The Universe

I have a hard time accepting the ugly side of life, the ugly realities. Am I wrong? I see them as things to correct. Other people seem to revel in the brutality and, oddly, it seems quite natural for them to do so. It seems their place. Maybe that is actually a healthier acceptance of life than the attitude and orientation that I have. It's a major thing to accept such rage, anger, cruelty and hatred as normal, and yet is is quite normal if normal is defined by the common or expected. Are we really supposed to transcend brutality or perhaps transform it? If it is there already and in such abundance, who are we to try to mess with the apparent scheme of things? Do we deny a large part of ourselves if we deny these dark things?

What are these dark things and why do they exists? "Original Sin" is sort of the wild card placeholder that many people throw in, but that nowhere near begins to explain things in my mind. It might be a comfort to throw in some kind of explanation, but I'm not looking for comfort. I'm looking for truth.

Is it simply all a scale or perspective problem? Am I seeing only a small slice of an evolving universe, a universe that will one day mold itself into a glorious thing? If one were to glimpse only a few seconds of an entire heart transplant operation, it might indeed appear to be a chamber of horrors seeing a chest cut open and a heart removed.

Is it simply a comprehensibility problem? Are we like that dog looking uselessly at a blackboard scribbled full of quantum physics equations? How does one ever explain even simple algebra to a dog?

What we tend to do because of doubt and uncertainty, I think, is to prematurely condense it all down into a good/evil problem and thereby create as many problems as we solve. The universe is so obviously subtler and more complex, at least to my eyes.

Perhaps it is all these problems and more. But the assumption, of course, is that I assume a purpose to the universe and perhaps, by necessity, a creator as well. Could this one assumption be bollixing up the works? If I assumed atheism does everything then automatically fall into place? Are my problems only problems of trying to, in essence, paint a happy face on a universe that is actually cold, dark, careless and meaningless?

But the strange thing is, as soon as you do that you actually increase the darkness. Cynicism and brutality expand. Meaninglessness expands. Hate and anger expand. That's not to say that overzealous and misdirected forms of religion don't do the same thing. They do. But what that is to say is that I have seen, and have personally been affected by, something that, at least to this mind, so clearly shows that there is more than meaninglessness; there is more than pain, cruelty and carelessness. How strange that these other things such as compassion and love live side-by-side with the darker things. You would think they are so different that the same domain could not spawn or hold both. But it does. And it teaches us, if anything, that, like the very nature of the material at the smallest of quantum levels, that things are not predetermined. That there is choice and that there is meant to be choice.

The meaning of life is to choose love or else there is no meaning at all for us. Light things expand and dark things contract when we choose love. There seems a mechanism built-in to the very universe so that this can happen, thus the presumption of love being the fulfillment of meaning. (Can there be any meaning in hate? Hmm.). But choosing, of course, implies that you can't force other people to do so. To unduly coerce them is to not have them choose love freely. To unduly coerce is to not be loving in the first place and thus it shouldn't be surprising if our actions do not spawn love.

The only possible use I can see for the dark things in life is to drive us to choose love. But the pain can be so great, individual circumstances so harsh, that even the universe of god, if not the love of god, feels like undue coercion at times.

There are mysteries aplenty that we may not solve. But we have been given near god-like powers in that we have it in our power to gently lead or to severely coerce. I'll not deny that god will often lead gently, but like the existence of those dark things, it seems to my eyes that he will also coerce. But maybe this is necessary. Maybe I don't fully understand it or can't comprehend it. I don't know. But the near-god-like, such as us, should be very careful when taking on the full-god powers of coercion. We have yet to show that we can handle that power. We would do much better, I think, to influence and cajole with simple love.

Brad, this is a good topic that we've never addressed head-on. I'm moving it to the Theology forum, as it seems to fit better there.

- - - -

A preliminary response I'd make, here, is that Original Sin doesn't intend to account for all sorts of phenomena that we might call natural evil -- earthquakes, tornadoes, supernovae, animals eating each other, etc. It's only meant to be an explanation for moral and spiritual evil -- especially of our tendency to feel a kind of gravitational draw toward non-loving selfishness.

The meaning of life is to choose love or else there is no meaning at all for us. Light things expand and dark things contract when we choose love. There seems a mechanism built-in to the very universe so that this can happen, thus the presumption of love being the fulfillment of meaning. . .

