toxic thought waste site

Where does the hatred for gay people come from?

2010-07-09T21:49:00.000-07:00

Every once in a while I like to ask people this question. To me it is a significant mystery. Rationally it would seem that heterosexual males should encourage as many males as possible to be gay. It can only help your odds with the ladies. And yet we live in a world where gay people are loathed (almost as much as atheists).

Invariably the first answer I get is that because the Bible condemns them. Now let's make a *huge* leap here and suppose just for sake of argument that, well, the Bible is completely fiction and the edicts of God are just normal people *pretending* that there is a God and that he said these things. (I know, a huge leap). So why was this such an important thing to codify?

The best I can come up with is that many/most non-gays have a bit of an ick response to gay activities. I do and I've heard the same from many people who intellectually support gay rights etc. I really liked 6 Feet Under, but it was hard to watch sometimes because of this.

As with many things in the Bible people just made God command something that they wanted to be forced on others. Stop being icky.

Of course even if this is correct there is still the question of why we have an ick response. (Well if you are heterosexual. Presumably gays don't have this. Or that would just be weird and sad).

So here's my crazy idea. If all dudes were gay all then the human race would disappear pretty fast. So there would be some evolutionary advantage to avoiding same sex interactions. Therefore the ick factor helps raise the threshold against the likelihood of someone not getting their genes into the next generation.

So ironically the edicts in the Bible against man on man action were put there by evolution. Hows that for a giant irony sandwich. :)

My Pet "Crazy" Idea

2010-07-03T15:51:00.000-07:00

I suspect most people have a few crazy ideas that continue to hang around even after they have done their best cognitive maintenance and rebooting. Sure, you've banished belief in god or expelled parapsychology, but perhaps there is something lingering around that *seems* like it should have just gone by now. And what's more you only sort of think it's a crazy idea. Actually you think there is some sense to it and it is others who just haven't given it proper consideration.

So it's not so much that you really believe its a crazy idea, its just that others wouldn't easily understand.

So what is my crazy notion that surprises me with its tenacity and that others would think odd? That there is a non-negligible chance we are living in a simulation.

You might be surprised to learn that I didn't (directly) get this from watching "The Matrix". Even if I did consider it at that time it didn't stick with me. I believe the seed got planted by reading (not surprisingly) Are We Living In a Simulation?. This was a serious case made by a serious person. And I found it surprisingly convincing.

So how does this affect me? No much really. But I do take this idea off the shelf of my mind surprisingly often and dust it off and look it over. Sometimes daily (perhaps for just a few seconds). Probably never less than once a week.

Probably the most impact I get from this idea is that I often consider this question: What (if anything) would I do differently this moment if I really *was* living in a simulation? I don't usually have a shocking answer to this question. I mostly feel like I'd pretty much do what I'm doing. Being in a simulation wouldn't (presumably) change what my options are and what makse me happy. In fact in a simulation this real it's not clear what the difference between reality and simulation would be.

So what crazy idea do you have that even your "sane"/"rational" friends would think is weird?

To the random redditor who recommended "A Brief History of Everything"

2010-07-02T14:49:00.000-07:00

I hate you.

So, I keep a long list of books to add to my ipod commute "reading" list. Generally this works out pretty well and I've been exposed to things I normally wouldn't have thought twice about (e.g. Hayek's "Road to Serfdom" for instance). But sometimes something gets through the filter and I end up listening to the most unbelievably awful garbage.

The current winner of the books that have no right to exist award is "A Brief History of Everything". Ken Wilber has got to be the most crazed New Age science ignorant person outside of an Oprah studio.

He starts off by talking about evolution. So I figure this is going to be a science-y book. Then he right away starts down the "half a wing is useless so obviously Darwin isn't the whole picture route". Then he starts talking about "holons". And then I died a little inside.

In the interest of exposing myself to things I don't agree with already I'm going to continue to listen for a couple of chapters. But really it is awful.

Pascal's Wager and Probability Aptitude

2010-05-14T22:16:00.000-07:00

It's hard not to get exposed to Pascal's wager at some point in your life. It's one of those things that's so offensive to clear thinking that it practically has noticeable stench to it. It's pretty much a given that any one in this day and age who presents it as a valid argument for belief is a serious crack pot and/or hasn't really thought about it for more than a few minutes.

But then, how did the great man Pascal come to make such an argument. I mean the guy has a triangle named after him and everything. He's got to have been a sharp cookie. But of course after a while you stop being surprised when otherwise smart people have these huge blind spots with respect to religion. That's just one of those weird failure modes of the mind.

