Tuesday, May 13, 2008

New Death Cab For Cutie Album

Narrow Stairs is reviewed by the Associated Press (appearing in the San Francisco Chronicle).

Death Cab For Cutie, "Narrow Stairs" (Atlantic): Making the jump from an indie label to a major one can spell disaster, and many a fan heralded the demise of Death Cab For Cutie after their unfairly criticized Atlantic debut, 2005's "Plans."

Again boasting slick production and a new direction for their sound, Death Cab's follow-up, "Narrow Stairs," will shatter any expectations about this band — and here it's a compliment.

Typically grounded in warm and bright flavors, Death Cab have widened their scope dramatically on "Narrow Stairs," with synth providing dark tones and biting atmosphere — the disc floats and echoes.

Death Cab still cover the same heartfelt territory — love and happiness, rejection and regret — just with a lot more aplomb.

Disc opener "Bixby Canyon Bridge" provides a jolt, with a soft intro and frontman Ben Gibbard's emotive vocals lulling you in before a hard riff hits you over the head.

Impressive lead single "I Will Possess Your Heart" boasts an ambitious intro — maybe too much so — propelled by bass and piano before Gibbard flashes his typical eloquence: "How I wish you could see the potential/The potential of you and me/It's like a book elegantly bound/But in a language you can't read just yet."

The disc is nicely balanced between driving rock — the poppy "No Sunlight," anthemic "Cath," and joyous retro vibe of "Long Division" and "Pity and Fear" — and moody mid-tempo ballads — a poetic "Grapevine Fires" and the self-deprecating oddity of "You Can Do Better Than Me."

"Narrow Stairs" is a knockout, and will make you throw out everything you've come to know about Death Cab For Cutie.

CHECK THIS TRACK OUT: Equally sad and romantic, "Your New Twin Sized Bed" is a sweet lament to heartbreak, and Gibbard's longing vocal will touch anyone who's spent a rainy day crying in bed.

First single: I Will Possess Your Heart



Also: Your New Twin Sized Bed (just audio)




Authors@Google: Lawrence Lessig

Lawrence Lessig is the creator of the Creative Commons licenses and one of the biggest advocates for sensible copyright reform. This talk is from 2006, so I'm sure it has made the rounds already.

This is of particular interest to me because as I do more writing and research, I find myself shut out from a lot of the information that exists in the academic journals. I am a huge fan of creative commons "fair use" ideas and open access publishing. Knowledge and information should be limited to the academy or the wealthy.


via videosift.com


Monday, May 12, 2008

Emmanuel Levinas - A Response to Heidegger

Much of post-modern philosophy is a footnote to Martin Heidegger and his classic Being and Time. Despite his support of the Nazis, Heidegger remains one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century.

One of his students, Emmanuel Levinas, was eventually captured in the Second World War and sent to a concentration camp to do hard labor. But he also had time to read, study, and begin formulating a response to Heidegger.

From The New Humanist:

Emmanuel Levinas spoke scathingly of the “stupidity” and “pathos” of any endeavour to relate his life meaningfully in a linear narrative. In his book Difficult Liberty, he briskly recounts a rough sequence of events that coloured his personal and intellectual development: reading Pushkin, Tolstoy, and the Hebrew Bible during his childhood in Lithuania; the Bolshevik Revolution; philosophical studies in Freiburg; captivity during the Second World War; distinguished professorships at Poitiers, the Sorbonne, and so on. Nevertheless, these loose threads were bound together by a single cataclysmic theme: “This disparate inventory,” he concluded, “…is dominated by the presentiment and the memory of the Nazi horror.”

Nor was his most abstract philosophical thought unaffected. As circumstance would have it, the most profound intellectual influence of his life, the German thinker Martin Heidegger (1889-1976), would also happen to be a Nazi who saw himself as no less than the official philosopher of the Third Reich, at whose hands Levinas would remain imprisoned for five years while the systematic murder of his people was carried out across Europe.

Despite his fate as a Jewish prisoner of war, Levinas saw Heidegger as a genius who must be answered rather than ignored or dismissed. While Heidegger sought to do away with the metaphysical tradition in Western philosophy that had evolved since Plato and replace with an ontology of being, Levinas wanted to restore some sense of human ethics.

