me as hoping that what I say will change the world. And what you see is me banging my head against a wall which will never move because I don’t understand how the world actually works.

I appreciate your friendship and your compassion (if that’s what it is that motivates you to speak). But, I doubt you understand my motivations as well as you imagine. And that’s not meant to be a dig or a rebuff. I would love for you or anyone I consider to be a friend to understand me better so that when we talk or write, we are working within the same framework of understandings.

I’m not sure where the deep roots of my motivation differ from what you imagine them to be. I suppose some of it may be spiritual as I believe that spiritual motivations are largely anathema to you. And I believe there are secular material reasons as well to believe that the world can be a better place and to believe that action in aid of a better world is not wasted.

The world does make progress – slow and inefficient as it is. We’ve moved from various forms of totalitarianism to democracies, we’ve moved from dog-eat-dog societies to ones with social welfare protection nets. Not everywhere and not everyone – but these things are happening. We can, in many societies, now read what ever books we want to even if they are about other political systems or alternative religious beliefs. Doing that was difficult, if not impossible, not too long ago. We can, in many societies, rely on the rule-of-law to feel that our lands and possessions are relatively safe from confiscation by those more powerful than ourselves.

So, complete cynicism about mankind’s prospects and potentials doesn’t appeal to me. I can see that we can become better people because we’ve been, in fits and starts, becoming better people.

That’s what I might call an on-the-ground empirical judgment. But I have also motivations that arise from spiritual wellsprings.

From this I get that working for a better world should not be contingent on getting results. I get that speaking your highest truth is of value in and of itself. I also understand, that to those who believe there is no meaning or purpose to the world and who are deeply cynical of it, such actions, without obvious results, are just a form of pissing into the wind.

But, all that energy goes somewhere. If no one had been willing to speak up in favor of women’s rights or the abolition of slavery unless he or she was certain of success, then I doubt that women would have ever received the vote or the slaves been freed. But many people spoke up and worked in obscurity with nothing to show for their efforts but rejection and ridicule for decades – even centuries. But, eventually, their aggregate efforts begin to yield results. People resist change just as the rock resists the river – but eventually, if the river flows long enough, the rock will yield.

The things I write about appeal to only a small fringe. The vast vast majority don’t care and would avoid writings like mine on sight. And of the few who do read them, many are already ‘in the choir’ as they say and need no more convincing. But there are the very few who come by at that critical point in their thinking where they are open to new ideas and something I say may, just may, cause their next insight to click into place.

You might say, ‘Is that small return on investment worth all the effort and angst?” Well, it doesn’t matter because it is not a return on investment motivated action. It is a ‘it-is-right-in-and-of-itself’ action and it needs no external justification in my subjective world.

So, to summarize: Much of what I do is just because I think it is the right thing to do. But, I also act because I can see that mankind is capable of improving – because we have been improving.

The deep irony, as I am sure you are aware, is that even while I do these idealistic things, the empirical scientist in me is making hard predictive judgments about how mankind’s future is likely to turn out in the near term (say the next 20 to 100 years) – and I’m judging those probabilities as very bad indeed.

That’s why I’m focused on New Zealand – and I think I’ve discussed this with you before. I still have a very deep motivation to work for a better world but I’m enough of a physical pragmatist to realize that it is time to get out of harm’s way.

So, I am not unhappily beating myself to death for lost causes. And even if the world does goes to ruin, and I strongly suspect it will, I will still not think my efforts were wasted. Spiritually, I don’t think doing the right thing is ever wasted – though we may not see the results.

The advocates of Vedanta, a form of Hinduism, say that one should do their absolute best in all that they do and then be completely indifferent with regard to how the results of their actions turn out.

The Buddhists say that the source of all of our unhappiness is that we want things to be different than as they are. Many people mistake that for meaning that we cannot and should not work for improvement. But we can work to make things better and also accept how they are with equanimity – without it being a conflict. It is hard idea for the logical mind to accept but the spiritual heart grasps it well.

