Serenity

Actually, this is a Japanese teahouse pavilion in a public park in Toulouse, France. Canon 10D; Nov. 2004. (click to enlarge)

Images Of Paris

Even to someone from another galaxy, Paris is something special.

I earn my bread these days by working for a French company. It's one of those evil multi-national pharmuceutical giants. Hey, someone has to pay my salary, and no one is forcing you to take those pills. Anyway, one of the "hardships" I have to put up with is having to travel to France 2 or 3 times a year on business. Here are some traditional tourista views from a trip in Sept. 2004. My camera is a Canon 10D.

Sacre_Coeur
The hill and church of Sacre Coeur taken through a window of the Orsay Museum.

Notre_Dame
From la Rive Gauche.

Notre_Dame
From the Isle Saint-Louis

Eiffel_Tower
I just wandered around until I got the right angle. I don't know what street I was on.

Arc_de_Triumph
I'ts a little tricky to be jumping in and out of Paris traffic, but the reward can be worth the risk.

Alcoholism

Throughout their history and across different cultures the human species has been universally self-destructive. They find the silliest-looking ways (many of them absurdly elaborate and expensive) to hurl themselves into danger and physical risk for no apparent reason, and they call it "fun". They initiate devastating wars on themselves because of religious differences or pieces of paper called "treaties" or completely make-believe insults and injuries (the most recent example was a childishly transparent fable known as "WMD"). And since before they had the capacity to record their own history, the humans have deliberately manufactured and consumed an addictive poison called ethanol or alcohol.

The interesting thing is that although undeniably poisonous and mildly addictive to most of them, a severe addictive response is relatively rare. As of this point, the humans don't seem to have figured out the biochemistry of why this happens, either. Because the severe addictive response is only selective, and the majority of the population thoroughly enjoys the mild physiological reaction to the poison, the society as a whole has made only the feeblest attempts to regulate the substance.

As I was growing up as a child in the 60's, my parents had alcohol around the house as a normal thing. They would have a drink when friends came over, or together on a weekend, or when going out to a restaurant, but neither of them ever had a problem with drinking that I noticed. Although I remember them getting "happy", I do not recall any case when I would have called them "drunk".

From time to time as a child I too might be given a glass of wine with dinner on a special occasion, but never more than one. I was a "good kid" (actually, a major dork) and in high school I never hung out with other kids who drank or partied.

My first real encounter with alcohol was between high school graduation and starting college. Maybe I'll write the whole story of that summer someday, but the point of the moment is a glorious warm summer afternoon in the deep woods of New Hampshire reading philosophy books at a picnic table and sipping a bottle of wine. I can still feel that erotic little breeze off the lake, sexier than any lover I have ever had. Anyway, the first thing I knew, the whole bottle of wine was gone, and I was having a hard time finding the latrine. I was drunk for the first time in my life.

In college (Penn State, of course) I got really serious about my drinking. Dorm-parties would always see me passed out somewhere, invariably early in the evening (at least I got enough sleep that way). I was actually proud of how I could almost always hit the toilet I was aiming at when getting sick. At the time, though, there were plenty of other recreational materials to keep me occupied (hey, that sounds like another future post). Although grass, acid and speed were good fun, I never did get into 'ludes, since alcohol did the job of a depressant for me. I remember one Christmas break, when I stayed in town rather than going home, and I decided to see how long I could stay drunk. I literally set the bottle by my bed so I could wake up and have a drink before brushing my teeth, not because I wanted a drink, but just to see if I could stay buzzed day-and-night for a solid week. Frankly, that experiment was a failure because I really didn't like drinking as soon as the sun came up. Ultimately, that dislike for daytime drinking may have been the thing that saved me.

I guess that I first really noticed that something was not right the year I spent back with my parents after my Penn State BA, but before starting on my Masters degree at Drexel. I was unemployed, and I spent a lot of time home alone. I would go into my parent's liqueur cabinet and nip at the bottles in the back hoping that they wouldn't notice the "evaporation" of stuff they rarely got out. By the time I moved out of my parent's house for good to start my Masters degree, I was 21 and hanging at bars. I was going to Library School at Drexel in Philadelphia, and another future post will have to do with that stage of my life. The incident that relates to this post was when our term finals happened to be on March 17. A bunch of us (about 5 or 6 girls and me… this was library school, after all) went straight from the exam to the local bar and pounded on the door at 11AM until they opened for us. I left about 1AM, and I wasn't the last of those library lushes!