In his 1961 masterpiece Totality and Infinity, Levinas argued that beyond ontology – the basics of existence – is an irreducible ethical sense that arises in us when we come “face to face” with “the Other”. It is experiential, and therefore transcends theorising – it just happens. This Other is always another person, and is always, Levinas says, “absolutely other”, always absolutely inscrutable. We can never objectify, theorise, or reduce the Other to a likeness of one’s self, or to an ontological category. We may meditate insularly on Being, but the Other always comes to us unexpectedly, and calls us out of ourselves and into an ethical confrontation. The unbridgeable gap between us gives rise to a “metaphysical desire” for discourse and reciprocity, which can never be completely fulfilled, but remains all the more powerful for that reason. We may choose to shun the call of the Other or to subject him to our will, but not even by murdering him can we dissolve the infinite gulf between us, and objectify him, as the Nazis attempted to do to European Jewry. And no matter how we may treat the Other, he is always justified in his existence, and speaks to an innate need in us to justify our own existence in his presence, for he is always higher than one’s self, is never subsumed by Being, and always remains outside any totalising mode of thought (such as Nazism). In this sense, the Other is “infinite”.

This inscrutability, and the sense of “infinity” that arises from it, is the fundamental experience from which all thought derives, and is the generator of our ethical feelings. Indeed, Levinas, in arguing that thought arises from ethics, and not vice versa, turned philosophy on its head, and as such is the humanist philosopher par excellence. He brought philosophy back from the realm of the lone thinker meditating dangerously on Being, to the experience of our fellow human being. Totality and Infinity, then, can be seen as a veritable humanist manifesto. Though not without its problems (many criticise, for example, the opacity of Levinas’s language when it comes to explaining just how it is that we know that this primordial experience is genuine or reliable), Levinas’s thought comprises the most comprehensive attempt yet to bring philosophy to bear upon the world of human relations. As such, it is ever more relevant to the current geopolitical morass, which, without a drastic reevaluation of our relation to our fellow human beings, is doomed to enact a repetition of the same old round of nationalism, theocratic fascism and ideological dogma.

This brief article doesn't get too much into detail, but I was drawn to it because it represents a direction in philosophy that I think remains largely marginal. A lot of current philosophers are caught up in deciphering the nature of consciousness, as though the mind exists in a vacuum.

But we are social beings, and a great deal of our humanity derives from our interactions with other human beings. From the moment we emerge from the womb, our lives are defined by the "Other." The first Other we encounter in any real sense is our mother (at least for most of us). From her we learn what relationships are and how they function (both good/healthy and bad/dysfunctional).

From then onward, our sense of self, our values, our likes and dislikes -- nearly everything about us -- is shaped by our relationships with others. This relationship to the Other begins with individuals (our family), then moves to our peers, then to the culture at large, and for most of us -- at some point and in some way -- to the nature of God, the ultimate Other.

And as Levinas suggests, it is from these relationships that our ethical sense develops, and from that sense, our thinking evolves. From Wikipedia:
Lévinas maintained that subjectivity was formed in and through our subjected-ness to the other. In this way, his effort was not to move away from traditional attempts to locate the other within subjectivity (this he agrees with), so much as his view was that subjectivity was primordially ethical and not theoretical. That is to say, our responsibility for-the-other was not a derivative feature of our subjectivity; instead, obligation founds our subjective being-in-the-world by giving it a meaningful direction and orientation. Lévinas's thesis "ethics is first philosophy", then, means that the traditional philosophical pursuit of knowledge is but a secondary feature of a more basic ethical duty to-the-other.
At some point I will have to read Totality and Infinity. If you want to know more about Levinas, I suggest the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy page devoted to him and his work.


Mind & Brain - Trauma Memories, Anxiety, Depression, Substance Abuse, and More

All kinds of interesting items on the mind & brain to report today. As always, these are excerpts of longer articles, so follow the links to read the whole article.

