It is Really Very Simple

I didn’t do it again this week. I promised myself I would get it done and AGAIN, I didn’t. I will put it off again until next week and make sure I do it then. No wait! I have to babysit two days, I have a trip to go on and a bunch of meetings; I will do it the week after.

Why don’t we get things done? What gets in the way of getting things done? It really comes down to five very simple reasons:

The first reason we don’t get things done is because WE DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO. We know that something is supposed to be accomplished or fixed but we don’t know what that SOMETHING is. I know that when I plug something into that outlet it would work but it doesn’t. What do I do? It is an IGNORANCE problem.

The second reason is that WE DON’T KNOW HOW TO DO IT. Here we know WHAT to do but don’t know HOW to get do it. I know that there is a wire not completing the circuit somewhere to cause that plug not to work but I don’t know how to get at it or where that wire is. How do I do it? It is an EDUCATION problem.

The third reason we don’t get things done is because WE DON’T HAVE THE AUTHORITY to do it. I would love to fix that outlet but it is in my neighbor’s house. It is an PERMISSION problem.

The fourth reason is that WE DON’T HAVE THE RESOURCES to complete it. I misplaced my screwdriver and my hot wire tester thingy so I can’t get it done. It is a PREPAREDNESS problem.

The fifth and final reason we don’t get things done is REALLY the main reason we don’t get things done. That is WE ARE AFRAID. Every time I open up a wiring outlet I get ZAPPED or when I open up one I cause two more problems to pop up. Fix one thing and two more don’t work. It is a FEAR problem.

So, once you figure out what’s getting in the way of the task you need to complete you should find it easier to get it done. What is the answer to why you don’t get things done? Your stuck?

Stuck is a state of mind, and it is curable. Let’s get unstuck together this week.

The Death of Ebay

I was an Ebay nut. I have the “collectors” gene in me which causes me to collect things. I have a coin collection, shot glass collection, mug collection (of shows I’ve gone to), Lord of the Rings memorabilia collection, Egyptian Ushabti collection, Lord’s Supper art work collection, Archeology and History Magazine collection, and probably a navel fuzz collection on me right now. One of my dreams would be having an “antique” Bible collection. I keep looking at an original 1607 Geneva Study Bible that is in Bauman’s Rare Books at the Venetian Hotel but it doesn’t get much cheaper than the $5000 they want for it right now. Still a dream. But now, my main source for my collections: Ebay, has died.

In 1846 an Irish immigrant named Alexander Stewart opened a store in NYC unlike any that Americans has ever seen before. Stewart started many innovations like in-store fashion shows, street level windows for window shopping and a lavishly decorated store to appeal to shoppers. But his most important innovation was that all of his products came with a price tag. You see, before Alex got involved you had to haggle your price with the merchant which, as most of us know, can be a frustrating dance between the two parties and rarely do both go away happy with the transaction. So Alex marked everything with a fixed price, pay it or don’t, it is up to you. MANY decided to pay it and made Alex one of the most successful retailers in NYC in the mid 1800’s.

A century and a half later there was another innovator by the name of Pierre Omidyar. His new store was unlike ANYTHING that Americans had seen before. Pierre’s vision was to have the world’s largest open market, which would sell ANYTHING to EVERYBODY, where the small guy could compete with the huge corporations and where shoppers could find all kinds of products they never dreamed of buying. He called his “store” Ebay. Pierre’s greatest innovation was in pricing, just like Alex, but is replaced fixed prices with auctions. The prices were to be set by the ever changing supply and demand. Customers responded and made Ebay the world’s largest retailer and business experts called it the “perfect store”.

But Pierre’s model, just like Alex’s has been run through the cycle of changing technology and scam artists. Bidding on Ebay items used to be fun, but now it is not, with “snipers” electronically putting in the last bid in milliseconds to take that beanie baby you were hoping for. Winning a bid on Ebay no longer seems to be a bargain like it used to be or you would win an item for a good price and the shipping costs would kill you. Ebay, as originally intended, has died. Now auctions are a distant second to the “Buy it Now” button price. Shipping costs are set by Ebay based on distance to keep the scammers at bay. But the novelty has simply worn off.

It was fun while it lasted but my collections will have to grow in other ways. We grow, we adapt, we adjust, we move on. The problem is clingers, those who valiantly try to cling to past innovation while the world moves on. The buggy whip is no longer for sale other than as a novelty. The Minivan pushed out the Station Wagon which is gave way to the SUV which is now under attack by the Crossovers. Those of us clinging to land line phones will find that they will no longer be in service. I just heard that Amazon now sells more books electronically than it sells books that are actually made out of paper. Are you ready?

We MUST grow, we MUST adapt, we MUST adjust, and we MUST move on. The alternative is not too pleasant and potentially dangerous. So does anyone have hookups for a rare Bible for me?