I’m a happy and lucky guy. I’ve got a good business and great wife and two fine strong sons. My health and intelligence are good. I live in one of the bests places in the world at an amazing time in the world’s history. I have many blessings.

If I didn’t believe that life had any meaning or purpose, I could work to see how many material toys I could gather around me in a pile before I died to help me cope with the emptiness of it all.

But I do believe it has purpose and meaning even if I cannot understand much about them. I can see that life advances and that mankind has been advancing. I think those advances have something to do with Spirit’s purposes here and so I want to put my shoulder against that self-same wheel that advances life, raises awareness and treasures emerging complexity on this planet and I want to push. I have no illusions that I’m going to be the one to put the problems right. But I do believe I’m moving in the right direction and that’s enough, in and of itself.

You said, “The definition of Stupid is: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”

It’s true that I would like a different result and I think it is inherently right and fulfilling to work for a different result – but I am not expecting one and my happiness is not dependent upon one. Perhaps that’s the part you don’t get – perhaps you always see my actions as part of some return-on-investment strategy.

Dennis
=====================================

Hello Dennis,

I enjoy reading your web-site. I must admit, that I am constantly amazed that you get so disappointed at the nature of humans. For example, in your latest post you highlight:

“We agree to work to achieve a common understanding on a long-term aspirational global emissions reduction goal to pave the way for an effective post-2012 international arrangement.”

How long will it take for you to get it through your thick noggin that this is the way it is?????

Do you know that I work for a consensus organization? If this is a new term for you, it means all decisions have to be agreed by everybody unanimously. That which you quote as frustrating, is business as usual in large GOs and NGOs (Governement and Non-Government Organisations).

These people do not do things for the good of humanity! They do it for the good (survival) of the self. The self can be more than the individual, maybe the family or the organisation. But it is primarily self survival. We could do a treatise on this, but I think you get my meaning.

Let me remind you on something I told you some time back: The definition of Stupid is: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

M.

070427 – Friday – The train ride to Hell

Friday, April 27th, 2007

In the five plus years I’ve been talking about the Perfect Storm concept, I’ve often told a story I call The Train to Hell story. It’s a simile, but I find it’s useful when people tell me that things are going to be alright because everyday more and more people are becoming concerned about the environment. It explains clearly how things can be getting better – and why that’s just not enough. As you read this, think of it as a dream story – something someone might relate to you just after they’ve woken up.

So imagine we’re on a train and we’re rolling across the flat countryside at high speed in a straight line. Ahead, the tracks lead right to the edge of a very deep cliff and then they just end. If the train doesn’t stop before we arrive at the cliff, we’re all going over the edge together and it is going to be very bad indeed.

The train has one of those cords you pull to signal that the train should make an emergency stop. This cord works a bit differently, however. With this cord, how well it works depends on how many people are pulling on it.

Now, some folks have leaned way out the windows or maybe even climbed atop the train and they’ve seen the cliff coming and they can also see what’s going to happen if we don’t stop. Now they’re down in the cabin pulling on the cord and talking to everyone around them trying to convince them that there’s a big problem up ahead and they too should start pulling the cord. Some folks, a few, believe them and help with the cord. A few more lean way out the window and see that they are right and they begin to lend a hand as well.

But most folks listen for a moment, glance out the windows casually and don’t see anything so they go on about their business. After all, train rides are fun.

Now, I’m on the train and I’m helping with the cord but I’m worried that not many people are. I tell my friend who is also pulling the cord about my concern and he says, “Hey, don’t worry. Look, more and more people all the time are joining us and helping with the cord.

Unfortunately, I’ve done a calculation. Even with more new people adding their efforts all the time and even with the train’s increasing rate of slowing, I can see it’s just not going to be enough to stop us before we go over the edge. The new folks are adding in too slowly and the rate we are approaching the cliff’s edge is much too fast.

I tell my friend we may not have time to try to convince people to help by reason or example. But he says it is critically important that everyone makes the decision to help on their own. We cannot interfere in another person’s decisions and in the exercise of their free will.