There were probably two times (I think) that alcohol came close to killing me. The first time I was in my 20's and working at my first professional job for about a year or so. I was living just down the boardwalk from Asbury Park N.J. at the time, and I walked up to the Stone Pony from time to time to drink. One night in November I was there drinking martinis. Later, my wife used to tell me that whenever I drank gin my personality changed and I became really nasty. Anyway, I woke up in the middle of the night freezing cold on the beach without my coat and feeling that something more than a hangover was wrong. I found a door (I have no idea whose door) and began pounding on it, collapsing on the spot when no one would open it. Eventually a pair of police showed up and took me to a hospital (I remember spending the whole ride apologizing to them, and the one guy finally commented to his partner that I was the politest drunk he had ever seen… they didn't arrest me). I was apparently busted up and needed a few thousand dollars of dental work to put things back. It took me several years to remember, but eventually I did recall having a disagreement with the bartender that eventually included the bouncer. I never did get my hat or coat back, and I really liked that hat. In November on the beach in nothing but a shirt, I suppose I could have died of exposure before waking up.

The second time I almost died I was still in my 20's, but now at my 3rd professional job. I was traveling on business to a weeklong technical training class. The class itself was boring enough, but when the class was over there was nothing to do at all. By the end of the week I ended up in the motel bar ordering cognac. I have no clue how long I was there, how many I had, how much money I spent or how I made it back to my room. All I know is that I woke up the next day in my motel bed with vomit covering everything. It is just a miracle that I didn't drown in it like Jimi and Janice and Keith. I dragged myself over to hang the Do Not Disturb sign on the door and it took me until noon to pull myself together enough to pack and leave. I still feel sorry for whatever poor housekeeper had to deal with that mess. Please forgive me.

Apart from occasionally getting surly, I was never violent when I was drinking, and I was almost always "functional" the next day, though with diminished capacity through my hangovers. I was never arrested and the one car-crash I had when drinking involved just me, about a mile from where I was living and I could leave the car and walk away from it (the policeman who came to my house the next morning looking for the car's owner knew I was hung-over, but by that time, he couldn't arrest me). I was never professionally diagnosed as an official "alcoholic", but I knew that alcohol was becoming a serious problem. My wife rarely nagged me about my drinking. She was known to get pretty stupid sometimes too, and it was not unusual for me to be the one carrying her home and cleaning up after her. Of the 365 days in a year, I probably spent at least 350 with a hangover, and probably once a month I wouldn't remember how I got to bed at all. Although I almost never had anything to drink during the day, I was so hung-over every morning that I knew it was affecting my ability to do my job, and that was the thing that bothered me the most.

I knew that this was a problem, but in spite of years of trying, I never could control my drinking. I'd try all sorts of "tricks", like promising myself over and over that I'd stop at only one this evening (that held up nicely until the end of that one, at which point I felt so good I had to keep it going), or only buy liquor that I didn't like (hoping I'd drink less), or telling myself I'd only drink with other people (never worked, not even once) or only on odd-numbered days (what?). The thing was that although every morning I'd wake up saying "Man, this sucks, I have GOT to quit doing this to myself"… by about 4PM each day my only thought was what kind of booze I was going to drink that night.

One day I was visiting my father and his new second wife in Florida. While we were there, she got a call from her daughter (no relation to me… got it?) and spent pretty much half a day on the phone with her. The gist of it was that the daughter's husband had just died from liver failure brought on by drinking. At the time I was 36 and he had been 40.

That incident percolated in my head for about a month and finally I said, "You know, if I don't do something, I'm going to be dead by the time I'm 40 too. I've tried and tried and I really can't 'control' this drinking. In fact, it is so painful and difficult to try to control it, that it would probably be way-easier to just not drink at all!" That simple thought was actually an incredibly profound revelation to me, and I still remember exactly where I was when I had it. So I skipped the liquor store that evening and when I got home, I looked at myself and said… "Guess what, that person there in the mirror… he doesn't drink!" … And suddenly that monster I had been wrestling with for years just turned into smoke and vanished. That was over 15 years ago now, and I still don't drink. Of course, it wasn't really quite that easy. For about 2 years I had regular cravings. But every time the monster would wake up and say… "Com'on, you know that you want that beautifully tasty little scotch… do it for the taste, not the buzz"… I'd think back… "Yea, that was tasty, but you know… I'm a non-drinker, so it just isn't an option. And anyway, I haven't had any for so long and if I start again, I'll just have to go through all this crap again and I just can't take that". Eventually the cravings subsided and I rarely (but not never) get them anymore.

