Friday, May 29, 2020

Public Service

     When I was a child in the 1950s I learned from my Father, a historian who specialized in US Constitution, that going to Congress was "public service" and actually required some sacrifice. Back then I remember being struck by the fact that a high percent of Congressmen (it was all white males back then) were farmers and would have to make long, expensive journeys home to care for their farm. Sacrifice. 
    President Harry S. Truman was not a wealthy man. When he moved out of the White House he had to pay for it himself and had to borrow a car to get back to Missouri.  His Secret Service protection ended the moment he was no longer president. Harry got a government pension of $112.56 a month, and that's thanks to his military service in World War I and Army Reserve.  He never got a penny of taxpayer money! (i)  Public service. Sacrifice.  Harry is the origin of the famous "the buck stops here" statement.  None of the modern Trumpite "if it works I take full credit. If it fails, it was the Democrat's fault."  And Harry had to make some unbelievably hard decisions. 
     When I got to college in the early 60s I met the first of a new breed. I asked my new friend his major. He said he was majoring in Political Science. At that point "poli-sci" was still mostly historians who studied and taught the history of world politics. This young man went on to say, "I'm going to be a politician."  Who decides when they're 19 or 20 years old that they're going to make their living being a politician? That's elected public service. Who, in their right mind, would want to do that much public service? What makes you think you're going to continue to be elected for an entire life-time?  
     Welcome to the new world of politics. Forget "public service". Now that you're going to make a living at politics you do what you must to get elected and re-elected. 
     I knew a young man who was very involved in politics in the late 1960s. He was almost always the leader or president of the local or state party organization.  By the time he gave up politics people who wanted party support in his state needed his blessing.  One year he decided that he was tired of being the power behind the throne and ran for a county office. He was well known so you'd think he would have had a good chance. His opponent was a friend. "Tom (that wasn't really his name), I hate to see you do this," said his friendly opponent. "You know I'm going to embarrass you."  Tom, as we're calling him, was puzzled. "I'm as well known in this county as you are," Tom replied.  "Yes," said his friend and opponent, "but you're going to tell the voters what you believe and what you think needs to be done.  I'm going to tell them what they want to hear."   I don't remember the exact results. That's been over fifty years ago, but suffice it to say Tom was embarrassed.  His foray into the modern political arena had been an enlightenment. That was the end of politics for him.   
     I'm sure there are still a few members of Congress who are there as public service. I know our Montana senator, John Tester, is still an honest-to-goodness rancher. At his last election, when everyone else was in the hotel ballroom watching the results, John was on the farm putting the engine back in an old truck.  Sadly I believe that it would be quite easy to show that such people are very much a minority.  
     Today the several reputable sources I checked (ii) say that fifty-percent of members of Congress are millionaires with a median net worth of $1,008,767.  They receive a life-time benefit of $139,200 per year plus other federal benefits. Every penny is taxpayer money. A bit different than Harry S.  Probably the biggest perk is that you don't have to work for 35 years to get this. One term and you're set for life.  Of course, you know who sets Congress' pay. They do. 
     Being a member of Congress is a well-paying job with tremendous benefits and unbelievable power. Doing what you think is right for the benefit of the people you supposedly serve is no longer a part of the equation.
    Routinely I see FaceBook posts demanding that Congress have term limits and other controls.  It makes me wonder if people slept through civics class. Actually, according to American Federation of Teachers only 26% of the adult US population know the three branches of the US government, (iii) and Education Weekly found that most states require history but not civics to graduate from highschool. (iv) This is probably why people don't know that the general public has no say in government terms or salaries. Congressional terms are in the Constitution. That means that term limits would require a Constitutional Amendment.  Guess where an amendment must start. Well, if you slept through or weren't offered civics, I'll tell you. A Constitutional Amendment must start in Congress and be ratified by the States. There are still six Amendments to the US Constitution that are not ratified and only two of those six still stand a chance.  What do you think the chances of a term limit amendment even getting to the floor?  Congress sets its own salaries, pensions and other perks. Sorry, folks!  We're stuck. Public service is gone and, thanks to Citizens United versus Federal Election Commission (2010) we have no hope of ever having any say in our own government.

                                                   
FOOTNOTES.   




Thursday, May 28, 2020

Peace in troubled times

 If you're like me, you spend an awful lot of your quarantine/stay-safe-at-home time working to stay calm, escape depression and trying to find peace in these troubled times. In truth, my series of essays on peace and essays like this one are a sharing of what I learn in my own personal search for peace.  Perhaps this is my personal CBT.  
     One thing I'm sure we all agree upon; viz. that these are troubled times. Government of, by and for the people (i) is gone from the USA. We are now owned and operated by the richest one-percent thanks to Citizens United v FEC. (ii) Capitalism, which is unsustainable under any circumstances, could collapse at any time, and there is a pandemic threatening all our lives which is made worse by a sizable group who think it's a hoax, refuse to cooperate in fighting it, and are going to keep spreading it. Yes, we live in troubled times. 
     I know places that are so far off the grid that the world could end and it would be days before I got the news. I would gladly live out my remaining days there. The vast majority of people, however, have neither the desire nor the skills to live like me.  Further, the vast majority, currently including myself, do not have that as an option.  So we need to move on to explore peace in troubled times. 
     If you read my essay "Peace is not lost" you will remember that the premise was that peace is not hidden somewhere in the future for us to find, but is right with us. We must find ways of putting off the worry, anxiety and depression of our troubled times and grasp peace.  
     Again referring back to my previous essay, we realize that to put off worry, anxiety and depression first requires that we get our Chatty Kathy brains, that are constantly talking to us and usually keeping life in turmoil, to be quiet. Actually, you can't make Chatty Kathy stop. You can only get your mind so focused that you don't give Chatty Kathy a chance to dominate your thoughts. 
     Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that to have peace we must also find some way to deal with the chaos and violence in the society around us. Ignoring or shutting it out isn't going to work long-term. People like Thich Nhat Hanh and the Dalai Lama seem to be able to function calmly in the thick of the anger, chaos and violence without sacrificing peace. Both of them have suffered horrendous prejudice, violence, war, forced expatriation and personal threats and danger. I'm sure their answer to 'how do you do it?' would be practice.  I'm sure that that is a big part of it. However, I can't help but believe that there is something else, which I'm sure they would gladly share if they were aware of it. (iii)  I must admit to a strong inclination to believe that their innate personalities play a significant role, but are all Buddhist monks of the same personality types?  
     Truthfully, Buddhist meditation is probably the best at helping us keep calm. There is no "religion" involved in their meditation so, if you're religious, you don't have to worry.  
     Meditation is an on-going activity with growing benefits. To stop reading or listening to the news first thing in the morning gives immediate relief. Actually I avoid all news media and FaceBook, skimming headlines, etc., once a day. In 99.9% of the situations you can do absolutely nothing except get upset. I will check out a news site that has a bullet format and check on Face Book friends until I notice my stress level going up. I quit immediately and do something designed to reduce stress.  That something might be walking meditation, exercise, writing or working in the hollow. (iv) 
     What helps us avoid worrying about what might happen tomorrow or get angry about something that has already happened is to have some project or activity that keeps you totally focused on the project and the present moment. Trying to identify plants takes lots of concentration. You might be a bird watcher. Some people find that physical labor helps. 
     I have found that chanting Om mani peme hung as I walk the hollow trail helps me control Chatty Kathy. I also talk to the plants and animals as I go.  Some people might think they would feel silly.  Look at it this way. Which would you prefer; feeling depressed, anxious, and stressed or happy and a wee bit foolish? 
     Of course, we can't deny that we should address those things which are appropriate. Even as reclusive as I am, I will be sure to vote and will speak out on issues. I cannot complain if I do not participate. Neverthless, only you can decide upon what those things should be. I find myself writing essays like this. I might occasionally directly address a political issue but I find that I try to share facts with lots of footnotes and references without any expectation of changing anyone's mind. I accept the fact that the United States has always been an arrogant, destructive, violent, racist, anti-intellectual society. There is good reason for the old label "Ugly American" (v)  I have lived overseas and have personally observed the ugly Americans, making me very embarrassed, and heard people talk about Americans. After Trump was elected and started his infamous behavior I had friends from three foreign counties write me and ask if it was really true. They were appauled. I still have many friends around the world, and spend time with foreign visitors. Sadly, we are still the ugly Americans. How we accept this reality and maintain our personal peace while doing our part to rebuild a just, equitable and non-violent society is the challenge which faces us.   
FOOTNOTES