Wonderfully stated!

The only possible use I can see for the dark things in life is to drive us to choose love. But the pain can be so great, individual circumstances so harsh, that even the universe of god, if not the love of god, feels like undue coercion at times.

Many don't experience the options as presenting themselves in such stark relief. I think evil works, more often than not, by just slowly, insidiously, lulling one into moral and spiritual dullness, so that even emotion itself becomes so numbed that the individual is unlikely to protest injustice -- unless it pinches them personally.

Sometimes dark powers do play into God's hands, however. Many conversions come from the recognition that one just doesn't have any other options for meaning. This might be conceived as a kind of coercion, or it doesn't remove from one the responsibility to choose. Besides, how else could a universe centered on love as its meaning work? Does it not follow that there are to be consequences for living otherwise?

. . .We would do much better, I think, to influence and cajole with simple love.

Oh yes! Unless otherwise given clear guidance, that is indeed the best route.

Thanks for your comments, Phil. I've got more to spout out in soliloquy before answering back, if I do at all. Not sure how the following thoughts will sit with Catholics or Protestants, but I�m not here to either please or enrage. You can all do that on your own as you see fit. But this is what is on my mind. If you can gain anything from it then I would be pleased. If you think some of it is horse-sh*t then you gotta call it like you see it and I�m sure I will learn something from your response. Oh, and I just got this little emaily notice so I guess this topic has graduated to a serious discussion of religion. Thanks. I guess my lounge act days are almost over. You wish.


How does one account for all the detail in religion? It seems I can neither condemn it as the work of man nor recommend it as the work of divine providence. Logic and reason would suggest it is both. To accept or reject completely, say, Christianity seems intuitively wrong.

So then we're left, like Jefferson, trying to decide which words are true and which aren't, and that doesn't work either. Errors seem to be made on both the individual and collective level, so it's hard to simply pin things down to the inherent problems of collectivism (a church or Church) or the excess of the individual (like me!). Religions are all tainted and yet they are all needed to some extent for we would all be tainted by their loss. I think the bias should clearly, clearly be on each person connecting to god on his or her own. Although our actions will surely be put to good use by god, we can not, no matter our faith, be so un-humble as to assume we are ever doing his work. Therefore, I think before we instruct others in the art of connecting to god we must be very humble and deferential to the almost probably reality that the other person doesn't need our help and that we are simply as likely to bollix things up. But if we come with the attitude that another's innate simplicity and ignorance can be our teacher, then we might be a quite positive influence on them.

When we try to mold, we must remember that we don't know what the master mold looks like. Surely when people come to us for help we may help, but we ought to do so with the utmost humility. The fact is, whether through divine providence or not, they are much more likely to teach us something than we them.

Sometimes all you can do is give yourself, be silent, and wait. Remember; it's no coincidence that you are drawn to silence. You are not just avoiding noise, hurry and stress. I'm always antsy and concerned about doing the next thing that will keep me active, involved, distracted perhaps, and inspired. Perhaps laziness has been given a bad name in the name of industry and the lust for material possessions (nice as those can be). We use words like "silence" and "stillness" to make us feel better about doin' nuttin, but we need not be so coy. Let us celebrate laziness, lethargy and loafing. Those are not necessarily desires to avoid work (usually somebody else's, anyway). They are likely calls to do our most important work. It may be our deepest calling and one that we almost criminally taint with such ideas as "laziness". Either one believes in eternity or not. If someone or something can make time in the first place then there is no shortage of it. There's no hurry. You've got eternity.

To actively avoid connecting with that which may be the ground of all being is near self-mutilation. And offhand I wouldn't think it a good idea to try connecting using a tight microwave beam unless that seems best for us. A good silence could be no more than four walls and a ceiling and enjoying the stillness. Personally, I think attempts to force a connection with an aerobics-like prayer or meditation can be as unhelpful as ignoring the call for silence in the first place. There are exceptions, of course, but we're all exceptions so what would make anyone think that some other Yoga-in-the-Himalayas exception is their exception? You've got your own. Find it. Still, particularly in this insanely noisy world, a regular practice of stillness seems as good of an idea as a regular eating of one's vegetables.

