What If?

You were born very tall or very short?

What if you disliked your name?

What if we lived our faith — practiced it each day?

What if you were married for eternity and lived forever?

What if we changed the world to help those left behind?

What if marriages were all contractual and you could end them every 10 years just by saying so?

What if every day reached 120 degrees Fahrenheit, and water was like gold?

What if you were in line to speak with God for 10 minutes? What would you say? At the end of your time, what might he say to you? Next? 

What if men got pregnant?

What if everyone lost sexual interest at 35?

What if you were born impoverished? Or rich? How would life be different?

What if you could wear only clothes made by famous designers?

What if no one brushed their teeth or used deodorant?

What if hell required imprisonment with someone who disagreed with all of your political opinions?

What if the same person agreed with everything you said and had no ideas of his own? 

What if he believed in a different religion?

What if you suffered from pain every day?

What if you knew what people really think and say about you?

What if the dead could be brought back to life on earth? How would the world change?

What if everyone were taught to use the word love more often than four-letter words? 

What if you had a special piggy bank for charity and put loose change into it every day?

What if you took your kids to a food depository, brought along food, and filled the bags of other donors for those who can’t afford it?

What if you took a homeless person to lunch?

What if we taught kids that money isn’t the secret to happiness and told them what fulfillment really is?

===========

The first photo is by Hisa Matsumura at the Tottori Sand Dunes, sourced from jameslucasit@substack.com. It is followed by an Elephant at Sunset in Amboseli, Kenya, in Early November 2024. It is the work of the photographic artist, Laura Hedien, presented with her kind permission: Laura Hedien Official Website.

Story Telling and Our Weakness for Misinformation

Think about stories. We have them and tell them, all of us. That has been true since the time of Stone Age Man. He tried to explain the world, the sun, the moon, and the stars. Add the plants, animals, and seasons, as well as how to make the best tools, and survive. 

If someone else had a better or more entertaining account of his circumstances, perhaps the first tale would have been altered or forgotten.

The stories that bound small groups together had an advantage over other, more disparate groups of Homo sapiens. The accounts of how to endure and prosper were useful. 

These ideas kept people secure, instructed them in the refinement of weapons, and more. It explained how and when to plant vegetables, communicated strategies for difficult times, and enabled teamwork in self-defense.

Groups that shared the same story prospered and got larger over time. They were made up of people who identified with each other, in part because they shared the same stories, practices, and beliefs. Yuval Harari,* the author of Nexus, provides a more extended view of the role of narratives that cemented various tribes to one another.

What does this have to do with misinformation?

Stories don’t have to be true. A leader who might offer incomplete or flawed knowledge, in some cases could be persuasive in leading followers and making beneficial decisions about peace and war. Tales about the leader’s strengths, the magnetism of his voice and appearance, and his benevolent nature might create a halo effect of confidence in his talents.

Think of how young ones believe in Santa Claus or Superman. Some stories win over adherents, in part, because parents, educators, or clergy encourage belief in them from an early age.

Adults find religious stories compelling for several reasons. Many explain how the world works, provide meaning, describe how best to live, promise a reward after death, and offer a like-minded community. Religions have both benefited mankind and done harm.

Ancient wisdom should not be dismissed with ease, no matter a sceptic’s perspective. Again, stories don’t have to be verifiable to persuade and benefit much of mankind, but sometimes set them against unbelievers, both spiritual and political.

Religion and faith have also enabled communities of worshipers to survive. Faith-based conviction has fueled the inspirational words and actions of leaders like Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.

Attractive and fluent influencers, as well as TV ads, promote alleged excellent products and themselves via brief stories. These performers often suggest that those who do as they do can become more like them. Direct or implied messages cause some of their viewers to model their decisions on what to wear and what to value.

A common phrase descriptive of free trumpeting of products goes, “If the product is free, you are the product.” You pay with loss of privacy, the capture of your attention, becoming the unaware object of persuasion, and perhaps losing your free will.

Humans are vulnerable. With some frequency, they buy into the merchandise promoted and sometimes the promise of little more than hope and a chance to fulfill their desires. 

Goods featured in commercials are touted by everyday folks who claim miraculous transformations. They tell of prior unhappiness. Not just physical distress, but a lack of confidence, sleep, and relationships. With this background, they indicate their lives have been transformed by the wondrous cosmetic, machine, or supplement being sold.