But what if the explanation was simpler? What if Pascal just simply didn't understand probability theory? Surprisingly this actually seems to be the case.

Here is a video of Keith Devlin (who I normally find pretty objectionable as the NPR "Math Guy") giving a talk that among other things goes over the inception of probability theory. And who should be at attendance at the birth of this topic? Our friend Pascal. And who should be showing a complete confusion at the topic? I think you can guess.

Pascal, Fermat and Probability

The Power of 11:11

2009-02-06T23:11:00.000-08:00

I have a number of personal productivity blogs I check on occasion. Reading about being productive is the next best thing to being productive, doncha know! In any case it occurred to me recently that for some reason or another Steven Pavlina's feed had disappeared from my list. So I hopped over to his page to see what he was up to.

Apparently he is a pretty famous productivity guru. I had read a couple of his essays at one point and they were pretty inspiring. Dream big, work hard, etc. Over time he seemed to veer farther and farther off into the weeds. He would mention how he and his wife had an actual psychic link. He did a weird polyphasic sleep experiment (nap for a few minutes every few hours and don't sleep at night), and raw veganism among other things. I don't actually have anything against the last two, but I completely turn off when people start talking about their psychic abilities.

So I didn't know if I was going to get productivity advice or bizarreness or woo when I checked in. Well, the answer was woo. Woo in a big way.

The two things that compel me to write are: (1) it's always interesting to come across a new area of crazy that I'd never heard of before and (2) it's always oddly compelling to watch the train wreck of a life dedicated to crazy ideas.

I thought I was pretty educated in the ways of woo, but I had never heard of the "11:11" thing before. The funniest part is that it was apparently started by Uri Geller. I kind of find it amazing that people do anything but laugh at this guy. Apparently, I'm pretty out of touch with the New Age movement these days. Here is a pretty succinct response to the whole 11:11 school of thought. In any case, I now have another crazy belief system to add to my collection.

Even more interesting is the long essay that Steve writes on this subject. He clearly really believes it and really believes it's important. At one point he writes:

Form this intention with your thoughts, but feel it as well. You must really want it. You must desire to see the truth about reality as strongly as a drowning man desires his next breath. If you don’t really want to see the truth, nothing will change.

Here he summarizes my feelings about knowing the truth. And yet he does this in service of the idea that seeing a digital clock with the numbers 11:11 on it is a message from the universe. Something special is going on.

And so now I have to stand back a second and be kind of amazed that I'm even surprised by this sort of thing. I guess it just makes me mad that this sort of nonsense is so contagious. Who knows, I'm probably adding to it by mentioning it at all....

I sort of freaked myself out while writing this post, because I noticed that there were 11's all over my screen. Of course this is because I typed them all as I was writing this post and searching for links. But still, what are the chances....?

Of course, what if I'm wrong and being closed minded? Are you brave enough to challenge your preconceptions and experience the power of 11:11? Do you have the guts? No? Okay then... As for me, I'm taking the red pill. Actually 11 of them.

I'm ready to embrace the truth.

Christian Radio Watch: Why a cold, hostile and mostly empty universe proves that god exists and loves us

2009-01-09T22:09:00.000-08:00

Listen to the interview here (starts at 1h30m). The book is called: "Why The Universe Is The Way It Is". See how many logical fallacies and out right lies you can count before your head explodes.

It turns out the entire universe really was created just to make this one planet work. You see, there really was no other way to do it. And, um, we had to be in a dark spot so, um, we could see the rest of it easily.

Prayer-cebo?

2009-01-07T21:16:00.000-08:00

I've heard about placebos, obviously, but I had never heard that they often work even if you *know* they are a placebo? I recently heard this in this video and then again in an essay by Ramachandran. This paragraph really jumped out for me:

Her ability to hold mutually inconsistent beliefs seems bizarre to us but in fact we all do this from time to time. I have known many an eminent theoretical physicist who prays to a personal God; an old guy watching him from somewhere up there in the sky. I might mention that I have long known that prayer was a placebo; but upon learning recently of a study that showed that a drug works even when you know it is a placebo, I immediately started praying. There are two Ramachandrans—one an arch skeptic and the other a devout believer. Fortunately I enjoy this ambiguous state of mind, unlike Darwin who was tormented by it. It is not unlike my enjoyment of an Escher engraving.

If it's good enough for Ramachandran, then it's good enough for me. So I think I'll try an experiment and pray to Placebo Jesus for a month and see if it works or not. Here is a sample prayer:

Dear Placebo Jesus,

I know you don't exist and if you did it's not clear why you would be listening to my thoughts and care about my needs, but any hoo, please make me smart, give me good health, keep my family safe, send some extra cash my way, and generally make life awesome for me.