Es Es Percepe

Is there really an external world? Is there really a world outside of our experience? When you see an apple, you picture it in your mind (as you are right now); what happens when you close your eyes and think of something else? Does the apple disappear? Does the world disappear when you close your eyes? If everyone in the world closed their eyes and emptied their minds at the same time would the universe disappear? When we group our regularly occurring experiences we give them names. “Apple” is our word for a consistent collection of sweet, red, crunchy sensations of a certain size, texture, and smell. But that is all an apple is. Or is it? According to George Berkeley (1685-1753) that is all an apple is. To suppose that it is something more, something OUT THERE, is to go beyond the evidence of experience. Worse, it is to think the absurd thought that sweetness can exist untasted and red can exist unseen. To believe that something exists in the realm OUTSIDE the senses is to build a shaky scaffolding to stand on. Yet it might surprise you to know that George was a devout Christian. He actually used this “idealism” as evidence and proof for God. Berkeley argues that God perceives and therefore sustains the whole of the universe whether we happen to be looking at it or not. For Berkeley the continued existence of everything is proof not only of God’s existence but also his benevolence. If God blinked, not only would our world go out of existence but so would we. The Latin “es es percepe” means “to be is to be perceived”. What would we be without others experiencing us? What would we be without our own senses? What would we be without God perceiving us? With us being unable to trust our own senses reality and truth, then, is how God perceives it. The truth corresponds to reality as GOD perceives it: NOT OUR PERCEPTION. Our very existence depends on GOD perceiving us: NOT OUR PERCEPTION of HIM! I think ancient scripture writers understood this when they gave us the priestly benediction: “May the Lord bless you and keep you; may the Lord make his FACE SHINE ON YOU and be gracious to you; may the Lord TURN HIS FACE TOWARD YOU and give you peace.” May the Lord PERCEIVE you too.

Akhenaten

Akhenaten ruled only 17 years as Pharaoh of Egypt but his influence was astounding. Imagine a new president coming to the US and this president deciding to change the center of power from Washington DC to the middle of the desert in central Nevada. They would have to start building new buildings from the foundation up, then work on the infrastructure of roads, airports, power lines, etc. Then they would have to move all the governmental support with the people, copy machines, computers, office furniture. They would then have to fill in with the Walmarts, Home Depots, Pharmacies, and Bars. You get the idea.

That is what Akhenaten did. He moved EVERYTHING from the capital near Cairo to a new capital 350 miles away in the middle of the desert called Amarna. He moved the whole government, people and all, to this new site. But what he did that REALLY changed everything was to outlaw the gods of Egypt. He “starved out” the temples to all gods but one: the Egyptian god Aten, the sun god. He changed his name from Amenhotep (Amun is happy) to Akhenaten (Spirit of Aten). This was heretical to the people, but what can you do when your king, the ultimate ruler, said “jump”?

It took a LOT of money to do this. It took a lot of confidence in Aten to do this. That is why many biblical historians believe that Akhenaten was the Pharaoh of Joseph. Joseph influenced Amenhotep with the dream interpretation of HUGE prosperity followed by TERRIBLE famine. Joseph influence Amenhotep towards ONE God, the God who shines on all people, not just the Egyptians. Joseph influenced Amenhotep to become Akhenaten, the Spirit of the One God. Because of the prosperity Egypt was awash in gold, because of the famine and being the ONLY one with food Egypt was FLOODED with gold, people looking for work, and people who couldn’t ply their trade anywhere else. Just what is needed to build a new city in the middle of the desert.

It is interesting that built into the four corners of this new city were steles (tombstone like granite plaques) which were inscribed with the rules for behavior and commands for living in this new city. Here are some of the commands: “There is no God but Aten, you shall worship the Aten and the Aten alone.” And “You shall make no images of the Aten out of wood or stone.” (which, again, was radical because ALL the other gods had images made of them) The Aten was represented only in beams of light coming from the sun which gave light, warmed, and even was shown with little hands on the end of the beams indicating that all we have is from the Aten.

I don’t know if Akhenaten was influenced by Joseph or not. I don’t know if his view of the Aten was really the same God we serve but I do know he changed everything from the government, to the religion, to the art (check out Amarna period Egyptian art). Change came only from HUGE amounts of money and willing workers. But his changes didn’t last long. Akhenaten’s son Tutankhaten (Living image of Aten) became pharaoh at the age of nine due to the untimely death of his father and older brother. He died only 9 years later at 18 and many believe he was murdered because of his father’s heretical ways. (Many priests were unhappy that their patron god was de-funded by Akhenaten). Even though the boy tried to change back under the influence of his “vizier” Ay and changed his name from “Living image of Aten” to “Living image of Amun” or Tutankhamun or as we know him King Tut.

A short 32 years later the 18th dynasty of Egypt came to a close and there came a new dynasty of pharaohs who probably didn’t know Joseph and probably would have made those troublesome Hebrews work a little harder for a LOT less money.

Egypt 2: The Mummy Room

The Cairo Museum is a musty old place. It was built in 1902 and it looks it. It has, obviously, had many remodels and some modernization but basically it is the same as it was over 100 years ago. The good news is that Egypt is building a new museum on the Giza Plateau, next to the Great Pyramids; the bad news is that even with the new museum they will not be able to house more than 25% of all the “stuff” they have for people to see. Right now 95% of Egyptian antiquities are in storage and not displayed.

Most of the display cases in the museum are old mahogany with think smudged glass surrounding the priceless artifacts. It smells of old wood and dust, the tiled floors are swept mainly by the feet of the thousands of visitors each day but behind the cases you will find the desert dust accumulating. After touring with our guide for a while we get free time to look at whatever we want. There are a few items I am interested in:
- Ahkenaten: the heretic pharaoh who believed in the ONE god.
- Merneptah Stele: the only etched evidence of Israel in Egypt.
- Coffers: There are many “boxes” or “arks” which were buried with the kings.
- Ushabtis: Little statues buried with the Kings and Wealthy to help them in the afterlife.
- The Silver Coffins: In the 22nd Dynasty the kings built for themselves silver sarcophaguses instead of the gold covered wood. These was actually MORE valuable than King Tut’s gold sarcophagus.
- The Mummy Room …

The Mummy Room is a modern addition. They remodeled one of the old rooms and made it climate controlled for preservation of the bodies. I first look at Hatshepsut who was a female pharaoh in the 18th dynasty. She MIGHT have been the princess who pulled Moses from the Nile. She is famous for being the daughter of a Pharaoh, the wife of a Pharaoh, and the mother of a Pharaoh as well as being the Pharaoh herself while her son grew up. I look at the face of the Greatest Pharaoh of all time, Ramses II or Ramses the Great; I am amazed by a few things. He is a small man. I would judge that he was not more than 5 and a half feet tall. He had a receding hair line and curly hair. He looked like his father, Seti I who was lies next to him and also similar features to his grandfather Ramses I who was also nearby.

