Not fitting in

In my last post, I made the comment that I've never felt that I fit into this world. In response, a friend of mine sent me a quote from the book Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis:

Most of us find it very difficult to want "Heaven" at all- except in so far as "Heaven" means meeting again our friends who have died. One reason for this difficulty is that we have not been trained: our whole education tends to fix our minds on this world. Another reason is that when the real want for Heaven is present in us, we do not recognise it Most people, if they had really learned to look into their own hearts, would know that they do want, and want acutely, something that cannot be had in this world. There are all sorts of things in this world that offer to give it to you, but they never quite keep their promise. The longings which arise in us when we first fall in love, or first think of some foreign country, or first take up some subject that excites us, are longings which no marriage, no travel, no learning, can really satisfy. I am not now speaking of what would be ordinarily called unsuccessful marriages, or holidays, or learned careers. I am speaking of the best possible ones. There was something we grasped at, in that first moment of longing, which just fades away in the reality. I think everyone knows what I mean. The wife may be a good wife, and the hotels and scenery may have been excellent, and chemistry may be a very interesting job: but something has evaded us. Now there are two wrong ways of dealing with this fact, and one right one.

(1) The Fool's Way.- He puts the blame on the things themselves. He goes on all his life thinking that if only he tried another woman, or went for a more expensive holiday, or whatever it is, then, this time, he really would catch the mysterious something we are all after. Most of the bored, discontented, rich people in the world are of this type. They spend their whole lives trotting from woman to woman (through the divorce courts), from
continent to continent, from hobby to hobby, always thinking that the latest is "the Real Thing" at last, and always disappointed.

(2) The Way of the Disillusioned "Sensible Man."- He soon decides that the whole thing was moonshine. "Of course," he says, "one feels like that when one's young. But by the time you get to my age you've given up chasing the rainbow's end." And so he settles down and learns not to expect too much and represses the part of himself which used, as he would say, "to cry for the moon." This is, of course, a much better way than the first, and makes a man much happier, and less of a nuisance to society. It tends to make him a prig (he is apt to be rather superior towards what he calls "adolescents"), but, on the whole, he rubs along fairly comfortably. It would be the best line we could take if man did not live for ever. But supposing infinite happiness really is there, waiting for us? Supposing one really can reach the rainbow's end? In that case it would be a pity to find out too late (a moment after death) that by our supposed "common sense" we had stifled in ourselves the faculty of enjoying it.

(3) The Christian Way.- The Christian says, "Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feels hunger well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water. Men feel sexual desire: well, there is such a thing as sex. If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world. If none of my earthly pleasures satisfy it, that does not prove that the universe is a fraud. Probably earthly pleasures were never meant to satisfy it, but only to arouse it, to suggest the real thing. If that is so, I must take care, on the one hand, never to despise, or be unthankful for, these earthly blessings, and on the other, never to mistake them for the something else of which they are only a kind of copy, or echo, or mirage. I must keep alive in myself the desire for my true country, which I shall not find till after death; I must never let it get snowed under or turned aside; I must make it the main object of life to press on to that other country and to help others to do the same."

She commented that "I just think I feel like I don't belong because I DON'T. I don't know if this is a comforting thought to you or not, but I really think this life is so temporary and vaporous, and really sub-par compared to the world we experienced before and after this life." I would tend to agree. When I was listening to The Purpose-Driven Life awhile ago, the author said that God doesn't want us to get too attached to this world since it's not our real home. He made the analogy to an ambassador in a foreign land. So perhaps none of us fit into this world and I've just come to that realization fairly early in life. Hard to say.

Facing Darkness

It's interesting to see how certain topics suddenly get popular in the press. In the last week, I've seen two articles on men and depression. The first was in Men's Health, entitled "Exercising Your Demons", and the second was in Newsweek, entitled "Facing Darkness". Both articles pointed out that depression in men has classicly been misdiagnosed and that men are very reluctant to admit to the problem. Rather, men exhibit tendencies towards alcoholism, violence, extreme exercise, hard work, and suicide. Men also tend to fly off the handle about little things like bad service or some other seemingly minor incident.

A couple of excerpts from the Men's Health article:

"It's understandable that women are three times more likely than men to be treated for depression; our culture has put a feminine face on the disease, so women give themselves permission to feel it and to seek help for it. Polluck puts it this way: 'We have in our society a feminized view of depression, coming out of a model of hysteria that dates back to Freud.' Terrance Real, author of I Don't Want to Talk About It, and a marriage and family therapist in Massachusetts, wrote, 'There is a terrible collusion in our society, a cultural cover-up about depression in men.' And part of the cultural influence involves the way men are taught from early childhood to be strong, silent, independent, and resistant to suffering. As Real puts it, 'Men have about a millisecond's tolerance for feeling [this type of] pain, and then they spring into action. A flight from shame into grandiosity lies at the heart of male covert depression.'"

