Thursday, December 11, 2008

How Culture and Consciousness Intertwine


I liked this interesting article from Rise of the Innerpreneur. It's a fairly useful article considering that it comes from a business oriented site. The article basically offers an integral stage model, based on Jean Gebser's original work in this area (which both Spiral Dynamics and Ken Wilber's work have benefited from). Very cool to see this on a business site.

I'm not sure I but the interpretations of absolute and relative consciousness for each and every stage - seems the author might not have a clear understanding of absolute reality, at least from a Buddhist perspective.

How Culture and Consciousness Intertwine

December 9, 2008 - Thoughts on Growing Your Self

When it comes to consciousness, there are really two forms that exist, absolute consciousness and relative consciousness.

What is Absolute Consciousness

Absolute consciousness is your moment to moment awareness of everything in the world. I am aware of the computer screen in front of me and the Mulder and Scully Barbie dolls smiling down at me from their shrine on my shelf. I am aware of the snow falling on my skylight and the wind rustling my window panes. All of these things are arising in my pure or absolute awareness.

What is Relative Consciousness

Relative consciousness is how each of us interpret that absolute experience of consciousness. As you know, the interpretations of an experience can vary widely from person to person. What creates these varying interpretations is the developmental stage you are in and the cultural values you hold.

The easiest way to understand these developmental stages is through the names we give them. Jean Gebser, an early 20th century Renaissance man, identified that human consciousness and culture have developed over time through a fluid and hierarchical sequence of stages. He identified that the “mutations” in the way humanity interprets reality have been occurring throughout history and continue today.

Go read the whole post.

Here are the full stages of development that Gebser outlined, with more in-depth information about each stage (from An Overview of the Work of Jean Gebser):

The Archaic structure of consciousness

The Archaic structure of consciousness is perhaps the most difficult to understand, for it is the one most removed from our present-day way of thinking. Stated succinctly, it can be likened to zero dimensional mentation, a world devoid of any perspectivity at all. It is a stated in which the holder of consciousness is perhaps only minimally aware of himself or his relationship to the world around him. According to Feuerstein, this structure denotes "a consciousness of maximum latency and minimum transparency."[5] The term "archaic" as used here is derived from the Greek arce, meaning inception, or origin. Origin (or Ursprung, in the original German) is the source from which all springs, but it is that which springs forth itself. It is the essence which is behind and which underlies consciousness. As Gebser understands the term, "conscious is neither knowledge nor conscience but must be understood for the time being in the broadest sense as wakeful presence."[6] This presence, or being present, excludes two further overpowering by the past (past-orientation) or any future-oriented finality. He writes:

It is our task to presentiate the past in ourselves, not to lose the present to the transient power of the past. This we can achieve by recognizing the balancing power of the latent "future" with its character of the present, which is to say, its potentiality for consciousness.[7]

At the origin, there is not past to overwhelm and the future is complete potentiality. Consequently, that which we understand to intuit consciousness to be is qualitatively different from this original structure. What hampers any investigation into it is the fact that we have no records, no written testimony, regarding it. It is a state that is swallowed by the primal shadows of a far-distant past. It is referred to in myths and legends, but these references are of a much later time. About all we can say in this regard is that within the Archaic structure the consciousness is quite undifferentiated; it is just there, and things just happen. Man is still unquestionably part of the whole of the universe in which he finds himself. The process of individuation of consciousness, in any sense of the word, has not taken place. This type of consciousness "can be likened to a dimly lit mist devoid of shadows."[8] This is not consciousness in any sense that we understand it today. Instead, it can be likened to a state of deep sleep; one that eludes the specification of particularity or uniqueness.

The Magic structure of consciousness

Around some unspecified time far back in our past, a change took place. Man entered into a second phase of development and gained a new structure of consciousness, the Magical structure. This structure is characterized by five primary characteristics: (1) its egolessness, (2) its spacelessness and timelessness, (3) its pointlike-unitary world, (4) its interweaving with nature, and (5) its magical reaction to the world.[9] A rudimentary self- sense was emerging and language is the real product of this change. Words as vehicles of power are typical of this time and structure; incantations as precursors to prayer emerged. Consciousness, in this phase, is characterized by man's intimate association with nature.

This is perhaps the most notable characteristic regarding this structure. Man, at this time, does not really distinguish himself apart from nature. He is a part of all that surrounds him; in the earliest stages it is hard to conceive that he views himself apart from his environment. The plants, animals and other elements of his surroundings share the same fate as he does; they experience in a similar manner. Latency is still dominant; little is transparent. Magic we can define in agreement with Gustav Meyrink as doing without knowing,[10] and it is magic man who is engaged in this activity in all aspects of his existence. The hunting and gathering, the quest for survival are all activities that consume most of his waking hours. But in the quiet of the evening around the fire; there is time for reflection of sorts. The activities of the day were codified (in speech) and recounted. Memory was collective, tribal, and all things were shared and experienced by all. The "I" is not a factor; the "we" is dominant.

This is a one-dimensional, pre-perspectival, point-like existence that occurs in a dream- like state. Unlike the dreamlessness of the previous structure, a recognition is developing in man that he is something different from that around him. Not fully awake to who he is or what his role in the world is, man is recognizing his self as an entity. The forms of expression for this structure can be found in the art and other artifacts that have been recovered from this time. Graven images and idols are what first come to mind. However, ritual should also be considered here, for it is in the specific and directed execution of certain actions and gestures that conveys much about this consciousness structure. Feuerstein feels that this structure persisted till around 40,000 BC and the advent of the Cro-Magnons.

Another feature of this structure that we should bring to mind is its spacelessness and timelessness. The idea that space and time are illusions derives from this stage in our development as human beings. The fact that this is one of the first lessons one learns when embarking upon the esoteric path is further evidence of this idea. To Magic Man, closely linked as he is with others of like mind, space and time need not concern him. In fact, I am not convinced that he would understand them anyway, for there is no need that he do so. Magic, however, is very much alive today, and it comes as no surprise (nor should it be) that there is such a strong interest in magic today. It seems that the fast growing branches of occult study seem to be Wicca (overlayed as it is with feminism) and similar earth magic(k) studies. What is more, it is the most vital and emotional of all structures. We live in very decisive times, potentially catastrophic times. This is a time when emotion rises near the surface of our consciousness and it is here that magic manifests itself. The proliferation of stories and films dealing with Voodoo and similar matters (e.g. The Serpent and the Rainbow) further substantiate our claim. Yet, this is not the only structure that seems to be making a comeback these days.

The Mythical structure of consciousness

With the advent of the Cro-Magnons, man became a tool-making individual, also one who formed into larger social structures. As Feuerstein points out, it is clear from the archaeological finds that the Cro-Magnons had evolved a symbolic universe that was religious and shamanistic. Part of this appears to have been a keen interest in calendric reckoning, and with it we may presume the existence of a fairly complex mythology.[11] This structure can be considered two-dimensional since it is characterized by fundamental polarities. Word was the reflector of inner silence; myth was the reflector of the soul.[12] Religion appears as the interaction between memory and feeling.[13] Man is beginning to recognize himself as opposed to others. The next 30,000 odd years or so spent developing these various mythologies. Language is becoming ever more important, it will be noted, and not only receptive, but active, language at that. Not the ear, but the mouth is important in making transparent what is involved in being and life. The mouth now becomes the spiritual organ. We witness, as well, the initial concretization of the "I" of man.

