I've been saying this for years!
An Op-ed from Thomas Friedman. Beyond the corniness of Friedman, this is something that really needs to be said (which I guess could be true of much of Friedman's posts.)
The point of the article:
"We’re trying to deal with a whole array of integrated problems — climate change, energy, biodiversity loss, poverty alleviation and the need to grow enough food to feed the planet — separately. The poverty fighters resent the climate-change folks; climate folks hold summits without reference to biodiversity; the food advocates resist the biodiversity protectors...
'We need to stop thinking about these issues in isolation — each with its own champion, constituency and agenda — and deal with them in an integrated way, the way they actually occur on the ground,” argued Glenn Prickett, senior vice president with Conservation International. “We tend to think about climate change as just an energy issue, but it’s also about land use: one-third of greenhouse gas emissions come from tropical deforestation and agriculture. So we need to preserve forests and other ecosystems to solve climate change, not only to save species.'"
Notice the word "integrated" above. As I struggle to explain Integral Theory to everyone, one thing I keep coming out with is that it's mostly a different way of looking at things, a different set of lenses through which to look at the world, one which tries to take into account that reality is unified.
What this means is that if there's a problem, it's most likely either one of viewpoint, or one of orientation.
How can a change of viewpoint change everything?
Well, remember when fire was magic, some random event or act of the gods? Of course not. Every advance that we make occurs because of a shift in viewpoint, a greater, deeper, or wider understanding, or a more encompassing, more connected worldview.
There are no problems in the Universe. You have problems. There are two ways to eliminate them: externally and internally. If you no longer care about something (internal) it's not a problem. If you remove the external cause of the problem, it's not a problem. Both are important. You won't be a very good human if you ignore the external reality of problems. You'll probably starve to death. But you also won't be a very good human if you don't grow past some of your problems. You'll be waiting for your mother to feed you, and you'll starve to death. Both are shifts in viewpoint: you either change your view of what you are and what your relationship to the world is, or you change the way you look at the outside world, which changes what you can do to it and in it.
The shift in perspective that Friedman is discussing is from one where each act in the universe, or process (a series of acts and reactions through time) is basically unrelated to each other (SDi 5) to one which recognizes that every act has consequences for every other ongoing process, or that every process and system is linked to each other (SDi 6). You could also view this in terms of input and output, in the movement from an understanding of inputs and outputs occurring separately to one where every output is a different process' input, creating cycles.
Much of where modernity has gone awry is in disrupting cycles between the output of one and the input of another, creating waste, which doesn't exist in the natural world.
This is not to say that man has no right to tinker with what's there: as mentioned in the end of the article, we can make nature better, or rather, better for us, which is the process of solving problems externally. (Very simply, making a roof underneath which to hide from the rain.) What we need to understand is that instead of creating a different framework to solve every problem we have, we already have been given the perfect framework within which to work, we just need to recognize it as such.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Meditative visuals when tired. Lucid dreaming?
Recently when I have been tired I have noticed a fascinating phenomenon- I am not usually a visual person, that is, it is sometimes difficult for me to maintain mental images in my head. However, I have been meditating quite a lot recently, and when I have been tired, especially if I am not going to sleep but just resting my eyes, I have been paying attention to the shapes and colors playing behind my eyelids. The greater my focus, and greater my relaxation, (I am often meditating casually as I rest) the more real they appear, like the images that can guide you into dreams directly from waking, something I have frequently experienced since the time I was young. I have either been waking up to jot it down or falling asleep, but my goal is to be able to enter lucid dreams from this state, which I'm pretty sure is possible even though I have been as yet unable to control them.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Violent Right?
An article from Sunday's NYT by Frank Rich.
Rich, if you don't read him, is an excellent columnist, funny, scathing, sarcastic, and all in the straightforward service of screaming that the Emperor's got no clothes on. He is sharp and lucid as glass when it comes to historical analogies as well, which comes out in this article quite a bit.
One subtle undertone of the column is that the Right, for whatever reason, seems to be legitimized in the US in a way the Left never would be. Perhaps it is that huge swaths of the country are rural, or the sort of suburban sprawl metros that maintain a rural twang even as they reach a million people. Maybe it has to do with our pledge towards liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And surely there's something in it of the protestant ethos of individual responsibility and accountability and belief in a personal soul, which tends the "life" omitted above and that happiness to refer strictly to one's own, and which informs even our atheists' senses of self.
But whatever it is we surely would not be in this situation if there were an equal balance of Left and Right in this country, at least in so far as what is acceptable in the public discourse, or what is weighing down the levers of power. There does honestly seem to be a virtual tie in terms of the private views of the citizenry, wobbling back and forth every few years, but could you honestly imagine a scenario where far-left zealots caused enough of a stink to get anything on the ropes, let alone something (we're not even considering single-payer here) fairly centrist? They are ostracized, not eulogized as the equally imbalanced recent protesters have been, even with much grumbling about how incorrect their take on the contents of reform are. As Paul Krugman writes, it's almost insanity that the Right's 'government is satan always' rhetoric hasn't died off after the actual policies grown from it have failed beyond failure. The question isn't why the right is so loud- they're loud because they've got amplifiers. But why do they have amplifiers in sober thinking people?