If there's anything I can do for you, just let me know.

Ramen (oops, I mean Amen, of course)

Religulous on google video

2009-01-03T07:00:00.000-08:00

While it lasts: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1839369108234002661

Programming and Religions

2008-12-19T21:23:00.000-08:00

Two great tastes that taste great together:

If programming languages were religions...

Dear Global Economy

2008-12-04T22:11:00.000-08:00

A rationalist prayer of thanks:

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/11/thanksgiving-pr.html

Pythonistas and their religion (or lack thereof)

2008-12-03T21:00:00.000-08:00

I had to chuckle at Steve Holden's recent entry "Religion is not python". I'm always carefully observing bloggers and other writers to see if I can ascertain where they fit on the religious spectrum. It's easier when they pretty much come out and tell you.

I still don't have a firm picture of Guido's religious tendencies but from his blog his writing definitely seems to skew to the skeptical side of things.

It's funny how even this far along in life I'm still surprised when I come across a smart well spoken person who is religious. I guess I'm a slow learner.

Is it already too late for most people?

2008-10-11T13:13:00.000-07:00

Someone (I forget who) once observed that people had only until a certain age to reject their religious faith. Afterward they would have answers to all the objections, and it would be too late. That is the kind of existence you must surpass. This is a test of your strength as a rationalist, and it is very severe; but if you cannot pass it, you will be weaker than a ten-year-old.

(overcomingbias.com)

I wonder how true this is. And fear that it is more true than not. And further, I fear that you can almost never see this in yourself without exahuastive (and exhausting) ongoing effort.

But you should try.

The Gay Left Handed Bayesian

2008-07-06T23:09:00.000-07:00

Don't know why this little story problem jumped in my head, but here you go.

The number of people who are homosexual seems to be around 4.5% of the population (wikipedia says 2 to 7%). The percent of people who are left handed is about 10%. For males, being gay increases your chance of being left handed by 36% (90% for females) [link]. So if you meet a left handed man or woman, what are the chances they are homosexual?

Pulling out my book of Bayesian spells....

P(h) = 0.045 # probability of being homosexual
P(l) = 0.1 # probability of being left handed
P(l|h) = 0.1 * 1.36 = 0.136 for guys (or 0.19 for dames)# probability of being left handed if you are a homosexual

What we *want* to know is P(h|l) (probability of being a homosexual if you are left handed). For you Bayes newbies you must resist the temptation to assume that P(h|l) = P(l|h).

By Bayes theorem:

P(h|l) = P(l|h) * P(h) / P(l)

Or

P(h|l) = 6% for dudes and 9% for the ladies.

I'm not sure what use this information is, but you are welcome anyway.

Christian Radio Watch: "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist"

2008-07-02T20:58:00.000-07:00

Fortunately, you don't need faith to be an atheist. In fact, sir, I think it's safe to say you don't really grasp the concept. Part 1 (1h31m), Part 2(1h31m)

This guy really spent some time addressing this book...

I don't know why I love listening to Christian apologetics so much. I guess it's sort of like watching a car wreck. Except it's a human brain spinning wildly out of control.

Achewood and the Improved Bible

2008-07-02T20:48:00.000-07:00

Having recently discovered Achewood I've been catching up by reading it from the beginning. Truly a masterpeice. Here was today's entry (for me, catching up):

Comedy gold. I totally need to get a bible printed with coupons and tear out adds. I think this is now my life's work.

Godless Code 0.3

2008-06-25T21:02:00.000-07:00

REFERENCE: (godless code 0.3)

The first entry of the godless code is always your disbelief path, the rest of the items are optional and may appear in any order. ":" is used as a delimiter between terms.

Belief path: each step of your disbelief journey, separated by "->". You may prefix a node with a number in parentheses to indicate at which age a transition occurred.