Many myths deal explicitly with man's (unperspectival) separation from nature. Witness the story of the Fall in Genesis (and its admonition to go forth and dominate nature); and the myth of Prometheus and the giving of fire to man. These both indicate a strong awareness of man's differentness from nature. Man is coming into his own, although he is anything but independent of it. One could characterize this as a two-dimensional understanding of the world. Within the circle of believers is where the important acts of life take place. The mere forces of nature have a beingness, often anthropomorphized, but a beingness nevertheless. Myth, then, or the mythologeme is the primary form of expression of this period. Subsets of this basic form would be the gods, symbols and mysteries. These figures provide the emerging consciousness with imaginative images around which to center man's knowledge and understanding of the world. If the Magic structure of consciousness is the emotional aspect, then the Mythical structure is the imaginative one. It is this fact that makes mythology so difficult for us as moderns to deal with. The plethora of images (gods) and the seeming inconsistent pantheons of deities brings the rational mind quickly to confusion. Who can keep track of all these figures, their meanings, their correspondences and their associations. This is the time of the dream.

Up until this time, that is in the magical structure of consciousness, souls and afterlives were not of great importance (at least we do not find a lot of evidence thereof). Yet in the fully developed mythical consciousness, this is important. The entire civilization of Egypt, as we know it, revolved around this very issue. When we are told, then, in certain rosicrucian documents that we must descend into Egypt, we are being told that we must regain, not revert to, our mythical heritage.

Mouths begin to play a more important role. Not only is the shaman and wise person of the tribe a repository of wisdom, others, the poets, such as Homer, begin to play a more important role in the culture. This does not really begin to happen until the mythical structure of consciousness, however. The "I" of man is not yet fully developed, to be sure, but it has developed to that point that it recognizes and demands a separation from nature, from its environment. We can take this as evidence of an increasing crystallization of the ego. We are on the way to selfhood.

Of course, mythology is very much alive today. This explains the popularity of Joseph Campbell and his work on myth. It explains the appeal that Robert Bly and his "Gathering of Men" workshops have. What both Campbell and Bly do is tell stories: imaginative, intuitively understood stories that reveal to us things that our current rational mode of thinking prohibits us from knowing. We have much to learn from myth, however, and should be ever aware of its influences.

The Mental structure of consciousness

The next shift in consciousness took place between 10,000 B.C. and 500 B.C. This was the transition to the Mental structure of consciousness. It was at this time that man, to use Gebser's image, stepped out of the mythical circle (two-dimensional) into three- dimensional space. Mythology had become so deficient (and it should be noted that each structure has its "efficient" as well as "deficient" form), that man needed a clean break with the past. The plethora of gods and contradictory stories of creation, formation of institutions, and so on threatened to overwhelm the consciousness of man; he practi- cally stood on the verge of drowning in a deluge of mythological mentation. In reaction to this, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and of course, Pythagoras stepped forth to counteract this trend. The mental structure was inaugurated and this coincides with the "discovery" of "causality," Abstraction becomes a key word to describe mental activity and we find man using his mind to overcome and "master" the world around him. With abstraction comes philosophizing, hence the philosopheme is the primary form of expression. Monotheism almost universally replaces the plethora of gods of bygone days; dogma, in both allegory and creed, replaces the symbols of previous times; method replaces the mysteries as man develops an ever-increasing desire to penetrate, and, of course, master nature. This has given rise to the idea of science as the dominant religion of today. Also at this time, time itself was conceptualized (spatialized) as an "arrow" that points from the past to the future by way of the present.[14]

About the time of the Renaissance, man came into his own and really mastered space. It was at this time that perspective was actually introduced into art. Since that time, perspective has come to be a major part and aspect of our mental functioning. Perspective is the life blood of reasoning and the Rational structure of consciousness, which Gebser considers to be only a deficient form of the Mental structure. What we have is the full development of the ego and its related centeredness. We conceive things, events and phenomena in terms of our own perspectives, often at the expense of others. The eye, it will be seen (and the last of the openings in the head), becomes the spiritual organ representative of this structure. Our language, our entire imagery and dominant metaphor takes on visual, spatial character. Space is finally overcome, in the true sense of the word. With the supercession of space, man finally accomplishes his egoistic, individual separation from nature. In this concretization of the "I," we become very aware of our existence, of our beingness, of our individuality. And so it should be. But in a deficient mode, the outcomes, of course, are loneliness, isolation, and alienation, which are so characteristic of our own American culture. In fact, our current materialistic approach to understanding reality is perhaps the final stage of this structure. There is also much everyday evidence to indicate that we are moving through a great change at this time.

We should remember, however, that this is also the time of philosophy. The mental ordering and systematization of thought becomes the real dominant mode of expression. The myths have lost their vibrancy and existential connection to reality. Greek thought followed later by the Scholastics and finally the Enlightenment are all periods in which this particular structure of consciousness flourishes and strongly manifests. It is not without its opposition, of course, since any change will bring about the requisite opposition to its own development. By the time of the Renaissance, though, this structure had firmly established itself and was prepared to move into the next phase of its development. At this time, as was pointed out earlier, a very profound and significant event occurred: man incorporated space into his thought. We cannot underestimate, or overstate, the importance of this development. It is literally at this time that the world begins to shrink. The seeds of our one world community are planted at this time. The ripples begun during the magical structure are widening significantly: first spirit, then soul, now space have become constituents of man's consciousness. Three dimensions have been established and we are prepared for the next significant step we are taking now.

The Integral Structure of Consciousness

As can be guessed, then, Gebser feels that we are on the threshold of a new structure of consciousness, namely the Integral. For Gebser, this structure integrates those which have come before and enable the human mind to transcend the limitations of three- dimensionality. A fourth dimension, time, if you will, is added. This integration is not simply a union of seemingly disparate opposites, rather it is the "irruption of qualitative time into our consciousness."[15] The supercession of time is a theme that will play an extremely important role in this structure. In fact, the ideas of arationality (as opposed to the rationality of the current structure), aperspectivity (as opposed to the perspective, spatially determined mentation of the current structure), and diaphaneity (the transparent recognition of the whole, not just parts) are significant characteristics of this new structure. Stated differently, the tensions and relations between things are more important, at times, than the things themselves; how the relationships develop over time takes precedence to the mere fact that a relationship exists. It will be this structure of consciousness that will enable us to overcome the dualism of the mental structure and actually participate in the transparency of self and life. This fourth structure toward which we are moving is one of minimum latency and maximum transparency; diaphaneity is one of its hallmarks. Transparency is not a "not seeing" as one does not see the pane of glass though which one looks out a window, rather one sees through things and perceives their true nature. Statements about truth are superseded by statements as truth. Verition not description is what we experience and know. Philosophy is replaced by eteology; that is, the eteon, or being-in-truth.[16]

This structure is difficult to describe since it depends to a great deal on experience, not just that we have them, but on how intense they are and what we glean from them for now and the future. Intensity is a key characteristic of this mode of consciousness. By intensity, I do not mean simply an emotional relationship to experience or the feeling or deepening of emotion itself. This would be a magical response not an integral one. Perhaps it would be best to review a few examples of what is meant by fourth dimensionality, arationality and aperspectivity.

