Up@dawn 2.0

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Happiness today

Grades in. Time to exhale.

Soon as I pushed the “submit” button yesterday, I received a query from one of our public information officers:
Since you taught a class on “The Philosophy of Happiness,” would you have a moment to respond to this reporter? His deadline is 1 p.m. Central Dec. 21.

The reporter’s questions:
What constitutes happiness today? It used to be about the American Dream, but that concept is slipping away. Are we happier today than we were? Why or why not? How is happiness sought after differently today than, say, 50 years ago? Why are we less happy?

My off-the-cuff reply... 

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Happy Holidays

It's all over but the grading. I'll submit final grades by Monday morning. Have a happy holiday break, everyone. See you next year!

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Continued happiness

We're done, except for those of you who are writing additional short essays to try and bump an earlier exam score. Please get those to me by Wednesday the 14th.

This site will remain up, until the next time I teach the course - projected for the Fall of '13. I invite you all to continue sharing your reflections, epiphanies, reading suggestions, and other happiness insights in this space. I feel like we've only just begun to explore this most vital topic. Why stop now?

As Mr. Keillor says: "Be well, do good work, and keep in touch."

And, of course: Happy Holidays!


JPO
p.s.  If you're still looking for a Spring course, consider "Atheism & Philosophy"...

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

presentation

I am presenting on the notion of the self and emptiness as ultimate reality.

Friday, December 2, 2011

Good reports!

I really enjoyed yesterday's reports, and look forward to the rest of them on Tuesday.

I love days like yesterday: wall-to-wall final report presentations, every one of them thoughtful and enlightening, preceded by quality time with Younger Daughter (home on a sick day, asking for a story) and capped with an excellent James tutorial.
In SOL, Bonnie reported on grumpy Eric Wilson’s contrarian stand “against happiness.” Melancholy has its place, he says, especially other people’s melancholy. It’s “the muse of great literature, painting, music, and innovation,” a “wellspring of creativity.” I was reminded of Peter (Listening to Prozac) Kramer and his counter-contrarian screed “against depression.” And of Lou Marinoff’s Plato, Not Prozac. Can philosophers ever replace drugs, at (say) $75 an hour? I don’t have my philosophical counselinglicense yet but I’m still willing to give it a shot, if anybody wants to give me a hire.
And you might, if you heard Erik’s catalog of Celexa side-effects:
Abdominal pain, agitation, anxiety, diarrhea, drowsiness, mouth, ejaculation disorders, fatigue, impotence, indigestion, insomnia, loss of appetite, nausea, painful menstruation, respitory tract infection, sinus or nasal inflammation, sweating, tremor, and vomiting, Amnesia, attempted suicide, confusion, coughing, decreased sexual drive, depression, excessive urination, fever, gas, impaired concentration, increased appetite, increased salivation, itching, joint pain, lack of emotion, loss of menstruation, low blood pressure, migraine, muscle pain, rapid heartbeat, rash, skin tingling, taste disturbances, visual disturbances, weight gain, weight loss, and yawning.
Ah, the miracle of modern medicine. But I think I can get most of those on my own for free, without a prescription.
Rebekah talked about self-help, to which she confesses an addiction even though she knows it doesn’t really “help.” Specifically, Scott Berkun’sMindfire challenges us to “learn from your mistakes.” I’ve learned a lot. Seriously, as James says in “Will to Believe,”
Our errors are surely not such awfully solemn things. In a world where we are so certain to incur them in spite of all our caution, a certain lightness of heart seems healthier than this excessive nervousness on their behalf. At any rate, it seems the fittest thing for the empiricist philosopher.
Connor reported on Andrew Newberg‘s neurotheology. Are some people simply born to believe? And some of us not? And does the putative existence of a “G(od)-spot” in the brain discredit or strengthen religion’s credibility? What if peyote activates it? (“If you really want to see God, try some of this.”) We may need to talk some more about that on Tuesday. (Post continues...)

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Jonathan's Comments

Forgive me for my awkward commenting technqiue again, it will not allow me to post comments the normal way again :(.


At this point we may be tired of the Dalai Lama, but this article published in the New York Times in 2005 is quite interesting. I believe this is expounded upon in his work "The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality."
Here are some big points:

1. "Science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and understanding of reality"
I believe this is often taken for granted, as scientific "discovery" is of such great importance due to financial backing, contributors, etc. and as for Buddhism - which is a religion - the "understanding reality" concept is often lost in a blinding faith theory. Perhaps I am simply cynical about religion, but I found this idea to be quite refreshing. I appreciate that such a revered spiritual leader embraces both scientific and religious study, but does not claim either to be infallible.

2.Meditation as studied by neurologists
Meditation is thought to alter brain function, and can be linking to happiness, attention, as well as perhaps increased empathy.
- "The goal of taking methods out of the traditional context is to studying potential benefits and share them with those who may find them helpful."

3. There are ethical considerations which need to be considered as we face scientific advancement
The Dalai Lama proposes a "secular ethics," which embrace the principles we share as human beings: compassion, tolerance, consideration of others, the responsible use of knowledge and power. These principles transcend the barriers between religious believers and non-believers; they belong not to one faith, but to all faiths.

The idea here is that moral thinking has not kept up with society and scientific discovery, but in the same breath one may say the same of many religions. The Dalai Lama advocates for "deeper dialogue" between science and society. This is a concern for human existence itself.
In his final words, "Scientists should be more than merely technically adept; they should be mindful of their own motivation and the larger goal of what they do: the betterment of humanity."

The Dalai Lama also points to the central motivation in a larger cultural and religious context. Are we truly mindful of our own motivation? Is it a lust for power, praise, or eternal life after death? Most would probably agree that the fact that more and more businesses are making a great return to focus on ethical practices is a good thing. But what about science and religion? Is this possible? There certainly are ethical standards irregardless of religion, but we will never be able to separate the cultural relativism and traditional norms that construct and maintain each society's ethical core.

These questions will probably never be answered, but I believe in many ways they are central to our understanding of the world around us and in many ways our happiness. We must decide if something is done for the betterment of humanity - if that is even our goal - and in order to challenge norms we must be willing to go against what has become ingrained as scientific advancement and religious fervor.