"The social conditioning that leads to men's response to depression begins in infancy. Male babies receive less of every type of nurturing, including speech, touch, and comfort when they cry. And that is only the beginning of what will be, to one degree or another, a brutal upbringing for boys. In the 1960s, the crusading social psychologist Jeanne Block and her colleagues explored how differently parents treat boys and girls. For instance, moms and dads encourage boys to be competitive and to achieve. They don't like them to show their emotions. They encourage them to be less dependent; mothers push them away. They punish them more than they punish girls. And they are unaware that they treat boys and girls differently."

"But there is not much in our cultural definition of what it means to be a man that is inherent to maleness. Children start off surprisingly alike, whether they're boys or girls. If there's a difference, it's the opposite of what the culture seems to expect: Boys are more sensitive. They give expression to their emotions more readily than girls. They affiliate with others in the same way as girls. Then someone tells them it's not okay to be that way. If you act like that, you're a pussy. As Real and others have explained, it is through this process of denial that men are primed for depression. And it is the cultural necessity of carrying out and carrying on this process that makes it so difficult for them to recognize and admit to depression when it comes. They not only don't acknowledge it to themselves, they often don't display the symptoms that psychotherapists use to diagnose depression. The cultural training that lays the groundwork for depression in men and for their denial of it later in life involves social isolation. That means telling people the truth about yourself and trusting that they'll do the same, a concept that seems terrifying to many men."

The Newsweek article has a sidebar called "The Sad Legacy of Depressed Parents". The most interesting excerpt was:

In one recent study at Columbia University, researchers found that rates of anxiety disorders and depression were three times as high among the adult children of depressed parents as they were among people whose parents were not depressed. Adult children of depressed parents also reported about five times the rate of cardiovascular disease—a sign that emotional disorders affect more than mood. Even kids who manage to succeed socially often struggle at home to care for their parents or younger siblings. "Depression has an entire family dynamic," says Myrna Weissman, the lead researcher in the Columbia study.

Both articles had little quizes men could take to determine whether they suffer from depression. I failed (or passed, depending on your perspective) both quizes. But it wasn't a surprise. After an initial period of excitement with my new job, the stress (mostly self-imposed) has really gotten to me over the last three months. I've always had a disposition towards working hard. I've also increasingly been getting really upset (and staying upset) about really minor, stupid stuff. And I've been having trouble getting to sleep and staying asleep - so then I'm tired a lot. It's definitely a viscous cycle I'm in. I've never really felt like I fit in the world. I'm feeling that way now. Perhaps I don't fit; perhaps it's depression; probably the latter. I've also noticed other negative patterns of behavior reemerging so it's time to take action.

Not sure how to break out of this. I've seen a therapist for the last 5 years but I need to work out some issues with my current health insurance before I can see her again. In the meantime, I guess I'll lean on my wife (not that I don't lean on her enough as it is). I should start exercising more regularly as well. Baby steps but positive steps.

Useless men

About two and half months ago, I read an interesting article regarding peak oil and its implications for society. The gist of the article was that men in this generation don't have the fundamental skills required to survive (and provide for their families) in a society without cheap energy.

Over the last few weeks I have been doing oral history interviews with older people ... of their memories of the 30s, 40s and 50s. They remember working with horses on the farms, raising children with gas lamps, candles, home grown vegetables and home made clothes. This is less than 2 generations ago. What emerges is an innate sense, in the generation that made it through World War Two, of what constitutes enough, of an instinctive sense of self-reliance and an almost universal ability to turn one’s hand to anything.

A couple of years ago I went to London to a peak oil conference, and the evening before it I went to the pre-event social. I was struck by the fact that everyone there (with one exception) was male, aged 25-40, and, as far as I could tell, worked in IT. They were all very pleasant, intelligent, well read on the whole peak oil issue, and as able as anyone to argue that the peak is imminent and we need to act. There were however, almost no women, no gardeners, no builders, no foresters in the room, nor at the subsequent conference as far as I can tell.

Writers such as Shepherd Bliss and Carolyn Baker have questioned why it is that women are less prominent in the peak oil community. I have a nagging suspicion that it is because what we are seeing is, in part, a generation of men awakening to the fact that they are completely ill-prepared for life beyond oil. Almost all of the peak oil writers, and the vast majority of peak oil website writers and bloggers, are men. When I have organised peak oil-related events, finding female speakers on the subject is very tricky.