Protestant
------------
P++ : The bible is 100% true and I spend much of my life studying/evangelizing
P+ : I really believe, but I could be more involved
P : I call myself a Christian but I'm not on fire for it.
P- : I attend church but some of the ideas don't really hang together

Catholic
-----------
C
[use +/- as above]

Atheist
-----------
A++ : I'm very convinced, very vocal. I am defined by disbelief
A+ : I'm convinced and and active but it's not everything to me.
A : I don't believe, but I don't really think about it too much.
A- : I don't believe but I'm still pretty uncomfortable with disbelief

agnostic
--------------
a+ : I really don't think you can know either way. Also, there might be a tea pot out there. Who can know for sure?
a : The word atheist make people uncomfortable and we don't want anyone to be uncomfortable.

and so on:

B : Buddhist
H : Hindu
I : Islam
M : Mormon
7 : SeventhDay
W : Jehovah's Witness
J : Jew

The above single character codes may be used or if you are feeling fancy go ahead and use the following 3 digit codes:

ADV Adventist
ALL Alliance Church
AMI Amish
ANI Animist
ASA Ásatrú
AOG Assembly Of God
BAH Baha'i
BAP Baptist
BUD Buddhist
CAT Catholic
CHR Christian
CMA Christian Mission Alliance
COC Church Of Christ
COG Church Of God
CON Congregational
CSC Christian Science
DCD Christian Disciples Of Christ
DST Diest
EPI Episcopalian
FRE Free Church/Independent
GRE Greek Orthodox
HIN Hindu
ISL Islam
JAN Jainism
JEH Jehovah's Witness
JEW Jewish
LUT Lutheran
MEN Mennonite
MET Methodist
MOM Mormon (Latter-Day Saint)
NAR Native American Religion
NON Non Denominational
PEN Pentecostal
PRE Presbyterian
PRO Protestant
QUA Quaker
SAT Satanist
SCI Scientology
SHA Shamanism
SHI Shinto
SIK Sikhism
SPI Spiritualist
TAO Taoism
UCC United Church Of Christ
UNI Unitarian
WIC Wicca/Druidry

You can further modify the above with an abbreviated sub-type in []. For instance if you want to specifify Theravadan Buddhism you could write it as: B[Thera]

Religions I find tolerable:

TR(x,y,...)

A tuple of religion codes from the religion path section. The tuple
may be the empty set, e.g. TR().

Holy Books read:

r({B|K|BoM}%XX[, ...]) # one or more holy books you've read and how much

B : Bible
K : Koran
BoM : Book of Mormon
D: Dhammapadda (Buddhism)
TR: Tripitaka (Buddhism)
V: Veda (Hinduism)
BG: Bhagavad Gita (Hinduism)
T: Talmud (Judaism)
TTC: Tao-te-ching (Taoism)
ZA: Zend Avesta (Zoroastrianism)
K: Kojiki (Shintoism)
N: Nihongi (Shintoism)
JS: Jaina Sutras (Jainism)
SGGS: Shri Guru Granth Sahib (Sikhism)

eg. r(B%20,K%10)

Religious instruction: How much religious instruction have you received
in your life?

RI(pX,sY,uZ, ...)

hW : years of home schooling
pX : years of primary school
sY : years of secondary school
uZ : years of university
mQ : years of seminary

Exposure: How many people know you are a non-believer?

ex(XYZ(x)[, ...]) or ex(ALL)

Fam - Family
Wk - Co-workers
Fr - Friends

values can range from 0.0 (no one knows) to 1.0 (everyone knows)

e.g. ex(Fam(.54),Wk(.5),Fr(1.0))

ex(ALL) indicates you're godlessness is known 100% to the world.

Religious affiliation of significant other(s):

SO([X, ...])

Where X is one of the religion codes from above. Empty set means no SO. :(

Fanboy (or girl): What non-believers inspire you? And how much?

FB(X[,...])

Currently available non-believer codes:

RD : Richard Dawkins
SH : Sam Harris
DD : Daniel Dennett
SB : Susan Blackmore
BF : Brian Flemming
RC : Richard Carrier
MS : Michael Shermer
JS : Julia Sweeney
CS : Carl Sagan
JR : James Randi
RI : Robert Green Ingersoll
PJ : Penn Jillette
PZ : PZ Myers
CH : Christopher Hitchens
SJG : Stephen Jay Gould

You may include as many as you want to. You may also add a "+" (e.g. DD+) to show special approval of or "-" if you don't really like them (opposite of fanboy appreciation)

Getting the message out:

What do you do to share the news and/or stir up conversation?

M(X[,...])

Blg : blogging
Auth : writing books
D2D : door to door evangelization

What godless memberships do you have?

MS(o,l,n,i,...)

o Online atheist related groups.
l A member of a local atheist group
n A member of a national atheist group
i A member of an international atheist group
csi A member of CSI (formerly CSICOP)
bha A member of The British Humanist Association
iheu A member of Internation Humanist and Ethical Union
nss A member of the National Secular Society

a plus can be used for additional groups up to 2...a single * can be used to denote that the person is active in the leadership of the group(board member, webmaster, etc.)

An example...

MS (o++,l+*,i*)

For member of at least 3 online groups, at 2 local groups and is in the leadership of at least one of them, and is a leadership member of an international organization.

