Newco

Some of you may be wondering why I haven't posted a new entry in so long. Others may not have noticed. Regardless, there is a good reason why I haven't posted recently. Specifically, over the last two weeks, I met and decided to join a small (9-person) startup. They're in stealth mode so no website or other information at the moment. Current investors include Khosla Ventures and Flagship Ventures. On the Flagship site, they describe Newco as "designing microbial factories to produce energy related products". So very different than what I've been doing in the past but certainly well-aligned with my desire to help fight global warming (since biofuels are carbon-neutral since the feedstock for the biofuel is plant-based and takes an equivalent amount of CO2 out of the air as cars put into it).

I'll be the "business entrepreneur" (officially "Senior Director of Business Development") - basically the first full-time business person. Everyone else in the company is a scientist-type. Should be interesting. Certainly an opportunity for me to shine ... or fall flat on my face. Hopefully it will be the former. =)

I'm actually writing this from the Advancing Renewable Energy conference in St. Louis. Even though I won't officially begin my new position for about a month, I'm here "drinking from the firehose" to learn about this new space. President Bush will actually be speaking at the conference tomorrow but, unfortunately, I'll miss his speech since I need to catch a flight and couldn't get onto a later plane (darn!). It's not everyday that you get a chance to see the President of the United States in person.

I have to admit that I'm very curious to see how I do in this new role. If nothing else, there is going to be a massive learning curve associated with both the technology involved (biochemistry and synthetic biology) and the market for the technology (biofuels). I basically have zero domain knowledge/experience with either and will be relying upon (a) being smart, (b) learning quickly, (c) being a strong overall "business athlete" with diverse functional experience, and (d) leveraging the experience of others wherever possible. We'll see if that's enough to be successful .

I'm both excited and scared about what's to come. But I take a lot of comfort from knowing that I have so many people in my corner. Let the new adventure begin.

The Joy of Sons

My sister-in-law pointed me to this Web page called "The Joy of Sons". Check it out if you get the chance. It will give you a quick laugh. Haven't encountered a lot of this stuff with JD and AJ yet but it's a good reminder that it's all coming soon so I should begin to brace myself.

Convictions

One of my favorite quotes is "the true measure of a man is not where he stands in times of comfort and convenience, but where he stands in times of challenge and controversy" (Martin Luther King). In a prior post, I said that when I'm gone, I'd like people to remember me as someone who lived his beliefs, could be counted on when it counted, and left things better than he found them. Thus, my current attempt to reorient my career around fighting global warming. But living with conviction has subtler, more day-to-day consequences. One is doing what you say you're going to do - whether big or small. Awhile ago (see this post), I said I was going to get down to 190 pounds by Christmas. My wife asked me yesterday whether I'm still planning to do that. Honestly, I was planning to ignore I ever set that goal. But that's not the example I want to set for my kids or the precedent I want to set for myself. So, despite an overwhelming desire not to, I'm going to try my best to meet my goal by Christmas. Losing 15-16 pounds in 3 months is still achievable without doing something drastic or unhealthy - although Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and business breakfasts/lunches/dinners (for my job search) will certainly increase the degree of difficulty.

Divine council

In this week's lecture for my Old Testament class, it says:

You will also read about how the Israelite God is part of a divine council of beings. He is the leader of this council and has higher standards of ethics, including concern for the poor and justice for the weak. This is another area that has been enriched with Near Eastern studies, for in them we learn that the idea of a divine council of the gods was prevalent throughout the world of the Bible. For one reference to the divine council in the Bible see Psalm 82:1-4. It is interesting to see that even Satan seems to be a part of the divine council before he becomes a much more sinister and evil being in the New Testament. Please see Job 1 and 2 where God and Satan discuss Job’s righteousness and essentially make a wager to see if Job will hold up or not if he loses everything of value to himself.

While I’m not affiliated with a particular religion, I would describe myself as monotheist so the introduction of a divine council took me a little by surprise. In particular, two excerpts from the textbook intrigued me. First, “empowered by his great wisdom and ethical superiority, YHWH is eventually seen as reigning supreme over other council members, known collectively as the ‘sons of the gods’. Ultimately reduced to a dependent status as YHWH’s vassals and servants, the ‘sons of the gods’ become YHWH’s divine courtiers, running errands and conveying orders to human recipients” (page 65). So, there were many gods but YHWH (who was initially their equal) eventually became their supreme ruler – either the mightiest of all the gods or a one and only God (Israel’s God). Second, “in Gilgamesh, the gods hold council after the flood to lament their destructive excesses … In the Atrahasis epic, they similarly confer after the great deluge, exploring less extreme options … for limiting human population growth” (page 64). So, even if YHWH was ultimately all powerful, at least at the time of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis, YHWH did not reign supreme. Therefore, there was some period of time during which humans existed on the earth where YHWH was not the one and only God. If that is true, how is it that YHWH (and YHWH alone) created the universe, human beings, animals, etc. in Gensis? It doesn’t seem compatible with the concept of a divine council.

The only ways to reconcile thing is to assume that (a) multiple gods have existed at one time or another but YHWH has always been supreme over them and it simply took time for human understanding of that fact to catch up and take shape, (b) multiple gods have never existed but what human beings interpreted as multiple gods or a divine council were simply manifestations or projections of different roles and characteristics of a single God, or (c) a divine council exists but the other members are not gods (and never were) but are simply instruments of a single God. I personally believe (b) but I could also see how (a) or (c) could be true.

Destruction

On to chapter 3 in The Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible and one of the questions for reflection and discussion is:

Ancient Israel's geographic location between the mighty empires of Egypt and Mesopotamia virtually ensured its repeated domination by superior military forces. Rather than view their history as the result of a vulnerable position and the realities of international aggression, however, most biblical writers interpreted Israel's rise and fall as a consequence of its failure to worship YHWH alone. How do you interpret Judah's destruction by Babylon (587 B.C.E) and again by Rome (70 C.E.)? Why did YHWH not protect his convenant people from their enemies?

I believe that YHWH allowed Judah’s destruction by Babylon and again by Rome to facilitate spiritual growth among the covenant people – and, by extension, followers of other faiths who built upon Judaism. The period of the Babylonian exile was “the most productive era in terms of biblical composition. Scholars believe that much of the Hebrew Bible … was thoroughly revised and reedited during the late sixth, fifth, and fourth centuries B.C.E … Without king, country, or sanctuary, the Jewish exiles in Babylon pondered the national disaster that had robbed them of all the divine promises made to Abraham and David. In the final edition, the Torah thus does not end as one would expect, with Israel’s possession of Canaan. Instead, it concludes with Moses’ ultimate disappointment – seeing the Promised Land from afar and then dying before he can enter it. The divine promises remain in effect, but their fulfillment lies in the indefinite future … At that low point in their history, it may have seemed as if God had entirely abandoned his people. During the exile and its aftermath, Judean writers produced varied works that dramatized their nation’s misfortunes, including the Book of Job, in which a righteous man reexamines traditional concepts of God’s character and divine justice. As Job, after almost unbearable suffering, is finally returned to divine favor, so Israel could hope for restoration” (page 54).

Moments of crisis truly test people’s beliefs and cause them to reevaluate their worldview. Viewed with a long-term perspective, Judah’s destruction by Babylon and again by Rome was a very positive development since it caused scholars to fundamentally reevaluate and refine their belief system and to search for deeper meaning. Many centuries later, we all still benefit from the results of their suffering and searching – in the form of the Hebrew Bible. Also, by leaving people wanting, YHWH provided ongoing motivation to people – even the most righteous among us – to uphold their end of the covenant in hopes of being returned to divine favor.

In his bestselling book Good to Great, Jim Collins opens by observing that “good is the enemy of great”. Had YHWH simply handed Israel possession of Canaan and vanquished its enemies, the people probably would have led good lives but not pushed themselves to be truly great spiritually. It’s just human nature to do that. Why endure pain (even in the form of intellectual or spiritual questioning) if there is nothing to be gained? If YHWH has already told you you’re the chosen people and he has bestowed blessing upon you, why push to become something more than that? Why push to deepen your understanding of the covenant or become better people? You couldn’t have things better than they already were. Instead, YHWH pushes his people to go to the next level and continually seek to improve themselves and their understanding of Him over time. In a word, to strive for greatness as YHWH is great.