Comment begins here:


I'm not quite sure if this has anything to do with the comment, but I can not shake off my own cynicism of the very idea of "If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims," a statement made by the Dalai Lama. For what purpose or what gain would that achieve? And is it possible? According to George Johnson, author of the article “'The Universe in a Single Atom': Reason and Faith”, not so much. He says, “when it comes to questions about life and its origins, this would-be man of science begins to waver. Though he professes to accept evolutionary theory, he recoils at one of its most basic tenets: that the mutations that provide the raw material for natural selection occur at random. Look deeply enough, he suggests, and the randomness will turn out to be complexity in disguise - "hidden causality," the Buddha's smile. There you have it, Eastern religion's version of intelligent design. He also opposes physical explanations for consciousness, invoking instead the existence of some kind of irreducible mind stuff, an idea rejected long ago by mainstream science,” (George Johnson). He goes on to conclude about a protest on the Dalai Lama's “science of meditation, is known for "hyperbolic claims, limited research and compromised scientific rigor,” (George Johnson). He also says “Inviting a holy man to address a scientific conference may be leaving the back door ajar for ghosts.”

But besides all that, what is left when you take the faith out of a faith? There is nothing wrong with trying to validate beliefs, but if you are going to leave it to an objective standard, faith becomes obsolete. It must then go through the scientific rigorous process and what is left is honestly nothing but a few lucky guesses that survive the process (if any) and ethical values which aren't even limited to any religion; ultimately, just another philosophy-devoid of spirituality, subjectivity, warmth, community/culture, ritual, faith, replaced with cold hard facts and ethical values (which would seem out of place as it has nothing to do with science). It's like Christians taking all of the supernatural out of Christianity-no god, no divinity of Jesus, no resurrection, no biblical stories, no ritual, no church, just scientific theories and ethical values (which would probably change to, as they would have no base or justification). I'm not trying to define religion here, but I can just take a few science classes, learn some ethical values from somewhere, and I guess I'm a born again Christian? Maybe a Muslim?Jewish? Buddhists? I honestly don't know, I just feel that when you try to mesh ultimately two separate ideals together, they kind of cancel each other out.


What makes a faith beautiful, exotic, and faith based, is the supernatural. It's what makes it alluring to some and a turn off to others. An emotional, subjective, and spiritual experience as opposed to an objective, neutral, and natural one. What is there to gain in objectifying it? Credibility? To prove one faith is right and all the others are wrong once and for all? To convert everyone over to one side? Then what?

When you take any religion and concentrate all your efforts in trying to prove it has all the answers and its more accurate than anything else, you have ultimately lost sight of the original purpose and are missing out on something that can be truly beneficial. All you are left with is a political struggle that goes nowhere, but travels an eternity through time.

Mistakes

If all goes well I'm going to be presenting tomorrow on an article written by Scott Berkun "How to Identify and Learn from Your Mistakes." This may seem a bit off topic, but as we have studied happiness throughout the semester we have focused a lot on what society (thanks to Positive Thinking), individuals, and experts believe lead to a sense of happiness. I still cannot answer that first question posed on Day #1, "What do you believe happiness is? Is there a path to true happiness?" I believe it has a lot to do with being able to recognize our past failings, or mistakes rather, and to accept our past without dwelling in it daily.

Here is a link to the article, http://lifehacker.com/mistakes/. You might also want to check out the writer and public speaker's blog: http://www.scottberkun.com/essays/44-how-to-learn-from-your-mistakes/. He is a best-selling author, having written Mindfire: Big Ideas for Curious Minds, Confessions of a Public Speaker, The Myths of Innovation, Making Things Happen: Mastering Project Management.

"Our Faith in Science" - Tenzin Gyatso

At this point we may be tired of the Dalai Lama, but this article published in the New York Times in 2005 is quite interesting. I believe this is expounded upon in his work "The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality."

Here are some big points:
1. "Science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and understanding of reality"
I believe this is often taken for granted, as scientific "discovery" is of such great importance due to financial backing, contributors, etc. and as for Buddhism - which is a religion - the "understanding reality" concept is often lost in a blinding faith theory. Perhaps I am simply cynical about religion, but I found this idea to be quite refreshing. I appreciate that such a revered spiritual leader embraces both scientific and religious study, but does not claim either to be infallible.

2.Meditation as studied by neurologists
Meditation is thought to alter brain function, and can be linking to happiness, attention, as well as perhaps increased empathy.
- "The goal of taking methods out of the traditional context is to studying potential benefits and share them with those who may find them helpful."

3. There are ethical considerations which need to be considered as we face scientific advancement
The Dalai Lama proposes a "secular ethics," which embrace the principles we share as human beings: compassion, tolerance, consideration of others, the responsible use of knowledge and power. These principles transcend the barriers between religious believers and non-believers; they belong not to one faith, but to all faiths.
The idea here is that moral thinking has not kept up with society and scientific discovery, but in the same breath one may say the same of many religions. The Dalai Lama advocates for "deeper dialogue" between science and society. This is a concern for human existence itself.

In his final words, "Scientists should be more than merely technically adept; they should be mindful of their own motivation and the larger goal of what they do: the betterment of humanity."

The Dalai Lama also points to the central motivation in a larger cultural and religious context. Are we truly mindful of our own motivation? Is it a lust for power, praise, or eternal life after death? Most would probably agree that the fact that more and more businesses are making a great return to focus on ethical practices is a good thing. But what about science and religion? Is this possible? There certainly are ethical standards irregardless of religion, but we will never be able to separate the cultural relativism and traditional norms that construct and maintain each society's ethical core.

These questions will probably never be answered, but I believe in many ways they are central to our understanding of the world around us and in many ways our happiness. We must decide if something is done for the betterment of humanity - if that is even our goal - and in order to challenge norms we must be willing to go against what has become ingrained as scientific advancement and religious fervor.


Depression Medications

I am going to be presenting on the myths and long-term effects of anti-depressant medications like Prozac. A good website for info on these drugs is http://helpguide.org/mental/medications_depression.htm

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

In Praise of Melancholy

We’ve spent an entire semester exploring ways to define, reach, obtain, and/ or conquer happiness. But who says we’re supposed to be happy?

In Against Happiness, Eric Wilson argues, in a typically Romantic essay, that melancholia is not only good, but necessary for a thriving culture; “that it is the muse of great literature, painting, music, and innovation--and that it is the force underlying original insights. So enough Prozac-ing our brains. Let’s embrace our depressive side as the wellspring of creativity. It’s time to throw off the shackles of positivity and relish the blues that make us human.” On his blog, Wilson phrases that he is against the pop culture driven positiveness and aims to “challenge America’s addiction to superficial happiness and demonstrate the revelatory powers of melancholy.”

His worry, and I’ll admit it’s mine also, is that amid today’s cornucopia of antidepressants and self-help books (from “armchair philosophers and clinical psychologists to the Dalai Lama)--used to treat “mild sadness”--might make “sweet sorrow” an anachronistic expression.

This sorrow (which he does go to lengths to differentiate from severe depression, which needs medical intervention) is sweet because it flavors our world in making it more rich, more expressive, and more human. Thus, when we embrace ourselves, melancholy and all, we not only enhance our self understanding but we also enhance how we relate to each other and the “terrible beauties” of the world around us.