Hey Brad,
There is a lot of good stuff here. I'd like to jump into the water and explore a bit of it..or at least comment on it .

quote:

Originally posted by Brad Nelson:
[qb] The Universe

I have a hard time accepting the ugly side of life, the ugly realities. Am I wrong? I see them as things to correct. Other people seem to revel in the brutality and, oddly, it seems quite natural for them to do so. It seems their place. Maybe that is actually a healthier acceptance of life than the attitude and orientation that I have. It's a major thing to accept such rage, anger, cruelty and hatred as normal, and yet is is quite normal if normal is defined by the common or expected. Are we really supposed to transcend brutality or perhaps transform it? If it is there already and in such abundance, who are we to try to mess with the apparent scheme of things? Do we deny a large part of ourselves if we deny these dark things?[/qb]

In some ways, I think there indeed are people who are more desensitized to rage, anger, brutality than others. I believe part of that depends on the atmosphere of your upbringing and quite possibly the locale (geographically speaking).

It's my opinion that we are put here to battle the brutality with loving kindness as our mentor/teacher/Savior Jesus did. And yes, we deny a part of ourselves (although I'm not sure it's a "large" part) when we deny the dark things...think- speck in brothers eye, plank in our own. The Light who overcomes and pierces through our own darkness is Christ, who also enables us to battle the darkness of the world.

quote:

[qb]What are these dark things and why do they exists? "Original Sin" is sort of the wild card placeholder that many people throw in, but that nowhere near begins to explain things in my mind. It might be a comfort to throw in some kind of explanation, but I'm not looking for comfort. I'm looking for truth.[/qb]

I think Original Sin is a copout sometimes. It's sort of like always blaming the devil for our own shortcomings and meanness. While I believe both OS and the devil influence the way things work, they do not erase the responsibility we have in making moral choices. Scripture addresses this as mortifying the things of the flesh (worldliness, anger, lust, brutality, etc.).

quote:

[qb]Is it simply all a scale or perspective problem? Am I seeing only a small slice of an evolving universe, a universe that will one day mold itself into a glorious thing? If one were to glimpse only a few seconds of an entire heart transplant operation, it might indeed appear to be a chamber of horrors seeing a chest cut open and a heart removed.[/qb]

In part, yes, it's a perspective or scale problem. For instance, by living in this tiny community of mine, I rarely see brutality or the darkness of evil. However, when I moved to San Diego 20-odd years ago, I witnessed a whole different level of interaction between people. For the most part it was overwhelming, and I was glad to come back to my little hole in the wall here. Yet, even in the vastness of population there, love and caring was apparent in circles of friends and neighbors. Depending on where I was at, I was either pretty much surrounded by "light" or by "darkness," which influenced my own actions and reactions.

quote:

[qb]Is it simply a comprehensibility problem? Are we like that dog looking uselessly at a blackboard scribbled full of quantum physics equations? How does one ever explain even simple algebra to a dog?[/qb]

I'd say that's a pretty good analogy. In respect to the universe and all that's going on in it...we are an ant. Makes me think of this:

Psa 8:3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
Psa 8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

It seems that man has been pondering the universe, our part in it, and the way of it for a loooong time .

quote:

[qb]Perhaps it is all these problems and more. But the assumption, of course, is that I assume a purpose to the universe and perhaps, by necessity, a creator as well. Could this one assumption be bollixing up the works? If I assumed atheism does everything then automatically fall into place? Are my problems only problems of trying to, in essence, paint a happy face on a universe that is actually cold, dark, careless and meaningless?[/qb]

I think your problem comes because you, in fact, see reality rather than the fantasy that the market machine tries to foist on us. There's nothing wrong with pain and angst over the cruel things in the world. That is the attitude that brings changes to correct those problems. I would even say that it is something God puts within you because there is most certainly a purpose for His creation. I read an article here a while back about how we've so rationalized everything that we recoil from calling evil what it is. Instead we give it excuses and allow it to continue it's cancerous effect on individuals and society.

To be honest, I'd much rather know someone who has trouble accepting the bad things in life than someone who simply shrugs and says "so what."

quote:

[qb]There are mysteries aplenty that we may not solve. But we have been given near god-like powers in that we have it in our power to gently lead or to severely coerce. I'll not deny that god will often lead gently, but like the existence of those dark things, it seems to my eyes that he will also coerce. But maybe this is necessary. Maybe I don't fully understand it or can't comprehend it. I don't know. But the near-god-like, such as us, should be very careful when taking on the full-god powers of coercion. We have yet to show that we can handle that power. We would do much better, I think, to influence and cajole with simple love. [/qb]

I would agree that at times God coerces, and I'm quite thankful that He does because even though we have been created in His image, we do not have His wisdom nor insight. Part of our problems do come from a God complex, but then some of our solutions to the problems come from that same complex. Love IS the key..it is the greatest commandment given us. The unfortunate part is that sometimes the real meaning of love is ignored and the substitue veneer of love is the norm.