Let us start with intensity and use the analogy of love. Love is the energy (yet it has only recently been referred to as such) or the driving force behind true spirituality and spiritual growth. We learn early as mystics and students of the other arts, that we should love our neighbors as ourselves. This is, in fact, one of the two great commandments given us by the Christ and the theme of Love is one that was very strongly developed by the great apostle, Saint Paul, as well. However, it is easy to love those who are our neighbors (even though at times they are exasperating) because they are so much like us. We recognize ourselves in them and so we love them. The affinity of interests, locale, or any other of myriad possibilities makes loving those who are like us a joy. We fulfill our spirituality by adhering to this commandment; it is a yoke that we gladly bear. Nevertheless, this love is a three-dimensional love at best. We love those who fit neatly into our perspectives of being and life. We choose who they are and when and how often we extend that love to them. An integral love, a fourth dimensional love, though, would go beyond that. The Christ also informed us of what that love is when he admonished us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. It is this love that is intense for it is required without asking our opinion (our point of view, our perspective) of it. This is the love of Judas. This is a demanding love that not many are willing to offer.
This article by Alan Combs offers an overview of the work of Gebser: Inner and Outer Realities: Jean Gebser in a Cultural/Historical Perspective. Combs places Gebser's work within a long line of philosophers and psychologists, which is helpful in contextualizing his work.

Finally, one would benefit in comparing Gebser's work to Spiral Dynamics model of Don Beck and Chris Cowan - this introduction explains the processes at work beneath Gebser's stages, how they evolve and why.


Pop Matters - The Best Singer-Songwriter Albums of 2008

Nice list. I'm going to need to get some of these.
Steve Wynn (photo by Guy Kokken)

The Best Singer-Songwriter Albums of 2008

[10 December 2008]

by Michael Keefe

cover art
1. Steve Wynn
Crossing Dragon Bridge
(Rock Ridge; US: 9 Sep 2008; UK: 28 Apr 2008)

Steve Wynn’s Crossing Dragon Bridge is an unusually acoustic-leaning and sophisticated sounding release for him. Though he’s clearly a talented songcrafter, Wynn tends to funnel his strongest works through a rock setting. Since disbanding his excellent 1980s group, the Dream Syndicate, his more rockin’ efforts (with the Miracle 3) have tended to be his best. Here, however, he channels Leonard Cohen, Jacques Brel, and other great singer-songwriters who have a flair for incorporating European melodies into their tunes and string arrangements into their recordings. Wynn traveled to Slovenia to make Crossing Dragon Bridge and performed the majority of it himself. Album bookends “Slovenian Rhapsody I” and “II” capture his locale, while standout tracks like “Love Me Anyway” and “Wait Until You Get to Know Me” employ a spare groove, allowing Wynn’s dark and self-deprecating wit to shine. The lovely “Manhattan Fault Line”, meanwhile, uses a more traditional singer-songwriter structure, accented by graceful strings. As strongly assured as Crossing Dragon Bridge is, you’d think Wynn had been recording albums like this all along.

cover art

2. Martha Wainwright
I Know You're Married But I've Got Feelings Too
(Zoe/Rounder; US: 10 Jun 2008; UK: 12 May 2008)

On her superbly titled sophomore release, Martha Wainwright (yes, daughter of Loudon and sister of Rufus) shrugs free of the conventions of her 2005 eponymous debut. It’s not that she was overly hemmed in before. That first album is a beauty, and her soaringly pretty-yet-creaky voice gave it great character. On her latest, though, she ventures further outside. Her singing here lays waste to standard notions of placement and rhythm, as her words take flight and touch down in marvelous and unexpected ways. Likewise, Wainwright loosens up the music on I Know You’re Married. From her picking patterns to the string sounds, the arrangements feel organic and open. Wainwright’s lyrics are devastatingly good, as well. She picks at her foolish heart until it’s raw and then describes the mess with candor, humor, and sharp imagery. On top of it all, she turns in excellent covers of Syd Barrett-era Pink Floyd and early Eurythmics, and works them in seamlessly with her excellent batch of original tunes.

cover art

3. Lindsey Buckingham
Gift of Screws
(Reprise; US: 16 Sep 2008; UK: 15 Sep 2008)

In Ron Hart’s review, he wrote that Lindsey Buckingham’s Gift of Screws sounds like “Fleetwood Mac without the chicks”, explaining that bassist John McVie and drummer Mick Fleetwood join Buckingham on three of the album’s tracks. “The best of these,” wrote Hart, “is the album’s title cut, a propulsive rocker in the vein of the more kinetic moments of Fleetwood Mac’s 1972 masterpiece Bare Trees and the bluesy ‘Wait for Me’, both of which exhibit the musical synergy of McVie, Buckingham, and Fleetwood better than anything they have ever recorded together. Elsewhere, tracks like ‘The Right Place to Fade’ and ‘Did You Miss Me?’ will remind fans of material from Fleetwood Mac’s surprise 2003 comeback album Say You Will. Other songs here will remind you of Buckingham’s previous solo effort, 2006’s magnificent Under the Skin.” He revives the intricate guitar picking of that album on Gift of Screws tracks like “Time Precious Time” and “Bel Air Rain”. Hart concludes: “There might not be a more poignant protest anthem in these times of bogus bailouts than ‘Treason’, a shimmering acoustic lament that stands out as one of the finest moments of Buckingham’s already-storied career.”


See the whole list.

PopMatters Picks: The Best Music of 2008


Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Simon Baron-Cohen - The Biology of the Imagination

A geeky cool article from an excellent website with no RSS feed - I hate that. Who doesn't use an RSS feed these days?


Anyway, the article - The Biology of the Imagination - argues that although imagination is mostly a cultural activity, the ability to imagine is distinctly biological, referencing Asperger's and autism to demonstrate what happens when that biological "module" is not present or developed.

The Biology of the Imagination

by Simon Baron-Cohen

In what sense might something as intrinsically human as the imagination be biological? How could the products of the imagination – a novel, a painting, a sonata, a theory – be thought of as the result of biological matter? After all, such artefacts are what culture is made of. So why invoke biology? In this essay, I will argue that the content of the imagination is of course determined more by culture than biology. But the capacity to imagine owes more to biology than culture.

Let’s start with a few definitional issues. What do we mean by ‘imagination’? I do not mean mere imagery, though clearly the imagination may depend on the manipulation of imagery. Imagery is usually the product of one of the five senses (though it can also be generated without any sensory input at all, from the mere act of thinking or dreaming). Imagery typically comprises a mental representation of a state of affairs in the outside, physical world. I don’t want to put you off from reading this essay by littering it with jargon, so let’s just think of a mental representation as a picture in your head. That is what we are going to be calling an image, but that is not the same as imagination. Consider why not.