That for some reason seems to be at the heart of this whole matter. America has been the greatest force of progressivism in the last two hundred and thirty-three years, through fits and starts, and yet it's as if every positive step is taken against the weight of a begrudging dragging boulder, and mitigated by terribly insensitive acts that would cause, I'm sure, quite a few people to blanch at the first clause of this sentence.
Maybe it's just energy- America and her people are both energetically progressive and energetically conservative, and we get the best and worst of both. Thanks to that. Without it the world would probably either be a right or left dystopian hell. But we could sure use a burst of progressive energy now.
And we'll need it seriously if we're going to get over the money, without which the situation just doesn't add up. Things are going the way they are because of money, and I think the real disenchantment with Obama now isn't just because of the flagging of the public option, it's because the only thing that could possibly be behind it is gobs of questionably earned money. I, for one, voted for the man mostly because I thought he could be the kind of rare person to point this out and step around it, which is really the only way to make this work in the long run. As an optimist I hold out hope, since the O-man's pattern so far has been staying out of the fray until everyone thinks the game is up, descending, and laying down the law, no strings attached, which is why so many people look to him as a sort of savior figure. The race speech, the clearest example of this pattern, is much less important in the long run than the current debate, but Obama must know this as well. My confidence in him would be destroyed if a bill passed that screwed me (no income no health insurance 27 year old male) but it remains, waiting for the man to work things out. He certainly has the ability to. It would be a shame if he didn't realize that, and it will ruin his presidency if he doesn't act on it.
Perhaps it's coming. Lefties are fairly outraged by all the blabber about the impossibility of passing real meaningful reform in the face of a bullying insurance industry, and if history is a guide the right is about to become more and more violent, something which can only discredit them (much of what Rich is saying.)
And Washington is not a campaign. That is, he'll need all the prodding from the left and discrediting of the right he can get to sort this out. A speech isn't going to cut it.
It's ironic that I lived through eight years of W and am only contemplating finding a Canadian woman to marry with a Democratic president.
Rich, if you don't read him, is an excellent columnist, funny, scathing, sarcastic, and all in the straightforward service of screaming that the Emperor's got no clothes on. He is sharp and lucid as glass when it comes to historical analogies as well, which comes out in this article quite a bit.
One subtle undertone of the column is that the Right, for whatever reason, seems to be legitimized in the US in a way the Left never would be. Perhaps it is that huge swaths of the country are rural, or the sort of suburban sprawl metros that maintain a rural twang even as they reach a million people. Maybe it has to do with our pledge towards liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And surely there's something in it of the protestant ethos of individual responsibility and accountability and belief in a personal soul, which tends the "life" omitted above and that happiness to refer strictly to one's own, and which informs even our atheists' senses of self.
But whatever it is we surely would not be in this situation if there were an equal balance of Left and Right in this country, at least in so far as what is acceptable in the public discourse, or what is weighing down the levers of power. There does honestly seem to be a virtual tie in terms of the private views of the citizenry, wobbling back and forth every few years, but could you honestly imagine a scenario where far-left zealots caused enough of a stink to get anything on the ropes, let alone something (we're not even considering single-payer here) fairly centrist? They are ostracized, not eulogized as the equally imbalanced recent protesters have been, even with much grumbling about how incorrect their take on the contents of reform are. As Paul Krugman writes, it's almost insanity that the Right's 'government is satan always' rhetoric hasn't died off after the actual policies grown from it have failed beyond failure. The question isn't why the right is so loud- they're loud because they've got amplifiers. But why do they have amplifiers in sober thinking people?
That for some reason seems to be at the heart of this whole matter. America has been the greatest force of progressivism in the last two hundred and thirty-three years, through fits and starts, and yet it's as if every positive step is taken against the weight of a begrudging dragging boulder, and mitigated by terribly insensitive acts that would cause, I'm sure, quite a few people to blanch at the first clause of this sentence.
Maybe it's just energy- America and her people are both energetically progressive and energetically conservative, and we get the best and worst of both. Thanks to that. Without it the world would probably either be a right or left dystopian hell. But we could sure use a burst of progressive energy now.