From Psychology Today: Love's Loopy Logic

A date makes us both spectator and performer at a two-ring circus: We troll for wit, kindness, curiosity, and "chemistry," hoping that we radiate these same attributes in the right amounts. From strategic winks and blinks to elaborate grooming to gifts of gorgeous baubles, men and women employ an arsenal of tricks in their romantic lives, all in the service of a demanding master at the far reaches of conscious awareness. Eons of evolution have honed our behavior to aid and abet a reproductive payoff. The sum of the stratagems we employ, and the wisdom of nature in crafting them without our explicit awareness, are now the subject of intense study by evolutionary psychologists.

Our sexual calculations and character reconnaissance, it turns out, call for smart, but not always accurate, judgments. That's because mating intelligence is as oxymoronic as the term suggests. We routinely bring both cold reason and outsized misconceptions to a relationship. Both serve a purpose. A woman will accurately gauge her date's personality on first meeting, but she will grow more convinced of his good humor and charm if they stick together. To woo a woman, a guy will grossly exaggerate his income, commitment, and affection for cuddly creatures. But he may have to correctly read microgestures as fine as tea leaves to discern whether she's truly impressed.

Male and female mating intelligence part ways when it comes to each sex's competing procreative goals. Inscrutable though our machinations may be to our partners (and to ourselves), romantic behavior is driven by a deep logic. Our minds have evolved to warp reality. Even so, we have unique skews in the mating realm. We've all got blind spots about the opposite sex. And sometimes that's for the best.

This is a long, but interesting article.

* * * * *

From Science Daily: Why Emotional Memories Of Traumatic Life Events Are So Persistent

The expression “post-traumatic stress disorder” is once again constantly on everyone’s lips in relation to those returning from the Iraq war or survivors of catastrophes such as the tsunami. This is not a new development, since it always occurs when people experience extreme situations. It is known that emotional memories of both a positive and a negative kind are stored by our brain in a particularly robust way.

Consequently they have a very large effect on our behaviour and, in the case of adverse memories, they can place considerable restrictions on the way we go about our lives. As a result, we avoid places, smells or objects that remind us of the traumatic experience, because they may trigger severe anxieties. Isabelle Mansuy, Professor of Cellular Neurobiology at ETH Zurich and of Molecular and Cognitive Neurosciences at the University of Zurich, and her research group have now shown that the enzyme calcineurin and the gene regulation factor Zif268 decisively determine the intensity of emotional memories. For the first time, this has enabled the regulatory processes at the synapse, which are important for emotional memories, to be linked to the processes in the cell nucleus.

This might finally allow for an effective treatment for PTSD and other trauma related issues. Other approaches, such as EMDR, have also proven successful - and they might work by disrupting memory storage at the cellular level and allowing the emotions to be processed in the therapeutic setting.

* * * * *

Again, from Science Daily: Are Anxiety Disorders All In The Mind?

The study compared densities of elements of the serotonin and dopamine neurotransmitter systems in the brains of 12 people diagnosed with social anxiety disorder, but who had not taken medication to treat it, and a control group of 12 healthy people who were matched by sex and age.

Both groups were injected with a radioactive compound that binds with elements of the brain's serotonin and dopamine systems. Once administered, the radiotracer revealed functional alterations in these systems by measuring the radioactive binding in the thalamus, midbrain and pons (known to be acted upon by serotonin) and in the striatum (known to be acted upon by dopamine). The altered uptake activity in these regions indicated a greater level of disordered function.

"Our study provides direct evidence for the involvement of the brain's dopaminergic system in social anxiety disorder in patients who had no prior exposure to medication," said Dr. van der Wee, M.D., Ph.D., at the department of psychiatry and the Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition at the Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden (and previously at the Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, University Medical Center in Utrecht, The Netherlands). "It demonstrates that social anxiety has a physical, brain dependent component."

Those of us with social anxiety who have tried all the various non-drug approaches already knew it had a biological basis.

* * * * *

One more from Science Daily: Young People Are Intentionally Drinking And Taking Drugs For Better Sex, European Survey Finds

The study was conducted by researchers in public health and social sciences from across Europe. More than 1300 people aged between 16 and 35 and who routinely socialise in nightlife settings completed anonymous questionnaires.