When we create a visual image of a specific object in our mind, the image as a picture of the object has a more or less truthful relationship to that object or outside state of affairs. If the image is a good, faithful, representation, it depicts the object or state of affairs accurately in all its detail. So, mental images typically have ‘truth relationships’ to the outside world. Of course, to create imagery in the first place depends on having the relevant ‘hardware’. To create a photo, one needs a camera. To create a mental image, one needs a sense organ hooked up to a brain. An eye can do the trick, since the retina contains receptors that can code both position and colour in sufficient detail for the brain to which it is hooked up to create an accurate image. But in the absence of an eye, clearly an ear or a finger can do the trick too. With your ear, you can create an image of where that owl might be. With your finger, you can create an image of where your car-keys are.

Imagery may be necessary for human imagination. It has been suggested that all the products of the imagination are derived from imagery, following some transformation of the basic imagery. For example, Rutgers’ psychologist Alan Leslie, when he worked in London in the 1980s, proposed that imagination essentially involves three steps: Take what he called a ‘primary’ representation (which, as we have already established, is an image that has truth relations to the outside world). Then make a copy of this primary representation (Leslie calls this copy a ‘second-order’ representation). Finally, one can then introduce some change to this second-order representation, playing with its truth relationships to the outside world without jeopardising the important truth relationships that the original, primary representation needs to preserve. For Leslie, when you use your imagination, you leave your primary representation untouched (for important evolutionary reasons that we will come onto), but once you have a photocopy of this (as it were), you can do pretty much anything you like with it.

Let’s make this more concrete. Your eye looks at a fish. This causes your brain to form a visual image of a fish. So far, your primary representation ‘fish’ still has accurate truth relations with the outside world. The real fish has fins, eyes and gills, and so does your image of the fish. Or your eye looks at a woman, and this causes your brain to form a visual image of the woman. Now you not only have a primary representation of a fish, but you also have a primary representation of a woman. This image, like the one of the fish, is also truthful. The woman you looked at has long hair and an alluring smile, and so does your primary representation of the woman.

Read the whole article.

After an in-depth explanation of the philosophy of mind and its ability to construct representations of reality, this is the main point:
So, what has all this got to do with the original question of whether the capacity for human imagination is, at its core, biological? For Leslie, the capacity for meta-representation involves a special module in the brain, which humans have and that possibly no other species possesses. In the vast majority of the population, this module functions well. It can be seen in the normal infant at 14 months old who can introduce pretence into their play; seen in the normal 4 year old child who can employ mind-reading in their relationships and thus appreciate different points of view; or seen in the adult novelist who can imagine all sorts of scenarios that exist nowhere except in her own imagination, and in the imagination of her reader.

But sometimes this module can fail to develop in the normal way. A child might be delayed in developing this special piece of hardware: meta-representation. The consequence would be that they find it hard to mind-read others. This appears to be the case in children with Asperger Syndrome. They have degrees of difficulty with mind-reading.

Or they may never develop meta-representation, such that they are effectively ‘mind-blind’. This appears to be the case in children with severe or extreme (classic) autism. Given that classic autism and Asperger Syndrome are both sub-groups on what is today recognized as the ‘autistic spectrum’, and that this spectrum appears to be caused by genetic factors affecting brain development, the inference from this is that the capacity for meta-representation itself may depend on genes that can build the relevant brain structures, that allow us to imagine other people’s worlds.

What are the consequences for people on the autistic spectrum, and for our understanding of the role of biology in human imagination? Children with severe or classic autism may end up with an exclusive interest in the real world, with no interest at all either in mind-reading, pretending, or fiction. They may enjoy making patterns with real objects, or watching how real objects behave, but not even spare a thought for how someone else might be feeling or what they might be thinking, or understand why a mermaid or a unicorn is a fun idea. Children with Asperger Syndrome may manage to mind-read to some extent, after a delay in developing this skill. But their delay may mean they still find empathy challenging even in adulthood. They may show a preference for factual reading material over fiction, or for documentaries over fictional films, perhaps because the hardware in their brain that functions to form primary representations and understand the real world of physical objects is more highly developed than the meta-representational hardware in their brain that functions to represent possible states of mind.
Cool article.


Ex-Finland Leader Accepts Nobel Peace Prize

From CNN, this year's recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, Martti Ahtisaari of Finland, gave his acceptance speech and called on Barack Obama to solve the conflicts in the Middle East.
Ex-Finland Leader Accepts Nobel Peace Prize

(CNN) -- Nobel Peace Prize winner Martti Ahtisaari Wednesday called on U.S. President-elect Barack Obama to "give high priority to the Middle East conflict in his first year in office."

Martti Ahtisaari (left) with King Harald of Norway before the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony
Martti Ahtisaari (left) with King Harald of Norway
before the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony

"All crises, including the one in the Middle East, can be solved," the former Finnish president said in his Nobel acceptance speech. The international community also had to put its weight behind the project, he added, saying its credibility was at stake.

"Peace is a question of will," he said as he received the prize for his efforts to resolve conflicts from Kosovo to Indonesia and Namibia.

"Wars and conflicts are not inevitable," he said, arguing that they are caused by people who have something to gain from them. "All conflicts can be settled."

Ahtisaari was modest about the role of mediators in ending conflicts, saying only the parties themselves could end bloodshed.

He said his own experience as a child, when his hometown in Finland became part of the Soviet Union under a "spheres-of-influence" agreement between German leader Adolf Hitler and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, had influenced his determination to work towards peace.

"We became refugees in our own country," he said of the events that took place when he was two years old.

Ole Danbolt Mjos, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, praised Ahtisaari for brokering an end to the long conflict between Indonesia and separatists in Aceh, leading to extensive autonomy for the region.

Ahtisaari and his organization Crisis Management Initiative "saw opportunities where others only saw conflict," Mjos said.

And he praised the Finn's work in pressing Slobodan Milosevic to end the war in Kosovo in 1999. Ahtisaari put forward an autonomy plan for Kosovo in 2007 which Serbia refused to accept, but Mjos said the province's subsequent declaration of independence came close to mirroring the Ahtisaari plan.

"Ahtisaari's solution for Kosovo has to a large extent been put into practice. Kosovo has become independent. The conflict had no other solution," Mjos said, admitting that in some conflicts, "the parties are too far apart."

He also cited Ahtisaari's 14 years of work in Namibia, starting as United Nations Commissioner there and culminating in the country's independence in 1990.

Read the whole article.


Facts, Values and a Place for the Profound: A conversation with Sam Harris

Sam Harris posted this video conversation with him at his blog - interesting discussion. This was part of the Beyond Belief series of presentations. This is a long video (about 84 minutes), but it gives a great overview of Harris's work and career.
Sam Harris discusses his work with The Science Network's Roger Bingham on October 3, 2008 at the Salk Institute, La Jolla, California.