Little Hoopsters

We signed JD up for a basketball program at the YMCA called Little Hoopsters. The program is geared towards boys and girls ages 3 to 5 and introduces fundamentals like passing, dribbling, and shooting. Today was our second class. JD is doing well, particularly with shooting. We got him a kids basketball last weekend so he can practice at home. What I find the most interesting about the program is that parent participation is required and all the parents are dads. With most kid activities, the moms tend to dominate - whether by choice or necessity. But not at Little Hoopsters - and I suspect most youth sports. I suppose that's because sports are a more natural way for dads to bond with their kids. Or perhaps the dads have dreams of their kids becoming football stars or basketball stars or soccer stars or any old star. And this is their way of helping that process along. Whatever the reason, in most (but certainly not all) cases, sports and dads go hand-in-hand. There's a part of me that wants JD to be a sports star - probably because I wasn't - but I'm trying to follow his lead rather than pushing him towards something he's not personally interested in. Will be interesting to see how the whole sports thing plays out for him and AJ over time.

YHWH

At the end of the first chapter of The Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, one of the questions for reflection and discussion is:

From this brief introductory survey of some diverse portrayals of God in the Hebrew Bible (though to derive from different traditions and from different historical periods), what attributes of YHWH do you think have most influenced your own ideas about God? Explain the concepts of divine immanence and transcendence, and give a biblical example of each quality. How can God be both a pure Spirit unencumbered by the physical universe and also a covenant-making Deity who closely communicate with earth-bound individuals?

Certainly, many attributes of YHWH have influenced by ideas about God. I believe in divine immanence (presence in human life). As the text describes on page 14, “as an immanent Being, God intimately communicates with humans, operating within the realm of material reality and remaining accessible to the human mind and consciousness. In Genesis and Exodus, divine immanence takes several forms, ranging from direct appearances to inspired dreams and visitations from angels (supernatural messengers).” I personally envision this interaction between God and human being as being similar to a game of computer chess – see this post for greater detail.

I also believe in God’s transcendence, his absolute independence of both the human and natural worlds. As described on page 15, “unlike other ancient Near Eastern gods, who were typically identified with natural phenomena such as storm and rain or with psychological states such as love and desire, YHWH is usually portrayed as infinitely surpassing the limits of physical nature, undefinable by any aspect of the material universe. Although different biblical concepts of God emphasize different divine attributes, one of the Tanak’s controlling principles is that no image can be made of Israel’s God – he cannot be represented (and thus limited) by any concrete form (Exod. 20:3-6, cf. Deut. 5:8-10). Insisting on God’s transcendence, the author of 1 Kings depicts Solomon as contrasting the inadequacy of the Temple he built to house YHWH’s ‘name’ with the Deity’s infinite majesty: ‘Even heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain [God], much less this house that I have built” (1 Kings 8:27-30). This belief is actually quite similar to Hindu belief that Brahman (the unique Godhead of Hinduism who has no other and no second) cannot be comprehended or objectified (with attributes) without diminishing or limiting his greatness in some way – see this post for greater detail. In the realm of science, Sir John Houghton believes that God exists in a fifth dimension beyond space and time. Therefore, God could be anywhere and everywhere in space and time simultaneously. See this post for more detail.

In terms of the last part of the question, I would flip the question on its head and ask why an all-powerful God can't both transcend the physical universe but also take a personal interest in each being in that physical universe. The question becomes one more of motivation than ability. If God is all powerful, why would He take an interest in me personally? The simple answer in my mind is because He can. With great power comes great responsibility. An absolute ruler on Earth abuses his power (and the interests of individuals under him) because he can. God does the opposite because he can and serves as a personal example for the rest of us to emulate and aspire to.

Lost in translation

At the end of each chapter in The Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, there is a set of questions for reflection and discussion. One of the questions at the end of the second chapter is:

Why is the gap between the earliest extant copies of the Hebrew Bible and their time of composition significant? How can we be sure that surviving manuscripts accurately represent the work of their authors? What commonly happens to a document during the long process of copying, editing, and transmitting the text?

The gap between the earliest extant copies of the Hebrew Bible and their time of composition is troubling for many reasons. As the text states on pages 19-20, “our knowledge of the Tanak’s formation and transmission is severely limited by the fact that not a single scrap of any biblical writer’s original composition has survived. Many centuries separate the time in which the older parts of the Hebrew were written from that in which the earliest extant copies were made. The great chronological gap between a given book’s date of composition and the oldest version we have of it is significant because it is during a document’s earliest stages of copying and transmission, before it acquires the status of recognized scripture, that the text is most fluid, subject to editorial additions, deletions, and other changes … In the earliest stages of transmission, many ancient scribes apparently also acted as editors, adding explanatory phrases, or otherwise modifying the text to reflect the covenant community’s ever-changing circumstances. Many editorial changes were minor, mere errors in copying, but others produced notable differences in content … Because neither the author’s original text nor copies made soon after a book first appeared survive, it is impossible to determine the full extent to which later copies differ from the writer’s original version.”

One area of conflict between Muslims and Christians, for example, is the Muslim belief that the Bible is not the word of God as there are likely a number of items that were compromised by human involvement. Where the Bible and Koran differ, the Koran should serve as the definitive source (according to Muslims) since it is a “direct transmission” from God (through Muhammad). This is, of course, what we all care about – the “direct transmission” from God – not a modified or editorialized version based on human biases or limitations. We’ll likely never know the full truth, however (at least not while we are on this Earth). Even with new editions of the Bible (like the NRSV) going back to many of the earliest sources, we’re still not working off the truly “original sources”. Also, as the text points out, “language changes over time and words lose their original meanings and take on new connotations” (page 28). Therefore, we can’t be totally certain how the original text should be interpreted in a modern context. Also, some words or phrases do not translate perfectly from one language to another. In the preface to the Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach, the author’s grandson bemoans the enormous difficulty translators face in trying to express the exact meaning of a text in a different language (page 24):

For what was originally expressed in Hebrew does not have exactly the same sense when translated into another language. Not only this book [Ecclesiasticus], but even the Law [Torah] itself, the Prophecies, and the rest of the books differ not a little when read in the original.

Here's one personal example of meaning changing slightly (but meaningfully) in transmission from one version to another. We just had a board of directors meeting at work and prepared a modified version of our company P&L that showed the relative profitability of each line of business. When we asked the CFO what the BOD thought of the analysis, he stated that they were "very interested" in it. When someone else asked one of my co-workers the same question, he said that the BOD "liked" it. The restated version (while mostly correct) is materially different from the original version - but it's very easy for these changes to creep into the historical record and cause people to form very different judgments than they might have otherwise form given a full understanding of the true reality.

Hebrew Scriptures class @ LTCC

I'm starting another online religion class. This time, the subject is the Old Testament (Hebrew Scriptures) and it's being taught at Lake Tahoe Community College (LTCC). The instructor is the same one as last time (John Provost) and it's the primary reason I signed up for the class even though I have a lot of other things going on right now. The course description is:

This course explores the origin, history and significant ideas of the Western world’s foundational text. Hebrew Scriptures presents an academic introduction to the ancient stories of the TANAK (The Old Testament) from the creation stories in the book of Genesis all the way until we encounter the ancient prophets of Israel. In between we will explore a world of literature including history, poetry, mythology, and some of the world’s most moving prose. In the process we will learn about the latest evidence on how the scriptures came together and what we can know about that process. While doing all of this we will be able to explore the values and meaning the Bible promotes and look at our own worldview in the process.

And the course objectives are:

• Comprehend the basic historical, cultural, moral, political and theological issues raised by the Hebrew Scriptures,
• Understand the thought and culture of other peoples and the role of Judaism in human history,
• Discuss the three major sections (Torah, Writings, Prophets) of the Hebrew Scriptures and see how they are different and related at the same time,
• Understand the human need for religious expression,
• Analyze major themes of scriptural interpretation and translation including source and form criticism,
• Understand the problems and mysteries that the Hebrew Scriptures attempt to solve,
• Demonstrate critical thinking and communication skills in the context of religious and philosophical ideas.