From the oral history interviews I have been doing, I have seen how older men are less concerned about “going back” to the kind of lifestyles of the 40s and 50s because they still remember how to do things. They often say “well it’s not a problem, I still know how to do all that stuff”. Something happened around the 1960s and the passing-on of that knowledge just stopped. Perhaps mens’ natural instinct is to protect and to provide, and at a time when we feel on some level the need to be doing so again, we are realising that our education has left us completely incapable of doing either. The oil-based economic system has basically said “don’t worry about that, we’ll take care of that for you” for that last 50 years, but that system is now starting to look very shaky, and we realise we have been taught the wrong skills.

The skills one needs to work in the service industry, in sales, in IT, in the insurance industry, in a call centre, are of very little use when one starts thinking about what might follow that in a more localised near-future. What those of 2 generations ago had that we have lost was a practical attitude. They knew how to use the various tools around them, and had a confidence that they could turn their hands to most things. They had the core skills they would need to get through most challenges. Dig for Victory was possible because most people still knew how to garden.

It is interesting to me how specialized professions have become and how much we take for granted in terms of food supply, transportation, etc. If you begin to unravel that support infrastructure, many other aspects of society (including specialized careers) no longer make sense. Need to get going on teaching the kids some basic skills.

Nothing New Here

I read this article in the Washington Post about two months ago. It's about a group of people in San Francisco that decided they weren't going to buy anything new (aside from necessities like food) for a year. It's a little extreme but they set a good example for the rest of us. Reducing consumption is definitely key to helping solve a number of the world's challenges. The most interesting quote from the article (at least for me) was: ""I go on talk radio shows, and I'm amazed by the anger of some people, the Chamber of Commerce president who calls up and says, 'You're trying to ruin the economy' ... I think it upsets people because it seems like we're making a value judgment about them. When we're simply trying to bring less . . . into our house." During the holidays, I gave some of my in-laws checks for $10 to buy energy-efficient light bulbs for their homes. It definitely wasn't a value judgment; just trying to make a contribution to reducing electricity consumption.

Ten Axioms to Guide Your Life

There was a good article in the February 2007 issue of Ensign magazine. It's a talk that Elder Robert D. Hales of the LDS Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gave at a commencement address at Brigham Young University on August 14, 2003. During his life, he distilled the following ten axioms to guide his life:

1. It’s not the obstacle that counts, but how you overcome it.
2. Pursue your goals with all your heart, might, mind, and strength. You are doomed to failure if you pursue them in a vacillating manner.
3. From a tiny spark can come a large fire.
4. Our greatest strengths can become our greatest weaknesses.
5. Failure is one of the greatest teachers if we have the faith to learn from it.
6. It is not how you start the race or where you are during the race. It is how you cross the finish line that matters.
7. “If you wish to get rich, save what you get. A fool can earn money; but it takes a wise man to save and dispose of it to his own advantage.”
8. You cannot learn the Lord’s will without exercising your agency and becoming accountable for your decisions.
9. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
10. The temple of God is the greatest university.

One interesting excerpt from the conclusion of the article is:

We can share the gospel only to the extent we live it. During my life at college, in the military as an adjutant and fighter pilot, in graduate school, or in my professional career in sales and marketing, as president of a division, or as a group vice president at corporate headquarters—I was never required to compromise my values or beliefs.

Was it easy? I don’t know. I wasn’t looking for easy.

Was it hard? I wasn’t looking for hard either. That is just the way it was.

Were there men and women who challenged me on my beliefs at times? Certainly.

When I held to my beliefs, did they respect and honor the commitment I had made to live the gospel? In every instance.

If you will remember who you are and act accordingly; if you will return with honor from every calling, task, and assignment; if you will be true to the Savior’s name and worthy of His eternal blessings, you will always have the light of the Holy Ghost to be with you, to lead you, to guide you, and to buoy you up. You will never want for what to say or how to act. It will be given you.

I think it's very important to hold true to your convictions, whatever they are.

Two-wheeler

JD had a big accomplishment today. He rode his bike for the first time without training wheels. I wasn't there but apparently he was either (a) a natural or (b) ready a long time ago. Regardless, he was off to the races from the very beginning. It's cool to see him progressing like this and doing age-appropriate things. He's getting so old. At the same time, I try not to get too worked up about this stuff. They are his accomplishments, not mine. But I'm certainly excited for him. He seems quite proud of himself.