TED Talks - Paul Collier: 4 Ways to Improve the Lives of the "Bottom Billion"

A cool and inspirational TED Talk. He offers a worldcentric position on how to help the weakest and poorest of the Earth's citizens.
Around the world right now, one billion people are trapped in poor or failing countries. How can we help them? Economist Paul Collier lays out a bold, compassionate plan for closing the gap between rich and poor.

Collier studies the political and economic problems of the very poorest countries: 50 societies, many in sub-Saharan Africa, that are stagnating or in decline, and taking a billion people down with them. His book The Bottom Billion identifies the four traps that keep such countries mired in poverty, and outlines ways to help them escape, with a mix of direct aid and external support for internal change.

From 1998 to 2003, Collier was the director of the World Bank’s Development Research Group; he now directs the Centre for the Study of African Economies at Oxford, where he continues to advise policymakers.

Paul Collier on the Web

  • Website: Centre for the Study of African Economies
  • Lecture: "War and Peace in Africa"





Natural Hormone Reduces Stress Hormones In Arguing Couples

[image source]

I can see it now - oxytocin nasal spray to keep couples "in love" with other, no matter what.

I'm not sure what I think of this. Personally, I'd love a product that could reduce cortisol. This natural hormone is the enemy of athletes trying to get strong and lean.

And then there is the application for weight loss. Rather than wasting money on one of the stupid and worthless "cortisol reduction" supplements for weight loss, you could just sniff some oxytocin - lower cortisol and no chocolate cravings.

Yet, as far as relationships go, being able to arguing compassionately is crucial to a healthy and growing relationship, so I don't really think this is a good idea. You can't just substitute drugs for empathy - we the empathy skill.

Natural Hormone Reduces Stress Hormones In Arguing Couples

ScienceDaily (Dec. 8, 2008) — A dose of the hormone Oxytocin reduces the stress hormone Cortisol in arguing couples. In addition, Oxytocin strengthens positive behaviour, as researchers at the University of Zurich have discovered.

Various studies in recent years have repeatedly shown that the hormone Oxytocin in the brain of mammals – and therefore human beings too – is jointly responsible for regulating the social behaviour. Beate Ditzen from the Psychological Institute of the UZH has now, together with colleagues from the University of Zurich, examined the hormone particularly in terms of the behaviour in partnerships.

The scientists asked 47 couples aged between 20 and 50 to argue in the laboratory about a typical subject of conflict for them. Before this conflict discussion, the couples received either the hormone Oxytocin or a placebo in the form of a nasal spray. The behaviour of the couples was recorded on video and analysed with the aid of a coding system. Moreover, the stress hormone Cortisol was repeatedly measured in the saliva of both partners in order to record the psychobiological stress reaction to the conflict.

Beate Ditzen and her colleagues then assessed the positive behaviour, such as listening, confirming or laughing during the conflict in relation to the negative conflict behaviour such as interrupting, criticising or degrading the partner. "Couples that received Oxytocin behaved significantly more positively than couples with the placebo", said Beate Ditzen in summarising the results. Oxytocin prolongs the duration of positive behaviour in relation to negative behaviour. In addition, the Cortisol values of couples who received Oxytocin were lower after the conflict than those of the placebo group.

The results suggest that Oxytocin as a neuronal mechanism might influence the behaviour and the stress reaction in couples. "Oxytocin might be a possible biological candidate to explain how close relationships – and particularly couple relationships – have a positive effect on our health" explains Beate Ditzen.


Journal reference:

  1. Ditzen et al. Intranasal Oxytocin Increases Positive Communication and Reduces Cortisol Levels During Couple Conflict. Biological Psychiatry, 2008; DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2008.10.011
Adapted from materials provided by University of Zurich.

Kurt Barstow - Letting Go

Another nice post from Kurt Barstow at Examiner.com. Here he looks at "letting go," or perhaps more precisely, surrender.
Letting Go

I was recently watching a DVD of an introduction to The Sedona Method with Hale Dwoskin, who was appearing at a seminar in Las Vegas as a guest of Jack Canfield, the co-creator of the Chicken Soup for the Soul series. Both authors and self-help gurus had appeared in the popular movie The Secret. The Sedona Method is about release, potentially of anything that is negative or does not serve, but especially of emotions. It was inspired by a man who was given three weeks to live and, basically, by letting go of layers and layers of negativity lived another forty-two years. Behind its principles are the belief that every human being has a natural mechanism of release that is in evidence, for example, when a child falls down and looks around to see if he or she needs to cry. In the DVD Dwoskin has his audience think of an unwanted emotion that they have been holding on to and to just feel what that's like in the body. He then asks, "Just for now, could you welcome that emotion?" Then, "Just for now, would you be willing to release that emotion?...Would you?...Could you?...When?" Although The Sedona Method Course discusses the many possibilities for using this as well as various strategies, the core of it is that simple. You welcome and release. You can do it for emotions, thoughts, physical sensations, relationships, just about anything that can be imagined or felt by you. As a result you get in touch with your unlimited self, with the vast spaciousness of your being. If that begins to sound spiritual to you, you would be right, for The Sedona Method would seem to be based on tried and true psychological/spiritual principles.

The great thirteenth-century Sufi poet Jelaluddin Rumi says in his poem "The Guest House":

This being human is a guest house,
Every morning a new arrival.

A joy, a depression, a meanness,
Some momentary awareness comes
as an unexpected visitor.

Welcome and entertain them all!
Even if they are a crowd of sorrows,
who violently sweeps your house
empty of its furniture,

still, treat each guest honorably.
He may be clearing you
out for some new delight.

The dark thought, the shame, the malice,
meet them at the door laughing,
and invite them in.

Be grateful for whoever comes,
because each has been sent
as a guide from beyond.
Notice that the central idea of this poem is that we should not ignore, repress, avoid, reject, or project these feelings--good or bad--nor should we carry them around like a burden. Instead we should welcome them, the first step after identifying and feeling them in The Sedona Method. And while he doesn't talk about releasing them, their transience is implied in the metaphor of the guest house. So the first step in working with the transformative powers of emotions is to allow them in, not to resist them.

In his book Open Mind, Open Heart (Continuum, 2006), Father Thomas Keating discusses practices that help to translate the effects of centering prayer (the Christian version of meditation) into daily life, One such practice is called The Welcoming Prayer. To perform this practice one must first observe the emotions that are most unsettling to oneself. As he describes it, this "is a way of 'letting go' into the present moment and ordinary routines of daily life... It is a way of turning over everything to God by using... three simple movements." The first is to focus and sink into the body sensation, to simply experience it. The second part is to remain in this bodily sensation and to say interiorly the word "Welcome," as you "embrace the Holy Spirit in and through the body sensation." The third component is letting go.
Read the whole article.


Tuesday, December 09, 2008

Two Articles on Change - Taking a Buddhist View


Change is one of those topics that is hard to pin down, but you know it after you've gone through it. However, the trick is knowing WHEN it is happening. I have a series of articles on the sidebar that I wrote about the change process, how it works, how to frame it, and how to navigate it.

Two good articles came up in my reader this week.