Algorithms determine what captures our attention, including those presenters, products, games, and politicians we find compelling. Recall Michael Jordan, a charismatic basketball star, who is associated with Air Jordan footwear, clothing, and the commercial slogan “Be like Mike.”

Yuval Harari emphasizes that fiction, inclusive of conspiracy theories, has two advantages over truth.

First, fiction can be made as simple as we like, whereas the truth tends to be complicated, because the reality it is supposed to represent is complicated.

Second, the truth is often painful and disturbing, and if we try to make it more comforting and flattering, it will no longer be the truth.

One example is trying to change the minds of those who believe man-made climate change is fake news. Persuasion might require a detailed explanation and a discussion of research methods and findings, which may be beyond the typical listener’s ability to follow. Such a presentation also risks humiliating the subject, returning him to the days of boring lectures by a know-it-all instructor.

There is more. In our troubled and untrusting world, many are not open to information that unsettles their well-being. They may look away due to the stress of the truth of what is happening.

A person’s worldview is often attached to other beliefs that would be undercut by changing such an opinion. It can be easier to believe in untruths and keep on the right side of one’s social circle. 

Painful knowledge that frays or ends relationships with friends and relatives, and loses the benefit of belonging, comes at a high cost. A hoax can be comforting on multiple levels.

The planet is a complicated place these days, but it offers rewards that require recognition of what is happening in it. The birds still sing, the sun still shines, and children still delight in an ice cream cone on a hot day. May they flourish.

We are the caretakers and defenders of such moments, and what astronomer Carl Sagan referred to as a “pale blue dot.”

Earth and all its living things.

==========

All of the photos are the work of Laura Hedien, presented with her kind permission: Laura Hedien Official Website.

In order from the top, they include Elephant at Sunset in Amboseli, Kenya, Early November 2024. Next is a Supercell in Lubbock, Texas, in June 2025. Finally, Texas Sunset with Sunflare in June 2023.

*Here is the link to Yuval Harari’s Nexus, which served as a foundation for this essay.

Some Random Observations That Don’t Tell You What To Do

Here we go:

  • There is strength in numbers. We feel better with the support of other like-minded people who also benefit from our presence.
  • My old friend Mel was a child during the Great Depression. He made no big deal of it because his father supported the family, and Mel never thought he was in any peril. He was a kid, after all. Surviving a calamitous time under favorable circumstances is not the same as experiencing the trouble of others.
  • Those under pressure benefit from our kindness and assistance. The Greeks have a long tradition of hospitality toward the stranger. It goes back to the time of Homer and his Iliad and Odyssey. This sacred duty is called Philoxenia, the opposite of Xenophobia, the fear of strangers.
  • You will be loved, but also betrayed, sometimes by the same person or people you thought to be friends.
  • The world of AI is a bit of a mystery, but it’s worth understanding what is known. This nonhuman, nonliving agent is a growing presence in our lives. Youval Harari, a brilliant public intellectual, is among those who speak intelligently on the subject. He is all over YouTube.
  • I was born in the luckiest historical moment and place in history for white people, just after World War II. Those born later, including my children, have encountered a less favorable set of conditions.
  • My mother used to say, “God helps those who help themselves.” She was not religious, though she prayed to my dad and her mother. Mom wanted to die and asked for their help in the several months she lived after my father passed away. Make what you will of that.

  • When my friend Joe, also a psychologist, was recovering from a heart attack, I stepped in for him with one of his challenging patients. She believed herself the most unfortunate person in world history. This woman expected special consideration from others as a result. Her sense of entitlement was part of her problem.
  • Most of the young and middle-aged do not understand the physical pain brought by old age. I sure didn’t. Better that you don’t.
  • Love and let yourself be loved. OK, I said I wouldn’t tell you to do something, but I couldn’t resist.
  • One of the problems created by the pandemic was skin hunger. We need human or animal physical contact, but not of the cannibal variety.
  • About 13 years ago, I learned how to read in a new way. Instead of judging the author after reading a bit, I tried to understand what the author intended without judgment. I was also instructed not to read background material or expert opinions and explanations of the book’s contents. I came to ponder how the human strengths and flaws portrayed in words might apply to my life, my decisions, and the human condition.
  • Are we free? That depends on how you define freedom, free will in particular. To some degree, we have become the prisoners of algorithms. These early AI interventions into our online lives keep track of what we choose to see and read, and provide us more of it. Included are media that enrages us and contribute to the virality of untruth and conspiracy theories. The only way to achieve freedom from this algorithmic effect is to dispose of our phones and computers. I haven’t heard of anyone who has made this choice.