Companion

I just took a spirituality survey on ExploreFaith.org. Based on the ten questions, it concluded that I'm a "companion". Here's the description provided:

Companions are people who naturally connect with the Holy One through their relationships with others. They believe that God is present in everyone and look for the spark of that presence when they are with others. They look to others to help them make sense of their own faith, and trust that God will speak to them and lead them through the words, actions, and holiness of other godly people. They relate best with God through shared interaction. They tend to spend more time praying and worshipping with others than by themselves. If they were to meet God face to face, they would want to have those they love with them.

In the Bible, Ruth was a good example of a companion. After her father-in-law, brother-in-law, and husband died she became a companion to Naomi, her mother-in-law, even though it meant leaving behind all that, for her, was familiar and expected. Through Naomi’s personal faith and the faith of Naomi’s people, Ruth felt the touch of the Holy One and discovered a new way of living and being. She allowed her new faith community to be the primary source of her spiritual transformation.

I don't really view myself this way but perhaps there's something to it.

Keeping romance alive

I just read a good article on ParentCenter about different things that married couples do to keep romance alive after they have kids. It's definitely a tough thing to do but it's also really important. Most of the articles on ParentCenter are pretty poor in my opinion but there are some good ideas in this particular article.

Photo cross-section of NYC

I'm trying to get a Web site together for my new company so I've been taking a number of photos for the site. I've never really been into photography but the field has always intrigued me. This photo project of New Yorkers at the turnstiles is interesting. Thought I'd share with others.

Marriage Partnership

For Christmas, I bought my wife a subscription to Marriage Partnership. In the first issue we received, there was a good article about "couples devotional":

No amount of being religious can replace the time a couple spends in shared prayer. Research shows that couples who frequently pray together are twice as likely as those who pray less often to describe their marriages as being highly romantic. And couples who pray together are 90 percent more likely to report higher satisfaction with sex than couples who don't pray together. Because of the vulnerability it demands, prayer draws a couple closer.

If prayer is so good for marriage, why don't more couples do it? Because it's not easy and the price of that vulnerability can seem too high ... We've become convinced that the most desperate need in many marriages is not for more excitement or activity, but for depth. Try sojourning together toward communion with God. Then your aching urge to be connected - soul to soul - will be satisfied.

There was also a good quote from Trent Dilfer, quarterback of the Cleveland Browns. He said, "People are often enamored with my Super Bowl ring. But it's my wedding ring that I'm most proud of. Having a good marriage takes even more work than winning a Super Bowl."

Periodic Table of Visualization Methods

My brother sent this page to me and it's totally cool. Well ... maybe only cool if you're into analytics and data visualization. In some situations, the right visualization can make all the difference. Enjoy.

Cool Christmas present

For Christmas, my brother bought me a ton of CO2 emissions through NativeEnergy. Specifically, NativeEnergy will use the money to build new wind power projects that reduce one ton of CO2 emissions (about a third of a car's annual emissions). What a thoughtful gift. Thanks! For Christmas, I gave some of my in-laws $10 each towards the purchase of compact flourescent lightbulbs (or some other energy efficiency project of their choice). It was one way to remember the environment (a gift to humanity) this holiday season.

The Science of Happiness

I just read an article in the January-February issue of Harvard Magazine called "The Science of Happiness". Apparently "positive psychology" is a new and fast-growing field, although some like Daniel Gilbert (author of Stumbling on Happiness) "don't think psychology needs a movement ... probably 85% of the ideas are worthless, but that's true everywhere in science." As I was reading through the article, I marked three passages that I thought were interesting:

Environs, too, affect mood. Settings that combine “prospect and refuge,” for example, seem to support a sense of well-being. “People like to be on a hill, where they can see a landscape. And they like somewhere to go where they can not be seen themselves,” Etcoff explains. “That’s a place desirable to a predator who wants to avoid becoming prey.” Other attractive features include a source of water (streams for beauty and slaking thirst), low-canopy trees (shade, protection), and animals (proof of habitability). “Humans prefer this to deserts or man-made environments,” Etcoff says. “Building windowless, nature-less, isolated offices full of cubicles ignores what people actually want. A study of patients hospitalized for gall-bladder surgery compared those whose rooms looked out on a park with those facing a brick wall. The park-view patients used less pain medication, had shorter stays, and complained less to their nurses. We ignore our nature at our own peril.”

“We evolved in a much different world, with much less choice and no sedentary people,” Etcoff continues. “We didn’t evolve for happiness, we evolved for survival and reproduction.” For this reason, we are sensitive to danger. “Pleasure and the positive-reward system is for opportunity and gain,” Etcoff explains. “And pleasure involves risk, taking a chance that can override some of your fear at that moment.”

