Da Bomb

Apr. 24th, 2013 03:22 pm

Patriots’ Day is a state holiday, which my employer honored until this year, having been purchased by a company in Las Vegas that doesn’t think particularly much of Massachusetts’ Revolutionary War history.

The Boston Marathon, which takes place on that day, finishes a block—150 yards—from my condo. Between setup, tear-down, and cleanup, it royally screws up transportation for most of a week. Street closures bring most of the neighborhood to a standstill. They close my MBTA station (Copley) and you physically cannot cross Boylston Street without going a mile out of your way.

Since I would be unable to get to work (or back), I chose to work from home on this year’s Patriots’ Day. In the evening, I also had an appointment to pick up my new bike and do a full fitting, although I didn’t know whether I’d be able to get through the crowds to get to the bike shop!

For most of the day, I ignored the race. Public events are common where I live, whether it’s the Walk for Hunger or a pride parade or a Critical Mass ride or a sports team celebrating a championship or a free concert or a political rally or the Santa Speedo Run or whatever. I mostly tuned out the race’s PA announcer, the shouting vendors, and the partying revelers. Once or twice I looked out my window to see the crowds of exhausted runners walking down Boylston Street, having just crossed the finish line.

Just before 3pm I heard a loud boom. Yes, it might have sounded like a canon, but the first thing I thought of was that someone had taken a huge dump truck and dropped it from 20 feet up. It was an echoing heavy metal sound, like a big truck carrying steel I-beams hitting a wall. Except the concussion was a lot stronger than that. My building was rocked, and a dozen building and car alarms were going off.

Twelve seconds later, as I wondered what was up, I heard the second blast. It was further away from me, but still didn’t sound normal. I got up and went to the window and saw hundreds of panicked runners, spectators, and volunteers streaming out of Copley Square, running down Dartmouth Street toward me. (That’s my condo in the news photo at right.)

Something very bad had obviously happened in the square. I looked for the smoke that would be the tell-tale sign of an explosion, but there was none that I could see above the single row of five-story brownstones between me and the finish line.

My first instinct was to share the news. I went to Facebook and entered what I knew:

Something bad at the marathon… People running all over. Two huge booms, whole building shook, emergency vehicles all over the place.

My next instinct was that this was going to be national news, and I should reach out to friends and family who might wonder if I was injured, so that was my next task.

After that, there was just a whole lot of news watching, and checking out my window as runners, volunteers, and spectators fled the area, rescue vehicles swarmed in to assist the injured, and law enforcement units sealed off the neighborhood.

As it turned out, the first bomb blast was a block from me (see the map), right near my bank and across the street from the Boston Public Library. The second was a block further up, across from Lord & Taylor and my walking route to my neighborhood grocery store.

Although cell service was initially flooded—and despite persistent reports that the police had intentionally terminated cell phone service city-wide—service freed up as people gradually left the neighborhood. I spent the next couple hours fielding inquiries from friends via cell phone, Facebook, instant messaging, and text messages.

Despite all the chaos, I still thought that I could make my bike fitting appointment across town, and brought my old bike down to the lobby. On the way out the door I heard another muffled boom which apparently was a controlled detonation of an abandoned bag that wound up being completely innocuous.

On the street, thousands of people were milling around aimlessly, and the cops had cordoned Dartmouth street off at Commonwealth Avenue. What that meant is that my building was squarely on the edge of the lockdown zone; We could go in and out the main (north) entry, but the side (east) and rear (south) doors were off limits.

I biked off through streets that were largely empty of cars, but with a large number of pedestrians walking around obliviously. Once I got to the bike shop, I saw the “closed early” sign and turned around and made my way home. Knowing Comm Ave would be a mess due to the marathon, I took my only other alternative: the Charles River bike path.

While crossing the Dartmouth Street footbridge over Storrow Drive, one matronly lady headed in the other direction yelled at me, “Don’t go there! The police are there!” to which I, of course, responded, “I live there.”