The text for the class is The Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible by Stephen L. Harris and Robert L. Platzner. Should be interesting. I've been meaning to read the Bible but never really got going on it.

Ten best things about global warming

Global warming certainly isn't a laughing matter but it's important to keep a sense of humor about things. I came across this top 10 list this morning and found it amusing.

10. Why pay for tattoos when melanoma's free?
9. No more pesky weeds. In fact, no more pesky plants.
8. Nile Encephalitis: not just for Egyptians anymore.
7. Furnaces convert easily into tornado shelters.
6. Helsinki: the new Riviera.
5. Middle East oil producers feel right at home— everywhere.
4. Golfers only need a putter and a sand wedge.
3. For those who can't get enough of global warming. One word: Venus.
2. Steaks, medium rare, on the hoof.
1. Three thongs and you're dressed!

CAR Aquathon

This morning, the whole family swam in the CAR Aquathon. It was our third time participating in this fund-raising event. Each team does as many lengths of the pool as it can in a 30-minute period. We were part of the first heat and did 46 lengths. The winning team did 130 lengths (roughly 3 times as many as we did). The last two years, our performance really bugged me (we did 24 lengths my first year and 33 lengths last year ... at least we're improving). The other teams would come over to the scoreboard and wonder aloud how they did 100+ lenghts and we did only a quarter to a third of their total. I'd want to justify our performance ... we have little kids who can't swim, we have a paralyzed guy, we have some old ladies. This year, I was feeling the same way. But, then it got worse. I started taking comfort in the fact that we beat (by 8 lengths) the team of retarded kids who also had a member with a prosthetic leg. What's wrong with me? Am I really that competitive? I didn't think I was. Perhaps I was just feeding off the competitiveness of some of the other teams. Perhaps I have some deep character flaw. Perhaps I need to rent The Ringer. Who knows. At least we raised some money for a good cause.

The Cutting Edge Of Ambition

I was reading an article in Men's Health magazine the other day called "The Cutting Edge Of Ambition" (see online version). The article is about what modern brain science can tell us about questions such as "what level of personal drive is most likely to produce true success? what level will kill you? or ruin the rest of your life?". I was only lukewarm on the article as a whole. But there was one call-out box that I found very useful (not in the online version). It was called "beat your coworkers to the punch (before they even arrive)" and said:

Start your workday bathed in the sickly glow of a gossip blog and you'll sabotage your productivity all day, says Julie Morgenstern, author of Never Check Your E-mail in the Morning. "When you accomplish a high-level task first thing in the morning, that sense of productivity feeds into the rest of your day," she says. These three quick fixed will optimize your first 60 minutes at your desk.

LAY THE GROUDWORK
Your workday really began in the last hour of the day before, when you contemplated the disaster zone known as your desk. "Never leave your office without knowing exactly what you're going to do with the first hour of the next day," says Morgenstern.

HIT A LEADOFF HOME RUN
"Use your brain's prime time for prime-time work," says Ronni Eisenberg, author of The Overwhelmed Person's Guide to Time Management. So target one major project in your first hour on the job: Knocking it off early amplifies your efficiency once you start multitasking again. The brain is better at multitasking later in the day, after you've had a chance to wake up.

TUNE OUT OUTLOOK
"E-mail has created an instant response culture," says Morgenstern. "It turns you into a reactive slave to Outlook." So turn off that "alert" noise, steal a "Do Not Disturb" hotel tag and post it prominently, and punch the "hold all calls" button on the phone. Now you're cooking.

I could definitely put the first hour of my workday to better use. Recently, I've been getting into work by 9am or 9:30am. By then, a lot of people are well into their day and it's hard to get stuff done since I immediately get pulled into things before I can even get settled. Wish I could get onto an earlier schedule. A co-worker of mine gets into the office every morning at 7:00am or so and is the only one there for about an hour to an hour and a half. That's the way to go. But that would also mean I'd need to get to bed earlier and also be out of the house before the kids are up. Hard call - especially since sometimes I'm the most productive from 10pm to 2am.

How do I love thee?

I was going through a stack of papers tonight and I came across an old note from my wife. It was a pink sheet of paper and "How Do I Love Thee? Let me count the ways..." is printed across the top. Then she filled in the following:

• You are a great dad


• You spend lots of time with JD and AJ


• You have a very kind heart


• You work hard on improving yourself


• You are very handsome


• You have a great voice


• You take care of all of us


• You work hard to support us


• You help take care of the house


• You are honest


• You are kind to animals


• You are faithful


• You are incredibly smart


• Yet, you are humble


• You are generous with time and money


• You read with your kids


• You don't laugh at my silly fears


• You have terrific hair and lips


• You are gentle

I'm so lucky to have such a supportive spouse. My wife rocks (see also this post). I wouldn't be the person I am today without my wife and I couldn't have accomplished many of the things I've accomplished without her either. Her support means more than I can explain.

Progress

A friend of mine AC sent me an email today about my blog. Specifically, he said:

I just got through two days straight of reading through it. I don’t know if you’ve had a chance to view it as a whole collection, but you get the sense of immense personal growth in the period you’ve been writing this. Your belief in God seems to have gone from tentative to certain (and now you’re dealing with issues of religious theology pre-assuming God). It’s amazing. Keep it up!

A couple of quick reactions. Wow, two straight days of reading! Amazing my blog could hold his attention for that long - or maybe he just powered through it since he's my friend. Regardless, I'm very impressed and feel very loved. =) Thanks AC, hopefully you got something out of the blog personally.

In terms of the whole collection, no, I haven't had a chance to go back and read through prior entries. I'm sure it would be fascinating to do that sometime. Interesting that AC saw so much growth / progress in such a short period of time (roughly six months). When you're going through a change personally (whether it's losing weight or deciding what to do about religion), you often lack sufficient distance (or objectivity) to really gauge how much progress (if any) you're really making. So it's great to get an outside perspective and some positive feedback.

Revenge of Gaia

I received a Washington Post article in the mail today from my mom (thanks!). It was called "The End of Eden" (see online version) and it was about James Lovelock's new book The Revenge of Gaia: Earth's Climate Crisis and the Fate of Humanity. The basic gist of the book and article is that we're all screwed. It reminded me of Al Gore's comment that "in the long run the earth is going to be fine. It's humans who are at risk" (see this post). Lovelock argues that the most of the world will become uninhabitable before we can do anything about it - "billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable." Lovelock dismisses solar cells, recycling, wind turbines, etc saying "it won't matter a damn ... [people] make the mistake of thinking we have decades. We don't."

A very gloomy outlook indeed. Here's how I see things. I think Lovelock is generally right about what's going on with the planet but I hope to God he's wrong about whether we can still do something about it and how soon the ill-effects of global warming will play out. Regardless, I'm inheriting this problem from prior generation and my children will inherit it from me. I can't do anything about that. The choice in front of me is what I do in the face of this information. On some level, it's a binary decision. I can either do something about the problem or not. Having chosen to do something about the problem, there's a spectrum of options from there - from totally realigning my whole life/career around helping solve the problem to simply recycling more and riding my bike to work. As we speak, I'm attempting the realignment option - updated my resume and trying to find a position at a solar cell company in the Bay Area. Either I'm going to make a difference or go down fighting. At least I'll be able to look my kids in the face 10 to 20 to 30 years from now and honestly say I tried my best to make the world a better place for them.

Faith & Reason

In one of my mother-in-law's family letters, she mentioned a Bill Moyers series on PBS called Faith and Reason. Specifically, she talked about an interview she'd seen with Sir John Houghton. I just watched it and found it quite interesting. A good use of 26 minutes. Two things stuck with me. First, Houghton said that, as a scientist, he thinks it's important to be able to say "I don't know". As a believer, it's also important to be able to say "I don't know". Lack of specific knowledge does not invalidate a particular scientific or spiritual belief. Second, Houghton had an interesting idea that God may exist in a fifth dimension beyond space and time. In that sense, God could be anywhere and everywhere in space and time simultaneously. An interesting concept and one that isn't incongruent with my current world view.

