Sunday "sermon": The internet - web - is US/ing us

  acceleration of info = mental gravity

How is your mental gravity doing today??

 

Finding keepin' up this week is taking up more emotional and mental energy than usual?

How is your spirituality doing in all of this?

Are you trusting "the process"?

Are you keeping up?

; )

It is an Idea Whose Time has Come.: smoke and mirrors blog

Tuesday, March 25

On they go, through the wreckage and the ruins, toward the glorious future that hangs like dew-kissed fruit on the rotating candy tree at the edge of the world. “Catch me and pick me and eat me.” The tree whispers into the dreams of the millions who follow the leader and onward they go. It doesn’t matter if it’s Chairman Mao or Dick Cheney, Olmert or Hitler. The uniforms change, the slogans change but the men remain the same. The people remain the same. They breed on the highway. They die by the roadside. They laugh in the sunlight and weep in the darkness. The circle of life completes.

The markets rise and the markets fall. The magic alphabet of numbers pours like sand, over and over through the grasping hands. The rich get richer and the poor stay poor; dreaming of lottery tickets and alchemical gold. It never changes. It never gets old and they breed on the highway and die by the roadside.

As uncertain and treacherous as the world has always been, there was always hope; sleeping like a poisoned princess in Pandora’s Box.

I cannot ever remember understanding the world in personal terms. Even when I was a child, I never got the glory of war or the call to arms. I never wanted to wear a suit and tie and be a master of the universe. But I see that there are many who do. Among the decent souls who struggle here, there are always the others who will do anything to advance their interests. The good people are hamstrung. They can only go so far before their conscience stops them. There are no such barriers for the others.

I toy with solutions in my mind. Sometimes it seems if people were better informed that there would be less misery. Sometimes it seems that there should be a period where the rich and the powerful should all be publicly executed as a lesson; dragged like Ceauºescu to a natural destiny; something like The Olympics with wide media coverage.

Throughout human history, in every religion, there is the example of sacrifice; the martyred God, the expiating divinity that washes the landscape clean and whose gift becomes the currency for the age. There is the implication that the blood that washes away the sins also paints the world in new colors. I’ve seen it written by those who have found enlightenment that everything sparkles like gold and precious gems.

We have no religion that puts the psychopaths into The Wicker Man but maybe we should. Maybe this is where we have gone wrong. Maybe there should be a world wide spring cleaning in every generation. Everything would be as it is now. Dick Cheney could go on saying things like, “So?” and “They volunteered.” Rupert Murdoch could go right on pumping sewage into the collective consciousness. Bankers could go right on recycling new versions of The Grapes of Wrath. Loan-sharks could continue breaking legs and lives. Politicians could lie and orchestrate pointless wars at the behest of bankers and corporations. Religious leaders could milk their flocks, shear their sheep and operate their open air meat markets for wolves; reaching their hands heavenward and proclaiming that their followers should throw their money up into the air and testifying that all that remains there belongs to God and all that falls to the ground is theirs.

Everything could go on just the way it always does but every twenty years a lot of them would be rounded up and executed in creative ways for the entertainment of the people. It could be several weeks of unforgettable television. They could each deliver their parting words.

The beauty of such a thing is that everyone would go into it knowing the possible outcome. To make it interesting, not all of them would be chosen. It could be a fifty-fifty lottery with odd and even numbers. Who could argue with it? Justice would be automatic. There could even be loopholes. There could be American Idol-like competitions where contestants in a “You Bet Your Life” scenario could compete against each other for the public’s favor. In ancient Rome, in the coliseum, it was occasionally the case where a gladiator would win his life and his freedom if the public wished it.

It should not forever be the case that the Mahatma Gandhi’s and Jesus Christ’s should bear the full weight of sacrifice. It’s time to share the burden of sacrifice. People die in the effort to enrich themselves at the public expense. People die in wars. People die in traffic accidents. Everybody dies. Since everyone dies… why shouldn’t there be a greater meaning in particular deaths?

A festive energy is in the air. The Month of Recompense has come; colorfully dressed agents of the people advance on the Rockefeller estate and drag David Rockefeller from his bed. David got an odd number. In accordance with the rules, none of the possible participants are informed in advance of their selection. Rockefellers and Rothschild’s share the stage. Rock music fills the stadium and people dance and hold their children upon their shoulders. It’s party time.