D: Wilson explores the link between sadness, artistic creation and depression, which has led to suicide in many well-known cases: Virginia Woolf, Vincent Van Gogh, Hart Crane and Ernest Hemingway, for instance. He says perhaps this is "just part of the tragic nature of existence, that sometimes there's a great price to be paid for great works or beauty, for truth."

Is melancholy a fair exchange for works, beauty, or truth?

My answer is perhaps, if the truth you are finding through your melancholy inspires you to reinvigorate, reevaluate, and remark at the world that surrounds you.


Some excerpts available:

http://books.google.com/books/about/Against_Happiness.html?id=KREKDJVDuo4C


Eric Wilson’s Blog

http://againsthappiness.blogspot.com

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Next

Nice reports today from Brian on Geography of Bliss and Chris on how language structures not only our concepts but also our "affect" or capacity for happiness.

All other presenters, please be present and ready to deliver on Thursday. Please post your topic and suggested reading by Wednesday. Also, please give us a discussion question pertaining to your topic.

If you can also give me a brief summary of your main talking points, that's helpful.

Essays from everyone else are due on Tuesday, our last class.

We're not doing a final exam, so if you want to try and bump one of your previous exam scores just do an additional short essay (min. 3 pages) on the happiness topic of your choice and turn it in by the 14th.

JPO

Sunday, November 27, 2011

This site sheds light on some of the core concepts in Buddhism.

The link leads to the page description on emptiness as form/It has a pretty thorough and easy to understand explanation on one of the harder/trickier concepts. It incorporates physics and math to demonstrate a more practical application.

Here is an excerpt on karma and rebirth.

If the idea of non-self sounds odd, then it must sound even more curious that non-self can be reborn. There is a seeming contradiction between the canon of rebirth and that of the non-self, which even many Buddhists find difficult to understand. The contradiction is, however, only on the surface and can be solved if one pictures the self as the result of karmic formation. This can be put into less abstract words:
If we imagine the world as an ocean, we are like the ripples on the ocean. Formations like ripples and waves occur, because of wind, tides, and other kinetic forces. In the Buddhist analogy, the universe is in motion due to karmic forces. A ripple, a wave, or a billow may seem as an individual entity for a moment, creating the illusion that it has a self, but it is gone in the next moment. The truth is that all individuals are one. A ripple is a temporary phenomenon; it is just water in motion. We know that kinetic energy causes wave forms on a body of water and it would be ridiculous to say that a single ripple or wave has a self.
Similarly, in case of beings, the process of coming into life and being conditioned in a particular way is caused by karmic forces. The up and down of the ocean's waves corresponds with the rotation of the wheel of life. The sea that surges, falls, and resurges, is the life that is born, dies, and is reborn again. It is therefore obvious that we should not focus on the temporary phenomenon of the wave, but on the force that causes, forms, and drives it. Nothing else is said, although in more practical terms, in the Eightfold Path.

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Next

T 29 final report presentations begin: Brian on the World Happiness Index, Erik M., Erik J., Eric S., Chris, Connor... (Please post your topics & suggested reading)

P.S. There's a TED Talk by Nic Marks on the Happy Planet Index that might be good prep for Brian's presentation, and here's a site devoted to the topic (or to the environmental side of it). Here's another. Other suggestions, Brian? Or anyone?

P.P.S. 1. All presenters, please let us know your topic and suggested readings by Wednesday if possible. 
2. I've begun reading Sisela Bok's Exploring Happiness. It's really good so far, I recommend it. (When this class comes around again in a couple of years, I'll probably require it.)

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Meditation

The chapter over meditation in FBAB made some really good points on how meditation can help you find greater happiness. Learning to find your place where nothing matters, and you can just idle for a moment, would bring you to an inner happy place. This place is described as a place without judgement where we can detach from our world and rest our minds. Relief like that would take the tension off things and make you smile more. I think the secret of happiness in located somewhere in this place.

Thinking of nothing seems easy enough, but when you attempt to, other thoughts form in your head. If you were to think of nothing, what would you do to clear your thoughts?

Dalai Lama Interview.

For our class "pot luck" today, i read an interview with the Dalai Lama that was conducted in 1993. The interview gives the reader a sense of what the Dalai Lama is like as a human being and not just an authority figure. One of the biggest shockers was how he viewed conflict of the Gulf War and the part that Saddam Hussein played in it. While he states that he is a bad man, the Dalai Lama points out that an army carries out his action and one cannot have an army without weapons. These weapons were not manufactured in Iraq, but in Western countries. While I agree that weapons were provided to Iraq, it was there choice to use them in a negative manner. As well as war he gave his opinion on birth control and abortion. The Buddhist belief is that taking life is negative, but the Dalai Lama seems to think, on the subject of abortion, it depends on circumstance. I identify completely with him on his point of view when dealing with abortion. Having an abortion because one inconveniently got pregnant is wrong, but if there are circumstances where the child will not lead a full and happy life or there is risk of harm to the mother, it should be permissible. The Dalai Lama admits that his biggest fault is laziness, but it is how he defines laziness that makes this point interesting. Laziness is not simply lying around and doing nothing. The Dalai Lama sees laziness as not completing tasks such as mastering the English language as he points out. The interview concludes with something peculiar. A man who represents peace and universal happiness has a strange fondness for things dealing with WWII. He states that because the subject material is so violent and gruesome it reaffirms his belief in non-violence for the future.

Geography of Bliss

I was only able to read the first chapter of "The Geography of Bliss" by Eric Weiner on Google books, which is a shame because it seems like a great read. The way Weiner describes the cafes in Rotterdam made me want a warm beer......and i HATE warm beer. there was one line that stood out to me from the short excerpt that i was able to read....A polish citizen living in America made this comment about Americans..."When Americans say it was great, I know it was good. When they say it was good, i know it was okay. When they say it was okay, i know it was bad." I don't know if this is a good or a bad thing, if it is indeed true. Are we happier because we save each other's feelings by some ingrained societal padding of the stats? Maybe we are really not as happy as we say we are, and we do this to trick our minds into believing that things are better. I think that i am a reasonably happy person......so keep telling me that I'm a great cook, a really nice guy, and that I'm an awesome person to have a drink with America (truthful or not). It's working!

Monday, November 21, 2011

Patience

After reading the chapter on patience and anger I was reminded again of the idea I discussed in my last post about taking the good with the bad. Whenever I start to feel angry or upset or depressed about something, I not only remind myself to be patient as it will not be permanent, I also remind myself that filling my head with negative thoughts about being upset will only make it worse. I remind myself that I am in control of my emotions and try to find something good to take my mind off it while I wait for it to pass. How do you all deal with anger during troubling times?

