Blog Posts

Recently, a very close friend lost her battle with cancer and died; she was 76. Everyone probably knew she would likely lose that battle at her age, but it still comes as a shock when it happens. We console ourselves by saying things like, "Her pain is over" or "She's in a better place" if you subscribe to religious philosophy, but no amount of consoling statements will shorten or ease the sense of loss for any of us and some experts caution against those kinds of remarks.

My wife, Gale, and I have discussed death many times over the years. With 80 years of age squarely in our sites, we know people will be making these comments about us one day. There can be no life without death. We neither fear death nor encourage it to come any sooner than necessary, programmed, or ordained depending on your point of view. Neither of us is "religious." Gale does embrace much of the Buddhist philosophy but is not a practicing Buddhist, whatever that might mean.

As for me, I probably come closest to being a Humanist. I don't believe in an afterlife in the traditional sense. I think that I am made up of elements that were in and around my parents when I was conceived. I absorbed the energy and elements of life from them and the world around me through my mother as I lived in her womb. Throughout my life, I have continued to derive my energy and my being by consuming food, water, oxygen, all the elements of our earth that permit and sustain life. And, when I die, those elements that I really only borrowed for the duration of my life will be released back into the world to sustain other life forms after I am gone. That is my version of an afterlife.

Regardless of what you believe about life and death, when there is a loss, it hurts. Losses can come in many ways. Death is the most obvious, but as a child, your best friend might move to another town, or your family is the one that moves, leaving all your friends behind. Your parents get divorced. You can have a breakup with a friend or partner that results in the sense of loss. Friends at work leave or you change jobs and leave friends behind. You can lose a dog, cat, bird, horse, or any number of non-human friends that you loved, and that leaves you miserable with a profound sense of loss. There are no shortages of losses in a person's life.

While talking about loss and grieving, and trying to understand what is happening, it occurred to me that we are not grieving for the person or animal that is gone - they may or may not be aware of anything - but rather we are grieving for ourselves. The pain we are feeling is that we have lost them in our lives.

If you have followed my writing on several topics, you know I'm a visual person. I see the world in pictures. Imagine that your being, the person that you are, is full of circles that represent the many elements in your life. A partner, a spouse, children, grandchildren, parents, siblings, your closest friend(s), workmates, dog or cat, casual friends, your job, your car, local bartender, server at your favorite restaurant. All of these people and non-people fill your life by being present and filling your memory with an encyclopedia of events, mostly happy ones, we hope.

Some of the circles are larger than others. The larger circle means that that person is involved more heavily in your life. You interact with them often, and their emotional impact is high. The best example of this is probably the parents of a child. For the parents, the child is an all-consuming part of their life. For the child, the parent is critical to guiding them to adulthood. Others, perhaps a coworker, can also be meaningful, but they occupy less space in your life. Partners and siblings also typically play a significant role.

The grief we feel when there is a loss is relative to the role the person or animal played in our lives. Significant impact, major pain. When they are lost to us, it leaves a larger or smaller void in our hearts, in our minds, and in our so-called souls. Something is missing from our lives, something that was important to us on an emotional level is gone.

I say so-called soul because the soul in many religious, philosophical, and mythological traditions is the incorporeal essence of a living being. In ancient Greek, the soul means "to breathe." It comprises the mental abilities of a living being: reason, character, feeling, consciousness, memory, perception, thinking, etc. As religion evolved, the soul became a central part of religious philosophy, particularly in the Christian-Judeo philosophy, where it was concluded that only humans are permitted to have souls.

Another way of visualizing this 'loss' and the accompanying distress is similar to something Gale went through to quit smoking years ago. I had quit cold turkey a couple of years earlier. But, because of some personal trauma in her life, Gale needed help to break free of the habit. We tried a hypnotist that a boss and a good friend of mine, Terry Clow, had tried and enthusiastically endorsed. The instructor of this approach applied self-hypnosis. I had already quit smoking, but I asked to audit the class out of curiosity, and he agreed. In describing the anxiety one feels when stopping smoking, or any habit for that matter, he explained that the subconscious mind manages our day-to-day activities without us thinking about it.

For example, you don't have to think about how to use a fork to eat, or how many times to turn the steering wheel on your car when making a turn. You learned all these things when you were young, and that trained the subconscious mind to do these tasks for you, leaving the creative mind free to create. You learned how to form individual letters when writing and how to spell words. You learned sentence structure and the basics of grammar. Now, when you write something, you do those things automatically while your conscious brain creates the message you want to write.

In our case, smoking was a learned habit that the subconscious mind took over after you have learned the habit, and smoking became a part of you. You begin to associate smoking with a cup of coffee, fishing on a boat, after sex, any number of activities that you do while smoking, and enjoying the act. The teacher, David (the last name is lost), explained that it might only take three minutes to drink a cup of coffee. But, if you smoke a cigarette at the same time, it might take a total of six minutes.