Can anyone argue with this? Does this sound crazy to you? A million dead Iraqi’s doesn’t sound crazy? Paris Hilton getting 200,000 dollars to attend a party of Japanese businessmen doesn’t sound crazy? George W. Bush doesn’t sound crazy? Being strip searched in an airport without reason doesn’t sound crazy? Thousands of homes boarded up with people living in the streets isn’t crazy? A pile of bodies of murdered monks in the Myanmar jungles doesn’t sound crazy? Three skyscrapers falling in controlled demolition doesn’t sound crazy? Your believing this is a normal affair doesn’t sound crazy? What is crazy?

It seems perfectly reasonable to me that every twenty years we clean up the psychopath population and have a little closure. George and his brother presided over the largest amount of executions in American history in their respective states. Was that crazy or coincidence? Could they possibly complain if they were the recipients of public justice? Think of how many people have died at the hands of this one family.

You can’t depend on your laws to balance the scales. The laws may declare one thing in principle but they aren’t going to reflect that principle once the lawyers get through with them. It really comes down to who can pay for the best lawyers. It’s no wonder that Phil Spector didn’t worry about killing a woman in his home. There is no law, people. There is no lottery ticket. There is no home equity. It was never intended so.

Yes, you are a fool when you play Three Card Monte. You’re a fool when you bet on the come. You’re a fool to think you can become an aristocrat. It’s not going to happen. But it should cost something to be an aristocrat. The French Revolution should be a Disney-like theme park and it should stand as the people’s recourse to justice because there really isn’t any justice and you know that.

Is there a higher justice? There may well be. Does it all fit together perfectly in the end? That may well be. All I’m saying is that I think we would all feel a lot better if we could adjust the scales intentionally every so many years. I think we’d all be more comfortable with our lot if what goes around actually came around. The perception of justice done will do more for your complexion than all the cancer creams you’re using now. I think this might be an idea whose time has come.

The Bitch in the Beemer

A book to ponder on a winter's night

Minimalism: A Bridge between Classical Philosophy and the Bahá'í Revelation

By William S. Hatcher

ISBN: 988-97451-2-7 | Pages: 132
Availability: Printed, Electronic, Republishing
License: Juxta Publishing Books for the World License.

Printed Version
Price: USD9.95 | GBP6.95
Buy from Amazon.com, Bahá'í Distribution Service

Electronic Version
Download Now (PDF, 828KB)

Republishing
This title can be licensed royalty-free for republication in certain circumstances. If you are interested, please contact us.

Second Edition

During the axial period of classical Greek philosophy (roughly 500-200 B.C.E.), philosophers posed virtually every question that it is possible to ask concerning the world, humanity, God, and the meaning of life. Different schools of philosophy gave different answers to these questions. Some of these answers have proved wrong (e.g., Aristotle's contention that rest is the natural state of motion of a physical body), some have proved true (e.g., Archimedes' principle) and some remain speculative (e.g., whether or not matter is infinitely divisible).

In the modern period, beginning with Descartes and his method, empirical investigation of the world replaced rational speculation about the world as the "prime mover" of philosophical (including scientific) thought. Empirical science is "bottom up," beginning with concrete observation and then moving inductively to general, abstract laws and principles, whereas classical philosophy and metaphysics are typically "top down," starting with certain abstract, general principles and then moving deductively towards application to the concrete.

However, empirical science has been increasingly mathematized, especially after the 19th-20th century discovery of the new and powerful logic of relations (classical, Aristotlean logic was only attributional, not relational). This highly mathematized empirical science now finds itself facing the same questions posed by classical philosophy.

Minimalism is the name given by Professor Hatcher to his method of applying modern relational logic retroactively to problems in classical philosophy such as the existence and nature of God. The answers obtained by a persistent application of this method are seen to coincide remarkably with the answers to these same questions found in the Sacred Scriptures of the Bahá'í Faith. Thus, with respect to fundamental issues of philosophy, Hatcher's minimalism seems to constitute an empirical/logical approach parallel and complementary to the exegetical study of the Bahá'í Writings themselves.

