Brian Greene and Religion

via Lubos Motl, excerpts of Brian Greene's interview in Whole Life Times:

Does your work with string theory make you more or less religious?

I think it partly depends on your exact definition of religious. If it means the traditional notion of going to services and some organized religion, then the answer is no. If it means, does it fill me with a sense of awe and wonder about the universe, does it fill me with a sense of how remarkable it is that the pieces of the universe fit together with such logical cohesion, does it fill me with this unshakable sense that there is an underlying order and harmony behind the universe, then to all of those I would say absolutely, yes. For some people, that is religion.

I could not have said it better. When I speak of religion and the Freedom of Religion as it is promised in our First Amendment, this is what I mean. It is the Freedom of Thought, the choice to believe in whatever reasons you want to explain the "underlying order and harmony behind the universe."

I realize that many bad things have been done in the name of religion, but the same is true of any idea. I can't think of a single idea that is exempt from being abused and misused. Does that mean that all ideas should be discounted? Of course not. So why do so many people think that eliminating religion and religious thinking will accomplish anything?

The answer is, and it's so simple, respect for others' rights. Sure, you can think that you are right and everyone else is wrong. But when it comes to actions, we do not have unlimited freedom to trample all over everyone else's beliefs. You can tell people they are wrong, but you can't enforce or impose your own beliefs on them. You just have to agree to disagree. If everyone could do that there would be more peace.

What’s your favorite conspiracy theory?

The most fun one is that God created the universe. But would one consider that a conspiracy? Certainly it arises from a lot of individuals collectively believing in something, which to me is wonderful because it’s a wonderful point of departure for so many ways of thinking about things. I love the fact that you’ve got individuals such as myself trying to figure out the universe using math and equations. You’ve got other people trying to figure out the origins of the universe from philosophical concerns, others that are approaching it from a theological direction. My brother is a Hare Krishna, and for years every time we’ve had a breakthrough in physics I tell him about it and he says, “Oh, yes, we know of that. It’s in Vedic text number 16,” or something like that. To me it’s always difficult to make sense of the resonances between what you find in sacred texts and what we find in science, because often times it’s a similarity of language or a similarity of perspective — but they’re really not exactly the same by any stretch of the imagination. But I do find it compelling that human thought, trying to answer the same question how the universe began, brushes up against similar concepts [as science] now and then.

That's a funny way of putting it, as a "conspiracy theory."

I've thought a lot about how the religious and philosophical ideas about ourselves, our origins and universe began and evolved with our increasing knowledge. In many ways it probably seems like modern people are much smarter than ancient people. But I wonder if that's really true. There seems to be a difference between amount of knowledge and ability to reason. Humans have had this reasoning ability for a very long time. In the past I'm certain that some people had intuited basic Truths about our existence but were limited by their language and knowledge in how they explained it. That would explain how many sacred texts contain some of the 'same' information as recent scientific discoveries. They are just put into different terms and symbols. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The development of symbolic and religious thinking is one of the characteristics that separated us from the "apes". One of the "pillars of civilization."

I have never intended to sound like I put religion above science or "rationality." If anyone has thought that, then they simply haven't been paying attention or trying to understand me. I'm sorry if my communication isn't always clear and if that is the reason for any confusion. Anyway, if we use Greene's definition of religion, "unshakable sense that there is an underlying order and harmony behind the universe," you will realize that without it we never would have bothered to invent science at all. Science is the process of discovering that underlying order. Religion is the celebration of it.


Incidentally, a friend of mine has experienced a real and genuine miracle last week. I would like to explain it explicitly, but due to privacy concerns she really doesn't want me to talk about it. But allow me to say this much. What happened absolutely cannot be explained away unless you want to say that the best and most unexpected solution out of 10^500 jumped out and said, "Here I am!" ;-) Really and truly, and you just have to trust my judgment about it, the one thing that no one even imagined could happen did happen. The series of events leading up to it were so convoluted and uncertain that it seemed completely impossible. But as they say, in God all things are possible. Miracles really do happen.

The Joker

Some people call me the space cowboy
Yeah
Some call me the gangster of love

"The Joker" by Steve Miller Band

My oldest is very interested in card tricks and other illusionist/magic stuff and was opening a new pack of cards. He asked me why there were always Jokers in decks of cards. Since I don't really know much about card games I told him that it's probably because some games need them, but I don't know for sure.

In Tarot, the Fool card is somewhat related to the Joker somewhere back in their histories.


Please click picture to be able to read the meaning next to it, but "ancana" should be "arcana". Sorry for the error.

Along comes a Trickster.

About six months ago I solved the riddle of my clown phobia.