I think that the common view of alcoholism is actually a disservice to many alcoholics. People are told that alcoholism is a "disease", and this implies that you either have it or you don't have it. It is also the common view that everyone who has this disease is completely dysfunctional. I'm sure that many alcoholics can't function, but this common view means that it is easy to tell yourself … "Well…since I'm not completely dysfunctional, I must not be an alcoholic!" In fact, whether it has physiological causes or not, there are definitely "degrees" to alcoholism and it isn't just a "yes" or "no" light switch. You CAN be a "borderline" alcoholic and you CAN be maintaining a job and relationships and not be arrested for DUI, and yet still have a serious problem with alcohol. I think that perhaps the really critical question is… just how badly do you want to keep living?

Another reason I don't like the "disease" model, is that it distances the individual from personal responsibility ("…It's not my fault, it's The Disease") and this makes it too easy give up, backslide and surrender to the monster. Consuming alcohol is not like having cancer, because consuming alcohol requires personal action and every individual has ultimate control over his or her own behavior. If YOU don't buy that bottle and if YOU don't lift the glass, then YOU HAVE WON!! Your destiny is completely within your own personal control.

Metaphysics

At dictionary.com, "metaphysics" is defined as; a priori speculation (presupposed; not supported by factual study) upon questions that are unanswerable to scientific observation, analysis, or experiment.

The humans spend an astonishing amount of time and energy with their metaphysics and take these issues very seriously. Much of human history is consumed with questions like "Where did I come from", "Why am I here" and "What happens when I die". Even today they are known to kill each other over these issues, if you can believe that! Proof, if any was needed, that they really are a sad and pitiful little species. Religion is closely allied with metaphysics, but you may think of the difference as being that "religion" is the structure, documents, organizational hierarchy and prescribed rituals (i.e. the "vessel") that carry the metaphysical ideas, beliefs and explanations.

Here are my thoughts.

Existence is like a lava lamp. In fact, I keep one on my desk to remind me of this principle. There are two basic substances in this existence; let's call them "Spirit" and "Matter". These two substances intermingle with each other in the lava lamp with a reservoir of Spirit at the bottom budding off to form individual bubbles of Spirit that float through the world of "Matter" for a while, and then eventually rejoin the Spirit reservoir and continue the cycle.

As you look at a lava lamp, you will notice that there are all different sizes and shapes of floating bubbles. This is analogous to the way all life participates, to one degree or another, in the world of Spirit. Yes, even that african violet on your windowsill contains the same kind of Spirit as you do! Maybe we could think of it as just being a smaller bubble of the same stuff.

So, where did we come from and where are we going? We all came from the same reservoir of Spirit, and we will all return there too, just like in the lava lamp. Is it "wrong" to harm another living thing? Well, this may be a little more difficult. In the lava lamp the floating bubbles are mechanical and have no "morality" and you can see one bubble consuming another without any implications, so how can this translate to life? At one level, since Spirit is indestructible, it might be argued that taking life doesn't matter, but that is surly a rationalization and perversion. Ultimately, we must all consume life in order to continue to live ourselves (humans can't eat sterile rocks). There are clearly cultural imperatives, however, that make it wrong at a societal level to take another human life (yes, I too choose to live by that one) and only within the last 100 years in American society has it also become common to extend that moral ban to include wanton cruelty to animals. In some of the strictest Buddhist traditions, even plants and insects were included as scared life that should never be harmed (although clearly, that can go too far. In the case of the Buddhists of China centuries ago, this was the rationalization for monks not tilling the soil and growing their own food. Eventually their society got sick of supporting the worthless parasites and they almost wiped out Buddhism in China with a violent pogrom reaction). I think that the principle could be summed up with common sense… do what you need to in order to survive, but the wanton destruction of life, especially of your own species, is clearly wrong. As for myself, I still pull weeds out of the garden and spray wasp nests around the house, but I do feel bad about it, and as in the tradition of some native North American tribes, I always silently ask for "forgiveness" from these bothers in Spirit.

So, what about God? Well, I suppose if you really, really need to label something as "God", then the reservoir of Spirit at the bottom of the lava lamp would be it. However, it seems clear to me that there is no "personality" to this Spirit reservoir, at least not in any sense a human could recognize. It is silly to try to ascribe the traits of a human person, like "will" and "purpose" and "anger" or "love" to the reservoir of Spirit, even if we all did come from there. In a different, but similar analogy, how can an individual raindrop hope to understand the nature of the ocean? The water vapor came from the ocean, and it will return there as a drop of rain, but the ocean is a lot more than just a single big-ass raindrop, and the raindrop has no hope of understanding the ocean in raindrop-terms. So just don't even waste time starting to talk about "God" as some big-ass person sitting around in the sky with human-like thoughts, feelings and reactions. The one thing we can be sure of is that it ain't like that at all.