Virtually all of the survey participants had drunk alcohol with most having had their first drink when 14 or 15 years old. Three quarters of the respondents had tried or used cannabis, while around 30 percent had at least tried ecstasy or cocaine.

Overall, alcohol was most likely to be used to facilitate a sexual encounter, while cocaine and cannabis were more likely to be utilised to enhance sexual sensations and arousal.

Despite these perceived sexual "benefits", drunkenness and drug use were strongly associated with an increase in risk taking behaviour and feeling regretful about having sex while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Thus, participants who had been drunk in the past four weeks were more likely to have had five or more partners, sex without a condom and to have regretted sex after drink or drugs in the past 12 months. Cannabis, cocaine or ecstasy use was linked to similar consequences.

[Emphasis added.] Is anyone surprised by these findings? These people are probably going to end up in some form of treatment at some point. At least I hope so (and I can say that because I have been where they are now).

* * * * *

From Medical News Today: Untreated Depressed People Have Fewer Serotonin & Opioid Receptors, And Variation Is Linked To Symptoms And Treatment Response
Depressed people may have far fewer of the receptors for some of the brain's "feel good" stress-response chemicals than non-depressed people, new University of Michigan Depression Center research shows.

And even among depressed people, the numbers of these receptors can vary greatly. What's more, the number of receptors a depressed person has appears to be linked with the severity of their symptoms - and the chances that they'll feel better after taking a medication.

These preliminary findings, presented at the American Psychiatric Association's annual meeting in Washington, D.C., amplify a growing understanding of depression as a condition that affects different people in different ways, and is solidly rooted in genetic and molecular factors that are unique to each individual.
Yep.

* * * * *

From EurekAlert, more on substance abuse: Men are more likely than women to crave alcohol when they feel negative emotions

Women and men tend to have different types of stress-related psychological disorders. Women have greater rates of depression and some types of anxiety disorders than men, while men have greater rates of alcohol-use disorders than women. A new study of emotional and alcohol-craving responses to stress has found that when men become upset, they are more likely than women to want alcohol.

Results will be published in the July issue of Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research and are currently available at OnlineEarly.

“We know that women and men respond to stress differently,” said Tara M. Chaplin, associate research scientist at Yale University School of Medicine and first author of the study. “For example, following a stressful experience, women are more likely than men to say that they feel sad or anxious, which may lead to risk for depression and anxiety disorders. Some studies have found that men are more likely to drink alcohol following stress than women. If this becomes a pattern, it could lead to alcohol-use disorders.”

As part of a larger study, the researchers exposed 54 healthy adult social drinkers (27 women, 27 men) to three types of imagery scripts – stressful, alcohol-related, and neutral/relaxing – in separate sessions, on separate days and in random order. Chaplin and her colleagues then assessed participants’ subjective emotions, behavioral/bodily responses, cardiovascular arousal as indicated by heart rate and blood pressure, and self-reported alcohol craving.

“After listening to the stressful story, women reported more sadness and anxiety than men,” said Chaplin, “as well as greater behavioral arousal. But, for the men … emotional arousal was linked to increases in alcohol craving. In other words, when men are upset, they are more likely to want alcohol.”

Again, is anyone surprised by these findings? Traditionally, men have not been taught how to sit with "hard" feelings, only that they aren't supposed to show them. So what do they do? They make them go away any way they can. Been there, done that.

* * * * *

Finally, from The Daily Mail: The REAL brain drain: Modern technology - including violent video games - is changing the way our brains work, says neuroscientist

What would such aspirations to be "perfect" or "better" do to our notions of identity, and what would it do to those who could not get their hands on the pills? Would some finally have become more equal than others, as George Orwell always feared?

Of course, there are benefits from technical progress - but there are great dangers as well, and I believe that we are seeing some of those today.

I'm a neuroscientist and my day-to-day research at Oxford University strives for an ever greater understanding - and therefore maybe, one day, a cure - for Alzheimer's disease.

But one vital fact I have learnt is that the brain is not the unchanging organ that we might imagine.

It not only goes on developing, changing and, in some tragic cases, eventually deteriorating with age, it is also substantially shaped by what we do to it and by the experience of daily life.