When you quit smoking, there will be a three-minute gap of unoccupied time in your subconscious (like a gap in an audiotape) as you drink that cup of coffee. The subconscious does not like to sit around with nothing to do, and that gap in your subconscious will make you anxious. That is the panic smokers experience time and time again when they first quit. In time, the subconscious is reprogrammed for all the activities you associate with smoking, and the gap and anxiety go away as the mind reforms around that gap.

I believe grief over a loss of any kind is much like that. The loss of anyone who has played a significant role in your life leaves "gaps" in our lives, in our hearts, and in our minds. Time and interaction with others will eventually fill that void, but it will take a little time. You will never forget the loss or the person or friend, but the grief of loss will diminish as that void in your life is filled with other people, events, and activities.

How long that takes will vary with the individual. It will depend on how much support and love you have around you, how interested you are in life, or how engaged or isolated you may be. And, your particular belief system may also play a role in your healing.

Grieving is not unique to humans. We have all heard stories about a dog sleeping by its owners grave, or we have seen wildlife shows of everything from elephants to penguins and crows mourning the loss of one of their members or a mate. While we don't know exactly how animals process information in their brains, it seems evident to me, that, like us, a member of their group can become a big part of their life. When that member is lost to death or other causes, they suffer from grief in a way similar to us. In time, other members of the group help fill that empty place in their heart and mind. The mere act of living tends to make us move on.

Knowing this, and assuming you understand and accept my premise, will not reduce your grief or shorten the duration of that grief. But, knowing why you feel as you do and that everyone, even animals go through a similar process can help understand the experience. And know that, in time, the emptiness will be filled with the love of other people, animals, and activities that lets you know there is an endpoint to the pain.

0 Comments

Everyone has their own definition for a democracy. Some want unfettered freedom and others want a security blanket. The fact is that we have both. We have more freedoms than many countries in the world and we have social security blankets but not as many as other democracies in the western world.

Over the next fourteen or so months, we are going to hear wild accusations, the gnashing of teeth, and see the wringing of hands as the various candidates for president and their supporters and paid mudslingers work to attract or distract the voters regarding their man or woman. Along with all of that, the blunderbuss currently holding the office will engage in rage-tweets and run-on sentences...make that strings of words that make little to no sense as he attempts to enhance the orange glow of his ridiculousness.

There will be shouts of socialism (maybe even the term commie a time or two), fascism, racism, nationalism, nepotism, cronyism, and as the great orange stink-tank cranks up, round after round of name-calling and childish put-downs, like what we’ve grown accustomed to over the last several years.

But as a voter, all we need to do is decide whether we’re progressive, conservative, hard-right-or-left, or independent (whatever that means). To assist in making that decision, it seems to me we need to fly over our government at about 50,000 feet and develop a macro-vision of what kind of nation we want to be. The awful details that turn that vision into reality will be the job of those we elect based on their vision of government. If they can’t get it right, we kick their butts out and try again.

To explain the next visual aid below (I’m a visual guy), I need to explain where this brain-fart came from. One of my assignments (I was sort of Shanghaied into the job) was as part of a team that was trying to standardize processes around the Boeing Company. I think it might have been easier to train a hive of killer bees to dance the Mexican hat dance than get folks to standardize, but that was my assignment. The basic problem with standardization is that no one wants to do that. We are a bunch of innovative, creative, and to a large extent rebellious human beings.

Using the Boeing example to make the point, you hire a highly degreed engineer to design the next generation of space fighters because he or she is on the leading edge of knowledge, technology, and a seer when it comes to flight engineering. You sit them down, give them all the company manuals and say something like, “Go to work, but do everything according to the standards - the way it’s always been done.” After they stop crying, they are likely to hand you their resignation.

Unlike the cow chewing its cud in the field for hours on end, we humans are not like that. We want variety, change (as long as it was our idea), and the liberty to do pretty damn much anything we want. We do not like marching in formation.

Something was said in one of those discussions at Boeing by my manager, who will remain nameless because he was, hands down, the worst manager in the roughly 60 years I worked in and around aerospace. He was Trump-like before most of us had ever heard of Trump.

Our task was to standardize those critical processes inside the company to ensure a continuity of results as well as to reduce the overall cost of doing business. My boss’ statement referred to a “level” of standardization that helped achieve that consistency of purpose and cost reduction. He called that line the “critical mass” line. The idea was that the processes above that line needed to be standardized for the benefit of the employees, the customer, and the company (the Big3).

Very briefly, in the context of a company the size of Boeing, you certainly want the payroll to be “standard” across the company. You can’t have every organization deciding what day they want to call payday, and each using their own financial institution to issue paychecks, etc. It would be chaos and costly to operate that way.

So we drew a pyramid to demonstrate the idea. The line or base of the top section of the pyramid was the “critical mass” line. Above this would go those processes that had to be common and standard across the company. Things like payroll, accounting, company identification badges, etcetera.

In the section below that top level was where we still wanted a degree of standardization, but we also wanted to allow organizations the flexibility to be innovative and creative while functioning in a way that was most efficient for them. There might be “company guidelines” to help them establish processes, but they would still innovate. And, where possible, we wanted them to cooperate with other organizations to utilize the best ideas and practices and to standardize where it made sense, again for the benefit of the Big3.