These Pharaohs left instructions for the preservation of their body and their eventual burial with their children. Most honored their parents with monuments and riches for them to take into the afterlife hoping for the same from their children. Seventy days of mourning and embalming, paid mourners lined the funeral procession as the body passed along the causeway from the funerary temple to the pyramid or to the Nile river for its journey to the tomb in the Valley of the Kings. The tomb was packed with chariots, games, food, gold, statues for servants, boxes of clothes and jewelry; everything you might need in your journey to the afterlife. The anticipation of eternity.

Amazingly they all achieved a kind of immortality. We can still see them in glass boxes in a climate controlled room in Cairo. But almost every tomb was raided and robbed in antiquity, almost every mummy was cast aside, used as firewood or fertilizer and had little importance until the last 150 years. Their Ka and Ba (Egyptian soul) is somewhere but I don’t believe it will be joined again with their mummified body like they thought it would be. Eternal life is more than your skill at embalming, it is more than the right incantations and charms, and it is definitely more than how much gold you can cover your coffin with. Eternal life is relationship with the ONE God and not being Ra-mses or “child of Ra”.

Where do Ethics come From? The Trolley Problem

So we have discussed Aristotle, Hobbes, Rousseau, Kant and Mills and their different take on where ethics come from. Some sadist named Phillipa Foot in the 1950's came up with an ethics test called the "Trolley Problem" which goes something like this.
A trolley is running out of control down a track. in its path are five people who are tied to the track. Happily, it is possible to flip a switch that will send the trolley down a different track to safety. Unfortunately, there's one person tied to that track who will be killed if you flip the switch. What should you do?

Most people would say you flip the switch. Would you?

An even worse sadist names Judith Thomson proposed an amendment to the Trolley problem. The scenario is the same except this time you're standing on a bridge under which th trolley will pass, and there's a large mand standing next to you. The only way to save the five people is to push him onto the track, thereby stopping the trolley. What would you do?

The transaction is the same. One person dies to save five but there is something different about this scenario. Most people would NOT take the active role of pushing the man to save five others.

Here's my take on the Trolley Problem. A difference between the two is how active the parties are involved in the scenario. The one tied to the track is already involved somehow, the one standing next to you is an outside observer as you are. In other words, we think the one tied to the track is "dead already" and the one next to us is not. Hence are ease at condemning one and not the other.

The reality of the situation is that this is a false situation with a false premise. It is assuming I cannot sacrifice myself to stop the train. It is assuming I cannot jump out and untie one or all of the individuals. It is assuming that there is NO OTHER alternative to the two options laid out. So my simple answer is: "I don't ride the trolley." I don't buy your scenario and your parameters. There are ALWAYS more alternatives, our problem is that we refuse to see them because they require sacrifice, pain or simply inconvenience on our part.

Get active, get involved, make the hard choices NOW so that there never will occur a Trolley Problem in your life. Get off the trolley!

Where do Ethics come From? Part 4

Aristotle's thought ethics came from choosing to do GOOD rather than choosing to do BAD.
Rousseau thought ethics needed to be forced on you by an absolute authority or leviathan.
Hobbes thought ethics were determined by the majority and so we need a government to force that majority belief upon us to have a GOOD society.

Kant believed in a variation of the golden rule where GOOD would be achieved by everybody asking themselves BEFORE they act "would I want this done to me?"

John Stuart Mill was a utilitarian. Which means that ethics and what is GOOD is determined by whatever promotes happiness at the time you make the decision. Does this give pleasure or pain? Mill is talking about aggregate happiness of the greatest number of people though, not necessary your personal happiness. Mill had to build in some checks so that we all don't become totally hedonistic (seeking only our pleasure all the time) so he came up with certain kinds of pleasure being better than others. Listening to good music, for example, is likely a better kind of pleasure than spending the day eating Ben and Jerry's ice-cream. He explained this by calling on experience: nobody who has experienced both higher and lower pleasures would be willing to swap a life of higher pleasure for lower ones. He said "No intelligent human being would consent to be a fool though they should be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the rascal is better satisfied with his lot than they are with theirs."

There are, of course, many problems with this. Not the least of which is the fact that the GOOD in Mill's case would be the pleasure of the greatest amount of people. But mob rule is rarely a good thing especially when practiced at the pleasure of the KKK or Gestapo. This also leaves too much room for personal choice, I would be hurting if all there was was Starbucks since I don't like coffee or chocolate but Starbucks seems to give pleasure to a GREAT amount of people therefore I must be a BAD person.

It, again, boils down to the NECESSITY of having an outside arbitrator of what is good or bad. A rule or guide given to us by someone who knows the truth and the best and has our best interests in mind. Sounds like a Savior I know and a Word I try to follow, doesn't it?

Where do Ethics come From? Part 3

Aristotle's thought ethics came from choosing to do GOOD rather than choosing to do BAD.
Rousseau thought ethics needed to be forced on you by an absolute authority or leviathan.
Hobbes thought ethics were determined by the majority and so we need a government to force that majority belief upon us to have a GOOD society.