A few minutes after I got settled back into my apartment, our fire alarm started going off. I assumed the cops had decided to evacuate us, but I checked the hallway and actually smelled smoke. So I started going through the handy list of evacuation tasks I keep by the door. Grady the cat, who up until now had shown absolutely no evidence of concern, was (justifiably) spooked by the blaring fire alarm and it took me a while to corner him and get him into his carrier.

As it turned out, one of the residents had burned dinner. What an irresponsible thing to do, given all the other stuff going on in the neighborhood that needed the fire department’s attention! After a bit of fresh air, the residents were let back inside to soothe our now doubly-jangled nerves.

As night fell, outside my window Newbury Street—which was within the lockdown zone—was absolutely deserted except for cops and military personnel. Absolutely no one was allowed into or out of most of the Back Bay. Huge situation response trucks took up station as the police began to comb through what they termed a “crime scene” that was several square miles in area.

I had planned to take the next day (Tuesday) off to ride my new bike. Despite not having the bike, with the entire neighborhood sealed off there was very little point in trying to get to work, so I took it as a vacation day. And if I could get out and pick up the bike, then I’d take it for a bit of a shakedown cruise.

That morning, one positive development was that the cops opened up Newbury Street to traffic, reducing the lockdown zone a bit and ensuring that my building, at least, would be accessible.

I wasn’t home for much of the day, tho. It was an amazingly stressful and hectic day, made worse by the continuing closure of the Copley MBTA station. At a high level, it went like this…

Walk half a mile to Hynes station. Get past National Guard troops. Take the trolley to the bike shop in Brighton. Take the new bike for a 16-mile test ride outside of the city. Take the trolley back to Boston. Walk half a mile home from Arlington station. Have a Pop-Tart and a glass of juice. Ride the old bike two miles back out to the bike shop. Have an abbreviated fitting done. Ride the old bike two miles back home. Walk half a mile to Arlington station. Take the trolley back out to the bike shop (don’t forget all the National Guard watching this). Ride the new bike two miles home. Turn around and walk half a mile back to Hynes. Hop an MBTA bus to Central Square in Cambridge. Inhale a burrito. Walk to my meditation center for my Tuesday night practice group. Meditate for an hour, then socialize a bit. Walk back to Central and hop the MBTA bus back to Hynes. Walk down to the Fenway Whole Foods, since the two grocery stores that are nearer to me are in the lockdown zone. Too late; they’re closed, so buy milk and OJ at a nearby CVS. Shlep those another mile back home. Collapse.

After just five hours’ sleep, Wednesday I went back to work. The lockdown zone shrank a bit more—down from 17 blocks to 12—freeing up Hereford, Berkeley, and Clarendon. Investigators concluded that the bombs had been constructed of pressure cookers, nails, and metal pellets, and announced that they had obtained surveillance video evidence showing a suspect.

Thursday President Obama (and many others) came to town for an inter-faith ceremony. That night the FBI released photographs of the two suspects.

Friday I was going to bike to work, because it was going to be the warmest day in more than six months, but that plan came to a crashing halt when I learned that shortly after the photos had been released, the bombers had engaged the police in firefights in Cambridge and Watertown, and one of them had been killed. The police had most of eastern Massachusetts completely locked down: no Amtrak, no MBTA, no commuter rail, no cabs, all businesses closed, and residents were told to stay indoors all day.

Despite live news broadcasts all day long, literally nothing happened in the 18 hours after the firefight. After a fruitless search of the neighborhood in Watertown where the surviving suspect was last seen, the police gave a press conference wherein they lifted the stay-put order. On the good side, that meant that the Amtrak would be running Saturday morning, when I had plans to travel to Maine.

But going outside sounded like the height of folly to me, because the second suspect was still armed and on the run. I guess the cops were probably hoping that he’d just turn up somewhere.

Which, as it turns out, was exactly what happened. A man just outside the cordoned-off part of Watertown found the remaining fugitive injured and semi-conscious, hidden in a shrink-wrapped yacht in his backyard, and the police came and took him into custody.

