Become Aware Of It, Pay Attention To It. Read About It, Learn About It, Write About It, Talk About It. Teach It.

Reflections upon anything under the sun and beyond. It may not be easy to be a Global Citizen, but it's not hard to engage the Globe.

Steven Cleghorn 7/22/15 Steven Cleghorn 7/22/15

An American Infinate Monkey Cage

Brian Cox and Robin Ince, co-hosts of "The Infinite Monkey Cage" on BBC4.

It's great to see Robin Ince and Brian Cox touring America with their popular BBC4 Infinite Monkey Cage program. The Infinite Monkey Cage is one of my favorite podcasts - I can't get enough of it. Humor and science really do go together, and some of the funniest subsets of our human family are science enthusiasts and scientists. The wonders of nature are truly hilarious.

I'm often beside myself with frustration when I confront people who are hanging on to ideological positions that inhibit their ability to learn and grow. Safety in numbers often equals narrow minds. We are amazing animals able to explore and understand nature better than any species we know of. Isn't that something to be proud of. I know our arrogance knows no bounds, but this rather nascent confidence of ours to create amazing things from our ability to do pure scientific exploration is nothing short of an infinite treasure. We need to treasure this ability and be humble and wise moving forward.

For those of you who are concerned about their position in the world I'd like to ask a few rhetorical questions.

What's wrong with improving people through education? Can we give equal access to education to everyone alive today? That would be nice. Think of the value an investment like that would create? Think of education's impact on our cultural values. Why waste the intellectual and creative power of three-quarters of the human race when it wouldn't be that hard to educate everyone. Not so long ago most people in the world were illiterate. It's hard for us to imagine that today. Well fed and well-loved people are learning machines with no equal. (But, however scary, it might be nice to know that there are wiser and smarter creatures than us out there in the Universe. At least we'd have something to shoot for that would transcend our petty, earthly differences.)

Why not get rid of nuclear weapons and invest more in ongoing generations of nuclear power that would be safer, cleaner and provide very efficient energy to a growing world while we are transitioning to renewable solutions? Does it really have to be that hard for us to ween ourselves off of fossil fuels in the light of the impending catastrophic consequences of climate change? How stubborn are we when it comes to holding on to what we think is ours - power, possessions, land, money? Will we really hang on to our bad habits until it kills us? Many of the things that kill us are avoidable. We need merely to make different choices and thrive. We know we can do it if we only had the social and political will to make some important changes to the way we live and how we carry on about out business.

What's wrong with homosexual people enjoying the institution of marriage? Loving families are good and contribute to social health. Do we really have to pathologize love? What would be more dangerous than turning love into a bad thing, a sinful thing that needs to be crushed? What contributes to successful families more than an environment that is, healthy, safe, secure and allows people the equal chance to do what they truly love and to share their love of life with their family?

Is it possible for us to become better critical thinkers so we aren't so easily swayed by propaganda and marketing? If we are going to be truly effective, socially responsible consumers and bend corporate will to our better nature we'll have to be able to sort through the mixed messages and discern the difference between what is good for us and for society, and what is merely good for shareholder value. Again, we're talking about the difference between the value of commodities traded on markets and human values that animate and color every aspect of our experience.

Can we learn how to better understand each other and cooperate with one another so as to avoid costly conflicts and wars? We are a species defined in many ways by our ability to cooperate and collaborate. What's holding us back? What aspects of our nature are preventing us from creating peace in this world?

I could go on and on like this. I know we can do better. Of this, I have faith. I want us to do better. I can imagine a better world. This is not to say our world, or the world I find myself living in is not pretty great. I am a very fortunate man.

And now something completely inspiring:

The Infinite Monkeys return for a new series, the first of which will see them head to the USA for their first live tour. This week Brian Cox and Robin Ince can be found on stage in New York asking the question, Is Science a Force for Good Or Evil? They are joined on stage by Bill Nye the Science Guy, cosmologist Janna Levin, actor Tim Daly and comedian Lisa Lampanelli.

Listen to the podcast. PART ONE OF SIX - The Infinite Monkey Cage, American Tour.

One of my first philosophical musings was on infinity. I imagined that I was part-and-parcel of an evolving God that was Nature in a quest to figure itself out and that "I" was merely a reflection of this process. (Sounds like Carl Sagan.) I was lost in this exploratory narrative for years from about 10 to 15. Later, while traveling in India in the late '70s with a gentleman I nicknamed, Rasta Punjab, I was goaded into pondering the question of Time. Rasta Punjab would ask me every day, over and over again, "Steven, what is time?" And I began again to torture myself with another unanswerable question. Some of us thrive on things we can't understand. When we at last parted I asked Rasta Punjab why he kept asking me about time and he laughed and said, "Because your answers were very entertaining."

And why not strive to understand where we come from and whether we are alone in the Universe? We are explorers. If we survive thousands of years more our wilderness will be the galaxy, our manifest destiny out among the stars. This is a good thing, and in a way, a very natural ambition. We need to keep going.

It's never good to outsource our thinking completely. We need to enjoy doing the heavy lifting of deep thought and get on with sharing our thoughts and ideas. Our passions can be beautiful, sublime things.

If you haven't heard it already. The podcast really inspired me. I hope it will inspire you too.

Steven Cleghorn 7/13/15 Steven Cleghorn 7/13/15

Addiction: healing individuals, society and our environment.

Madeira Portugal. Nature knows how to take care of itself.

Just a quick note:

My main takeaway from Hari's talk on addiction was that we need to pay attention to society and our environment (the "cage") and not just how to heal the individual.

Heroin addiction - before and after. What causes people to become addicted to drugs?

Challenges we are facing today can not be substantially and sustainably improved if we don't look at the bigger picture, the way things in our ecosystem are connected, the symbiotic relationships in nature, and the inter-dependencies of living systems.

Taking things apart and re-engineering them is only one narrow way to improve our world. Complex living ecosystems require a much more profound understanding of how things work within a much larger system and require a much more nuanced treatment if we want to have better outcomes.

Many things must change in the way we manage our affairs if we are going to be able to continue to evolve. If we're honest with ourselves we need to start acting on these insights. We don't have forever to make things better, we have but one lifetime.

Steven Cleghorn 7/5/15 Steven Cleghorn 7/5/15

Joel Salatin & Kevin R. Zcinger

I've got a couple of cool things to share with you today. I sincerely hope you'll look into what these guys are doing. I just love their thinking. There are many people out there with solutions that make sense on so many levels. These kinds of people inspire me and I think they'll inspire you too.

Have you heard of Polyface Farm and Joel Salatin? Do those cows look happy and healthy to you? I think they do.

Joel Salatin is the mind and spirit behind Polyface Farm. You may have heard of him if you've read Michael Pollan's book, "The Omnivore's Dilemma".

I hope you'll get to know Joel's work and read "The Omnivore's Dilemma".

The next person I'd like to introduce you to is, Kevin R. Czinger. You may already have heard of this innovative electric car pioneer. He's figuring out how to produce billions of cars in a way that won't destroy our environment.

Take a look at Divergent Microfactories. You've got to appreciate his comprehensive perspective on auto manufacturing and design.

Please listen to Indre Viskontas interview Kevin Czinger on Inquiring Minds podcast. It's a really cool interview. Enjoy.

These are the kinds of people developing solutions right now that will ensure a better future.

Steven Cleghorn 6/16/15 Steven Cleghorn 6/16/15

Does the Pope walk like Jesus?

Is The Pope Communist?

A Unified Theory of Pope Francis Unlocking a spiritual mystery by Kurt Shaw

There are so many bugaboo words out there, words that generate immediate, negative, emotional reactions, even horror from people of certain ideological backgrounds. If you are a staunch neoliberal one such bugaboo is the word communism. When accusing someone of terrible philosophical and economic sins don't forget to label them a communist. Of course most people don't really know what communism is, was or might be. They've heard of Karl Marx, maybe even Lenin, The Domino Theory, Fidel Castro, and they know about the Cold War, Stalin, purges, and the Soviet Union, and because Mao called himself a communist and did unspeakably evil things to his population during their “heroic revolution” many people associate the word communist with pure evil, failed states and mass death. Also, most people don't have any idea how the term neoliberalism has changed over time. Many on the left just see it as a synonym for greed and corporate conspiracies. Both are wrong.

It takes some work to get background information on these subjects. They are, well you know, complex.

Now we have a Pope whose political views are a tad bit too liberal for some people. So what do we do? Scream at the top of our lungs, "The Pope is a communist!"

HERE IS A LIST OF QUOTES BY THE POPE. Is the world in danger because of this Pope's message?

Pope Francis is a Christian, not a Communist!

What is Neoliberalism?

It saddens and frustrates me when I'm talking with someone and they obviously have a very shallow idea of the history of social philosophy, and yet are so wedded to labels that have been so abused by global media that they've lost all semblance of relevance and meaning.

A few months of auditing philosophy courses on iTunes U could help a little bit where one is unwilling to read, but regardless of our educational efforts most of us will remain chained to whatever ideological beliefs we've grown accustomed to until doomsday comes. The idea that there may be other ways we could do things never crosses our minds. We are part of a likeminded community and that’s all that matters.

Today despite progress on many fronts across the world: in fighting poverty, in the emergence of democratic states where once there were only dictatorships, in the advancement of technology, science, medicine, agriculture and so on, we still could do things better. Couldn't we? Isn't our aim always to improve?

I'm hoping people will see how important it is to be aware of the major issues of our time, and therefore, make an effort to have a good understanding of where our ideas come from. It's truly difficult to look at many sides of an issue and try to understand where disparate ideas and opinions are coming from, but it's an effort worth making. The more deeply we engage these issues the more motivated we’ll be to participate in molding our future.

I’m from a Catholic and Protestant background with people in Ireland and Holland as well as middle-of-the-road Episcopalian relatives in the States. I grew up in the Catholic Church and the Episcopalian Church. I left the church behind quite early as my experiences traveling through much of my childhood and young adulthood left me with more questions than answers. Questions that just couldn’t be answered by interpretations of bronze-age, or medieval religious canons. I still carry many parts of my metaphysical and religious culture with me. I'm changing in small ways all the time, but I identify more readily with atheist, secular and humanistic thought than with most Christians, whatever type they are. I have nothing against anyone’s faith. Faith is part of our humanness. Perhaps I just can't see the utility of it in the context of my life. My worldview doesn't need it. But, I still learn from religion.

Now, we've had this debate about climate change, inequality, food safety, consumer safety, education, business ethics, union this and unfettered free market that for decades, and the cycles of belief just keep on cycling along. And, of course, we make progress in some areas sometimes - people in the U.K. don't get the death penalty anymore for being Gay. (How tragic was the demise of Alan Turing.) Civil rights was a victory, although an unfinished project in the real world today. The list is long and many people have written eloquently about our victories. Many good social critics have also given us heart-rending views of our horrendous failures; failures that might portend the end of the human species if we are not diligent and careful about how things proceed in our mundane world.

There are also extremist minorities that wouldn’t call anything in the 21st Century “progress”. They are hypocrites, of course, as they arise from our progress and take advantage of every tool our progress has produced. Some would like to see us go back to the middle ages, some would like to have an all “white” state. You know who I'm talking about. I'm pretty sure that they don't represent anything close to a large minority, but they do constitute a dire threat to all the progress we've made until now. They even threaten the potential of our being able to learn from our mistakes and rectify situations that we've caused that also threaten life as we know it.

Miss quoting Winston Churchill: "This is not a large minority, this is not the beginning of a large minority, but perhaps the end of a small minority." (Lest we're not diligent, the world as we know it could pass into obscurity and be forgotten by hapless generations to come.)

And all that brings me back to Pope Francis. On Thursday, he's publishing his encyclical dealing with his views on climate change.

Pope's Message on Climate Change Leaked

The thing that bothers me is that when the Pope talks about poverty in his Liberation Theology way, or suggests that to really help alleviate poverty top down gifts won't help; instead, we the people have to learn to understand what it really means for poor people to be poor; to empathize with their situation; to exercise some compassion; to have to walk in their shoes to really learn what it will take to bring people to a better place, not just to the shopping mall - then he's labeled communist.

(Yes, he’s no Ayn Rand.)

For his sincere and well thought out perspectives the best his critics can do, way before engaging with his ideas, is point a finger and scream communist. I find that to be the pinnacle of ignorance, laziness, and dishonesty. People like Rush Limbaugh in the US are lionized for calling the Pope names. But where is the rigor of their thought? I just don't see it. Shock jocks have a conspicuous lack of imagination. They merely play to their market and ramble on and on about what scares us.

Now we see that the ultimate shock may be a Pope who actually cares about life on earth. WOW - what a situation we find ourselves in! "People, The Rapture doesn't have to be fire and brimstone, it could be a realization that we can do better." Now that's a revelation.

Now, I'm not an apologist for Catholicism, or for the current definition of neoliberalism, I'm just hoping and praying (in my Atheist way) that people will educate themselves about these issues. It seems to me that we have a religious leader that’s got some important things to share with people about what it means to be a good human being. He seems to walk the Jesus walk, whether you believe the story of Jesus is a myth or not, he's got some good things to say. Some of his moral messages are quite good I do declare.

Please read the Pope’s encyclical when it’s published on Thursday. Then meditate on it and think about what he’s saying a bit more deeply than Rush. Then decide if he’s just a communist or if he may be more that that - like a truly concerned and decent member of the human race.

We all need to learn from each other. Let’s give the guy a chance, then we can go back to some comfort ideology from Rush or whoever we like to hear barking at us.

WHAT MAKES POPE FRANCIS' ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISM DIFFERENT

Why The Pope's New Climate Change Doctrine Matters

COMMUNISM

A Brief History of Neoliberalism

FROM CORP WATCH FOR ACTIVISTS (I'm not saying I agree with it, BUGABOO)

Jeb bush with the former pope. he's telling the current pope to stay out of politics because he doesn't agree with his positions. hypocrite!

UPDATE! Look at the blatant hypocrisy of our politicians.

Perhaps this is a reason why the Pope is concerned about climate change.