Reviews and Commentary about the Book

In "Minimalism," Dr. Hatcher presents a completely new philosophical approach to these concerns -- and then moves forward to create a new school of philosophical thinking. The approach offers new insights into the great questions of classical philosophers, such as whether there is a God, the nature of being, and the notion of good. The success of his method is revealed towards the end of this short book -- only 128 pages long -- where he offers a logical proof for the existence of God.

From a review by Brad Pokorny
Bahá'í World News Service

Minimalism is a beautifully simple book in the deep meaning of simple. Hatcher cogently explains how the formal method of minimalism avoids the Scylla of reductionism/positivism and the Charybdis of postmodern relativism. In a condensed, but readable style, he summarizes the work of the philosophy of science of the last century, while integrating the interests of philosophy and religion with that of science. He then powerfully presents and explicates a small set of metaphysical propositions that are empirically grounded, and yet have profound spiritual implications. His proof concerning the existence of a single, simple (non-composite), self-caused universal cause (God), builds on and then exceeds the groundwork set up by Aristotle and Avicenna, and is a new and unique application of non-modal logic to this crucial topic. Anyone that is engaged by rigorous logic, as applied to some of the most important issues in the philosophy of science, metaphysics and religion, will find this text profoundly meaningful. It was a "page-turner" for me!

Rhett Diessner
Professor of Psychology & Education, Lewis-Clark State College
Chair of Psychology & Education, Landegg International University

Do you believe that 'mind' is more than 'brain chemistry'? Do you suspect that 'wisdom' and 'faith' are more than 'ideologies of ruling elites'? And have you ever allowed yourself to envision a world where Science, Religion and Art cooperate to produce a peaceful, just and beautiful Global Civilization?

There are many North Americans, both inside and outside academia, who sense that Reductionism in the sciences and Postmodernism in the arts and humanities are un-necessarily narrow and extreme views. They suspect that these two dominant outlooks are constricting at best, and they are blind alleys at worst. That is, there are many on this continent who believe that Reductionism and Postmodernism are false gods that have retarded humanity's intellectual and spiritual progress. I refer to people who have a kind of inner warning system that says: "Do not eliminate all ideas which have no empirical referent, and which cannot be quantified, nor made precise enough for a rigourous logical system. Nor should we abandon hope that progress can be made toward useful and improvable truths. Because there may be more things in heaven and earth than dreamt of by doctrinaire academicians, scientists and art critics. Surely Science, Religion and Art can be complementary in today's world, and some kind of moral-spiritual 'progress' is possible"!

I find many minds and hearts who wish to affirm that 'reality' is richer and grander than our technical reasoning powers, but 'reality' is also more accessible and public than skeptics and subjectivists assume. I count myself among those who respect science, but also know that we need solid ethical and spiritual values to give our lives meaning and to guide humanity into an ever more interdependent future.

For people with these healthy suspicions and moderate orientations, William Hatcher's "Minimalism" offers fresh intellectual and spiritual air, and provides a sound and creative 'middle way' between the various dogmas of 'scientism' and 'agnosticism'. Hatcher gives us some new tools of reasoning and appreciating for broadening the community of those who have never abandoned the search for Truth, Beauty and Goodness. He offers a fresh and insightful and long overdue critique of Reductionism and Postmodernism. He shows how Philosophy can be a bridge, not only between Science and Religion, but also between the classical rationalism that many Euro-North Americans cherish and the newest of the major world religions, the Baha'i Faith.

William Hatcher has discovered a method which assures progress in all fields... yes, I mean progress in all the highest areas of human endeavor. If his "Minimalism" were to become widely understood and implemented, and his "bridge" to Baha'I crossed, the walls between departments, and disciplines, and sciences, and humanities, and societies, and cultures, and nations, and religions would develop more doors, windows and welcome signs! Cooperation would increase and competition and hostility would decrease. Severe problems would eventually be solved. New challenges would be creatively addressed. Humanity would begin to rediscover its oneness and togetherness. We would embrace anew our creative potential and divine destiny. But please do not take my word for all this. Investigate his book for yourself.

Harold Rosen
Masters Degress in Philosophy, Education, Religion

“TAO
The Doctrine is the doctrine of non-doctrine,
The Practice is the practice of non-practice,
The Method is meditation by non-meditation,
And Cultivation which is cultivation by non-cultivation.”
-- Wei Wu Wei