I look out the window and I’m thinking, “What will the nicety of respecting their free will gain either them or us if we all go over the edge together?

At some point, a problem can become so critical that it must begin to percolate up through the levels of one’s priorities until it reaches a level where decisions can be made that can effectively deal with the problem. If we are not willing to rearrange our priorities in favor of survival and defer, instead, to the considerations of lesser levels and priorities, then we are quite likely not to survive.

So where’s the limit? Should we avoid taking action because we might get our clothes dirty and they are expensive? Should we avoid taking action because we might have to speak loudly and forcefully and that’s unseemly? Should we not act to save all of us because we might have to force some of us to help against their will?

There’s a similar riddle which concerns a rowboat with a few too many people in it out on the open sea. It bears thinking through.

These are not easy questions but, unfortunately, we’ve put ourselves into the position of having to answer them.

Some of us believe we can see the magnitude of the problems facing mankind and the entire biosphere at this point in history. But, most folks don’t believe there’s a problem at all. And many others acknowledge that there is but they are talking politely about it and trying to get more folks on board to deal with it by reason and example.

But the scientists are telling us clearly that we are very near the point where if we don’t act decisively, the Earth’s weather system’s are going to move into configurations we’ve never seen before and the results will be a very large disruption to civilization, the death of millions and millions of people and a massive die-off of species the likes of which hasn’t happened here since the comet smashed into the Yucatan 66 million years ago.

Meanwhile, the majority of the people in the most powerful nation on Earth don’t believe in the relevance of science or the reality of evolution. Some of the most powerful constructs mankind has ever conceived and unleashed, entities called corporations, which have power which exceeds many small and medium nation states, press on with their monomaniacal pursuit of money and power – as if there will be a place to spend the money and a place to wield the power in the future. Meanwhile, the majority of the world’s populations do not care for anything more distant or abstract than the probability that they will receive their next paycheck and be able to put food on the table.

Do you see the problem, Lambchop? It’s likely we’re going to be toast.

070407 – Saturday – Change, the only constant

Saturday, April 7th, 2007

A friend’s family is going through some big changes. And when she and I talked about it the other day, she was feeling mixed about it all. She was wanting , on one hand, to embrace the changes and she was mourning a bit, perhaps, on the other hand, for the things they were going to leave behind.

I told her that I don’t think change can be avoided. In fact, when we try to avoid change, change will end up stalking us.

All life, all existence, is change. And riding over the changes are cycles. We assimilate and then we act. We design and then we build. We save and then we spend. We learn a way of life and then we transcend it. We are born, we live and we die.

If we are here for anything, we are here to experience, learn and grow. As life happens to us, we are offered choices. We can choose to try to hang onto what we have and to consolidate our gains but sooner or later, the cycle will turn and we will be called upon to strike out again and grow and learn and accumulate more experience. Those who resist are denying that change is a deep law of existence and they will come into conflict with it inevitably. Those who listen to the gentle urgings calling them out to transcendence are honoring how existence works. Those who try to stand still in the river of time, will feel the gathering press of the rising river of change.

Look around. You will see the evidence of this everywhere. People trying to hang on to their youth while time moves past them. People trying to hang onto their job, just as it is, while the corporation and its requirements evolves around them. People of a conservative bent, trying to keep their lives and their societies just as they were in an earlier day – and over the long run losing the battle as the historical dialectic unavoidably derives the present from the past and the future from the present.

See the middle-aged men who, when they were younger in their twenties, dominated the young women they were with because those ingénues were still trying to work out their places and their roles in a male dominated culture deeply infused with the iconic deceptions of the suggestive sexual role advertising blitz we all live under. Now older, these women have found their feet and their centers and they know much better who they are and what’s important. The balance of power between the sexes shifts as we age and the macho men who thrived on compliant women now find themselves playing to an unappreciative audience. A deep reevaluation or a fall into the bottle are often the only two choices faced by men who’ve never developed the art of introspection and a willingness to change and grow.