To the extent you're interested, there were 11 other people interviewed in Bill Moyers' series (see portraits).

The power of advertising

I just read this post from the Cleantech blog and it reminded me why I'm so fired up at the moment about global warming. Some people may disagree regarding how severe this problem is and what needs to be done about it, but I believe it's more likely than not that this is a big problem (and not going away) and I'm personally not willing to take significant risks with the world that my kids will inherit. The sentiment is captured well in a recent TV ad by Environmental Defense. In it, the narrator stands on a railroad track with a train approaching behind him, talking about climate change coming 20-30 years from now and saying the problem is beyond his lifetime. He steps off the track just before the train is to hit him, but standing behind the narrator is a little girl, who is implied to be inevitably steamrolled by the locomotive (see ad here). The guys at Cleantech compared the Environmental Defense ad to the legendary (if not infamous) "daisy" ad that LBJ used against Goldwater in the 1964 election (see Wikipedia or PBS). I can only hope that global warming ads like this one have a similar impact on the collective consciousness as the daisy ad had on the 1964 election.

Invisible soccer ball

I was reading parts of the book The God Particle a little while ago. Leon M. Lederman (a Nobel prize winner) wrote the book as an argument for the construction of particle accelerators that could find a Higgs boson - a hypothetical particle that might hold a key to the subatomic world of quarks and leptons. There was one excerpt regarding an "invisible soccer ball" that particularly struck me. It is fairly lengthy so I created a separate page for the excerpt rather than include it here - but definitely check it out if you have interest. The except concludes with the following observation:

This is an extended metaphor for many puzzles in physics, and it is especially relevant to particle physics. We can't understand the rules (the laws of natures) without knowing the objects (the ball) and, without a belief in a logical set of laws, we would never deduce the existence of all the particles.

The same could be said about religion and the existence of God. I continue to believe that science (and the scientific method) has much to teach us about our search for God - and vice versa.

Belief-O-Matic

I took a test on the beliefnet site last night. The site claims that "even if you don't know what faith you are, Belief-O-Matic™ knows. Answer 20 questions about your concept of God, the afterlife, human nature, and more, and Belief-O-Matic™ will tell you what religion (if any) you practice ... or ought to consider practicing. Warning: Belief-O-Matic™ assumes no legal liability for the ultimate fate of your soul."

Here are my results. Per the email I received, a couple of caveats ... The top score in the list below represents the faith that Belief-O-Matic, in its less than infinite wisdom, thinks most closely matches my beliefs. However, even a score of 100% does not mean that my views are all shared by this faith, or vice versa. Belief-O-Matic then lists another 26 faiths in the order of how much they have in common with my professed beliefs. The higher a faith appears on this list, the more closely it aligns with my thinking.

• Reform Judaism (100%)


• Sikhism (100%)


• Unitarian Universalism (99%)


• Liberal Quakers (97%)


• Neo-Pagan (89%)


• Jainism (88%)


• Mahayana Buddhism (88%)


• Bahá'í Faith (85%)


• New Age (82%)


• Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (80%)


• Theravada Buddhism (78%)


• Hinduism (77%)


• Orthodox Judaism (76%)


• New Thought (69%)


• Scientology (67%)


• Islam (66%)


• Orthodox Quaker (64%)


• Taoism (62%)


• Secular Humanism (52%)


• Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (42%)


• Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (37%)


• Seventh Day Adventist (36%)


• Eastern Orthodox (34%)


• Roman Catholic (34%)


• Nontheist (30%)


• Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (27%)


• Jehovah's Witness (10%)

Honestly, I'm not sure what (if anything) to make of the results. I've never even heard of three-quarters of these religions. And my gut says I'm more likely to be a Mormon than a Neo-Pagan but perhaps I shouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions. At any rate, if I do decide to affiliate myself with a particular religion in the future, I'll worry about it then. For the time-being, I'll just consider myself a Reform Jew. =)

Where we meet God

In the most recent ExploreFaith.org newsletter, they poise the question of where we meet God. Specifically, "what does it mean to lead a spiritual life?" Offering a Jewish perspective, Rabbi Micah D. Greenstein says:

Spirituality - whether you are Christian, Muslim, a Jew or a Hindu - is religion experienced intimately. You might say it's the core, the essence of religion. Spirituality is where you and God meet and what you do about it. It doesn't have to be, as Larry Kushner says, "other worldly," such as in Handel's "Hallelujah Chorus." For most people, spirituality is ordinary and every day. It's a buzzword today. Earlier generations probably called the same idea sacred or holy. One of the great Jewish philosophers of all time, Abraham Joshua Heschel, who is a great mystical theologian, suggested that spirituality is life lived in the continuous presence of the divine. I like Heschel's definition a lot.

He goes on to offer his top ten list of what it means to be a spiritual person today:

• To view the world as an ultimate mystery rather than as a mechanized machine
• To view life as meaningful rather than meaningless
• To view life as a lesson in gratitude
• Giving as a matter of obligation for what you owe, not as something that is nice to do
• To realize that mind, body, and soul are all gifts of God
• To acknowledge life's mysteries, even the questions that have no answers
• To trust in the goodness of life and all the potential this implies
• To always hope and never succumb to despair
• To strive for goodness, not things - to believe that honesty, integrity and dignity matter more than anything else
• The belief that every person carries with them the special signature of God

The question of spirituality is also approached from a Buddhist perspective, Christian perspective, and Muslim perspective - although I haven't had the chance to read them yet.

Independent of these essays, if someone asked me the question "where do you meet God", I would say it's in moments where things seem to make sense - whether that's a moment of clarity or insight at work (with a business or technical problem), a connecting of the dots (see this post), or some new piece of scientific knowledge (see this post). If solving complex problems is my purpose in life (see this post), this would seem a logical meeting place for me and God. In that sense, I guess I do live in the continuous presence of the divine.

LDS Primary and beyond

In response to my post regarding the Sacramento Temple, one reader asked me "How do you feel about your sons going on LDS missions? How do you suppose you would feel if you did not get to attend their temple weddings?" - not in a bad way, in a genuinely curious way. Even though I'm personally not a member of the LDS church, my kids are being raised in that faith.

A couple of comments. First, I think it's better for my kids to be raised with religion and a faith in God rather than without it. Since I can't offer a more compelling alternative, I'm happy for the kids to be part of the LDS church. That being said, it is my sincere hope that we expose them to other faith traditions over time and that they grow up to be tolerant of other religions (or even benefit from other religions to augment their world view). Also, at some point (perhaps in their teens, perhaps sooner or later), I would like my kids to make up their own minds regarding which faith they want to pursue long-term. If that turns out to be the LDS church, I will fully support that decision. But I want it to be their decision (at the appropriate time) and not place any expectations on them regarding what they ultimately decide.

In terms of going on LDS missions, again, I would want it to be their decision. I'm personally not an advocate of actively trying to convert people from one faith to another. That said, I know a number of people who have been on missions and they seemed to have been valuable life experiences for them. Also, having missionaries available as a resource to those investigating the church is certainly helpful. I just have trouble with the door-to-door, unsolicited attempts to spread the faith. But, as I said, if my sons decide to go on LDS missions, I will fully support them in that endeavor.

Regarding having a temple wedding, I would probably be pretty sad to miss the ceremony itself. Perhaps there would need to be a seperate mock ceremony for my benefit. =) Regardless, like I said, I'm fine with my kids being raised LDS until they're old enough to choose for themselves. After that, it's up to them. So I'd run into the same challenge if they were raised a different faith and then converted to LDS later in life (but before they were married). At that stage of the game, I basically view all of this as being out of my control. What is in my control, however, is supporting my children in whatever is most important in their lives. If that included a temple wedding, I'd stand outside the temple and be the first one to embrace and congratulate them on the way out.

Interesting how having kids brings the question of religion into the forefront. It's definitely important to be on the same page regarding these issues before the kids are born - especially if the parents are of different faiths. I can see now why so many people try to marry within their own faith to avoid these concerns.