Kant had a slightly different take on the nature of ethics. He didn't really care if we were born bad or born good. He though that all we need to do in order to be ethical would be to impose the "golden rule" on every decision we make. Think BEFORE you choose: "would I want this done to me if I were on the other end of this?" If I borrow money from you with NO intent of ever giving it back, would I want that done to me? If I sneak into your home and steal your 64 inch flat screen TV would I want someone to do that to me?

Kant believed that if EVERYBODY thought this way BEFORE they acted then society would be an ethical one. This sounds very rational and efficient but is practically impossible. We are selfish animals and so that battle must be won first. When we win over our selfishness then we get into the rationalization problems inherent in the system. What if I steal from you to feed my family? What if I steal from you because you have so much more than I do? What if I steal from you to give to those who don't have any? Once we get past the selfishness issue and the rationalizing issue then we are left with the ability to make this simple choice of the golden rule.

I believe that Jesus, who espoused the golden rule, had an even better one that people keep forgetting. Call it the platinum rule: "Love God and Love your neighbor." If every decision you made you would not only ask yourself: "would I want this done to me?" ask Kant says; but would also ask "Does this show my love for God or my love for my neighbor?" then you would be an ethical person if you can answer yes to those questions on every decision.

Kant was right but didn't go far enough, Jesus takes us the rest of the way.

Where do Ethics come From? Part 2

So Aristotle believes you are good because you do good things, the more good things you do the better person you would be; therefore, ethics is simply choosing the good over the bad.

Hobbes and Rousseau had some VERY different ideas of where ethics come from. Hobbes said that without the civilizing effect of societal pressure we would be poor, nasty, brutish, and live in continual fear. Rousseau was a little more optimistic because he called us "noble savages" who lived only for SELF and a desire to fulfill only our immediate needs. Hobbes saw civilization as the only means to taming the savage beast and that includes handing some of our "rights" as individuals over to an absolute authority (he called leviathon). This social contract is the only thing keeping us safe and sane. Rousseau bought into the social contract idea but believed that the only way for people to overcome their savagery is for them to accept the "general will" of the public as expressed in government.

The question these two are answering is this: "Is monstrous, unethical behavior natural or is it created by society?" Is society or the will of the masses the savior or the problem as far as ethics is concerned? In order to fix us do we need to fix society first? If we have a perfect government will we have perfect people?

The Bible tells us that we are corrupted from birth and will always have that bent towards doing the wrong thing. We must constantly struggle against that bent.

Growing up on the farm I remember trying to get the pickup truck out of a rut that was hard caked into the ground. It was a constant battle to get the wheels out of the rut and onto the smoother surface. The steering wheel fought me the whole time and I really didn't need to drive if I kept in the rut since the rut steered for me. That is like us and our nature. We are in this rut that keeps pulling us back in, it's easier, and even a kind of autopilot to just do what our nature tells us to do. To be an ethical person takes hard work, fighting against the rut and never letting go of the steering wheel.

Society and government is a reflection of the individuals that make up that society. When we are good people, fighting to be even better we will have a better and better society. Society doesn't civilize us as Hobbes claims, nor does society tell us what is ethical by majority vote as Rousseau claims. WE are society and what we do is echoed and even amplified in our society/government.

So choose wisely.

Where do Ethics come From? Part 1

Aristotle's first run for being good is that there are no rules. Being good is about developing your character, so that you are disposed to do the best thing in each situation. It is NOT about internalizing some moral manual. Human being are creatures of habit and just as a good musician becomes so by practicing, so, by doing virtuous things, we become virtuous people.

But then the question becomes, "What is virtue?" According to Aristotle it is living according to our natures as rational animals. A good dog does doggy things well. A good human does good human things. We can be guided towards the right action by NOT thinking of good and bad as opposite ends of a spectrum but we must think of good as lying on a "mean" or middle of the two BAD extremes. For instance, courage lied between the excess of rashness and the deficiency of cowardice; generosity between meanness and profligacy; kindness between the excess of ignoring others and the deficiency of indulgence.

Aristotle's ethics are about more than being good - they are about living right. So doing the right thing is not about following rules, but striking the correct balance according to the circumstances.

This seems to make sense and in a society where people actually have the urge to BE virtuous or good, it would work. Unfortunately we live in a society where people no longer believe in virtue or goodness. So we lock up our kids after school instead of letting them play in the streets, we take the keys out of our cars in our driveways and lock our houses at night.
The thinking is circular and so illogical. We know what the right thing to do is because we see it in the good people, we know they are good people because they do good things, they do good things because ... they are good people. Um, wait?

Now Aristotle was attempting to describe a perfect world but as long as selfishness, greed, and evil is present there will not be a perfect world. But that doesn't mean you should not be virtuous or good. What it means is that you must work VERY HARD at being good in a bad world. It also means that we need some OUTSIDE standard that will determine whether what we do is good or not because we cannot rely on the good we see in others.

Now, where did we put that 10 commandments again? Oh, yea, here it is!

Fun Philosophy 2: The Ghost in the Machine

The 20th century philosopher Gilbert Ryle said that philosophers who think of the mind as a kind of thing that causes the body to move are making a bad mistake. He called the view of the mind "the ghost in the machine". He would walk around Oxford and would say, "I see all these buildings but where is Oxford?" The mistake is in thinking that Oxford is in the sum of its buildings, but it is more than that. Ryle claimed that those who think of the mind as a thing in addition to the body are missing the point that the body and its activities comprises the mind. In other words your mind is NOT just your brain. You mind is made up of all the actions, activities and decisions of your WHOLE BODY. When we say someone has an inquisitive mind we cannot pull that brain out of the person and find the inquisitive part and analyze it. What we are saying is that all the actions of that person, the questions and movements indicate that they are inquisitive. That person behaves in inquisitive ways. The mind is not a ghost in the machine it is a way of describing the machines activities.

