fear and trembling: the ethical question

Kierkegaard's book analyzes the old testament story of Abraham and Issac. basically God told Abraham to murder his son, an indefensible, unjustified and unethical command with which he complied.

the fact that at the last moment God said "stop, I was just testing you" is irrelevant. Abraham was carrying out an act of murder and so had accepted that mindset. this submission to a perception of something greater than oneself is a scary, recognized, human trait. note "Islam" in english directly translates to "submission".

so, when God is on the line, do you take the call? have him leave a message? remember that avoidance is still a decision and if the issue is important, non-action is as serious as any action that you do...

I heard a disturbing story on "This American Life" recently. in it Alex Kotlowitz interviews a woman whose abusive father probably killed someone. she reported her suspicions to the police, but the detectives didn't pursue the matter. she let it go -- even though the guilt of not acting forcefully enough and following up with the police ate at her. years later, a review of the cold case resulted in a conviction -- of the wrong man. he spent years in prison until somehow the woman heard about him and she finally came forward with what she knew. he considers her his angel, but she still feels terrible about it.

...cut to my dream last night. I'm at work and get a phone call from a stranger -- maybe it's a wrong number, I don't know. he wants me to go meet him at the police station in 5 minutes - he needs a witness and is afraid for his life. I have no idea what is going on. he insists he needs me so the police don't beat him or shoot him. what can I do? what should I do? hang up? sorry, wrong number? I don't want to get involved? it sounds very important; my decision could have life impacting consequences.
I think...
"on what basis and with what justification are you asking this request, and how is it that you are asking this request of me and not someone else?" of course, the answers to these questions may not be enough to make the right decision... we should in any case know ourselves well enough to be prepared to make the choice. you may be selfish, you may be foolish or mixed up or even consider yourself wise and caring; whatever you honestly are, you must admit to yourself.

Bob Dylan said "you gotta serve someone". personally, I think I serve many masters. in the end they all boil down to one, but who's to say that end is ever reached?

tired old religious arguments...

So I was having a conversation with a coworker. I mentioned how as we age and develop various ailments what’s happening in a sense is that we are dying in little ways. We avoid death by staying healthy and fit for as long as possible because it’s in our nature. She, being the fundamentalist christian that she is, replied that when she died she knew she would get a new perfect body. I argued, well, you don’t know anything, you have belief or faith that that will happen. “No”, she said, “I know it’s true. It’s a fact that’s in the bible”. “But”, I said, “you only have belief that the bible is true. You don’t know something is true merely because it self-references itself as true". This basic logic statement puzzled her a bit. “What do you mean?” she asked. “Well, you need evidence to prove something, external evidence”. “Oh, but there is lots of evidence that the bible is true!”. (she also believes the bible is without error and the contradictions I’ve pointed out in the past are merely misinterpretations taken out of context).

Anyway, she asks if I’ve ever heard of the book "Evidence Which Demands a Verdict" written by a christian apologist. I hadn’t, but the internet is a wonderful thing, so I just did a little research. Didn’t find the book online, but I did find a good rebuttal: "The Jury is In". the verdict. apparently, is that christianity really hasn’t got a lot to stand on besides faith and belief. Scientific evidence isn’t there. And paradoxically, those who are looking for evidence to bolster their convictions are doing so because of a lack of faith -- and faith is the only saving grace of the whole religion!

Getting back to new bodies, last week I listened to an interesting podcast recorded in a Chicago diner a while back and was played on “This American Life”. the woman “Nancy” is in her early 40’s, and says the following (please excuse the grammar):
“where am I and what time is it? I don’t think I'm really here. I'm doing a two dimensional kind of thing, so there's part of me that’s here and there’s part of me that’s somewhere else. The future me. So what time is it? Earthly time it’s 1:15 AM and there is no time where my future self is. You know when you go to sleep and you dream, how you can bend and shape the events that take place in that dream? Well, what if that was your reality, and what if this were the dream? You know you can actually paint your future and you can make everything that’s ever happened, is happening and will happen has already happened. It’s shape shifting time and events so that you know why your soul is here. And that’s the purpose. To know why you’re here. To know why you came back. I know one past life I was a cowboy. And I was shot by accident. And I’ve met two of my four buddies that I was with together here. We agreed to come back on some kind of subliminal basis. So yeah, I was a cowboy in one lifetime, probably right before the turn of the century and my other lifetime I really don’t know but I know I was crushed. I don't know by what, but probably by a large building. I haven't identified the time yet; I'm still working on that."

Nancy may be easy to dismiss on first glance as a nut; a victim, perhaps, of too many acid trips. but on further reflection, her story holds up probably better than my christian friends. could it be true? are we the players in our own plays? if so, that could be the leverage needed to really make a change for the better in our world (if you have that intention!). because face it, without leverage you're not going to make much impact.

my verdict? I'll just quote from John: "whatever gets you through the night... s'alright, s'alright..."

for more info see:

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Reincarnation

the visionary is reading...

my friend Jennifer at goodnessgraciousness.blogspot.com invites us to "blog about your vision of what is possible" because "We need to imagine a world healed from its illnesses. We need to allow the images of peace and goodness to enter our consciousness, our minds, and our souls. We need to believe a world of compassion and care is a real possibility."

keeping that in mind, I was planning on doing a little book report today anyway and it kind of ties in with that meme.