Photographic essence

Many people say "a picture says a million words." Martha Graham said that "the body says what words cannot." I've often wondered whether you could capture the essence of one's being in a single photograph. The thought experiment goes something like this. What if someone asked you to describe someone, what it was really like to know them, what they were all about. But, instead of being able to use words, you could only hand them a single photograph. Could you really do justice to answering that question with a single photo - with a record of a single instant in time? I'm not sure that you could. But you might be able to come close.

I thought of this question today as I was scanning a picture of my son JD (see high-quality version here). Perhaps it's just because I know him so well but I think this photo really captures a lot of his essence - creative, energetic, a love for life.

So, here's a thought-provoking question (that I haven't figured out for myself). If you were going to be remembered by a single photograph, which one would it be and why? Would it be a current photo? One from your childhood? Would the photo be of just you or would it be a group shot? Would it be fun or serious? An everyday shot or a special event? Would you even be in the photo or would it be a piece of art or a scene from nature?

Sacramento Temple

On Friday, the whole family (including my sister-in-law HG) drove up to Sacramento (technically Rancho Cordova) to attend the open-house for the new Sacramento LDS Temple. This is the 123rd temple worldwide and the 7th in California. There is one relatively close to us in Oakland and another close to where I grew up in Bethesda. Since I'm not a member of the LDS Church, this could very well be my only opportunity to see the inside of a LDS temple.

For those of you not familiar with LDS temples, here are two questions and answers from a handout I received (see scans of all handouts here).

Q: What is the purpose of the temple?

A: Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints consider the temple the house of the Lord. Inside, Church members learn more about the purpose of life and make covenants to serve Jesus Christ and other people. In addition, they participate in ordinances such as baptism and eternal marriage for their deceased ancestors.

Q: What is the inside of the temple like?

A: The interior of the temple does not resemble a great hall or a cathedral. Instead, it contains a number of rooms, each designed to accommodate certain ceremonies, such as marriage, baptism, and instructional sessions. Church members participating in these ordinances change into simple, modest, white clothing. The color white symbolizes purity and reverence.

A couple of observations from the trip. It was a gorgeous day - very sunny. The temple itself was quite beautiful - not as stunning or majestic as the ones in DC or SLC but still an impressive piece of architecture. Many commented that it's similar to the temple in Fresno. I was a little disappointed that the interior of the temple isn't more exotic. Other than the baptismal font (resting on the backs of 12 oxen, symbolically representing the 12 tribes of Israel), all of the rooms were fairly ordinary - although impeccably designed and furnished. During the informational video at the beginning of the tour, a couple of church members commented that temples are like a piece of heaven on Earth. I personally didn't get that feeling going through the building but I'm also not a church member.

On our way into the temple grounds, there were people holding signs for SacredOrSecret.com. It's always amazing to me to see people who want to tear down other people's beliefs rather than exemplify their own. In the case of LDS temples, I guess people fear what they can't personally experience or understand. The same is true with fraternities (like Kappa Sigma), other secret societies, and their rituals.

On a whole, I'm very glad I took the day to visit the temple. I'm especially glad that I got to share the experience with my wife, kids, and HG - all of whom are church members.

We Feel Fine

I came across a cool site today - We Feel Fine - based on an article in the Juice Analytics blog. Here's the concept (more in their mission statement):

Since August 2005, We Feel Fine has been harvesting human feelings from a large number of weblogs. Every few minutes, the system searches the world’s newly posted blog entries for occurrences of the phrases “I feel” and “I am feeling”. When it finds such a phrase, it records the full sentence, up to the period, and identifies the “feeling” expressed in that sentence (e.g. sad, happy, depressed, etc.). Because blogs are structured in largely standard ways, the age, gender, and geographical location of the author can often be extracted and saved along with the sentence, as can the local weather conditions at the time the sentence was written. All of this information is saved.

Give the applet a try. It's pretty fascinating to explore the range of emotions out there - complete with quotes and the ability to drill down into different categories (e.g., show me feelings from August 2006 when it's sunny out for men in their 30's who live in California). Makes you feel not so alone in how you're feeling.

Band of Brothers

About a month or so ago, I borrowed the mini-series Band of Brothers from a co-worker. I ripped through the 10 hours of DVDs in a weekend - it was that good. The mini-series tells the story of Easy Company - a paratrooper division that sees its first action in WWII on D-Day but then endures the challenges of war all the way through the fall of the Nazi regime in Germany. Whenver I see movies like this, I wonder how I would have reacted in those types of situations in my late teens or early twenties - seeing friends die, facing your own likely death, killing others, integrating newcomers into the company, coming back from injuries, holding the line in the dead of winter, seeing a concentration camp, etc. I want to believe I would have risen to the challenge but I'm not so sure. I think I would have been fine laying down my own life but it would have torn me apart to see others in my company (especially close friends of mine) die. I doubt I could have taken that for long.

The Rock

Dwayne Douglas Johnson a.k.a The Rock is an interesting guy. I've seen a couple of interviews with him and he seems quite down-to-earth in real life. There was an article about him in the September 2006 issue of Men's Health's magazine entitled "The Rock's Rules for Reinvention". Some of my favorite excerpts were:

"Always improve. Always evolve. Never give up."

"Clarity is king: being very clear on what your intention is, on what your goal is ... When you have that, the truth shall set you free ... those are the most powerful tools we have in life: truth and knowledge. A lot of times the truth can hurt, the truth sucks, it can crush your ego. But it's freeing just to know it. Make sure that everyone is very, very clear on things."

"My director once quoted a basketball player who said, 'When you are not practicing, remember, someone somewhere is practicing, and when you meet him, he will win.' I think I jumped up and threw my table across the restaurant, it connected so well with me. But a lot of times you have to dial it down a bit ... Going without sleep is counterproductive. At some point, you just have to get off that treadmill."

There was also a good swiss-ball exercise I'll need to keep in mind for the future:

Get into pushup position, resting your shins on a Swiss ball. Raise your hips as high as you can as you roll the ball toward your body. This is the starting position. From here, bend your elbows to lower your chest toward the floor, pause, then push yourself back up. "You can do so many variations," says Johnson. "Lift one leg, come down slow, isometrically hold the pushup, with your face 6 inches off the ground. It works your core, shoulders, triceps, chest, balance, everything."

Interesting that I'm taking life advice from a former pro wrestler but it's important not to judge a book by the cover. I'm learning that everyone has something to share with us if we're willing to really listen.

Growing backlog

Some of you may have noticed that I haven't posted much recently - only 3 entries thus far in August compared with an average of almost one a day (or at least 3-4 a week) prior to that. There's two main reasons for that: (1) a trip I took to NYC for my cousin's wedding and for an industry conference, and (2) a talent show I organized at work that just took place. During that time, plenty of topics have been piling up in a backlog and hopefully I'll get through them all at some point. Topics include:

• Hinduism - part 2 (the follow-up to this post)
• Godicles (sort for God Particles, based on a conversation I had with PG in NYC)
• Talent show reflections
• Searching for truth - responses to questions from Mormon missionaries
• Band of Brothers reflections
• How do you know I love you?
• Buddhist perspective (based on this article from ExploreFaith.org)
• Karaoke cable car (including article from Men's Health magazine)
• The Rock's rules for reinvention (from this article in Men's Health magazine)
• Consumerism (visceral reactions at Costco and Bed Bath & Beyond)
• Prayer book (idea courtesy of EGE)
• Screwtape letter with me as the patient (based on Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis)
• Stumbling on Happiness reflections (once I finish the book)
• The Language of God reflections (once I finish the book)
• Americans and Climate Change reflections (once I finish the paper)
• Plan B 2.0 reflections (once I finish the book)
• Bible relfections (once I get back to reading it)

So no lack of things to talk about ... just a lack of time to investigate and talk about them. I'm really enjoying this explosion of interest in such a diversity of topics. At the same time, I find myself jumping around between topics too much - getting through the first chapter of a book, for example, and then starting a new book that catches my eye. Definitely not being as efficient as I could be but that's probably ok given where I am right now.