Development of the godless code:

GCD : godless code deity - they who develop the code and/or have
suggestions incorporated

optional "+" if it was your idea in the first place. :)

Version: As the code evolves need to know what version to use for decoding.

[gc-0.1] = Use version 0.1 for decoding this

This coding system is new so if you have suggestions for additions,
clarifications, etc please let me know and I'll try to address for
gc-0.4

The KJV in a blender

2008-06-14T21:45:00.000-07:00

(A markov chain bible chapter using the entire KJV as input. The final verse is especially, er, chilling)

1:01 crow, thou shalt take the goods of his land:

1:02 And thou shalt fear, and let him acknowledge that the children of Ammon;

1:03 And Gilead, and Galilee, all the set feasts, by number, according to Christ Jesus:

1:04 That ye love one another, even as a servant, for a memorial before the ark of the Chaldeans:

1:05 for thou shalt not be purged from thy glory, and wisdom, and bow myself in great abundance.

1:06 And Solomon said, If we say then? Shall we give, or shall the earth feared, and said, He is antichrist, that denieth me before men, to pray before the LORD;

1:07 for he beareth not fruit he taketh away:

1:08 and they shall smite him;

1:09 or if there be any work that they might stand before their eyes, and, behold, they are consumed out of your dwellings.

1:10 And Pharaoh said unto them, and returned unto the king, That Daniel, which art infamous and much vexed.

1:11 Behold, the Hebrews hath met with us of his person, and well favoured.

1:12 And it came to her maidens.

1:13 She considereth a field, and thou shalt eat it in her month they shall burn it on a smoke, because the LORD which is a feast by an ordinance for Israel unto this day;

1:14 give me half thine house, and his hand toward heaven, that thou doest well to draw water.

1:15 And he answered, Here am I.

1:16 Are they not judge.

1:17 Shall I yet to cry unto God a more sure word of God made a covenant of the offering up of the LORD was there upon me.

1:18 They that forsake the idols of Egypt:

1:19 in vain shalt thou change them, and the priests of the children free.

1:20 Notwithstanding, lest we should pray for you in Egypt since it became as a bride adorned for her husband.

1:21 And I will make drunk her princes, and gave him to be feared above all gods.

1:22 For all this people, who have purposed to return unto thee the righteous shall be of the priests the Levites which are my people, and tongues, stood before the testimony, and cover you with mine own bowels:

1:23 Whom I would not destroy it for me, O thou fairest among women? what is his body, according to the earth.

1:24 And when the Jews which dwelt in a strange woman, from the pestilence;

1:25 that they might put us therein.

1:26 And when they had emerods in their own souls by their own confusion, as with his face about, and when thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, and for every man's money was not to covetousness.

1:27 Turn away my peace be with the mouth of the tabernacle of the LORD thy God, those deliver thou me.

1:28 For ye know these things will I send pestilence among you;

1:29 that ye might be the woman returned out of the night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, is the stumblingblock of their enemies:

1:30 and awake for thee, and as for me, which to day into mine hand?

1:31 Now therefore kill every woman

Make Your Own Bible Verses

2008-06-14T21:28:00.000-07:00

I was reading this article on the unholy union of Garfield and Markov models and it reminded me that I'd never gotten around to trying out markov modelling first hand.

Over my lunch hour I cranked out the code at the bottom of this entry. And yes I write code over my lunch hour as a form of relaxation. What do you do?

In any case, the previous blog entry was the result of running this script on the book of Mark. Mark, Markov, get it?

Any way if you've ever wanted to generate your own biblical sounding text, here's your chance. Just download some scripture and crank up your python interpreter and away you go!

BTW, I'm really curious if Mark(ov) Chapter 1 get's any hits from people seeking Biblical inspiration. I know it inspired me.


import sys
import random
import itertools

#http://www.o-bible.org/download/kjv.txt

def make_frequencies(words):
    result = {}

    for i in range(2, len(words)):
        w1, w2, w3 = words[i-2:i+1]
        if (w1,w2) not in result:
            result[(w1,w2)] = {}
        if w3 not in result[(w1,w2)]:
            result[(w1,w2)][w3] = 0
        result[(w1,w2)][w3] += 1

    return result
    
def find_first_random(freqs):
    return get_random_ith_item(list(set([x[0] for x in freqs])))

def find_second_random(first, freqs):
    pair = get_random_ith_item(list(set(x for x in freqs if x[0] == first)))
    if not pair:
        return find_first_random(freqs)
    return pair[1]

