Way Past Noon

Ref:Quantum Physics, Near Death Experiences, Eternal Consciousness, Religion, and the Human Soul

What follow is a variation of a review I posted about the book online.

The book focuses on the implications of consciousness as an integral part of quantum mechanics.

The author's basic premises are that consciousness stands outside any existing universe as eternal and infinite, and that consistent with quantum mechanics (at least the Copenhagen interpretation), this consciousness paints the actual universe into existence. The real part of each being is that eternal and infinite consciousness; the temporal part of existence is that which has been painted into existence by consciousness. Only consciousness is real in the sense that infinite is real compared to any virtual transience of  finite temporality..

That is an interesting thesis, and a plausible argument, using rational arguments of quantum mechanics to support the argument. This re-discussion of the strangeness and mystery of quantum mechanics was in itself something interesting. His tie to infinite consciousness as a necessary agent of temporality was also interesting, but not convincingly compelling..

It is, however, a liberating thought of sorts to think of consciousness as something that is neither born or dies. The resulting conclusion seems eerily similar to that reached if one assumes that this temporary life is the only real thing. Nothing matters. That's the conclusion of both. In one instance, it doesn't matter because in the infinite context of things, this temporary life and even the life of the universe is an infinitesimal dot. In the other instance, it doesn't matter, because the flash of this life has no meaning other than the unconscious, impersonal flux of indifferent mass and energy. If nothing matters, then why all the struggle about life and the trivial accomplishments encompassed in its wake?

I am a religious person who lives in the South. So  keep that in mind when reading the remainder of the post. But I'm not Christian nor Jewish, nor Muslim, nor Hindu, I am a freethinker. That leaves me out of faith based religions.

There are two articles I want to reference:

• An older article: Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism
• A newer one: The Real Boundaries of the Bible Belt

Conclusions mapped from the second article:

• Most religious states generally skew Republican.
• Religiosity is higher in lower income states where poverty is prevalent.
• Religiosity is higher in less educated states, and negatively associated with the share of state residents that are college grads
• Religiosity is positively associated with the share of working class jobs and negatively associated with the share of workers doing knowledge, professional and creative work.

Basic conclusion of the first article:

• People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice

From the data, one can draw a conclusion that conservative religious people are likely to be working class, less educated people with lower income.

Jack's reflections (influenced by the articles):

Ref: Rewarding Life (Creating Lifestyle) [Kindle Edition]

I've just recently started reading Kindle books. Most of the ones I read are free, and worth every penny. This one is free, and you can read it online in a Kindle Cloud reader if you have an account at Amazon. I'm not going to reiterate the points of the book in this note, because I think they are organized reasonably well in this short book.  The last chapter is filled with typos and tie-ins that I haven't explored.  While it's not an outstanding book, it saves me the effort of writing very similar material myself to capture some of the worthwhile points.

One thing in the book I liked is acknowledgment of the grand shift that has taken place in our workforce economy during the last few decades.  I would emphasize it more than the book, but the book implicitly talks about the elephant in the room that most books ignore.  We as a country are still caught in the dreamy fondness of working for a benevolent employer who will ensure that as long as we're "good" employees, we'll be taken care of with health insurance, pensions, and enough money to live the middle class life of college for our children, a growing bank account, and security of long association. As our educational relevance diminishes with time, we compensate by adding real world experience, that in the context of the corporation we've adopted as parent, pays more than raw technical knowledge. We know how to do things within the corporation, even while the scope of our technical knowledge or cutting edge job skills stagnate.

Reference: My Secret to Getting Sober in the Wall Street Journal 3/17/12

For some reason I'm not sure about, I've become interested in the AA program over the last couple of years. I'm don't have a substance addiction problem, so I've never been inside the program. I think the program must have merit for some people, but I'm not sure if the impact is one of teaching or simply one of community. I'm not Christian so the "higher power" aspects of the AA program are not compelling to me either as methodology or some sort of anecdotal "proof" of orthodoxy..

The program seems to work for some friends of mine, but they also have had trouble with some aspects of the program. One honest soul wanted to belong the group because he thought it helped him even though he wasn't having any serious problems with alcohol and it's not clear that he ever did. He was denied full participation in the program because he knew he had never experienced any sort of "rock bottom" trauma that is supposed to be the turning point for AA. Finally, under adamant pressure that he couldn't really do the program until he admitted that he was both powerless and at "rock bottom," he "confessed" to both and was admitted as a recovering alcoholic. I don't condemn him for whatever he did, but it did smack of a bit of brainwashing rather than wholesome recovery assistance. It seems a distinct deficiency of the AA dogma that it excludes those who might want to avoid the hell of addiction, and only deals with those who have already been destroyed by it. I wish my friend had been more honest. But it was his admission ticket to the community. And he's now become a sponsor. And I think he's probably a very rational and helpful one.

Ref: http://www.amazon.com/Butterflies-Are-Free-Fly-ebook/dp/B0047742HY

What follows is a modified version of the review I posted on Amazon.

I didn't expect to like this book, but I did. The introduction is unusually indifferent about whether or not the reader accepts this as truth. "I'm a scout, not a guru or teacher. Try it. See for yourself. Find and keep what you find to be true." That is so unusual a stance from "spiritual" writers that I lowered my shield of skepticism for further investigation. And I'm glad I did.