When I say "shaped", I'm not talking figuratively or metaphorically; I'm talking literally.

At a microcellular level, the infinitely complex network of nerve cells that make up the constituent parts of the brain actually change in response to certain experiences and stimuli.

The brain, in other words, is malleable - not just in early childhood but right up to early adulthood, and, in certain instances, beyond.

The surrounding environment has a huge impact both on the way our brains develop and how that brain is transformed into a unique human mind.

Of course, there's nothing new about that: human brains have been changing, adapting and developing in response to outside stimuli for centuries.

What prompted me to write my book is that the pace of change in the outside environment and in the development of new technologies has increased dramatically.

This will affect our brains over the next 100 years in ways we might never have imagined.

Our brains are under the influence of an ever- expanding world of new technology: multichannel television, video games, MP3 players, the internet, wireless networks, Bluetooth links - the list goes on and on.

One of the central premises of Clare Graves's theory -- that became Spiral Dynamics -- is that the life conditions individuals face (environment) have a marked impact on brain chemistry and evolution. This article supports that once-rejected point of view. The evolution of neurostructures can occur within a single generation, and the fact that we are messing with these chemicals and structures both directly and indirectly might have profound implications for our future as a species.


Daily Om: Feeling Fed Up With Humanity


Today's Daily Om is useful, at least for me, especially considering the painful situation in Burma right now -- an example of humans behaving so badly that I really wonder about our future.

Still, when I can limit my focus to the people in front of me, I feel hopeful. Most people are genuinely good, and that awareness helps in the face of corrupt and fearful governments that can make humanity seem so deeply flawed.

In The World And In Ourselves
Feeling Fed Up With Humanity

From time to time, we may all feel fed up with humanity, whether it's from learning about what's going on around the world, or what’s going on next door. There are always situations that leave us feeling as if people are simply not capable of behaving in a way that is coming from a place of awareness. Often it seems as if people are actually geared to handle things in the worst possible way, repeatedly. At the same time, none of us wants to linger in a judgmental mood about our own species. As a result, we might tend to repress the feelings coming up as we take in the news from the world and the neighborhood.

It is natural to feel let down and disappointed when we see our fellow humans behaving in ways that are greedy, selfish, violent, or uncaring, but there are also ways to process that disappointment without sinking into despondency. As with any emotional response, we honor our feelings by feeling them fully, without judging or acting on them. Once we've done that—and we may need to do it every day, as part of our daily self-care—we can begin to consider ways that we might help the situation in which humanity finds itself.

As always, we start with ourselves, utilizing our awareness of the failings of others to renew our own commitment to be more conscious human beings. We are all capable of the best and the worst that humanity has to offer, and remembering this keeps us in check, as well as allowing us to find compassion for others. We may find ourselves feeling compelled to serve people who are suffering injustices at the hands of other people, or we may begin to speak out when we see something that we don’t think is right. Whatever the case, the only thing we can do is pledge to serve the best, rather than the worst, of what humanity has to offer, both in the world, and in ourselves.

Steven Pinker - The Stupidity of Dignity

Steven Pinker has a new article in The New Republic.
The Stupidity of Dignity

Conservative bioethics' latest, most dangerous ploy.

Steven Pinker, The New Republic Published: Wednesday, May 28, 2008

This spring, the President's Council on Bioethics released a 555-page report, titled Human Dignity and Bioethics. The Council, created in 2001 by George W. Bush, is a panel of scholars charged with advising the president and exploring policy issues related to the ethics of biomedical innovation, including drugs that would enhance cognition, genetic manipulation of animals or humans, therapies that could extend the lifespan, and embryonic stem cells and so-called "therapeutic cloning" that could furnish replacements for diseased tissue and organs. Advances like these, if translated into freely undertaken treatments, could make millions of people better off and no one worse off. So what's not to like? The advances do not raise the traditional concerns of bioethics, which focuses on potential harm and coercion of patients or research subjects. What, then, are the ethical concerns that call for a presidential council?