def find_markov_random(first, second, freqs):
    markov_words = freqs.get((first,second), {})
    word = get_random_ith_item(itertools.chain(*[[x]*count for (x,count) in markov_words.items()]))
    if not word:
        return find_second_random(second, freqs)

    return word

def get_random_ith_item(stream):
    item = None
    for i,x in enumerate(stream):
        if random.randint(0,i) == 0:
            item = x

    return item
   
def markovize(freqs, output_length):
    result = [find_first_random(freqs)]
    result.append(find_second_random(result[0], freqs))
    output_length -= 2

    while output_length > 0:
        w1, w2 = result[-2:] 
        result.append(find_markov_random(w1,w2,freqs))
        output_length -= 1

    return result

def main():
    output_length = 500

    words = ' '.join(sys.stdin.readlines())

    word_frequencies = make_frequencies(words.split())
    print ' '.join(markovize(word_frequencies, output_length))

if __name__ == '__main__':
    main()

Bible Study: Mark(ov) Chapter 1

2008-06-12T21:32:00.000-07:00

Mark(ov) 1:01 he, casting away his wife, and raise up seed unto his disciples, How hardly shall they cast stones, and wounded him in the ship again departed to the poor, and thou shalt deny me thrice.

Mark(ov) 1:02 And when they had sent forth and laid hold on him: for they have heard the word, and it becometh unfruitful.

Mark(ov) 1:03 And these are they which are sown on good ground, and prayed that, if it were but the end shall not be among you: but whosoever shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ;

Mark(ov) 1:04 or, lo, he that hath, to him from every quarter.

Mark(ov) 1:05 And again he sent him away empty.

Mark(ov) 1:06 And again he sent another;

Mark(ov) 1:07 and him they cast stones, and wounded him in the bush God spake unto him, Seest thou these things?

Mark(ov) 1:08 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done?

Mark(ov) 1:09 And they call the King of the physician, but they that were rich cast in of their abundance;

Mark(ov) 1:10 but she of her daughter.

Mark(ov) 1:11 But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto him, Go thy way;

Mark(ov) 1:12 the devil out of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee.

Mark(ov) 1:13 But Jesus said, Verily I say unto him, Why do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be hated of all men counted John, that he would not suffer that any man should cast seed into the hall, called Praetorium;

Mark(ov) 1:14 and they bring a blind man by the farther side of the multitude, they took up twelve baskets full of fragments took ye up?

Mark(ov) 1:15 And they all saw him, and killed him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus and his disciples asked him again of the Blessed?

Mark(ov) 1:16 And Jesus said, Forbid him not: for of such is the kingdom of God of the Jews?

Mark(ov) 1:17 For he taught in the morning: Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping.

Mark(ov) 1:18 And what I will, but what thou sayest.

Mark(ov) 1:19 And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto him, By what authority doest thou these things?

Mark(ov) 1:20 and what shall a man satisfy these men with bread here in the days of Abiathar the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?

Mark(ov) 1:21 Ye have heard the word that was possessed with the wild beasts;

Mark(ov) 1:22 and the cock crew.

Mark(ov) 1:23 And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto them, How is it ago since this came unto him, and put it on his eyes, and put his hands again upon his eyes, and put his own house.

Mark(ov) 1:24 And the unclean spirits, when they looked, they saw no man of him.

Mark(ov) 1:25 And always, night and day, and the chains had been seen of her, believed not.

Mark(ov) 1:26 After that he was as one that was sown in their synagogue a man leave his wife behind him, and from Idumaea, and from Idumaea, and from Judaea, And from thence he arose, and rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, By what authority doest thou these things?

Mark(ov) 1:27 and what buildings are here!

Mark(ov) 1:28 And Jesus answered and said

Zero to Zen Master: Zen as Mind Poison

2008-02-11T20:47:00.000-08:00

So I'm trying to take zen seriously. I really am. But I feel like I'm in charge of testing whether or not some food has poison in it and I'm told, "just taste it!". Umm, sorry, no.

Here's the problem. I have my own ideas what enlightenment is or should be like. If I knew what it was exactly, presumably I'd already be there. But at the very least it seems fair that if someone points in the direction of enlightenment I should at least have some sanity check as to whether it's a reasonable direction. If you haven't noticed there are a lot of people claiming to point to enlightenment and they are pointing in a lot of incompatible directions.

My two main problems with studying zen then are: (1) do I have *any* indications that the zen people (and specifically which ones) are pointing in a valid (or at least interesting) direction? and (2) how do I jive this with what I think enlightenment is or should be?