Good post, Brad!

Blessings,
Terri

You're on a roll here, Brad. (I almost called you "bubba"...hahaha..ahem now on to the topic.)

quote:

Originally posted by Brad Nelson:
[qb] How does one account for all the detail in religion? It seems I can neither condemn it as the work of man nor recommend it as the work of divine providence. Logic and reason would suggest it is both. To accept or reject completely, say, Christianity seems intuitively wrong.[/qb]

I believe the detail goes back to Moses (quite possibly before, but we're given more info about Moses' time). Imagine a classroom of Kindergarteners being turned loose to organize themselves into a structured society. In essence that's what happened when the Israelites were freed. Therefore, God set up some rules and rituals to bring order from chaos and to protect them from the outside world as well as each other! There are boundaries even in, and maybe even moreso, in Christianity (and basically any religion) because humans need boundaries. Otherwise we'll spin out of control..it's a flaw in our nature (and if you want a little sermon I would tell you that the correction to that flaw is the guidance of the Holy Spirit ). Details are important. They are a part of our heritage as believers in the One True God; they are a means of maintaining order within our organized churches; they are tools for living within the community (whether secular or religious).

quote:

[qb]So then we're left, like Jefferson, trying to decide which words are true and which aren't, and that doesn't work either. Errors seem to be made on both the individual and collective level, so it's hard to simply pin things down to the inherent problems of collectivism (a church or Church) or the excess of the individual (like me!). Religions are all tainted and yet they are all needed to some extent for we would all be tainted by their loss. I think the bias should clearly, clearly be on each person connecting to god on his or her own. Although our actions will surely be put to good use by god, we can not, no matter our faith, be so un-humble as to assume we are ever doing his work. Therefore, I think before we instruct others in the art of connecting to god we must be very humble and deferential to the almost probably reality that the other person doesn't need our help and that we are simply as likely to bollix things up. But if we come with the attitude that another's innate simplicity and ignorance can be our teacher, then we might be a quite positive influence on them.[/qb]

There's a lot of truth in those thoughts, Brad. We are instructed in scripture that we are to esteem all others as above ourselves. Even in spreading the Gospel, we hold the people we're addressing at a higher level of respect..or at least we should. At the 9th-Grade Graduation ceremony the other night, the Youth Pastor from our local Baptist Church gave the talk, and he said something that I thought was one of the wisest things I've heard at a commencement address (particularly for this age group) in a long time. He stated that society had changed the rules about respect. Now we say that someone must "earn" respect, when in actuality they DON'T have to "earn" our respect; we give others respect simply because they are someone other than ourselves. I would say that this kind of attitude would mirror your statement about how we approach people with the idea that we will learn from them..humbleness. And, indeed, it quite often will have a positive influence on them.

quote:

[qb]When we try to mold, we must remember that we don't know what the master mold looks like. Surely when people come to us for help we may help, but we ought to do so with the utmost humility. The fact is, whether through divine providence or not, they are much more likely to teach us something than we them. [/qb]

While I agree with the most part, I would mention that the Master Himself will do the molding. We might be used in some respect, but we can't really do that molding. As for the rest of the paragraph....you betcha!

Blessings,
Terri

I almost called you "bubba".

Bubba works for me, Terri. There are very very few names that I don�t like, and even fewer that don�t fit me. But just take think twice �fore ya go callin� me a leftie pinko commie. I reckon� I might not take too kindly to that.

He stated that society had changed the rules about respect. Now we say that someone must "earn" respect, when in actuality they DON'T have to "earn" our respect; we give others respect simply because they are someone other than ourselves.

Bravo Terri (and Mr. Youth Pastor). Bravo. I hadn�t got around yet to parsing and analyzing this whole idea of being "disrespected" but I don�t think I need to now. The Youth Pastor said it all. Perhaps all I could do would be to, errr, fill in the details. But those details are a-plenty and I might just do that sometime.