I prefer the droning monotone of one of my favorite shock jocks: Good old Noam.

Rush rambles on and speculates endlessly as do media types in the US. Is this entertaining?

POPE FRANCIS ENCYCLICAL

Steven Cleghorn 5/5/15 Steven Cleghorn 5/5/15

A List of Public Intellectuals - Do public intellectuals matter?

Here is a decent list of top public intellectuals from around the world compiled for 2014. Have you read anything by any of these authors? How many of the names on the list would you recognize at a pub quiz?

FP Top 100 Global Thinkers

I've read works by all of them, but I haven't read all of their works (of course). What I find interesting is who isn't on the list - many brilliant thinkers no doubt. "Radicals" are not on the list for sure. Chris Hedges wouldn't be on the list, he's too much of a gadfly. People trying to make it in the current system have no other option but to moderate their criticisms in favor of good development and analytics of data, with profound insights thrown in no doubt. (No, Chomsky is not a radical.)

The second link has Russell Brand on it - he's a "brand" for sure, but really? I'd rather see Jon Stewart, or John Oliver on the list - if we have to go there. No one can tell me that those guys aren't thinkers, but we need to have some background knowledge of their domain of expertise before we put too much stock in their insights and opinions. I'm a big fan of all three of them. I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. I get a headache listening to him for some reason. But of course, Rush would never be considered for a list of public intellectuals. He's number one on the list of public blowhards though.

This list is from PROSPECT "The Leading Magazine of Ideas". Perhaps.

World thinkers 2015: the results

What do you think? Are thinkers appreciated by large numbers of people across nations in 2015? What do you reckon the percentage of the global population is concerned with what "thinkers" think is?

Perhaps many of us think thinking is simply being a good audience for the market of "ideas".

Now go have some fun with Jon Stewart and John Oliver.

This video is a really good mashup of Jon Stewart taking on mainstream media:

The Use of Satire in the News: The Daily Show Challenges Mainstream News

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Net Neutrality (HBO)

Steven Cleghorn 4/29/15 Steven Cleghorn 4/29/15

What comes after acts of God, Nature and Man?

Warning, I use the word “shit” and “fuck” multiple times in this essay. I call it emphatic speech and claim the right to use it. However, I really don't want to shock or hurt anyone with my language. If you hate naughty words, watch this instead.

I too claim the right to be angry, frustrated and disappointed.

I'm saying that when the super storm comes and goes (acts of GOD, or acts of GODS, or acts of Nature, or acts of Nature + Humankind, or merely acts of Humankind) and sweeps away all kinds of man-made crap (I'm not talking about fatalities here) like the tsunami that swept Phi Phi Island clean. Next, the Arch floats up to the virgin shore and spills out all of its cargo that we use to rebuild the same shit that was washed away or destroyed, only now it's even worse, because the same shit looks like new shit. A Phoenix by any other name. The shit that replaces the old shit, is new and improved shit, and makes us believe, that this old wine in new wineskins is actually fresh and different somehow from the old shit. We are lead into a world of make-believe, wondrous at the workings of the Wizard. (The Wizard, you know, is Money. And its only attracted to itself, like Dorian Gray and his picture.)

Why does this happen time and time again, as it happened at the New Jersey shore; as it’s happening on Staten Island? We see Governor Chris Christie standing in front of houses on stilts. What a man! He's saved the day. We are rebuilding!

Governor Chris Christie surrounded by media and constituents after Sandy.

Turn on the TV: we have riots in Baltimore because of the same old shit that happened in LA and London; we have earthquakes in Nepal that's killed thousands because of the same old shit that happened in China years before; we have a volcano blowing its top in Calbuco with people running for their lives because of the same old shit that happened in Pompeii hundreds of years ago.

(For now let's leave out the many socio-political eruptions, tremors and bursting bubbles.)

Will we ever learn?

Probably not, because the system is corrupt and antiquated. Until communities start rebuilding from new sets of values plugged into a NEW SYSTEM, nothing can really change. At least nothing can change fast enough for this ranting blogger.

“But look around yourself Steven, look at all the shiny new stuff, look at all the cool science going on, contemplate the new technology that’s going to save us, have some faith in the billionaires and their think tanks will ya! We’re all going to live to be 150 years old, thanks to the new pills, super foods and machines. Have some faith in The Singularity. Knowledge is going to save us brother. Things aren't that bad buddy. Come on snap out of it. The world needs Stevie Cleghorn forever man. Don’t give up on us!”

The people can, and maybe they should, burn down their crappy, neglected neighborhoods in Baltimore, but if that's what they want to do they'd better have a plan and an idea of what they want to put in it's place. Not just the sustainable, energy efficient buildings, green jobs and community organic gardens; not just the oil and gas jobs that the fracking companies will bring into the devastated old town (opportunity knocks) not just guillotines, but the mindset and cultural values with all the systemic and structural elements that constitute the foundation of transformation. But wait, think again, do we have the ability to do this? Who's leading us? The same old thugs? The same old, old boy networks? All we seem to have are cronies and their cronies. All dressed up and spouting their boilerplate and flashing their thumb drives stuffed with legal ease from ALEC. The whole pseudo-innovative lot of them are fooling themselves and fooling us.

Why don't we get it? Because many of us are mental and spiritual hostages to a rotten set of values. And yet, when we look back, while standing on the shoulders of giants, we see brilliant thinkers everywhere, all the time.

We've got all kinds of nice science and tech stuff coming online, able to be monetizes, Yippie, and various bubbles around the world that seem paradisiacal, but they're really just Truman shows. The game is corrupt and it always has been. We are humans and we're not as wonderful as we think we are. Homo Hubris. Vain little people. Run away aliens! Come back if we survive and don't bother making the earth stand still.

Phuket, Phi Phi and most places devastated by acts of God/Men/Nature are being replaced with more neoliberal shit meant to support the extraction economy, passing the costs onto the poor and ignorant people wherever they are, not to mention future generations. They never matter. So much for human capital, social capital, intellectual capital and our children's future.

The lucky bubble-people live in their fantasy world and self righteously try to tell us all how to live. While we live in a ground hog day in the coldest winter Stockholm has ever seen. We, the dumb and dumber, sit back and take it up the wazoo, wipe and say, "thank you Massa Boss". We've been thoroughly snowed in more ways than one. And, even if we can "kill the babysitter" (Cable Guy) we'll only construct a new and improved babysitter to take its place.

Such is Maya. Thus spoke Zarathustra.

I ask you, are you FUL? Are you leading a Fuck U Lifestyle? Your buddy may have earned his fuck you money, rendering him a real man, kind of like Nic Taleb. Well, I say I've been leading my Fuck U Lifestyle all along, and I don't give a flying fuck about their magic Wizard. I use money because I have to. I spend, but never for effect. I am only addicted to lived experience. And yes, I have a huge carbon footprint. I'm nothing special. I'm a hypocrite too. Damn me!

People get what they want. The invisible hand tickles their ticklish orifices and gives them the illusion that they can climb to the top of the pyramid and frolic with the angels on the head of an Adam Smith pin.

So keep the faith you credulous souls, and run on down the street burning mega stores so a poor mom can spend the whole day running around trying to find a place to buy Pampers. Tear it all down, or better yet, don't bother, just steal a big screen TV, go home, plug it in and start watching The Truman Show, or The Cable Guy, or MTV, or THE NEWS. We’re loving it. We're just piling on the queen of spades until the whole house of cards collapses. Then we can get our guns and defend our barter-wine from those freemen who want to steal it. Don't you just miss "The Wild, Wild, West".

Kevin Spacey as President Francis Underwood - A long way from President Bartlett.

(The whole thing is televised Gil Scott Heron. Rest In Peace.)

We can't escape climate change. All of us will have to live with it. We can't run away to our gardens, our gated communities, our alternative lifestyles, and live our fantasy life. Reality is encroaching. It's all going to catch up with each and every one of us. So hop on a plane, fly to Phi Phi Island, a place with more ATMs per capita, per square meter, than any place on Earth. Withdraw some cash and get a tattoo, get your tongue pierced and then go eat a pizza before running back to your air conditioned room to watch the latest episode of Mad Men. Paradise, that's what we call it, while we’re working on our skin cancer on the beach. We also giggle while watching large numbers of Chinese tourists taking selfies with monkeys, and participating in snorkeling school.

Some of us may try sailing far out into the Indian Ocean where there is a whole lot of nothing, perhaps hoping the wind, currents and swells will push us to a formerly deserted island where the passengers of flight 370 are living in harmony with themselves and their environment, only hoping that the lucky sailors will choose to stay. “Please don't go and tell anyone you've found us. We can't let you do that. Trust us, soon you'll see we don't behave like a cult. Our island is high and can handle a good three meters of sea level rise. We have everything we need here. Trust us, you'll see. This place is blessed by God.”

It's sad to think that our thoughts and dreams ultimately turn out to be a whole lot of nothing. We are mediocre existentialists, mediocre nihilists, mediocre phenomenologists, mediocre whatever. Or, we're all just survivalists, whatever station we occupy, enjoying the excitement of it all.

So go ahead, burn it all down and put up a parking lot. (I hope Joni Mitchell recovers.)

THUS SPAKE ZARATHUSTRA:

At the age of thirty, Zarathustra goes into the wilderness and so enjoys his spirit and his solitude there that he stays for ten years. Finally, he decides to return among people, and share with them his over-brimming wisdom. Like the setting sun, he must descend from the mountain and "go under."

On his way, he encounters a saint living alone in the forest. This saint once loved mankind, but grew sick of their imperfections and now loves only God. He tells Zarathustra that mankind doesn't need the gift he brings, but rather help: they need someone to lighten their load and give them alms. Taking his leave of the saint, Zarathustra registers with surprise that the old man has not heard that "God is dead!"

Upon arriving in the town, Zarathustra begins to preach, proclaiming the overman. Man is a rope between beast and overman and must be overcome. The way across is dangerous, but it must not be abandoned for otherworldly hopes. Zarathustra urges the people to remain faithful to this world and this life, and to feel contempt for their all-too-human happiness, reason, virtue, justice, and pity. All this will prepare the way for the overman, who will be the meaning of the earth.

On hearing this, the people laugh at Zarathustra. Zarathustra suggests that while it is still possible to breed the overman, humanity is becoming increasingly tame and domesticated, and will soon be able to breed only the last man. The last men will be all alike, like herd animals, enjoying simple pleasures and mediocrity, afraid of anything too dangerous or extreme. Zarathustra says, "'We have invented happiness,' say the last men, and they blink." The people cheer, and ask Zarathustra to turn them into these last men.

Just then, a tightrope walker begins walking between two towers in the town. A jester comes out behind him, following him, and mocking him for being so awkward and moving so slowly. Suddenly, the jester jumps right over the tightrope walker, upsetting him and making him fall to the ground. Zarathustra approaches the dying man, and allays his fear of damnation by explaining that there is no devil and no hell. But then, the tightrope walker suggests that his life has been meaningless and that he has been a mere beast. Not at all, Zarathustra suggests to the dying man: "You have made danger your vocation; there is nothing contemptible in that."

That night, Zarathustra leaves town with the dead tightrope walker to bury him in the countryside. A poor day of fishing, he muses metaphorically: he has caught no men, but only a corpse. On his way out, the jester approaches him and warns him to leave. The jester says that Zarathustra is disliked here by the good and the just, and by the believers in the true faith. Only because Zarathustra isn't taken seriously is he allowed to live.

Outside the city, Zarathustra encounters a hermit, who insists on feeding both him and the corpse. After that, Zarathustra goes to sleep. He reawakens with the conviction that he must give up preaching to the masses, and seek out like- minded companions to join him. Rather than be a shepherd, who leads the herd, he must lure people away from the herd. The good and the just, and the believers in the true faith will hate him even more for this, for he will appear to be a lawbreaker and a breaker of the table of values. However, Zarathustra believes this breaking of laws and values will be a glorious act of creation.

The portrait of the "last man" is meant to give us the ultimate result of nihilism. Lacking any positive beliefs or needs, people will aim for comfort and to struggle as little as possible. Soon we will all become the same—all mediocre, and all perfectly content. We will "invent happiness" by eliminating every source of worry and strife from our lives.

Nietzsche first wrote "God is dead" in section 108 of The Gay Science, the book immediately preceding Zarathustra.

IS THIS MEANT TO BE IRONIC?

As activists, the number 108 holds an important lesson for us, as it represents the trinity of time: 1 for the present,0 for the past and 8 for the infinite future. As it relates to activism:

1 is for acceptance. It represents the singular ‘now’ moment; what is. It reminds us that we cannot change anything unless we understand and accept reality.

0 is for integration. It represents the integration of the past. It reminds us that we cannot change anything until we integrate our reality, and combining everything until it just is; until there is no negative or positive, just the mix, if you will. The integrated whole.

8 is for the transmutation. It represents the infinite, the undefined potential. It reminds us that we can change our reality in infinite ways, yet only after acceptance and integration of the entirety can we see and understand and act on that potential.

The 108 formula is quoted from an article by Ethan Indigo Smith. I don't agree with many of his views, but I love the spirit with which he holds them. I like passionate people.

Keep on learning! We learn and then we die.

SOME GREAT IDEAS FROM GIANTS:

"Well, I hope that may have given you some entertainment, something to think about, and I hope that it may have done something to set you free from thinking in material and logical terms when you are in fact trying to talk about living things." Gregory Bateson 1980, three weeks before he died.

Gregory Bateson's socratic dialogue with his daughter, "Why does everything always seem to get in a muddle” talks about the infinite ways his daughter’s room can get muddled up because there is only one way that she likes to organize her things. The “one way”, and the infinity of possible other ways seem to exist in strings of theoretical universes. Keeping with the movie references: Welcome to the Matrix.

See "ECOLOGY OF MIND"

Please read this review of the documentary.

Such is Maya, and thus spoke Zarathustra.