Next

We're doing a pot-luck class tomorrow: everybody "bring" something, i.e., post your thoughts & questions on either For the Benefit of All Beings or whatever else you've been reading. Anything goes. Final report presentations begin next week, after the Thanksgiving break. We'll decide tomorrow what else to read and discuss, as a class. Presenters can help with this by suggesting relevant readings to accompany their presentations.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Dalai Lama on trees and Law


I read two articles dealing with the Dalai Lama. One was a speech he gave in 1990 in Tibet about the importance of planting trees and the other was an excerpt from a book called All The People: A Conversation with the Dalai Lama on Money Politics and Life as it Could Be.

The speech on tree planting is short and to the point but, highlights even the simplest of ways to preserve and encourage growth were we live.  He discusses the importance of planting new fruit trees for their aesthetics and their obvious benefit of feeding people.  He also stressed the importance of maintaining and caring for older trees as they provide many befits as well.

The excerpt on politics and the environment is also eye opening yet somewhat idealistic. He seems to harp on the need for legal systems to incorporate animal and plant rights into legal systems to ensure there protection. However, he also makes a point that there should be no need for laws protecting animals and plants because it should be natural to humans to preserve and care for these things that cannot protect themselves.

The Dalai Lama continues in discussing the need for the western world to end its need to be ever growing. He says; “The western concept of increasing GNP each year must change, and fast. The principle itself contradicts all natural and logical laws.”

Patience

The chapter of patience deals with anger and how we can manage to control our emotions and stop anger before it increases to anger. The text claims, "there is no fault as serious as anger. (52)" Anger brings down our emotions, changes our facial expression, and unbalances our lives. Being in this state of mind can seriously affect how we see our everyday life and also burden those around us. By learning to control our anger we can not only benefit ourselves but also others. If we are able to harness and control our emotional level, then we will be able to reduce the anger through the act of being patient. Does meditating and learning to be more tolerable of certain actions eliminate anger? Most certainly not, but taking actions to reduce our anger can only benefit us.

The Buddha

I was able to watch The Buddha documentary film, and was surprised by the insights it was able to show. What was most interesting to me was the constant reference to a communal journey--what the Buddha achieved, we can all achieve. The two dichotomies that arose, and that I would be interested in discussing, are:
1. Does the wide community of Buddhist followers really constitute a communal journey? My previous connotations about Buddhism narrowed down into the belief that each journey to enlightenment was an intensely personal one. Can a communal journey and individual enlightenment occur together?
2. It is simplistic to say that a Buddhist world view holds that the world is a place of terrible suffering, because there is much joy to be found in our lives on Earth. How does one lend to the other?

Bonnie

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Next

Looks like the book we voted more than a month ago to read has proved mysteriously elusive for many of us. Not sure why, my copy arrived less than a week after I placed my order.

So, tomorrow we'll discuss what we've each separately found to be worthy of our attention, pertaining to the Dalai Lama. Those of us with the book may want to focus especially on ch.6, on patience.

We'll also decide tomorrow what to read and discuss on Tuesday. Those of us with the book may want to finish it, those without may want to select an alternative reading (possibly from the array of links on our site). There are generous online selections of Art of Happiness by the Dalai Lama and Exploring Happiness by Sissela Bok, for instance. We'll talk about it.

Please let me know tomorrow if you intend to do a final presentation, beginning after the Thanksgiving holiday.

JPO
I still have not been able to find the book so I completed the alternative assignment instead.

I researched a bit about the Dalai Lama's biography and purpose on a website dedicated to him, http://www.dalailama.com/. I focused on reading about his commitments. His three commitments are centered on preserving human well being and happiness. In the first, he believes humans, religious or not, are made happier by not suffering. The term is secular ethics. His second commitment is to preserve religious harmony. The last commitment is not as permanent as the first two, at least that's what I gathered. It is to be the spokesperson for the Tibetans. Once the Chinese and Tibetans reach peace this commitment is no longer necessary. Just thought that was an interesting bit of information and have to say I definitely agree with the first commitment.

For the Benefit

Dear Classmates,

Has anyone had trouble finding this book locally? Or did everyone else just beat me to the bookstore? After just getting the funds to purchase, I have checked into the MTSU local bookstores, Barnes and Noble, and Books a Million, and I cannot find the book anywhere as they are all sold out or are waiting on shipments. I ended up overnighting the book from ATL, but wanted to give everyone else a heads up if you still haven't had gotten the book that I couldn't find it locally.

Bonnie

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

empty of inherent existence

In How To See Yourself As You Really Are,

The Dalai Lama examines the concept of emptiness and the value of dependent arising.
Dependent arising is the idea that all phenomena, physical, mental, or otherwise, exist dependent upon certain causes and conditions. As a consequence of dependent arising, nothing operates exclusively under its own power. Everything is a consequence of causes and conditions. Without the realization of interdependency, we cannot fully grasp the meaning of emptiness of all phenomena including ourselves.

To quote Nagarjuna:
"The apprehension of inherent existence is the cause of all unhealthy views.
Afflictive emotions are not produced without this error.
Therefore, when emptiness is thoroughly known,
Unhealthy views and afflictive emotions are thoroughly purified."

When we falsely conceive the way in which something exists, an exaggerated mode of thought will follow in accordance with one's own perception. Thoughts are mental projections of our own imposed ideas and beliefs of reality. By superimposing qualities onto objects, other beings, and ourselves, attachments to things are formed based on these qualitites. We say this is "my body" or "my friends" and emphasize its attractiveness, while attributing characteristics to it as inherent qualities of its existence. To grant an object with integral quality is to mistakenly believe it exists within its own right. In regards to the self, we often think of "I" as separate from others. Consequently, we may say this is "my body" asserting it is "yours". Like an illusion, we view the mind and body as separate entities. In reality, the mind cannot exist without the body and the body without the mind. Yet when a hand is burned on the stove, it's hard not to exclaim, "ohh my hand!" Almost out of a mental reflex, we see the nature of how inherent independent arising is perpetuated over the true nature of things. "I" do not exist outside of the mind body. "I" am dependent upon the mind body. Without it, "I" do not exist; therefore, the conception of oneself as a seperate and independent entity is a mentally superimposed conception of the mind body. If we perpetuate the notion we are independently arising phenomena, it is not possible to reflect on our emptiness. Instead of looking inward at emptiness, we see a mental projection of the "I". If we reflect on our own inherent emptiness, much of the daily attachments we form to people and things we deem tantamount to happiness can slowly dissolve. Attachment to our own conceptions of things is the cause of afflictive emotions. As the Dalai Lama frames it, attachment will lead us to afflictive emotions, as if by a ring in our nose.