Many people are vaguely disquieted by developments (real or imagined) that could alter minds and bodies in novel ways. Romantics and Greens tend to idealize the natural and demonize technology. Traditionalists and conservatives by temperament distrust radical change. Egalitarians worry about an arms race in enhancement techniques. And anyone is likely to have a "yuck" response when contemplating unprecedented manipulations of our biology. The President's Council has become a forum for the airing of this disquiet, and the concept of "dignity" a rubric for expounding on it. This collection of essays is the culmination of a long effort by the Council to place dignity at the center of bioethics. The general feeling is that, even if a new technology would improve life and health and decrease suffering and waste, it might have to be rejected, or even outlawed, if it affronted human dignity.

Whatever that is. The problem is that "dignity" is a squishy, subjective notion, hardly up to the heavyweight moral demands assigned to it. The bioethicist Ruth Macklin, who had been fed up with loose talk about dignity intended to squelch research and therapy, threw down the gauntlet in a 2003 editorial, "Dignity Is a Useless Concept." Macklin argued that bioethics has done just fine with the principle of personal autonomy--the idea that, because all humans have the same minimum capacity to suffer, prosper, reason, and choose, no human has the right to impinge on the life, body, or freedom of another. This is why informed consent serves as the bedrock of ethical research and practice, and it clearly rules out the kinds of abuses that led to the birth of bioethics in the first place, such as Mengele's sadistic pseudoexperiments in Nazi Germany and the withholding of treatment to indigent black patients in the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study. Once you recognize the principle of autonomy, Macklin argued, "dignity" adds nothing.

Goaded by Macklin's essay, the Council acknowledged the need to put dignity on a firmer conceptual foundation. This volume of 28 essays and commentaries by Council members and invited contributors is their deliverable, addressed directly to President Bush. The report does not, the editors admit, settle the question of what dignity is or how it should guide our policies. It does, however, reveal a great deal about the approach to bioethics represented by the Council. And what it reveals should alarm anyone concerned with American biomedicine and its promise to improve human welfare. For this government-sponsored bioethics does not want medical practice to maximize health and flourishing; it considers that quest to be a bad thing, not a good thing.

Read the rest of this erudite article from Pinker.

As always, he is interesting and challenging. In the case of dignity, which I think is a valid concept in some areas (contrary to Pinker), he suggests that in medicine and research, it isn't as crucial as the president's "advisers" might suggest.


Craig Ferguson and Hugh Laurie (5/5/08)

Craig Ferguson had Hugh Laurie (of House) on the show as his guest last week. These guys are hilarious together.


via videosift.com


Black Lab - Two Videos

Two videos from one of my favorite bands.

This Night


Lonely Boy
Black Lab - Lonely Boy video



Pico Iyer on Tibet, China and the Dalai Lama


A good interview with Pico Iyer over at truthdig this weekend.

Pico Iyer on Tibet, China and the Dalai Lama

By Jon Wiener

As opening day of the Beijing Olympics approaches, the Chinese government and official media have intensified their attacks on Tibet’s Dalai Lama, blaming him for the recent violent demonstrations in Lhasa, where Tibetans have been protesting against China’s restrictions on their religion and culture. The Tibetan government in exile, based in India, says the Chinese have killed more than 200 people in these protests, which started in March. Pico Iyer has been following the story—his new book is “The Open Road: The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama.” He spoke recently with Truthdig’s Jon Wiener.

Jon Wiener: The Dalai Lama is the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, and the international media personification of Tibet. But some Tibetans are criticizing him because he does not support the “Free Tibet” campaign, which seeks an end to the Chinese occupation of Tibet. Why doesn’t he support independence?

Pico Iyer: For 21 years he has said “Save Tibet” rather than “Free Tibet.” He asks for autonomy rather than independence. The last time I saw him, five months ago in Japan, he was reminding me that Tibet has a lot to gain from being part of China—materially. It is still an underdeveloped and impoverished place. He says that the more interconnection between cultures, the better.

Wiener: The Dalai Lama didn’t support the street protests of the past two months, led by monks. Why not?

Iyer: After those demonstrations he made the symbolic act of threatening to step down, which was his way of sending a message to the monks, saying: “Please, please, please don’t practice violence. Speak out on behalf of Tibet, keep championing the freedoms you deserve, but don’t demonize or antagonize the Chinese in the process.”