I haven't become a convert, but I wasn't looking to be saved or converted to some other "ism" or "new age" theory or philosophy. I found the book to be more credible and creative than Ken Wilber's so called "philosophy" which seems to cause others to swoon. There's little philosophy here. It's more an interesting conjecture that is based on some of the deepest mysteries of physics.

While such speculation isn't close to proof, it is just plausible enough that I was willing to think about and explore the metaphor rather than discarding it as untrue because it is unreal. Truth equals reality, though we as humans, while living reality, may not be mentally capable of perceiving it conceptually. The Zen position of saying "I don't know" in the absence of knowing is fundamentally more sound than claiming to grasp something we don't.

Ref: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0056J0OII

I like to read a bit about economics, but I'm no expert.

The author traverses an amazingly complex subject without getting lost in economic or political dogma. It's an amazing feat, since I've come across so few in my reading that can achieve that. I was amazed at how interested I became as I read. It's one of the few books recently that made me stop and read just because I enjoyed the romp of exploring what happened in the financial meltdown. The writing style is both easy and entertaining. I'd probably have gone with a few less quotes, though some of them were gems.

Two themes of the book are critical ones I had already found to be compelling elsewhere. One theme is that complexity greatly increases risk, not only because it means things are less understandable, but because it makes things inherently unpredictable. The second theme is that risk is greatly increased by the hubris of believing we "know" things we don't. So, rather than being cautious, we become arrogant -- and then we crash and burn.

This human problem of believing we know things we don't is one that is likely to doom us as human beings.This assertion that we "know" for sure things we don't seems to be an integral part of both warp and weft of religion. We know what our imagined "God" wants and is like. We know that if we propitiate him we will be "blessed" and that if we don't we'll be punished. And the preposterousness of claims only increases from there. We humans even know these things when facts, reason, and logical consistency suggest that at least some claims are doubtful. and show many to be untrue.  This propensity extends to the religion of economics and many other social sciences.

I'm reading a book called Redirect by Timothy Wilson, given to me as a gift. The principal reason I'm writing about it is to help me integrate whatever useful ideas it offers into my own life and experience. Another is to share, perhaps, if there are any who wander this way, with others what I have distilled from my investment of time to read and think about it.

One thing I like about the book in general is that the author seems to have a rigorous bent about insisting that "what works" be based on experimental results or scientific evaluation. That is a strong departure from 98% of the "self help" literature out there, 99% of the religious indoctrination, and 50% of the "psychological" books and techniques. Perhaps it is an engineer's approach. We build bridges based on calculations and practical science that works rather than artistic intuition, theoretical reason, or even neat things like quantum mechanics theory.

One need only look at all the political "solutions" being offered in this season that contradict known facts to see the ianity and foolishness that we Americans tolerate as our basis of government. And those who attend most churches regularly insist their adopted "doctrine" is true, though it fails to change their life in any wholesome manner. "Faith" is mostly continuing to believe something is true, even when  untested, even when contradicted by experience and facts.

Blind faith is a failure (often based on fear about what we'd find out) to reasonably ask that what we believe be subject to reality -- at least those things that can be tested. (Questions like "is there life after death?" or "Is there a God?" are not testable propositions.)  Don't look at facts. Don't do tests. Don't measure results. Those are the general foundations of our political and religious faith.

Two overriding questions for my life have been something like: "What is reality?" and "Who or what am I relative to this reality?" I have to confess I have not found too many people interested in those questions.

Some dismiss those questions with whatever beliefs the cultural or their personal history hands out to soothe the soul. In the case of America, Christianity would provide stock answers. In the Middle East, Islam would provide stock answers, except for Israel where Judaism would offer different explanations. And with those answers most people return to the normal life, happy to anethesize and lock away the unease that would otherwise bubble up. And then they get back to the "real" business of life: breathing, eating, excreting, sleeping, and procreating with their attention now fully bent to doing those things in ever more comfortable conditions.

I've put a past friendship on indefinite hold. I have attempted to be a reasonably steady friend to someone who suffers from depression, mental instability, and now an ever increasing array of physical problems.  My effort was partly motivated by a common past relationship and some understanding of the environment that shaped his life. He did have a few insights that clarified a few things that had puzzled me previously. And his mind, though now shot through with burned out circuits fried by chronic emotional overload, shows remnants of both significant intelligence and knowledge. I suppose it is those remnants that seemed signs of hope for something better than before.

Perhaps my tenacity was an attempt on my own part to help, though it hasn't had any significant impact. I have benefited from the effort. I have come to see even more clearly that mental illness both causes and ferociously perpetuates its own misery.  It's analogous to an addict or alcoholic who insists the world he creates by his addiction is a real one because it is real to him. It is propped up by endless rationalization about how everyone else is messed up, by adamant denial about their problems, and by determined ignorance about the impact it has on others. At the bottom of it, there isn't much help for addicts, until and unless, for some reason, they make a commitment to face the wreckage of their life and their complicity in the carnage. That's a tough thing to do, and few at the point of addiction have the courage or remaining energy to do so. They become truly lost souls, not because of any innate lostness, but because their now ingrained mental and emotional habits make it unlikely they will ever seek or use the door out of their misery.