Monday, November 14, 2011

No class Tuesday Nov.15

Not having heard from most of you, I infer that many are still without the Dalai Lama's book. Let's not meet tomorrow. 


If you still do not have the book in hand by Wednesday, please complete the alternative assignment before we meet on Thursday: find something else by or about the Dalai Lama, read or watch it, and post your observations.

The Buddha

I watched the PBS special called The Buddha and was re-inspired by something I had long ago found profound about his teachings. The idea of taking the good with the bad, that bad things are going to happen and you're not going to like it. But these things pass in time and always will, and so we must learn to take solace in their passing and appreciate the good times in between.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Do you have the book in hand?

Everybody, please let me know by Monday if you have For the Benefit of All Beings in hand yet. If so, your assignment is to read the first three chapters and post questions before Tuesday (Grp #1 on ch1, Grp#2 on ch2, Grp #3 on ch3).

If you do not have the book in hand, here's your alternative assignment: find something else by or about the Dalai Lama, read or watch it, and post your observations.

Thanks to Eric for calling our attention to the eponymous documentary (check his post for the link). Also  worth a look: "The Four Noble Truths" and the PBS documentary "The Buddha" (available on YouTube and netflix).

And the radio program "On Being" had a nice show today on contemplative practice, meditation, and "holding life consciously." Worth a listen.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Movie: For the Benefit of All Beings

I found a movie about the Dalai Lama

"Born on the roof of the world in Tibet
Discovered by a king as the reincarnation of a great Lama
Enthroned at the age of seven, leading a monastic life of study and meditation
Freedom shattered, Imprisoned for 20 years, Witnessed the death of friends
What kind of person would YOU become if this happened to you?
Would you dedicate your life....For The Benefit of All Beings"

http://www.forthebenefitofallbeings.com/


Maybe we could acquire and watch it?

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Dalai Lama Says China Has Turned Tibet Into "Hell On Earth"

In 2009, the Dalai Lama delivered a speech in which he protested Communist China's treatment of Tibet and how their views had damaged the culture. He stated that the laws being pressed upon them had made Tibet a " hell on earth" and Tibetans were viewed as common criminals by the Chinese authorities. His main focus was the loss of tradition that the Tibetan people were facing. “Today, the religion, culture, language and identity, which successive generations of Tibetans have considered more precious than their lives, are nearing extinction,” stated the Dalai Lama. As well as threatening ancient traditions, the Chinese government had locked down significant areas in China as well as cutting off cell phone and internet locations to prevent communication to the outside world. Although his speech contained a strong tone and could be considered as angry, the Dalai Lama says he is still committed to working out this problem with China.

Factual Question: When did the Dalai Lama begin negotiations over the future of Tibet?
A: 1951 after Chinese troops invaded and seized control of Tibet Plateau

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Next

Still waiting to get HHDL's For the Benefit of All Beings in everybody's hands, so tomorrow let's just read around on the New York Times Dalai Lama "Topics" page. In particular, I'd suggest looking at his op-ed pieces:
Beyond that, a group-based division of labor might be smart. I suggest that Group 1 look at (and post questions about) the the DL's Realism and Two Realities, Group 2 explore "Highlights from the Archives," and Group 3 do "Other Coverage."

Monday, November 7, 2011

Chapter 20

One quote from this reading stuck out among the many others, "Even Memorial Day, despite the name, is all hot dogs and hamburgers to most of us." Here, I think that Hecht is being more comical than serious, especially given her larger themes and attention to holidays in the modern era. However pessimistic it may be, I actually think this quote is on target sans comedic attitude, and perhaps even applicable to the holidays that she thinks leave room "for the expression of dark emotion" (296). What is Thanksgiving but turkey? What is Christmas without Santa Claus? What is July 4th without fireworks? Maybe it's true that holidays and such events bring us together, but I doubt it's for the nobler intentions, like memorial, remembrance, and/or religion.(I'm thinking its more for greed and gluttony, all to the benefit of the corporations that market them). This is a thoroughly depressing world view. Thankfully, Hecht revives her idea of holidays just at the end of the chapter, "There are only a few pragmatic routes to happiness, and celebration is one of them. Get out there" (310).
In other words, so what? You spend $400 on fireworks, celebrating independence of a country whose history you haven't read since middle school? Have fun anyways with all your buddies and some beer. Roast a turkey or buy some tofu and give into the moral tale that Thanksgiving provides and watch the Macy's parade with all your crazy family before the football game comes on--yet another way to celebrate. Cheers.
D: My opinion turns out rather cynical about holiday festivities in America, although I do think there is much truth in Hecht's evaluation that people need public, communal celebration in order to be happy. If we continue to pass the tradition of holidays, as they are now celebration, commercialism and all, to the next generation what impressions of happiness will we leave for our children? Do these impressions live up to Hecht's standard rules for what celebration should be?
F: What modern occasion is closely related to festival?
A: A sporting event

-Bonnie W.

Greek Festivals

In chapter 17 Hecht describes the massive drunken celebrations of the ancient Greeks. A lot of parallels can be seen between this and celebrations of modern society, being that many people get totally wasted together. I had my fun with it for a time but quickly moved past it as I found it to be a little too wild and destructive.

Discussion Q: Is the larger sense of social/cultural unified happiness brought on by large drunken parties worth the risk of the dangers it brings?

Factual Q: According to Hecht, is it men or women that are more celebratory? A: women

Friday, November 4, 2011

Essay on Russell: Keeping Up with the Jones'

Bonnie Williams

Philosophy of Happiness

Dr. Oliver

November 3, 2011

Keeping Up with the Jones’: How Comparison Kills Happiness

Throughout Bertrand Russell’s The Conquest of Happiness, by making excellent use of thematic gravity and sometimes utter preposterousness, he clarifies what happiness is and how to we should go about obtaining it. One of Russell’s favorite words and probably his most significant theme is zest; “Zest is an appetite for possible things, upon which all happiness, whether of men or animals, ultimately depends” (5). His syllogism that “what hunger is in relation to food, zest is in relation to life” establishes the foundation for his thought process (and the namesake for his book) that happiness is an idea, a state to be quested after (111). Just as we cannot become totally satiated by subtracting hunger, we cannot become completely gratified by obtaining the element of zest: happiness requires an active, passionate pursuit. To passionately pursue the holy grail of happiness, we must fight some battles with particular foes, including ourselves and our view of others. In this paper, I aim to focus on what Russell pontificates about envy, specifically the folly of comparison, and how we must slay this destructive habit in order to establish ourselves as happy “citizen[s] of the universe.”