There is a basic psychological truth that says we most fear those things that reflect the parts of ourselves that we hate or reject. I'm only now, at 39 years old, beginning to accept my fate or role as the Holy Fool, Trickster, Jester, Clown.

This is probably why I was such a quiet and shy child. I refused to be the Clown or Trickster but had not yet learned how to be something else. It took me a long time to learn how to provide comic relief, at least that's how I remember it. ;-) God love her and this is not a serious criticism, but my mother seemed to be startled or puzzled by me most of the time until I became an adult. I think I interpreted her puzzlement as disapproval or some other subtle form of persuasion to subdue my "tricksterness." Well, maybe that's just a bunch of psychobabble. ;-)

Whatever the reasons, being the Joker isn't as bad as my mom or I worried it would be. Maybe it's because being a gangster of love is pretty fun. ;-)

Previous mention of the Trickster

Serious Conjunction

To the right of Leo's front leg the smaller dot is Saturn atop the larger one, Venus. Click picture for larger view.

On June 30 Saturn and Venus will be very closely conjuncted. Allow me to indulge in a bit of hokey astrological interpretation. After all, all work and no play makes Rae a dull girl. ;-)

I'm not an astrologer by any stretch of the imagination, but I am aware enough of the basics to create my own interpretation of this celestial event. Venus is the planet ruling love and sensuality. Saturn is the planet ruling responsibility and discipline. A conjunction may indicate auspicious, difficult, or some combination of, events depending upon the nature of the planets involved and the extent of the conjunction. This conjunction is very intense (close) in between the signs of Leo and Cancer. I'm not sure in which sign 'real' astrologers would put place this conjunction, but to me it looks on the edge of Leo. Leo is the sign of confidence, leadership, and open expression. Cancer is the sign of sensitivity, nurturing, and protectiveness.

So what do I think it all means? Well, it seems to say that cold, analytical Saturn is in a collision course with warm, emotional Venus, and the results will be intense and possibly daunting, kind of like the immovable object meeting the irresistible force. ;-) But not to say that this will not be beneficial in many ways. This kind of conjunction might be seen as a catalyst (beginning) or a culmination (ending) of unavoidable events. Of course, this isn't meant as any kind of prediction, but more as advice to be prepared to deal with some big happening (internal or external).

Personally, I find this whole thing rather interesting and surprisingly relevant to my own life. Coincidence? Probably, but it is kind of fun to look at the similarities.

Lucky Guess?

While cooking supper a little while ago I was also listening to the news (FoxNews because cnn isn't conducive to good digestion). There was a guy on there who was organizing a boycott of Bank of America in response to its deal with the no social security number credit card. (not being a good blogger right now and adding links to the relevent articles, etc., maybe I'll have time later)

It struck me as kind of funny that just recently I had mentioned that banking was not exactly a pristine industry and so on. My observations about banking were made well before the current hoopla about Bank of America. Isn't that an interesting "coincidence"?

Things that make you go "hmmm." Well, draw your own conclusions. ;-)

Freaky!

I really like to read Jonathan Cainer's horoscopes because they usually surprise me with a nice chunk of wisdom or some other thought-provoking thing. I was just checking tomorrow's 'scopes because he usually has them up early. I always check the Aquarius because that is my Sun sign, but I also check the one for Sagittarius because I have three planets or "signs" there (Venus, Moon, Ascendent or Rising Sign) which could make me more Sagittarius than Aquarius since I only have two planets/signs there (Sun and Mercury). This might not be an 'orthodox' method of checking horoscopes, but I guess orthodoxy isn't the biggest concern there. ;-)

Anyway, Tuesday's Sagittarius 'scope really freaked me out!

Tuesday, 9th January 2007

SAGITTARIUS
(Nov 23 - Dec 21)
'Put on a happy face.' 'Smile though your heart is breaking.' 'Pack up your troubles in your old kit-bag and smile, smile, smile.' The songwriters are unanimous. The thing to do when you find yourself in times of trouble is to let it be. To some extent this puts them in direct conflict with the psychotherapists who are strongly of the opinion that emotions must be honestly expressed at all times. Whose advice should you take? It doesn't much matter. Soon your problem will be fixed!

I bolded the part that is so freaky because just yesterday I posted the lyrics to the Beatles song "Let It Be." Do you think that Jonathan Cainer might be reading my lyrics blog? ;-) Or maybe Mother Mary came to him yesterday too? Wonders never cease!

By the way the Aquarius scope for tomorrow wasn't up yet, as of my writing this.