Wiener: And yet China’s President Hu Jintao has blamed the Dalai Lama for inciting the protests in Lhasa. Recently, Hu said, “We hope the Dalai will stop acting to separate the homeland, stop orchestrating the inciting of violent acts.”

Iyer: It’s so bitterly funny that the Chinese are accusing him of fomenting violence when he’s doing everything he can to try to restrain it. When he led prayers after those disturbances, the first people he prayed for were the Chinese individuals who had been the victims of that violence.

Wiener: The official line in China is that the Dalai Lama is a “splittist.”

Iyer: It’s ironic that the Chinese accuse him of creating divisions, because he always works from the core Buddhist principle, which is interdependence. Everything is connected. It’s an example of how gratuitous their insults are. He says we have to keep extending the hand of friendship until the Chinese government wakes up to its better self.

Read the rest of the interview.


Sunday, May 11, 2008

How to Be a Man

A very cool post from Steve Pavlina on how to be a masculine, yet sensitive man.

How to Be a Man

May 9th, 2008 by Steve Pavlina

What does it mean to be a man today? How can men consciously express their masculinity without becoming cold or closed-hearted on the one hand… or wimpy and emasculated on the other? What’s the most loving way for a conscious man to express himself?

Here are 10 ways to live more consciously as a man:

1. Make real decisions.
2. Put your relationships second.
3. Be willing to fail.
4. Be confident.
5. Express love actively.
6. Re-channel sex energy.
7. Face your fears.
8. Honor the masculinity of other men.
9. Accept responsibility for your relationships.
10. Die well.
You'll have to go to Steve's blog to get the details on each item; and if you might know how to be a woman, he's looking for input.
I’ll tell you what. If you can write the “How to Be a Woman” article, go ahead and post it on your site, and email me a link to it. Next week I’ll make a post linking to all the quality submissions. Erin and I will select the article we consider the most insightful, and that link will be given special prominence at the top of the results post. So basically the prize is a permanent link and free traffic.

6 Things You Didn't Know You Could Get Addicted To

This is funny, except for the part about books. At least I'm not yet as bad as the guy they mention. But I do have several of those special shelves for holding books.

From Cracked.

6 Things You Didn't Know You Could Get Addicted To

article image

Soy shakes, golden retrievers, squat thrusts. These aren't the makings of a week-long bender in Vegas, unless you happen to be Marquis de Sade. However, the human brain is a mysterious lump of meat, and under rare circumstances the mind can become hooked on all sorts of things that are usually completely innocent or even commendable.

Such as ...

#6. Books

Doesn't sound so bad ...
Many of us own collections that we're too ashamed to discuss in public, whether it's vintage porn, yarn or commemorative Burger King glasses. So when you hear there's such a thing as book addiction, you figure, hell, it'd be rad to be addicted to the Western literary canon. You'd be so quick with quips and quotes at dinner parties you could wear a damned monocle and nobody would dare call you on it.

The horrifying reality:
The most prominent modern bibiliomaniac was Stephen Carrie Blumberg. From 1974 to 1990, this bookish chap raided the archives of about 185 North American universities. When the FBI finally raided his Ottumwa, Iowa home, the feds discovered 28,000 stolen books and manuscripts he had been compulsively hoarding.

Bibliomaniacs like him don't necessarily read their books or even collect valuable ones. They just collect them out of a compulsive need to have a fuckload of books. So you could be a bibliomaniac while remaining completely illiterate, though you could build a kick-ass fort.

By the way, after Blumberg spent 4.5 years in prison for stealing all those books, he was rearrested in July 2003 for stealing, um, doorknobs. Figure that one out.

Warning Signs:
Technology has obviously made books unnecessary, so the sight of even one book in a friend's home should be cause for concern. If the person has gone as far as to purchase an entire special shelf to hold all of his books, it's probably time for an intervention.

#5. Pets

Doesn't sound so bad ...
We know what you're thinking: If one puppy is adorable, think how much more adorable a dozen of them would be! Furthermore, chicks dig animal lovers and dudes love the movie Beastmaster, so where's the problem? Every day we come home will be like that scene in Ace Ventura!