When we compare ourselves to others what we are really doing is becoming entirely self-absorbed, and Russell has much to say, in just a few words, about the precociousness of self-absorption; “one’s ego is no very large part of the world” (48). In America especially, the consumeristic basis for happiness is marketed as fulfillment: you will not be happy until you have this product which is proven to make you happy because the Smiths’, the Jones’, and the Browns’ already have this product and, gee, don’t they look happy? In a very warped way, many of us buy into this notion because we are forever trying to prove to ourselves (and show others) that we are living the American dream--land, liberty, happiness and all. In my mind, the fruitlessness of this dead dream is the unforgettable situation of the doctor who lives next to the lawyer in a perfectly prim suburb.

Every morning as the lawyer leaves for work, he sees the doctor getting into his brand new -----, a symbol of his big paycheck, long workweeks, and high status. Of course, the lawyer wants this to display this same status and drives home from work in a brand new -----. Then the doctor pulls up, and they exchange small talk, mostly about the new in-ground pool, the great private school they put their kids in, the just-around-the-corner promotions, not to mention the upcoming charity benefit. We all know this story, right? The doctor and the lawyer, blazingly self-absorbed in their own status, use each other as points of comparison as to what a successful, happy person should be. Russell explains, “What people fear [. . .] is not that they will fail to get their breakfast next morning, but that they will fail to outshine their neighbors” (27). What people don’t see inside the new Beamers and white picket fences are the marriages falling apart, the kids being ignored, and the third mortgages being taken out. Even worse, if we do see behind the illusions, why do we keep working 65 hour weeks, sending the kids to after-school programs, and buying iPads? Envy, and jealousy (a special form of envy), are effectively “fatal to all excellence” and happiness (69). Envy makes everyone miserable, from the husband medicating with alcohol, to the wife downing Prozac, to the kids doped on Adderall. So what is the cure for envy?

As far as I know, there’s not a pill yet. However, Russell offers a good dose of advice in how to overcome it, “teach yourself that life would still be worth living even if you were not, as of course you are, immeasurably superior to all your friends in virtue and intelligence” (173). Sarcasm aside, we must note that there is always something we see as better, and if we focus to much on objects in relation, never in themselves, then we will become “eaten up with a sense of injustice” (71). My favorite Russell quote for his chapter on envy rings just this note, “If you desire glory, you may envy Napoleon. But Napoleon envied Caesar, Caesar envied Alexander, and Alexander, I dare say, envied Hercules, who never existed” (72). There will always someone who does some job better than you, makes more money than you, got better grades in school than you, and if we trace it back far enough, who are we really envying? Russell and I are here to tell you, Hercules never existed. There is no point in chasing an unattainable goal. To escape from the universal affliction of envy and the disparaging unattainable goal, we must reinvigorate our attempts to seek happiness for ourselves: happiness, which is obtainable.

But it isn’t obtainable over the counter, it require mental discipline. If we omit saints from the account, the crux of the matter becomes this: “the only cure for envy in the case of ordinary men and women is happiness, and the difficulty is that envy is itself a terrible obstacle for happiness” (70). The answer to this riddle first lies in the recognition of why we are each so envious. And if we are to be envious of something, then “what is more enviable than happiness?” The second clue is that, instead of spending some much thought and energy on detrimental emotions, we must truly experience our own lives; “When anything pleasant occurs it should be enjoyed to the full, without stopping to think that it is not so pleasant as something else that may possibly be happening to someone else” (71). We must stop being pained by what others have, and instead be joyful with what we do have (69). Furthermore, “You can get away from envy by enjoying the pleasures that come your way, by doing the work that you have to do, and by avoiding comparisons with those whom you imagine, perhaps quite falsely, to be more fortunate than yourself” (72).

Stop attempting to keep up with Jones’ or else we are all going to end up bankrupted, unhappy, and psychologically exhausted. Instead of looking through their window to see what size their new flat screen is, let’s look around our own house and take stock of how we can use our energy for more admirable purposes. Stop and think about it. The lawyer may have noticed that the neighbor kids all wear Abercrombie, but how much notice does he give his own children? The lawyer and the doctor, the manifested envious person in us all, notice family dynamics, just not their own, stereotypically. If they could just settle on 40 hour weeks and a Volkswagen, I bet they could each use that time to reinvent his own family dynamics into a recognizably functioning home. Instead of passionately pursuing the next paycheck, if they could realize to passionately pursue parenting then I bet their children will grow into a generation that doesn’t hold the same envious attitudes.

In this extreme, stereotypical example I have sought to really underline what Russell means by envy and what he means to say about fixing it. I have attributed the stereotypes of this example parenting as the cause for which their envy can be misdirected, and while I firmly believe it is crucial to rear the next generation without this outrageous competition with the Jones’, many of you reading this paper, I would guess, don’t have children. But I don’t assume that to mean that you do not have a cause.

If you don’t have one, pick one up at Walmart, search the cosmos for one, just find one. We must find a cause, some important work to do in the world, to relinquish our occupation with ourselves and our envy of others, and, of course, to become happy. Russell was famously humanist, even getting arrested at age 90 for protesting the Vietnam War. He had an active interest in our world even upon death’s doorstep and he fought for his cause. Humanity is all that we have, and we must not ignore it. Ever closer to death, Russell was asked what he would want future generations to know. His moral advice was simple, “Love is wise, hatred is foolish.” As the world becomes more interrelated and we all become global citizens this advice is sage as ever. Try not to become burdened by the world’s seemingly imminent doom. Fight for healthcare, become a pacifist, banner clean energy, whatever it is you decide to do, “find the right road out of this despair, civilized man must enlarge his heart as he has enlarged his mind. He must learn to transcend self, and in so doing to acquire the freedom of the Universe” (76).




Russell, Bertrand. The Conquest of Happiness. London, England: Allen and Unwin, 1930. Print.

Next

T 8 H 17-20, Conclusion. Celebration
Nice reports yesterday from Connor in SOL, on SAD, and Tim in CoPhi on Social Constructivism... (continued in take the weather with you)

Do you wonder "what it costs philosophy to take religious belief seriously?" Come to the TPA tonight and find out. It's all free and open to the public, come as you are and stay for the free food and drink afterwards (and pick up easy extra credit, CoPhi and SOL students).

Anybody doing NaNoWriMo?