Magical Vines and Adjacent Universes

The Vine
by Robert Herrick
(1591-1674)

I dreamed this mortal part of mine
Was Metamorphoz'd to a Vine;
Which crawling one and every way,
Enthrall'd my dainty Lucia.
Me thought, her long small legs & thighs
I with my Tendrils did surprize;
Her Belly, Buttocks, and her Waste
By my soft Nerv'lits were embrac'd:
About her head I writhing hung,
And with rich clusters (hid among
The leaves) her temples I behung:
So that my Lucia seem'd to me
Young Bacchus ravished by his tree.
My curles about her neck did craule,
And armes and hands they did enthrall:
So that she could not freely stir,
(All parts there made one prisoner.)
But when I crept with leaves to hide
Those parts, which maids keep unespy'd,
Such fleeting pleasures there I took,
That with the fancie I awook;
And found (Ah me!) this flesh of mine
More like a Stock then like a Vine.

That's one of my all-time favorite poems. It's almost pornographic. ;-)



A birdhouse gourd vine has 'magically' grown over one of my butterfly bushes. I grew gourds a few years ago but not since (intentionally), so the kids must have broken one in the yard and spilled the seeds. And actually, these 'accidental' ones are growing even better than the intentionally grown ones. There are two large gourds already and many small ones growing and many more blooms to come. It blooms at night with these big 'veiny' but delicate white flowers. They don't smell good, but they kind of glow in the moonlight. There is one starting to open in the photo.

It is a single plant that has branched out to cover the butterfly bush and weigh it down. (I don't think it will break.) It's amazing how those tendrils 'know' to grasp onto whatever they touch and wind themselves around it. (That brings to mind images of dna replicating.) There is a primal sensuality about tendrils and vines, as Herrick's "dream" also suggests. And to the overimaginative it could appear to be some kind of rudimentary intelligence that a plant responds to touch and has developed a way to exploit that ability.

This year I've been blessed with many volunteer plants, but this gourd vine is the most surprising and perhaps symbolic. Maybe Nature wants me to make more birdhouses and rattles? Yeah, that's probably it - to make up for the ones I didn't finish last time. Nature always manages to get her way. ;-)

So, why rattles? Well, it's a shamanic thing. Many, probably most, shamans use drums and rattles to "call the spirits" and enter trance states and assorted other things. I'm intimidated by drums. I'm not ready to make that much noise. ;-) And I find myself more receptive to a rattle's sound. But I rarely ever shake a rattle because I don't want the kids to wonder what Momma's doing or to think I'm even that much weirder.

Maybe Nature wants me to make rattles and to actually use them? Great, I can hear it now, "knock-knock-knock Momma? What are you doing?" I think I'll keep one in the kitchen to chase away the "evil spirits" that make my lights go off and on by themselves sometimes. Yes, that really does happen, but I'm assured by the resident electrician that it's not "supernatural" though he hasn't fixed the problem yet. ;-) The rattle will be more fun anyway.

What do magical vines have to do with adjacent universes? Last night when I started this I knew where that was going, but today I'm afraid I can only guess. Maybe I was thinking about the surprises of life and how we handle them. When I found the vine growing on my butterfly bush I could have pulled it out to save the bush from any potential damage. But that seemed too rigid and boring. I like to let things grow and to see what happens. I can imagine that if we ever 'find' an adjacent universe and can actually see into it we should be prepared for surprises and possibly even disappointments. What if we find that our counterpart in the other universe doesn't fit our ideal image? Do we reject it or say, "oh, I made a mistake"? Or do we look closer and try to see if the differences are only a reflection of some kind of 'quantum' variations? I don't know. It's not really up to me anyway.

Besides, even if we do wake to find that our magical vine is really 'just' a stock there are lot things that stocks are good for. ;-)

Magic Words and Alchemy

Much of the Cognitive brand of psychology tells us that we create our own reality with our thoughts and perceptions. A nice summary (from the above linked wikipedia article) of this approach to psychology is as follows:

Cognitive theory contends that solutions to problems take the form of algorithms—rules [processes] that are not necessarily understood but promise a solution, or heuristics—rules [exploratory or trial-and-error processes] that are understood but that do not always guarantee solutions. In other instances, solutions may be found through insight, a sudden awareness of relationships [intuition].

I must confess that I've had a longterm love/hate relationship with this Cognitive approach. While it seems to be one of the 'best' approaches to understanding our minds it still is missing something. And those "rules that are understood but that do not always guarantee solutions" are just not satisfying. When I was in school there was little discussion about the physical/biological aspects of our thoughts and behavior other than some brain anatomy about which structures were 'believed' to be related to different thought processes, etc., and even then the brain imaging technologies were still in their infancies so we just didn't know that much. All of that is probably the main reason I was unsatisfied with this 'cognitive only' approach. Apparently, many other people felt this same way because these fields were much more widely researched and developed shortly after I graduated.