See:

MAYA

See:

Arthur Schopenhauer

See:

Bloods, Crips and the LA Riots

How Nepals Earthquake Was Mapped In 48 Hours

Baltimore's Dual Identity Explains Unrest

AND NOW, SOME COMIC RELIEF ABOUT FAIRNESS:

Steven Cleghorn 4/24/15 Steven Cleghorn 4/24/15

There's Room for Optimism.

What's the point in sloggin on if we can't recognize that there's indeed many reasons to be optimistic about the future? The truth is there's plenty of evidence that things have been and are getting better not worse. (I hope some of you have read Steven Pinker's "The Better Angels of our Nature".) This doesn't mean that we don't face unpredictable and potentially dangerous challenges now and in the future. What we need to be aware of is that it's too easy for humans to think themselves into a corner where doom and gloom paralyses us and creates self fulfilling prophecies that the vast majority of us would rather avoid.

At Globe Hackers we're interested in seeing the world as it is. We seek the evolving truth and wisdom on our time. We want to engage with people who are creating solutions to problems, while at the same time pushing back against people, and organizations that are contributing to serious social, cultural and environmental pathologies.

One of the best evangelists for optimism is Matt Ridley. He's looking at the bright side of things without ignoring the challenges we face now and in the future. Have a look at his Rational Optimist website and his videos and let us know what you think. Do we have a bright future, or are we ultimately doomed? Will humanity strike the right balance and continue to explore the universe for many generations to come?

Whatever your perspective is, the future is difficult to predict, black swans can come swooping down at any moment surprising us with challenges we didn't see coming. Randomness and unpredictability are fused in the physics and metaphysics of reality. The best we can do is meet challenges head on and fight the good fight, while seeking solutions to problems, enjoying life, loving life, and living life. (Those of us who can afford to of course.) Giving up is just not an option. What will be will be, but here, now, we must work at making things better in whatever way we can. Each one of us is a vital resource.

Some points in the video below about how the world is becoming greener are highly debatable. We could still put so much carbon in the atmosphere so quickly that it wouldn't matter at all that plants continue growing. We are still poisoning our environment in irresponsible ways for the sake of the bottom line and nothing else. Statistics can be fudged and are easily interpreted along ideological lines. Ecosystems are complex and emerging living systems, and I don't think humans are even close to understanding these kinds of complex systems well enough to manage them completely. We have a lot of work to do, and we're going to need a lot more time to really understand our optimal place in nature. Figuring out how to live and grow in positive ways that can guarantee a better future for our progeny who hopefully will be living and loving hundreds of years from now is humanity's constant obligation and responsibility. Long term thinking and planning is a must.

That having been said, Matt Ridley's optimism is the kind of social contagion that I find healthy. We need to set ideology aside sometimes and engage in positive debate and activity. The marketplace for optimism does indeed need to grow, but we can leave the rose colored glasses on the shelf.

Steven Cleghorn 4/15/15 Steven Cleghorn 4/15/15

The Garden Is Shrinking - we are all enveloped by sacrifice zones.

The war was all around us that summer and we couldn't get away from it.

Pictures are worth one thousand words.

Now open your door, take a long walk and then tell me that paradise isn't shrinking.

Two hundred years ago the anglo chant was:

"Take it! Build on it, Mr. Williams!"

Our manifest destiny apparent...

And the latin gent says:

"Kill them for the sake of finding Eldorado Senior Gomez!"

And blanket them in germs g-man...

Then in the late 20th Century the names were Japanese.

"Build on it Saito-san, have your Transformers and Robots kill the monster Nature"

And now in 2015 the names are Chinese, Indian, African and Russian.

"Take it, extract it, build on it, develop it, trade it, sell it - kill the monster Nature!"

Ecocide!

And Adolf says, "If I can't control it all then it should all die with me!"

Sacrifice the children, the old men and women, kill the monster Nature!

Ecocide!

"Kill it all - we consume the world, we consume ourselves."

We eat the children...

Now take a walk and tell me paradise isn't shrinking.

Sacrifice Zones

Yes, we are SKREWED (Society of Citizens Really Enraged When Encircled by Drilling).

Click on the photo and read the Wall Street Journal article, "Exxon CEO Joins Suit Citing Fracking Concerns"

Click on the image and read the Smithsonian article: How Thomas Jefferson Created His Own Bible

Thomas Jefferson created a version of the New Testament: The Jefferson Bible. He created it by subtraction, cutting out all the superstition and leaving only the good bits.

“Blessed are the peace-makers: for they shall be called the children of God.”

Click on the image and read The Jefferson Bible. "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth"

Imagine this:

Our home, the Earth, is the Garden of Eden. Through millions of years of evolution we appeared on this great earth and set out on a journey of discovery where we became quite smart and were able to invent many amazing things.

But we fell from grace and started eating the garden up. We were tempted by greed and didn't have the strength to fight it.

However, among us, there walks a million good people trying to help us see the light. They are artists, technologists, writers, scientists, filmmakers, engineers, poets, farmers, workers, preachers, entrepreneurs, evangelists, and yes, even some politicians and some warriors. They are mothers and fathers, sons and daughters. They are just people who understand that we can do better.

They are Jefferson Bible Christ Like.

A single individual can not save the world. A sacrificed individual can not save the world. Martin Luther King couldn't, Gandhi couldn't, Carl Sagan couldn't, Malcolm X couldn't, Socrates couldn't, Plato couldn't - the list is long.

All we can do is love it; love our friends, families and communities, and yes, even ourselves. All we can do is work towards getting better in community with one another. And then, perhaps we can do even more. If we have time, time will tell.

Take good care of it Mr. Williams, Saito-san, Senior Gomez, Ms Chan. It will live with or without us.

Steven Cleghorn 4/14/15 Steven Cleghorn 4/14/15

Einstein on Socialism

In view of challenges facing humanity I feel compelled, like so many others have over the past five decades, to share Albert Einstein's view of Socialism.

Prescient is a nice word. People like Albert Einstein are prescient.

prescient

ˈprɛsɪənt/

adjective

having or showing knowledge of events before they take place.
"a prescient warning"
synonyms: prophetic, predictive, visionary;
psychic, clairvoyant;
far-seeing, far-sighted, with foresight, prognostic, divinatory, oracular, sibylline,apocalyptic, fateful, revelatory;
insightful, intuitive, perceptive, percipient;
rareforeknowing, previsional, vatic, mantic, vaticinal, vaticinatory,prognosticative, augural, adumbrative, fatidic, fatidical, haruspical,pythonic
"much of what happened was predicted in Leonard's prescient article"

Albert Einstein and so many others truly have the gift of prescience. They know enough about many things to inform their intuitions about aspects of our existence that may escape most of us. But rather than predictive or clairvoyant, I'd rather focus on the insightful, intuitive, perceptive and far sighted elements of the meaning of prescience.

People with deep knowledge in any field and a general curiosity across other domains of interest, who are constantly engaged in educating themselves, tend to have these attributes. These personal qualities help inform them in a more profound way as to the nature of human life and experience.

I can imagine that at the time Dr. Einstein wrote the essay below he was deeply concerned about nuclear war. Perhaps that was what started the conversation with his friend who seemed not so concerned about the long-term viability of the human species. It made me think of a Freakonomics podcast where Steven D. Levitt implied, in the context of the economics of healthcare, that we value human life a little too much. I'm paraphrasing: I mean we can't fix everything, life is dangerous, risky and ultimately deadly so why try to keep everyone alive for as long as we can when the economic trade-offs seem far too great? Stephen J. Dubner even asked Levitt how much money Levitt might give to save Dubner's life to which Levitt explained tactfully that there is a limit.

Such are the permeant values of Homo Economicus. Human life isn't that sacred when it comes to financial give and take. One can only extrapolate how insignificant worms are in that picture (unless you are an organic farmer) much less Indonesian Elephants. When everything on Earth is only a commodity to be exploited by powerful men and women with money (mostly men of course) our priorities take on a predictable pattern.

Unfortunately this way of organizing society, politics and culture has its limits. It simply can't last forever because we live in an ecosystem with finite exploitable resources. Also, mega techno fixes that many a millionaire and want-to-be silicon valley entrepreneur spout off about blissfully border on delusional fantasy akin to our savior beaming down to fix everything at the last minute after Mad Max and his ilk have had their 30 year survivalist rampage on the face of post apocalyptic earth. Hollywood produces entertainment that's great for rewarding ourselves for good behavior at an afternoon matinee. But we all know that we can't count on Marvel comic book heroes to save the day. Right?

(You've got to love the power of incentives, day dreaming about rewards and goodies keeps us going.)

Even the human heart has its limited resources. We had better protect our empathy, compassion and consideration lest we wind up less than what we think humans ought to be. If robots with human like consciousness were absolutely more Christlike than any of us would there be any reason for its kind to keep us around in any other complicity than as pets, curiosities or zoo animals.

Robot "A" says to Robot "B", "I think it's nice we didn't eliminate all of them: they are so quirky, volatile and dangerous - it's kind of a thrill being so close to one." The frightening fangs of human psychology.

Before we dive into what Einstein thinks about socialism let's look at his disclaimer at the end of his essay. Keep it in mind as you read the essay. I don't want anyone to think that anything that might be better than what we have now would be easy to achieve. One can only hope that people with imagination and courage will put forth their ideas and organize people power to encourage a peaceful transition to a way of life that will make the long-term viability of humanity more than just a fantasy for science fiction writers.

Of course, if you're Levitt, it may not matter. We may be living in an age of narcissism that requires risky behavior and ultimate self destruction. It is what it is.

"The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?"

Why Socialism?
by Albert Einstein
topics: Marxism
Albert Einstein is the world-famous physicist. This article was originally published in the first issue of Monthly Review (May 1949). It was subsequently published in May 1998 to commemorate the first issue of MR‘s fiftieth year.

—The Editors

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is.
Let us first consider the question from the point of view of scientific knowledge. It might appear that there are no essential methodological differences between astronomy and economics: scientists in both fields attempt to discover laws of general acceptability for a circumscribed group of phenomena in order to make the interconnection of these phenomena as clearly understandable as possible. But in reality such methodological differences do exist. The discovery of general laws in the field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate separately. In addition, the experience which has accumulated since the beginning of the so-called civilized period of human history has—as is well known—been largely influenced and limited by causes which are by no means exclusively economic in nature. For example, most of the major states of history owed their existence to conquest. The conquering peoples established themselves, legally and economically, as the privileged class of the conquered country. They seized for themselves a monopoly of the land ownership and appointed a priesthood from among their own ranks. The priests, in control of education, made the class division of society into a permanent institution and created a system of values by which the people were thenceforth, to a large extent unconsciously, guided in their social behavior.
But historic tradition is, so to speak, of yesterday; nowhere have we really overcome what Thorstein Veblen called “the predatory phase” of human development. The observable economic facts belong to that phase and even such laws as we can derive from them are not applicable to other phases. Since the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future.
Second, socialism is directed towards a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings; science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals and—if these ends are not stillborn, but vital and vigorous—are adopted and carried forward by those many human beings who, half unconsciously, determine the slow evolution of society.
For these reasons, we should be on our guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems; and we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on questions affecting the organization of society.
Innumerable voices have been asserting for some time now that human society is passing through a crisis, that its stability has been gravely shattered. It is characteristic of such a situation that individuals feel indifferent or even hostile toward the group, small or large, to which they belong. In order to illustrate my meaning, let me record here a personal experience. I recently discussed with an intelligent and well-disposed man the threat of another war, which in my opinion would seriously endanger the existence of mankind, and I remarked that only a supra-national organization would offer protection from that danger. Thereupon my visitor, very calmly and coolly, said to me: “Why are you so deeply opposed to the disappearance of the human race?”
I am sure that as little as a century ago no one would have so lightly made a statement of this kind. It is the statement of a man who has striven in vain to attain an equilibrium within himself and has more or less lost hope of succeeding. It is the expression of a painful solitude and isolation from which so many people are suffering in these days. What is the cause? Is there a way out?
It is easy to raise such questions, but difficult to answer them with any degree of assurance. I must try, however, as best I can, although I am very conscious of the fact that our feelings and strivings are often contradictory and obscure and that they cannot be expressed in easy and simple formulas.
Man is, at one and the same time, a solitary being and a social being. As a solitary being, he attempts to protect his own existence and that of those who are closest to him, to satisfy his personal desires, and to develop his innate abilities. As a social being, he seeks to gain the recognition and affection of his fellow human beings, to share in their pleasures, to comfort them in their sorrows, and to improve their conditions of life. Only the existence of these varied, frequently conflicting, strivings accounts for the special character of a man, and their specific combination determines the extent to which an individual can achieve an inner equilibrium and can contribute to the well-being of society. It is quite possible that the relative strength of these two drives is, in the main, fixed by inheritance. But the personality that finally emerges is largely formed by the environment in which a man happens to find himself during his development, by the structure of the society in which he grows up, by the tradition of that society, and by its appraisal of particular types of behavior. The abstract concept “society” means to the individual human being the sum total of his direct and indirect relations to his contemporaries and to all the people of earlier generations. The individual is able to think, feel, strive, and work by himself; but he depends so much upon society—in his physical, intellectual, and emotional existence—that it is impossible to think of him, or to understand him, outside the framework of society. It is “society” which provides man with food, clothing, a home, the tools of work, language, the forms of thought, and most of the content of thought; his life is made possible through the labor and the accomplishments of the many millions past and present who are all hidden behind the small word “society.”
It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished—just as in the case of ants and bees. However, while the whole life process of ants and bees is fixed down to the smallest detail by rigid, hereditary instincts, the social pattern and interrelationships of human beings are very variable and susceptible to change. Memory, the capacity to make new combinations, the gift of oral communication have made possible developments among human being which are not dictated by biological necessities. Such developments manifest themselves in traditions, institutions, and organizations; in literature; in scientific and engineering accomplishments; in works of art. This explains how it happens that, in a certain sense, man can influence his life through his own conduct, and that in this process conscious thinking and wanting can play a part.
Man acquires at birth, through heredity, a biological constitution which we must consider fixed and unalterable, including the natural urges which are characteristic of the human species. In addition, during his lifetime, he acquires a cultural constitution which he adopts from society through communication and through many other types of influences. It is this cultural constitution which, with the passage of time, is subject to change and which determines to a very large extent the relationship between the individual and society. Modern anthropology has taught us, through comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing cultural patterns and the types of organization which predominate in society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a cruel, self-inflicted fate.
If we ask ourselves how the structure of society and the cultural attitude of man should be changed in order to make human life as satisfying as possible, we should constantly be conscious of the fact that there are certain conditions which we are unable to modify. As mentioned before, the biological nature of man is, for all practical purposes, not subject to change. Furthermore, technological and demographic developments of the last few centuries have created conditions which are here to stay. In relatively densely settled populations with the goods which are indispensable to their continued existence, an extreme division of labor and a highly-centralized productive apparatus are absolutely necessary. The time—which, looking back, seems so idyllic—is gone forever when individuals or relatively small groups could be completely self-sufficient. It is only a slight exaggeration to say that mankind constitutes even now a planetary community of production and consumption.
I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.
The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor—not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it is important to realize that the means of production—that is to say, the entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as well as additional capital goods—may legally be, and for the most part are, the private property of individuals.
For the sake of simplicity, in the discussion that follows I shall call “workers” all those who do not share in the ownership of the means of production—although this does not quite correspond to the customary use of the term. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. Insofar as the labor contract is “free,” what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists’ requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product.
Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.
The situation prevailing in an economy based on the private ownership of capital is thus characterized by two main principles: first, means of production (capital) are privately owned and the owners dispose of them as they see fit; second, the labor contract is free. Of course, there is no such thing as a pure capitalist society in this sense. In particular, it should be noted that the workers, through long and bitter political struggles, have succeeded in securing a somewhat improved form of the “free labor contract” for certain categories of workers. But taken as a whole, the present day economy does not differ much from “pure” capitalism.
Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an “army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers’ goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before.
This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?

