Friday, November 20, 2009
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Rights v. Taste
Taste, as it applies to....hmmm...let's say the "social realm" generally involves some sort of list of likes and dislikes held in common with most of those around us. Some might call these "social mores" but it all comes back to an element of taste. What do we like or dislike?
The other concept mentioned in the Title may have somewhat of a more concrete meaning than taste. For us Americans, when we think of rights we generally refer to the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and pertinent court cases. These sources outline what we can and cannot do while still abiding by the governing document of this nation. Some people also refer to innate "human rights." Although some definitions differ in the particulars, they can generally be summed up as "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" courtesy of Tom Jefferson. These are our rights that should not be violated by our government or any of its officials, lest we cease, in essence, to be the United States of America.
Now, how the two concepts (rights and taste) complement one another is an entirely different matter. Rights are the basis of our republic (as I mentioned above), but what of taste? Is it merely a funny remnant of the Dark Ages? I move that it is not. Taste, rather, is the natural counterweight to rights.
Take, for example, the Westboro Baptist Church. This organization did at one point in time (not aware of their current status) protest funerals of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that the deaths were God's punishment for homosexuality in the U.S. Now, I am still angered at these actions and wouldn't mind taking a 2x4 to a few myself. The question remains, though, were these actions illegal or distasteful? The First Amendment seems to only flimsily state - "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech." This broad and vague definition has been twisted by citizens and government officials to suit their purposes as the U.S. evolved. For example, the FCC regulates what can be said on the airwaves and Nazis can have marches. It works both ways. The question then comes to why is there such a gut reaction to a Nazi parade that makes us feel as if the sight of hatemongers in tan goosestepping down Main St. should be illegal. Clearly our 200 year old governing document says they have the right to "Heil Hitler!" 'til the cows come home, so why are we still offended? The answer lies in taste.
Taste tells us that Hitler junkies should not be proudly proclaiming their affiliation with the Nazi Party, nor should they be allowed to believe and promote such offensive ideologies in our towns and cities. In this way, I feel that a rebirth of taste will lead us to a more complete and true practice of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
I know the historical angle is a bit overplayed, but I feel it is necessary to recall that the Founding Fathers fought for the Bill of Rights so that a true republic, clothed in liberty (sounds a little histrionic, but I'll go with it), could blossom forth. Freedom of speech was meant to defend patriots speaking out against corruption and tyrrany, not a snot-nosed kid flipping the bird to a police officer. But, without taste, that brat is equal to any Patrick Henry or Samuel Adams. It is for this reason that I earnestly hope for the return of taste to American society.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Vampires, Freud, and Apple Pie
However, what I found most....interesting, is how this lifestyle is perceived as normal and part of our American culture of diversity. Let's talk straight for a bit and think about it---adults dressing-up in costumes on a daily basis and claiming to "need to feed" off of other people's auras.... Not exactly what I nor most folk call normal, but then again their just outcasts, right? Well, not exactly.
Ideas like this make me hearken back to Freud's declaration of religion as "mass hysteria." Although being a God-fearing man myself, I tend to agree with Freud, but with the modification that most religions can be a form of mass hysteria, and some are outright forms of mass hysteria. What religions you might ask? Well, generally any type of religion that seeks to objectify people is a good start. Cannibals, human sacrifices, vampires, skinheads, et al, are all pretty much out, as they see a need to selfishly sacrifice the other in order that they might survive (in contrast to what might be called the sacrifice of Christ for mankind, something which is regrettable to Christians, but an example of self sacrifice FOR the other). Any religion that seeks to regress what little progress we've made in our...oh....few thousand years as a species...is right out. Religions that promote peace, brotherhood, and virtue are comendable, at least, from a psychological standpoint. Even now, when our brothers and sisters die in remote parts of the globe, or just a few miles away, we can be encouraged by he fact that there are men and women who seek to end senseless violence and embrace peace and brotherhood. Any religion that propogates hate, bigotry, and murder is of no use to man.
Just thought I'd throw in that little reflection on Freud, religion, and "diversity." I love America, and this is why I care. I love a country where the descendant of a serf and the descendant of a lord can work side-by-side for a better country. However, I also fear a world where either works solely for his own benefit...
Labels: Christianity, diversity, Freud, mankind, psychiatry, psychology, religion, Vampires
Monday, May 21, 2007
Neurotheology
Damning use of neurotheology tries to use any research to undermine the truth of religion and/or its importance to human beings. This is the way in which the American Humanist Organization considers it, that organization, of course, being atheistic or at least secularist in nature. They see experiments in neurotheology as a means of definitively disproving religion as a mere misfiring of neurons. This same camp also tries to tie religious zeal with a comorbid psychiatric disorder. One of these disorders is a seizure disorder which affects the temporal lobe of the brain. People suffering from this disorder now supposedly show a heightened sense of religious experience, greater use of religious language, etc. Therfore, this camp implies, a sensitivity in the temporal lobe of the brain is that disorder to which we attribute the name of God. Also, hyper-activation of the limbic system of the brain (as happens during LSD intoxication) may also lead to a religious experience. One researcher has even gone so far to build a "God helmet" that activates the temporal lobe using magnetic fields. Most users have reported a religious sort of experience, except those who have no pre-existing religious beliefs (such as Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion). His results have been irreplicable, though, leading some to doubt that the God helmet acts as little more than a placebo.