And at the bottom level was where the most flexibility existed. Individuals had quite a few choices. If they like a particular type of pen, or computer mouse, or office chairs for back issues, they could make those changes, they were free to flex on many issues. There were flexible shifts where possible. I won’t list everything here, but hopefully you see what I’m talking about.

Running a country is very much like running a big company, at least in terms of organization and where to utilize top-down federal control, where to allow states and localities the freedom to innovate, and where to let the people have maximum freedom without upsetting the balance of a functioning society. Here then, is that notional pyramid applied to government.

The ‘A’ level is dominated by the federal government. A few of the functions that would seem to best be managed at the federal level for the benefit of all are shown on the left. In some cases, these may be hard-dictates and in some cases the rules may allow some wiggle room (democracy) as long as the top-most goals at a federal level are being met.

Some might call this progressive, others socialism, or who knows what, but I think few people would argue that the military and FAA and similar functions should not be left to the whim of state, county, and city politicians or turned over to for-profit enterprises. It is more a matter of common sense. Our safety and security as a nation demand these be administered at the federal level. At the bottom of this top section, you see the red CM line indicating that critical processes belong above that line. I’ve made that top section blue because it is an important value to most progressives that we do the right thing for and by all the people.

Level ‘B’ allows more democracy for states and localities to tailor processes to their needs. There may be some federal guidelines to assist in setting up these processes, but for the most part, it comes under the heading of state and local government rights.

Level ‘C’ is what I have labeled as “libertarian”. This is where, like the the company employee choosing their computer mouse, individuals make their decisions based on what is right for them. Things like where to work, where to live, what religion if any they want to follow, who to choose for a family doctor, whether or not to vote and who to vote for, where to buy groceries and gas - it’s a long list of personal rights.

This, I hope, is an easier way to look at the big picture of government. Naturally, there will be arguments about where the lines dividing A, B, & C should go and which processes and rights belong in which section. But, again, that is one of the tasks of our elected representatives.

I believe that if you approach it with the goal of identifying those critical processes, then the ones for the states and local governments, and finally the individual, we would find that we probably agree on about 80% and we would have to arm wrestle over the other 20%.

Now, all you have to do is pick a candidate. 😁

0 Comments

AFI

9/20/2019

0 Comments

Photo by Stéphane Delval on Unsplash

AFI - Not to be confused with the Arc-Fault Circuit Breaker

We’ve all seen the old man sitting in the restaurant with food dribbling down the front of his shirt as he slops up some pasta or soup. He seems oblivious to what is happening. Or, another old man on a chilly day sitting there with a wet drop of snot hanging off the end of his nose and again, seemingly unaware it’s there. Fear not, they (we) know what’s happening, we are merely applying the principle of AFI , also known as “Aw, Fuck It!”

This is a phase of aging that happens with varying degrees of intensity and at different ages; it’s a personal thing. It can come on in your 60s or hang back until your 70s or later. But it will happen. There will come a point where you look at something that’s out of place, or you know you just dropped catsup from a hotdog on the front of your shirt. You don’t have to look down, you know what happened. For a brief moment, you think about grabbing a napkin, dipping it in some water and cleaning yourself up, but then you say . . . Aw Fuck It!

You been around the block a few times. You've seen just about all there is to see in life and you know that you are treading on the thin ice of old age. All one has to do is spend time looking at the obituaries to realize you are walking through a mine field that could take you out at any time, so AFI; what the hell is anyone going to do to you?

It’s a rather liberating feeling when you get to that point. There is no young woman (in my case) that is going to be attracted to you unless your wealth is greater than your wrinkles; they all see their grandfather in your kindly old wrinkled face. You don’t have any job interviews to go to or anyone you’re trying to impress with your appearance. You are free to run (metaphor) through the rest of your life naked if you want. You really don’t much give a fuck.

All those pestering little things that used to bug the shit out of you when youn were young? They don’t matter any more. The concerns that kept you awake at night and sending you off to work with four-hours of sleep have evaporated into thin air. You see the fuzz growing out of your ears and nose and think ‘I should trim that’ but then AFI kicks in - there’s always tomorrow, maybe, and if not, who cares if I look like a Chia Pe when they slide me into the oven?

I imagine that women experience something similar except society has brainwashed them into believing they can’t leave the house without ‘putting on their face’ and donning something fashionable. That, and because they are wired to look after children and husbands, they are a little more particular about the details of life, but I think they get there eventually. I've seen some clown-like women in both dress and makeup in my life. We men just get their sooner, sometimes much, much sooner.

So, just know that as you glide down the path of life that you will almost certainly realize one day that most of your cares have dissolved into the ether and what matters is enjoying the moment, hopefully not your last one, and when confronted with a problem you’ll be overwhelmed with a feeling of AFI. So let the food fall, let the house become a little messy, fart if you need to and vacuum the car tomorrow.