And we'll need it seriously if we're going to get over the money, without which the situation just doesn't add up. Things are going the way they are because of money, and I think the real disenchantment with Obama now isn't just because of the flagging of the public option, it's because the only thing that could possibly be behind it is gobs of questionably earned money. I, for one, voted for the man mostly because I thought he could be the kind of rare person to point this out and step around it, which is really the only way to make this work in the long run. As an optimist I hold out hope, since the O-man's pattern so far has been staying out of the fray until everyone thinks the game is up, descending, and laying down the law, no strings attached, which is why so many people look to him as a sort of savior figure. The race speech, the clearest example of this pattern, is much less important in the long run than the current debate, but Obama must know this as well. My confidence in him would be destroyed if a bill passed that screwed me (no income no health insurance 27 year old male) but it remains, waiting for the man to work things out. He certainly has the ability to. It would be a shame if he didn't realize that, and it will ruin his presidency if he doesn't act on it.
Perhaps it's coming. Lefties are fairly outraged by all the blabber about the impossibility of passing real meaningful reform in the face of a bullying insurance industry, and if history is a guide the right is about to become more and more violent, something which can only discredit them (much of what Rich is saying.)
And Washington is not a campaign. That is, he'll need all the prodding from the left and discrediting of the right he can get to sort this out. A speech isn't going to cut it.
It's ironic that I lived through eight years of W and am only contemplating finding a Canadian woman to marry with a Democratic president.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Wide Moments
For you, what is the most natural trigger of reverence or awe?
What I mean is that when looking up at a sky full of stars, my mind hushes and melts into that expansiveness without my doing anything, a reminder of how grand it is to be alive and aware of it.
Coming home from Beijing I will no longer take that for granted; for sure the lack of stars in my life for the past seven months is the reason I noticed this. The stars and being surrounded by the smell of foliage at night bring me great peace.
On my birthday I woke up early and went to watch the sunrise on the seashore. It was overcast, so you couldn't see the sun over the horizon, but all of a sudden over clouds far away the sun came up a brilliant magenta color I'd never seen before, off the periwinkle of the clouds and the slate of the ocean, it was magnificent.
Also while hiking recently some friends and I were perched on the peak of a mountain in New Jersey watching the sun settle over mountains west, and the silence.
Again, for me, the stars are the most powerful, but all three of these recently have stuck in my mind. What, if anything, does it for you?
What I mean is that when looking up at a sky full of stars, my mind hushes and melts into that expansiveness without my doing anything, a reminder of how grand it is to be alive and aware of it.
Coming home from Beijing I will no longer take that for granted; for sure the lack of stars in my life for the past seven months is the reason I noticed this. The stars and being surrounded by the smell of foliage at night bring me great peace.
On my birthday I woke up early and went to watch the sunrise on the seashore. It was overcast, so you couldn't see the sun over the horizon, but all of a sudden over clouds far away the sun came up a brilliant magenta color I'd never seen before, off the periwinkle of the clouds and the slate of the ocean, it was magnificent.
Also while hiking recently some friends and I were perched on the peak of a mountain in New Jersey watching the sun settle over mountains west, and the silence.
Again, for me, the stars are the most powerful, but all three of these recently have stuck in my mind. What, if anything, does it for you?
Quote #2
- We are here and it is now. Further than that all human knowledge is moonshine.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Quote #1
"Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal."
-- T.S. Eliot
A translation of this I would give is: "Amateurs borrow, professionals steal."
-- T.S. Eliot
A translation of this I would give is: "Amateurs borrow, professionals steal."
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Round Two
I'm home!
Fresh Air! Full internet access! Books! Friends!
I haven't written on this site in more than three months because of the Chinese government's net nanny and my inability to get around it consistently, but here it goes.
There will be some changes to the blog, and I will be experimenting with quite a bit in the next year.
1- I would like to lighten up. There will be lengthy essays, there will also be cartoons, if they're apropos.
2- Something like Chycho.com (an interesting anarchist website) I would like to begin to create a web of meaning/information for Integral Studies, so quite a few posts, especially in the next few months or so, will be smaller chunks of a larger integrated whole, and may not make sense as-is. They'll be marked.
3- While one of the reasons for having this blog has always been to test out ideas and get them down on paper, as I am heading into a program in Integral Studies and trying to pen out a book, this will increase. Comments and criticism will be treated like VIPs.
4- Trying to pare my thought down and get direct. Nail me, if you like, for verbosity.
Okay!
Fresh Air! Full internet access! Books! Friends!
I haven't written on this site in more than three months because of the Chinese government's net nanny and my inability to get around it consistently, but here it goes.
There will be some changes to the blog, and I will be experimenting with quite a bit in the next year.
1- I would like to lighten up. There will be lengthy essays, there will also be cartoons, if they're apropos.
2- Something like Chycho.com (an interesting anarchist website) I would like to begin to create a web of meaning/information for Integral Studies, so quite a few posts, especially in the next few months or so, will be smaller chunks of a larger integrated whole, and may not make sense as-is. They'll be marked.
3- While one of the reasons for having this blog has always been to test out ideas and get them down on paper, as I am heading into a program in Integral Studies and trying to pen out a book, this will increase. Comments and criticism will be treated like VIPs.
4- Trying to pare my thought down and get direct. Nail me, if you like, for verbosity.
Okay!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