Distant cousins

My first-cousin got married a week ago (outside NYC). At the wedding, my brother and I met some distant cousins from England. Their mother is our aunt's cousin. It was fun meeting them and getting to know them a bit. Now, here's the most interesting part from my perspective. Prior to the wedding, these cousins could have walked past me on the streets of Manhattan and I would have never realized that we were related in any way. Makes me wonder how many times that's happened in my life. How many times have I encountered a family member, friend of a friend, or other connection in everyday life and not realized it? If I had known the connection, would I have treated these people differently?

Pi

I was recently in NYC for a couple of days and got to catch up with some old friends from college, including PG. I've always referred to PG as an "enigma". The guy totally fascinates me. We were catching up over drinks and the conversation eventually turned to PG's hypothesis that pi is a dimension rather than a number. It has always bothered him that π has an infinite number of digits and cannot be calculated precisely. Per the Wikipedia, "the exact value of π has an infinite decimal expansion: its decimal expansion never ends and does not repeat, since π is an irrational number (and indeed, a transcendental number). This infinite sequence of digits has fascinated mathematicians and laymen alike, and much effort over the last few centuries has been put into computing more digits and investigating the number's properties. Despite much analytical work, and supercomputer calculations that have determined over 1 trillion digits of π, no pattern in the digits has ever been found." [Note: In case you're interested, this Web page shows π to 1,000,000 places.] This all got PG wondering whether π is actually its own dimension and we simply experience a projection of it in our three-dimensional environment (or four-dimensional space if you include time).

Admittedly, thinking of π as its own dimension is a little far-fetched. When I mentioned it to JK (another college friend), he asked me "is PG doing ok ... he's not taking drugs, right?" But there might be more to this than we immediately realize. I just finished watching a NOVA documentary called The Elegant Universe. My brother suggested that I check it out (thanks!). The documentary is about the field of string theory. String theory has attempted to unify general relativity with quantum mechanics. Some refer to it as a "theory of everything". One thing which is challenging about this theory is that it requires 10-11 dimensions - six of which form a Calabi-Yau shape. Many string theorists believe that fundamental constants derive their values from properties of these additional dimensions. Therefore, the idea that π is its own dimension is likely not correct but its curious properties might indeed be the result of additional dimensions that are projected onto the 3-4 dimensions that we (as humans) are most comfortable with. Food for thought.

Eternal damnation

I'm becoming a big fan of the ExploreFaith.org newsletter. This week, there was an article entitled "Do Christians believe followers of other religions are doomed?" It's a good question and one that I've struggled with in the past. For example, if I choose to affiliate myself with a particular religion, am I implicitly saying that particular religion is "right" (or at least "more right") and other religions are "wrong" or "confused" or "incomplete"? Not surprisingly, the article takes a moderate (almost politically correct) stance on the subject. But there is some thought-provoking material in there. My two favorite excerpts were:

(1) My own feeling is that Christianity is unique but it is not exclusive. Let me illustrate: A magnifying glass focused on the bare shoulder of a person can burn and burn deeply. That glass makes more intense the heat of the sun. But that sun is shining all over the world--it just burns more intensely through the magnifying glass. My belief is that God is trying to make his love known through every source possible-- this includes religions other than Christian. In their religion they find a magnifying glass.

(2) We make God too small when we declare that only people like us can know God.

I'm currently of the opinion that all religions are incomplete in some way. For example, why would God create man and then offer revelations to different people / prophets around the world (“to every people we have sent a messenger”)? One explanation is that God wants man to search out the “truth” and conduct that search of their own free will. But that begs the question of why such a search for truth (religion) has led to so much turmoil and violence in the world? Perhaps it’s all a test of man. Perhaps God gave different pieces of the puzzle to different faiths but left enough overlap and confusion that it wouldn’t be immediately clear which pieces were which (or even what is or isn’t a piece in the first place) and how the pieces go together. Perhaps that man’s greatest test – finding a single truth among all the revelations (old and new), being selfless and God-seeking enough to set aside some of our prior beliefs, and come together as a people (all of us) in that new found truth.

Or maybe there is indeed one true faith and the rest of us will suffer eternal damnation. I doubt it, though. I just can't accept that's how God operates.

Myers-Briggs

I've taken the MBTI personality test a couple of times now. Each time, I've gotten a different result. My first year of business school (roughly 8 years ago), I was ISFP. The following year, I was INFP. When I took the test today, I was INFJ. You could either say that the test isn't particularly good at pinpointing my type - with the only commonalities across all three tests being I(ntroversion) and F(eeling) - or that my type has changed over time. I actually believe the latter since everytime I've done the test the results have resonated with me at the time. If you have a moment, read through the description of INFJ and let me know if you agree with the assessment.

Hinduism - part 1

As I mentioned in my world view post, my father is Hindu and my mother is Christian. I recently decided to learn more about Hinduism. My mom sent some information to me and my brother via email. I also read the chapter on Hinduism in The World's Religions, watched the first two tapes of the Bill Moyers special "The Wisdom of Faith with Huston Smith", and read the Wikipedia entry on Hinduism. I won't try to describe all Hindu belief or practicce here. I'm certainly no expert based on this limited investigation. Rather, I'll just focus on the things that I've learned so far that were most meaningful or surprising to me. I suspect I will return to Hinduism again and incorporate many of its philosophies and practices into my world view. Hindus believe that the goals of spiritual life can be attained through any religion so long as the religion is practiced sincerely. So, even if I ultimately go down the Christian route, it doesn't mean I'd need to forego the insights and teaching of Hinduism (see this mission in India that my grandfather was a member of later in his life).

One immediate misconception I had about Hinduism is that it's polytheist. This brief essay does an excellent job of distinguishing between Brahman (the unique Godhead of Hinduism who has no other and no second, "thou before whom all words recoil"), Iswara (the all powerful Almighty which is the subject of all religions), and other deities such as Kali. The logic chain is fascinating to me:

The difficulty with this concept [Brahman] is this; there is no subject-object relationship in this context, Brahman cannot be the object of cognition, since Brahman has no second. In fact nothing can be predicated about Brahman without delimiting the infiniteness of Braham. So Hindu Vedanta, with a mathematical precision, has postulated that the moment one wants to think of Brahman as an object of thought, one has already delimited Brahman and is only thinking of Iswara, , otherwise called saguna Brahman – Brahman with attributes. Iswara is the all powerful Almighty which is the subject of all religions. It has all the supreme qualities of Brahman – if Brahman could be said to have qualities or attributes – and, in addition, it could be the object of our thought process. By its very nature all names and forms suit it. The Vedic logic here is really very subtle, interesting and should be enjoyed as such. It has no name or form and therefore it could be called by any name and could be given any form. The concept of idol worship is the practical implementation of this unique logic of Hinduism. Hinduism has the daring to carry the rationale of this to its logical conclusion and hence it is we find a plethora of gods and goddesses in the Hindu framework.

To oversimplify, there is a single, infinite God (Brahman) but that God can manifest itself in a number of lesser, finite forms (Iswara and deities) that are easier for man for understand and relate to. These lesser forms, however, do not diminish or compete with "THAT" which "permeates everything in the world".

But what is Hinduism all about? Huston Smith says "if we were to take Hinduism as a whole - its vast literature, its complicated rituals, its sprawling folkways, its opulent art - and compress it into a single affirmation, we would find it saying: You can have what you want. This sounds promising, but it throws the problem back in our laps. For what do we want? It is easy to give a simple answer - not easy to give a good one. India has lived with this question for ages and has her answer waiting. People, she says, want four things." The first two (pleasure and success) form the Path of Desire and the second two (duty and liberation) form the Path of Renunciation (see excerpts from The World's Religions or this Web page for more detail).

I've been thinking a lot about the Path of Desire and the Path of Renunciation today. Specifically, I think I'm transitioning from one path to another. In some ways, I've been doing it my whole life but never realized it until now. It would explain a lot. I've always felt that I was meant to do something great in this life. Given our cultural stereotypes, I had always associated that material wealth and power (the second half of the Path of Desire). But it's really not that. It's about serving my fellow man, about making a difference in this world (whether that's the environment or something else). I might remain in the business world but it takes on a very different complexion when viewed through the lense of duty rather than success.