With the second suspect on the way to the hospital, the whole area burst out in celebrations. Of course, even despite the all-clear and the police high-fiving one another and the T being opened, Copley Square MBTA station remained closed, and the entire 12-block area around my apartment was still off-limits to the public.

That pretty much killed the day Friday.

On Saturday I did manage to get out of town on the Downeaster, and returned again on Sunday night. Copley and my neighborhood still off limits.

Monday. Still off limits. On the way home from work, I stopped at the grocery store, then lugged my provisions a mile and a half home. But the FBI turned the site back over to the city of Boston.

Tuesday. Still off limits. CIMC had a special evening gathering, led by the three guiding teachers.

Finally, on Wednesday morning they opened things up. After nine days of being unable to use my MBTA station or cross my neighborhood, the marathon (in both senses of that word) was finally over!

So that’s what happened. Now for a few thoughts…

One oddity is that I remember having the thought—sometime in the week leading up to the marathon—that we hadn’t had any major national emergencies in a long time, and that we were probably due. I don’t recall what prompted that thought, but I am certain it happened.

Although thinking back on it, Back Bay has been through a lot lately. We just got through a region-wide road closure due to a massive blizzard, but before that we spent 48 hours without power after a substation failure, and a week without drinking water when a 10-foot water main broke out in Weston. And then there were hurricanes Sandy and Irene.

I’m disappointed that I didn’t do more to help other people over the past week, to put my compassion practice into action. While I was probably right in telling myself that I wasn’t needed at the bomb scene, I probably could have helped stranded runners or traumatized spectators. But I guess there’s something to learn from my inaction, and hopefully I’ll do a better job next time.

On the other hand, one close friend said it was unexpectedly thoughtful of me to let people know that I was okay. And another friend used the word “compassion” as one of the three things that she thought I epitomized. So that was mildly reassuring.

Speaking of compassion and first responders, I saw an interesting reaction to the bombing that spoke eloquently to me about how men’s manifestations of love and compassion go unseen and unacknowledged. Here:

I had an amazing insight about men. This one insight seems life-changing to me: “Acts of heroism are acts of love.”
 
Why is this life changing? Because I don’t think the narrative out there right now is that men are constantly involved in deep, fundamentally good, acts of love. All the time. Men are not talked about, as a group, as being demonstrative of their love. Of being ongoing catalysts for acts of goodness. And yet they do that all the time. I think the narrative is that men take heroic actions because they are told it’s a role they must play, because men are “supposed” to be strong, supposed to be brave. Because they are “manning up” the way they were taught to. If love is talked about with men, it is in the context of sexuality. When men are called “lovers”, it is often code for “womanizers”. But men act in love, and show that love, all the time. For some unfathomable reason, we call it something else.
 
I don’t think men get enough credit for love.

I think my meditation practice really helped me deal with a situation that would otherwise produce a lot of anxiety and emotional discomfort. While I saw and acknowledged my own emotions, I was much more intrigued by the reactions of the people around me.

For several days, the main question on people’s minds was the search for “who”: who did it?

Lots of people either undertook their own search for the culprit based on photographs that had been posted or formulated their own opinions based on little to no data. But realistically, no private citizen was going to identify the bomber; that’s what we pay our law enforcement agencies for. Get out of the way and let them do their job!

As my teacher pointed out, this compulsion comes entirely from mental discomfort, because the identity of the bomber has absolutely no relevance for most of us. In fact, if the bomber had never been found, it would have made absolutely no material difference in most people’s lives. So why did they spend so much mental energy and anguish trying to answer this question? That kind of desperate, undisciplined thought is the symptom of someone with an undeveloped sense of self-awareness.

Then, after it was learned that the suspects were pretty average Cambridge kids, the next question everyone was asking was “why”: why would someone do such a thing? This was prevalent both in my family as well as from other practitioners at CIMC, and it really surprised me.