  • Among my favorite old songs is “If I Had a Hammer,” as sung by Peter, Paul, and Mary. Appropriate for our time. I like “My Boyfriend’s Back,” which has nothing to do with a body part, and “Rock Around the Clock,” as performed by Bill Haley and the Comets. “In the Mood” is a big band favorite from before my time. It still puts me in the mood, meaning thoughts of romance with the woman I love. Then, of course, the instrumental masterpieces of Mahler, Brahms, Beethoven, etc.
  • The 1950s and ’60s offered a proliferation of cowboy TV shows and reruns of World War II movies, not to mention the TV version of Superman. Thereby, kids my age absorbed a simplified version of right and wrong. Native Americans were among the bad guys, a more than unfortunate and dishonest depiction. Nonetheless, the abstract moral principles led me to buy in. I later understood how the white men mistreated the natives, something I never learned in school. More recently, I discovered we no longer agree on right and wrong.
  • Among the most thoughtful action movies of the time was Abandon Ship. An ocean liner on a pleasure cruise strikes a naval mine, which explodes and sinks the ship. The lifeboat has inadequate supplies, and those clinging to it in the ocean lack enough shark repellent. The commanding officer faces a moral dilemma. He considers how to save everyone, an impossible task. The single alternative is to select the hardiest among them for a challenging journey. The rest are forcefully put in the water, resulting in certain death as they float away.
  • We live in a world of ideas. There are more movies, classic books, and transformative, exciting, and uplifting music than one can enjoy in a lifetime of learning, watching, and listening. A friend rereads many of the books he considers the most thoughtful and provocative. If we read such works, the greatest minds of human history still speak to us. They wait patiently for us to listen to their words.

Enough for today. Be well.

==========

The three images are sourced from Wikiart.org.

They are Thinking Thought Bubble by FreyaSyangila, Orangutan Thinking by Dmitry Rozhkov, and The Thinker by Auguste Rodin.

On Therapy, God, and Love

Do you have a minute? I am not trying to sell you on religious faith, but I always appreciate a new idea. 

What does a preacher talking about love and God have to do with a therapist treating someone with depression?

This post is about a man of faith whose approach to the world can be used in therapy. I know this because I used it.

You might remember Reverend William Sloan Coffin Jr. (June 1, 1924 – April 12, 2006) if you read my posts regularly. His name is quite a name, one suggesting death, but he was a person more alive than most of us. He had a beautiful voice and used it to preach and take action for justice.

Wikipedia tells us this:

In his younger days, he was an athlete, a talented pianist, a CIA officer, and later chaplain of Yale University, where the influence of H. Richard Niebuhr‘s social philosophy led him to become a leader in the civil rights movement and peace movements of the 1960s and 1970s. He also was a member of the secret society Skull and Bones. He went on to serve as senior minister at Riverside Church in New York City and President of SANE/Freeze, the nation’s largest peace and justice group, and prominently opposed United States military interventions in conflicts, from the Vietnam War to the Iraq War.

This man was worth emulating. My psychotherapeutic practice reflected that.

As a therapist, I often tried reframing a patient’s worldview when he was in distress, as Coffin did. His approach fit best when I faced a client suffering from self-doubt and wondering whether he could meet a towering challenge. I asked questions to do this—to flip his view of himself and what the future still had to offer.

To someone who contemplated suicide, a friend might say, “Oh, but you have lots to live for,” and then name some reasons why his companion should not end his existence.

Instead, I wished to know, “Why haven’t you killed yourself?” I pursued an answer that attached the individual to life. Perhaps it was his faith, affection for his children, and the goals he hoped to achieve. In evoking his motives rather than those I could have created for him, he took ownership of the worth of his existence and its purpose.

With those who doubted they could defeat their depression, get another job, or find love, my question was a bit different. “Tell me about the moments you felt like this before, when you thought you couldn’t overcome your sadness or whatever was bringing you down.

Before asking such questions, I was confident I would get the response I sought. I trusted the client’s words would reveal resilience, strength, and the man’s remembered episodes of triumph, affirming his ability to bounce back. When he gave me what I wanted, I said, “You just identified the things you’ve conquered, haven’t you?

Yes.

Do you believe you still have those capacities, those skills, that courage within you?

Yes.

He was saying yes to life — his own.