Our society (on a whole) is so focused on pleasure and success that you get sucked into it. I've wondered why I can't embrace it more fully. It's actually quite uncomfortable and alienating - especially here in Silicon Valley. But I've probably had multiple lifetimes to really enjoy (and suck dry) the Path of Desire. I've had my fill and now I find it wanting.

There's so much more to say about Hinduism, including the eternal within us (Atman-Brahman), the way to God through knowledge (Jnana yoga), karma, non-attachment, etc. More to come in subsequent posts.

Being spiritual vs religious

A question that I've asked myself a lot is "is it all right to be spiritual without being religious?" It's a difficult question. Two religious leaders take on that question in this article from ExploreFaith.org. The article seemed vaguely familiar. It's possible that I've mentioned it before but it was in this week's newsletter so I read it again. The viewpoints - especially from two religious leaders - are refreshing. Both people point out that the word "spirit" is derived from words for breath and air.

Your breath (your spiritual nature) is given to you by the Creator. You cannot make yourself breathe, nor can you will your breathing to cease. You are intimately connected to the One who gave you the breath and every time you inhale and exhale, your spirit longs for a deeper relationship with that One who is beyond your wildest imaginings ... In the biblical sense, all living creatures are spiritual by virtue of being given breath in the first place.

They also point out (thankfully) that you can be "religious" without being affiliated to a specific "religious organization". That being said, the second author makes an excellent point that there is a community aspect to spirituality and religion that cannot be ignored.

It's the common humanity part that's the underlying issue of the question. As much as we might wish to, we can't escape being social creatures, only capable of differentiation within society itself. That's who we are, where we run into problems, and where we will resolve them too. Being aware of the spiritual dimension in life means sensing the sacred not only within ourselves but also among us. We can't be healed, made more whole, in a vacuum. The reason religion happens is because we need to work things out together, puzzle them out together, try them out on each other, mess up and labor to do better next time. If we aren't making mistakes, we aren't learning much. The bible calls mistakes sin and learning repentance ... When folk forbear one another and persevere in faith together, they get somewhere you just can't reach any other way ...

So it's not altogether all right to be spiritual without being religious. It's only partly right for some, some of the time, but it can't be most right in the end, over time. In the end, we can't solve our own problems, in and of themselves, without coming to the awareness that our problems are the world's problems. We're all in this together, for better and for worse. There's really no way to secede from the human race. Certainly, we don't need to submit to someone else's view of religion, but we can't avoid the general conversation, and sooner or later we will need to make some effort on behalf of the whole, the holy. We can't do it all. Neither can we remain on the sidelines. We can only do our part ... A religion of one will not restore spiritual community, even though it might be the right place to hang out for a time, to cool off, to reconsider and redirect ... However frustrating, it's about all of us and our broken community. True religion, while differentiating us, will also bind us together, in service to the holy and for the sake of the world. The religions we have, while imperfect, are the most time tested we have. We might as well see if we can use them for good, for God's sake.

I definitely buy into this community argument. For now, this blog is my church (see this post). But at some point I suspect I'll seek out a more formal group - perhaps a Western faith, perhaps an Eastern faith, or perhaps a mixture.

Early memories

My mom pointed out historical inaccuracies with two of my posts. In one regarding expectations, I said "I think the events took on even more significance in my mind since it was the kids' first time doing either activity and since my family never did this kind of stuff when I was growing up." And, in another regarding camping with JD, I said "This was JD's first time camping (my first time too)." Apparently when I was little, we did lots of fun stuff (including, but not limited to, going to the movie 101 Dalmatians and having a birthday trip to this scenic location in Germany). We also went camping a number of times. In her email, my mom went on to say:

I am sure I could come up with all kinds of things that Dad and I tried to do when you were young but reality is it would not matter. We all see the past through our own personal perspectives and what our expectations were … Like I said, this is not an emotional rant of why you and [your brother] did not get out of certain things what we had hoped. The message is only meant to try and help and I share it only out of love for you in case for some reason your children at a later time in life don't remember days or what you perceived as being happy days the same way.

A couple of things here. First, I have almost no memories from before I was seven. Therefore, whenever I make sweeping statements about my childhood, I'm actually referring to age seven onward. Second, when I say things like "never", I mean it figuratively, not literally. And, third, everyone's childhood has its good and bad aspects. That will be as true for my kids as it is for the rest of us. Our parents do their best given what they have, what their backgrounds are, and what challenges life presents. Just because their kids look back and have certain regrets or wish certain things were different (as I'm sure my kids will do too) doesn't mean that our parents didn't love us or didn't try their best to make everyday special.

I don't expect JD and AJ to remember baseball games or movies or camping or cutting the lawn. A lot of what I do with them is more for my benefit than theirs. It makes me feel like a "good Dad" to do fun things with them or to support their interests. 1-year olds, for example, don't want or need an elaborate birthday party. It's for the parent, not the child. My other goal with things like baseball games, camping, etc is to (a) establish traditions of doing things as a family that we can carry forward into the future (when the kids might otherwise be less keen to hang out with their parents) and (b) seed certain interests that might blossom a couple of years from now.

I actually wish I had more early memories. From what I can tell from photos and stories, it was a very happy time for me.

Heat waves

It's been really hot here in Mountain View recently. Temperatures over 100 degrees are relatively uncommon in the Bay Area but perhaps they'll occur more frequently in the future. There's a good discussion of this topic on the TerraBlog (see this article). Specifically, the author discusses the impact of increases in mean temperature and/or variance on the frequency of heat waves. The third scenario - with an increase in both mean and variance - is particularly scary but unfortunately likely given the results of recent climate models trying to explain the extremely improbable 2003 European heat wave.

Definitely concerning. As an aside, I'm still trying to figure out what I can do about all this - both personally and professionally. My wife recently bought a clothesline (see this article) and we got some CF bulbs awhile ago. But there's more than needs to be done.

Random connections

I received a comment on my blog today from a person I didn't know. This took me a little off-guard since I haven't told many people about my blog and I don't have it indexed with search engines. It turns out that Kelly is a friend of ChP who is a friend of GC who is a friend of mine. GC is a also the author of the foodwinesex blog (see this post). Turns out that Kelly studies the Course in Miracles, sings with Glide, and has a blog of her own. As she put it in an email to me, she is "humbly lost ... at times looking for others with common goals to work through things". Aren't we all in that same boat? Fascinating to see how life works sometimes. We find support where we least expect it (see also this post).

At the boardwalk

My company had a picnic/event at the Santa Cruz Boardwalk this afternoon. It was a lot of fun for the whole family. JD and I played some Skee Ball and arcade games together. The kids got to go on a bunch of rides. And my wife even got to go on an adult ride (Crazy Surf) twice by herself. I was particularly surprised to see how fearless JD and AJ are. JD really wanted to go on the Ferris Wheel - but wasn't the least bit afraid of the heights. When we went on a kids rollercoaster, I prepped JD with "this ride is going to go up and then down really fast so it might be a little scary but it will be ok". His immediate reply was "I'm not scared". AJ meanwhile (barely tall enough for the ride) was laughing through the whole thing and then couldn't wait to go another time. I guess sometimes we think we need to protect our kids even though they clearly don't need protecting.

As an aside, I'm definitely in trouble. As soon as the kids are a little older, they're going to want to go on every "throw-up ride" at these amusement parks - and I don't do particularly well on those rides. Perhaps I can outsource that job to my brother or my sister-in-law HG. Or perhaps my wife will be up to the challenge. Typhoon and Delirium, here we come.

Headbangers ball

I came across this image earlier today while trying to solve an Excel question that I had. I'm not sure why it resonated with me so strongly. I guess there have been a lot of days at work recently where I've felt this way. I've always known that my current role at work was temporary (12-24 months) but I think it's time to get ready to move on to other opportunities - either at my current employer or elsewhere. Will be interesting to see how that evolves over the next 6 months or so. A big part of me wants to stay at my current company but there is an equally big part that wants to move on to a new challenge at a new company in a new industry (likely something related to renewable energy and/or combating global warming).