I think the very question is indicative of cultural bias. While many of us say that we respect and value other cultures—especially in a highly educated, multi-cultural town like Cambridge—very few of us understand what that means in practice. It’s frustrating that I have to spell it out, but people from other cultures will have different values! They won’t be the same as ours.

While a Buddhist might value non-harming above all other things, and your average American Christian might value order and stability, someone from a foreign culture might consider those less important than individual freedom or cultural preservation or economic fairness. Why would someone bomb innocent civilians? Because it’s important to them within the framework of their values.

I don’t understand what is so mysterious about the fact that other people might have different values than yourself. Why is that so incomprehensible? But people really seem to operate on this unspoken assumption that everyone shares their values. That’s not true even within a family, never mind across vast ethnic, religious, geographic, and political divisions!

I heard the phrase “I don’t understand” so many times that I wanted to grab people and shake them. Of course you don’t understand! You’re not *trying* to understand. A criminal’s actions only make sense when viewed through *their* value system; of course it doesn’t make sense if you insist on viewing it through your very different values. That’s like wondering why birds don’t save their energy and just drive south like the rest of us, rather than fly. Of course it doesn’t make sense if you insist on interpreting bird behavior using human norms and values!

But this question of “why” is even broader than that. Sure, any seemingly “inexplicable” act (criminal or otherwise) can be partially explained by understanding the values espoused by the protagonist. But what about acts of nature or acts of “god”? Aren’t people are just as prone to ask “why” in response to a tsunami or a wildfire or a landslide or a cancer diagnosis?

I find this baffling, because change is inevitable and life is very fragile. These aren’t just platitudes to make you feel better (in fact, they should make you feel quite insecure). But more importantly, these are the incontrovertible base assumptions and conditions that we live under! There doesn’t need to be a *reason* for something bad to happen, because bad things are a part of life, an indisputable fact. All this breast-beating and asking why they happen is like asking why nitrogen happens or bemoaning the law of gravity. If you are asking why it happened, you really need to reexamine the mistaken assumptions you live by.

In contrast, I suppose I should point out something uplifting, too. With so much focus on the bombers and their actions, consider the correspondingly much greater number of people and acts of kindness and compassion that took place over the past week. We should all be heartened by the vastly larger outpouring of support for those affected.

I want to particularly highlight two tweets that crossed my feed shortly after the bombing. In the midst of the chaos and terror, many people thought of giving blood to help the injured. But still, I was amazed by this:

Red Cross reporting sufficient blood in banks at this time. Some marathoners ran directly to MGH to donate after blasts.

I can’t imagine finishing a marathon, running an extra mile, and then having blood drawn. Simply amazing! Not especially smart, but amazing.

But I really felt a deep pride in my city when I read the next tweet. How does Boston respond to a terrorist attack? Like this:

I have no idea how we are supposed to react to something like this, other than love each other more.

I’ve always loved this city. It’s a wonderful mix of ambition and compassion, competitiveness and brotherhood, pride of place and openness, history and innovation, intelligence and grit, vibrant city culture and outdoor activities for the athletically inclined. Boston isn’t perfect, but it strives mightily to be the best. And contrary to the intentions of these terrorist wannabes, the marathon bombing they undertook did something very special: it provided us with a rare opportunity to demonstrate love for our city and our fellow Bostonians, and it bound this great community together more tightly than ever before.

I love that dirty water. Aw, Boston you’re my home.

Heck, I’m so moved I might even include Cambridge…

I must admit, I’ve always been kinda confused by vegetarians.

Many, if not most, vegetarians avoid meat out of compassion for other living beings. This is, of course, a laudable sentiment that I personally agree with and support. If I were a vegetarian, this would be my primary motivation.

On the other hand, vegetarianism that’s based on the sanctity of life doesn’t make much sense if you agree that plants are just as much “living beings” as animals. Is killing and eating a plant really any less violent than killing a cow or a lamb? Why? Is it because we feel more “kinship” with that cow than we do, say, a turnip?