Post your questions, please.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

From Atheism to Christianity: The Search for Joy

C.S. Lewis may be one of the greatest Christian philosophers to ever contribute to the critical thought of the Christian faith. He is considered the father of modern Christian Apologetics. Lewis’ writings and systematic breakdowns of the Christian faith are presented from a very logical perspective that is often missed by outsiders looking into Christianity. For any person that deems Christianity as an inferior and ignorant religion that would quit worshiping an imaginary god if they simply became more educated would be surprisingly challenged by the work of C.S. Lewis.
Lewis’s story is loosely depicted in his book Surprised by Joy. He does not give an exhaustive account of his life but instead chooses to hit the “highlights,” as he called the. Lewis was not simply writing an account of his life and his conversion to Christianity but instead trying to map his search for happiness.
Lewis starts with his childhood and speaks of how his love of reading and writing came from a simple abnormality that prevented him from playing sports like the other children; the joints in his thumbs would not bend. Lewis would later suggest that the whole course of his life had been directed by a small deformation. He would even use it as an illustration in some of his other works to show how God can alter things in a major way by a small and simple tuning of something as small as a knuckle. He also implies that if he had been able to use his thumbs to play sports, he most likely would have never taken the time to read and write as a child and consequently would never have developed into the writer that he was. From this point the earliest memories of happiness in his life were from reading fantasy novels and writing stories. He calls this his first season of happiness.
In the later portion of his childhood Lewis was drawn to the beauty and ceremony of the Christian faith. He decided at this time to become a practicing Christian but found that his season of happiness faltered. He was unable to keep the simplest rules and unable to retain the awe that had original inspired him. He attempted to keep up his Christian practices but by the time he arrived at boarding school he had begun to develop doubts about his new found faith. Under the somewhat cruel treatment of his teacher and the ideas and theories that were presented to him he decided that there was no God. He became an atheist of the “snobbiest” degree.
Thus his next season of happiness had started. The next stage of his education only solidified his now atheistic worldview. With the help of his professor, Lewis began see life through a lens of criticism. Every sentence that came from a person’s mouth was dissected and corrected if fallible. In accordance with this the ceremonies of religion were also deemed as distasteful and “merely an emotional sensation.” It was looked at as being beneath “such a learned man.” Lewis eventually would become a Professor himself.
Later on in life, Lewis developed a relationship with the now well known author J.R.R. Tolkien. Through a long series of conversations, debates, and comparisons between the two experts of literature Lewis eventually made the conversion from atheism to theism. This was, while only based on what Lewis would call logical deduction, only the beginning of Lewis’s path to happiness. Eventually with the study of the bible and the influence of Tolkien Lewis “gave in and admitted that God was indeed God.”
I think that the most important thing that Lewis was attempting to get across was the distinction of what it is we are actually searching for. We are not searching for happiness but rather joy. At first it is easy for us to get the two mixed up because they are things of the same essence. They are so closely related yet so distinct from each other that the mistake of putting them in the wrong place is a danger of the highest degree.
As defined by Lewis, happiness is an emotion. It is a thing that comes and goes based not on intrinsic qualities but rather outside circumstances. Here lies the danger in happiness. If one tries to shape the intrinsic qualities of the heart in an attempt to find a consistent state of happiness we will waste away in frustration. Our lives will be spent chasing our tails instead of being lived out.
So the tendency now is to say that we must focus on our outside circumstances, but this must be avoided because this to will lead to constant frustration. After all, how much of our circumstances do we actually control? Can we control the death of a loved one, the crashing of the economy, or the cancer that blindsides us? This too is a fleeting endeavor. Lewis says that we must enjoy the moments of happiness presented to us and accept them as temporary.
Is this it though? By no means! The gaping hole in our being that urges to be filled is the hole that is meant to be filled by joy. Joy is the state of being that we all search for. The state which says this life, situation, circumstance, and season is enough. It is contentment in the highest purity, and in moments of happiness it is merely intensified. But the question remains…..how do we achieve this?
God is Lewis’ answer to this riddle. A common saying of Lewis was this; “if we search for joy apart from God, both will slip through our fingers. But if we search for God and God alone, we will find that He is the infinite source of joy that we were created to exist in.” Lewis is saying here that the very reason that all of us have a need to search for something that defines us, fulfills us, and gives us something to live for is there because God has created us with a need for it. A need that is so big that our lives are consumed with the search for it.
The problem with humanity however is that we try to fulfill this God sized hole without God. We try to fill the hole with the fleeting fulfillment of minute desires. Sex, power, money, stability, health, sports, meditation, knowledge, the list could go on and on. All of these things are a cheap substitute for what we are really meant for. They are finite pleasures that cannot fulfill the infinite hole that we were purposely created with. Lewis says that “one of the biggest showings of the wrath of God is the torture, turmoil, and lack of satisfaction we have in life apart from Him. He has created us to only be content in Him. We are children attempting to replace the ocean with a mud puddle in the back yard.”

Sex and Treatments(but not necessarily for sex)

Sex:
Hecht offers a summary of her chapter on sex in its beginning, "Searching for happiness, men and women throughout history have been advised to address the issue of sexuality: through fulfillment, abstinence, or monogamy, and a million further details" (222).This is a lot of ground to cover, so I'll just point out some sections that particularly stood out to me: The first being that I will probably never eat cereal again. From this section I learned that Kellogg was indeed a strange man filled with inconsistencies and paradoxical beliefs. His Battle Creek Sanitarium (sanitarium, yeah right) was the epitome of confounded Victorian views about sex and its relation to the public/private life. This point exemplified the second because, from Victorian society to the sexual revolution to now, there is a constant correlation between social rewards and pressures to the sex lives of Americans. D: What are these correlations and how do they still manifest in our society?
F: (I'm going to list a few, just in case we have a question crisis again.)
In Hecht's opinion, who's work led directly into the sexual revolution later in the century (in which he was working) because of his focus on primary responsibility being personal happiness ?
A: Freud (231)
F: What are the sex lives of Americans, grouped by gender, age, class, and ethnicity, heavily determined by?
A: social rewards and pressures (above and 238)
F: In the book _Married Love_ who argued that, for the benefit of the nation, happy homes are needed which generate from healthy sexual relationships?
A: Marie Stopes (230)

Treatments:
In this section, she focuses mainly water treatments/spas and its relationship with society starting with Roman spas and ending with modern showers. Her larger goal, I think, in this chapter is to further point out "the programs of self-denial" in societal norms, which even spa days and bubble baths have. Regardless of the indulgence of treatments, spas were still advertised as a place to become healthy and if you are going to pay all that money just live sparsely then at least you get to "break through" your own psychology. Although Hecht concedes the point that "self-denial can be very distracting, and sometimes people need distraction" (250), she concludes that "Flexing you willpower is no more meritorious than flexing your muscles: not much. What matters is whether you step up when it counts" (255)
D: How do you interpret this last quote? What does this last ambiguous "it" mean?
F: In the twentieth century, what became a symbol of pampered female life?
A: bubble bath (245)
F: In what two cities does the rise of a culture of self-denial become exemplified?
A: Ocean Grove and Asbury Park (250)

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Eating

In chapter 13, Hecht discusses the age-old argument between eating for health and purity and eating for taste and happiness. I love food that most would say is horrible for the body, cheeseburgers, pizza, fried chicken, and so on, and yet I seem to be healthy enough (I'm certainly thin enough), though I admit it'll probably catch up to me someday. But I think in my last breath I would look back at my life, however short it might be, and be happy that I ate what I liked instead of just trying to prolong my life and in so doing emptying it of anything that's worth living for at all.