(i) Abraham Lincoln's famous Gettysburg Address on Nov. 19, 1863 concluded "and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
(ii) Citizens United v Fed Election Comm. Jan 21, 2010.    https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained
(iii) They might actually address this in one of their many books, but I haven't read all of them so I'm sorry that I cannot be of further assistance. 
(iv) At our place in Kentucky we have a hollow that is almost 1.5 acres. We have worked to return it to its original state. I have cataloged 90 trees, plants and flowers. We have 55 trees, 29 edible plants (nuts, berries, flowers, leaves, roots) and 9 medicinal plants, all indigenous to the area. We call it Black Fox Hollow after the man who was the Cherokee chief here in the late 18th century. 
(v)  Lederer, William and Eugene Burdick (1958)  Ugly American.  Norton. NYC.       

Utilizing time

Does utilizing time properly make our lives meaningful and happy?

     In my essay entitled Mind the Definition, I mentioned a list of philosophical questions. It happens that one of those questions rather reached out and grabbed me; viz. does utilizing time properly make our lives meaningful and happy?  
     Before I jump into the thick of the issue I must make full disclosure; viz. that this question grabbed me because I have, throughout my life, been accused of acting as though I believe that I must always be doing something.  I resemble that accusation. It is not conscious but, after Pamela having recently made the observation, I started watching myself and I do go from project to project as though I must at all times be attempting to accomplish something. I describe and evaluate my days according to what was accomplished.  Looking back, both of my parents seemed to have been driven to be doing something at all times. For my Father it was always something which he found meaningful; working on a book, making wine, preparing a lecture. For my Mother it was something she enjoyed doing; running, biking, sewing, playing the piano. 
     Does utilizing time properly make our lives meaningful and happy? 
     For starters, what does it mean to utilize time properly?  For me the proper use of time might be to take a hike, catalogue plants I have pictured, or write an essay.  Is that your proper use of time?  If you are not taking a hike or cataloging plants are you not making proper use of your time?  I believe that would be very presumptious of me and totally wrong. You might find it perfectly appropriate and "proper" to take a nap, watch a program on television, check out the new restaurant in town or sit on your porch and do nothing.  
     So we have an unresolvable problem right out of the blocks.  If we drop the word 'properly' then we create another problem; viz. that doing nothing is utilizing time therefore we can not not utilize time.  I guess that being comatose might qualify as not utilizing our time since it is a state over which we have no control, but that seems to be pushing a bit hard. 
     Let's come back to this because this isn't the end of our problem.  Who or what determines if our lives are meaningful and happy?  
     This entire question has the smack of a societal question. Our social systems (i) like to tell us what is meaningful and what makes us happy.  If we determine what is meaningful in our lives and what makes us happy, that may not bode well with our society.  Prof. Tim Ingold, University of Manchester, was actually writing about the social relations of the hunter-gatherer band, but his observation about society is appropriate here. 
     "... transactions based on self-interest are conceived as the very antithesis of the social. Here, society connotes a domain of external regulation - identified either with the state or, in polites lacking centralized administration, with comparable regulative institutions - which curbs the spontaneous expression of private interests on behalf of public ideals of collective justice and harmony."  (ii)
     In other words, in our question, who gets to decide the definition of 'meaningful'?  I can tell you right now that my definition of meaningful in my life is about as contrary to the society in which I live as any definition can be.  I very honestly have no use for the society around me therefore I see the modern US social definition of meaningful as totally meaningless.  
     We have the same problem with the concept of 'happy'.  Modern American society tells its members that if they are good capitalists - working exhausting hours to pay ever increasing bills due to the expectation to continue outlandish consumption of things they do not need - they are happy.  I won't even begin to tell you what I think of capitalism, but I'm sure you can guess. I am a minimalist. I am a naturalist and conservationist who gets clausterphobic in a town and prefers to be totally out of sight of any sign of human civilization. The modern American capitalistic definition of 'happy' isn't going to come close to my definition. 
     Call it a gut feeling but I feel compelled to believe that the original question was posed with the idea that the words 'properly', 'meaningful' and 'happy' are defined by some external force known only to the person who originally posed the question.  My guess is that that external force is their society and/or their own personal social environment; viz. their social systems.   
     The early 20th century philosopher, Juddi Krishnamurti, defines this social environment as "... wealth, poverty, exploitation, oppression, nationalities, religions, and all the inanities of social life in modern existence,..." (iii)  
     I must insist that I am not trying to be sarcastic when I say that this original questioner was a part of modern western society that defines 'meaningful' as doing something which benefits the society and those who control it, and 'happy' means the collection of copious amounts of useless goods which are defined as wealth. My gut level reaction is that the original questioner was having second thoughts about mindlessly accepting her society's definition of 'proper', 'meaningful' and 'happy'.  But that doesn't really help us face her question. 
     So now we are faced with a much more complex question with a multifaceted answer. 
     Firstly, I propose that proper utilization of time is a totally personal concept therefore a generalized definition cannot be ascribed. Therefore any attempt to answer the question must differentiate between the personal and the definition of one's social systems. 
     Secondly, meaning and happiness are again personal. Do we want to know what makes us feel happy and enjoy a sense of meaning, or do we want to know what utilization of time makes our social systems happy?  
     One of the great things about philosophy is that we can take the simplest of question and debate it ad infinitum. (Most people considered that debating ad nausem or ad absurdum.) However, knowing that most modern readers do not like lengthy argument, I am going to attempt to sum up the question with a simple 'yes' and a resounding 'no'.  
     If the proper utilization of time is defined by our social systems there is going to be a very strong probability that it will not bring meaning and happiness to us, but to the beneficiaries of the society who are usually the very rich and/or elite ruling class who make the definition in the first place. Our only escape from this condition is either rebellion or to convince ourselves that we are happy with the confines of the society. In any such case I must conclude that the answer to the question is a resounding 'no'.     
     If the proper utilization of time is by our own personal definition, I would have to conclude that we have a greater potential for meaning and happiness if we have selected those things which bring us meaning and happiness.  I know this sounds stupidly simplistic, but there is always that possibility that our own definition of proper utilization, whether or not it identifies with our society, can be contrary to our actual happiness. It is here that one must turn the tables on the question and ask 'what use of time brings me meaning and hapiness?'  If one's definition of proper utilization is thus determined, then it should follow that their life will have meaning and be happy and the answer to the question is 'yes.'  
      
FOOTNOTES

(i) see my essay What constitutes a social system? for my definitions.  2/27/2020
(ii) Tim Ingold, "On the social relationships of the hunter-gatherer band" in Lee and Daly (1999) Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers. p 400. 
(iii) Krishnamurti, Juddi.  Total Freedom: the essential Krishnamurti.  Harper Collins Ebooks.  p. 20.  