Happiness activates the sympathetic nervous system (which stimulates the “flight or fight” response), whereas joy stimulates the parasympathetic nervous system (controlling “rest and digest” functions). “We can laugh from either joy or happiness,” Vaillant said. “We weep only from grief or joy.” Happiness displaces pain, but joy embraces it: “Without the pain of farewell, there is no joy of reunion,” he asserted. “Without the pain of captivity, we don’t experience the joy of freedom.”

I've seen a couple of authors make the distinction between happiness and joy before. I've also heard authors argue that we can't appreciate what's good in our lives within having some bad stuff for contrast.

There was one other passage from Daniel Gilbert that was thought-provoking:

The reason is that humans hold fast to a number of wrong ideas about what will make them happy. Ironically, these misconceptions may be evolutionary necessities. “Imagine a species that figured out that children don’t make you happy,” says Gilbert. “We have a word for that species: extinct. There is a conspiracy between genes and culture to keep us in the dark about the real sources of happiness. If a society realized that money would not make people happy, its economy would grind to a halt.”

That last sentence is pretty interesting. If people weren't interested in making more than a bare minimum amount of money, would capitalism still be able to operate or would it fall apart?

I wonder where all this research will take us - or whether it will be a passing fad with not much to show for itself 10-20 years from now.

How to raise a spiritual child

I'm glad that my kids have religion in thier lives. I read this article from Parent Center on "how to raise a spiritual child". There is nothing too earth-shattering in there but it was reassuring to see that we're doing many of the things they suggest. I ultimately don't care which religion (if any) my kids select. But I do hope that they understand that there is something larger in the world than themselves and that they have an on-going dialogue with God.

GreenDimes

A friend of mine pointed me to GreenDimes.com. The $3/month subscription service helps get you off (and keep you off) of junk-mail lists - which saves paper, eliminates clutter in your home, and reduces the chances of identity theft. The company also plants a tree for you every month. I just signed up so I can't vouch for the service yet. But it seems intriguing and potentially quite valuable.

Save the polar bear

The Bush Administration is considering adding the polar bear to the endangered species list (see this article). If it does so, there may be a ripple effect on the government's stance and policies on global climate change since federal agencies would then have a regulatory obligation to protect the polar bear (whose main threat right now is habitat loss due to global warming). Given the adminstration's past stance on climate change, it would be ironic is polar bears could accomplish what scientists have not - get the adminstration to take greenhouse gas emissions seriously.

New blog functionality

Blogger just upgraded its service to include some new functionality (including the ability to "label" or categorize posts). They also "upgraded" their templates. I'm still getting used to the new template and don't really like everything about it (i.e., some of the formatting and spacing). Also, it's going to take a little while to go back and label all my prior posts. So there will be a little turmoil with the blog while I'll work through all these issues. In the meantime, I'll also try to get some new content up. So stick with me through this transition.

Climate change videos

The University of Arizona put together a seminar series on climate change this past fall. There were seven talks by different U of A professors, covering almost all important aspects of the "climate change problem." I have not had a chance to watch them myself but I hear that the talks are quite good.

The One Sentence Challenge

One of the blogs I read issued the following challenge:

Physicist Richard Feynman once said that if all knowledge about physics was about to expire the one sentence he would tell the future is that "Everything is made of atoms." What one sentence would you tell the future about your own area, whether it's entrepreneurship, hedge funds, venture capital, or something else? Examples: An economist might say that "People respond to incentives." I had an engineering professor years ago who said all of that field could be reduced to "F=MA and you can't push on a rope." A couple of other good ones come immediately to mind: the GBN motto, "the future is uncertain, and yet we must act;" Bruce Sterling's "the future is a process, not a destination;" Yogi Berra's "prediction is very hard, especially about the future."

In my case, I'd probably say "everything happens for a reason" (see this post). Perhaps I suffer from confirmation bias, but I keep seeing more and more evidence in my life that it's true.

So, what would your one sentence be?

Blue skies

There was a brief AskMarilyn in today's PARADE magazine asking "My daughter, who lives near Palm Springs, California, says her sky is bluer than my sky in Portland, Oregan. Can that be?" The answer is:

Yes: Sky color - or "sky transparency" - depends on many factors, among which is humidity. And you know that Portand is a teensy bit more humid than Palm Springs! Consider the brilliant blue sky of a cold, dry winter day compared to the whitish look of the sky on a muggy day in summer. Residents of Palm Springs enjoy a great many low-humidity, sunny days.

So, I suppose while the grass may not be greener on the other side, the sky may indeed be bluer in California compared to where you live. =)

Complete failure

Awhile ago, I set a goal for myself to weigh 190 pounds by Christmas (see this post). With Christmas only a couple of days ago, I can confidently say I won't achieve my goal. I won't even come close. Despite a post three months ago regarding convictions, I weigh more now than I did then. It's pathetic and the exact opposite example to set for my kids.