0 Comments

As The Atheist Turns

9/20/2019

0 Comments

I guess it is clear to most who have read my ramblings that I am an avowed Atheist. Some people assume that as an Atheist, you don't believe in anything. In my case, that is the furthest thing from the truth. I believe in a whole lot of shit; it's just that it doesn't include God and may not align comfortably with what Pope Frankie believes, and I have a ton of respect for the guy.

This from www.myjewishlearning.com
"While in traditional Jewish thought the subjects of heaven and hell were treated extensively, most modern Jewish thinkers have shied away from this topic, preferring to follow the biblical model, which focuses on life on earth."

This from www.religiousfacts.com
" Islam teaches that there will be a day of judgment when all humans will be divided between the eternal destinations of Paradise and Hell", and, "Until the Day of Judgment, deceased souls remain in their graves awaiting the resurrection. However, they begin to feel immediately a taste of their destiny to come. Those bound for hell will suffer in their graves, while those bound for heaven will be in peace until that time." Hmm, eternity in the grave seems a bit dark and cold.

I think we all know that most of the Christian sects believe in heaven and hell. So what do I, as an Atheist believe? My philosophy lines up pretty well with the modern Jewish belief. Lest anyone be confused, I don't believe there is a God, so obviously I also don't believe there is a heaven or hell in terms of somewhere you go after death; you don't go anywhere after death - you're dead. You life has ended and what ever wondrous deeds you may have achieved or evil you may have pooped on the populace dies with you.

I totally understand that this notion of no eternal life scares the shit out of people. No one wants to die; I don't want to die, but it has nothing to do with living forever or burning in hell. I love life. I am curious about every damn thing going on in the world in which I live and I want to see what the hell happens in the future. That is why I dislike the concept of death, as inevitable as I know it is.

Every religion in history has formulated some form of afterlife. Even the Buddhists who go on about reincarnation and coming back until you get it right or are the perfect human being is a form of an afterlife. The problem is that there is no such thing as a perfect human being which, in affect, guarantees you will live forever because you will keep coming back trying to fix the screwups from your previous live or lives.

I understand the draw of this eternal life thing, and I understand the need to believe that loved ones, especially those who die young, are somewhere waiting for you to bite the big one and join them. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over.

Okay, a little unfair to those of faith. I get the value of this kind of thinking if you have a hard time dealing with reality. Take the example of a young couple who lose their infant child early in life. I can't imagine going through that. If it had happened to one of my three children, I'm not sure what I would have done but the word Jameson comes to mind. But, for those who have faith, being able to believe that their infant child is in heaven and is there because God wanted the kid there instead of living a happy and fulfilling life on earth provides a solace that I guess lets them deal with their tragedy. In that sense, religion is serving a real purpose. But the, Jameson makes me feel good as well.

As I wrote in my book, Religilution: The Evolution of Religion which doesn't seem to have gained much traction, none as a matter of fact, much of what we believe about life God and an after life is the construct of people thousands of years ago who were afraid of almost everything coupled with a good deal of revisionism about what might have happened or been said two thousand years ago (thus, the King James version of the Bible or this or that version). I would remind you there were no smartphones recording video or a scribe on Jesus' shoulder writing it all down. So be it.

And that, dear friends, is my sermon for today. I do hope you have a wonderful day and all the days to come.

0 Comments

Struggling With 'isms'

7/1/2019

0 Comments

Isms - racism, sexism, religionism, patriotism, nationalism, what's is all about?

Let's start by admitting that we all have some degree of these or other isms; it's who and what we are because we are animals. Advanced animals, hopefully, but animals nonetheless.

So let's look at the other animals for a moment. How do they generally recognize each other? In no particular order, they use sight, sound, and smell. So do we. Animals react to other species in a couple of different ways. If they are typically prey to other animals, they grow wary and afraid when a predator is near. If it's one of their own and it's mating season, their mating instincts kick in, and they start whatever their mating ritual might be. We, like our animal cousins, respond to these same stimuli.

I'm an old white guy. I feel most comfortable talking and interacting with other white guys. I like to believe they think like I do and like the things that I like; we have a "culture" of being old in common. Women do the same thing, so do people of color, people who follow a specific faith, even people who love a particular kind of food. If you love Mexican food and walk into a Mexican restaurant full of people, you feel "at home" because you know all the other people in that restaurant are there for the same reason; you share a love of that food.

But why is this? Why do we feel comfortable "with our own kind" and nervous around strangers? As with the predator and prey animals, there was a time that we needed these instincts to survive in the wild, just like them. When we came down from the trees and started to wander on the ground, we were already in troops or tribes. We had naturally bonded together for protection and for procreation.

We were limited in our range for hunting and gathering by the fact that our only mode of transport was on foot. We weren't the only troop of humans trying to survive by finding our food, there were other troops nearby doing the same thing. If their area was running out of food, they were not averse to borrowing a little food from their neighbors, which posed a threat to our survival.

We all looked a lot alike then, short, hairy, and depending on where you lived, mostly the same color of skin. That was confusing if you wanted to avoid interlopers, so different troops started devising ways to discriminate between their troop and outsiders. That may have taken the form of color and styles of dress, hairstyles, body art, and even language, so we knew who was an outsider because outsiders posed a danger to our troop.