When we see the lava lamp bubble (or raindrop) returning to its source and then budding off again, are we talking about "reincarnation"? Well, "yes" and "no". When a bubble finishes its travels around the lamp and returns to the lava reservoir, it ceases to be the individual bubble that it was. There is only the reservoir. When a new bubble buds off, is it a "reincarnation" of the previous one? No, not really, even though it does come from the same substance. So, there is one Spirit common to all life, and we all participate in it… humans, plants and bacteria. But when your physical form dies, the precise portion of Spirit that was with that physical form will not exactly return to another physical form any more than you can retrieve the same exact glass of water after pouring it into the ocean.

What happens when we die and is there a heaven? Well, I have already suggested that the end of an individual life is like the falling of a raindrop into the ocean (or lava bubble to the lamp reservoir). As far as heaven goes, think of "heaven" for a raindrop to be instantly becoming the self-aware totality of all the contiguous water molecules in all the contiguous oceans on the planet. Now imagine instantly "knowing" everything than any living entity that has ever lived has ever known or experienced. Yea, "heaven" is a pretty crummy little word to describe something like that, but I guess it is as good as any mere word ever could be. "Heaven" is not a place; it is just a linguistic placeholder for something completely unimaginable and inexpressible.

But if we all "go to the same place" when we die, why should we try to live a righteous life? What difference does it make? First, I think this notion that right-living is only possible through intimidation and threat of punishment is an archaic throwback to early human history when "Might" really was the only currency. Early religions did need to scare people into not chopping each other up with the threat of punishment in the afterlife by an omniscient God. This is why civilization embraced religion. Come on now though, do you really think we still need that? (Oh, yea, you dumb-ass humans might). Eventually we need to outgrow the ancient fairytales and do what is right just because we know that it is right. When I die, I will contribute my portion of Spirit into the rest of the Reservoir and everything I have done and felt will become part of the whole. I'd really like (in my silly little individualistic way) for that personal contribution to be honorable. Am I going to be "judged" by some guy in white robes sitting in front of a big gate… I doubt it. But in my last micro-moment as an individual, I want to be proud of what I am giving up back into The Whole. And this is why it is important to live a good a righteous life.

Why are we here? I am always amused by this question, because I see no reason why it needs an answer. It is like asking… Why is there "yellow"? The bubble buds off from the lava reservoir, floats around the lamp for a while in splendid egotistic isolation, consuming and being consumed by others, and then eventually it returns from whence it came. What more do you need? Everything that happens to us as we float through this world of irrelevant matter (samsara, as the Buddhists call it) is ultimately meaningless because the indestructible and indescribable world of the Spirit is the only truly "real" and lasting thing there is. The "point" of life is to live for a while and then die and return to this Great Ocean or Reservoir of Spirit at the bottom of the lava lamp (aka "God" if you prefer fewer letters). If you are fretting over some perceived hurt or unfairness that life has dealt you, then you are just not seeing the Big Picture and you need to adjust your priorities and your notion of what is important and real. So don't worry about it. The Good News is that life is temporary and we will all die soon and return to God.

Gender Differences

Humans make a big deal over what they sometimes refer to as gender-wars. Though odd by our standards, there are only two basic genders in this species, male and female (as is true of most of the fauna and even some flora on this planet). I do need to qualify my observations on this subject right up front with the disclaimer that, since I currently inhabit a male body, this is the perspective that I have naturally inherited. I will critique the foibles of masculinity in some later posting, but as a male, it is much easier for me to see the quirks of the Other Side.

In this human society, females have the reputation for being more "nurturing" and "caring" than males. Females seem to actually revel in viewing themselves as both selfless martyrs and helpless victims. When viewing TV channels designed for female audiences (such as WE or Lifetime) it is noticeable that the themes are almost exclusively… A) Female as a pitiful victim of nasty males; B) Female as an angry and avenging former-victim of nasty males; C) Female as noble protector of children against cold-cruel-world of nasty males. I think these 3 themes cover at least 90% of such "women's programming". This isn't to say that this is the way most women truly are; but rather that this is the way that most women enjoy viewing themselves.