Expectations

Expectations are a dangerous thing - the expectations others have of us, the expectations we have of ourselves (and others), and the expectations we have of the future. While these many forms of expectations deserve attention, let me concentrate on the last one for a moment - expectations we have of the future. I took my kids to a (minor league) baseball game for the first time this past weekend. We watched the San Jose Giants play the Stockton Ports and the kids got to go down to the field and run the bases afterwards (it was a promotional evening). It was my birthday a couple of weeks ago and this is one of the things I decided I wanted to do to celebrate. The other thing I wanted to do was take the kids to a movie. Rather than go to the theater, we borrowed Sesame Street Presents: Follow that Bird from the library and watched it at my work (in a large conference room with an overhead projector and ceiling-mounted speakers).

I had such high hopes for both events. I envisioned the kids being all excited about the special activities, sitting through them without too many interruptions, and remembering the events fondly afterwards - real father/son bonding moments. I think the events took on even more significance in my mind since it was the kids' first time doing either activity and since my family never did this kind of stuff when I was growing up.

In hindsight, it's not surprising that neither event lived up to my expectations. Charlotte Bronte said that "life is so constructed that an event does not, cannot, will not, match the expectation". In fact, I can't think of a single situation in which I got my hopes up for something and the actual event met or exceeded my expectations. There are plenty of times where my expectations were low and I've been pleasantly surprised. But not a single event that I've expected to be off-the-charts good has lived up to that billing. I guess Alexander Pope and Jonathan Swift were right when they said "blessed is the man who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed". I've often thought that I shouldn't get my hopes up since I'll only be disappointed in the end. But that seems like such a pathetic way to go through life that I haven't been able to fully embrace it.

I came across an interesting book the other day that sheds a little light on this. My friend GC is part of the TED book club and had Stumbling on Happiness sitting on his desk. It looked good - endorsed by Malcolm Gladwell (Blink), Steven Levitt (Freakonomics), and Daniel Goleman (Emotional Intelligence) - so I asked GC if I could borrow the book. As the author explains in the foreword, "this is a book that describes what science has to tell us about how and how well the human brain can imagine its own future, and about how and how well it can predict which of those futures it will most enjoy." Given the frontal lobes of our brains, human beings are the only animal that think about the future - not just predicting what will happen next (e.g., "last time I smelled this smell, a big thing tried to eat me") but genuinely imagining the world as it isn't and has never been, but as it might be. This is a mixed blessing...

What is the conceptual tie that binds anxiety and planning? Both, of course, are intimately connected to thinking about the future. We feel anxiety when we anticipate that something bad will happen, and we plan by imagining how our actions will unfold over time. Planning requires that we peer into our futures, and anxiety is one of the reactions we may have when we do. The fact that damage to the frontal lobe impairs planning and anxiety so uniquely and precisely suggests that the front lobe is the critical piece of cerebral machinery that allows normal, modern human adults to project themselves into the future. Without it we are trapped in the moment, unable to imagine tomorrow and hence unworried about what it may bring. (pg 14)

Human beings actually spend about 12% of their daily thoughts thinking about the future. It's pleasurable to daydream about the future since we tend to imagine ourselves achieving and succeeding rather than fumbling or failing. As the author points out, though:

Although imagining happy futures may make us feel happy, it can also have some troubling consequences. Researchers have discovered that when people find it easy to imagine an event, they overestimate the likelihood that it will actually occur. Because most of us get so much more practice imagining good events than bad events, we tend to overestimate the likelihood that good events will actually happen to us, which leads us to be unrealistically optimistic about our futures (pg 18) ... In fact, the one group of people who seem generally immune to this illusion are the clinically depressed, who tend to estimate accurately the degree to which they control events in most situations. (pg 22)

Can't wait to read the rest of this book. I'm only 26 pages (10.9%) of my way through it so far but I think it will be a really worthwhile read.

Getting Organized

My wife did a presentation last night at her church's Enrichment Night on de-cluttering and home organization. Thankfully she cares about such things. Otherwise, our home would be a disaster. My wife did a great job preparing for the talk (see slides in Powerpoint or PDF along with handouts). Unfortunately, I didn't get to see her present (since I was chasing AJ around the church parking lot) but I heard from a number of afterwards that it went well and that people got a lot of value out of it. As with many things, the real trick here is to start small rather than feeling overwhelmed by the feeling that you have to do everything all at once. Also, to the extent you don't have time to read through my wife's materials, I would summarize them in three statements: (1) clutter affects our state of mind more than we realize, (2) if you don't use something, get rid of it, and (3) think hard before bringing something new into your home.

Can't stop working

I just read an interesting article on ExploreFaith.org called "The Lord's Picnic". I can certainly relate to this paradoxical observation:

Sometimes you just can't get away. Everyone knows the odd combination of longing and dread with which overworked people anticipate their work holidays - longing to be at leisure for a week or two, dread at the pile of work that will await them when they return. It's not worth it to take a vacation, more than one person has told me. I'd be better off not going away at all.

There is more to it than the dread of the accumulated work though. A perverse momentum takes hold in some of us when we are in need of rest: we can't stop working. We don't take it easy - we take it hard. It's as if we were afraid to leave the very thing from which we need a break.

Most exhausted people I talk to go to work earlier than they need to and stay later. Work much more, and accomplish about the same as they would have if they worked normal hours. Maybe less. Their world shrinks to the workplace and the workplace alone. No other arena of their lives command their attention.

Sometimes they think other people would be critical of them if they took it easy, as if there were some moral high ground of martyrdom demanded of them that is not expected of everyone else. Sometimes they think terrible things will happen if they aren't there. They may hate it, but they can't bring themselves to stop.

The truth is, terrible things will happen whether you're there or not. The escalating hours of work, the inability to do anything else - these are symptoms of depression, a loss of self and perspective on the world so profound it can paralyze and even kill if it is not stopped.

I'm improving along this dimension but I have noticed that when I need rest the most, I often press forward the hardest - as if one final burst of energy will magically get me across the finish line and allow me to rest (guilt-free) for as long as I want/need. But it doesn't work that way. As soon as I finish one task, there is another one waiting. There's no end to it. Also, you get into a vicious cycle. You stay up late one night to get some extra work done but that makes you tired the next day. Being tired leads you to be less focused and productive at work which causes you to get less done which causes more work to pile up. Faced with the growing pile of work, you stay up late the next night to "catch up" but the cycle simply continues and gets worse over time. In the end, you're burnt out and no further ahead work-wise than if you had just gotten a full night's sleep to begin with. Also, the consequences of not getting work things done - or at least done on time - is often much less significant than we convince ourselves they are.

That all makes rational sense to me but the irrational part of me still hangs on to its old ways. It wants to believe that I am indispensableble at work, that others are depending on me to get my stuff done on time, and that loyalty to my coworkers dictates that I (automatically) go the extra mile even if I'm not really up to it. It's hard to let go of old ways - they've worked so well for so long. But strengths during one stage of our lives can become Achilles' heels at the next stage of our life (see this post). Things change - hopefully for the better.

What Do Our Neighbors Believe?

ExploreFaith.org has a preview of a new book called What Do Our Neighbors Believe? (see site). The book will focus on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - as did the religion course I took. For those of you interested in learning more about other religions (well, these three in particular), you may want to check out the site or this new book.

Living Homes

This is a really cool housing-related development - Living Homes. The company designs environmentally-friendly houses that include materials, technologies and building processes which make a positive impact on air, soil, water and energy standards. The company has developed a model home in Santa Monica, California — a pre-fabricated 2,500 square foot modern home built with high-performance glass and insulation, LED lighting, low-flow faucets, solar energy, solar-radiant heat, natural ventilation, gray water irrigation and green roofs planted with organic gardens. They are also developing a community near Joshua Tree National Park. But, at some point, you should be able to get one of these homes anywhere in the country. I'd definitely be interested in one. The only trick is figuring out how to afford to buy some land in the Bay Area and get the house on that land.