Desperado, why don’t you come to your senses?
You been out ridin’ fences for so long now.
Oh you’re a hard one, I know that you got your reasons,
These things that are pleasin’ you can hurt you somehow.

Don’t you draw the queen of diamonds, boy,
she’ll beat you if she’s able,
you know the queen of hearts is always your best bet.
Now it seems to me some fine things
have been laid upon your table
but you only want the ones that you can’t get.

Desperado, oh you ain’t gettin’ no younger,
Your pain and your hunger they’re drivin’ you home.
And freedom, oh freedom, well that’s just some people talkin’,
Your prison is walkin’ through this world all alone.

Don’t your feet get cold in the wintertime?
The sky won’t snow and the sun won’t shine,
it’s hard to tell the night time from the day.
You’re losin’ all your highs and lows,
ain’t it funny how the feelin’ goes away?

– Desperado by The Eagles

I remember my mother and the sad habits she fell into towards the end of her life. Rather than embracing life and walking into it as one might walk into a warm caressing wind, she decided to draw lines in the shifting sand and then fought to hold them. She was an alcoholic and her life settled into a repeating cycle. When she’d just emerged from a binge and she was gathering up the pieces, she would decide that if everything in her house was as neat as a pin, if she had the right job, if her finances were organized just so and if the place she lived in was quiet so that the neighbors didn’t stress her, then everything would be alright. She would fight to make it all just as she wanted it – and she would achieve it. But, always, something was missing. Politics would arise at work, the apartment, which was so quiet when she moved in, would seem to get noisier the longer she stayed. The finances she worked out so nicely would be upset when her car needed a repair. In short, the perfect world she tried to create always faltered against the chaos of reality. Today’s quiet apartment, which was so much better than the last place she’d lived, would slowly become the new status quo – and the noise levels would ‘seem’ to increase. And the only answer was to move to a quieter place again – but the problem would repeat. Further and further she painted herself into corners of her own making – resisting and denying and refusing to accept life and existence as it was and trying to make it fit her plan. And then one day, she’d have a drink, slip over the edge, lose her job, blow her finances, make her neighbors crazy, and a week later call me to come over and save her from the spiders on the wall. She’d be deep into delirium tremens and I’d spend hours assuring her she was sane and that it would all pass. Then, we would begin again.

Change is good. It’s what’s on the menu here. Enjoy what you have and remember that it all may, and probably will, change at some point. Your children grow, the face you look at in the mirror ages, the people you are competing with get smarter, everyone dies. It’s the plan, it’s the way and we can grok and embrace it and make the very best of it and ride the waves of change to maximize our growth and experience before we’re called away – or we can resist the impossible and waste the time that’s given to us.

– for Katy –

070320 – Tuesday – Multiculturalism – Not!

Tuesday, March 20th, 2007

This is going to be a piece some folks are going to find offensive. I’m going to attack the idea of universal multicultural tolerance. And note the word ‘universal’ because I am decidedly not against all cultures other than my own. And, in fact, there are aspects of my own culture that I think the planet would be much better off without.

I am sorry that these ideas may offend some because I don’t like offending people. But, these are things that need to be said. I am most definitely open to alternative view points and I welcome your comments and I will respond to them.

I believe that when people immigrate to a new country, they should make a conscious decision to embrace the culture of that country before they go. If they want the benefits of living in the new country, then they should accept its culture as well. If they don’t like its culture, then they should stay home.

Immigration should be encouraged but it should also be controlled. A country’s culture can absorb a certain number of new members with harm or confusion but there is an upper limit and the government should be sensitive to not cross that limit. If too many people come in at once, the country’s self-identity can become confused and the result is that it can become like a person with multiple personalities.

And when large numbers of people are allowed come in without having made a conscious decision to embrace the culture of their new home, the danger of the nation developing multiple personality disorder is magnified exponentially.