I guess the universe has a lot of roads (a weak attempt to tie this all together, but what the hey).

It�s taken me a long time but I think I just figured out that people who are in a hurry are very often not of much desire to get where they�re going. Surely that must be the case for the daily tailgating commuter who I invariable encounter and who I assume, perhaps ungenerously, is trying to pass his aggression and angst onto me. But I refuse to believe that the majority of these road warriors are so gosh darn enthused with getting to work that they ride my bumper and slalom down the road in between cars just so they can get to their desk five minutes earlier. In the case of this morning�s kamikaze commuter, it�s likely that something inside him delayed his departure and that that something was a deep-down dread of another day spent in the salt mines.

How do I know this is the case? How do I know I�m not just projecting my own desires (or lack of desire)? Well, it could be that because I�ve experienced exactly that same thing I know it only too well in others. Despite my long list of things I can�t do, I am observant, if anything.

So maybe tomorrow I�ll have a little more sympathy for that lunatic on the morning commute. Maybe he or she will remind me of similar habits I have when I tend to rush through things that I don�t want to do. Well, maybe if I made an honest and brave appraisal I would realize that I don�t have to do those things. But even then we can�t necessarily immediately drop the distasteful things we may have unfortunately gotten ourselves into. We have certain realities and commitments to attend to. But I might do well to recognize these things, at least in the short term, as things presented for me to do that are exactly what I need to do, even if unpleasant. I may still rush through them but knowing one�s likes and dislikes is so important and is the key leading one away from the drudgery and slowly toward one�s calling. Oh, god only knows how we will fight this idea tooth and nail. It�s crazy, sure, but if we love anything more than doing our life�s work it is thinking of ourselves as martyrs. We simply seem to love to see our every pain is a sacrifice instead of perhaps as a sign that something is wrong. I�ll grant you without qualification that people do sacrifice and that that is their life�s work and that some sacrifice is a part of ALL of our work. But I think if we�re not very careful we will fall into the trap of defining the hero as the one who puts off what they want for the good of others when, at least as far as I�m concerned, only when one is doing one�s life work can one be doing the maximum good for others.

I seriously doubt I could communicate all that to the mad motorist as he passes me. Perhaps a finger would communicate the same thing.

Thank you for all your comments, Terri.

I read an article here a while back about how we've so rationalized everything that we recoil from calling evil what it is. Instead we give it excuses and allow it to continue it's cancerous effect on individuals and society.

If you can find that article again I�d love to read it. I�m working on a similar line of thought whereby socialism is seen as basically an institutionalized form of codependence. Let me repeat what I�ve written elsewhere:

Dysfunction is, after all, when someone else has so shamed us for our own authentic expressions of self that you escape into the comfort of someone else�s idea of how to be. It�s an understandable thing. We need a sense of safety and security and if we can�t find it in our own thoughts and feelings then we will find it (or try to) in the officially-sanctioned thoughts and feelings of others, be they parents or entire governments. Thus socialism is inherently a kind of social philosophy that propagates dysfunction. In fact, it is this dysfunction (if it can get a critical mass started that can sort of feed on itself) that strengthens socialism and allows it to spread even further.

[I] The unfortunate part is that sometimes the real meaning of love is ignored and the substitue veneer of love is the norm./I]

I think that�s a wonderful observation. And as I�ve heard brother Phil say before, it seems helpful for us to "try on" good behaviors so that they not only sort of choke off the bad ones but help to access the good natures in ourselves�or something to that effect. It would seem the key here is simply being conscious of what we are doing and why, eh?

Hey Brad,

The article I mentioned can be found here.

I hadn't thought of socialism in the way you wrote about it, but I can see the truth in that. While there is legitimacy in a "should be" measuring stick, it does have its drawbacks because instead of really searching ourselves and our motives, we just follow a pattern, and that isn't always a good thing..in fact, it could be a very bad thing.

It would seem the key here is simply being conscious of what we are doing and why, eh?

Absolutely. Otherwise, we're living a type of deceit because what we're doing may not even begin to relate to what we really have inside us. I could go off the deep end talking about that because I believe the media has convinced people that they have to "be" this or that, "do" this or that, in order to "be" a real person "doing" real things. Rubbish!