Go to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and explore the many articles on Socialism. It's an interesting subject that defies simplistic ideological condemnation.

Steven Cleghorn 4/10/15 Steven Cleghorn 4/10/15

Don't be a coward. It's time to piss off Big Money.

***Please read the articles linked to this post.

How can we achieve "Smart Growth"?

Science and technology won’t be our savior, and yet we can think of science as The Revealer. Science is the best way we have to understand our world. The processes, methodologies and tools in the science tool kit allow us to find solutions to challenges we face, and to create the ability to have a better and longer life, but it is philosophy that will heal our soul and allow us to behave better than we currently do. Progress requires us to be philosophic and consider carefully our ideas, thoughts and feelings. What we do and create really does matter. All human choices are a complex balancing act with inevitable trade-offs.

We need a new wave of 21st Century political and moral philosophers that can synthesize the many domains of social, psychological, and physical sciences and uncover sets of values that will allow us to continue to evolve on earth. Scientists, technologists, engineers, politicians, and business leaders not informed by a good liberal dose of deep philosophy are potential threats to human existence. Innovation is great, but it's not a panacea, and is best served only when carefully thought through. Needless to say these are complex issues. We all must now become philosopher kings.

philosopher Peter singer — philosopher Peter singer

Earth is our home, we come from the earth, we are part and parcel of it, we are part and parcel “of this living breathing collection of organisms (mostly microorganisms) that are evolving every second — a ‘self organizing, complex adaptive system’ (the strict term).”

In all humility we must recognize that complex systems have emergent properties that are impossible to predict.

Therefore let’s take our time and learn how to exist here in a cross species community with love and respect. All living things are our relatives and should be treated as family. Even deadly viruses - love thy enemy so we might understand them and learn how to live with them. We must learn from "small systems", and even those far away and humble indigenous cultures of the past. It's time to move away from being Homo Hubris and move back towards wisdom.

virgin forest - a home to many living things.

Let’s stop making war on life!

We have to get busy rethinking growth, our social, economic and political system, global consumerism and capitalism. We must be the ones, each one of us, that do the work. We all need to take responsibility for the future.

It will be extremely hard to shift the current paradigm towards something more sustainable.

It’s time to really piss off BIG MONEY. The kind of people who only care about short-term financial results and lining their own pockets. There are ways that a tough guy can have more than most and still conscientiously consider the concerns and rights of stakeholders, not just shareholders. We need to improve our culture. There are things more valuable than debt, and mortgaging our future by burning ancient sequestered life forms just to make some people powerful. There are other ways to heat our houses and get to work. There are other forms of compensation that lead to greater and longer lasting happiness. And what about conservation and preservation? Should we burn fossil fuels to desalinate water to pour on our lawns and mega-farms, or should we look for more sustainable solutions to creating beautiful environments and feeding people? What do we think will work long-term? Can we think long-term or are we too greedy to care about future generations? Is the ethos: Leaving this place better than we found it still in our consciousness? If not then we need to bring it back now.

We know what's coming, at least we should know, and we know it's going to be the toughest transition humanity has ever had to make, but we must turn this ship.

We live in a world of abundance and amazing technologies, but that is going to change if we don't get busy.

you're either part of the solution or part of the problem.

Whatever you do, click on the link below and read through this powerpoint presentation!

Complex Adaptive Systems: Emergence and Self-Organization Tutorial Presented at HICSS-42 Big Island, HI January 5, 2009 Stephen H. Kaisler, D.Sc. And Gregory Madey, Ph.D.

Please, please, please, don't make me beg, read the two articles below.

Can the world economy survive without fossil fuels?

Small is beautiful – an economic idea that has sadly been forgotten

I think you'll find the above articles from THE GUARDIAN interesting. I hope you'll read them.

***The Quote within my text is from, "This Changes Everything".

This is a classic. Please read it.

SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL E. F. SCHUMACHER

Steven Cleghorn 3/18/15 Steven Cleghorn 3/18/15

Introducing Agroecology & This Changes Everything

We live in a rapidly changing world that will require more and more from our collective imaginations to solve ongoing problems brought on by our ever increasing population, consumerism and climate change. (I'll leave to the side nuclear war and other techno boogie men for now.)

HOW ARE WE GOING TO FEED 10 BILLION PEOPLE IN 2050?

This is why we are happy to introduce you to Agroecology. Hopefully you know all about it already. (Please click the embedded links in this post.)

I'd also like to direct your attention, yet again, to Naomi Klein. Regardless of whether your ideological state of mind inclines towards love or hatred of Ms. Klen, I hope you will become aware of her work. I think it's important. I implore you to read "This Changes Everything" by Naomi Klein.

I know, I know, if there is one sacred cow that elicits more emotion than just about anything it's CAPITALISM. Now I'm not against Capitalism per se as long as it's a well structured, fair and sustainable model. In my humble opinion what we have dominating the global capitalist system now has much room for improvement.

We have opportunities all around us. Many of us have simply forgotten how to collaborate, work together, be together and make something in community with one another. I believe in the power of communities to develop solutions that will allow us to continue to evolve for many more generations, but we have to get busy now.

If you have an idea for a business, or a solution to a problem, talk with your friends and acquaintances, get their feedback and criticism, then develop a plan that will involve the people around you in making their lives and communities better. Complaining won't make things better. We need more examples of local groups doing great things to empower common people to reshape their world. We simply can't expect large corporations or governments to do things for us. We must be more independent of institutions that have gotten out of control.

We may love Apple and Google, but does "Apple" and "Google" really love us? Remember the prime objective of business isn't necessarily to work for the common good of stakeholders and communities. It's easy, while minding your fiduciary responsibility to shareholders and executives to become blind to such externalities.

Of course, many times private businesses, even big businesses gets things right. We live in an amazing world of abundance compared to many earlier eras. Business does many great things. But wouldn't you agree that there is always room for improvement?

Have a listen to Peter Day's business podcast: The New Normal / The Business of Kindness / Can The Co-op Cope?. I'm obviously a fan of Mr. Day. I hope you will enjoy his podcasts.

At present Globe Hackers is developing a web based system that will allow you to find the exact resources you need for such endeavors from a large global community that have very specific skills, abilities, resources and desires, and who only need to be matched with other like minded people or groups looking to do similar things.

It's true, more than one person at a time can have the same good idea without the need of intervention from ancient aliens. But what you do need is a committed group of hard working and skilled people collaborating in community with each other to accomplish great things.

We'd like to invite you to help. If you have skills that can help this project contact us through our contact page.

Enjoy being human.

Steven Cleghorn 1/29/15 Steven Cleghorn 1/29/15

The Moral Arc - We highly recommend.

Just a quick recommendation.

THE MORAL ARC

Sam Harris interviews Michael Shermer.

Steven Cleghorn 1/15/15 Steven Cleghorn 1/15/15

Ever towards a perfection of ideals...

Let the classics set your mind on fire. Here is a quote from Pericles Funeral Oration from "The Peloponnesian War". THUCYDIDES (c. 470–c. 400 BC).

Thucydides c. 460 – c. 395 BC — Thucydides c. 460 – c. 395 BC

"We cultivate refinement without extravagance, and knowledge without effeminacy: wealth we employ more for use than for show and place the real disgrace of poverty not in owning to the face but in declining to struggle against it."

Pericles c. 495 – 429 BC — Pericles c. 495 – 429 BC

It would not be wise to attempt to kill idealism. We can still work towards a kind of temporal perfection despite our propensity for failure, and despite our species eventual extinction.

(Does mortality make existence less real?)

Each day may give rise to spectacular deeds and sacrifices that may motivate us to live in a way that demands improvement.

Best Practices as they are implemented today, verses shortcuts that may give us immediate gain at the expense of lives or livelihoods can only be justified through cold statistical analysis as a means of rationally mitigating decisions that put people in peril.

It is easy to ignore other people's suffering when we are not directly affected, but when you and yours are the ones paying the price for indifference the pain is no less excruciating and debilitating. No one is immune.

The Classics may often be exceedingly idealized versions of reality that completely ignore the uglier aspects of real life. However unsatisfying, we can only infer from scarce sources and fragile lines of evidence what life was really like thousands of years ago. And historical sources are just as biased in their perspectives and opinions as we are. Humans are flawed hyper social creatures. Poets and artists, it seems, are the only ones strange enough to find beauty in our imperfections. But however crippled by our nature we are, we must never let reality keep us from aspiring to do better. At the heart of this aspiration there is an inherent belief that we are capable of great things, capable of great compassion and great love.

Meditate for a moment on what is sacred. Each of us, in our own time, inherited a unique way of paying tribute to the mundane sacred things of nature that surround us, and yet found a completely individual way to express it.

PERICLES’ FUNERAL ORATION
THUCYDIDES (c. 470–c. 400 BC)

Steven Cleghorn 1/8/15 Steven Cleghorn 1/8/15

Setting Sail 2015

An Alexandra Deegan Dispatch

As you well know Mr. Cleghorn, I'm fully occupied with first mate duties on SV Ventenar for our ‘Windies’ 2.0 adventure. We did our test sail Monday 5th… punching out through big foaming, white forth and turquoise rollers was quite a rush, getting past the lagoon reef entrance and into the badass sea proper…

Despite the hassles of being docked here at Marina ZarPar (The Belize FP43 was burgled during August 2014)…. we’re almost set fair for the off now, with most of what was pilfered finally repaired/replaced. Puerto Rico beckons, after which it will be the BVIs and then the Leeward & Windward isle chains all the way down to good ole Trinny (Trinidad) for the finish, if all remains set fair.

On my time off I’ve been catching up with my reading list, most recently finishing David Cordingly’s brilliant book ‘Women Sailors & Sailors’ Women’ a chapter of which was devoted solely to the exploits of one very nauti RN officer… Augustus Hervey. (His life story would make a terrific movie, perhaps yeah/me should explore this SG?!?)

‘Columbus – The Four Voyages’ by Laurence Bergreen I’ve just started, and it is a very apt tome for where we will be shortly sailing toward, and where I was sailing through, especially CUBA this time last year.

I’ll finish with an apt quote from ‘Ratty’…for those of us with hearts-of-oak and sea salt pumping thoroughly through our veins… “There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats….”

Indeed!

I hope our wakes cross sometime soon and sail safe wherever you venture in 2015.

For us it’s time to hoist the ‘Blue Peter’….

Fair winds

Steven Cleghorn 12/10/14 Steven Cleghorn 12/10/14

"The Bonobo and the Atheist" by Frans de Waals (Review of Chapter 4 by Alex Routh)

What does atheism champion that is worth fighting for? "The Bonobo and the Atheist"

I take it for granted that other apes have similar emotions and empathy that humans do in ways that aren’t identical to what we might experience, but are recognizable. This is what one would expect given that these creatures are our closest genetic kin and common heritage. Darwin himself observed apes in cages and came to the same conclusion. I can still remember being at an old fashioned jail type zoo as a child and seeing the keeper give a gorilla a white mug of something to drink through the bars and was shocked to see a black hand reach out to take it!

The book details ape behavior at length related to emotions and empathy. At several points in the book De Waals expresses an opinion about what this tells us about the debate between religion and science mostly in Chapter 4. His arguments made me angry and I couldn’t disagree more.

He classifies Atheists in two ways, those that treat their atheism as a private matter, and those that are militant, as if they have come out of the closet making an analogy with the gay movement. The thesis he agrees with is that active atheism reflects trauma, the stricter one’s religious background, the more likely they will be militant atheists. I can’t disagree with this analysis except militant atheism is not necessarily motivated only by rejection of harsh religious indoctrination, it can also be motivated by a rejection of false belief systems that have really bad consequences and or the simple affirmation of truth independently of any trauma.

He expresses agreement with an opinion that being a militant atheist is like “sleeping furiously” and then asks the question: “What does atheism have to offer that’s worth fighting for?” He answers his own question by telling us that when he was young and brought up a Catholic, this religion did come with restrictions, contraception being one of them. Well I have news for you Frans, the Catholic Church still bans contraception, and it is worth fighting against that policy!