The history of human ethical development can be viewed as a glacially slow progression of extending respect to other life forms. We began back in the caveman days, when Grog came up with the revolutionary idea that he shouldn’t cross the river and kill Kracken’s whole family, since they were kinda the same as his family.

Tens of thousands of years later, mankind is still struggling with the idea that people from the neighboring country are kinda the same as we are, even though they talk funny; that people are still people, even if they worship ridiculous pagan gods (or, heaven forbid, some blasphemous variation of our own); and that we are all one, even if our skin color isn’t.

Here’s where I give vegetarians credit: they’ve extended that idea of kinship, and the compassion that comes with it, to other mammals. You don’t eat cows and pigs and dogs and lambs because, dammit, there’s something about them that we can identify with and care about. We don’t want them to suffer and die just for our convenience. Well done, Captain Vegetable!

But that’s just one more incremental step along a long path of ethical development: one more case of us realizing that just because something is different doesn’t mean it isn’t worthy of our honor, respect, and compassion.

The next steps in our ethical development are obvious: extend that same degree of compassion to birds, fish, shellfish, and insects. Giving mammals preferential treatment over other members of the animal kingdom makes about as much sense as giving Jews preferential treatment over Muslims.

Oh. Right. We’re not quite there yet, are we? Maybe someday.

Objectively, fish and insects are life forms just like you and I, and the more we respect life, the more we must care about their suffering, too. There are already people who, instead of swatting them, escort their household bugs outside, being careful not to harm them.

Assuming we finally manage to extend our compassion beyond our fellow humans and other mammals, to fish and insects, it’s only a matter of time before we finally admit that plants are living beings, too.

And here is where I must ask of my vegetarian friends: why is the life of one stink bug more precious than our annual destruction of millions upon millions of tomato plants, or corn stalks, or Christmas trees?

The precedent has already been set of humans taking action to save an individual redwood or a swath of forest from being clear-cut. That action makes no sense unless the idea has begun to take root that all life—even vegetables!—is worthy of our respect and compassion.

Of course, I’m not arguing that vegetarians should stop eating vegetables, or ethically regress by resuming eating meat. It’s an unfortunate and unavoidable fact that right now, humans must eat formerly living beings in order to survive.

That’s an interesting realization, because it establishes an ethical dilemma for us: our survival requires us to kill living beings. Since most religions say that killing is one of the worst actions one can perform, doesn’t that mean that mankind is inherently evil?

That’s an interesting contrast to what we normally hear, which is that humans have a favored position in the universe. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all assert that man was created in God’s image, and Buddhism says that a human rebirth is a rare and precious opportunity to attain enlightenment. A good example is this quote, attributed to Anagarika Darmapala at the 1892 World Parliament of Religions:

To be born as a human being is a glorious privilege. Man’s dignity consists in his capability to reason and think and to live up to the highest ideal of pure life, of calm thought, of wisdom without extraneous intervention.

But how do we reconcile this self-congratulatory view of ourselves with the gory fact that every day of our lives we must kill and eat our fellow living beings?

Now let me set the question aside and take a bit of a side track, because that idea dovetails nicely with some of my own feelings concerning the sanctity of nature, and particularly trees.

Since childhood, when my summers were spent along wooded lakes in Maine, I’ve felt a deep spiritual respect for trees. In college, there was a particular pine tree deep in the woods behind campus that was “my tree”, where I’d go to commune with nature, and more recently I have similarly rooted myself to a particular spot near the Arnold Arboretum’s “Conifer Path”.

Combining this with my previous train of thought has given me a better reason to admire trees from a spiritual standpoint. Think about it: unlike us, trees don’t need to kill anything in order to survive. In fact, trees do zero harm at all, yet they have the longest lifespans of any complex living organism on our planet.

From a Buddhist perspective, trees are the epitome of equanimity, stoically accepting life as it is, with no need to control it or change it. They are equally connected to the air, the earth, and to water.