First up, How About Changing?, from Integral Coach Gabriella Kortsch, Ph.D. at Psychology, Transformation & Freedom Papers. Here is an excerpt:
We turn off the news, sickened, or disgusted, or heart-broken, and mainly horrified that we seem so helpless to make a difference.

So we turn to our daily lives, and suddenly we face the banality of keeping up with the joneses, we realize we are throwing out perfectly good food in the trash, we realize our SUV guzzles gas, we realize our children are beginning to show inordinate interest in consumerism, we realize we spend more on one meal at a good restaurant than many people have to live on for an entire month or more, we face worrying about the dictates of this season's fashions according to an outrageously expensive glossy magazine, and we recognize that we have the beginnings of a conscience that is not feeling good, a conscience that is telling us we need to do something.

And so to assuage it, to make ourselves feel better, we send a check to one of the charities, or we sponsor a child in a country where our money stretches fifty-fold, or we do some volunteer work, or donate some of our time to a soup kitchen, and then - to further assuage that guilty conscience, we check in on the lives of people outside of our own orbit, who live on a distant edge of the universe as they travel in private jets, luxury yachts, vacation more than they work, and spend $8,000 for an evening bag, or $300,000 for a car and twenty million dollars for a new home.

Let's go back to the initial premise ... a world gone awry ... a world that needs to change to become better ...

So how about this: change yourself. Begin there.
Read the whole post.

This is good advice. We can't change the world, we can't change our country, we can't even change our family members, but we CAN change ourselves. Wanting to change others is attachment - a clinging to the way we want things to be rather than working with things as they are. [This is not to be confused with attachment theory in psychology, which is a good thing.]

As Gabriella states, when we change ourselves, there is a ripple effect out into the world. But we must not engage in this "change project" with the intention of changing others. Our intention must be something along the lines of the Bodhisattva Vow:
May I assist all sentient beings to attain Buddhahood, and may I be the last one to attain Buddhahood when all sentient beings have attained Buddhahood, as did Avalokiteshvara (Tib. Chenresi)
There must be purity in our intention. And there must be the absence of attachment. We must be acting from compassion.

* * *

The other article is from Psychology Today, and talks about using challenges as the vehicle for growth and change. Here is some of the post:

Using Crisis to Break Free From the Familiar Zone

Our struggle with growth is very much about the dramas we engage in trying to come out of our comfort zone. In fact, we'd be better advised to call it our familiar zone, since these areas of habitual thinking and experience, may actually not be comfortable, but they are certainly very familiar. Picture the familiar zone as a circle that circumscribes the known boundaries of your thoughts, feelings and behaviors.

* * *

A crisis is an event or circumstance, which we didn't choose and certainly didn't want. It often involves loss, pain or struggle. We ordinarily avoid this experience at all costs. Yet, the crisis provides a valuable opportunity. It is as if a tornado has swept in and when we open our eyes, everything has changed. The maelstrom placed us well beyond the bounds of the known. We typically find ourselves wanting desperately to get back inside the comfort of the known. But the crisis precludes that option. There is no going back. And that is where the opportunity lies.

Whether we choose to freeze in the panic of loss and focus on retreat or whether we settle in, create a new mindscape and inquire as to the potential of the new territory, is ultimately the question. The former presents anxiety and retreat, the latter evokes growth. I suggest that crisis in most forms--financial, relationship, health, spiritual--all present unique opportunity for personal emergence. The gift that the crisis provides is that it moves us decidedly out of our familiar zone.The crisis is a turning point. In which direction we turn is of our choosing.

This again is good advice. As long as we remain in our comfort zones, change is not very likely to happen. We know we are open to change when we live on the edge of our personal safety. And this does not mean physical safety, but rather those feelings and situations that create anxiety, such as a personal or national crises.

* * *

Loss is one of those really tough ones for most of us. No matter what the crisis is that confronts us, however, the only way out is through. Anything else just postpones the inevitable. And we are dealing with most times is the loss of control.

In fact, a recent study of people who have been rejected (think divorced or dumped to get to the crisis level) reveals that the real source of pain for these people is the loss of control. It's not the loss of the "loved one" or the relationship - it's the loss of control.
Gerber analysed 88 existing experimental rejection research studies. He found that while rejection moderately lowers mood and self-esteem, the loss of control felt by the person who has been rejected was found to be a major factor contributing further to their hurt and distress.

Rejection makes us realise that we are not as powerful and in control as we would like to be, Gerber says. As a result, one of the first things most people do when rejected is to look for opportunities to regain that lost sense of control.
As if we ever had control in the first place.

Attachment rears its ugly head again - we all live under the iron heel of the ego's illusion that it is in control. One of the ways that ego asserts control when confronted with the lack of any real control, as Gabriella pointed out above in terms of the chaotic world, is doing something to make us feel better - in that case, donating to a cause, volunteering, or something else. These are not bad things, but they are band aids.

What we really need to do is to learn to be with our feelings of not having control. We need to let that truth pervade our bodies - we have no control over anything but ourselves. Even that is tenuous when ego wants what it wants.

Pema Chodron teaches
us that we should see obstacles - such as crises - as teachers. First she talks about "holding one's seat":
The choice is yours: you can further strengthen your painful and crippling habit or you can shake it up a bit by holding your seat. Each time you sit still with the restlessness and heat of anger neither acting it out nor repressing it you are tamed and strengthened. Each time you act on the anger or suppress it, you are weakened; you become more and more like a walking target. Then, as the years go by, almost everything makes you mad.

So this is the first method: remember that you set the target up yourself, and only you can take it down. Understand that if you hold your seat when you want to retaliate even for 1.5 seconds longer than ever before you are starting to dissolve a pattern of aggression that, if you let it, will continue to hurt you and others forever.
This is crucial - being mindful in this way is essential to dealing with attachment and moving through a crisis of any kind. But when we see difficulties as teachers, we begin to see that life is the only real teacher we may ever need:
If there is no teacher around to give you direct personal guidance on how to stop causing harm, never fear! Life itself will provide the opportunities for learning how to hold your seat. The troublemaker, for instance, who so disturbs you without this person how could you ever get the chance to practice patience? How could you ever get the chance to know the energy of anger so intimately that it loses its power?

There is a saying that the teacher is always with us. The teacher is always showing us precisely where we are at and encouraging us to relax and open our hearts and minds, encouraging us to not speak and act in the same old stuck ways, encouraging us also not to repress or dissociate. So with this one who is scaring you or insulting you, do you retaliate as you have one hundred thousand times before, or do you start to get smart and do something different?

Right at the point when you are about to blow your top, remember this: you are a disciple being taught how to sit still with the edginess and discomfort of the energy. You are a disciple being challenged to hold your seat and open to the situation with as much courage and as much kindness as you possibly can.

Of course, like countless students before you, you may often feel, I'm not ready for this. So sometimes you will run away, and sometimes you will kick and scream, and sometimes you will hold your seat. Somehow, gradually, all of this becomes part of your ability not to cause harm and part of your ability to understand the pain and confusion of others and to help them.