Blessings,
Terri

Thanks so much, Terri, for finding that article. I won�t hold you responsible for any theories I spin out of any info I garner. Promise. But if the Nobel Prize is forthcoming I will remember my friends�especially that one from, uh, where was that?�from Arkansas who gave me my start in once and for all countering the evils of Marxism.

I could go off the deep end talking about that because I believe the media has convinced people that they have to "be" this or that, "do" this or that, in order to "be" a real person "doing" real things. Rubbish!

Go off that deep end. Me first. We certainly run into the "responsibility" side of freedom and capitalism when we run into this kind of stuff. The alternative is to have, say, instead of Pepsi-Cola filling our heads with their image of goodness, to have some special blue ribbon committee � one in every state, county and district � decide such stuff for us. No thanks. At least Pepsi�s message, although invasive, is not ultimately coercive. Not like the state can do, at least.

Terri, I know there are plenty of organizations around the country trying to combat some of that cesspool cultural stuff. Some would try to ban it outright. I would be okay with clear ratings on stuff. But ultimately this becomes a WWJD question. I�m not for tearing the violent video games out of the hands of kids and adults and replacing it with pure Hee-Haw G-rated corn. But I am for getting out another message and that message would be a heartfelt educational pleas to all people, not just parents, of the effects with filling one�s mind with such stuff. It�s a simple case of denial to say that this stuff is merely an "outlet" for aggression. I do believe it is that and more, but few want to face up to the facts of the dark side. I haven�t been watching much TV lately, and that�s to put it mildly. But last week some time I flipped through just four channels (ABC, NBC, CBS and one other) and I did not get sick to my stomach. I have a fairly strong stomach. But something inside of me was sickened by what I saw. And it sort of scared the hell out of me to think that my friends and neighbors are out there watching this stuff for entertainment. I used to have a very hard time trying to understand how people could have gone to a Roman Coliseum event back in the days of the Caesars. Now I know. There�s no doubt in my mind. Now I know. And I guess that should put some perspective on this. Thank goodness we can sort of satisfy our bloodlust with (hopefully) harmless outlets like movies and video games. But I still think that bloodlust is a symptom of a deeper problem. My message for people would be to fill that whole with something soul-enriching, not soul-destroying.

*Applause!!!!* That was great! I heartily agree with your sentiments. We don't watch the mainstream TV networks because that same sick-to-your-stomach feeling hits us, too. We quit watching them a few years ago when we were embarrassed to sit through a TV show with our kids. That's exactly why we watch Discovery, A&E, History, National Geo...that kind of thing. Some would probably deem me a hypocrit because I DID let the girls watch MTV, but it didn't take long for that to wear off because by the time we let them watch it, they already knew that the videos they were seeing were just NOT what life was all about, not to mention so explicit that they found themselves embarrassed for US to see them.

I agree wholeheartedly that the bloodlust is a symptom of a deeper problem. Part of that, I believe, goes back to this fantasy that's been created and the frustration felt from not being able to live out that fantasy, frustration because there hasn't been a clear-cut dividing line taught about what IS fantasy and what is reality.

I was glancing at a magazine today, and there was an article about some big show that Oprah is putting on for the African-American women she considers heroes. As I was looking at the pics of some of them, I was struck by the fact that they were celebrities either because of acting, singing, poetry, or the like. I thought to myself..what about the African-American woman raising 6 kids on her own, working 2 or 3 jobs, and living in the ghetto, trying with all her might to get her kids out of there alive and on to a productive life...what about her?? THAT is the woman who is the hero, not the ones that are living in mansions, having "made it" in the big time. But, that is exactly what our society sees as heroic..money, recognizability, power, fame..all the most superficial junk on the planet. What ever happened to people who actually have to LIVE in reality; moral, upright, working so hard they fall into bed at night, struggling against violence in their schools and homes? Where are those people as these famous ones walk up the red carpet, getting their awards, and smiling for the camera?

When is the last time we've seen anyone get recognized for being a plain old good, ethical, hard-working person? That is the real shame of our society. We've taken all the concrete things that construct life and shelved them in favor of story-book examples.

So yeah, there is an outlet needed because there is something missing in people's lives. We were created to care for others, to love our neighbor, to be honest, to bring something into this world that is "real" instead of those things that evaporate as the times change. We've forgotten the foundation of life.

"soul-enriching, not soul-destroying"....how true that is, Brad...it's what we were made for, and it's why we're struggling to live. We survive alright, but most of the time, we don't live.