So, what to do? I'm going to put my money where my mouth is. It's a self-bet. If I weigh less than 195 pounds on my next birthday (in June), I'll put $1,000 into my kids' college savings account. Otherwise, I'll donate $1,000 to Heifer.org for a heifer, two goats, and a water buffalo. Basically, I'm putting $1,000 at risk. If I succeed, the money will go toward something that I care about deeply. If I fail, I forfeit the money to something I don't care about (but at least it will do some good in the world).

It's unfortunate I have to resort to tactics like this but such is life. There are consequences for all of our actions and inactions. This just extends those consequences into the physical world and makes them more tangible for me.

My life is my message

I came across a great quote by Mahatma Gandhi the other day. When asked by a reporter “what is your message,” he responded “my life is my message.” That is a valuable perspective and one that I've tried to take to heart - see, for example, this post. I haven't gone through this "my life is my message" questionnaire but it might be a valuable exercise at some point. The questionnaire includes another interesting quote by William Ellery Channing - "may your life preach more loudly than your words.”

Biofuel crash course

For any of you interested in learning more about biofuels, Grist just posted a special two-week series on biofuels. Looks like a good cross-section of relevant topics.

Gapminder

I'm a big data guy and Gapminder is one of the coolest things I've seen in a long time. If you have twenty minutes, definitely check out this video from the TED 2006 conference. It's a fascinating talk by Hans Rosling on human development trends over the last 40 years. The speaker (and the software) does an amazing job of bringing the data alive. I've never seen anything quite like it. I'd love to give a talk like that sometime. So cool!

Goal setting

I'm reading a new book by Michael Neill called You Can Have What You Want. Here is one interesting excerpt regarding goal setting:

I once asked one of my most financially successful clients, a multimillionaire "super salesman," whether or not he set goals. He told me that he did, and in fact always had, but not in the way that most people do. Traditional goal setting encourages us to think big and reach for the stars, but also to keep our target constant while we do whatever it takes to achieve it. My client didn't do any of that. He would sit down once or twice a year over a good meal and a nice glass of wine and ask himself, "What would be fun and exciting to make my life about over the next year?" He would then take as long as he wanted to write down his ideas until he had a list that totally inspired him. As the year unfolded, he would check in with his "goals" every now and then and adjust them up or down depending on how things were going in his life.

When he saw how horrified I looked (didn't anyone ever tell him you're not allowed to change your goals once you've written them down?), he told me something I have never forgotten: "The only real purpose of a goal is to inspire you to fall more deeply in love with your life."

There's another good quote regarding goal setting at the beginning of that section of the book. Michelangelo said, "The great danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it."

Thankful

Seeing as it's Thanksgiving, I thought it would be fitting to see a post regarding what I am thankful for this year. There are so many blessings in my life. I am quite lucky compared to most. I have a wonderful, supportive wife; two sweet, energetic sons; a brother and a sister-in-law near-by who are great supports to me and my family; loving parents and in-laws; a new job that I'm excited about; and good friends. I also have many material comforts that I too often take for granted (warm home, plenty of food to eat, financial security, etc). I couldn't really ask for more ... well, maybe instant knowledge of everything I need to learn for work. =) This is a really good part of my life and I am very thankful for that.

Borat

I went to see the new Borat movie yesterday afternoon. I thought I'd take advantage of the brief time off before I officially start my new job. Everyone who had seen the movie described it as both (a) "extremely funny" and (b) "very offensive" and/or "very disturbing" . I can confirm that's all true. I think I found the most interesting about the movie is how willing Sacha Baron Cohen (Borat) is to put himself out there and do ridiculous stuff. Sometimes I wish I was more like that. I was a bit during the talent show that I mc'd awhile ago. But not nearly to Borat's level. When I first started in marketing five years ago, my manager would always encourage us to be in "the bozo zone" when we presented. The idea was that you should push yourself way out of your comfort zone ("the bozo zone") because, to the audience, it would only appear that you were being energetic or passionate about what you were saying. Having seen this movie, perhaps I'll rename that being in "the Borat zone".

Speaking of putting yourself out there and overcoming fear, Michael Neill has a new book out called You Can Have What You Want. In a newsletter that I subscribe to, Neill suggests that people try the following experiment:

For the next week, live as if fear is completely unnecessary. Don't worry about it if you feel it - a lifetime of conditioning tends not to disappear overnight. Just notice when you are about to do something if it is coming from fear or 'not-fear', and if it's from fear, don't do it. Any time you aren't sure what to do, ask yourself what you would do if you were not afraid and do that.