Now I have the benefit of many more years of living and experience to add to my education. I've had plenty of time to observe, examine, study, and learn about my own thought processes and behaviors so that I've been able to figure out what's what (for the most part). Of course, not all people are like me so I can't assume that because something works for me that it must work for everyone else. But it's probably safe to assume that I'm not an anomaly either.

Besides, one of the things I've noticed over the years is that the things I get interested in are almost always very 'popular' soon after I get into them. I think it's just that I somehow have insights about future events/trends a little sooner than most people. And largely, when I talk about being "psychic" that is what I mean- "having insights about future events/trends sooner than most people." However, as I get older I'm finding that I'm becoming more accurate in more 'specific predictions' in addition to the more general trends. Maybe this is some brain mechanism or process that "burns" an 'easy track' in the neurons so that it speeds up with use. Maybe it's like a 'smoothing' or 'polishing' effect more than just a simple 'carving' out of space. Whoa, where'd that come from?? *snickers*

(Okay, so, I just got a little lost in the smoothing-and-polishing visuals ;-), sorry.)

"Neural Perturbations"


Anyway, this cognitive approach to understanding behavior has successfully spawned a large movement of psycho-spirituality which advocates the idea that we are ultimately in control of our mental environment (and by extension our outer environment somewhat) by adjusting our thoughts and perceptions of the world and how we react to them. The Four Agreements are a reflection of this movement, too, even though the Toltec Wisdom that bases them is much older than modern cognitive psychology. Part of this psycho-spiritual movement's growth has happened because of the compatibility of that older wisdom with the newer 'discoveries.' And in many ways it can and does work for people. We can stop thinking a certain way about things and therefore change our 'reality' (extrinsic and intrinsic environments) within limits.

But at what point does it fail to work? I've always thought that it is at some physical or biological point in the process, a threshold of sorts. I'm tempted to call this the Point of Alchemy*, meaning the point of "an inexplicable or mysterious transmuting," but that term is not optimistic enough for me. ;-)

It's pretty clear that there are many things we can't do just by thinking about it. We can't think up a rose out of thin air. We can't change water into wine just by thinking it. But at some point we are able to alter our reality with our thoughts, and by extension, with our words. And this is pretty much the basis of the Cognitive Therapies as well as the concepts of prayer and magical incantations.

We have lots of 'magic' words - words we can say that change our realities. Probably one of the most powerful is "love." If someone tells us, "I love you," it has the power to make us soar. How is it that one word (or three) can have so much power or 'magic'? And in case someone's heart is so hardened that "love" can't work its magic there is most likely some other word that would work just as well to change that person's reality.

Cognitive therapies are largely based on 'talk therapy' and working on 'controlling' or altering thoughts and behaviors through the use of words. The same is true for prayer (spoken or not). This cognitive practice in whatever form it takes can work at large scales of influence on people just as it can work on individuals. I think a good example might be the way the media can use particular words to alter reality. But again, I'm asking myself about the boundaries, or thresholds, or constraints. ;-)

Let's return to the quote at the beginning about cognitive problem solving. What it seems we need is something to 'consummate' or bridge the gap between the "algorithms" and the "heuristics". Even in psychology we need a 'unifying' theory of everything. Is it some 'physical' or biological process at which this 'alchemy' of reality happens? We know that many psychiatric drugs work by altering the 'chemical imbalances' that result in 'wrong' thoughts and behaviors. It seems we understand the chemistry of that action. But what about the changes that aren't assisted by introduced chemicals? What about those changes we induce ourselves by our own thoughts, etc.? Through biofeedback we do know of some things we can alter by our thoughts, like heartrate, pain relief, etc. But again, we don't know exactly why or how or to what extent.

I certainly hope that whenever someone does discover and 'prove' a Theory of Everything that he/she or another someone will be able to translate it easily enough to terms that describe how our minds work. And in many ways translations are a type of magic words and alchemy too. ;-)


--------
*Alchemy was the medieval chemical science and speculative philosophy aiming to achieve the transmutation of the base metals into gold, the discovery of a universal cure for disease, and the discovery of a means of indefinitely prolonging life. Personally, I can't imagine why anyone would want to live forever, unless you could remain at your youthful peak forever. ;-) And besides, I think that life is indefinitely prolonged no matter what we do. That's probably my Christian upbringing and its "eternal life/eternal damnation" influence showing. ;-)