Blessings,
Terri

Hmmm for some reason, it posted that twice, so I erased the second one....lol.

quote:

I was glancing at a magazine today, and there was an article about some big show that Oprah is putting on for the African-American women she considers heroes. As I was looking at the pics of some of them, I was struck by the fact that they were celebrities either because of acting, singing, poetry, or the like. I thought to myself..what about the African-American woman raising 6 kids on her own, working 2 or 3 jobs, and living in the ghetto, trying with all her might to get her kids out of there alive and on to a productive life...what about her?? THAT is the woman who is the hero, not the ones that are living in mansions, having "made it" in the big time. But, that is exactly what our society sees as heroic..money, recognizability, power, fame..all the most superficial junk on the planet.

That just hit me as powerfully, powerfully true.

When is the last time we've seen anyone get recognized for being a plain old good, ethical, hard-working person? That is the real shame of our society. We've taken all the concrete things that construct life and shelved them in favor of story-book examples.

The last time was right now and I was glad to hear it.

I think too many men see harshness and cruelty as "good for me" love. They see it as character-building. Maybe this is the same for women as well. I don't know. But as viciously competitive as women are in their own way (particularly between themselves) I think the phenomenon I�m talking about, while not uniquely male, at least has a large component that is perhaps more heavily expressed in males.

My gut instinct is that it's all tied in with a sort of tribal "rite of passage" thing. Each of us needs to see in the other's eyes, and in one's own eyes, that they "have made it", that they are part of the tribe, no matter how remote we may be from those days of hunting for lions. This lack of a proper passage is something I�m aware of in myself and that still gives me chills. But I�m aware now that, at least for me, it is about passing the rites that I see as important and necessary, not the steps other people have laid out and think are important. For me, that's a huge thing�but it can hardly be unique. And I have a very sneaking suspicion that those who jump the hurdles placed out there by other people are ultimately more susceptible to losing themselves, becoming more dependent on the opinions of other, and thus setting in motion, or continuing in motion, a whole chain of anguishing events. Peer pressure can get us to do darn near everything from perhaps going on a panty raid to killing our fellow man. I think it would be my premise that there is no more white-knuckle anguish and pain in holding to one's own ideals than there is conforming to others. In fact, I think a serious case could be made that there is less and that it is the only road to peace and any sort of sense of fulfillment. In older times not conforming to the group could and did have serious consequences�even serious life and death consequences. But that is not true but in perhaps some of the ugliest of tribal neighborhoods in America and even then one can simply walk out of that place to the next town if one can summon the vision and courage.

I'm not suggesting overturning the steps toward maturity, toward individuation that men must make. It seems they must in some way. But what I would suggest is that they reach deep down and find those challenges and goals that are important to them, no matter how easy, small, apparently dumb, sissy, or whatever. But that is hard to do. The forces pointing us toward belonging and fitting in seem to far outweigh the forces of doing one's own thing. And that's how and why we can so easily get blown off course and lose touch with ourselves. And for males it is especially difficult to keep to a sense of self when you throw in the crazy-making element of associating harshness and cruelty for love or for what is good for oneself. As soon as that association is made then there is no way out until it is substantially broken. None. Notta. Because deep down, whether men or women, what we want is to be loved, to be held gently, talked to reassuringly, to be supported, to be nurtured.

As men we also need to be challenged and while this challenging can very often look cruel, it surely matters very much the wisdom of the other and what is in his or her heart. It's the difference between passing on the dysfunction by playing out the cruelties that were once thrust upon us or recognizing that other men do indeed need that approving eye of a brother or father. The effect you get dependents on whether it is an exploitative eye or a loving one. Men will jump through fire for the right kind of approval�and they will do so seeking the wrong kind, such is our need to not only belong but to please and serve and thus have purpose.

But we have some innate human tribal thing going on whereby there seems to be some powerful evolutionary advantage if you can get men to swallow their emotions (or at least internally change the associations). That works wonderfully for the pursuit of power. But it does little for the pursuit of the individual or truth. And it will forever be true that when we discard our individuality for what we perceive as group needs or requirements that we are in danger of heading down the road to misery, cruelty, barbarity and dysfunction. But, if only in small ways, we do find ways to make healthy compromises with such forces � including, but not limited to, such things as baseball games.