The horrifying reality:
In one infamous 2005 case, animal control officers retrieved more than 300 sewage-scented pups from Barbara and Robert Woodley's Sanford, North Carolina home. The house's stench was so damn doggy that it brought the rescuing veterinarians to tears ... literally. Animal hoarding is often the result of crippling obsessive-compulsive disorder. The hoarder believes that he alone understands his pets, who apparently wish to live cramped and knee-deep in their own shit.

On a similar note, The New York Times recently posited that "crazy cat lady" syndrome stems from an infection by the Toxoplasma gondii parasite. According to this model, feline stool transmits the bug, which gives the infected owner an unhealthy case of cat-scratch fever. Before you laugh, know that 60 million Americans may be infected with toxoplasma and that some experts think it will turn all of us into zombies.

Warning Signs:
We're going to go out on a limb here, but we're thinking the presence of lots and lots of animals in a guy's living room may be an indication. Further, if you catch someone extolling the virtues of Eddie Murphy's 1998 opus Doctor Dolittle, that individual is either a potential animal hoarder or eight-years-old. On the other hand, if you catch someone extolling the virtues of Marc Singer's 1982 opus The Beastmaster, buy that man a drink!


He has a Master's degree ... in beasts

#4. Eating Right

Doesn't sound so bad ...
Hey reader, what'd you eat today? What's that? A sausage stromboli, some Skittles and a teacup full of Maker's Mark? And it's not even noon? For shame, you're not getting enough fiber to absorb that bourbon.

Wait, what did we eat? The internet writer's special, natch: a tub of Crisco and a tin of Skoal. So if they say there's such a thing as getting addicted to healthy food (or orthorexia) then we should all be so lucky. Right?

The horrifying reality:
You can die from it.

See, the orthorexia nervosa sufferer's fanatical desire to consume the correct foods comes with the problem that their idea of what "correct" means is entirely subjective and often nutritionally unsound. Eating 10 cans of pinto beans a day sounds healthier than eating ten Big Macs, but both diets leave out important nutrients and will reward you with DEFCON 5 flatulence. And at the end of the day, your body just needs fat. A diet with zero fat can kill you just as effectively as too much, though most of us are a very long way away from experiencing that for ourselves.

Warning Signs:
The doctor who discovered this disorder says "social isolation" resulting from the diet is one warning sign. So take Mr. Pinto Bean from our above example. Chances are he's disgusted with other people's "impure," non-bean diets, so he posts a personal on Craigslist entitled "LOOKING 4 GOYA-MINDED WOMAN."

And since no one shares the rectitude required to eat beans 24/7, Mr. Bean spends the rest of his life alone, weeping as he farts, farting as he weeps.

Read the rest of this post to see the top three.


Crossfit Workout - Thrusters and Pullups for Time

This looks freaking tough. Which of course means I will have to give it a shot in one of my workouts this week.

21 Thrusters (95 lbs.)
21 Pull Ups
15 Thrusters
15 Pull Ups
9 Thrusters
9 Pull Ups

This guy does it in 2:25. [Too much swing on the pull ups though.]




Daily Dharma: Maximum Openness


Saturday's Daily Dharma from Tricycle.

Maximum Openness

The only way to achieve maximum openness is to arrive at every moment without a single preconception. Otherwise, we resist what doesn't fit our model. Regardless of how much we know, or how evolved we've become, we must put every bit of that aside. We must step into the mystery naked and undefended.When we truly hate what's happening, our instinct is to flee from it like a house on fire. But if we can learn to turn around and enter that fire, to let it burn all our resistance away, then we find ourselves arising from the ashes with a new sense of power and freedom. Sometimes, without any answers to hold onto, it seems like we're nothing at all. Other times, overwhelmed by life's roaring torrent, it seems like we're everything at once. These two impressions are actually flipsides of the same coin. They're a taste of what happens when the barriers of our personality become porous. We encounter life directly, without anything to mediate its intensity. We see clearly, in those moments, how the self we carry with us is no more or less than a tool of our organism, a system that allows us to function, but that also, miraculously, we have the ability to step right through.

--Raphael Cushnir, from 365 Nirvana, Here and Now by Josh Baran