In my opinion, Britain, France and Germany have already crossed this fatal line and may never recover. They have let in too many people from other cultures who have brought their native cultures along lock, stock and barrel and setup cultural enclaves within their new nations. Australia is beginning now to grapple with this problem.

Here’s a quote from an editorial in an Australian newspaper that illustrates my point:

Many Britons are concerned that multicultural policies that have discouraged assimilation have divided their society and created what one commentator called a “voluntary apartheid”. In the age of terrorism, this is a worrisome trend, especially considering that a recent survey of British Muslims suggested 100,000 of them felt the 7/7 attacks were justified and that one in five felt little or no loyalty to Britain.

And:

While tolerance is certainly a positive virtue that should be strived for, it cannot be a cultural suicide pact. A culture that is tolerant of those who are intolerant of its freedoms is ripe for destruction, and bit by bit will see all it values eroded. And radical Islam knows this. Just as an Australian wouldn’t go to Saudi Arabia to wear a bikini on the beach and drink beer in the corner pub, those who see the proper role of women as subservient, anonymous and under cover should not expect a postmodern secular democracy such as Britain or Australia to accommodate these beliefs.

It may be too late for Britain and much of Western Europe to maintain coherent cultures but Australian politicians have been speaking up of late:

Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to [Australian Prime Minister] Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament. “If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you“, he said on National Television.

I’d be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia; one the Australian law and another Islamic law, that is false. If you can’t agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that’s a better option“, Costello said.

If you examine cultural tolerance in many places in the Islamic world, like Saudi Arabia, it is nearly non-existant. They believe their culture is the right one and they are not going to let other cultural practices corrupt theirs. This is their country and they have the right to preserve their culture. Why should they come to our cultures and expect to practice theirs within ours? If cultures are tolerant of each other, then they can and should mix but intolerant cultures should not expect to get the same treatment.

Choosing between Profits or People

Sunday, February 11th, 2007

In the speech Bill Moyers gave recently entitled Life on the Plantation, he quoted Teddy Roosevelt from 100 years ago. Roosevelt was talking then about the collision between those who think our societies should be about maximizing profit for their personal gain and those who think that they should be about the people who comprise them. Roosevelt said, “Our democracy is now put to a vital test, for the conflict is between human rights on the one side and on the other special privilege asserted as a property right. The parting of the ways has come“.

Now, in Moyers’ speech he was decrying the increasing subjugation of the news media to big business and the damage this does to democratic institutions. But, this is not a new phenomenon. Here as quote from 1880 in which a journalist of that day was complaining about the interference of big money in how the news is reported, “The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth… We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes“, by John Swinton from speech given while working for the New York Sun. (Thx for this quote goes to Kevin at www.cryptogon.com.)

In the February 11th, 2007 edition of the New York Times appeared an article entitled, “Troubles Grow for a University Built on Profits“. The article discusses how the University of Phoenix has been great at generating profits but its reputation for academic excellence is fading. Consider also how not too many years ago, corporate America swept up the medical world and now most of the doctors and hospitals around are part and parcel of corporate entities which we refer to as the Healthcare Industry. Most people, and physicians as well, would tell you today that the quality of medical care has suffered as a result.

All of these themes; the subversion of the news, the dumbing down of education and the profitization of medicine are all aspects of the same thing. And that single thing is the dividing of the ways Roosevelt mentioned; the battle between those who think the rest of us were born to be pawns in their games of profit and those of us who think that this world should be about maximizing the quality of life for all of us. And these are just three examples. Look around – examples abound.

Corporations are, in many cases, becoming stronger than national governments. It is important to realize that a corporation is a for profit entity without a heart. Regardless of what its PR may say, when push comes to shove, profit is what really matters. Corporations and industries cannot help but see countries, their resources and their peoples as pieces on the chessboard. And they will move and manipulate them in which ever way maximizes their profits.

Some national governments have implemented a mix of Socialism and Capitalism in which Socialism has the upper hand but it only uses its ability to trump and limit Capitalism when Capitalism’s drive for profit begins to degrade and imbalance the society.