Informative use of neurotheology seeks to use neurotheology as a means of understanding how religious experience is sensed and processed by the human person. This camp is full of those who are either objective scientists or those theologians and Believers of various faiths who have not condemned the discipline outright. One of the best explanations I've read of what neurothology might mean to this camp is that it might only be discovering an antenna which picks up on the spiritual. Other groups seek to condemn the research outright, but most of these groups are evangelical in nature. Most Evangelical Christianity and most Protestant theology is based on an extremely unscientific approach to God, as whatever humans discover would be more likely to be a deceitful product of our fallen nature than a discovery of God's work in nature.
For myself, I'm pretty interested in the field, being a believer and also being a student of psychology. I think that neurotheology is a bit like exploring the other senses--audition, gustation, touch, olfaction, and sight. The over activity of the limbic system during a religious experience may merely be how the brain processes religious experiences, the same way that neurons fire in other parts of the brain to process other stimuli. Neurotheology may seem a bit atheistic in its nature, and I agree that any in the field may have entered it due to an interest in debunking religious experience. This unscientific/biased attitude is the same attitude Paul Broca entered his infamous brain mass study with. The only problem with cold hard scientific fact is that it's observed and written down by human beings. The same species that took the better part of several 1000 years to discover how the circulatory system works....
An article on neurotheology (interseting if not a bit biased)
Labels: faith, neurology, neurotheology, psychology, religion, theology
Friday, April 27, 2007
Icky Thump!!!
Give it a listen on the radio, or buy the single off of iTunes, or just wait for the album to come out.
LA, LA, LA, LA!!!!
Saturday, March 17, 2007
A Southern Musical Odyssey, to be Expounded Upon as Time Goes On...
Your humble so and so is currently working on a review of his phenomenal musical, spiritual, and psychological journey through the South. Of course I'm still in shock as to how wonderful it was including just how genuinely awesome the people I went with were and how much fun I was able to have. I've never really enjoyed myself that much in such a short period of time. Of course, I don't get out much with peers so it's kinda my own fault, but it was pretty much like a week-long weekend with no hard-core debauchery on my group's part (please ignore the brief Ben and Jerry's Extravaganza as well as two trips to the mythical Sonic).
Why am I waiting so ong to provide reflections? I'm trying to get an artsy perspective and all especially since I had the ridiculous fortune to attend a swingin Blues/Soul/Funk/R & B dance club, a legitimate Dixieland Jazz Band Performance on Bourbon Street, and the Grand Ole Opry. Needless to say, and yet I say it, this was a great experience for somebody as steeped in music as myself. I was able to witness roots and branches of that loving mother called American music (eloquently and literally expressed at B.B. King's Blues Club in Nashville, TN). Whether moaning through a well-played slide guitar, whining through a pedal steel guitar, thumping through a persistent bass line, or blasting through a trumpet, she was there. That ever-pervailing sense of quality in artistic representation. That same rhythm our ancestors circled a campfire with in the good ol' primeval days. That same groove that has carried us on from mammoth hunts to dance clubs is still with us and more alive than ever in the hearts of almost all people around the world waiting for a skilled band or performer to draw it into the open, toy with it a bit, then lovingly set it back in place.
The communal experience of the music placed it in an even more interesting context. Today with iPods, Walkmans, headphones, etc. music is turning into an even more personal experience. This is alright, as it allows a more personal exploration of oneself and possibly the musicians as well, but it also robs an essential element from the grooves of yore--communion. In a dancehall with a live band you either groove or get out. No asking for the latest sappy emo hit, just dance or drop out, brothers and sisters. This experience makes young dance alongside old, codgers and children tap their toes, white and black and red and yellow and brown boogie with reckless abandon. Communion is clearly one of the functions of music and even though one can say communion is always had through others listening privately to the same recording a new level is brought to the communal experience when we are together, all present with one another, all united in appreciation of something at the heart of the human existence--rhythm.
Maybe it's just me brothers and sisters, but this Foolish Freudian Rocker feels everyone everywhere can dance or at least wants to dance. Let it ride, brothers and sisters, let it ride and become part of the congregation.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Well, read the story above and you'll find yet another hilarious doomsday story. Looks as if NASA is afraid an asteroid is gonna kill us all in 2037....
Hmmm.....
Let's see, depending on when theasteroid hits, I'll probably be around...40 when the fateful rock is supposed to hit. I think I'm cool with an asteroid hitting Earth at that time. The thing is that the doomsday clock is continuously ticking and just because someone has a few degrees under his/her belt they're thought to be much more respectable than a preacher.
Signs in the sky, eh? I seem to recall a certain saying about the Apocalypse.....what was it, oh, yes....
"Of that day and hour no one knoweth: no, not the angels of heaven, but the Father alone."
Sounds like pretty wise words...