All this may have taken a thousand years, or about 55 generations (assuming shorter generations back then). It may have been less or more, but evolution generally takes some time. We didn't just start or stop discriminating when we made these changes.

The conventional thinking is that we descended from the trees 6 or 7 million years ago, and we were already using tools to discriminate back then, mostly sight and smell one would imagine. As we continued to evolve as humans, we perfected many of these discriminatory behaviors because we still needed them to survive.

Zip 6 million years ahead and here we are in the twenty-first century with the most sophisticated methods of discrimination of any other animal. We have perfected the art of the ism.

The threats to our survival that emanated from that old way of life, hunting, gathering, and warding off invaders has pretty much ended, but with several million years of using our discriminatory tools, we have become damned good at our skills. In fact, it is my opinion that our brains are hardwired to do the job for us now; that means we don't have to stop and think about the danger before we take action.

Here we are, this tightly-wound defensive animal ready to spring into action at the first sign of danger, dangers that are mostly extinct in society today. We see someone who looks different or sounds different, or sometimes even smells different, and the red flag goes up in our subconscious, warning us to be careful. But the threat isn't really there, so what should we do.

While we were perfecting this hair-trigger response to outsiders, we were also changing our world in many ways to eliminate most of the old threats. And, our brains were evolving something we call logic and critical thinking, another tool that seems to separate us from the other animals that rely mostly on instinct. We need to use that marvelous brain to overcome the old ways of seeing the world.

When we feel that sense of unease or fear about a stranger, we let our logical brain override that sense because we know we live in a modern world where we buy our food at the store, the wild animals are long gone from our society, and we have police protection from most threats of violence.

Even with the dangers presented by modern outlaw organizations like ISIS or the KKK or Neo-Nazis, we know that they are a minority of the earth population and in most cases are far removed from us. We shouldn't assume that every person from the Middle East is a radical, or that everyone with a southern accent is in the KKK; we know better.

In time, our brains will rewire themselves away from these primal instincts, but if we took a few million years to become expert discriminators, it might take some time to reverse that process. In the meantime, we use that beautiful blob of grey matter sitting behind our eyes to override the fears of our reptile brain.

0 Comments

Religion and God(s)

6/13/2019

0 Comments

Created in God's image. Reality or the product of an overactive ego?

Religion, it seems to me, and there is ample evidence to support my belief, has caused more pain, suffering, and death to humans and other living creatures than all the wars and pandemics in the history of humans put together. What is it that drives some of us to be so passionate about our religion that it blinds us to our humanity? Why do we go off in a rage at another religion or take the words of some ancient being to mean we can lord it over all things on the earth?

I believe it is our egos that came up with this notion and that continues to need to be fed by the belief that we are "superior." Let's take a look at the Hebrew Bible, the first to "document" this idea.

Gen 1:26–28
And God said: 'Let us make man in our image/b'tsalmeinu, after our likeness/kid'muteinu; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.' And God created man in His image, in the image of God He created him, male and female created He them. And God blessed them; and God said to them: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth.'

If that isn't an exercise in the human ego, I've never seen or read one. We, and only we are created in God's image, and we hold dominion over all other living things on the planet, and one assumes if we ever find life on another planet, we update that to include that life. That is pure narcissism, more so that even Trump is capable of. And, let's not forget that this was all written by a bunch of old men who wandered off by themselves and came back claiming to have conversed with God.

We might also note that the statement 'Let us make man. . .' was written by a man. It was not 'Let us make humans or men and women'. In fact, the entirety of the Bible, Torah, and Koran were written by men, men with, one must assume, rather large egos and who appear to have been motivated to create a world in which men ruled and mostly had their way.

Tradition credits Moses as the author of Genesis, as well as the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most of Deuteronomy, but modern scholars increasingly see them as a product of the 6th and 5th centuries BCE. Moses walked the earth in the 14th & 13th centuries BCE. Whether it was Moses who set down these words, or others, it was still somewhere between about 2,500 and 3,200 years ago that all this was written and the intellectual properties of humans back then might be subject to discussion.

Studies were done, and continuing studies as well show that dolphins and whales are exceeding intelligent. We can't be sure how bright because we have yet to learn how to communicate with them, but they are unquestionably very intelligent animals. They have complicated languages, societal rule, and a sense of self-awareness, attributes we like to point to that make us human. What if God really created dolphins in His image and we humans have circumvented God's plan?

We have continually used the excuse, myth, or belief that we are just like God to justify running roughshod over all living things on the earth. That callous attitude includes other humans who we have determined, for a variety of reasons, often words in our religious texts, are not part of God's plan and we are therefore justified in killing them off or enslaving them or simply ignoring them. Was this really what you think God had in mind, assuming there is a God and that this God has a mind like ours?

The only evidence we have of our God-like personage is the presumed words of a man who lived over 3,000 years ago and who, like Pat Robertson, claimed to have exchanged texts with God. The people of that time protected their households by putting lamb's blood on their doorway so that the Angel of Death would know to pass over their homes. Moses "parted the Red Sea to escape the approaching Egyptian soldiers. These texts are full of genuinely outrageous events that we would never believe today, but represent how the people of that time thought.