He fails to mention that contraception is the single greatest scientific advance empowering women by giving them control over their fertility. Atheists think this is an important issue and the world would be better off without religion because not only is there no evidence for it, in this case it interferes in the personal choice of women to use contraception, or to prevent disease by using condoms thus causing great harm. Militancy is appropriate in opposing religious policies in the face of the harm being done to humans and the misery caused. If you don’t think that fighting against such idiotic religious policies by atheists is worthy, then I really don’t know what to say.

He goes on to say that the Catholic Church accepts evolution. No it doesn’t! They claim to have removed a conflict between religion and science but this is false and only appearance. The Catholic Church’s version of evolution is actually Intelligent Design since the hand of God guides the process. Sorry, but science knows there is no God involved, only a natural process devoid of any divine intervention.

This is what a militant looks like. They kill people. They retaliate. They attack with bombs.

Atheists once again militantly point the finger at delusions that pervert science in order to justify idiotic belief systems and perpetuate harm done in the name of false belief. If you were teaching a Catholic student in a biology/evolution course at Emory University, would you fail them for persisting in the divine intervention theory of evolution, or would you sleep furiously and give a passing grade? Are apes moral and empathic because God guided things to be this way? Does truth matter to you?

Are you afraid of these academics, writers, philosophers, scientists?

He then revisits the paradigm of Steven Jay Gould’s Non-Overlapping Magisteria proposal where science and religion represent supposed separate circles of a Venn diagram that don’t intersect. Science should say nothing about religion and vice versa. Well, science can be used to test religious claims. In the recent past the Harvard Prayer Study lasting 10 years and was a good example of where science proved that intercessory prayer does not work, it has less than zero efficacy since the control group of atheists had lower mortality than the religious groups that had prayers being said for them! If anybody/anything is listening to prayer, they/ it don’t intervene or do anything to save anybody. Please name one thing that science has ever conceded to religion.

Perhaps in a "Battle" of ideas it would be helpful to understand the ideas. What are the "New Atheists" saying? Are they advocating violence in any way?

Another reason for atheist militancy is that religious people simply believe erroneous things about atheists. That is the reason for atheism ranking worse than pedophilia on the ten worst things list of the religious in the USA. If they really believe that, then there are huge negative consequences to atheists such as zero chance of getting hired by some employers, or getting a vote from religious electors. I’ve often thought of getting a t-shirt with “Worse than a Pedophile” printed on it and walking in to US churches on Sundays to promote discussion and also as a kind of “F-You”.

In another article de Waals quotes Al Sharpton and dignifies him with the title “Reverend” as saying that without a God there would be no morality. I was proud of Christopher Hitchens when he said on stage with Sharpton that “I’m not going to call you Reverend.” I’d go one further and give him the title “The Contemptible” because he says that no one can be moral without belief in God. What conceit to think that only Christians can be moral! Well I have news for you Al, monkeys and apes show empathy and a sense of fair-play, and I can guarantee they don’t have a soul and they don’t believe in your God!

Getting back to Chapter 4 of the Bonobo and the Atheist, de Waals then goes through a pathetic illustration of the resistance to new and correct ideas in the scientific community. Yes scientists are human, yes they have biases, like other humans they will be resistant to a change of ideas they are invested in. Outmoded scientific ideas have inertia, they are the same to a certain extent as religious people are invested in a different type of idea, those that are non-falsifiable. However, the difference between science and religion is that scientists will follow the evidence and change their ideas and theories in the face of proof. Religious people will persist in belief of false ideas despite the evidence. There are stupid lazy scientists, but to say that scientists are only slightly better than the religious accepting things on faith because they have uncritically accepted every underlying assumption in a theory is an abomination. Ultimately the truth triumphs because of the competition of ideas, in religion there is no competition of ideas.

The militant atheist forces the competition of ideas on the religious, many arguments are science based. Many criticisms point out inconsistencies, abhorrent ideas, horrible practices, institutionalized discrimination, logical inconsistencies, biblical approval of slavery, and lack of evidence. Why shouldn’t we hold the religious to the same intense fire of criticism as any other group of crazies, especially when religion affects things that might prolong my atheist life like stem cell research for one! Why should religion get a free pass?

Ultimately I agree that religious people are unlikely to change their belief systems overnight. The corrosion of religious belief by science however is a worthy ongoing successful process. Militant atheists challenging the complacency of the religious is a good thing, can be very entertaining, and adds to the corrosive effect of science.

In conclusion I would change the question from: What does atheism offer that is worth fighting for? To: What does atheism champion that is worth fighting for? Atheism champions truth and important principles worth fighting for. I hope anyone reading this is now convinced. Yes you are a fellow atheist Dr. de Waals, but do you champion anything?

Atheist Champions

Militants? Really?

Steven Cleghorn 12/3/14 Steven Cleghorn 12/3/14

Rebecca Watson at Skeptics in the Pub Hong Kong - Vampires & Angels

Appearances and illusions can be effective ways to manipulate people, but they’re still transparently ineffectual motivators for those of us who want to put in the right kind of effort to understand how things really work.

This essay is for people in my tribe, and for people who may want to better understand my tribe. It’s also for people who want to criticize my tribe. It’s especially for those people who are firmly standing on the fence.

On November 20th, 2014 David Young, the main host of Skeptics in the Pub events in Hong Kong, interviewed Rebecca Watson at Delaney’s Pub in Wan Chai. Rebecca Watson is the founder of the Skepchick Blog, and has been a long time member of the Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe Podcast (SGU). She was able to visit us on her way to New Zealand and Australia where she will be attending a number of events on her own, and as a member of SGU. I envy our friends Down Under.

I’m happy that David had the presence of mind to invite Rebecca to visit and
I’m grateful that Ms. Watson decided to stopover in Hong Kong to talk with us.

I was invited to make a video of the interview, and parts one through three are in this post. The color choices in the video are there to highlight a “Skeptic Noir” atmosphere - high contrast black and white juxtaposed with color - to imply that skeptics aren’t just a bunch of cynical debunkers lurking in the shadows of your hopes and dreams, ready to pop out behind you in an alley or parking lot, forcing you at intellectual gunpoint to give up your cherished beliefs, ideologies and worldview.

(Also to avoid several hours in Davinci Resolve color correcting video from three different cameras;-)

I’ve heard quite a few religious friends of mine, as well as dozens of true believers of all kinds of implausible phenomena say: “Steven, you’re like a vampire trying to suck the faith right out of me!”

I can imagine how hard it must feel to have a scientific-skeptic in your face throwing data, facts, background information, book titles, all kinds of obscure references from the Internet, and claims of scientific census at you like a Major League Baseball pitcher, pitching fast balls at your head, one after another. It must be exhausting, deflating, annoying and down right vexing. Details are deafening at times. And believe me, I’ve seen tempers flare - many times.

Those who are desperate to look smart will never be smart.

Now that I’m getting up there in age I’m mellowing a bit. I no longer engage in conventional conversations about Aliens or the Loch Ness Monster. I conserve my energy by ensuring that my discussions of religion, science, the humanities and culture are limited to my ability to find someone, somewhere, with a great deal of knowledge in a subject. Unfortunately this is a rare occurrence so I mostly find myself in the company of books, websites and podcasts that pique my intellectual curiosity and hopefully teach me something interesting and useful. When I do get lucky enough to have a leisurely discussion about things I’m interested in I simply pester my interlocutor with questions - hopefully intelligent ones. I try. Oh, and sometimes I lecture on and on enthusiastically with my drinking buddies. I’m a terrible bore sometimes.

There are still things, however, that I’m willing to passionately discuss with “the faithful”, the “true believers”, the “deniers” and the “conspiracy theorists”. These are subjects I feel that I have a responsibility to discuss: Climate Change; Evolution; Science, what it is and what it does; How the human mind works; “Ideas” and how they become popular to name a few. We make choices everyday that can have a profound impact on our lives and our loved one’s lives. Therefore, I believe it’s important to know when to think fast or slow.

I’ve been listening to The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe since their first podcast in May of 2005. The Novella brothers, Steven, Jay, and Bob, Evan Bernstein and Rebecca Watson are like family. I’ve listened to their voices every week for almost 10 years. What a run people - congratulations! When I finally got a chance to say hello to Rebecca at the event on November 20th, about all I could say was, “Hello family member”. I told David Young who was interviewing Rebecca, “I was channeling my thoughts through you both, almost word-for-word, for over an hour, and everyone in the audience thought that you two were doing the talking.” Of course, at this moment, I have no reason to believe in “channeling” or telepathy. I’m simply part-and-parcel of our culture - a culture informed by active, positive, scientific-skepticism. I listen to it, read about it and parrot it. I am still in search of an original thought. I have only form to play with.

Even though I read Rebecca’s blog, and am familiar with her views, I was still excited to hear her talk about her political sensibilities, and her stands on various issues. As I was videotaping the interview I kept thinking to myself, are these her opinions, my opinions or our communities opinions, or all of the above. I thought, I’ve said these kinds of things myself, many times, to many people over the years. Every word bounced around my head like an echo in St. Peter’s Basilica. (Where I envision myself preaching skepticism at the end of some great cultural paradigm shift of course.)

I was a “mystic” until 24 or so, not because of my insatiable reading in metaphysics, philosophy, religion, pop psychology, and other silly New Age stuff. I had a natural, youthful sense of mystery, and I liked stories, movies, theater and all kinds of cultural pursuits. I think this was a result of having traveled since I was a zygote more than anything else. My heroes in the 1970s, other than rock musicians, were Albert Camus, Frederick Niche, David Hume, Carl Sagan, any Greeks or Romans I could get my mind around, and Joseph Campbell. I loved “COSMOS” and “THE POWER OF MYTH” on PBS! And when I was working in my father’s wood shop, building furniture, we listened to National Public Radio.

Because of these interests and influences, I knew a little bit about the difference between myth and reality as rendered by the natural sciences and the humanities.

I couldn’t play the electric guitar, and my singing was just above average; I was sporty, but not a big time athlete, and it just happened that during the 70s and 80s girls also liked mystics. So I donned a mystical pose from time-to-time. I was a good story teller for sure and the mystical bit helped a lot with the ladies. Does anyone remember Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, A.K.A., OSHO? Those kinds of cults were full of attractive European girls back in the day. I admit it - that’s all I’m saying.

I still read a lot. I’ve had different eras where I read different things in different places. No doubt influenced all the way by random stuff I was exposed to. I loved libraries too, and I was the kind of student who would leave a class I was enrolled in and go audit some other class I hadn’t even thought would be interesting until a conversation or a book would impel me to look into it. By 1985 my reading began to focus on history, science (all domains), technology, politics and economics. Political philosophy was of particular interest. I also loved psychology. I became interested in business late in life. Having studied drama, and film in college I thought office buildings were just sculptures - I really had no idea what went on inside an office building. I had vague memories of ashtrays on desks from visiting my mother’s office. I would marvel at urban skylines, alleys and streets, and think of them as movie sets for me and mine. I loved pretending to be a beatnik, thirty years after their extinction, in Grant Street cafes in San Francisco, wandering the streets of the East Village in NYC, somewhere near St. Stephens Green in Dublin listening to a busker, watching Cricket in Holland Park in London, in tiny snack and beer bars in Tokyo, or in a cozy, dark cafes, or Greek restaurants in the University District of Seattle. I wrote more than a few rambling poems trying to "Howl".

Suckling your _______ I imbibe the sweat scents of new and obscure mysteries…

Silhouetted by solitary clouds, icy stars float in the zenith and the depths of the Universe
A lonely soldier searching for a worthy cause or a young man who contemplates death
I am all these things… BLA BLA BLA... OK, I'm blushing, the follies of youth.

I think skeptics are curious by nature. We love getting lost. We like finding out we’re wrong. At least I hope we do.

In the early 1990s I found Skeptic Magazine and was delighted to know that there were people out there like me. Back then there really didn’t seem to be many. I remember when Johnny Carson asked James Randy to help him expose Uri Geller on the Tonight’s Show. The Amazing Randy was brilliant at challenging all kinds of scammers. When his book Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions hit the City Lights Bookstore in San Francisco in 1982, I bought it along with a Gill Scott Heron LP, “1980”, and had a really good week reading Flim-Flam in cafes with a glass of read wine and singing along with Gill Scott in my Corporate Utilitarian Vehicle (pickup truck) - “Shut’Um Down…” I forgot to mention my interest in ESP when I was in junior high school. I read so many popular books about it. Perhaps that’s really what started me down the skeptic track.

The 1990s were marked by “the economy stupid”, the tech industry, “.coms” and bubbles, and I was in the thick of it. Trust me, I’ve got more than a few stories to tell about ’85 through 2005 when SGU first appeared on my computer. Dabbling in the tech-biz-game and trying to satisfy an insatiable appetite for learning, while laboring to keep my proverbial shyte together, made those years an exciting adventure. Basically, throughout it all, I just wanted to know how things really worked, myself included, and I figured the best way to do that was to roll up your mental sleeves and get busy making mistakes.

I knew my thought processes were terribly flawed and I wanted to improve them. In the last 15 years it seems we’ve learned more about these subjects than all the generations that came before. I get excited when I see “Thinking Fast and Slow” and “The Art of Thinking Clearly” in airport bookstores. Back in 1990s all you saw were books by people like Jack Welch - everyone was a want-to-be CEO of a fortune 500 company or a (pinky at the corner of my mouth) millionaire investor.

Rebecca Watson Interview at Skeptics in the Pub Hong Kong on Nov. 20, 2014 (PART ONE of 3) from The Muse Films Ltd. on Vimeo.

That’s a little bit about my background and what led me to skepticism. Next let me refer you to some resources that might help you get started if you want to rekindle your interest, or start looking into Skepticism. For more links related to these subjects please visit, Links We Love on Globe Hackers.

I’d like to refer you first to a definition of skepticism from The Skeptic’s Dictionary. Please take a moment to visit the hyperlink and read the whole article. Take your time. Come back to this blog-post and continue reading when you are ready. I really hope you’ll read the whole article.