Saturday, May 23, 2020

And they came

Martin Anastas sat at the end of the bar with an untouched glass of raki in front of him.  He sat quietly staring at the line of bottles below the standard bar mirror.  The bartender would occasional pause near him, look at the untouched glass, and move on.
     O’Sullivan’s was a good Irish pub just off the university campus. It was mostly frequented by faculty and graduate students.  Undergrads didn’t come in much because it didn’t have loud music. O'Sullivan’s was more of the local debate center and the venue of some of the most outstanding exchanges of opinion the university community had ever known. Hardly a night went by that there wasn't a large table of faculty being challenged by grad students over a pint of beer. The debates were often heated and lots of beer was consumed. Everyone left friends, agreeing to disagree. It was the academic's paradise. The campus, the library and the classrooms were the formal centers of academia. O'Sullivan's was the informal primus locus for debating ideas and testing hypotheses. 
     Martin Anastas, PhD,  Ledbetter Professor of Philosophy until about two hours previous, had been a participant in many of the debates and a moderator in many more. His entire life had been dedicated to his greatest loves; philosophy, learning and education. 
     Dr. Raymond Fedder, Professor of Psychology, walked in the door.  Sean, the owner/bartender, called out a welcome and with a tilt of the head set the new arrival's attention on Martin.  Raymond pulled up a stool next to Martin and ordered a pint of stout.  
     "You still drinking that Greek rot-gut?" Raymond tried to be light and friendly, but got no reply. 
     "Okay," said Raymond, "so much for the casual approach. What the hell's going on, Martin?" 
     "Sorry," said Martin. "I just got fired."
     "You what?!"
     "I got fired."
     "How in the hell do they fire the most popular professor ever to hold one of the most pretigious philosophical chairs in the country?" 
     "They tell you that you're a liability to the university."
     "You're a what?"
     "They said I'm a fucking liability because the federal Department of Education says they think I'm teaching anti-American philosophy!  They're replacing me with a DOE approved teacher."
     "You must be kidding.  It's April 1st. This must be an April Fools joke. This type of thing doesn't happen."  Raymond was dumbfounded.  What the hell was anti-American philosophy?  "A DOE approved teacher is an oximoron!"  
     "They made me clean out my office before I left campus."
    "That's absurd! You have to fight this!"
    "And how do I fight it?" Martin asked. "I'll be lucky to get my pension."
    As they talked another friend, Amos Frank, PhD, Associate Professor of Physics, entered the pub. He pulled a stool around the end of the bar so he could sit on the other side of Martin. 
    Amos' experience was with the government always wanting his department to develop something that the government could use to make a bigger and more destructive weapon. Amos had survived several such episodes, so his advice was "hang in there, this too will pass." 
     "I wonder," Martin said after a great deal of useless suggestions made to make him feel better, "if this is what refugees feel like?" 
    "What do you mean?" asked Raymond.
    "They have no control over their lives or their destiny. That's why they're fleeing. There are people whose sole purpose in life is to destroy their lives as well as their way of life. They are often treated by those who are driving them out as well as those with whom they seek asylum as inferior and losers. Do you  think refugees are angry?  I bet they're damn angry. Isn't anger a part of the cycle of grief?  I'm absolutely pissed beyond belief!"
     "But what are you fleeing?" Amos was lost. He was usually lost in anything other than a scientific argument. 
     "I feel like I have no control over my life. My own government seems absolutely intent upon destroying my life as well as my ability to live. It is definitely destroying the land that I love and calling me inferior and a loser because they have the power. I'm watching nature being raped. I'm watching people being abused for the benefit of a handful of super-rich people.  I'm watching prejudice and violence being normalized. I'm being told that my students can not seek truth and understanding but must be taught to conform and believe what the government tells them. If I do otherwise it is called anti-American." 
    "I can't believe that you would ever be accused of being anti-American," argued Raymond. "To disagree with the government is an integral part of democracy."
    "Who says we still have a democracy?" questioned Martin. 
    "That's a ridiculous question," Amos snapped. "Soon enough people will see through these ass-holes and vote them out. It will be okay." 
    "Normally I love your naivete," Martin almost smiled, "but that type of naive sentiment actually pisses me off. These monsters survive because of such sentiment." 
    "I have to agree with Martin on that one," said Raymond.  "Even before Hitler's final take-over of the German government people were saying 'it can never happen here.'  We're doing the same thing." 
    "Oh, come on guys," Amos looked seriously concerned, "you guys are talking like a couple of conspiracy geeks."
    "Do you know poem by the German Lutheran pastor, Martin Niemoller?" Martin asked. 
    "Who?" both of his friends asked.
    "Martin Niemoller was a Luthern pastor who opposed Hitler and paid dearly. He did survive and in 1946 wrote the famous poem . . ."

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.

    "We're not there yet," exclaimed Amos.
    "Aren't we?" questioned Martin. 
    "I know how you feel, Martin," Raymond said, "but we'll take this to the Regents and we'll win.  You're a phenomenal teacher and a brilliant thinker. They won't get rid of you."
    "Thank you, Raymond," said Martin. "but they don't want a phenomenal teacher or brilliant thinker. Those are the last things they want. They want someone to indoctrinate students with the government's latest position. It's 1984, my friends."
    Martin's two friends tried to disagree but they couldn't find a flaw in Martin's argument or logic. The government was using double-think and snubbing morality while claiming to be the definers of morality. They were teaching that war is peace, slavery is freedom and ignornce is strength, just like the novel. They finally gave up the argument and invited Martin to join them with a couple of grad students who wanted to pitch the idea of an interdisciplinary doctoral program. 
     As expected, Martin politely declined and the two friends moved to a neaby table.
    Martin was actually listening in on the grad students as they made their pitch when three men entered the pub. They stood for a moment at the door. They were all dressed in black suits, white shirts with bright red ties, and an American flag on their suit-coat lapel. 
     "We're looking for Professor Anastas," they demanded of the bartender. 
    Before Sean could say or do anything, Martin looked up. "I'm Professor Anastas." 
    The men made their way to the end of the bar; one on each side of Martin while the third stood facing him.
    "Dr. Martin Anastas, you are under arrest for unAmerican activities and teaching subversive philosophy. Please turn around and put your hands behind your back." 
    As everyone in the bar was paralyzed with shocked, Martin stood up and put his hands behind his back as instructed. The men in black hand-cuffed him.
    He turned to his friends and said "And they came for me . . . ."    
    Martin was led from the bar. His friends looked at each other wondering what they should do. It was then that they heard the shot. A single shot and then silence. 
    The evening news ran a report. 
"Martin Anastas, an immigrant college professor, was shot dead as he resisted arrest for unAmerican activities."  
     And they came . . . .
     
    
    