"The Razor's Edge" by W. Somerset Maugham, 1944:
as Jeffery Leach writes, "'The Razor’s Edge' really has a simple message. It asks us to reflect on how we lead our lives. Do we follow the masses or seek inner fulfillment? Is it right or wrong to drop out of society and follow our inner selves?".
I can identify with Larry Darrel, the main character to some degree; however we are in very different situations. my path to enlightenment has not led me to a guru in India for one...

an excerpt dealing with reincarnation:
'Am I right in thinking that it means that the soul passes from body to body in an endless course of experience occaisioned by the merit or demerit of previous works?'
'I think so.'
'But you see, I'm not only my spirit but my body, and who can decide how much I, my individual self, am conditioned by the accident of my body? Would Byron have been Byron but for his club foot, or Dostoyevsky Dostoyevsky without his epilipsy?'
'The Indians wouldn't speak of an accident. They would answer that it's your action in previous lives that have determined your soul to inhabit an imperfect body.' Larry drummed idly on the table and, lost in thought, gazed into space. Then, with a faint smile on his lips and a reflective look in his eyes, he went on. 'Has it occurred to you that transmigration is at once an explanation and a justification of the evil of the world? If the evils we suffer are the result of sins committed in our past lives we can bear them with resignation and hope that if in this one we strive towards virtue our future lives will be less affected. But it's easy enough to bear our own evils, all we need for that is a little manliness; what's intolerable is the evil, often so unmerited in appearance, that befalls others. If you can persuade yourself that it is the inevitable result of the past you may pity, you may do what you can to alleviate, and you should, but you have no cause to be indignant.

they also made a movie from the book (starring Bill Murray) if you are so inclined.

you're mormon or a member...

...to have fun in Salt Lake City that is, according to someone in our party. I'm definitely not mormon and agree with Groucho Marx that "I'd never join any club that would have me as a member". yet here I was last weekend at Murphy's Bar newly bestowed with a lifetime membership (drinking only allowed in "private" clubs in Utah) and slamming down car bombs with the "wild cousins" in celebration of the impending wedding of a family member. (earlier, during enjoyment of a few microbrews at Squatters Pub and being asked my relationship to the wedding couple numerous times, I figured out I was the bride's-aunt's-step-son-in-law.)

it was a fun, whirlwind weekend trip in crazy Utah. now and then it's nice to feel like you belong, to be inside and included. I'm not the bar hopping gregarious type. my normal state is one of peaceful solitude. that's where I'm most comfortable and productive. but it's good to get dissolute once in while... and what better excuse than a new marriage?

while I claim to be religious, my religion is not organized. sunday afternoon as we toured the spotless gardens, buildings and statues in Temple Square and I read the official proclamations chiseled in stone, I kept wondering out loud "why was Joseph Smith murdered?" (story here). how else is my religion disorganized? I enjoy reading the gutsy athiest reasoning and debates by the likes of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens (skewering the corpse of the recently departed Jerry Falwell).

my god of course allows suffering, hate and discontent, and a general lack of caring as well as good and love. the best evidence for my god is existence itself - "I am" is all I need. the proof of our existence is self-evident. another man's view of the probabilities of our existence happening as it is are
"The Incredible Design of the Earth and Our Solar System" or
"Probability For Life On Earth". take that with a bit of salt please.

anyway, the most religious conversation I had in salt lake was downtown sunday not in temple square where the pleasant zombies greeted me, but at carls jr -- one of the few places open on the sabbath. on the way to wash up I came across a paraplegic borderline homeless guy (looked rough but had bought lunch and had a cellphone). he was complaining about a hobo outside the restaurant begging and stealing from the salsa bar - "It's not right, him doing that...". I started to engage in conversation saying saying we all do what me must, we all have our crosses to bear. but he wasn't interested in listening, so I moved on. after lunch and exiting carls I was approached by aforementioned hobo at the corner. our conversation went like this:
"excuse me sir, I'm an american indian. you know, your father defeated Superman".
"Superman? my father?"
"your father defeated Superman. and he defeated Spiderman."
"are you talking about the great father?"
he paused and smiled. he didn't know what to say.
from behind me came a yell. "aaaaah! where you going?"
I turned and saw a mildly disabled (physical and mentally I think) guy pushed an overweight woman in a wheelchair. they had trouble coming up the curb because a concrete barrier and my body were blocking the way somewhat. the two started arguing. they were well practiced and quick about it. my american indian friend tried to intervene: "don't fight. please don't fight. I'm an american indian..."
they were gone quickly and the hobo came back to me. "I was hoping to get a quarter or maybe fifty cents".
"oh, feeling lucky are you?"
I placed a quarter in his thick palm and looked at his aged pocked face and cloudy eyes. he took the quarter and said "call it" with a smile.
"tails", I said. he deftly gave it a flip. I lost.