As a result, it is no surprise that euphemisms like “the Tree of Life” fill our language, and that trees play a central and symbolic role in all major religions, be it the bodhi tree that the Buddha reached enlightenment beneath, or the Judeo-Christian images of the olive branch and Tree of Knowledge.

I seem to be in implausibly diverse company in my respect for trees’ spiritual nature:

  • Willa Cather: I like trees because they seem more resigned to the way they have to live than other things do.
     
  • George Bernard Shaw: Except during the nine months before he draws his first breath, no man manages his affairs as well as a tree does.
     
  • Friedrich Nietzsche: The pine tree seems to listen, the fir tree to wait, and both without impatience. They give no thought to the little people beneath them devoured by their impatience and their curiosity.
     
  • Ralph Waldo Emerson: The wonder is that we can see these trees and not wonder more.
     
  • Mikhail Gorbachev: To me, nature is sacred; trees are my temples and forests are my cathedrals.
     
  • Ronald Reagan: A tree is a tree—how many more do you need to look at?

Trees give us a model of simplicity, acceptance, and meditative silence. If you searched the world over for the best master meditation guru alive, you could do no better than to follow the example of a tall, strong tree, standing silently while the world flows and transpires all around him.

If I was to be reincarnated after this life is over, I think, contrary to most people’s belief, that coming back as a tree might well be the wisest choice one could make.

And if you were looking for evidence of divinity in our world, I think this is where you should look. Surely the pattern of growth rings in a tree are the literal fingerprints of whatever force—personified or otherwise—created us.

No shit, there I was: thinking evil thoughts. Or more specifically, thoughts about how evil compares across the major religions of the world. But I didn’t have to do all the footwork myself, when Google could do it for me!

So the first thing I did was a Google Image search on Satan. Of the results on the first page, fifteen were evil images, one was a happy little Satan, one was the Satan from South Park, and the last image was a diagram of nine “satan fingers” to flash in heavy metal concerts. Oooo, scary!

Next up: Islam. A Google Image search on Iblis turned up thirteen evil images, three interesting abstract designs, a Battlestar Galactica ship, and fan art for what appears to be a series called “Charmed” on WB with the caption, “The Tempting Ones”. Pretty evil, I’d say.

Hinduism is represented by Rahu. A Google Image search on Rahu again returns mostly the god eating the sun, but also with two charts of the orbit of the theoretical planet Rahu, which is the cause of eclipses, and a garnet ring from VedicStore.com. Pretty solidly evil.

On cannot discount the Zoroastrians. The results for a Google Image search for Angra Mainyu were 100 percent the evil god, if you count one instance of evil god on a tee shirt. This guy’s got evil down to a science!

In Egypt, Set is the big man. But the images returned for a Google Image search on Set include a tea set, a drum set, a chemistry set, a movie set, the Mandelbrot set, the Julia set, one image for a set of nude pictures, and setting a Guinness World Record for the number of bikini-clad women needed to form the Olympic rings (1202). As evil goes, Set’s name doesn’t carry much weight.

Finally, we get to Buddhism. In Buddhism, the evil one is known as Mara. But unlike all the other candidates, a Google Image search on Mara returns only one image of Buddha’s temptation, two photos of an Argentinian rodent, and an overwhelmingly abundant fifteen images of beautiful women! Score! Now whose evil do you think is best, huh?

Just thought I’d share, in case you were wondering.

Monday marks Grady the Cat’s first adoptaversary. I really haven’t written about him or posted any pictures since his first couple weeks at home. That’s partly due to my five-month travel assignment.

I have taken pictures of him, but he’s not as photogenic as I once hoped, mostly because he’s not a very patient subject, so few of them have made it to Flickr or my LJ. You can see the ones I have taken here.

How can I describe life with Grady? In many ways, it’s great. He’s not a fussy eater. He doesn’t scratch furniture. He’s usually not noisy or destructive. He doesn’t have litterbox issues. He doesn’t spray or mark. He’s a pretty good cat, in all respects but one.