Thursday, May 21, 2020

A nomad's letter - 20200521

Thurs., May 21st., 2020

Dear Katie and Ron, 
     I certainly hope that this letter finds you happy and healthy.  The county next door to where we are camped had the largest number of new virus cases yesterday. That's scary. 
     This morning I awakened with the birds. That was just before daybreak.  Pamela went into Hopkinsville about 6:30.  I opened the window and laid quietly listening to the concert as the forest awakened and light began to filter through the canopy of trees.  It is wonderfully cool but the humidity, typical of these eastern hills, is high. You can almost feel the air, but it is pleasant and such tranquility quickly had me at that marvelous place between sleep and awake.
     The surface of the lake is like glass and I hear the occasional fishing boat go by. We are on the Kentucky Lake side of Land Between the Lakes. The two lakes, Kentucky on the west and Barkley on the east, were made from the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers. There is generally a lot of barge traffic even though they are both relatively shallow and silting in quickly. They are beautiful lakes but, unlike our crystal clear lakes in the Rockies, they are mud bottomed and so can actually appear brown in places. You know I've always said that nature will take back the land. It is definitely doing that here. Locals tell me that both lakes are shrinking.  You can boat the Cumberland River past Nashville, TN and the Tennessee River down to Alabama and use the Tom Bigbee Waterway to go all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. Even with the barges it is the epitomy of peace. The barges don't bother me but those loud engines must deafen the poor crew members.  
     We are camped on a promontory that is about a hundred feet above the lake and everything around us. The woods are thick and there's just enough room to park Mr. Spock. Even with the forest canopy above us there is enough light to run our solar panel. We can get water about five miles away but Pamela gets our drinking water in Hopkinsville which is about forty miles away. We could probably buy water at a store ten miles up the road, but she had to go into town anyway. We still don't drink from the holding tank even though we just cleaned it with clorox the other day. No matter how clean you keep it, a holding tank starts tasting bad sooner or later, and Mr. Spock is now twenty-four years old. Roadtreks are really rare around here, so we always get the looks.        
     This is a wonderfully beautiful place. The forest is so different from back home in Montana but I grew up in Pennsylvania in mountains like this. They bring back great memories.  Instead a soft layer of needles covering the forest floor like we have in the Rockies, there are leaves. They make noise as you walk through them but the deer still bound away without a sound.  The deer are quite skittish here. We figure that it's because hunting is allowed. The trees are almost all disceduous. Around us we have mostly hickory, oak, sweetgum, with some  elm and hackberry. When you see an evergreen you really notice. Actually about the only everygreens here are white pine which the CCC planted during the Great Depression. It is not uncommon to be driving down one of these one-lane dirt trails and suddenly see a line of four or five white pine. You know who's been there. The understory is quite lush from the humidity and heavy leaf compost.  The spring bloom doesn't quite match a Sonoran Desert super-bloom but it does have its own magnificance.  It reminds me that life is everywhere.  Just like we see in the desert, beautiful plants and flowers growing from what appears to be solid rock are all along the flooding streams. 
     We go out and drive through the forest whenever possible. The "roads" are dirt trails which were graveled at some point in the past. We spend most of our time in four-wheel drive fording flooded creeks and climbing rocky hillsides. That's where we find some of the most spectacular follage. We had to stop to see if it was safe to try to cross a creek when we spotted some Cardinal flowers growing out of the rocky creek wall just above the flood water. They were magnificent in their color, simplicity and delicacy. Well, they look delicate, but they must be quite hearty to survive where they obviously thrive. 
     There are lots of deer, turkey, bison and elk here.  Yes, bison. Bison were still here when the white man invaded. In fact, the state flag of Indiana has a bison on it. I wonder if they are the forest bison like we encountered in the Yukon last summer. This is a large area for the east but their range is still quite constricted.  People here have no idea of space. What feels to them to be spacious is really quite contained to those of us from the west. Our county in Montana; Flathead; is bigger than the twelve counties around us here in western Kentucky.  To make it even more congested, one town here has more people than our entire Flathead, Montana  county. In fact, Nashville, TN., just down the road, has almost as many people as the entire State of Montana. Montana is made for social distancing.
      A ranger told us that they actually sell bison here because the herds are doing so well but there's no place for them to expand. We have heard stories about bear and mountain lions moving back in.  We haven't seen any signs of either, but you know how they can be practically standing next to you and you don't know it. 
     We miss being back in Montana. Normally we would have been opening campgrounds three weeks ago.  The national park may not open at all this year.  If we had not come east to see our family we would most likely be hunkering down to ride out this pandemic with you in the high desert. Since we're always back in Montana by May we have no experience of summer in the desert; even the high desert. We hope you are doing well.  The only thing I worry about is your getting water.  Are the water kiosks open?    
     Well, I need to be going. Max is telling me that it is almost 8:00 and time to go out, so I'd better get with the program.  Keep safe and healthy. Drop us a note when you can.  We hope to see you soon, but things are strictly day by day with the pandemic. Pamela sends her love. 
With love,