Other countries, and the US is a good example, let Capitalism run largely uncontrolled. Yes, at some points in the past when the imbalance got badly out of control and corporations were threatening to gain control of everything through monopolies, the federal government broke industries up. Think about the railroad barons of the 19th century and of Standard Oil and AT&T. But in the US, the trump card is rarely played other than to guarantee that the government retains dominance over the corporations. It is not generally played to improve the lot of the people.

Now, the sad part is that Capitalism, as the US practices it, puts a Capitalistic entity on the world stage that is extremely competitive and very much like a junkyard dog. Whereas, the Capitalistic dogs loosed by those countries who keep their Capitalism subservient to their Socialistic goals, are less competitive and less vicious – more like pets.

What is sad is that nine times out of 10, when the junkyard Capitalistic dog meets the mellower pets of the more Socialistic countries, it dominates them and wealth and power flow from their systems to its system and raw Capitalism thereby advances in its subversion of the idea that societies should be for their peoples. And it advances its philosophy that societies should be considered as sandboxes in which corporations get to play for profits.

It is a classic weakest-link-in-the-chain problem. So long as one country allows its corporate dogs to run loose unmuzzeled, they will terrorize and weaken those other countries who’ve chosen to spend their resources on improving the lot of their people rather than trying to dominate the world. Unless all the countries get together and agree to limit the power of corporations for the good of humanity together, those societies dedicated to the quality of life of their people will always potentially be at the mercy of those who’ve already been captured by the siren songs of wealth promised by unfettered Capitalism.

061208 – Friday – Historical inevitability

Thursday, December 7th, 2006

One of the great blessings of being here in New Zealand for several months is having a lot of time to read, think, correspond and reflect. Recently, I’ve been receiving a lot of input and sometime, over the last few days, I started putting the pieces together into what is, for me, a new pattern.

One influence on me has been two science fiction books I’ve recently finished by Peter Watts. The two books (which are the first two in a series) are Starfish and Maelstrom. These, along with others I’ve read, have envisioned a future in which many of the coming Perfect Storm disasters I’ve been writing about have come to pass and are just a part of people’s day-to-day lives.

Over this same period, one of my correspondents also wrote and reminded me about how adaptable people are. Put them in a prison camp or an arctic wasteland and those who survive the initial shock will adapt and soon it will seem to them as if life had always been this way.

Thinking about these things, it also came to me how we all grow up assuming that the conditions that existed as we personally emerged into our childhoods – aways existed.

One piece I’ve been meaning to write now for some time has to do with the tension between those who want things to stay the same and those who like and embrace change. For the most part, I’ve always identified with those who embrace change and tolerance and I’ve laughed at people who’ve made statements like, “Rock and Roll music will ruin our youth“, “Long Hair is a sign of social decadence“, or “Too much social tolerance towards alternative lifestyles leads to the breakdown of family values“. I’ve seen that these things seldom come to pass as the doom-sayers predict and I’ve believed that most of their resistance has been driven by their fear of change and the uncertainty it brings.

So, this brings me around full-circle to my own railing against the coming Perfect Storm. And here, I find myself on the side of those resisting change.

Within the last day or so, one of my correspondents asked me who I am writing for and what I hope to accomplish with my writing and why I’m not offering my readers more specific recommendations about what people can do to defuse the coming problems rather than just pointing out the problems over and over.

Thinking about his questions gave me deep pause.

I realized that emotionally, I deeply hate (see Eden Lost) and resist what the coming Perfect Storm will do to the world I was born in and have come to love so deeply.

But I also realized that I’m not offering specific recommendations about what people can do to resist the changes because I don’t believe there’s any point. The truth is the changes are coming and I think, given human nature and the Biological Imperatives that underlie it, there’s very little we can do to avoid the bullet.

So, as I’ve worked through these new thoughts, the various pieces and their relationships have come into focus.