On the first point, are there any examples of zen awesomeness? Presumably you can use zen to be calm, learn to go with the flow, etc. But seriously, who cares? If you are completely at sea and zen helps you find some inner calm, go for it. But how much calm do you need? And more importantly what is the value of a unit of calm worth compared to mastery of some skill or other life experiences? Don't get me wrong, I'm the first guy to sign up for alone time. But if I need to decide whether to use the time to get a little more "centered" or for instance learn another programming language. I get more joy from learning than pursuing calm. And if I could trade calm units I already have for instant mastery of another skill I'd probably be willing to do so. And probably even willing to go into debt.

I know zen is supposedly not about achieving some end, but really that's a BS answer. No one does something for no reason at all. Even if the reason is to satisfy your curiosity or some other unconscious inkling, you are not acting without some purpose. People do zen because they want something.

There is the idea that zen people are more in touch with their spontaneous side (really this is a Taoism thing, but we'll let the zen people have it for now). And of course doing zen will make you a master archer. Unfortunately there is no compelling reason to suppose that "zen" was the secret sauce, when we can just as easily rely on the simple maxim that mastery takes time. If you find some archer who practices archery everyday AND practices zen everyday why should you think zen helped him get to mastery? For all you know it slowed him down because he spent less time doing archery.

Secondly, it seems like enlightenment has to have something to do with true, deep understanding. In the case of zen the self or at least your awareness is your subject. Great. But do zen people have any great insights here? People studying cognitive science have learned a lot about the mind. It's not very clear to me that zen masters have really learned anything worth sharing on the topic. And it seems pretty likely that they have *lots* of metaphysical baggage from taking things like the existence of the soul, or atman or reincarnation seriously. And to make things worse, since they typically hide behind a wall of abstruse metaphors and nonsensical anecdotes, it's really hard to know.

They really could know something amazing about the self and awareness or other things I don't have an inkling of. But how would I now? If you don't have enlightenment already then sort of by definition you are going to have trouble identifying enlightenment in others. And honestly I think if people had true enlightenment they'd be able to share it more explicitly.

I can understand quantum mechanics (at least well enough). Is there any chance that the zen "truths" are more complicated, less expressible in words? Color me skeptical.

And yet...

And yet I plan to continue with my admittedly too brief meditation practice. And reading some zen books and thinking about the ideas.... I can't shake the feeling that there *is* something to meditation and the zen people seem to have spent the most time thinking about this area. But it's not really clear that the zen outer coating around the practice of mindfulness is anything but kruft.

And there is always a better way to test for poison than just eating whatever you are fed.

A Random Walk Through The Bible: Hosea 7:4

2008-01-19T21:02:00.000-08:00

Using our random verse finder and the basic methodology:

Hosea 7:4 (New International Version)

They are all adulterers, burning like an oven whose fire the baker need not stir from the kneading of the dough till it rises.

So last time God said I was to be his messenger (or something like that). Now this has *got* to be the message.

discern the spiritual principle in this verse
- God hates adulterers
ask what was god trying to get across to these people when he spoke these words
- you are going to experience the powers of a convection oven, up close and personal like
ask how does this apply to me
- I'm not an adulterer (that you can prove) so, *whew*.

I wonder if God has any more important messages to give to me (and to the world by me). I guess we'll find out next time on the next installment of A Random Walk Through the Bible!

A Random Walk Through The Bible: Exodus 19:6

2008-01-13T06:07:00.000-08:00

Using our random verse finder and the basic methodology:

Exodus 19:6 (New International Version)

you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.

discern the spiritual principle in this verse
- God wants me to be his priest unto the Israelites
ask what was god trying to get across to these people when he spoke these words
- He wants me to tell them something
ask how does this apply to me
- Stand by for an important announcement...

OK, folks God has chosen me to present a message. I don't know what it is yet, but I think it's going to be important!

Zero to Zen Master: How I got here (again)

2008-01-09T20:19:00.000-08:00

Some thoughts on how I came to spend my ever so valuable time thinking about silly things like zen. Like a lot of people I read a bunch of zen books in college. But that's college. You are allowed to do crazy experimental stuff. But now I'm a grown up (sort of) why am I wasting my time on this stuff again? I sort of got hit from three directions and decided to pay attention.

First, Sam Harris talks glowingly about contemplative practices in a number of places. And I was really intrigued by his essay on Buddhism and meditation.

Secondly I heard an interview with Susan Blackmore on pointofinquiry.org. It was a really interesting discussion on memes and parapsychology and drugs and consciousness and atheism. I was really surprised I had never heard of her before. I started reading her articles on her website and well, they are drenched in zen.