Modern science has been throwing wrenches at this ghost in the machine. Brain scans have revealed actual places where inquisitiveness comes from, where joy shows up as firing neurons, and where anger can be removed or lessened. So the question for us fun philosophers is which is it?

Are you the sum of your parts? You raise your hand due to a decision made by firing neurons in your head which tell you that if you do you will be rewarded because other neurons tell you that it happened in the past that way.

Of are you something separate from your actions, activities, and decisions. As if you could stand outside your body and direct it and have everything still work?

Is your mind in your brain or is it something outside your physical body? If you were cloned would your clone have a "mind"?

If you take the Bible seriously you would have the answer to this question. God created us special and put his "image" within us. God's Image is the Ghost in the Machine. We stand outside our physical bodies as spiritual beings. Every time you make a decision it and use your "mind" you are proving that God exists. And those who don't know that are simply out of their mind.

Fun Philosophy 1: The Demon, Determinism, and Free Will

Pierre Simon Laplace supposed that everything is composes of atoms and that the motions of atoms are governed by the laws that Isaac Newton discovered in the 17th century. Laplace imagined a super intelligent and mathematically gifted demon, who knows the positions and velocities of all particles in the universe at a particular time, along with all the laws of nature. He claimed that this demon could compute the positions and velocities of all particles at every other time. The demon then could PREDICTE where you body would be and how it would be moving next year from your history and the history of time. Basically he was saying that Newton's laws were deterministic or you could predict the future based on his laws.

Interesting, but what does that mean, really? What it means is that you future is already determined. "I knew you were going to say that!" you would say. If the motions of every atom in your body have been determined when God set everything in motion way back when; then you have no control over your movements, they have been predetermined. Laplace then stated that ether Newton's deterministic laws are false or Free Will is an illusion.

Many philosophers have battled with this paradox of free will vs. determinism and many have made good attempts at resolving it in some form of free will within the confines of determinism but the conflict is still there. Today philosopher/physicists believe that Newton's laws are probabilities and not absolutes. In other words, these laws work MOST of the time the rest of the time Quantum laws take effect. But it would be wrong to say that Quantum mechanics is not deterministic simply because we haven't figured it out yet.

I said all that to say this: Does free will exist? If not, can we have things like justice and morals? Is everything pre-determined for us? If not, what do we do with the laws we keep discovering? This paradox of free will vs. determinism is a VERY biblical battle as well and it has split churches.

The problem with a seemingly irresolvable conflict or paradox is that we tend to throw our hands up in despair and give up. I mean, if all the smart people can't figure it out, how can we? But remember: the growth doesn't happen in reaching the answer, the growth happens in the struggle to get there. Let's struggle together.

I NEVER tell the Truth

Another paradox or isn't it?

The ancient Greek philosopher Zeno of Elea spent most of his time on the paradoxes of time and motion. For example it can be logically argued that Achilles (the fastest man EVER) could never catch up to a tortoise if he gave the tortoise a head start. This is because in order for Achilles to overtake the tortoise he MUST reach where the tortoise is/was, but by that time the tortoise has moved on. So then he must reach where the tortoise has moved on to but by then, of course, the tortoise has moved on again, and so on and so on, as infinitum.

Also Zeno logically proved that any arrow shot from a bow cannot possibly move. Since at any moment of time, the arrow had to completely occupy a certain space. Like a photograph, at any given moment, the arrow is where it is and not somewhere else. Hence, it is stationary. If time is nothing more than a series of moments, and if the arrow is stationary at every particular moment, then it NEVER MOVES!
Yet we know that arrows do move and the fastest man can overtake a tortoise, so what is flawed? Our view of reality or the logic of the paradox?

Zeno's paradoxes had the ancient world running hard just to stay still. But what these questions/paradoxes do is allow us to get to the right questions. Knowledge is NOT having the answers as much as it is having the right questions. What is time? Is time made up of a series of ever smaller chunks called moments or is it something else? Einstein called time the fourth dimension in his theories. The universe was NOT just made up of length, width, and height; it was also made up of time. With Uncle Albert time was NOT an infinite series of moments, time was fluid and could be flexed, shortened and lengthened.

This introduced a whole NEW batch of paradoxes: can I arrive BEFORE I leave? Can I go back in time and kill one of my ancestors? What would happen if I meet myself?
Just when we think we got this world figured out; God throws us another curve. The world is flat; nope it round. The planets revolve around the earth; nope we revolve around the sun. Things fall faster if they are heavier; nope gravity works the same on heavy and light. Newtonian physics explains the universe; nope not quite, what about relativity and the speed of light. Newton and Einstein figured it out; nope quantum physics is needed to explain certain phenomena. Quantum physics is than answer; nope ... whatever is next is just around the corner with its own paradoxes to explain.

God is not a cruel pet owner teasing his cat with a string that he will never catch. God is enjoying the sense of discovery in his world like a home designer hearing you go "oooohhh, ahhhhh" at every corner that has something new and neat.

"When I look at your heavens, the works of your hands; what is man that you are mindful of him?"

This sentence is False

Wait, what? Did you catch the paradox? If the sentence is false then it must be true, but if it is true then it must be false so if it is false it must be true ... .