I see that I’ve spent several years emotionally railing against the coming changes. The thought that has come to me, agonizingly, again and again has been that if we can understand these coming problems, we can do something about them. I’ve looked at this Eden of ours and reflected on how one-of-a-kind it is in all of existence and how it is the intricate and delicate product of three and half billion years of natural selection. It is the nursery from which our species has been birthed; perfectly and naturally matched to us. It is inconceivable to me that we should cast it away through inattention.

But, at the same time, I’ve been working to understand why we are doing the things we are doing which are carrying the world to great change and ruin. And, as my understandings have deepened, the logical and pragmatic side of me has been realizing and accepting that these problems arise from so deep within the core of what we are as evolved biological beings, that it is extremely unlikely that we will find the self-understanding and will to transcend their directives. (see Transcending our Biological Imperatives)

I am resisting change, but change will come – as it always does. I am mourning the world I was born into that I love, but as the world changes and new generations are born into it, they will each imprint on the world as they find it and what seems so very wrong to me will seem normal to them.

I, for instance, know there was a time when New Zealand was untouched by human hands and species walked here that haven’t been seen in many hundreds of years since the first Maori peoples arrived and drove them to extinction. And I also know, as I look around, that these trees and plants I see which are part of the beauty of this place are mostly not the ones that existed then. I know there was a New Zealand before men but it is an intellectual knowing. I can be curious about what it was like and I can mourn it in a muted fashion and I can regret how my species has changed the world unknowingly in so many ways. But, in the end, it wasn’t my world and I love this world before me now – even though I know that it was different then.

So it will be I think, three or four generations from now, when the world will be largely unrecognizable to us – if we were still there. But the people of that future time will love it because they will be born to it.

The sea coasts rearranged, the missing ice caps, the vast deserts, the shells of lowland cities long dead from inundation, the stories of the millions or even billions that died during the big changes,will be to them no different than it is for us hearing from historians about Napoleon at Waterloo or the carnage of WWI; just fascinating stories of what went before our now.

“So, where to now, traveler?”, I ask myself. Why do I write and what do I want to say, if these are my understandings?

I see my emotions are just resistance to the inevitable changes. I can let that go – though with great sadness because something in me had always hoped that we might change things and prevent the coming chaos.

I see that my ideas about getting out of harm’s way are still valid – at least for now. In 20 or 30 years, it will have all changed again. But, for now, while the changes are still building up, there are some places that are better than others to watch the evolving show from and New Zealand seems to me to be one of them.

I watched a bus load of Chinese tourists the other day. They had just piled out of the bus beside Hagley Park. On one side, 800 acres of pristine park stretched away as far as one could see. And, on the other side of the street behind them, clean and neat homes and apartments – bright with flowers, prosperity and loving attention. On the sidewalks and in the park, young men and women were running together for exercise and above it all, a vast blue sky, clean and clear, with white clouds slowly moving through it. Everything very near to the way one would think the world should be.

Did they come from Shanghai with its millions crawling like ants beneath an impenetrable industrial sky? From down in the deep shadows beneath the skyscrapers clawing through the grit and smoke. A land where everyone wants a new car and they all go out and sit in them for hours hoping the traffic will move so they can go someplace. A dog eat dog fight to get more and rise above the chaos that swells on all sides. People in your face at every turn – a horror of too much too soon, too fast and too artificial.

And here, out in the vast great southern ocean, they see a beautiful green land free of pollution, prosperous and clean with only four million people to share and enjoy all of its bounty and beautiful open spaces. Were some of them who came to see this quaint little place looking stunned – at paradise?

I wonder if I should even write of these things? To say to those few here and there in the world who are beginning to see the way things are going – that there still is a place like this. One of the few and perhaps the last. A place where everything is very near to the way one would think the world should be. Should I be putting up a sign on the Internet saying, “Over here!