In my own observations however, I have to reject the idea of females being especially "caring" and "giving" and "concerned for others". For example: I go to the grocery store almost every day for food shopping because I do all of the cooking in our household, and I prefer to food shop prior to every meal. Grocery stores are traditional female venues, however, so I get regular opportunities to view large herds of the gender in its "natural habitat". My observation is that, contrary to the gender-myth, females in American food stores are remarkably cold and discourteous to other people. If there is an exact center to an aisle, then that is where the woman will put her cart so it is difficult to get by. If there is more than one female in the aisle, they frequently have their carts thoughtlessly side-by-side making it impossible to get by. As you approach the woman, she will be totally oblivious to what is going on around her and make no effort to get out of the way. Probably due to early socialization, females assume that males will extend all manner of chivalry, and they simply anticipate that doors will be opened and right-of-way will be yielded. My observation is that actual female behavior is radically different from the reputation the gender enjoys. By the way, though these are only generalizations, males in similar circumstances tend to react much differently. Most of the time a male in the food store will place his cart to the side, be aware when someone approaches and make an effort to get out of the way when necessary. In short, the males are MUCH more caring and courteous and responsive to others than the females.

I do have a theory for this observational discrepancy. Women have a reputation for selfless-giving-to-others largely due to their traditional "service" role in the family (don't whine about it ladies, you know that you love being the martyr). However, my theory is that females do not actually view members of their own immediate family as "others" at all. To a female, members of the immediate family are the same as the self (literally an extension of the Freudian id). Therefore, as long as the female can justify that her actions are on behalf of "family", then get the hell out of the way, 'cause anything goes! Ever notice how some of the very, very worst drivers on the road are not young reckless males, but adult women with children in the car? That's because the female has convinced herself that she is doing it "for the children", only it is really for herself, because her children are her "self".

So… if we eliminate immediate family from the category of non-self others, then what women do for "true" others becomes greatly diminished and the female reputation for being caring and nurturing takes a gigantic hit.

Marriage

I often hear these humans say, as though it is a universal Great Truth, that …"a good marriage takes lots of hard work". I don't understand that concept at all. In this present incarnation I have been married over 20-years, and my wife and I are more in love now than we have ever been. We never fight or even argue seriously, and even the petty annoyances are… well… pretty damn petty. And all of this has taken exactly zero "work".

I think that The Secret is more in the realm of Common Sense than secret. Human beings are individuals. Somehow, however, there is a commonly held but completely insane notion that marriage somehow creates a whole greater than the sum of it's parts. This means that people are focused on The Marriage or The Family or The Relationship as though it is an entity unto itself or an external thing that you can possess. When a person thinks that The Marriage is a greater whole, and that they are participants in that whole, like being an employee of a corporation, then there is a natural impulse to influence this entity and exert their will on it's nature and direction. In other words, just because you are my spouse, I come to think that I have a RIGHT to tell you what to do and control your behavior, because what you do affects this larger entity that I participate in also. You are just the other half of my whole. I have a RIGHT to nag you about chores, or tell you how to drive your car because I am at least an equal partner in all aspects of your life, if not the god-granted controller of your destiny.

This is all totally nuts. There is, in fact, only you… an individual; and your partner… another individual. There is no "greater entity" here, and you DO NOT have any special rights in your partner's life, other than those your partner may willingly grant you. What this means in practice is that The Secret to a fabulous marriage and personal relationship is to always treat your partner with the same level of respect that you show to a casual acquaintance. If you wouldn't do it or say it to someone you just met last week for the first time, for god's sake, don't do it or say it to your spouse!

When you love someone, there is an intense natural desire to please him or her. When, for example, my wife wants to do something with me that I don't particularly like, I do it happily anyway because it is pleasurable to me to please her. It is not the activity I enjoy, it is pleasing her that I enjoy. This is called "love". If a situation like this is approached with a huge sigh and viewed as "work", then you are NOT in love and I feel sorry for you. I can tell she loves me too because this happens in the other direction also. Although she may want me to be involved in some of the things she does, she knows that I may not particularly care for some of these things, and she will avoid asking me, unless it is particularly important to her, in which case it is "my pleasure"… etc. etc. Contrary to popular myth, LOVE IS NOT WORK!!

I remember an old saying from somewhere that went something like… "A man marries the perfect woman believing that she will never change, and a woman marries a flawed man believing that he will change... but they are usually both mistaken." You have to love your partner as the individual that they are, and not as some Hollywood-contrived role or job-description.

Blogs I Like

To Whom It May Concern
Clever idea. It was pretty new when I saw it, but it should get good when more people find it.

Parenthood And Various Other Disasters
I like the writing.