The problem with these or any instructions is that we have a tendency to get serious and rigid about them. We get tense and uptight about trying to relax and be patient. This is where the fourth instruction comes in: it is helpful to contemplate that the one who is angry, the anger itself, and the recipient of that anger are all happening as if in a dream.
This final point is also very important, and one that I often teach to my clients. But I don't use the dream image, I use the ideas of parts - the one who is angry, or afraid, or anxious, is an object, a thing to be looked at, examined, but it is not me or you.

When we are able to see it as a "part," we allow it to become an object of attention rather than the subject of our experience. To rephrase this, since it's an important point: seeing the angry, hurt, or frightened "part" as an object, not as "me" (I'm not living its experience) allows me to step back into my observing self and have some distance from the feeling.

From this emotional distance, we can explore the part and see what it wants us to know about itself, what it needs to teach us. We must enter this conversation with a spirit of curiosity, however, and compassion - not as an interrogation.

Understanding our parts, practicing nonattachment, offering ourselves in service of others -- all these are great ways to embrace the process of change when we find ourselves in the midst of it. After all, as is noted above, we cannot change anyone but ourselves, but doing so is a great service to the world.


20 Minute DB Workout

dumbbell squat exerciseDumbbell Squat Exercise


Don't have time to spend an hour in the gym? Don't feel like going to the gym, but you have DBs at home? Then this is exactly what you need.

I admit it, some days I am lazy. Today was one of those days. No clients to see, so I just didn't feel like going in to the gym. So I dug out an old pair of 40 lb dumbbells and did a quick little circuit that burned some calories, worked all the major muscle groups, and got me winded -- all in 20 minutes.

It's really quite simple. Grab a pair of dumbbells that feel challenging (I used 40's because that's all I have at home) and do the following circuit (aiming for 12-20 reps each set on each exercise).

DB Lunges (knee touches floor on each rep)
Push Ups (feet up if these are easy - and go to failure)
DB Snatch (one arm at a time, DB touches floor on each rep)
Bent Over Straight Arm Row (both arms at the same time)*
DB Squat (narrow stance, DBs must touch the floor on each rep)
DB Chest Press (do these on the floor if you have no bench)
DB Ab Wheel (One DB in each hand, roll out and back)

*The straight arm row is similar to a standard two arm row, except the arm is kept straight. Back is parallel to the floor, abs tight.

If all you have at are VERY light weights, go for slow reps (10 seconds down, pause, 1 second up) and more challenging exercises, such as overhead squats, lunges up stairs, dumbbell swing, or thrusters.

Do the circuit three or four times with as little rest as possible - should take less than 20 minutes.

Here is a good exercise database for building your own workouts.


NYT - Our Sense of Touch

This is an interesting article from the New York Times - Primal, Acute and Easily Duped: Our Sense of Touch - taking a look at the sensitivity and the ambiguity of our sense of touch.
Primal, Acute and Easily Duped: Our Sense of Touch

Published: December 8, 2008

Imagine you’re in a dark room, running your fingers over a smooth surface in search of a single dot the size of this period. How high do you think the dot must be for your finger pads to feel it? A hundredth of an inch above background? A thousandth?

Well, take a tip from the economy and keep downsizing. Scientists have determined that the human finger is so sensitive it can detect a surface bump just one micron high. All our punctuation point need do, then, is poke above its glassy backdrop by 1/400,000th of an inch — the diameter of a bacterial cell — and our fastidious fingers can find it. The human eye, by contrast, can’t resolve anything much smaller than 100 microns. No wonder we rely on touch rather than vision when confronted by a new roll of toilet paper and its Abominable Invisible Seam.

Biologically, chronologically, allegorically and delusionally, touch is the mother of all sensory systems. It is an ancient sense in evolution: even the simplest single-celled organisms can feel when something brushes up against them and will respond by nudging closer or pulling away. It is the first sense aroused during a baby’s gestation and the last sense to fade at life’s culmination. Patients in a deep vegetative coma who seem otherwise lost to the world will show skin responsiveness when touched by a nurse.

Like a mother, touch is always hovering somewhere in the perceptual background, often ignored, but indispensable to our sense of safety and sanity. “Touch is so central to what we are, to the feeling of being ourselves, that we almost cannot imagine ourselves without it,” said Chris Dijkerman, a neuropsychologist at the Helmholtz Institute of Utrecht University in the Netherlands. “It’s not like vision, where you close your eyes and you don’t see anything. You can’t do that with touch. It’s always there.”

Long neglected in favor of the sensory heavyweights of vision and hearing, the study of touch lately has been gaining new cachet among neuroscientists, who sometimes refer to it by the amiably jargony term of haptics, Greek for touch. They’re exploring the implications of recently reported tactile illusions, of people being made to feel as though they had three arms, for example, or were levitating out of their bodies, with the hope of gaining insight into how the mind works.

Others are turning to haptics for more practical purposes, to build better touch screen devices and robot hands, a more well-rounded virtual life. “There’s a fair amount of research into new ways of offloading information onto our tactile sense,” said Lynette Jones of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “To have your cellphone buzzing as opposed to ringing turned out to have a lot of advantages in some situations, and the question is, where else can vibrotactile cues be applied?”

For all its antiquity and constancy, touch is not passive or primitive or stuck in its ways. It is our most active sense, our means of seizing the world and experiencing it, quite literally, first hand. Susan J. Lederman, a professor of psychology at Queen’s University in Canada, pointed out that while we can perceive something visually or acoustically from a distance and without really trying, if we want to learn about something tactilely, we must make a move. We must rub the fabric, pet the cat, squeeze the Charmin. And with every touchy foray, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle looms large. “Contact is a two-way street, and that’s not true for vision or audition,” Dr. Lederman said. “If you have a soft object and you squeeze it, you change its shape. The physical world reacts back.”

Another trait that distinguishes touch is its widespread distribution. Whereas the sensory receptors for sight, vision, smell and taste are clustered together in the head, conveniently close to the brain that interprets the fruits of their vigils, touch receptors are scattered throughout the skin and muscle tissue and must convey their signals by way of the spinal cord. There are also many distinct classes of touch-related receptors: mechanoreceptors that respond to pressure and vibrations, thermal receptors primed to sense warmth or cold, kinesthetic receptors that keep track of where our limbs are, and the dread nociceptors, or pain receptors — nerve bundles with bare endings that fire when surrounding tissue is damaged.

The signals from the various touch receptors converge on the brain and sketch out a so-called somatosensory homunculus, a highly plastic internal representation of the body. Like any map, the homunculus exaggerates some features and downplays others. Looming largest are cortical sketches of those body parts that are especially blessed with touch receptors, which means our hidden homunculus has a clownishly large face and mouth and a pair of Paul Bunyan hands. “Our hands and fingers are the tactile equivalent of the fovea in vision,” said Dr. Dijkerman, referring to the part of the retina where cone cell density is greatest and visual acuity highest. “If you want to explore the tactile world, your hands are the tool to use.”