Grady

He’s one aggressive muthafuxx0r.

You’d think a cat would enjoy spending time sunbathing in a south-facing bay window in a fancy Back Bay apartment, watching all the pedestrian activity on shi-shi Newbury Street. He’s even got sparrows, pigeons, and seagulls to stare and chatter at when he gets bored.

But no. My cat’s got ennui. No, not just ennui; my cat’s got ANGST. Angst like Arlo Guthrie on the Group W bench: he wants ta kill. I mean, he wants ta kill. He wants ta see blood and gore and guts and veins in his teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. He wants ta kill, Kill, KILL, KILL!

Unfortunately, the only other living thing in my apartment happens to be *me*, and I’m not about to become “prey” to any twelve-pound ball of teh fluffeh, even if he does have nasty big pointy teeth. It’s kind of a pity, because he’d be an ideal farm cat, where he could go out and run and hunt and kill all day and all night long.

So after a year, during which time I’ve utterly failed to train this behavior out of him, I finally called for an exorcist. Today a Senior Applied Animal Behaviorist came by—along with two veterinary student observers—and we talked about Grady’s “case”.

Basically, the diagnosis is boredom combined with an inhuman—or infeline—amount of energy. They played with him for ten minutes, the point at which point most cats will get tired and go for a lay-down. After 80 more minutes of vigorous, non-stop play the Senior Applied Animal Behaviorist got tired and declared that Grady is “ninety-ninth percentile”, and that he’ll remain this hyperactive for a minimum five more years.

Meanwhile, I got all kinds of advice. A lot of it is geared toward finding ways to entertain and exercise him, so that he has an outlet for all this satanic energy other than mad killing sprees. We also discussed deterrence, drugs, and acquiring other living creatures for him to disembowel, ranging in sizes from crickets up to fostered shelter cats. The idea is to redirect his persistent demands for human sacrifices.

In the end, only time is going to tell whether I can live with this killing machine or not. But at least now I’ve some well-educated support and some ideas to try. Wish me luck…

Were you raised in a particular religious faith?
No.
 
Do you still practice that faith? Why or why not?
No.
 
What do you think happens after death?
From my February 24th LJ entry "Philosophy for Dummies":
When we die, like any animal, we die. There is no essense or spirit which survives when our brain activity ceases. Because death is an inevitable end of our being, and because we never live to experience it, it is illogical to fear death. On the other hand, it certainly is logical to fear suffering and pain, if those are part of your road to death. But death itself should be accepted as the ultimate, immutable fact of life. Accept it and move on and enjoy your life, motivated further by the knowledge that your portion of life is finite.
I firmly agree with the Existential creed that there is no meaning to life other than to experience it, and believe that is an incredibly empowering, liberating, and optimistic realization.
 
What is your favorite religious ritual (participating in or just observing)?
Although I do not believe in religion as such, I feel that it is eminently logical to observe the solstices, equinoxes, and cross-quarter days, although not in any self-impressed wiccan sense. On those days I try to reconnect with nature and quietly celebrate the beauty and wonder of nature and life.
 
One tidbit: did you know that the change of seasons actually used to be observed on the cross-quarter days, rather than the solstices and equinoxes (they were thought of as the midpoints of seasons)? I find that a much more logical arrangement.
 
And happy Samhain everyone (even if few people realize that the cross-quarter day actually falls on November 7th).
 
Do you believe people are basically good?
I believe people have a strong trend toward laziness, ignorance, selfishness, and fear . As a moral relativist and secular humanist, I do not believe in the ideas of objective "good" and "evil" as such. The only "good" is acting in conformance with your own unique set of morals and values.

Having already developed a strong personal philosophy outside of any structured study, I bought the book "Philosophy for Dummies" in order to get an overview of the great philosophers and philosophies of history. I was hoping that I'd be exposed to some new ideas that I hadn't accounted for in my own philosophy, and/or find some more details about philosophers whose opinions coincided with the ones I've developed during my life.