Discussion Q: Is it better to die young and well contented?

Factual Q: Who brought vegetarianism to America? A: William Metcalfe

Next

Th 3 H 13-16. Bodies 
We've regrouped. Everybody in Group #1, please post questions pertaining to approx. the first 1/3 of the readings, #2 to the second 1/3, etc., prior to class. Everybody post directly, there are no "leaders" anymore. (Or, rather, we're all leaders!)

#1 - Alexandra, Jonathan, Erik M., Eric J., Marie

#2 - Josh, Claire, Brian, Kendra

#3 - Rebekah, Eric, Colton, Bonnie

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Exercise Smexercise....

JMH lets loose on the wealthy stay at home moms and gym rats that are dumb enough to spend their free time working out. being that i am one of those idiots that "exerts tremendous energy making nothing", as Hecht so elegantly puts it, i will have to respectfully disagree. i work out to feel better physically and mentally and can feel a big difference when i don't have time to make it to the gym. just like in anything else, people can be over invested in fitness and be mistaken on the benefits it may afford them. Hecht spends a lot of time siting research to defend her position, however, we all know that there is a study or two somewhere that can support just about any argument so i am not swayed at all by the numbers. JMH sounds like she is arguing for a culture where everyone is just active enough to not die of heart disease at 46 and that we should all forget the idea of being physically appealing to the opposite sex because its a made up social condition.....no shit its made up but its still a reality of our situation. ill stick with CrossFit...Hecht can stick to doing as little as humanly possible and I'm sure that we will both be happier that way.
Fact Q: What is the name of the "Apostle of Jogging" that dropped dead at age 52 of a massive heart attack while while out for a run?
A: Jim Fixx (pg. 214)

Friday, October 28, 2011

Tuesday's exam

Click here for the half-dozen questions I found in the October powerpoint file. Also eligible for inclusion on Tuesday's exam are any question-topics posted to this site in October, as well as topics discussed in my posts.

For extra credit you can prepare an answer to the discussion question of your choice in advance and bring it with you to turn in with your exam, OR write your answer in class. I'll suggest an extra credit question.



We'll sign up again for three groups, so that everyone knows what portion of each day's assigned reading to post questions about (Group #1 gets the first third, Group #2 the second etc.)... but it looks like we're through with separate group discussion.


Following last night's incredible Game #6 I'm in the mood to do a small gratuitous kindness, so... essays are now due Thursday. 


P.S. And, following the Cards' World Series WIN, I'm declaring a mini-holiday. We'll do our exam on Tuesday but that's all. Discussion of JMH will resume on Thursday. We'll do any remaining presentations then also, unless someone prefers Tuesday.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Factual Questions from Bertrand Russell

1. How should man view his problems to achieve relief from anxiety and a greater happiness?
- nothing in one's life has any cosmic importance
2. what in human nature is a better substitute to envy?
- admiration
3. What test might reveal whether one's art (or any productive contribution to society) is bad due to the public's rejection of it or if it is good and the public is simply ignorant to it.
- is your contribution conceptual or at least inspired by come conviction from the self or is it inspired by a need for attention
"do you produce because you feel an urgent compulsion to express certain ideas or feelings, or are you actuated by the desire for applause?"

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Next

Th 27 H 9-12. Money. 
Again, Exam #2 has been postponed until Tuesday. Please post your questions. Report presenters please be ready.

Exam #2 postponed

We'll do the October exam on Tuesday, not tomorrow. Essays are due from non-presenters on Tuesday as well. 

I found only a half-dozen questions in the Powerpoint file, so they've either been lost or not entered. Please post any questions pertaining to the October material (Russell mostly) you'd like me to consider including in the exam by Saturday.

JPO

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Throughout the reading for class today, I was most focused on a particular phrase in Chapter 6: "Wakefulness is productive. Bliss wastes time." Here, she was discussing how cocaine was viewed by and large as a "happiness drug" while today we refer to caffeine as a "wakefulness drug." In our society today is completely true--especially for a hectic college student--that being awake somehow denotes productivity, progress, and profit while we hesitate to view happiness in and of itself as productive, progressive, and profitable. If I spent my time taking a walk, hiking, reading for pleasure (things that make me "happy") then mostly I would be considered wasting my time, but if I am awake and sitting in an early morning business meeting in a deadened stupor then somehow I am being more in touch with American views on happiness i.e. what is profitable. At a point later in the book, I think Hecht does discuss how money can aid in happiness, but by and large in modern culture how we get money is not also how we become happy. Additionally in this section Hecht is touching on something we've discussed extensively--how products are marketed by appealing to the happiness factor of whatever is being sold example: Coca-Cola.
So, discussion question: What is it about the marketing/selling of drugs that holds such appeal to American buyers and how does this relationship influence our daily lives?
Factual question: In what study did Freud explore his fascination with cocaine?
A: On Cola

-Bonnie W.

Jonathan's comments

"In chapter 8 Hecht discusses the culture of drugs in modern America. I have dabbled in narcotics a few times over the past few years (nothing too extreme) and I can say from experience that there definitely are some positive effects about it. It has opened my eyes to whole new side of life and of the world and has opened my mind to a new sense of spirituality. On the flip side I look out at the world today, especially in the college and other such youth-oriented parts of society and see that drugs are being vastly over used and have clouded the minds of many people."

I personally have never tried drugs or alcoholic drinks (not a serious amount), but drugs in American and even in other countries tend to be heavily related to gang activity and violence. In my criminal justice classes we touched on this “Deadly Triad”. I suppose drugs themselves aren't a global issue when it's just a lone kid stuck in his attic smoking pot(individual use); and for those that get addicted it's their and their family's problem (albeit unfair perhaps). But drugs combined with gang activity and violence has become a heath academic for everyone, even those not involved in the three. That's when drug use becomes an issue for anyone's happiness. Gangs sell it to create revenue to buy weapons and kill off the competition, and innocents are killed in the process. Hence why some may call it a “War on Drugs”, and that's just in America, I heard things become far worse in other countries.

That being said there is no simple solution to this problem, but it is a serious issue and not just to the criminal justice world, but even politically. There is no policy that can be written to handle single users of drugs and people who sell it as a business. If there is a ban on drugs, it must be applied universally, and if it is allowed the same applies.