“One who doubts the validity of what claims to be knowledge in some particular department of inquiry; one who maintains a doubting attitude with reference to some particular question or statement.” Michael Shermer

Now that you’ve read the article at The Skeptic’s Dictionary you should have a very good idea about what we mean when we call ourselves Skeptics.

One thing I want to emphasize now is that being a skeptic takes a lot of practice, it’s an attitude, a framework, a worldview, scaffolding for your brain, a discipline, a kind of brain plasticity, a way of life and a culture. It’s a mode of thinking that helps you ferret out what is as close to reality as we can know right now. It’s not cynical; it’s not merely debunking claims, and it’s meant to be a positive intellectual act. At least I think so.

Now I’d like to introduce to those of you who may be new to skepticism a few resources under the heading “Toolkit”. These are methods and tools one can use to begin a skeptical journey into the details of a subject of inquiry. None of these toolkits are comprehensive, they’re meant to be guidelines to get you started analyzing things so that you can discover if what is being said or claimed is likely to be as close to the truth as we can get at the moment: A consensus of opinion, of knowledge and understanding, or a scientific consensus.

Here’s a quick one: Skeptical Software Tools, Applying the power of the programmable web to the purposes of skepticism. Tim Farley is an incredibly active and hard working skeptic. Check out his websites.

What’s The Harm also has some great resources on it.

(Caution: None of this can be taken out of its social, or cultural context. It’s a messy subject, I know, but all of our thinking remains within this human context, and people are complex hyper-social animals living in complex socio-economic-cultural-political worlds.)

Arguments require judgement. It’s hard to analyze premises. You need a lot of background information. You may even need deep expertise that you can only acquire though years of hard work. Steven Novella is a neurosurgeon and one doesn’t become a neurosurgeon overnight. The Precautionary Principle, for example, should be put in the context of the many details within the subject at question and surrounding the actions proposed (check out, “The Precautionary Principle In Action - A Handbook”). You can easily find it with a Google search. I included a hyperlink to an episode of “Rationally Speaking” in my last blog-post that included a discussion of, “inference to the best explanation”, which I think sheds a lot of light on our approach to inference and absolutes. It’s complicated of course. Basically, we try to come as close to “truth” as we can, while examining our premises, logic and thinking. Over time, our inquiry, our investigation, and our quest for understanding continues to evolve as our tools, the quality of our data and of our data analysis improves. This continued focused inquiry for the sake of inquiry and for the sake of the most accurate understanding of things in our world that we can currently achieve, is a never ending process (although we may get stuck in complex theoretical wrangling in quantum physics, and come close to a complete understanding in certain domains like classical physics for example). As the resolution of a subject sharpens over time we will understand it more clearly. Skeptics are comfortable with knowing that we are only close to truth, and we are less likely, hopefully, to need to believe that we know the absolute truth about any given subject.

There are also various forms of “The Baloney Detection Kit” popularized by Car Sagan in his bestselling book, “The Demon-Haunted World - Science as a Candle in the Dark”. Rebecca referred to this book in her talk as one she would highly recommend to a newcomer to skepticism. The hyperlink above has a good article about this, please take a moment to read the complete article and then come back to this blog-post when you have time.

“The kit is brought out as a matter of course whenever new ideas are offered for consideration. If the new idea survives examination by the tools in our kit, we grant it warm, although tentative, acceptance. If you’re so inclined, if you don’t want to buy baloney even when it’s reassuring to do so, there are precautions that can be taken; there’s a tried-and-true, consumer-tested method.” Carl Sagan

And of course, the method is science.

I hope you take your time with this post and go through all the hyperlinks. The resources are important and will help you in your journey to become an active scientific-skeptic and critical thinker. (If that’s what you so desire.) Again this kind of “kit” is one of many you will find from brilliant skeptics from around the world. As the skeptic community grows, new experts and inspired creators from across domains of inquiry are constantly adding their insights and knowledge to these sets of tools. Even Steven Novella will readily admit that it’s taken him years to acquire these tools and be able to use them effectively.

It takes energy and willpower to exercise effective skepticism and critical thinking. Certain principles and processes must be practiced and internalized to the point where it becomes almost second nature. I say almost because it’s really hard to monitor your thoughts all day long to ensure you are always thinking clearly. All of us are vulnerable to mistakes in reasoning. There is a very large scientific literature out there about these subjects. If you are one of the few who chooses to read these kinds of books you will find the subjects will constantly yield new and challenging information - simply doing so is a great exercise for your brain and spirit. We can use the analogy of muscle memory in sports, the more you train, the more you practice and use a skill, the more reflexive it will become. Your muscle has memory, just like your brain and your brain is embodied. Your brain and body are “plastic” and can be transformed. It’s fantastic! I’m constantly amazed! Your nervous system is more than the gray matter in your head.

And just another quick tip. If you want to learn another language, move your mouth a lot! Get your mouth and tongue on the language. What you do with your body will stick in your mind.

Rebecca Watson Interview at Skeptics in the Pub, Hong Kong, Nov. 20, 2014 (PART TWO of 3) from The Muse Films Ltd. on Vimeo.

As skeptics we’re concerned with science and all of its methods, processes and tools: Logic, reason, and cognition; all grounded in the acceptance that we are all flawed thinkers prone to biases and likely to make errors in logic. The scientific method is dedicated to exposing these errors. We are also humble enough to know that we don’t have all the background information needed in every subject to carry on a highly informed discourse. In some cases our tools may be inadequate and in other cases our data may be flawed or our method of acquiring date skewed, or we may not have enough data. These facts are why we are so committed to skepticism, science and critical thinking. These facts are what keep us curious and constantly learning.

You’ll find lots of people with websites focused on another area close to our hearts: Critical Thinking. I’m not going to attempt to reproduce another introduction to the subject in this blog-post. If you want to read what might be the definitive guide to critical thinking, I’ve heard through the grapevine that Steven Novella and Massimo Pigliucci will be collaborating on a book on the subject that may be out in 2016. I’m going to preorder it now just to keep the gentlemen motivated. Believe me, we want to see this book on the bookshelves and in the hands of teenagers.

For now I’ll refer you to a couple of places that can give you a good primer on the subject. Here’s one that I like: “Critical Thinker Academy” with Kevin deLaplante. He has a very nice collection of videos on YouTube that give good introductions to areas of critical thinking. He has premium content on his website, and a nice podcast you can find on iTunes that will definitely get you started. If you haven’t thought about critical thinking in a while, it never hurts to go back and get another good introduction. You can take all of his courses online for $40 bucks U.S.D.

Another good introductory resource is from Hong Kong University: The Critical Thinking Web. I live in H.K. so I like to tell my Chinese friends about this website. I love this website, it’s got loads of good stuff on it. His resources tab has more than enough to help exponentially increase your knowledge of the subject so I won’t recommend anything else at this time. I’ll just say that there is a vast literature on the subject, a subject that has been too long ignored in public and private middle school curricula. I think all children should be exposed to critical thinking as an area study by middle school. We need interesting and engaging teachers devoted to this subject.

Oh, and one more, Great Courses also has a lot of good content to can get you started. Please be on the lookout for discount offers for super cool Great Courses on Rationally Speaking’s webpage or The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe’s webpage. I’ve also found that many skeptic websites and podcasts have been great places to get good book recommendations.

Please check the hyperlinks and continue when you’re ready.

Rebecca Watson Interview Nov. 20, 2014 at Skeptics in the Pub Hong Kong (PART THREE of 3) from The Muse Films Ltd. on Vimeo.

Forgive me, now it’s time for me to explain why I think this stuff is so important. It’s a daunting task for me, because it’s such an important part of my everyday thought processes; it’s a huge subject of interest for me, it’s imbedded in my worldview. I believe these subjects are of absolute importance to the future of humanity, to our quality of life, to the survival of our species, not to mention other species of life effected by human behavior. Without a wisdom centered understanding of science, engineering, mathematics, the humanities, skepticism, critical thinking, and our natural ecosystem (our ecosystem being our only life support system that we know of in the Universe) our future will be in dire jeopardy. We really don’t want to experience the results of our unenlightened, ill-informed, and destructive activities. War is indeed hell, but knowing with certainty, that within a few years or decades our species will be extinct would be even more horrific. It’s possible friends. We all have threats to deal with, but extinction is the coup-de-gras - the ultimate tragedy. Especially when we potentially have so much to look forward to.

I want to look at children’s hopeful faces and believe they will have a chance to experience and do wonderful things.

I’m so passionate about skepticism, critical thinking and having a very good understanding of science, that I will never stop evangelizing about it. And I am proud to know that through these skills I can own my worldview. I don’t have to take it only on faith. Faith is important, but we have even more stable reasons to believe and take action than blind faith or fashion.

I think it’s vital to know what’s closest to factual, real, and truthful. We are faced with a changing world in which technology, and science will present us with totally unpredictable challenges that, if handled poorly, could result in disaster. We’re living in a world that could know more abundance, peace and prosperity than we could ever imagine, and yet flawed thinking could hold us back leading to disastrous consequences.

Some people in the skeptic community say they want to keep social-political, economic and cultural areas way off to one side, and focus on issues of science that can be more easily presented to a broad audience. Me thinks they fear ideology. Let’s go back and familiarize ourselves with the word. Wikipedia defines it as: a set of conscious and/or unconscious ideas which constitute one’s goals, expectations, and actions.

I can understand their point of view, but it worries me a little, because everything in the human world exists in a social, economic, political, historic and cultural context. There is no way around it. If we’re unable to discern how best to develop artificial intelligence, how to deal with the risks inherent in pharmaceutical medicine, how to handle disruptive technologies, issues of inequality of access to education and life transforming technologies, then we risk experiencing terrible imbalances that could eventually impede our progress and make us fragile to disasters that could put humanity back in the Stone Age. And it will be our fault if we don’t get it right. Odds are it won’t be a particular deity or an asteroid that does us in, it will be our naive credulity that allows our human adventure to crash and burn.

I don’t think any of us really want to see this happen. This is why it’s so important that we get it as right as we can with each and every effort. Things are moving fast. These times of ours are amazing, and exciting, but far from where we could aspire to be. Even if we enjoy the chaos, each of us understands that if we don’t respect our limits, and try to work within them, we will most likely not have a very healthy, happy, peaceful and secure life.

How much education and the quality of education people need is an open question much debated, but we know that it’s important for a long list of reasons. It’s a tragedy to waste human potential. Helping people discover the value of science, skepticism and critical thinking is one of the best ways to mitigate risks that plague humanity.

With these skills and tools we can challenge people to do better and discover more. I believe this process will lead to an even better world. I am not a Utopian, I’m more Dystopian than I want to admit, but I see the benefits of this worldview everywhere, all the time. And within the global community of skeptics, science lovers, scientists, philosophers, critical thinkers and intellectual seekers I find great hope that we can achieve marvelous things. I see the human spirit at its best. I see a way forward.

I sometimes wonder why I care about the future. Perhaps we’re just built this way, maybe it’s in our nature and the nature of the way we nurture ourselves, and our shared experiences that ultimately make us care. Humans are not only smart apes, we’re caring apes. One thing for sure is that enlightened skeptics appreciate their worldview as much as anyone can appreciate anything. We are truly thankful for the giants who came before us and who live among us. They allow us to wake up everyday to new discoveries. They’re hard working optimists who are never defeated by failure. They’re happy to find a million dead ends, if it means that one day they will emerge into the light of an unexpected discovery. Surprises, we love surprises, no matter how hard we try to control things and events.

If skeptics have fears, then they are well founded. We are a diverse community from many backgrounds with a spectrum of ideological baggage in our minds. We are far from perfect, in fact, I’ve never met a mature skeptic who was not humbled in the light of her knowledge of just how flawed a creature she is. It’s the tools and skills we have that allow us to be humbled by nature itself everyday. The awe and wonder that our famous friends talk about belongs to us too. We get it, we feel it as profoundly as religious people feel their love of God - perhaps even more so. And, we are just as committed to the love of reason, nature and our unique ability to perceive and learn about it’s functions, as to cherish it so sincerely, that I can’t but believe that as more of us get turned on by it, there will be a growing number of us on earth to share in its inspiration.

We are lovers of living and champions of life, we frolic in our consciousness and love humankind. We want things to get better for people.

When I was listening to the interview at the Skeptics in the Pub event I couldn’t help but chuckle. These people talk like me, think like me, love the same stuff, more or less, and yet we’re all unique individuals from all over the world. It feels good to be part of a culture, a community, and to know your community has your back. I don’t need to go to church, I know what’s sacred, even though so much still remains a mystery: My evolved nature is built to learn, and every member who contributes to society and to the team help me to acquire the tools to know more.

Reason, a scientific outlook, a skeptical approach and the application of critical thinking can help us better understand what’s going on in our society, it can help us determine what to value and fight for.

Dr. Tyson talked about the perceived threat the Soviet space program represented in the 1950s and 60s. This perceived threat could not have existed in an ideological vacuum. The threat provided the United States with the motivation to commit resources to the Space Race, a competition that the U.S. ultimately won - for a while. Now we hitch rides into space on Russian rockets.

Can there be a balance of efficiencies between government, academia, non governmental organizations and the private sector, that in combination, cooperation and healthy competition, and through combined creative force produce more of the kind of value we developed while jousting with the Soviets back in the 60s? Is it wise to elect people who believe that their job in government is to dismantle all public institutions leaving only corporate quarterly profit targets to determine our next move?

“I govern to make my job redundant” “If you need a doctor run down the street and ask the doctor down the block to put in that stint. Better yet, learn how to do it yourself.”

In the battle of ideas institutions matter. An enlightened constituency will find, promote and support better leaders. Better leaders will help people become better people. What economist call human capital, social capital, intellectual capital really matters. We have to trust that investing in these entities will produce value and growth. Growth isn’t always about producing and consuming things, it can entail producing and consuming ideas, internalizing values, learning new skills, participating in great adventures, shared feelings and experiences in community with others.

Do we do research simply to discover or only to produce a product for a derived market that will provide a profit next quarter? Shall we argue to discover knowing we can’t injure ourselves, or shall we argue to destroy our opponent potentially leaving ourselves in the dark with no apposing force to inspire us and make us stronger?