Be kind to yourself along the way - the path of not-fear is not always easy, especially at first. But after you've been on it for awhile, you may find it difficult to go back to living the other kind of life.

If that's a scary thought for you, ponder these words of Aung San Suu Kyi, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and the president of Burma who has lived under house arrest for many years:

"Fear is a habit. I am not afraid."

Between presenting at a board meeting on Friday and starting my new job officially on Monday (see post regarding how much I need to learn), I'll have plenty of opportunities to conduct this experiment over the next week or so.

How Beauty is Made

My wife pointed me to this video the other day. I've heard about how makeup and Photoshop can enhance the beauty of a model but the transformation which is possible is pretty dramatic. At the end of the video, it comments "no wonder how perception of beauty is so distorted" - and that's true. Someone should make one of these videos for Playboy too. I hear that many (if not all) of the photos in that magazine are "enhanced". Would be interesting to see a before and after.

Veterans Day

Quick funny story. Last weekend, we drove down to Fresno to visit my wife's aunt and uncle. Her uncle (GH) is recovering from two strokes. All things considered, he's doing quite well and will hopefully continue to make strong progress in his recovery. While we were visiting, GH and I decided to go to a movie. He is a big movie fan and can't get out the movies as easily anymore. We decided to see Flags of Our Fathers, the new Clint Eastwood movie about raising the flag at Iwo Jima. Given the strokes, GH needs a walker to get around. As we were coming out the movie, a woman came up to GH and said "I bet you're a veteran". Apparently every "disabled" person who goes to a WWII movie must be a veteran. Turns out that GH was in the Air Force and the woman was happy to discover that. She shook GH's hand, thanked him for his service, and commented that he must be excited that Veterans Day was coming up. Then she went on her way. I commented to GH that I hadn't known he had been in the Air Force for two years but left it at that.

After we got out of the theater, I had to run and get the car. We had forgetten the handicapped tag for the car so I had dropped off GH and then parked in the main lot. As I returned with the car, I found GH talking to a man and his family. They had actually sat directly behind us during the movie. Like the first woman, the man was thanking GH for his service to our country and shaking his hand. Then he turned to me, shook my hand, and told me how lucky I am to have GH (which I am), and went on his way. More intrigued, I asked GH if he had seen combat - to which he replied "I was a dentist in the Air Force for two years to serve out my ROTC commitment" (and it was during the Vietnam War, not WWII). I just love the conclusions that people jump to.

To be clear, we should honor our veterans (including GH). Their sacrifice is so often forgotten. We owe them a debt of gratitude that is not easily repaid. Thank you! [For those interested in videos, see also this tribute or this commercial.] We should also remember the service and sacrifice of others - both big and small. Whether it is caring for a veteran, a patient, or someone in need, the everyday service of so many people goes unnoticed and underappreciated. Thank you! We can all learn from your example.

Today is Veterans Day. Enjoy your big day, GH!

Divine Nobodies

In the ExploreFaith.org newsletter, I came across a book excerpt from Divine Nobodies: Shedding Religion to Find God by Jim Palmer. The author describes the moment he realized that God's love is not contigent on anything we can do for him. As Palmer puts it:

What if there isn't anything I can do for God? What if he just wants me to lean against his face and receive his love? What if this phantom Christian I have been chasing is just a big distraction from resting in what God wants to really give? What if my value and worth to God are not contingent on what I do? Maybe this is why I am so tired inside. My soul has only so much energy, and the bulk of mine is being drained through striving to earn God's love and acceptance. What would it be like to truly know there isn't one more thing I ever have to do for God in order for him to be pleased with me?

I certainly believe that God wants us to live our lives by certain standards (e.g, the Ten Commandments). I also believe that God wants us to live with purpose and find our unique way to contribute to the world. But God's love isn't contingent on these things.

Startup-land

Yesterday was my last day at my old job. I don't officially start my new job until Monday, November 20. But I've already started unofficially. There is a board-of-directors meeting on Friday, November 17. Originally, I was just going to be attending the BOD meeting (to listen and learn). Now I'm presenting some stuff as well. To set expectations correctly, I think the first words out of my mouth will be "hi, I start on Monday, but here are some thoughts". I figure things can only go up from there.