Paradox was a plaything of Greek philosophers. Epimenides wrote down the first documented one around the sixth century BC. He, who was from Crete, stated "All Cretans are liars." Their logic attempted to unravel the paradox and succeeded with many of them by simply defining their terms and coming up with the difference between language of instruction and the language of reality (vs. Absurdity). Other Greeks decided they could just live with a few contradictions.

Bertrand Russell asked "In a village, the barber shaves everyone who does not shave himself/herself, but no one else. Who shaves the barber?"

Even normal life fills us with paradoxes: "Don't go near the water until you have learned to swim." or "Nobody goes to that restaurant; it's too crowded" or "If you get this message, call me, and if you don't then don't worry about it" of "Raise your hand if you are not here."
Scripture is also FULL of these seeming paradoxes. You must die in order to live. You must give in order to get. If you are comfortable you should be uncomfortable. And many others. Opposition to God and scripture make fun of these and even create their own paradoxes: "If God is almighty and creator of everything can he create a stone too heavy for him to lift?" and "If God is good he cannot be almighty because there is bad in the world, if God is almighty then he cannot be good since he allows bad in the world."

These paradoxes are easy to unravel but there are paradoxes in the world that seem to question life's order and spiritual meaning. There are simply questions that we CANNOT answer. Maybe because there is no answers or resolutions. Quantum and Newtonian physics or light as a wave or a particle or chaos theory. Or simply the question of how and why we love? Maybe it is the conflict, the paradox, the journey that is important and not the resolution. Or not.

Which one of you said, "The truth is rarely pure and never simple."? Whoever is was, you're a liar... or ... telling the truth.

The Fifth Element

Ancient philosophers banged their heads together to come up with the ESSENTIAL elements that the universe is made up of. One thought everything boiled down to water. Water is most of the earth and makes up most of us. Another believed it was dirt, or earth. After all we return to the dirt after we die so earth must be one of the basic elements. Then there were the fire starters who believed that everything burned and that energy of fire was a core element in our makeup, once we lost our fire we were gone. Then, of course, there was the Wind faction. That invisible force that influenced everything and everyone. These four elements were fought over to the point that ALL of them came to be known as the Four Essential Elements: Earth, Wind, Fire and Water.

The question then became: "How do these four elements interact with each other?" Water breaks down earth, earth blocks wind, wind enhances fire, fire boils water, water feeds earth, earth funnels wind, wind blows out fire, fire it put out by water, etc. So began the search for the Fifth Element. The Fifth Essential (quintessential) element that explained everything. That perfect answer to the questions of elemental interaction.

Socrates tackled this problem calling the quintessential element "ether" and described it as the "pure essence where the gods lived and which they breathed" The ether had no measurable qualities (hot, cold, wet, dry, etc) but you could observe its influence on planet systems and in the lives of people. Later science disproved the ether theories in favor of gravity and the atomic.


We have lost that sense of the Fifth or Quintessential Element but we still struggle to define it. Now we seek to bring together the two essential theories in Physics: Newtonian Physics based on normal gravitational influences and Quantum Physics based on EXTREME gravitational influences like black holes and bent space. So now with two contradictory theories to explain observable interactions we are left looking for the ether again. This time it is called the "Theory of Everything" which will combine quantum mechanics with general relativity. Hawking's new book "The Grand Design" attempts to solve this with his version of ether called the "Multiverse" after his failed attempt to explain it in his earlier book on string theory.
I tend to fall back on one the best philosophical minds of the first century AD. Who referred back to those Greek philosophers when he described God as not living in temples built by hands and not needing anything from us because God gives all life and breath to men. He is never far from us and if we reach into the ether we can find him for "In HIM we live and move and have our being" or God IS the ether you are looking for. That essential element that resolves and controls all the elements.

God himself is the quintessential Fifth Element.

Ten Best Jobs of the Future

According to Popular Science magazine these are the Ten Best Jobs of the future that you still in school should be aiming for:

1. Human/Robot Interaction Specialist: help robots and people get along
2. Space Pilot: Fly commercial shuttles into space
3. Fetus Healer: Cure babies BEFORE they are born
4. Forecaster of Everything: Analyze data to predict the future
5. Organ Designer: Make organs from scratch
6. Animal Migration Engineer: Create new habitats for all critters
7. World Watcher: See it all through satellites
8. Galactic Architect: Build cosmic outposts
9. Fusion Worker: Manage fusion reactors
10. Thought Hacker: Read thoughts through facial and body clues

Now I don't know how many of you know what Post-Millennialism is but this is definitely a Post Millennial point of view. Or another way to say the same thing is to call it the Star Trek point of view. It is the view that everything is getting better and better until we can envision a utopian society. Based on a (kind of) Christian world view of the end times where the world will get better and better and so good that Christ will come with everybody welcoming him since we are doing so good in society.