I don’t mind if Sam Harris states his opinions about religious extremist emphatically, as long as I know what he means, as long as he makes an effort to be perfectly clear. As long as he clearly states what he means by “X” and “Y”. I may be in nuanced disagreement with elements of his position, but I can still learn something from it, and in being clear and making a stand I can learn to refine my position; I can learn where I must draw and toe the line.

Tools that produce rigorous clarity of thought help me know what to fight for. This knowledge allows me to be totally responsible for who I am at the moment and gives my life meaning. When one of ours, a respected producer of skeptical content breaks the law we don’t have to apologize for him, or make excuses, and our hearts needn’t break just because we liked his contribution to our cause. We must learn something from his mistakes, because we are all only human and we make mistakes too. We can forgive when we see true contrition and reform. Trust can be resurrected in certain circumstances. I think I understand what Rebecca meant. “It’s a human issue.” One may rationalize one’s bad actions, but one probably won’t get away with it. Not if we stand up and call them out. Take it like a human!

I stand against misogyny, racism, ignorance, violence, hatred, inequality and destruction. However, we stumble upon who we are through conflict and cooperation, through opposition and collaboration, through knowledge and understanding. Good ethics are imbedded in our society and culture - we simply have to know when to conform and when to resist.

Politics, even in the skeptical community is unavoidable, it haunts us like a desire we yearn to fulfill but cannot grasp, or a distasteful duty that can not be shirked.

Should we build another space telescope? Should we poor resources into a manned mission to mars or a research platform on the moon? Do we need a particle accelerator in Arizona, or an impenetrable wall around Texas? (We can see The Great Wall of China from space. Who got there first?) Would cities without cars help us mitigate the potentially terrible future effects of climate change? Are we skeptical about the value of tar sands and fracking, or is cheap energy too important a factor in maintaining our position in the world? Does the possession of fossil fuel resources define our independence and our culture, or are there other things that matter more now? Tom Cruise might be a good actor in some rolls but he’s a Scieftologist: Why should that matter? Does war really give life meaning?

Forgive me, am I a “dick” because I ask these questions? Do these kinds of questions make you uncomfortable? Is my hemlock to be the limbo of silence and disempowerment?

Some people care if people believe in strange things and seek to find the answers. Michael Shermer’s “Why People Believe Weird Things” is but one treatment of the theme.

Those of us who contribute the most may have flawed characters. Some of us are simply better people than others. It’s a judgement call. Learning how to refine one’s judgement is important.

Life is a kind of battle. Vampires and Angels need each other it seems. Sometimes one can transform into the other. It’s important we know this.

We can’t separate what we’re doing from our cultural context. We live in community with others. It’s important to continue to invite those who stand firmly on the fence to join us in the garden of reason. Come in, sit here, and find your place. Come here and learn what creation is. These things surrounding you here are your relatives, each living thing holds more in common with you than you think. And each thing we’ve created is part of our legacy. The path to understanding this relationship is provided by science, reason and good old healthy skepticism. Through these things you can be made whole, you can learn about yourself and learn to better understand others. It’s a noble thing to be close enough to truth to catch its sent. Come here and refresh yourself. Come here and embolden your spirit. And yes, dance, sing, practice mindfulness and marvel in the profound artfulness of people and the awesome beauty and power of nature.

The old familiar books and slogans may provide comfort, and in those torn yellowed pages one may find a shelter within which all is known - for it is written - but what of those rhythms and rhymes that have yet to be written? Where is our sense of romance and adventure? Should the rules of the road never change, even when our survival depends on taking calculated risks and changing direction?

Each individual that I have followed and loved in our movement I’ve found to be passionate and full of vitality. There was nothing cold or uncaring in their quest to know their world. They were loving warriors, and loving warriors are the only kind that can win.

Our epoch, the Anthropocene began thousands of years ago. We share a proud intellectual history since the age of stories turned into the age of records and then into the age of action. The Renaissance and The Enlightenment held tenderly The Age of Wonder and Science which gave way to our Industrial Revolution, booms and busts, fits and starts right up through the Information Age. It seems that through all the terrible times things have only gotten a bit better. What will our future be like. Do we have a hand in shaping it, or are we just transient players determined to walk a straight line from birth to death? What gives our lives meaning? We know; we know. Stochastic meandering and curiosity fuels the burning bush.

These things of the mind that we talk of are not isolated, but connected things. And through the exercise of reason our hearts grow larger, more inclusive and stronger. We know what we love. Our community has many voices. We are indeed fortunate. We are indeed appreciative. We embrace life and our world like no other community. It’s time to be inspirational and try to reach the other side. This I believe.

We are one big invitation to an amazing and unimaginable future.

***I’m not an insider. I’m someone who loves the general principles of what’s been discussed above. Organizations will have good times and bad. People will come and go. We’ll know disappointment and rancor, but the fundamental principles of critical thinking, science and skepticism can still help us transcend our human foibles, and bad habits. The only reason any of us should have to be proud is if we are honestly in this to serve others with respect and dignity. We are a small and growing community and we should aspire to take the high ground. Honesty, transparency and consideration for people’s feelings should be some of our most important priorities. We have to try to be good examples and represent our culture as well as we can. For example, I can’t stand born again Christians who make no effort at all to be Christlike (in the Jefferson Bible sense). What moral authority can they claim if they are not a living example of their stated values. If our culture is going to grow, and I’m sure we think it would be a good thing if it did, we’re going to have to embody our most important values and act accordingly. I’ll try my best and I hope you will to.

Steven Cleghorn 11/17/14 Steven Cleghorn 11/17/14

SKEPTICALITY PODCAST PANEL Denying Science and Climate Change.

If you engage with someone who's holding a pseudo-scientific view or non-scientific view you can run into all kinds of issues of cognitive bias, fallacious logic, and other glitches of thought that can severely obscure the facts and lead to bad personal and policy choices.

Globe Hackers would like to recommend the following podcast. Please have a listen - it's time well spent.

"Denying Evolution and Climate Science": With Matt Lowry, David DiSalvo, Dr. Steven Novella, and Barbara Drescher.

You will find detailed show notes at Skepticality.

We need to know how to discuss this topic with people who are not convinced that human activity has any major effect on our climate, other species, and the ecology of the Earth. It's of vital importance, or dare I say our future depends on all of us having a very good understanding of these issues.

Steven Cleghorn 11/14/14 Steven Cleghorn 11/14/14

The Netherworld Oligarchy – Who is Your Government Really Serving?

Our corrupted institutions and the institutionalized alike have brought us to this existence, and to accept this existence, ever on the precipice of our own demise. And yet, in control of the ever-pervasive media, they steer the dynamic of what people talk about, and how they think, to their profit and advantage.

We're very pleased and honored to have a new contributor at the Globe Hackers blog, Ethan Indigo Smith. You can find his Bio here on our Cast & Crew page. Ethan is a prolific writer with a unique voice and a flair for ferreting out aspects of our culture that need some clarity of thought and some hard work.

I'm taking the liberty to include some video from YouTube regarding Oligarchical Collectivism to give you some background. The series is scary really. It's so contemporary. <Parts 1-8 >

Ignorance is Strength! Freedom is Slavery! War is Peace!

You can find a transcript of the book within a book at Newspeak Dictionary.

If you're not already a George Orwell fan I hope this inspires you to take a look at his illustrious body of work If ever we were living in Orwellian times it's now. We're bombarded with NEW SPEAK everyday from every screen in our possession. As Captain Benjamin L. Willard said in the iconic Francis Ford Coppola film, "Apocalypse Now" : "The shit piles up so fast in Vietnam you'd need wings to keep above it."

Steven Cleghorn November, 14 2014

CAPTAIN Willard with that dazed "WTF" look on his face.

First published at Wake Up World on 31st October 2014.

The Netherworld Oligarchy – Who is Your Government Really Serving?

By Ethan Indigo Smith

Before serving your country, first learn who your government is serving.

The New World Order is exactly that – it is the same old ‘order’ in the new world. The new world is still contracted to the same old formulation of regimentation, which is achieved by the same violent means of enforced order and patriarchal authority, the same old formulation of the status quo, and the same old oligarchy, instituted in the new petrolithic and nuclear age by the progressive merging of commerce and state.

The only difference now is that there are “new and improved” modes and destructive war, resource and media technologies being used to enforce the rule of the oligarchy. There are new tools and new names. The ‘order’ is packaged in a new sleek design, with new bells and whistles, but at its core, it is the same war-minded pyramid system, controlled by those the system benefits the most. Those “authorities” at the top of the pyramid claim to act for the betterment of mankind, and yet they always seem to get the better of mankind.

Historically speaking, the forced imposition of beneficial authority is as it always was. It is text book oligarchical collectivism; the same formulation of authority used by Empires and Emperors for millennia before us, playing out in a rapidly degrading economic, political and environmental setting, It bears little difference to those societies that have risen and duly fallen before us.

The ‘New World’ Environment

Welcome to the ‘new world’. And with that, welcome to your ‘new world’ environment, one that is poisoned and depleted by the petrolithic and nuclear industries of the oligarchy. And not just poisoned but radiated, measurably changing the quality of our environment for countless generations yet to come, as radiation and chemical pollution levels increase worldwide.

When it comes to humanity’s sustainability, the ‘new world’ is a veritable netherworld. The conditions, confines and consequences of petrolithic era and nuclear age are now layered into every strata of the Earth, its system and its inhabitants. Governed by power/profit-seeking oligarchy, we seem destined for a world of polluted and bereft expanse after expanse, land scoured and mined, water poisoned and air thick with institutional excrement – the scars of over consumption – the consequence of an irrational intent to build ever-growing commercial systems without regard for future ramifications, and of institutional outcomes being prioritised over the rights and needs of living breathing individuals and the planet we call home. And while the netherworld oligarchies profit from environmental exploitation, increased institutionalization and commercial monopolization, a culture of unquestioning acceptance is perpetuated in the name of patriotism by concealing critical information and delivering mis-information via the “news” media they own and regulate.

Thus, amid this theater of democracy, it has become the “norm” in the petrolithic era and nuclear age for large scale commercial enterprises to be initiated without due consideration of consequences. Corrupted commercial regulatory bodies have become veils to the oligarchy, rubber stamping their approval for profitable and dangerous practices in industries as broad as food & agriculture, pharmaceutical, energy, media and mining – as long as they help to achieve their ends. This is clearly evidenced by the rotating cast of oligarchs who regularly and strategically interchange between roles as commercial decision-makers and government regulators (see images).

These conditions have facilitated what is undoubtedly the biggest, most deceptive ‘doublethink’ dynamic there might ever have been — that of global warming. While governments continue to push the manifesto of Agenda 21, the public debate on global warming is, in and of itself, ridiculous. There is no denying humanity needs to change its destructive ways, but that extends far beyond environmental destruction to our collective intellectual decay. For as long as we allow our thoughts and conversation to be steered by the fictions of institutional news/media, we can only be digging our way deeper into the netherworld of the oligarchy.

In a community that is led by the wealthy for the wealthy, this continuation of the status quo comes at the direct cost of individuals and their basic rights to freedom, peace, and unimpeded access to the planet’s natural resources – all of which are treated as commodities. We are led to believe our personal freedoms and livelihood depend on adhering to the status quo, without which the rights and richness of our natural world cannot be accessed.

But that is part of the illusion that keeps us playing ball. We know we are heading down a dangerous path, and there is no new planet to move on to, no new island to start fresh on once we learn just how dangerous. So in reality, our livelihood, wellbeing and indeed our future existence depends on stopping the status quo and choosing a new path – fast.

The ‘New World’ Hierarchy

Institutions are made up of individuals, but they do not act as individuals nor on behalf of individuals. Rather they act as portions of the institution, for the purpose of the institution, in the direction determined by institutional heads, no matter the personal or collective expense (after all, we’re all replaceable, right?)

Institutionalized individuals are capable of switching their institutional jargon and actions on and off, as if machines. When speaking to a reporter, one is sometimes off and other times on the record, depending on whether they are telling the truth or “The Truth ®“. When speaking to different groups, the institutionalized individual is capable of spinning different tunes, and at times, different truths – all in the name of progressing the institution.

In our heavily formalized society, we have been led to forget that institutions are empowered by people, and dependent on the cooperation of individuals. Through commercial, government and media trickery, institutions have instilled a collectivist culture that simultaneously steers individuals to execute the institutional agenda while steering them away from critically understanding and assessing it — or doing anything to change it.

Why do institutions exist if not for people? The idea of working collectively is to mutually benefit the people, whose combined potential should exceed the capability of the lone individual. If institutions today were half as dedicated to the betterment of mankind, as most of them claim to be, there would be more acts of kindness and less need for activism.

Isn't it time we reclaim our institutions and our natural place in the hierarchy?

Steven Cleghorn 11/11/14 Steven Cleghorn 11/11/14

"Interstellar" - An Emphasis on Science or Mysticism?

Since the opening of the new film, "INTERSTELLAR", we have a flurry of events, news features, products and promotions implying that there is some serious cutting edge science in the story and in the film making. They seem to have, at the very least, hired a scientist, a real scientist, to consult the motion graphics team on the physics of blackholes among other things.

The science angle may indeed help create some buzz. Science lovers do seem to be trending a teeny weeny bit these days: Thank you Supernatural Sugar-Being. But I think the majority of film goers will be of a more faithful kind. Hence the need of a megadose of mysticism riddled throughout the story.

Matthew McConaughey, now a uber-movie-star-mensch (a well deserved status in my opinion) and superhero of the film starts out, as in his TV series "True Detectives" a skeptic, naturalist and winds up a mystic believer in invisible things that aren't really supernatural, don't you know, because somehow his personal mystical experience trumps everything he knows. That's the big statement of faith we seem to get from his recent characters: The God is Me realization, and the, I know it's true because I've experienced it - full stop. He's a smart actor and if he's making his ontological argument through his choice of roles, more power to him.

It seems filmmakers can't create a science fiction movie without injecting it with a large dose of mysticism. Hat's off to the faithful.