Moses was preceded by Abraham who lived in the 18th century BCE, or about 500 years before Moses, and to whom it is said Moses was related. Abraham is said to have lived for 175 years. Others in Genesis are said to have lived 600 years and more. Notwithstanding "faith" this would seem, and it is likely that the cycle of the moon, or a month, was a year in which case 600 years would be 50 years old and the oldest person mentioned, Methuselah at 969 years-old would really have been around 81.

Again, these examples are cited to point out that the people of this time knew very little, were afraid of almost everything, and while perhaps well-meaning, their statements and contributions pale in their importance to human development compared to the likes Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, and Da Vinci.

This very brief visit to the Old Testament in search of examples of the mindset at the time is merely a way to point out that there seem to be some fanciful tales in the Bible that can sorely test a realistic mind.

Given the extent of suspicion and mysticism that prevailed at the time, it is not unreasonable to believe that the authors of Genesis and other books of the Bible may have been given to flights of fancy about who we are and how we came into being. Much of what happened back then, plagues, disease, natural disasters, and regular human events like birth and death were not understood the way they are today.

Abraham, Moses, and many others back then were the sleuths who were trying to do a couple of things I suspect. They indeed were curious about how we came to be, but the science of evolution simply didn't exist then. In fact, no science existed then, only imagination and storytelling. Astronomy, the first of the sciences didn't occur until about 1600 BCE.

Did the people in the Bible exist? Of course, they did, with the possible exceptions of any that may have been created as part of a convincing story that needed to be told. Did the voice of God really emanate from a burning bush? In the mind of Moses, I suspect it did, but in reality, I simply can't accept that as fact.

And, for these reasons, and more, I think it was the ego of humans that elevated us to some omnipotent status over all other living creatures, and not the work of a supreme being. And, given that hypothesis, I would like to see us develop a bit more humility toward each other and toward all life on this planet as opposed to the discrimination and bigotry of religion and begin to behave differently toward all life.

0 Comments

Foodie & Wino Paradise

6/6/2019

0 Comments

You may have noticed with my infrequent posts of All Things Food & Wine that my wife, Gale, and I are foodies and enthusiastic consumers of wine and other libations of the alcohol variety. And so, last evening we enjoyed just such an experience.

We were at Kaspar's Catering & Events company, conveniently located quite near our house. We've known Kaspar Donier and his wife Nancy for many years from their first restaurant in Belltown in 1989 to their relocation to Lower Queen Anne, and then, sadly for us, they decided to pursue catering rather than operate a full-time restaurant. Fortunately, for food lovers and us in Seattle, they still do special event dinners and holiday events, and so we signed on for the Fortuity Wine Dinner.

Like many of you, I suspect, we had never heard of Fortuity Wines, and like many of you, if they persist in producing the quality of wines we had last evening, a whole lot more people will know their name. Only two years old as a winery, Lee and Emily Fergestrom and winemaker Johnny Brose are producing wines like others who have been in the business for a decade or more. Enough of me sucking up, on with the evening.

We arrived right on time, which means five minutes late in our book. We were fortunate to be seated with Emily and Lee, the winemakers, along with Chelsey Nelson who writes about affordable wine on her blog, Wino On A Budget, and another woman I recall introducing herself as Terri (?).

We were immediately poured a glass of 2018 Rosé of Cinsault that would accompany the Charcuterie of fresh pickles, mustard, sausage, lamb and beef prosciutto, paté, and pickled rhubarb. The rosé was excellent with forward fruit and more body than you might typically expect from a rosé. The charcuterie was a perfect match with the wine.

Next up was a Hot & Sour Dungeness Crab Soup with tofu and English Peas married with a 2018 Viognier, another perfect pairing. The soup had just the right amount of heat, and the crab in the soup was a genius touch. The Viognier, although a white wine, had the structure and body to handle the heat of the soup and stand on its own. Another marvelous combination of food and wine.

The third course was Crispy Pork Belly & Nettle Risotto with wild mushrooms on the side was paired with a 2018 Sauvignon Blanc. The cube of pork belly was crispy and perfect, and the nettle risotto was another exciting dish from Kaspar's kitchen. The Sauvignon Blanc was earthy and fruity, and again, it would be hard to imagine a better combination of food and wine.

The entree' was half of a roasted Cornish hen with a romesco sauce accompanied by saffron mashed potatoes and a spicy sauteed kale. This course was joined by a 2017 Merlot that was full of berry flavor, bold yet gentle and a perfect match for this course.

And finally, the pièce de résistance was a Rhubarb Clafoutis with a strawberry & peppercorn tempura with Kefir ice cream. This dessert course was served with a 2017 Le Classique Red Blend that had the depth and fruit and light tannins to be a perfect wine with this classic French dessert.

From start to finish, it was about three hours of pure enchantment for lovers of great wine and world-class cuisine. Kaspar has a long and storied reputation as a master chef, and Lee and Emily are well on their way to gaining similar renown in winemaking.