In the video above, Reverend Coffin tells a similar story about a well-known man of his time, a dying friend, Norman Thomas. Like his old comrade in arms, Reverend Thomas was also a social activist, but unlike Coffin, he was a presidential candidate on multiple occasions.

He had also lost his faith.

In the YouTube clip, Coffin doesn’t tell his ally why he should believe in God. Instead, he flips the question of whether God believes in him and shows him love. The response he gets from his dying colleague, a man he called Big Daddy, is worth the 65 seconds it takes to watch the clip.

I hope you do.

=====

 

The painting at the top is Easy Dark by Julie Mehretu, 2007. It was sourced from Wikiart.org/

Words for the Second Day of the New Year

Lord … Number us, we beseech Thee, in the ranks of those who went forth … longing only for those things for which Thee dost make us long, men for whom the complexity of issues only serves to renew their zeal to deal with them, men who alleviated pain by sharing it, and men who are always willing to risk something big for something good — so may we leave in the world a little more truth, a little more justice, and a little more beauty than would have been there had we not loved the world enough to quarrel with it for what it is not — but still could be.

Oh God, take our minds and think through them, take our lips and speak through them, and take our hearts and set them on fire.

Amen.

The words are those of William Sloane Coffin, Jr. (1924 -2006). I will write more about him in a future post, but this is enough for today. Check out Coffin on Wikipedia if you’d like to know more now.

==========

The first painting is Chimera by Gustave Moreau from 1884. The last is Blueberry Eyes by Franz Kline, 1960. Chimera is sourced from Wikimedia Commons, while Blueberry Eyes comes from Wikiart.org.

Fundamentalism Without the Fun

What is it like to be raised in a strict religious home? Fundamentalism without the fun, at least according to two memoirs.

Though the authors were raised in Pentecostal Christian and Orthodox Jewish faiths, respectively, there are more similarities to their experiences than differences.

These two stories suggest that Tolstoy was wrong when he wrote, “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way,” at least for the unhappy families named Winterson and Auslander.

Sounds grim, doesn’t it? But Jeanette Winterson (born in 1959) and Shalom Auslander (born in 1970) write so brilliantly, often with side-splitting humor, that you don’t come away darkened by their experience, though you enter their darkness.

Winterson’s memoir, Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal? takes place in northern England, mainly in the 1960s and ’70s, while Auslander’s 2007 Foreskin’s Lament is located in the New York City/New Jersey area of a more recent time, with a brief side-trip to Israel.

Both writers survived oppressive childhoods, although Auslander’s family might have been somewhat more loving. Physical abuse was present in both, with Winterson’s again more severe.

How did they survive? Winterson’s comments capture a possible answer:

The one good thing about being shut in a coal-hole is that it prompts reflection.

Read on its own that is an absurd sentence. But as I try and understand how life works — why some people cope better than others with adversity — I come back to something to do with saying yes to life, which is love of life, however inadequate, and love for the self, however found.

Not in the me-first way that is the opposite of life and love, but with a salmon-like determination to swim upstream, however choppy upstream is, because this is your stream…

“Mrs. Winterson,” as the author refers to her adoptive mother in the text, is described as “a flamboyant depressive; a woman who kept a revolver in the duster drawer, and the bullets in a tin of Pledge. A woman who stayed up all night baking cakes to avoid sleeping in the same bed as my father” and who expected Jeanette “to live out some of her unlived life.”

Mother was “out of scale, larger than life,” filling up a phone booth with her girth. As to the author’s father, Winterson recalls an earlier novel where she wrote, “My father liked to watch the wrestling, my mother liked to wrestle.”

When Jeanette disappointed them, her mother told this adopted only child that “The Devil led us to the wrong crib.”

Both Winterson’s and Auslander’s homes were full of carefully observed restrictions. For Auslander, the various Jewish dietary laws chafed (forbidding pork; not eating milk and meat products at the same time or on the same dishes).

All the while, God’s ominous presence loomed as large for Auslander as Mrs. Winterson did for Jeanette. According to Auslander, not only did the Jews have to deal with historical mistreatment by human enemies, but those disasters “were nothing compared to the punishments meted out to us by the man himself. Then there would be famines. Then there would be floods. Then there would be furious vengeance. Hitler might have killed the Jews, but this man (God) drowned the world,” recalling Noah and the story of his ark.

Unlike Winterson’s passive father, who struck Jeanette only upon instruction from his wife, Shalom’s dad could be violent after drinking too much wine.