The last zen-ish thing was a little more circuitous. I had been reading some John (End of Science) Horgan writings on edge.org. This led me too his web site full of his essays and book excepts. I was particularly interested in his debunking of enlightened gurus. Some how from looking at this I found this article by Brad (HARDCORE ZEN) Warner which comments on Horgan's views on the topic. Soon after I started to read through his zen essays he started a blog which I keep in my feed and check every once in a while.

The funny thing is that it was Brad's writing that sort of broke the camel's back. And mostly it was his suggestion that to do zen you need to sit correctly. To what ever degree this is true it was what I needed to start having a *serious* meditation practice as meager as it is. Sitting slightly uncomfortably and with good posture really does make a difference. And his writings on zen are believable to me. He writes how he had a semi-mystical experience transcending space and time and viewing the whole universe in a vision of sorts and his zen teacher ridiculed him and told him it was garbage. It's a little thing, but that gives him credibility to me.

Now I need to actually read one (or more) of his books and see if I like him as much as I *think* I would.

Any way, dear reader, that is how I found myself in Zenville, in the zen district accross the street from Zen R Us, on Zen avenue. Perhaps you know the place.

Zero to Zen Master: General Plan

2008-01-06T22:07:00.000-08:00

My basic plan for the year is to come up with month long experiments related to zen and to read some books. Nothing much fancier than that. Unless I think of something fancier. I've pondered briefly trying to identify a zendo in my area, but the thought of hanging out with a bunch of strangers and sitting quietly for long stretches of time seems kind of weird. Almost weirder than just going to church. So we'll just stick with my modest plan.

I have a list of books I'm planning to work through. I'll go over my list in the near future in some detail. As it happens I decided to read "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Zen Living" first. And despite my knee jerk expectation that the book would suck (just the title I guess) I actually like it and it seems like a pretty calm and level headed introduction.

To a large extent zen is really just about meditating. When I was in college reading about it it always had this sense of *magic* about it. If I could just "get it" some how I'd have this calmness, this well spring of spontaneity and I'd have wisdom in some deep way. And the ability to shoot a bow and arrow in the dark and hit my target. To what ever extent that stuff is true I currently am just of the opinion that zen is really just about training your attention.

In that vein I will try not to get too bound up in my books but will mostly focus on the zazen practice. For each month I'll try some variation of poses, meditation style, perhaps some koans and other little things that I think of. I'm trying not to plan too far ahead so that I can just do whatever makes sense based on what I've tried so far.

So for January here's the plan:

- meditate 8 minutes a day
- count to 10 with breath
- sit in half lotus
- keep in mind the first of the Noble Eightfold Path - right view
- mindfulness trigger: first bite of food each meal

8 minutes doesn't seem like very long, but if you've never tried it, it's *insanely* long. Also I don't have a lot of time. I think it's more important to establish a doable habit than to try to do things perfectly.

I'm doing the count to 10 thing as a sort of training wheel. I've kept up a nightly meditation routine for the last 6 months or so but I still find it so very hard to focus on my breath for the 8 minutes. I've read that counting to 10 is a good "hack" to help you stay focused.

Sitting in a slightly uncomfortable position has made mindfulness possible. Years ago when I tried meditating I always fell asleep. Now it's never a problem. Doing a "true" half lotus is beyond my skill but it's the perfect level for me to aim at for now. I would *love* to get to a full lotus during the year but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Right View. I'm not deeply interested in the Buddhist aspects of zen but I also don't want to ignore them completely. So I'll just review the different steps of the noble path for a while.

Mindfulness triggers. The goal of zen (for some) seems to be as much awareness of now as you can muster. A useful tip I've heard in this respect is to create "mindfulness triggers". In other words set up a habit of having your environment remind you to be mindful. My first trigger will be for first bites of meals.

Ok, that's enough talking about zen for now. Gotta go sit on my ass for 8 minutes before I head off too bed.

A Random Walk Through the Bible: 2 Chronicles 18:23

2008-01-05T21:23:00.000-08:00

Using our random verse finder and the basic methodology:

2 Chronicles 18:23 (New International Version)

Then Zedekiah son of Kenaanah went up and slapped Micaiah in the face. "Which way did the spirit from the LORD go when he went from me to speak to you?" he asked.

discern the spiritual principle in this verse
- huh?
ask what was god trying to get across to these people when he spoke these words
- um.....
ask how does this apply to me
- errr....

One verse is more profound and meaningful than the next. No wonder people people find such meaning and solace in this grand old tome. Oh, what's that you say, no one actually reads it? I guess that makes more sense.