Russ  

Wednesday, May 13, 2020

Peace is not lost

 It is common in our venacular to talk about 'finding' peace. In fact, my last essay was entitled "Finding Peace".  But peace is not lost. We might be, but peace isn't.  
     I actually began to explore this idea when I was contemplating nature and thinking about how nature isn't out there somewhere hiding or hidden from us. Nature IS. It hit me that peace is the same.
     The movie Rocky and Bullwinkle was filled with subtle and not-so subtle gags. One of the more subtle has two young men pull up and offer Rocky and Bullwinkle a ride. The two young men explain that they are out looking for America but, alas, can't find it.  Is this not what we do with peace?  We assume that it is somewhere to be sought out and discovered while, like nature, it's right here. 
     When I walk the Black Fox Hollow trail singing Om mani peme hung, focusing on my breath or saying 'hi' to the plants, do I find peace or do I open myself up to something already here and recognize that as peace?  Could it be that in our constant chatter at ourselves, which I call our Chatty Kathy brain,  we separate ourselves from peace?  Could it be that we do not know how to let go of the issues and baggage we all carry around. 
     While I want to avoid the negative as much as possible in these essays on peace I would be amiss if I didn't acknowledge the role that our social systems play in our distress.  Social systems indoctrinate us to constantly be concerned about appearance, future, competition, etc. These keep us from knowing peace. We have been indoctrinated to believe in revenge, keeping face, etc. Capitalism, our economic social system, would have us believe that competition is a natural part of life, when, in reality, that is not true.  Part of the way social systems control us is to keep us constantly in turmoil or fearful of the future. We must be willing to stand up and contradict our social systems. For a greater peace, we cannot permit our social systems to dictate our behavior and beliefs. 
     It is imperative to be willing or desirous of  letting go of whatever keeps us from peace even if we have no idea how to do that. It is the willingness or desire that matters.  From my own experience I have found that peace comes to me especially when I am desirous of throwing off the emotional baggage I carry. I don't have to work at peace. The biggest effort comes in letting go of the issues. At the same time I find that, if I'm walking the trail and don't want to give up my funk, peace cannot be forced upon me.
     That last sentence made me think of an old gag or joke where the person is grumpy and angry and saying something along the lines of "don't try to cheer me up. I earned this funking and I'm going to . . . ."   If we insist upon holding on to our disquieting and oppressive thoughts and emotions, nothing is going to take them from us. 
     When I was in Rockford, MD for my National Hypnotherapy certification training I spoke with a practitioner who was very successful helping people to stop smoking. His success rate was well over 90%.  He explained that the reason was that the patient had to sincerely want to stop smoking for themselves.  If they came to him and said that they did it because their children or spouse convinced them to do it, he wouldn't take them as a patient.  The drive to quit had to be personal.  He then created other guarantees. He made them pay a large fee up front.  This, he said, served multiple clinical purposes:  it reinforced that it was their personal desire, and it put a significant value on completing the course.  There are people who might pay $50 or even $100 to say "I told you it wouldn't work," but most people are not going to shell out $400 to do that. 
     Letting go of our anger, frustration, etc.,  requires both a desire and a cue.  I have noticed that singing Om mani peme hung is evidently my cue. I did not create this cue on purpose.  I'm guessing that I came to naturally associate this popular Tibetan mantra with the Dalai Lama with whom I had the privilege of studying. That was a peaceful and happy time. There are times when I will pick up a mala, sometimes called a Tibetan rosary, and sing the mantra or I'll just start singing to myself.  No matter which way I do it, the  results are almost immediate. I first begin to feel a sense of calm followed by tranquility. Is this like cues I'd teach my patients? I guess it is.  The mantra brings my focus immediately on the present. When Om mani is on my lips there is no past or future. Just the present. For some reason it doesn't seem possible to have a negative thought or emotion and sing Om mani at the same time. 
     How to let go of issues and baggage is the focus of many self-help books of varying quality. Almost all books on Buddhism address this to some extent at some point. It is much easier to talk about than do while, at the same time, it isn't as hard as we think. I know. That sounds like a contradiction. The first thing is to interrupt our negative self-talk. That can be done with the basic meditation that focuses on our breath. (i) I'm not as regular as I should be, but I use walking meditation. 
     It seems only proper to share some of the cues of which I am aware and/or have used.  I have found great benefit to accupressure over the years. The skin between the thumb and index finger is called Hegu or LI-4 in accupuncture and accupressure.  It is used to control pain but is also a good place for a self-cue.  Either with the help of a professional hypnotherapist or on your own, you associate a gentle squeeze of LI-4 with a sense of tranquility. Basically you start by squeezing when you experience tranquility in your meditation or self-hypnotic state. After a while you will associate the squeeze with the tranquility and recall it when the squeeze comes first.  This breaks you out of the daily spiral of negativity, fear, anger, etc., and brings you back to the present where you find peace.  Since tranquility is a part of the peace experience, you learn to build upon it.  
     One thing to which I must confess is being rather reclusive. I'd be a happy recluse if Pamela would go along with it. Since becoming a nomad I have learned to turn sauntering through the desert or mountain wilderness into my walking meditation.  I got the idea of sauntering from John Muir who said he didn't like the word 'hike' but preferred to saunter. (ii)  Sauntering is much slower than walking or hiking.  I may be gone for several  hours and not cover more than four or five miles because I move slowly, in a mindful manner, looking closely at everything from the smallest plant to the greatest mountain. When I do this my focus is so much on the present, so much on the beauty of nature, that my Chatty Kathy brain, which is constantly talking to me and often in a negative way,  is tuned out.  Since we have been confined to our place in western Kentucky during the pandemic, I have been thankful for the Black Fox Hollow where I can replicate this experience and saunter.  I would strongly recommend getting out in nature, as far away from the din of humanity as you can, and just sit or saunter. Experience and learn the marvels of the here and now where one experiences peace. 
     I was introduced to the 'singing bowls' when I studied with the Dalai Lama some years ago.  I bought a modern bowl and loved it so much that I bought an 18th century bowl with the most phenomenal tone.  Pamela finds that a session with the singing bowl when trying to go to sleep helps with her Restless Leg Syndrome.  I find that the sound of the bowl is similar to Om Mani in that it is associated with present peace and tranquility.  A nomadic lady whom we know lives in her van and is known as 'the gong lady'. I won't use her name because I don't have permission. The point of telling about her is that she provides meditation sessions and programs using gongs and will draw a sizable crowd even out in the desert. The use of a bowl or gong is a two-way interaction.  The deep, rich, calm sound helps us in our efforts to turn off Chatty Kathy thereby being able to focus on the present moment and experience peace. While the bowl is initially an aid it soon becomes the cue. When we hear the sound of the bowl we can almost immediately tune out Chatty Kathy and focus on the present peace.  Believe me. It is an amazing experience. 
     Staying with the basic theme, bells are used by Buddhist monks to cue them to stop and be mindful of the world around them. One monk told me that he was so accustomed to the temple bells that he really missed them when he came to the United States. He started using any bell he might hear; church, tower clocks, etc.; and supplemented them with an alarm that made a bell sound. The use of bells to remind, or cue, us to stop and focus on the present is not only beneficial just for that but can also become a trigger as we found with the bowl. 
     The mala, sometimes called the Tibetan rosary, is not magical. It is a simple counting device. However, like other devices, it becomes our cue and perhaps a trigger. I do not use a mala to count the number of times I recited a mantra.  For me it is part of the process of maintaining my focus. I chant Om mani peme hung for each bead. Because I have done this so much over the years, the tempo of the recitation soon matches my steps which are matched to my breathing. It is all a very successful way of turning off Chatty Kathy and being grounded in the present. Peace is in the present. 
     The recitation of a gatha or mantra is an obvious part of the use of a mala, but the gatha or mantra can be used without a mala. In fact, I recite Om Mani more without a mala than I do with one. A gatha is a short reminder phrase that Thich Nhat Hanh teaches. He has a gatha for just about every activity of daily living. His gatha for brushing your teeth is a vow to use loving speech. 
Brushing my teeth and rinsing my mouth,
I vow to speak purely and lovingly
When my mouth is fragrant with right speech
a flower blooms in the garden of my heart.  (iii)
As I have said, for me to start chanting Om Mani has almost immediate results. But there are two things of which I should remind readers. Firstly, I have to be willing to use it. We must all be mindful of and willing to admit that there are times that we just don't want to give up our negative funk. We might say we want to be happy and at peace, but we cling to our funk and defend it like a close friend, when it is among our worst enemies. Secondly, any of these cues and triggers will work but work faster and more efficiently with practice. While I had a peaceful experience the first time I used a bowl and chanted Om Mani, they didn't have the almost instant effect for quite some time. It's rather like the classical musician in New York City who was asked by a tourist "how do you get to Carnegie Hall?" to which the musician replied "practice! practice! practice!"  
     The result of casting off the baggage, letting go of anger, etc., is that we realize that peace has been here all along. It is a matter of clearing away all the hindrances so kindly provided by difficulties, social systems and our Chatty Kathy brains.  Our cues remind us that peace is not something we lost in the past or must seek in the future.  When we focus on living in the present we find peace.  


FOOTNOTES
  
(i) I highly recommend any of Thich Hnat Hahn's books on meditation. 
(ii)  Palmer, Albert. (1911). The mountain trail and its message. Boston.  Pilgrim Press. p. 27.   The famous Muir quote actually comes from the work of Albert Palmer who tells about meeting Muir on the trail where he made this statement.  "I don't like either the word [hike] or the thing. People ought to saunter in the mountains - not 'hike!' Do you know the origin of that word saunter? It's a beautiful word. Away back in the middle ages people used to go on pilgrimages to the Holy Land, and when people in the villages through which they passed asked where they were going they would reply, 'a la sainte terre', to the Holy Land.  And so so they became known as sainte-terre-ers or saunterers. Now these mountains are our Holy Land, and we ought to saunter through them reverently, not 'hike' through them." 
(iii) Nhat Hanh, Thich. (2009). Happiness: essential mindfulness practices. Parallax Press. Berkeley, CA. p. 28