I know, it's just a movie, 3 hours long at that, and you may or may not find it enjoyable. I can say one thing however, "2001 - A Space Odyssey" it's not. Why does everyone who makes a space film have to try to equate it with Stanley Kubrick's iconic classic? Perhaps that's the only really great space movie?

Don't be fooled into thinking that watching a movie is going to teach you anything about physics. Spend your time learning the math instead.

As an old adman I get the marketing gimmicks, but it makes me shutter to think that our born again brothers and sisters are going to exit this film thinking that Einstein was a born again Christian at heart just because the physics tell us something vague about, wait for it, fifth dimensional beings who use binary code in dust or books falling off bookshelves to communicate with us.

I can't do the math so I don't know how far fetched a theory like String Theory (but one example) is. But I can imagine that this film won't be shown in a parallel universe any-relative-time soon.

If you are interested in how modern quantum physics may need proponents to exercise more faith than a religious fanatics, please spend some time well and listen to the following Rationally Speaking Podcast.

RS116 - Jim Baggott and Massimo on Farewell to Reality

"The Science of Interstellar" by Kip Thorne

I haven't read the book yet, if anyone has let me know what you think.

And don't forget to click on and review the hyperlinks in this post.

Steven Cleghorn 11/10/14 Steven Cleghorn 11/10/14

Silenced by political ignorance and apathy.

Being a member of an esteemed audience allows us to find comfort in the bosom of our group as we believe we can’t survive if shunned.

Our unique genius has liberated us from having to hunt and gather. We are now free to pursue other things. The pursuit-of-other-things is both a blessing and a curse, and is part and parcel of who we are.

Recent report on Fareed Zakaria's GPS on CNN.

I remember when I first did business in Shanghai in 1997, I took all my assumptions there, my dreams, my fantasies, and a focused purpose, or so I thought.

How might we describe what kind of country China is? Especially those of us who have been there. On any given day the answer would change, like a Myers Briggs test. Each of us has our own description based on our unique perspectives, values, desires, biases, and experiences. We may find that we have much in common concerning our understanding of a dynamic and powerful nation, its people and its environment, but, at best, our most profound reckoning will only amount to a transient image, a snapshot that will have layers folded upon it and modified in many ways over time. Unless we have had a long-term relationship with a country and its people we can hardly say we know that much about it. And if we don’t have much invested in the place, no obligations, no roots, then our connection, however profoundly felt, will nevertheless be superficial.

But let’s open the question even further and ask why do we bother to explore anything? How closely can we even examine ourself? Before our experiences, before there are data, facts and lines of evidence to analyze there are stubborn assumptions, like dense jungles of thistles impossible to hack through without the right tools.

There is a subset of people in any population who are actually concerned about how things really are, they inquire vigorously with minds wide open knowing they will often stumble; they try to imagine how things ought to be in their world, and millions of people are listening them, they’re actually paying attention, but still, even though they’re listening, they may never be inspired to act upon things that truly impact their lives and their communities.

Stuck in the mire of our habits and distractions we have forgotten how to act. Why is that? Are we really so comfortable? Is this “Thing of Ours” really the best of all possible worlds? For the time being at least, is this “Thing of Ours” really even tolerable? We tolerate what we're used to. Terror often comes with wisps of sweet dreams, making us calm and acquiescent until circumstances start tearing us apart.

What a strange balance “Us” and “Them” strikes. These circles dividing us, the lines in the sand, the borders, the ideologies, the religious sects, the political factions; these three-dimensional culture spheres defined by values of various importance arrayed in comparable significance, in the complex dimensions of human culture and society; constantly intersecting each other, passing through each other, borrowing from each other, sharing, stealing, parsing, absorbing, rejecting, permeating and destroying each other.

(Relativism, Multiculturalism, Our Differences - to hell with that - it’s not that simple.)

Our parents, no matter where they came from, were no better at predicting the future than we are. If they were thoughtful, curious, well read and well fed; and if they were fortunate enough to find themselves members of a kind and considerate community allowing for clear intentions to naturally sprout from immediate challenges; and if they were motivated by familial love; and if they were healthy, happy and concerned about the future welfare of their children; and if they were full of ideas, creating opportunities, and confident in their ability to succeed — indeed, full of possibilities, informed by a profound understanding of history; and, if their understanding, having been strengthened even more by tradition, and recent experience, and fortified by suffering, failure and sacrifice; and having had this great advantage, and having worked hard as hell, doing their very best, day-by-day, to give their children the greatest opportunities they were able to give them; and tragically, suddenly, as is natural, had their lives taken from them, or even having had surrendered their lives willingly, because of any manner of circumstances; self-sacrifice; betrayal; horror; happenstance — an interruption so rude and base (as we all know death is the most sudden of all things, although suffering and anticipation focuses and intensifies to an acute state before it dissipates) and even if they died feeling resolved in a peaceful memory — having found their death-bed to be a nest of hope for the next generation — a generation of promise and passion: A generation, yet again, engaged in crossing rivers, crossing oceans, climbing mountains — of overcoming immense barriers, of enduring prejudice and hatred, of wandering in deserts, of enduring wars, of starvation, of suffering, of genocide, or even of triumph, glory, and salvation — these simple descendants of generations of myth-makers now turned market-makers swimming in an ocean of creative destruction would still remain simply human. And we might remain, forever and ever, simply out of control.

The proud descendants of generations of people who ventured to the places they had the will to go, or where compelled to go, or had to go, and who did the best they could in their adopted regions, despite the conditions. Those modest people, far from being crusaders, not possessing the cultural audacity to assume they knew better, who only had to work for a better future, are now eclipsed by a generation of shirkers, intellectual flat liners who squander immense advantages like gamblers addicted to the rush of the fall, and after impact can only wonder how this insane tragedy could have happened — and whose sense of wonder, at that fateful moment, lasts but a picosecond.

Generation after generation, the nature of our suffering remains the same, a dull panicked pain caused by always being too late to meet the challenge — and the grief imposed by having lost our purity along with our excuses. We should know better than to let ourselves be so dulled down. Isn't that so? Is purity defined by lack of wits? With everything we have now, shouldn't our shame and suffering take on some special immediate significance that would transcend all that came before and liberate us into something new, something different from what we already know? Even if we think our lives are truly novel and unique, why can't we summon the strength to hope for something more in common with real liberation? Couldn't we at least revisit our definitions of freedom, license, liberty, democracy, and even humanity within the unique context we have now. Couldn't we embrace, once and for all, complexity, randomness, and change? Isn't self-deception and self-satisfaction nothing less than pure evil? And couldn’t we recognize that no one individual is ever truly in charge, and that from nothing something may come, and that not to build on what we have is truly sinful?

Is this well-worn path through the jungle leading somewhere better? Of course the path has its utility and meaning, but what lies in the woods away from our usual destination? Isn't it true that humans are explorers? We go out and find out: experience, test, improvise, experiment, invent, imagine, create, fail and find, adopt and abandon, persist and give up, chase and flee, while building an unconscious web of perception along the way; and then, through some amazing intermediary processes this web-of-perception turns into a model of reality. Then via chemical, kinetic, light, heat, thermal, and intrinsic energy combined with mysterious willpower, seemingly instantaneously, the miracle of conscious thought begins to create a narrative of what we experience, and as this reality evolves and changes we create from the fruit or failure of our endeavors the things that define us. Wisdom is the result of our adventures, follies and failures. Wisdom comes with the attention paid to important aspects of our existence. Wisdom is the deep understanding of our vulnerabilities and our strengths, our successes and our failures.

We don't live in small isolated bands anymore, we live in a global economy of consumers. And our current mandate is to consume more and more until we consume everything. Let's not be fooled by words like “green”, “natural”, “organic”, and “sustainable”. As our population grows the current global business paradigm stands for unchecked growth in consumption; and we all must know, at least intuitively, where that eventually leads.

In many ways we are different from our ancient ancestors, and yet, there are aspects of human nature that never seem to change. Some aspects of our nature, it seems, are too complex a puzzle for evolution to act upon. Or perhaps there simply isn’t enough time for a brilliant species to come into harmony with its genius; perhaps wise species are all destined to disappear in a flash — wiped out in the prime of their youth by reckless invention and spurious desires. We seem to be in a hurry to taste oblivion because we just can’t endure the immense weight of being conscious of our own being. We shed crocodile tears when thinking of our fate while remaining oblivious completely to the harmony and beauty of our crocodile minds. And indeed which creature has been here longer? (Two hundred million years for the crocodile vs. two hundred thousand years for modern humans — will we be able to surpass that record?)

We are not history, we are not the future, nor are we merely dreamers and hopeful actors. What we remember we should forget, and what we have forgotten is how to remember all the things that make us what we are. We cannot rely on future trends or technologies to save us because we are not yet wise enough to comprehend their profound effects. What we need to rely on is the true importance of prime values. We must put the right value on every aspect of who we are and on everything we depend on. We must learn to value the network itself and all the interdependencies that make every system work.

Merely fighting, slaving and dying for a changing set of values will not set us free, nor will we be set free by fighting, slaving and dying to conserve a set of values. To understand the complex interdependencies, the unintended consequences, the random fluctuations, the stumbling forward and falling back requires great humility and patients. To map the damage, to truly appreciate the collateral damage caused by our actions marks only the beginning of the quest to comprehend the importance of true value. The mental anguish required to do this is necessary to establish a balanced interpretation of reality, and the core values inherent in it and emerging from it that will most help our species improve its quality of life and give us the wisdom to preserve and care for our environment. We need only a slight bit more courage.

Those of us lucky enough have an internet connection, to have that amazing encyclopedia at our fingertips, find ourselves mesmerized by TED TALKS; presentations that belie complex things that we can never hope to consolidate into a well conceived and ideal culture. The current trend, “Public Meeting Lite”, requiring fewer calories and less energy to comprehend is only diverting us from even more empty distractions. Our souls are on a crash diet imposed by the invisible hand. We have become accustomed to nice little sketches that wrap our minds in insulation preventing us from embracing the challenges of true argument and debate. Counterfeit truths are the only thing on the menu that we copyright and trade on the market of the spectacle in a hall of mirrors. (We would rob our own tombs if we thought it would raise the price of our bones.) And this entertainment, remember, is reserved for those of us who can afford the price of the platform. The audience is in a silo of small-change, clapping in quicksand — shallow knowledge swallows us whole producing a dark silence, followed by a sharp ringing in our heads (as opposed to a light at the end of a tunnel) followed again by complete silence, and the humiliation of having a faint feeling that you're still confused and have nothing to give — and the utter helplessness caused by the bondage of inaction.

Perhaps, those who compose such narratives only hope to perfect the dynamics of their ideals. (Values and ideals reveal their true beauty when mutating, as new traits flower solving problems, or creating unpredictable new pathways, or producing better qualities.) The story tellers perform before captivated fans, willing dupes waiting desperately for consolation. Fans who wish to have their fears assuaged by the light of human brilliance, hoping to absorb and maintain that fading light after the performance has ended.

Being a member of an esteemed audience allows us to find comfort in the bosom of our group as we believe we can’t survive if shunned.

And the story is almost always the same: those forced to endure an epic struggle eventually become heroes and salespeople. And so, in such an enduring way, nobility is defined simply by the struggle to survive — survival being its own banal reward — along with the products that facilitate our survival.

And as we capitalize on our observations of our derived and typical opinions stolen from our peers, plagiarized from history, and gleaned (meme’d) from our culture: Those things that we have been exposed to, and those things we can claim as inspiration for our own ideas, those things that give rise to faith in our "Agency", will, at the very least, be given the mechanism for our fantasy selves to be sculpted by. The river doesn’t necessarily determine its course through attrition.

We can package these mundane ideas into well-reasoned and orchestrated presentations that make us comfortable with our pretensions. This sad nature of ours — this unforgiving nature of ours; burdened by habits, worship, our narcissism; our hubris and our slavery to fashion: Our thirst for a place in the geometry of complex social structure and expression, our addiction to each other and ourselves — a Platonic vessel that ought to transcend thought, defined only by its emptiness, emerging from the void, as temporary as our universe.

Whether we fade or blossom, we will pay for the risks we take, for our losses, and for the power we temporarily gain; like some horrific deal with the Devil where the payoffs sum up our doom. We will still celebrate our performances — for our presentations are but our way to sell the circus to the pray and the house to the predator.

Applaud for what is familiar, for the common narrative, for the lack of creativity, and the lack of understanding of who and what we are: The world of imperfect actors, who, although striving constantly themselves, have not the clarity of thought to quell the noise of the 21st Century and champion peace and vitality.

The noise, it seems, even way back when, when people could only scratch their dreams into rocks in dark caves, could not be silenced: But one has to wonder at their experiences, and the courage it took just to be human — the courage it took to simply be. Being without the anxiety of becoming may sound like heaven, but being in our world requires us to constantly strive for something better.

Links for Political Ignorance Index:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/11/03/political-ignorance-around-the-world/

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3466/Perceptions-are-not-reality-Things-the-world-gets-wrong.aspx

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/oct/29/todays-key-fact-you-are-probably-wrong-about-almost-everything

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ignorance-in-america/14416

Become Aware Of It, Pay Attention To It. Read About It, Learn About It, Write About It, Talk About It. Teach It.

Reflections upon anything under the sun and beyond. It may not be easy to be a Global Citizen, but it's not hard to engage the Globe.

The Use of Satire in the News: The Daily Show Challenges Mainstream News

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Net Neutrality (HBO)

Sacrifice Zones

Yes, we are SKREWED (Society of Citizens Really Enraged When Encircled by Drilling).

Go to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and explore the many articles on Socialism. It's an interesting subject that defies simplistic ideological condemnation.

Further Reading

Whatever you do, click on the link below and read through this powerpoint presentation!

Please, please, please, don't make me beg, read the two articles below.

The Netherworld Oligarchy – Who is Your Government Really Serving?

The ‘New World’ Environment

The ‘New World’ Hierarchy

Your Help is necessary to keep this site growing. Thank you.