I decided to go into the office today to work on slides for the meeting. Two startup moments from the "unofficial first day". About an hour after I got there, the head of R&D (who is effectively the day-to-day CEO) asks me if I could put together letterhead and business cards for the company. So I spent an hour or so playing graphic designer. Then, later in the day, I was having trouble connecting to the wireless network. I spoke with our bioinformatics expert (who doubles as the IT guy) and he said that the wireless network's a little unreliable and needs to be reset about once a day by unplugging the wireless router and then plugging it back in. So he ran off and did that and then everything worked just fine. Welcome to the world of 11-person startups. =)

Marriage in decline?

My father-in-law sent me this editorial from the Salt Lake Tribune entitled "Marriage faces inevitable decline in face of 'me' generation". It's a fairly interesting piece - a little too extreme relative to my own position on some of these topics but still thought-provoking. I was a little surprised that married couples are the minority in America today. Certainly more and more people are waiting in life to both get married and have kids - and having less kids than in the past. From a sustainability perspective, having less kids (or no kids) is potentially a good thing. It puts less pressure on the Earth's resources and our environment. On the other hand, it places a greater economic burden on the newer generation since there are less of them to support the ever-growing needs of older, longer-living generations at-or-near retirement.

Here's an interesting question. Is it better to have lots of people rush into marriage but have a 50% divorce rate? Or is it better for people to wait, potentially have sex outside of marriage, and get married once they're ready (if ever)? No easy answers here.

Road to Balance

The other day at work, a woman came in to talk about the "road to balance" (see her handouts). Given the fact that I'm about to join a small startup company, this is a particularly timely topic and one that I need to take very seriously. Relative to where I was a couple of years ago, I feel like I am more grounded and disciplined with respect to the importance of balance. But there is a high risk of this getting out of control in a hurry if I'm not careful about it - especially all the new things I need to learn for my new position (see this post). I'm really going to need to rely on my wife and the rest of my family to keep me honest here. It's not easy to tell someone that they have their priorities out of whack but I'm glad I have people in my life who care enough to do so.

Lots to learn

I'm starting to get ready for my new job. There's definitely no lack of new things to learn. And, what fun would it be if I didn't make the challenge extra-hard? Given the fact that Newco is focused on biofuels, I thought it might be interesting to learn more about conventional fuel production. So I looked at a book called Petroleum Refining: Technology and Economics. The very first sentence of the introduction is: "Modern refinery operations are very complex and, to a person unfamiliar with the industry, it seems to be an impossible task to reduce the complexity to a coordinated group of understandable processes." Wow ... and I thought it would be easy to get up to speed on this stuff. Well, perhaps the science side of things will be easier. Just ordered Organic Chemistry I for Dummies. The first sentence of the book description is: "Organic chemistry is rated among the most difficult courses that students take and is frequently the cause of washout among pre-med, medical, and nursing students." Hmm ... perhaps that won't be any easier. But, if freshmen and sophomores in college can tackle organic chemistry, I don't see why I can't too. My theory going into my career search was that there isn't any subject I can't learn. It's time to put that theory to the test.

The Lord's Prayer

ExploreFaith.org has an eight-part series exploring the meaning of the Lord's Prayer line-by-line. I won't have the chance to read through it anytime soon but others might be interested. When I was growing up, I had the Lord's Prayer hanging on my wall - although I must admit I never really paid attention to it.

Got hobbies?

I don't have any hobbies. I aspire to having hobbies but I really don't have any. A while ago, I created a list with my wife of hobbies I might want to take up at some point - including swimming, basketball, golf, biking, tennis, fine arts performances, sporting events, volunteer work, learning a musical instrument (piano), and getting into fantasy football. No progress on any of those fronts but it's a good list nonetheless.

I also created a list of things I wanted to learn more about - including statistics, game theory, complexity theory, auto maintenance, the environment, energy/alternative energy, culture of obesity, sleep patterns, and open source software. Some progress here - especially related to the environment and alternative energy (but there's plenty more to learn).

And one more list for good measure. At one point, I was thinking about taking a 3-6 month sabbatical from work. Some of the ideas I had for activities were visiting NYC, going to a fitness camp, taking a bike tour, getting some personal training, getting into yoga, going to India, going to Boston and Nantucket, doing some volunteer work, getting more into religion, and catching up with people. With the new job, I guess the sabbatical will need to wait a couple more years.

Since I found the lists, figured I'd share ... but the level of progress is a little depressing.

Lose Yourself

I was going through old papers this afternoon and came across a sign I created for myself when I did fat2phat originally. It contained an excerpt by an Eninem song called "Lose Yourself" (from the movie 8 Mile):

If you had one shot, one opportunity, to seize everything you ever wanted in one moment, would you capture it or just let it slip?
...
Success is my only option, failure is not.

Seems oddly appropriate given my jump into the biofuels space (see previous post).

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?