Wednesday, May 6, 2020

Finding Peace

 I raised the question in the essay  What is peace? as to whether or not there is such a thing as peace. I offer only antidotal evidence for the existence of 'inner' peace; i.e. the freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts and emotions.  
     First I guess I need to suggest that there are two types of peace based upon definition.  One I would consider a social condition as in 'they have a peace treaty' or 'the city is at peace as the rioting stops.'  The second, and the one to which I believe I speak in these essays, is what we might call inner peace as in 'she is at peace . . . .'  or 'he finds peace in the wilderness.' 
     My antidotal evidence for the latter is the sense of tranquility and the lack of disquieting or oppressive thoughts and emotions that I experience when I am in the wilderness.  When I am wandering through the desert or climb a mountain trail, where I can stand on a high promontory and see absolutely no signs of humanity, I admire the beauty around me and listen to the songs of nature. At these times I feel no emotional burdens, life feels good, there is a strong sense of calm. I am focused on the present and the life around me.  I greet the sky and clouds, plants and animals. I look closely at the smallest plant and study the creases in the massive mountain. Both are my friends.  It is interesting to notice that, at these times, I have no thought of the human world I left behind.  I do not think of the violence and destruction so prevalent in my species, nor do ignarus populi or the infamous turpus americanus enter my mind.  This is the best example and evidence for peace that I have.  
     Could the distance from and lack of evidence of human civilization be a significant part of this peace?  When I am in a town or highly populated area my senses are constantly bombarded and over-loaded by the negativity of humanity.  Look at social media or the news. It is one long, endlessly long, litany of lying and cheating miserabilis culus politicians, human against human violence, human against nature destruction, arrogant religions demanding dominance and mind-numbing, hope-killing promises that someone, usually your own government, is trying to destroy some important part of your life. 
     Yes, I'm sure that the news is probably sensationalized. At the same time they are still themes, concepts, ideas, actions and reality with which your brain must cope. Is anyone out there trying to tell me that people can actually live with this day after day and experience peace?  If that's true, why do we see so much child abuse, wife abuse, road rage, school shootings, and other forms of violence often associated with frustration and anger?    
     One thing that bothers me to no end is that it is never quiet in the over-populated, so-called civilization.  Humans can't hear the beautiful sounds of nature because they're too busy making noise.  Black Fox Hollow is big enough that I can sit on a log and feel like I'm in my beloved wilderness, except for one thing; viz. noise!  It is rare to sit in the hollow without at least one or two engines; mower, weed trimmers, chain saws, generators;  cars and trucks, screaming children, or low flying helicopters from the nearby fort. I can hear the blaring "music" from an approaching car.  It is so loud that I find it uncomfortable when it passes and I can still hear it long after the car is out of sight.  I post an audio of the birds singing in the hollow and it is received like a new symphony.  Why?  I would suspect it's because the vast majority of people can't hear the birds on their own over the din of human society. 
     Then there's the 'me-first-to-hell-with-you' attitude that seems to be endemic in cities. Pamela knows that basically everything about a city triggers me, so she does her best to help me avoid them or get in and out as quickly as possible. 
     I cannot believe that I'm the only one to have such feelings and experiences. I'm not that unique.  I cannot believe that the cause of the depression and search for peace among people isn't because they share my aversions but just can't put a name to them. The problem is that most of those thus suffering aren't retired and/or nomads like my friends and me.  We can give society the one-finger salute and drive off into the wilderness not to be seen for weeks. These other poor people can't do that. Call us escapist if you like, but it works!
     Now some may say that I am unnecessarily sensitive. You are welcome to accuse me of anything. It doesn't matter. I'm still not at peace in the so-called civilized world whether or not you are right. The issue is not to label or blame people like me, but to help us find peace.  
     What about desensitization?  Before I retired I was a nationally certified hypnotherapist, so I've made extended us of desensitization.  I used it to help people cope, not to make them accept something like certain aspects of our society and culture, which they are naturally rejecting.  I helped a patient who was afraid of riding in a vehicle be able to use public transportation.  I did not make him like riding in a vehicle.  Through desensitization I helped him discover that he had the strength necessary to cope and ride in a vehicle when it was necessary.  He still didn't like cars and buses.  I am an Ericsonian hypnotherapist. We're sometimes called "permissive" hypnotherapists because we never tell anyone "you will ..." we give them permission; e.g. "your hands may feel like they're floating, or they may feel so heavy you can't lift them."  We don't give orders or instructions because they can easily backfire.  I read of a person who went to a non-Ericsonian hypnotherapist about eating. Under hypnosis the person was told that sweets, pastries, pies, cakes, etc., would make them sick.  The person went to a wedding the next day.  What do you have at a wedding?  Wedding cake. What do you think happened?  How embarrassing.  That is the wrong use of hypnosis. 
     I had a young woman who was autistic.  She was very high functioning.  She was married, had two children and a home. Like most autistic people I know, she has a hard time going into a big, noisy, crowded place like Walmart. (Boy, can I relate to that!) Having a stranger hover over her baby was always good for a meltdown. Using hypnotherapeutic techniques I made it so whenever her husband put his hand on her shoulder and gently squeezed she would immediately recall one of her most cherished  memories. This didn't change the situation or make her like going to Walmart.  It was done to help her cope in those cases where she had no choice but go into a place like Walmart.  It briefly breaks the focus on the adverse situation and/or over-stimulation thereby giving she and her husband a chance to escape and defuse a meltdown. 
     Could we use desensitization in such a way to allow us to cope and as a result find peace?  It is worth considering.  Also akin to hypnosis is visualization, which would be much easier to use and often equally as successful.  For a few years I participated with two colleagues; a physician and a chiropractor/physical therapist; in a pain clinic.  We were actually quite successful but disbanded after our chiropractor developed some serious health problems. My job was to provide therapy to help the patients deal with the pain and the causes of the pain, and to use hypnotherapeutic techniques to help deal with pain when the medications wore off. The technique I used was visualization because it was something one could easily do themselves.  I had one lady to whom I taught visualization.  She was in with our chiropractor. He told me later that he said "what we're going to do today might be uncomfortable, so you might want to use some of those pain techniques Dr. Vance has been teaching you."  He turned around and she was out - asleep, unconscious, having switched off the world, whatever. 
     Most of my patients had low IQ. Back then this was called Mental Retardation and Developmental Disability. I'm sure there is a new politically correct term. I certainly hope so. In any case, hypnosis should not be used when the patient's IQ is too low.  I figured out that, except for the non-verbal and a few others, a high percentage of my patients could visualize. One's ability to abstract begins around age eleven. The precursor and training wheels for abstract thinking is make-believe; imagination, junior role-play.  
     A good example was one of my patients who suffered from great pain. He was in long-term care even though he was only in his thirties because of extreme medical conditions and the inability to care for himself. The nursing staff told me that his strong, addictive and potentially deadly pain killers were wearing off long before he was allowed more. There is nothing more dangerous than an animal in great pain and that includes the animal species homo sapiens. I taught him visualization. The short version is that he would lie down on the floor and pretend he was on a beach where the warm sand was making the pain go away. We practiced it so much together that it got to the point that the mention of warm sand had an observable effect. He was soon doing it on his own. His attending physician didn't like shrinks, nevertheless shrinks who were also hypnotherapists. He confronted me one day in the hallway and went on about how that foolishness I had taught our patient only worked for a couple of hours. I asked him how long his drugs lasted. Bad question. It just made him more angry so I had no choice but go for the coup de grace. I pointed out that if my method only lasted two hours, he could do it again immediately. In fact, there was no limit to how often he could use it. Tell me again how many pills is he allowed each day?  
     The step from visualization to Buddhist mindfulness, especially as it is taught by Thich Nhat Hanh, the famous Vietnamese meditation master, is an easy one. The most common method of practicing mindfulness is meditation.  Meditation, or some form thereof, is another common method of achieving peace and learning to cope.  Since the average Buddhist monk is meditating in an effort to achieve enlightenment, I would assume that they would agree that peace, for them, is a byproduct of that effort.  
     Quite a number of years ago, just a year or so before his brother died, I had the great privilege of studying with the Dalai Lama. Well, there were a couple of hundred others, but the Dalai Lama made each of us feel like we were the only students in the room. He is a phenomenal human being, but I don't dare get started on Dalai Lama stories. 
     Many of you are aware of my dislike of religion, yet the Dalai Lama is the leader of one of the world's largest religions. Why would I be drawn to him?  Our class went for two weeks. He almost immediately insisted that he is just a simple monk named Lhamo.  One of the first days there he said, "the world can do without religion but it cannot do without spirituality."  I've always rather like Pope Francis. Perhaps that's because he's always been a radical social activist like Jesus and a thorn in the established church's side. Nevertheless, can you imagine him saying that the world could do without the Roman Catholic Church?  
     In any case, the Dalai Lama explained, as he has done in books, that Buddhism is 99% philosophy and psychology of life and 1% religion. His prescription for inner peace is not believing what Buddhism teaches, giving money or killing those who disagree. In fact, the Dalai Lama sees no need for temples or the complications of religion. His prescription is to take some time each day to be alone. This is your time to reflect (perhaps meditate) and let go of negative thoughts such as anger, resentment, jealousy and exhaustion.  The Dalai Lama strongly believes that a calm mind is the "source of happiness and health".  Sounds like peace to me.   
     An organization called Cultura Colectiva (www.culturacolectia.com) published what they call the Dalai Lama's ten recommedations for inner peace.  They are definitely worthy of a look. 
(1) Be compassionate
(2) Cultivate friendship
(3) Be kind and help others
(4) Don't let technology take over your lives.
(5) Find happiness
(6) Negotiate instead of arguing
(7) Find inner peace
(8) Be kind to the earth
(9) Learn from your mistakes
(10) Don't hurt others 
Compassion and kindness (1&3) are not really a part of our modern culture. Such things are viewed as weakness.  The Dalai Lama shared with us his life long fascination for taking things apart to find out how they work. By the time he was a teenager he had done this with a clock and a car left in Tibet by an Englishman, and he has always loved watches. He is routinely hosting conferences with scientists and philosophers on such subjects as quantum physics and spirituality. So he is not against technology. He just warns us that the constant use of technology (4) tends to deter human relationships and limit people from being compassionate. Under 'find happiness' (5) the CC points out that the media bombards us with propaganda about material possessions but never gives a value to patience, forgiveness and tolerance. When people adopt these attitudes they are more able to find happiness. #7, 'find inner peace', is what I mentioned above about taking time alone.  I like #8, 'be kind to the earth', because I'm a conservationist but it follows that if you are kind to the earth you will be kind to yourself and others. That's definitely a prescription for peace. 'Don't hurt others' (10) is the foundation for the Buddhist first rule of life to which I subscribe. The full version is, as I learned and attempt to practice it, "do good to all sentient beings, and if you cannot do good, do no harm."  
     Could meditation or something similar be the key?  Could it actually be that simple? 
     For starters, meditation is not easy or simple.  It takes determination and consistency.  There are probably thousands of books on how to meditate. What I've found is that you read a few and then figure out what works for you. That's the really hard part. How do you know if it works?  I wish I could remember the Lama's name, but I remember him telling about being a young Buddhist monk and having to take a commuter train into the city each day. Long story short, he was told by his meditation master that when he could meditate standing up on that commuter train, then he knew how to meditate.  He did it and is now, himself, a lama teaching others.  I've had that image in my mind for a good twenty plus years.  It isn't a matter of whether you put your left leg over your right when in Lotus position or whether you can't cross your legs at all.  Since, when I was in practice, my work day went from around 6:30 am to 11:00 pm,  formal sitting meditation was almost an impossibility. That's when I turned to walking meditation. 
     Various Buddhist schools have very specific meditation techniques and practices but they will all tell you that it is a part of training your mind. Who is the one person in the world whom you can never get to shut up?  Yourself. You are talking to yourself constantly. It's one of the down-sides of the more complex brain. When you have control of your brain then you have control of your behavior. When you can break out of a long litany of self-degradation or a no-win game of "if I had only said" it seems reasonable to believe that you can experience freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts and emotions. Peace. 
     Yes, I confess, Black Fox Hollow is an escape for me. It was a very conscious undertaking with the purpose of returning the hollow to its natural pre-invasion state as well as escaping and providing a place to escape from the undesirable world around me. By taking on the project of returning the hollow to its pre-invasion state and cataloging all of the plants, I keep my focus on the positive, allowing me to forget I'm in the middle of humanity. The 1/8th mile long trail winds its way through the hollow where I can do walking meditation and focus upon the marvels of nature around me.  I've cataloged over 90 species of trees and plants. Sometimes I walk slowly calling each plant by name. That not only helps me remember the names but enables me to focus on a positive present and not the failing world around me. Sometimes I walk slowly and greet each by name. That is more personal.  Or I might walk slowly doing breath mindfulness or singing the mantra Om mani peme hung to all I pass. There is reason that I'm called a tree-huger.  
     Might we not conclude that visualization is a lot like meditation?  Both break our focus on the negative and direct it where we want/need it.  Both control our thoughts and give us a chance to escape the grip of the disquieting and oppressive thoughts and emotions. That escape then allows us to refocus on positive thoughts or calm.  It does seem that meditation and/or visualization  can help us find inner peace. The thing which I notice, as I think about this, is that this is not often lasting inner peace. I don't remember ever mentioning that the peace we seek must last a particular amount of time. I think that we often assume that those who find inner peace always have it.  That may be true in some cases. I can't help but think of the Buddhist monk.  Many exude a tranquility when they walk into a room.  The Dalai Lama can calm an arena just by walking in and bowing to his audience.  At the class I mentioned above, I frequently sat with the monk who was the caretaker for the Dalai Lama's brother, who was seriously ill even then. He too exuded calm and compassion.  The University of Minnesota studied the changes in the brain of a group of Buddhist monks who were meditation masters.  I can't find the results of that study, but I do remember that they found a great difference.  Could the extended practice of meditation and visualization actually bring about an almost permanent peace?  
     This is obviously beyond the purview of this essay. This essay was intended to answer the question of whether or not there is peace and, assuming that there is, where do we find it.  Although my evidence was only antidotal I think it was rather compelling and sufficient to say that peace does exist.  Finding that peace appears to be achievable through visualization and meditation.  The experience of Buddhist monks seems to indicate that long-term use of meditation has positive and permanent benefits.  It seems that the next step is to investigate the validity of this observation.  However, in the mean time, I'm heading back to Black Fox Hollow with Om Mani on my lips, looking for peace.  May peace be yours. 