Our hands are brilliant and can do many tasks automatically — button a shirt, fit a key in a lock, touch type for some of us, play piano for others. Dr. Lederman and her colleagues have shown that blindfolded subjects can easily recognize a wide range of common objects placed in their hands. But on some tactile tasks, touch is all thumbs. When people are given a raised line drawing of a common object, a bas-relief outline of, say, a screwdriver, they’re stumped. “If all we’ve got is contour information,” Dr. Lederman said, “no weight, no texture, no thermal information, well, we’re very, very bad with that.”

Touch also turns out to be easy to fool. Among the sensory tricks now being investigated is something called the Pinocchio illusion. Researchers have found that if they vibrate the tendon of the biceps, many people report feeling that their forearm is getting longer, their hand drifting ever further from their elbow. And if they are told to touch the forefinger of the vibrated arm to the tip of their nose, they feel as though their nose was lengthening, too.

Some tactile illusions require the collusion of other senses. People who watch a rubber hand being stroked while the same treatment is applied to one of their own hands kept out of view quickly come to believe that the rubber prosthesis is the real thing, and will wince with pain at the sight of a hammer slamming into it. Other researchers have reported what they call the parchment-skin illusion. Subjects who rubbed their hands together while listening to high-frequency sounds described their palms as feeling exceptionally dry and papery, as though their hands must be responsible for the rasping noise they heard. Look up, little Pinocchio! Somebody’s pulling your strings.


Paul Bloom on Blogging Heads TV

Great discussion between Blogging Heads regular Will Wilkinson and psychologist Paul Bloom on atheism, religion, morality, and the multiplicity of self.




Keith Martin-Smith - On the Future of Art and Art Criticism

James_bailey_7
[Auto Crucifix - James W. Bailey]

More on art and art theory, this time from an "integral" perspective by a one-time employee of the Integral Institute.
Keith Martin-Smith worked for Integral Institute from July 2006 until August 2007, when he left to pursue his own work. His collection of 12 short stories the Mysterious Divination of Tea Leaves, and Other Tales, a collection of “Integral” fiction, has been published by O-Books and is available through Amazon. Keith currently lives in Boulder, Colorado, where he teaches Kung Fu and Qi Gong, and works as a freelance writer. You can learn more about him and his work at www.keithmartinsmith.com. See also "Art, Postmodern Criticism, and the Emerging Integral Movement".
On the surface, his approach seems useful and relevant to working artists, which is always the bottom line for art theory. But is it? Any opinions out there?

On the Future of Art
and Art Criticism

Beyond Post-Modernism in the 21st Century
The death of postmodernism
and the birth of the Integral movement
in art and art criticism

Keith Martin-Smith

Introduction

Art struggles in our postmodern world, where genius has been pronounced dead and mediocrity and irony congratulate one another on their empty existence. A trip to a modern museum of art leaves most of us scratching our heads in confusion. Cutting-edge art and literature have lost their power over our collective imaginations because they can no longer speak for us in any meaningful way. Avante-garde art and literature have sadly been relegated to PhD's and ever-narrowing groups of intellectuals who “get it”, never bothering to ask if it's worthy of being gotten in the first place. Art has become an inside joke about an inside joke that fewer and fewer people are interested in hearing.
The postmodern movement is nearly dead, strangled to death on its own smug irony. In its place comes something that once again believes art can be grand, inspirational, magnificent, emergent, and capable of speaking to most people, not just the hyper-educated elite. A new movement that believes the artist need not be an angry social outcast or critic, or indifferent raconteur, but once again a revolutionary. This has been and still is the birthright of every great artist.
The entire edifice of postmodern art has rotted itself so completely from the inside out that it has nearly crumbled to dust. Let us turn the page, discover what postmodern art achieved and where it has utterly failed, and learn what we can build on its foundation. Standards of judgment, not based in an absolute, and not fixed, must nevertheless be used to once again pass judgment on art. “High” art, “Low” art, “good” and “bad” must once again be brought into the lexicon of art criticism, but without repeating the mistakes of the past that marginalized important voices outside of the mainstream.

The question “what is art” is both more simple and more complex than it might seem at first glance. Marshall McLuhan, philosopher of media theory, said in the heyday of 60's Pop Art, “Art is whatever you can get away with.”[1] Is it? His observation raises some interesting questions: How does one go about judging a work of art as “good”, “bad”, or “better than” something else? What standards are used? Is something shocking, like a New York City artist who recently put vials filled with her menstrual fluids on display, art? Or is such a display really something else? For those that defend such displays as art, what exactly do they see that the rest of us are missing?

Art criticism and the fine arts in general have fallen on strange times, which is why so many of us end up going through museums of modern art with either a roll of our eyes or a confused expression on our faces. Poetry and literature have not fared much better, and the reasons lay in the adoption of a particular kind of postmodern approach to criticism, “deconstructive postmodernism”. Art and its critics, many of whom probably are not even familiar with postmodernism as a movement, have nevertheless been under the influence of deconstructive postmodern philosophy since the days of Marcel Duchamp's Fountain, an ordinary white porcelain urinal, signed by Duchamp, put on display in 1917 as “serious artwork”. Its display caused a sensation and critics, the public, and other artists argued strenuously about the work, coming only to the conclusion that it was hugely controversial. But Duchamp was clearly onto something, for in 2004 five-hundred leaders in the art world voted it “the most influential work of modern art”,[2] beating out Picasso's Les Demoiselles d'Avignon and Guernica. How is it that a signed toilet is viewed with such reverence, and without a knowing wink? Is a signed toilet really art? If so, to whom, and for what reasons? What about a photograph of a crucifix sitting in urine [Serrano's Piss Christ] or menstrual fluids in beakers nailed to a wall — are these art?

"Fountain", Duchamp "Piss Christ", Serrano
Read the whole article.

Here are three of his assertions about the nature of art - they may seem out of context here, rather than embedded in the article, but I like the basic ideas he is trying to convey.
Figure 1.0
REALISM

Aesthetic Beauty is…
  • Absolute and fixed
  • Real, & outside the artist
  • Independent of culture
  • Independent of human view
Figure 1.1
Modernism

Aesthetic Beauty is…
  • Absolute but subjective
  • Real, & inside the artist
  • Dependant on culture
  • Shaped by human view
Figure 1.2:
Postmodernism

Aesthetic Beauty is…
  • Arbitrary and non-fixed
  • A construction of the artist
  • Created by culture
  • Determined by human view
He then goes on to outline some kind of integral model, but here is where I am in agreement, as mentioned in a previous post today that offers Heidegger's view on art:

Four things must be considered when evaluating artwork:

  1. the artist him or herself and what they think the work is (prevents critic projection)
  2. the cultural view of the artwork — aboriginal art in Brazil versus Serrano in NYC
  3. the artwork itself
  4. the viewer's response

If you look at any one of these things alone, it is impossible to determine with much accuracy what's going on in the artwork. Ken Wilber, for instance, is quite brilliant and complex-of-thought, yet as far as I know has little talent with a paintbrush (sorry, Ken). So if he draws a stick figure he says is “integral”, #'s 2, 3 and 4 would all dictate that the work actually lacked complexity and skill of execution — and therefore isn't art — even though the man himself maintains that it is.

Anyway, go read the article and let me know what you think.