Auslander’s family troubles didn’t end with their father. He compared his preoccupations with those of the Rabbi of his temple:

Rabbi Blonsky was forty years old, and he worried a lot about the Jewish people. I was nine years old, and it was the Jewish people in my house I was worried about.

As the boy saw it, “My mother had more pictures of the dead on our walls than she had of the living, and the dead seemed to be having a better time; my brother hated my mother and resented me; my mother loathed my brother and doted on me and my sister; my sister hated my brother and pitied my mother; my father hated us all; and my mother sighed, washed dishes, and sang mournful Yiddish songs about the miserable futility of life.”

That futility found a match in Jeanette’s Pentecostal Christian home, where mum prayed every day, “Lord, let me die:”

My mother, Mrs. Winterson, didn’t love life. She didn’t believe that anything would make life better. She once told me that the universe is a cosmic dustbin — and after I had thought about this for a bit, I asked her if the lid was on or off.

‘On,’ she said. ‘Nobody escapes.’

Winterson and Auslander rebelled, although, in her case, it was at the expense of a three-day church exorcism sans food and heat.

The church flock took mum’s lead in this ritual when Mrs. Winterson reported her daughter’s iniquity to them. They literally tried to purge the devil from her with the help of beatings, all while she was permitted little sleep. To their disappointment, the devil didn’t “pop out.”

Winterson, who lived in a family that forbade secular books other than Mrs. W.’s murder mysteries, found refuge in reading and hiding those she smuggled into the house until her mother discovered the cache and burned them all.

Auslander ate forbidden food, smoked marijuana, looked at pornographic magazines, shoplifted, and violated Sabbath restrictions, all surreptitiously. But for Shalom, the fear of a vengeful God never left him, as he remained “painfully, cripplingly, incurably, miserably, religious” at the same time that he gave God “the finger” by violating religious strictures, fearing the worst would follow.

Each story has an inevitable showdown between the young adult protagonist and the parents. For Winterson, it came in a confrontation with Mrs. W. about Jeanette’s lesbian relationship with another young woman and a daughter’s failure to please her mum:

“Jeanette, will you tell me why?”

“What why?

“You know what why.

“But I don’t know what why… what I am… why I don’t please her. What she wants. Why I am not what she wants. What I want or why. But there is something I know: When I am with her I am happy. Just happy).

“She nodded. She seemed to understand and I thought, really for that second, that she would change her mind, that we would talk, that we would be on the same side of the glass wall. I waited.

“She said, ‘Why be happy when you could be normal?'”

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Blake_ancient_of_days.jpg/256px-Blake_ancient_of_days.jpg

For Shalom Auslander, the crisis in his relationship with his parents and sister came over the question of the ritual circumcision of his newborn son. His religion required him to obtain this “mutilation” (removal of the foreskin on the baby’s penis) according to an ordained schedule and by the proper religiously anointed person, rather than in a hospital by a physician before discharge, as in fact happened:

Thousands of years ago, a terrified, half-mad old man genitally mutilated his son, hoping it would buy him some points with the Being he hoped was running the show. Over the years, equally terrified men wrote blessings and composed prayers and devised rituals (for this event).

Six thousand years later, a father will not look his grandson in the face, and a mother and sister will defend such behavior, because the child wasn’t mutilated in precisely the right fashion.

As you might guess, both writers struggled with creating loving and trusting relationships, but each seemed to have made significant progress by the end of their stories. Auslander’s is the more wildly irreverent book — both bitter and bitter-sweet. Winterson’s memoir is more knowingly psychological and sad.

Both will make you laugh out loud. Both will make you think about what our parents do to us and what we do to ourselves and our own kids.

Neither one will cause you to give up your faith, if you have one, or convert, for that matter. Their memoirs serve as a reminder of what long-reach parents can have and that religion, in the wrong hands, is something like Mrs. Winterson’s revolver.

A dangerous weapon indeed.

—–

The top image is the dust jacket of Jeanette Winterson’s Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal? sourced from her website where you can also hear her reading from the book. The second image is the front cover of the paperback version of Foreskin’s Lament.

Two videos that include Auslander’s voice-overs from his book can be found here: Auslander videos. The final picture shows God measuring the world in William Blake’s 1794 Ancient of Dayssourced from Wikimedia Commons.

What Might There Be … After Life?