Monday, May 4, 2020

What is peace

     This morning I spent almost three hours sitting on a log in our Black Fox Hollow. Three things consumed my time. First, I was admiring the beauty and tranquility of the hollow and noticing how plants we have brought here to survive are doing well. Secondly I was taking pictures and posting them to Instagram to share the marvels of nature and to offer pictures of beauty and peace in a social network filled with violence, death and miserabilis culus politicians.  Thirdly I was desperately seeking peace. I was searching for peace, an all-consuming desire, in a time when greed, death, violence and destruction seem to reign supreme. 
     What is peace? Where do we find peace?  How do we find peace?  Is there really such a thing as peace?  
     Modern homo sapiens are such domesticated herd animals that we make sheep and cows look like independent thinkers. Capitalists tell us that we will find peace and happiness if we just work more hours and spend more money.  Do you believe that? That just makes them richer and me more tired and more in debt.  
     Religion has been promising peace for thousands of years.  As recent as the last millenium, all you had to do was believe and do everything you're told, kill something to prove your loyalty and give your first-born son to serve in the church.  Today the major religions don't generally expect your first-born but many do expect you to kill the other guy (Moslems, Jews, Christians, etc.). They all expect total obedience and your money and then you can have peace. If you don't find peace it is because you didn't really believe strongly enought or pray hard enough. It couldn't be that the religion is totally groundless and serving the purpose of an elite few. Naw. That could never be the case. 
     Government will tell you . . . aw, who knows what the hell government will tell you. It depends upon what the governing elite want at any given moment.  If they want to pollute your drinking water with their leaky pipeline, they'll tell you that allowing the pipeline will make you happy and give you peace because you'll have cheap gasoline for your car.  The current Culus Primus of the US just wants to be a god and/or have all the marbles, whichever comes first. So he'll tell you that you can know peace and prosperity when you give him total power, your total allegiance, and be willing to die for the economy, which just happens to benefit him, not you. 
     Oh, I could go on and on, but I really did start this essay with the goal of exploring how one might find peace.  It is obvious that for the elite of the population 'peace' is a commodity or, at the least, a carrot to be held out in front of us to get us to do their bidding.
     Meriam-Webster Dictionary has four definitions of peace of which only two relate to individuals:  (1) a state of tranquility or quiet such as freedom from civil disturbance. (2) freedom from disquieting or oppressive emotions or thoughts (3) Harmony in a relationship.  (4) A treaty between two governments.
     Number one made me immediately think, 'okay, let Culus Primus have his way, work 60+ hours a week and still not make ends meet, and keep his precious economy going and we will have freedom from civil disturbance. '  Yes, and tell those trouble-makers who want things like civil rights, a  clean environment and a truly representative government to shut up. Then we'll have peace. Who buys this?  It also made me think of a Juddi Krishnamurti quote: "It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoudly sick society."
     I like number two; viz. freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts and emotions.  This, I believe, is what I'm looking for as I do walking meditation around the Black Fox Hollow trail.  
     Before we go any farther, l know someone is itching to tell me that life 'isn't a bowl of cherries' and that we can't always have freedom from disquieting or opressive emotions or thoughts. I can't agree more. Here I'm going to add that famous (and sometimes infamous) conjunction "but". But we can do very, very, very much better. Things like health issues, dying (a real downer), and relationships with friends and loved ones are going to have disquieting thoughts and emotions no matter what we do.  My first thought is I could sure use some freedom from the disquieting and opressive thoughts like: what is my government going to do next to destroy the environment and wilderness I love?  what is my government going to do next that will immediately or eventually kill me?  what is my government going to do next to take away any security I've earned and give my money to their rich employers? and what is my government going to do next to break the law and/or violate the Constitution they are supposed to uphold?  
     Granted, humans have the tremendous ability to be aware of past and present and contemplate the future. Sadly we have a strong propensity to live in the past, worry about the future and miss the present completely. Even this essay could be accused of that. 
     Actually, such an accusation is a good segue to the point at which I felt certain we would eventually reach; viz.  that what I see as the operational definition of peace is an individual issue, goal and state which is dependent upon focusing on the present. 
No religion, government, economic or social system is going to give you freedom from disquieting and oppressive thoughts and emotions. The only one who has that ability is you. 
     It is true.  The first person whom I need to hear this message is the one I see in the mirror.  The purpose of writing an essay is tantamont to thinking out loud and sharing any enlightenment I might experience.  
     The next step is to face the questions where do we find peace, how do we find peace and is there really such a thing as peace?   I'm not prepared at this time to even dip my toe in that raging river of philosophy and soul searching.  It's going to take a lot more trips with a cup of tea around the Black Fox Hollow trail before I can share any insights. 
     This is important to me, so I promise I will come back with some ideas and the next installment.  However, I can see the writing on the wall.  Eventually we're going to get to the point where this is all like dying . . . you've got to do it alone.         