I don't believe that things necessarily will get worse and worse and so we should just give up and say "who is John Galt?" But I do believe that without divine influence we will degenerate into a pre-flood kind of society. So in an effort to inject a virus of reality into PopSci's view of the future let me give you my take on the Ten Best Jobs of the Future:

1. Bicycle Repair Person: rebuild and repair bikes because cars will be too expensive to drive
2. Post Religion Spiritual Counselor: Since anything religious will be pushed to the crazy fringe, people will still need help answering ultimate questions
3. Computer Magicians: Since only a few religiously intense programmers will understand what computers do and how they work they will be considered magicians or priests.
4. Public Transportation Planners: Plan the best way for people to get to work to avoid delays, breakdowns, and government snafus
5. Parent Brokers: Since our kids have become so unruly with a lack of discipline we will need to find a broker to find and give us the best parental rental options.
6. Home School Attorney: Since the smart families NEVER send their kids to public schools but the public schools control education we will need attorneys to represent the Home Schoolers and prove that they aren't cheating when they win every academic award.
7. Neighborhood Vegetable Experts: Experts on growing food in a small space in a residential environment
8. Satellite Avoidance Specialist: Predictors of where and when the latest satellite will fall out of the sky
9. Home Retrogression Specialist: Former Builders who will specialize in scavenging vacant homes for parts, recycling, and returning to "natural" environment. Turning neighborhoods back into forests.
10. Military Grunts: because there will ALWAYS be wars and rumors of wars

Sound pessimistic? Maybe, but again, a nation without divine influence is bound to degenerate. What are we doing with God in our society right now? Me? I'm brushing up on my vegetable growing skills.

Rights and Responsibilities

A leader in the restaurant business, someone who lobbies the government for restaurants, was quoted as saying that it would violate the "rights' of free speech for restaurants to HAVE to post the health department's grade of their cleanliness in the window for all to see. In essence, it is their RIGHT to be dirty and not tell customers about it.

In this political season it is time for us to define rights vs. responsibilities. We seem to be abusing the word "right" quite frequently and we tend to ignore our responsibilities even more frequently.

Our Declaration of Independence tells us that we are given rights by our Creator and among these are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." It doesn't say that these three are all the rights but it does say that they come from God. The government was not established to give us rights. The government was to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity" according to our Constitution. The Bill of Rights then gives us our amendments to the Constitution by telling us there are "LEGAL rights" that we have in order to insure our "GOD GIVEN rights" like the freedom of speech and freedom to carry guns.
But here's the thing. We infringe on people's GOD GIVEN rights only when we don't take up our GOD GIVEN responsibilities and that has NOTHING to do with the government. We seem to have the whole thing backwards in our world today. We think we need to establish my RIGHTS through Government intervention so that others will act responsibly; THAT is backward. WE need to act responsibly so that others will have THEIR rights and then the Government can stay out of it.

Take the restaurant guy above. His belief is that it is the RIGHT of the restaurant owners to put up whatever THEY want on THEIR windows on THEIR restaurants and if a patron gets sick, well, then we'll deal with who's responsibility that is. So because of that attitude the Congress has to enact a law telling restaurant owners that they no longer have that right and the right of the patron to know their meal is safe is a higher "right" or priority.

What if. What if the owner put in BIG BOLD LETTERS that this restaurant is CERTIFIED by SOME BIG CLEANLINESS AGENCY as being the CLEANEST IN THE WHOLE WORLD. What if the restaurant owner would pay the patron twice what his sickness cost if he got sick from his food. What if the restaurant owners took RESPONSIBILITY instead of trying to avoid it. IF they would, there would be no law needed in Congress.

What if people took responsibility for their actions THEN the rights of all people would be protected and there would be VERY LITTLE NEED for Government action. What if instead of trying to deceive the most customers we attempted to educate the most customers because we had the best product or service. What if.

Take responsibility for your actions and your rights will be protected. Take only your RIGHTS without the responsibilities and you will lose both.

Dohicky, Thingamabob, and Whatchamacallit

These are three of the greatest words in the English language in that they say something without saying a thing. Therefore they are universal: "Hand me the dohicky, you know, the thingamabob next to the whatchamacallit." Words have meanings but these stand out in the fact that their meanings are lost in the nebulous.

Hand me the dohicky, however, doesn't get you the thingamabob very fast unless the other is a mind reader. Which could happen. When my wife wants me to give her the thingamabob I generally know what object she doesn't know the name of and can hand it to her based on our 30 years together. But that doesn't get you as far as saying "Hand me the 1/4 inch ratchet with the 9/16th socket."

Naming something USED TO require assessing the character and nature of the things named. In the biblical story Adam named the animals and I don't believe he just called them dohicky, thingamabob and watchamacallit. Genesis 2: 19 says "Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to Adam to SEE what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name." (Caps mine) God wanted to SEE what Adam would name them based on the character and nature of each animal.

Many cultures don't name their kids until they are 2 years old. They earn their name once the parents assess the character and nature of that child. To call your child Bob when he is born is the equivalent of calling him dohicky unless you have found the etymology which says: it is short for Robert and came from Germanic tribes to England and means "bright fame". Is that who your Robert, Rob, Bob, Bert is? We don't spend enough time on names and I find to many people naming their kids Thingamabob and Whatchamacallit. In Ancient Egyptian Culture the NAME was a part of the "essence" of an individual. We might have mind, soul, and body as the essence but Ancient Egyptians had five: Body, Shadow, Ka, Ba, and NAME. To abuse the NAME was to abuse the individual. When people were REALLY bad in Ancient Egypt they would scratch their NAME off any carving or hieroglyph and so erase the person.

Naming requires knowing the character and nature of the person. Using family names is significant and good. Naming based on what you HOPE that person will become is also good. Naming a name the just sounds cool is your right and privilege but is the equivalent of calling your child Dohicky.

My parents named me Steven, a form of Stephen and the Greek Stephanos which means: crown. Did my parents name me that so I would become royalty some day? Did they name me that because I was the 6th boy in the family and they were running out of names? OR maybe they named me that because I am going bald and everyone can now see my crown. Yea, that's it.