File:Sc 2.jpg

Never having been there, I am short of first-hand knowledge of the afterlife. Nonetheless, my focus here is to treat this topic as a thought experiment, including what I and others have imagined about life in the hereafter. 

———-

When I was a kid, an athlete who hit a home run or scored a touchdown didn’t make an enormous deal of it. Today, a significant number point to the sky, presumably to heaven, to give thanks.

In some cases, this represents a “Gott mit uns” attitude, a tribal view some countries adopt in and out of war-time: “God on our side.”

Other jocks state they are expressing gratitude for the gift of health and talent they received from God. This assumes one’s definition of an omnipotent deity includes distributing individualized skills to humans.

A casual conversation about heaven often includes the hope that our parents are looking after us from beyond the grave.

Of course, the thought is lovely. But what implications follow if paradise consists of people concerned about what is going on back home?

One such question this raises is how interest in our sometimes problematic lives might interfere with their never-ending happiness once they have entered the great beyond? Witnessing a child’s continuing hardships, accidents, injuries, and disappointments is heartbreaking and challenging enough when you live here.

Who among us wishes for emotional suffering to be written in the playbook of life after death?

Instead, let’s assume “the dead don’t care,” a refrain in Thomas Lynch’s book Undertakings. Lynch is a published poet and a professional undertaker, so his vantage point is unique. If our parents and loved ones no longer care about us (assuming they reside in heaven), they must be different creatures than those we knew on Earth.

Consistent with Lynch, when the actress Farrah Fawcett died in 2009, Michael Jackson’s nearly simultaneous demise overshadowed her life’s conclusion. A few of my patients expressed sadness that the media didn’t attend more to her passing. As Thomas Lynch envisions it, however, Farrah wasn’t bothered.

Again, “not caring” appears outside our customary belief about the nature of the hereafter. The petty jealousies of life, the hunger, the (at least) occasional insomnia, the worry, and so forth do not fit most heavenly visions.

If indifference to what occurs on our planet is characteristic of the afterworld, I doubt we would recognize celestial inhabitants as similar to their earthly incarnations. Moreover, I imagine one would be so transformed in conveyance to heaven as to have difficulty recognizing oneself.

A change of that sort might point to a different explanation of how heavenly life would be untroubled among deceased Christian parents who hold on to the attachment to their kids past the death that usually precedes that of their child. Romans 8: 28 offers these words:

And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are called according to his purpose.

———-

After Life is an intriguing Japanese movie from 1998. Recently, deceased countrymen assemble at a transit station to the “beyond.” Each is given several days to decide on their version of eternity. They would then live forever in whatever brief interval they choose from their just-ended time on Earth.

The wayfarers are assigned a counselor to assist them in choosing. To live “in the moment,” that is, a particular moment forever, necessitates relinquishing the ability to think back and remember the past, as well as gaze forward and anticipate the future. 

Experiencing the most precious happening one can recall involves sensations and feelings attached only to a sliver of time. The dead then would no longer have access to thought, analysis, worry, reflection, or concentration on other things, including positive experiences and events.

Because of that limitation on their future, the people in the waystation struggle with giving up all other recollections and relationships in return for eternity within a single juncture in time with a singular focus.

From the outside, once past the choice point, eternal bliss sounds like a heaven worth wishing for, assuming one chose a joyous, exciting, or touching event from one’s life. It also raises an interesting question: What moment would one choose?

Another possible future after death might be to reside beside a righteous, all-knowing, all-mighty being so dazzling as to render all imperfections and doubts mute, allowing us to share in his glory and shining presence.

Yet most of us fear our ending, the act of dying, or both. Why?

Shakespeare’s Hamlet fears a terrifying afterlife. As you learned in school, his famous soliloquy begins, “To be or not to be …” Hamlet is considering whether to kill himself: “not to be.” The King of Denmark, his father, has been murdered, and his mother unwittingly married the murderer, his uncle.

At first, this young man imagines a post-worldly existence consisting of eternal, restful sleep. But what of the possible nightmares, the Prince of Denmark wonders?

To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, ’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there’s the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. …

Another film on life and the afterlife is Defending Your Life. Albert Brooks and Meryl Streep star as two forty-something deceased yuppies who meet in a beautiful metropolis after expiring, a place of ease for those who have just departed life. In a few days, they fall in love.

During their stay in Judgement City, as their temporary location is called, they are subjected to a three-person tribunal determining whether they will go to a higher level of existence, something like heaven.