I would encourage folks in the Seattle area to check out Kaspar's for event catering from corporate gatherings to weddings and more intimate food events. And of course, everyone who loves the small round fruit.

"I enjoy a glass of wine each night for it's health benefits. The other glasses are for my witty comebacks and my flawless dance moves."

0 Comments

The Crusades

6/3/2019

0 Comments

This topic requires 1,000 or more pages to cover properly, but most people won’t read that much, and I am sure as hell not going to write that much. Therefor, I will offer an abridged version of the history of the Crusades and what lead up to that particular bloodbath in the history of the world and religion.

I will cite some sources/resources where I got some information; most of the rest of it bubble up in my mind through something called critical thinking, or rational thinking.

Let’s begin with a look at religious evolution, fo which I have written in my book, Religilution.

In the beginning, we believed in a bunch of gods, gods that presumably explained the unexplainable for we ignorant humans of the time. Events like lightning, blizzard, pestilence, and disease were all a complete mystery to humans, so we designed various gods as an explanation for these inexplicable events and we devised ways to worship these entities as a means to appease them and end our misery, none of which worked.

As we evolved over the millennia, our notions of gods changed and eventually, we arrived at a belief in one god, the God, notwithstanding areas of the far east, India, China, and surrounding areas that clung to their religions like Buddhism, Shintoism, and Hinduism to name a few.

With the single God theory taking hold throughout much of the West, and as governments and people in power are wont to do, religion and power became intertwined, bed partners if you will. This corruption of religion enraged many people. Not the least of these was a young Jewish boy named Jesus. He began to push back on the Jewish church and it’s corruption and his ideas took hold. He developed a considerable following of “Christians” although that name didn’t exist in the beginning. It came later and was self-proclaimed by his followers who decided he was the Christ King.

So, now, generally speaking, we had Jews and Christians cohabituating in the area we now call the Middle East. The Jews weren’t big fans of these new “Christians” because (a) they were renegade Jews, (b) they had declared this man, Jesus, to be the messiah but that wasn’t possible if it wasn’t blessed by the Jewish religion, and (c) the Christians had thrown off many of the Jewish rituals and holy days. This back and forth went on for some 500 years after Jesus died.

There was a third group hanging out in the Middle East those days who were likely Jews to begin with, may or may not have tasted Christianity, and in any case, found both religions wanting, so along came Islam. With a little reading, you will find many parallels between both Judaism and Christianity. Many of the same people like Abraham and the Angel Gabriel occupy central places in each. Jesus is recognized, not as the messiah but as a great prophet.

You now have the three great religions bowing down to one God with all of them competing for followers, power, land, and declaring themselves to be the true religion of the very same God. Does it surprise anyone that the next 2,000 years would see this area, and the rest of the world, embroiled in war after war after war with each side professing that God is on their side?

Which brings me to the topic of the Crusades because one of my friends invoked that as justification for the allegiances of the various Christian nations in the West and their conflict with the non-Christians. He went on to suggest that although there may still God-fearing religions in the world - the Jews and the Muslims - they are still at fault for not bowing down to both Christianity and Donald J. Trump and that makes them a “threat to the American way of life”.

The Crusades, like many human conflicts, were all about religion, and territory, and power as mentioned above. Here are a few statements from one of my citations below.

“The call to the Christian faithful for a "holy crusade" against the Islamic infidels (non-believers in Christ) was issued by Pope Urban II, on November 26, 1095.”
"Pope Urban II saw an opportunity to win glory for the church and by having a common foe, would help reduce warfare among European kings and nobles.”
Under the disguise of "religious grounds," those in positions of power started casting their eyes on the Jews’ money, their homes and their possessions…The popular image was that the Jew was a son of the Christian Devil, the Antichrist incarnated, as invented in the New Testament.”
"Peter told his Christian Knights, since the Jews were as much infidels as the Arabs and since they were much closer than the Arabs, they might as well begin their "holy crusade for Christ" by killing Jews along the way―a sure way for the Crusaders to earn salvation for themselves. This precipitated a genocidal slaughter of Jews on a staggering scale. First in France, then in England, the Crusaders massacred the Jews wherever they found them.

There followed a total of 8 Crusades over a period of the next 195 years as Christians attempted to "reform" the infidels.

To be sure, the Muslims were not innocent victims in all this. Starting in the early 600s, Islam began the process of expansion, which is a nice way of saying conquering huge swaths of land throughout the Middle East, although their motivations seemed not quite as religiously militant at that time as were the Christians who would come later.

“During the seventh century, after subduing rebellions in the Arabian peninsula, Arab Muslim armies began to swiftly conquer territory in the neighboring Byzantine and Sasanian empires and beyond. Within roughly two decades, they created a massive Arab Muslim empire spanning three continents. The Arab Muslim rulers were not purely motivated by religion, nor was their success attributed to the power of Islam alone, though religion certainly played a part.

Non-Muslim subjects under Arab Muslim rule were not especially opposed to their new rulers. A long period of instability and dissatisfaction had left them ambivalent toward their previous rulers. Like all other empires, the first Arab Muslim empires were built within the context of the political realities of their neighboring societies.”