The Creation of Religion

I was on the water by myself and far from shore. My sailboat had flipped as I leaned into the wind a little too much. Wet with waves hitting me in the face I attempted to grab the keel (now the top of the boat) to flip the sailboat upright again. Yet each time I attempted it the stronger than normal wind would push it back again. I pushed the boat in the opposite direction and pulled and it was as if the gods of wind were playing with me because the wind shifted and threw the mast and sail back into the water again. I am a good swimmer and had a life jacket on but after an hour of attempting to pull the boat upright all I could do was lay on the white underside of the boat and rest while the wind and waves attempted to beat me up. In exhaustion I was forced to believe that there was some kind of malevolent spirit at work in the universe plotting against me.

Imagine the ancients running into the same problems and wondering what was at work in the universe around them that seemed to be nothing but chaos. That chaos then came to have names in various ancient traditions: Set in Egypt, Yamm in Ugantic, Tiamat in Babylonian, Typhon in Greek and even in Jewish and Christian scripture as a Sea Serpent, Rahab and Leviathon.

Life was defined as a struggle to keep the Chaos at bay. The gods of chaos in battle with the gods that keep Chaos under control. So what can you do but "help out" the "good" gods fighting Chaos through sacrifices, worship, and rituals. Keep the good gods happy and you will keep the Chaos gods away.

Aristotle believed the particular gods came to be defined through our dreams. Our dreams had a connection with the divine and so showed us how to order the universe to prevent chaos. Euhemerus believed our gods came from ancient heroes who fought the fight against chaos. Cornutus believed that studying the names and places where the god myths came from would give insight into the gods themselves and why we worship them. They all believed in religion but reasoned that this system of beliefs and rituals came from different places.

Religion was created as system of beliefs and rituals that would keep the arbitrary and capricious nature of, well, NATURE at bay. Nature is a nasty place of death, destruction, kill or be eaten, survival of the strongest or deceptive, and scary place. Religions were created to make sense of the scary void. That is also why most religions will be polytheistic. The more gods you have the easier it is to blame one or more of them for the earthquake that just killed 1000 people. Or you can explain it as a battle between two gods resulting in an earthquake. When there is only one god involved, there is only one you can blame for the seemingly capricious killing of people. Polytheists will never wonder if god is good or not because there are simply good gods and bad gods to blame and credit for everything.

Christianity is monotheistic but believes in chaos, not as a god but as a state of NON-God. A place absent of THE-ONE-God's love and care. The REAL battle in Christianity is not the ONE-God versus some other deity but the ONE-God versus our corrupted nature. The ONE-God seeks to be placed on the throne of our lives and depose our selfish nature and therefore the commands and rituals are about denigrating self in favor of the ONE-God and others.

Commands like: love God first and then love your neighbor; if you are hit on one cheek turn the other for hitting as well; if you are asked for an overcoat give your shirt as well; don't give out of your excess but give sacrificially; whoever is the least will be the greatest; give to get; love first no matter if it is reciprocated, etc.

Christianity is a religion; as system of beliefs, but it is far different than the arbitrary battle of gods resulting in earthquakes and tsunamis. So when I was stranded on the sail boat I didn't wonder of the battle going on causing the chaos, I would ask "what is God trying to teach me here?" It isn't some cosmic battle of god vs. god but it probably is something like: "Don't go sailing in strong winds by yourself you dummy!"

The Dance of Inanna

Inanna danced into the minds of the Sumerian people. It was harvest time: Inanna's time. The fruitfulness of the year was celebrated by the princes of the land and even the slaves and servants joined in the party. The dance lasted, sometimes, for weeks depending on how much grace Inanna bestowed on her people. She is the goddess of fertility, sex, and ... warfare. She is the goddess of the fever; of the dance.

You know what dance I am talking about? That dance that goes on in your heart and mind between your passions and your reasoning. Inanna is the goddess who stirs your body when you see someone beautiful of the opposite sex. Inanna is the goddess who drives you to just one more drink and everything will be better. Inanna is the goddess who stirs the fever of war, the propaganda, and the passion to fight.

The sister of Inanna in Sumerian/Mesopotamian mythology is Ereshkigal. Ereshkigal is the goddess of the aftermath. While Inanna is the goddess of the fruitful harvest, Ereshkigal is the goddess of the barren fields of winter. Inanna is the goddess of passionate, secret, and illegitimate sex; Ereshkigal is the goddess of guilt in the aftermath. Inanna is the goddess of life and Ereshkigal was relegated to the goddess of the afterlife or underworld.

Yet Inanna was not happy being just the goddess of the college party of life; she wanted more. She went to the underworld to confront her sister who suspected she was up to something. At each gate of the underworld, in order to pass, Inanna was forced to give up some of her jewelry and clothes which was her power until finally she confronted her sister to conquer her but found her drive to control had stripped her of all her power and her sister easily overpowered her. In the myth with Inanna gone the world became fruitless. No crops, no children, no parties. The other gods saw the problem and pleaded with Ereshkigal to release her sister which she agreed to by requiring someone to take her place. While all Inanna's friends mourned for her she found her husband simply reading under a tree and she sent him to the underworld in her place. Yet six months of the year she pines for him and so we have the fall and winter months of unfruitfulness.

While ancient myths are not true they do convey some truths. Guilt and barrenness will follow the mindless caving in to your passions as sure as fall and winter follow summer. The inability of your reason to stop you passion will not only hurt you but hurt those you love.

Too often today we look for remedies for the hangover instead of stopping the drinking; we look for counselors who will tell us to ignore the guilt instead of seeking repentance for the sin and STOPPING the action. We all dance the dance of Inanna. The question is who will lead, who is the stronger: your reason and self discipline or your passion and weaknesses? Your dance, your decision.