The other day at the Christchurch Library, I put a hold on Jared Diamond’s book, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. Yesterday, I received an E-mail saying that they had it and it was ready for me to pick up. Today, I was at the library returning Watts’ second book, Maelstrom, and when I was ready to leave, I thought of stopping by the counter and picking up the Diamond book – but for the life of me, I couldn’t think of any reason why I wanted to read it.

Doctor, my eyes have seen the years
And the slow parade of fears without crying
Now I want to understand
I have done all that I could
To see the evil and the good without hiding
You must help me if you can
Doctor, my eyes
Tell me what is wrong
Was I unwise to leave them open for so long
‘Cause I have wandered through this world
And as each moment has unfurled
I’ve been waiting to awaken from these dreams
People go just where there will
I never noticed them until I got this feeling
That it’s later than it seems
Doctor, my eyes
Tell me what you see
I hear their cries
Just say if it’s too late for me
Doctor, my eyes
Cannot see the sky
Is this the prize for having learned how not to cry

– Jackson Browne, “Doctor My Eyes”

An arms race of ideas

Tuesday, September 12th, 2006

It will always essentially be an arms race between the Liberals and the Conservatives. And there will always be move and counter-move. Perhaps the central thing that distinguishes these two philosophies is that one, the Conservative, is more naturally described as an extension of our deep biological imperatives (those deep-seated and unconscious biological urges to reproduce and to control the environmental surround to better ensure the survival of one’s progeny) whereas the Liberal POV can be more naturally described as an semi-conscious attempt to transcend those same imperatives.

A transcendence driven by the vague recognition that while our biological imperatives have served as an optimal strategy for us and all other biological forms since life first began on this planet, the time has finally arrived, now that human expansion has finally hit the limits of this finite planet, to recognize that these imperatives have within them an implicit assumption of infinite space and resources which is fundamentally unsupportable.

This simple dichotomy is the core issue underlying the problems our species faces now. Will we continue to act out our biological imperatives blindly and wreak havoc on this beautiful blue planet? Or will we rise to the challenge of consciously recognizing that we must transcend our biological urges so that we may adopt a strategy that allows us to achieve a steady-state balance with the biosphere and live within its limitations indefinitely?

Eroding judgements

Saturday, August 12th, 2006
…the fundamentalist mind, running in a single rut for fifty years, is now quite unable to comprehend dissent from its basic superstitions, or to grant any common honesty, or even any decency, to those who reject them.
HL Mencken

Neurons that fire together, wire together was a line I remember from the movie I saw recently.

In other words, you become good at thinking what you think. You become good at doing what you do.

The first time you think something, it is as if you roll a wheel across level ground.

The twentith time you think it, it has gotten easier. As if a rut has been worn into the ground of perception guiding the wheel on its way.

If we care about truth, then we naturally want to percieve reality accurately. Because accurate perception is true perception. Thus the Buddhists tell us that we cannot see a thing clearly unless we are indifferent to the thing we see.

So, what happens then when we take up a cause or adopt a belief?

Before we took the cause or belief up, we were indifferent to it. And at the moment we took it up, our previous indifference allowed still us to see it clearly and accurately – and thus to make a good judgement about it.

But later, having embraced it, we become deeply engaged with it.

Now it begins to be central to us and the more we work with it, the more important it seems.

What  once seemed perhaps a bit difficult to grasp has been revealed and we see it all so easily now.

An example:

If we think the thoughts of an environmentalist, we then fire the neurons of environmentalist thought over and over again.

And as we fire them, we wire them together.

And what was before, for us, a level field of perception about environmentalism now begins to acquire the ruts of long use; the growing ease of habit. And thus, inevitably, our current thoughts become, more and more,  guided by the ruts of the environmentalist thoughts that went before and less and less based on clear, unbiased and accurate perceptions.

So where once, from the clarity of indifference, we saw a significant pattern called environmentalism and decided to engage it, now from the habit of long practice and interaction (the repetative firing and wiring), we now can’t help but see the pattern everywhere. And the more we see it, the more significant it seems to be to us and the more we feel called to engage it.

Where then lies truth when our very neurons can betray us like this?