To suggest that any of the three religions have “clean skirts” is preposterous. Each has committed atrocities in their pursuit of power, land, money, and influence and continue to do so. We are no better than a band of chimpanzees that want to expand their territory into the of another band of apes.

The Catholic Church is infamous for its wealth. Judaism and Islam have no “center of wealth” like Catholicism and Rome that I am aware of but you can be damed sure that each is worth billions and billions of dollars. Religions rely on donations from their flock; the bigger the flock, the greater their wealth. They are all on missionary journeys to bring in new adherents by either selling their product - their form of belief, justice, and an afterlife - whether through persuasion or more radical measures.

So the argument that anything we are doing today is somehow justified by the uhholy slaughter of human beings during the Crusades, or any other religious genocide is ludicrous and serves only to continue to foment the distrust and hatred between people of faith.

We all dream of world peace. In my opinion it will not happen until we humans activate our logical brain and understand that God and religion are the construct of very old, very uneducated, and very suspicious minds and that holding on to these ancient beliefs continues to be the source of much of our pain and misery today. When we understand that we and we alone are completely responsible for ourselves, our actions, and our impact on others and our environment, and that it is not the will of God but the will of man that screws it all up will we have a chance at world peace.

https://jdstone.org/cr/files/thetruthaboutthecrusades.html

https://www.franciscanmedia.org/born-jewish-jesus-was-the-first-christian/

https://www.allaboutreligion.org/origin-of-islam.htm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/earlyrise_1.shtml

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/medieval-times/spread-of-islam/a/the-rise-of-islamic-empires-and-states

0 Comments

What Is A Government?

5/18/2019

0 Comments

More to the point, what do we want our United States government to be?

Two documents are the foundation of our democracy, the Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution. Both of these documents have a preamble that attempts to sum up what the founders of our nation had in mind.

The preamble of the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The intent of that paragraph is quite clear. We had been under the thumb of the monarchy of England, an authoritarian plutocracy that was anything but free.

Preamble to the Constitution for the United States: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

A third document that has come to represent the dream of our founders was the Gettysburg Address that President Lincoln gave in 1863. Eighty-seven years after we fought and died to gain our freedom from England, we fought each other in the bloodiest war in our history with an estimated 620,000 fatalities. It was a war fought over the freedom of all the people.

In Lincoln's address, the line that is best remembered is, "that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

The single thread running through all these statements are the words "people" and "equality." We are supposed to be a nation devoted to freedom, to the idea that no one class of people or entity within our society is better or above all others; we are a nation of, by, and for the people, all the people residing within our borders.

That idea should be the principle upon which all of our elected leaders, CEOs of corporations, and people in positions of influence, be they celebrities, sports stars, or religious leaders, should make their decisions and pronouncements. They should be asking themselves, "Is what I am about to do or say in the interest of all the people, or is it to benefit one particular interest group?" Will it fulfill the vision of our founders and the words of Abraham Lincoln?

That is also how we voters, the people referred to in all these document must measure the success or failure of our leaders. When we vote, or when we gather in public meetings to discuss policies in our towns, counties, states and federal government, we must ask, have our political, civil, and religious leaders shaped the policies and laws for the good of all the citizens, or only for a select few?

Yes, the details can be complicated, but the outcome should be measurable against those three basic statements. When we vote in our local and federal elections, that is the template we must use in evaluating those in office and those aspiring to hold office.

If we get that right, we will have lived up to the founder's dream of a United States that is, of, by, and for all the people; the rich, the poor, the able and disabled, all the genders, all the races and nationalities, and all the religions.

<a href="https://www.hypersmash.com/hostgator/">Hostgator multiple domain names</a>

0 Comments

Perfect Espresso With Diamo

5/4/2019

0 Comments

I think I posted something about the Diamo espresso machine in the past, but I thought I'd give you a short video to show you how easy this thing is. I'm just doing an improv thing, not a big scripted production, so ignore the stumbles.

I love my espresso. It's mocha Cortado in the morning, and if I have one after dinner in a nice Italian restaurant, it's a doppio or double shot of espresso and a shot of grappa if they have it. There used to be a cigar involved in the old days, but I quit smoking, and then they outlawed everything, and I'll be damned if I'll stand in the rain to smoke a cigar.

The history of coffee, in general, is murky, though there are a few legends, it does look like it all began in the Middle East. My version of the story is that the beans grew wild and a hungry goat herder tried to eat them green, and they tasted horrible, so he tossed a handful into the fire where a few beans roasted just at the edges of the fire. Seeing that, the herder chewed the bean again and loved it. Here's another version of the story, but I like mine better.

By the 19th century, Europe was going nuts for coffee. As it is today, the traditional method of boiling or extracting the coffee with hot water was time-consuming, so the Italians, in particular, began to look into a quicker process using steam. If you want more on that history, see it here. Coffee has to be the worlds most consumed drug.

Without undo chatter, here's the video. No muss and no fuss and a terrific cup of espresso.

0 Comments