While the book was a passable overview of the major questions of life, the author presented it in a very biased and judgemental way, which is unfortunate because I disagree with him on most issues. Still, I was able to think about my opinions in a more structured fashion, and come up with a few specific statements that I believe, even if they're no different from the beliefs I had going into the exercise. Here are some highlights:

  1. We will probably never have the ability to answer some of life's biggest questions. We are in a situation where we must act based on limited information about what life is all about. So the most logical thing we can do is make conscious decisions and live our lives with the meaning that we choose to give them.
  2. Similarly, because there is no inherent or apparent meaning to life, we have the freedom and opportunity to give our lives meaning and enjoy our lives while we're here. What matters is what gets you through your life with the most meaning and happiness possible.
  3. Most people never enjoy the life they have now; they're always looking somewhere else, either in the future or the past, like a housewife who has misplaced her keys and is looking everywhere but where they are: right under her nose. This is exacerbated because we live in such an acquisitive culture, where you never seem to have "enough" of whatever it is you think will make you happy. Life is a process, and if you die never having reached a point where you're satisfied and content with your lot, you will have lived without ever having known happiness and contentment.
  4. Philosophy in general cannot prove anything, nor even provide much evidence on which to base an opinion about life's biggest questions. Because it doesn't make sense to believe that something is an absolute without evidence, I don't believe there can be any universal definition of morality or good (i.e., I believe in moral relativism or ethical subjectivism). There are certainly ample examples of people violating commonly-held morality, while adhering to what they believe is right. Even Hitler believed that he was doing something moral and good.
  5. I also believe in "amoral relativism". That is, you can define "evil" very simply and succintly as someone whose morals and values differ from your own. That's why, when people have philosophical difference, people are tempted to view the opposing viewpoint as "evil" or "amoral".
  6. We like to think that we "decide" what we believe, but belief is not subject to direct control. While we might be able to indirectly influence it, belief is one of the few things that is equally emotional as it is rational, and sometimes we only discover what we believe when we're put in a position that tests or challenges our belief. In fact, although we like to think that we "know" what we believe, it is just as difficult to understand as it is to control, which is why so many people refer to examining their beliefs as a "process of discovery".
  7. Humanity is the result of random evolution; we were not "created".
  8. Although most people refuse to accept it, man is not significantly different than most animals. Even a cat or dog has a memory, makes decisions based on experience, can understand cause and effect and future consequences, and lives much the same kind of life as we have. The only significant difference I can see is in scale: mankind's capacity to learn and communicate is radically higher than that of other beasts.
  9. When we die, like any animal, we die. There is no essense or spirit which survives when our brain activity ceases. Because death is and inevitable end of our being, and because we never live to experience it, it is illoigcal to fear death. On the other hand, it certainly is logical to fear suffering and pain, if those are part of your road to death. But death itself should be accepted as the ultimate, immutable fact of life. Accept it and move on and enjoy your life, motivated further by the knowledge that your portion of life is finite.
  10. Because of their dispassionate opinions, history's existential philosophers have been viewed by the majority as depressed, defeatist, and negative. However, existentialism can also be a very positive, empowering philosophy. When you accept the fact that life is transitory, it makes that time much more precious an experience, and drives you to consciously enjoy every moment as it occurs. The world is full of wonder and beauty, and each precious fleeting moment should be savored while it is available to you. And when you accept that there is no God or other meaning to your life, it gives you the amazing freedom to define what your life will mean, and pursue your own happiness and fulfilment. For me, existentialism is clearly the road which is the most positive, empowering, and likely to lead to a happy and fulfilling life.

So "Philosophy for Dummies" didn't really add much beyond what I originally came to the exercise with, unless you could the insight that there's not much out there that is going to significantly change my world-view. And because the book completely dismissed existentialism and the essence of my personal philosophy, the next thing for me to do is conduct a more thorough study of the thinkers who have expressed ideas that run in a similar vein to my own.

Frequent topics