Sunday, May 3, 2020

The Fallacy of Human Superiority

 I do believe that no matter how radical or critical a philosophy is of the homo sapiens, all philosophies and philosophers begin with the assumption of human superiority.  I believe that is wrong!  To start with, the assumption of human superiority is not only starting with a wrong, or at the least an unsubstantiated, first premise but it skews any logic to follow. Perhaps this is the downfall of all philosophies, because you can not reach a valid conclusion with an erroneous premise.
      My first premise in any essay or dialectic is that homo sapiens are not superior, just different. 
     The problem we have with even talking about this issue is that we base our definitions, and hence our conclusions, on ourselves.  We make ourselves the criteria for superiority. How can we fail?  When challenged, the proponents of human superiority can only turn to religion or the fact that we have a more complex brain. Those are not conclusive. In fact, religion is not even grounded in fact, and the fact that we have a more complex brain means just that. It doesn't mean that we are superior to all other species. 
     What if I was a bird?   Can a human fly without an airplane?  Can a human navigate over tremendous distances without a compass, map or navigational equipment? So far, as a bird, I'm superior to humans. 
     What if I was a bear?  Can a human hunt without special equipment?  Is a human strong enough to bring down a moose with his bare hands?  Can a human dig a ground squirrel or glacier lilly root out of the ground with their claws?   Can they navigate without map or compass?  A human on a bicycle can't outrun me.  As a bear, I'd say I'm superior to humans.  
     I can obviously go on through all of the animals in the world and come to the same conclusion.  If I use myself as the definition of superiority, I'm going to be superior.  
     So what do homo sapiens have that other animals do not have?  We may structurally be the ultimate running animal, but besides the fact that we have, for the most part, given up running, that doesn't make us the fastest runner and therefore not a superior runner. 
     Our brains are rather unique as the newest primate in the evolutionary process. That should make us superior as far as decision-making, analysis, etc.  Sadly, we seem to abuse our most unique quality making us arrogant, destructive and violent.  Nevertheless, in what we might call "brain power" we are superior. Does that make us superior animals?  No. We still can't fly, outrun a bear or navigate long distances without help. 
     If we had not purposely excluded ourselves from nature, I can't help but wonder whether or not we might have become an important part of the balace of nature. As it is, many scientist and other experts have concluded that homo sapiens could disappear from the Earth without being missed.  In fact, after all of the tremendous damage we've done, the Earth would be stronger and healthier without people.  Dr. Yuval Noah Harari (Hebrew: יובל נח הררי‎; born 24 February 1976) is an Israeli historian and a tenured professor in the Department of History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.  In his study of human history, Dr. Harari concludes that had homo sapiens not learned to work together and had stayed in their original setting, we would have become extinct long ago. 
     Let's call this brain power edge we have over other animals "intellect".  I know it is hard to believe that most homo sapiens actually have more intellect than other animals, but I do think this is supported by science. Does this make us superior?  
     Homo Sapiens think that intellect makes us superior, but that goes back to using ourselves as the definition of supperiority. That's our strong point and therefore we are likely to use it as our argument for superiority.  
     If you are facing an angry grizzly sow with a cub, you're intellect might keep you from getting killed; viz. being able to figure out how to get away without being attacked. Otherwise you're no match for the bear.  In that scenario they are the superior animal.  
     Now someone is going to say "oh, I'd have a gun with me."  I'd laugh hysterically but I hear it too often.  Unless you gun is the size of a small canon, you're probably just going to make the bear more angry.  Experts have seen it take as many as nine high powered rifle slugs to bring down a bear, and, upon autopsy, it was discovered that most of the slugs did not penetrate the bear's fat. We may be more vicious killers, but we're still not superior. 
     We do have among the best visual clarity in the animal kingdom. That's nice for us but does not make us superior. If you need to see in the dark, you don't want to be human.  I've seen Osprey sitting on a nest almost a quarter of a mile from a lake suddenly take flight and go pull a fish from the water. I've witnessed hawks soaring hundreds of feet above a field and spot a mouse.  We just can't do these things. It doesn't mean that the Osprey and the Hawk are superior animals. Just different. 
     Differences in species does not make one overall superior just superior in that situation. Nature uses these differences as a part of its balance.  How do lions and hyenes hunt in the same area without being in constant conflict? They hunt differently and at different times. How do wolves, mountain lions and coyotes co-exist and hunt in the same areas without being in constant conflict?  Again, different hunting techniques and times. 
     Sit and watch a busy bird feeder. You will soon notice the tremendous variation in the different species of birds.  These differences only make that species superior in a particular situation for which it has developed. It doesn't make that species superior to the others because, most likely, the others don't get into the situations to need  that skill.  
     Animals don't need to tell time so how does our ability to tell time make us superior?It doesn't.  My dog can tell when a storm is coming when it is still a good 100 miles away. I've tested it.  He spent the first part of his life on the streets so that was an important skill.  It doesn't make him superior to me in any other way than some sensory skills that were important to him.  I have noticed that since I became a nomad, spending the majority of my time in the wilderness, I'm actually improving some of my senses which we, as modern homo sapiens, gave up or didn't find as important.   I've purposely learned how to roam around mountain and desert wilderness and return safely home without electronic navagation. It has become important to me. Nevertheless, birds, mountain goats, wolverine, bears, and just about every undomesticated animal is superior to me. That does not make me lesser or inferior as an animal. 
     This essay started with the observation that we deem ourselves superior because we wrote the definition.  I could raise the question as to whether it is even possible to categorize animals in some sort of superioriy ranking.  Being the most dominant doesn't really count.  I don't have time to argue that dominance is a delusion, but consider this. Insects are important pollenators, gabage clean-up, pest control, and an indispensible part of our food chain.  If we actually got rid of all insects it would be tantamont to suicide,  so who is dominant?  
     It is obvious that the argument for human superiority is fallacious. We have a number of unique skills that give us advantage in certain situations, but that's true of all animal species. We are just different than others. It is our arrogance that insists upon assigning superiority, and I believe that arrogance is unique to humans.