Streep’s character was a heroic, generous, and loving woman in her lifetime. A better future seems certain for her. For the Brooks persona, however, things aren’t looking up. He never overcame his many fears and always played it safe. As a result, he risks being returned to his home planet, never again embracing the woman he loves. The future remains in doubt.

No spoilers. The story is a funny, entertaining, and wise take on the need to grow in wisdom and courage throughout our lives: to be brave in facing whatever comes.

Next stop, Judgement City? Not too soon, I hope.

==========

The top image is Stratoculuili from German Wikipedia, September 2004 by de: Benutzer. Living Shadow.

It is followed by four glorious 2022 photographs by Laura Hedien with her kind permission: Laura Hedien Official Website. The first two are pictures of the Sunset in the Italian Dolomites. Next comes a Great Plains Summertime Sunset and, finally, an Italian Dolomites Sunrise.

Michael Gerson: Fighting Depression with Hope, Faith, and Love

On the day before the Super Bowl, I’m guessing the short supply of serious newspaper readers is smaller than usual.

Still, the mention of Michael Gerson in today’s New York Times demands attention, though he can no longer know that anyone cares. He was a good man and perhaps a great one who died in December. Fifty-eight is too young for the departure of a person whose presence on the earth made it a better place.

Funny, I should say that. I didn’t always agree with his politics and didn’t vote for the President for whom he wrote speeches.

But in my book, I don’t have to agree with you to admire you, as I did him. I envied his gift of language, his principled stance on matters of importance, and a heroic battle that found him outlasted by death: a bigger-than-life opponent with an undefeated record.

Gerson fought a chemically-based depression severe enough for hospitalization, serious heart disease, and cancer that killed him. Outnumbered, you might say, but not out of hope, faith, and love.

I don’t have to believe in your faith to praise the way you go beyond the weekly attendance at a house of worship to live it. Gerson lived his own beliefs in deep consideration and helping the unfortunate. President Biden just hailed the 20th anniversary of the “President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief” created by President George W. Bush and Mr. Gerson. In today’s Times, Peter Baker said their effort saved more than 25 million lives.

Since my words pale to Michael Gerson’s, I hope you watch and listen to him in the video above, an invited Sunday sermon given three years ago. He will tell you enough about his troubles, his concern for the disadvantaged, and his belief in something transcendent to regret his early passing.

The Super Bowl can’t do that, though I hope you enjoy it.

A few seconds at halftime won’t be wasted to remember a humble, wounded, and wise man beyond describing with anyone’s words but his own.

Why Does Suffering Happen?

Good and bad, up and down, things happen. We prefer wins over losses and joy rather than sadness. While treatment often helps with suffering, reducing distress isn’t sufficient for a thoughtful therapist or client.

Most of us attempt to understand why we suffer. The attempt to reckon with this fact of life is called a philosophical approach to suffering, as described by Professor Edith Hall in discussing ancient Greek Tragedy.

Many answers have been offered, of which Dr. Hall mentions the first two below:

  • The individual who experienced a tragic event did something “stupid.” The person made a mistake. “He should have known better,” we might say to ourselves. In other words, the man made an error in judgment.
  • The misfortune goes far beyond what can be fully explained. The Professor cites Oedipus as an example. This king is arrogant and impulsive, not inclined to listen to advice or display kindness, but hasn’t earned the horror that befalls him.

  • A more satisfying answer can be found in the New Testament. Romans 8:28 tells us, “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” In other words, something positive will come from misfortune.
  • What is commonly referred to as Bad Karma is thought to be the result of your behavior in present or previous lives. Hindu sects suggest you must improve your actions and thoughts through successive reincarnated lives until you reach perfection. Doing so allows you to escape the cycle of death and rebirth on earth.
  • Some fundamentalist religions ascribe misfortune to a failure of your personal faith. They sometimes point to your misunderstanding of what God requires, leaving the directives of their “only true religion” unfulfilled.
  • Stoic philosophers tell us misfortune occurs within the regular unfolding of human existence. We suffer because we are mortal, subject to worldly events. Hurtful challenges offer opportunities to improve ourselves but aren’t fashioned by divine authority. We are left with the necessity of growing and taking on life as it is, not as we wish it could be. The Stoics encourage reminding ourselves of life’s brevity, living with the urgency such awareness imposes, and focusing on what we control. Since we cannot change the conditions, they suggest we accept them.