so where was god in all of this? where was god witnessed in salt lake city? in existence itself.. in each of the interactions described. that maya is my pantheistic heresy, part of my catholicus religion. like the tree falling in the forest with no one to hear, I tell my stories to the universe of the internet and say "yes, god was here. this did happen."

from the hobo's coin flip to the blessed union of Brad and Emily, God indeed was with us.

lastly, don't know how this all fits in, but it seems I just missed bumping into another religious leader in SLC: Rev. Al Sharpton was doing the mormon thang today (story). politics dontcha know. I think I prefer the Rev's debate with Christopher Hitchens. hmmm, that's all about book promotion, right?

'on earth as it is in heaven' indeed...

Norman Mailer recently spoke about his latest book "The Castle in the Forest", a fictionalized biography of a young Adolf Hitler, a child loved by his mother who yet became history's evil incarnate as the unexplainable killer of millions.

In an interview w/Micheal Silverblatt, Mailer describes his religious beliefs which provide structure for the story:

"When George Bush speaks about 'evil', he speaks of an enormous sweeping force that we have to mass up with our own huge sweeping forces and face him, face to face and fight him down, knock him down. Let me speak about fundamentalism, because I happen to be religious, I happen to believe that God exists. I believe it because it's simpler for me to believe that there is a creator than there is not one. I was an atheist for many years and the problem I always had with it is how do we all begin, what are we all about? Here we are with our rich complicated lives, so moral, so immoral, so good, so evil, so sweet, so ugly, and all of that has come out of a couple of germs colliding with one another? It never made sense to me and so over the years I began to think that what if one were to see God as a creator; an existential God, a God who could succeed or fail, a God who has a vision. And this is a God with whom we are entwined. And I began to see Satan in the same way, as also existential. Satan doing his best (or her best, just as you'd see God as his or her), to diminish human beings, to destroy civilization, to end this creation of God's. Now, the fundamentalists are exactly opposed to all this. The fundamentalists believe that there is only one way to live and that way is found in the Old Testament and even more in the New Testament. And this was all written by God and that's all you ever need to know and to have any ideas that are outside the Old Testament and the New Testament you're in danger of heresy and evil and ugliness and so forth. So they're absolutely monotonous and uninspiring as thinkers. They are totalitarian in the extreme. I've gone so far as to say that fundamentalism could end up being the last weapon of mass destruction. In that sense, I'm opposed to that -- my little notion that God is existential. But following that out makes for a very interesting study of what the devil does and what God does in relation to us. Which is it's small acts with small people all the time. So it's as if each small personal life has their own notion of what they want to do and become and at the same time they are affected to the right and to the left (however one wants to describe it) by activities of small gods and small demons -- and there's a huge bureaucracy on either flank. Not to mention our own bureaucracies of corporate capitalism..."

so this is the sense Mailer has made out of the world in his eighty some years. is it right? what do you think? as someone once said, "there are no answers. there are only questions".

it's all new, it's all good...

I was doing a little searching and came across something I posted elsewhere quite some time ago. it's interesting and maybe correct as much as it is, but also quite incomplete if you subscribe to the notion that you have in your head a set of "rules to live by". so why do I post it (again)? well, like the "eternal return", some things just keep coming back and never really get outdated. and the possibility is it's new to you, my reader:

“If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!”. here’s a nutshell of that book that a reviewer on amazon gave:
1. This is it!
2. There are no hidden meanings
3. You can’t get there from here, and besides, there’s no place else to go
4. We are all already dying and we’ll be dead for a long time.
5. Nothing lasts!
6. There is no way of getting all you want.
7. You can’t have anything unless you let go of it.
8. You only get to keep what you give away.
9. There is no particular reason why you lost out on some things.
10. The world is not necessarily just. Being good often does not pay off and there is no compensation for misfortune.
11. You have the responsibility to do your best nonetheless.
12. It is a random universe to which we bring meaning.
13. You don’t really control anything.
14. You can’t make someone love you.

so what was it I searching for? I googled "wonderland tomawesome" and wandered a bit. I searched because of a note from someone I've forgotten all about. she bumped into my profile on mybloglog and said "hi". (as a side note, I even have her on my blogroll -- see wonderland or not below). funny, when we keep forgetting (which I guess we must prepare for in old age), what tools we are left with to cope.that little mental jostle also reminded me to consider making a commitment to blog more often (courtesy of an idea podcasted by my pal Jason Calacanis a while ago "how to become an 'A-list' blogger"). I have no shortage of things to write about (could start by elaborating on my del.icio.us links), but the quality, I fear, would suffer. so what is my decision? for now, time and priorities dictate no changes. btw Alice, yr blog has mos def improved in the last two years and inspires (guilts?) me to somehow improve this blog. maybe :)
hey if this post inspires anyone, let me know and let's see what kind of connections reappear!

p.s. Jason, I may be linkbaiting you.