  • Speaking in a general way, Buddhism tells us life is suffering. To endure the pain and reach an elevated state (Nirvana), one is advised to empty himself of wanting and desire, two sources of unhappiness. The aim is to surrender our sense of individuality and merge with a higher state of being, a spiritual awakening known as “no self.” Meditation helps. Hinduism and Buddhism take various forms, as many religions do.
  • Let’s not forget the devil, a creature sometimes blamed for our catastrophes. Unfortunately, once we begin calling people “evildoers” or similar names, we move closer to harming them and becoming like the individuals we hate.
  • I’ll limit this list to one more cause of adversity: poor luck, randomness, or a lack of discoverable reasons. You walk down the block, and a falling brick strikes you. A shame.

Any solution to the “why” question must offer comfort. We’d probably be less inclined to keep asking such questions if they provided a satisfying and lasting answer. Watching dramatic enactments or reading books that keep the issue before us indicates we don’t easily let go of our preoccupation.

One way we try to quell our worries is to find heroic defenders. A strong mate, a gifted physician, and a charismatic political leader can serve this purpose. History tells us about injured soldiers in every war crying for their mothers.

Outside of reliance on others, most attempts to quiet the fear of suffering require regular “practice.” For example, Bible reading, the Stoic’s daily reminder of his mortality, and the Buddhist’s quiet meditation. All attempt to soothe or dismiss the looming possibility of future hardship.

Still, we are left with some related concerns. When misfortune occurs to someone else, do we feel better? Perhaps, if we believe their “mistakes” offer us the confidence we will not duplicate what they did.

The religious answers suggest some order exists in the universe. On the other hand, the presence of random unpredictability tends to be unsatisfying at least, terrifying at worst.

Do we blame others more than we blame ourselves when things go poorly? That is consistent with my observation, though not true of everyone. Humans are gifted with psychological defenses against full awareness of their flaws.

Is there any advantage to asking the question of why we suffer? I’d say yes. It can prepare you for unexpected events.

Considering the question may also raise your level of compassion and kindness, not setting you above the remainder of humanity.

Thus, the topic inclines us to embrace our universal circumstances as fellow suffers. As one might say, “There but for the grace of God go I.”

We are all mortals — every living being on the planet. We share the need to join together to make enlightened use of our fleeting time on earth. To do otherwise will leave us vulnerable to circumstances beyond individual control.

The question of philosophical suffering is optional, of course. There is no requirement to think about it or provide a specific answer.

One could argue too much preoccupation with such thoughts carries its own distress. If you think about how we live, no small part of our time is spent worrying about trivial issues. Much of our attention is put into self-distraction or various forms of entertainment.

It is your life to do as you wish. Choose wisely.

This fellow human wishes you the best life possible.

=======================

The top image is a Question Mark Choice created by quimono. After the brief youtube video featuring Dr. Hall comes Meditation at Empty Cloud Monastery by Rikku411. The final photo is called Reading in Solitude, the work of benwhitephotography. All are derived from Wikimedia Commons.

On the Need for Privacy

We are much occupied with public words these days. They often involve the need for privacy. Others focus on what is patriotic and nationalistic and whether you and I are one or both.

We think we understand the meaning of all these words, though some people express certainty about the interpretation of the U.S Constitution without having read it.

Not that such reading is time-consuming. I own a small paper-covered booklet of 38 pages containing every word. It is in the back pocket of my blue jeans right now, with room to spare.

I won’t go on at great length here. I am not an attorney, though I know the document just mentioned and studied it a bit with a gifted scholar on the subject.

What I will do instead is to provoke your thought with the brief and wise words of two people more knowledgeable than I am.

The first is Louis Brandeis, who offered an opinion on privacy in a 1928 Supreme Court Case: Olmstead v. United States. Brandeis was an Associate Justice of the Court at the time.

The second comment attempts to distinguish between the motivations of two different groups of people. The thoughts come from Jill Lepore’s short 2019 book, This America: The Case for the Nation. The author is a Professor of History at Harvard.

You can read these excerpted thoughts in a minute or two. I hope you think about them much longer.

1. Louis Brandeis:

The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man’s spiritual nature, of his feelings, and of his intellect. They knew that only part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone — the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.

2. Jill Lepore:

Patriotism is animated by love, nationalism by hatred. To confuse the one for the other is to pretend that hate is love and fear is courage.

=====

The first photo is of Louis Brandeis by Harris & Ewing. It was sourced from Wikipedia Commons. The second one is Jill Lepore from Amazon.com/