Categories
Politics Religion/Spirituality

Dualism: Syria and A.I.

(This essay, one of my first–but not the last–of my efforts to consider dualism and oneness as part of our spirituality as well as part of what it means to be fully human, was first written in March, 2016)

My visits to Time magazine are hit and miss; my wife and I go back and forth on the question of whether or not to renew our subscription and further infest our already magazine and paper-cluttered household.

So it must have been serendipity when I picked up the March 7, 2016 issue and was struck by two back to back articles. The first, on the collapse of the Syrian state, described the utter chaos and hopelessness of the war in Syria. Millions are dead, homeless, or trapped and there is little hope that a cease-fire will work, at least not until the Russians first help Assad re-conquer as much devastated land as he can. Not only, the article suggests, is there no “light at the end of the tunnel,” but the tunnel itself seems to be collapsing on its victims, while the world lets it all happen.

The next article, “Encounter with the Archgenius,”  by David Von Drehle, is a discussion of Artificial Intelligence with David Gelernter, a sixty-year old pioneer in the study of A.I. His book, The Tides of Mind: Uncovering the Spectrum of A.I. argues that most in the field of A.I. are dangerously off track because they ignore or refuse to answer the question: “Does it matter that your brain is part of your body?” or “What is the human mind without the human being?”

Categories
Politics

Donald Trump: A Mistake to Correct

It was nearly five years ago that I made a mistake for which I must ask forgiveness. In early December of 2015, I wrote and published in one of those liberal California digital magazines called the L.A. Progressive an article entitled “Donald Trump: Anti-Prophet and Blessing.” 

In this article, I said that Trump was an anti-prophet because, unlike the Old Testament prophets who chided rulers and people when they strayed from the path of ethical righteousness, Trump’s message was the opposite. “His job,” I wrote, “is to encourage us be our worst (unethical) rather than our best selves.”  I called Trump “a demagogue who appeals to the prejudice of the masses” as well as “to the dark side of our character.”

But that is not what I want to apologize for.

Categories
Politics

Can We Find Equilibrium?

Two New York Times opinion columns in early October triggered an outburst of optimism during this chaotic election season.

The first, on October 9, by midwestern novelist and essayist Marilynne Robinson, was titled “Don’t Give Up On America.”  Robinson, who calls herself a “liberal, loyal to the country in ways that make me a pragmatist,” is willing to acknowledge the “many flaws” of the previous Democratic administration while also denouncing the contemptible behavior of the current Republican one.

She hoped that we could “find our way back to equilibrium” by “restoring a sense of the dignity, even the beauty, of individual ethical behavior, of self-restraint, of courtesy in all things.” Doing this, she said, “might help us to like one another, even trust one another, both necessary to a functioning democracy.”

The following day the Times ran a column by the more conservative Russ Douthat assuring readers that “there will be no Trump coup” should the Donald lose the election.  Douthat tried to calm liberal Democratic fear of an authoritarian take-over by pointing out that successful authoritarian leaders control the military and the media in their countries and that Trump controls neither.

 “Our weak, ranting, infected-by-Covid chief executive is not plotting a coup,” he wrote, “because a term like ‘plotting’ implies capabilities he conspicuously lacks.”

These two Times opinion writers, one liberal and the other more conservative, are really (in a normal world) moderates who shoot arrows at those on both the Left and Right sides of the political wall separating the parties.  This wall used to be just a fence with gates that opened.

Can we “find our way back to equilibrium” as Robinson hoped? Can we liberals calm our fears enough to put our remaining energy into getting out the vote instead of writing about a possible Trump coup?

Can we Democrats restore even just a small sense of dignity to our political conversations and display a modicum of respect for democratic behavior instead of gloating in the wake of a Biden victory next month?

Perhaps we can, but only if we first secure that victory by removing Trump and his enablers in the Senate, people like McConnell, Graham, and Grassley who now hold power, and electing a Democratic majority to that body.

And in that event, Democrats also need to avoid the overconfidence and hubris (pride) that Douthat says led to Democratic defeat in 2016.

We can only improve America, a better slogan than “making America great again” by solving problems like the spread of Covid-19 and its accompanying economic recession instead of politicizing these problems.

That course of action might even help create the equilibrium that Robinson seeks; it would certainly be more rational. One might even wonder if problem-solving on the eve of an election might secure President Trump a few more votes.  Wouldn’t this be politically wiser than just proclaiming that the virus is disappearing when it clearly is not?

            Not too long ago, it was common to hear people tell their anxious friends to “just chill.”  The national mood could change after a Democratic victory in November, but only if we can all—Republicans and Democrats alike—“just chill” enough to allow that to happen.

Categories
Politics

Responsible Capitalism

In previous columns I have said that I am not an opponent of capitalism itself, but only of unregulated or uncontrolled capitalism, the sort that puts money ahead of ALL else and makes everything a commodity, including human values.

That is self-defeating capitalism, the kind that is weakening and could destroy our democracy, and one would think economists would deplore this.

Categories
Religion/Spirituality

Religion and Unity

Most religions, especially those considered major or “world religions,” seem to have a love-hate relationship with the idea of unity. They all reflect the philosophical and psychological tension between “the one and the many,”

Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism all promote the idea of ultimate unity–with God or Divinity (however named and understood) and even with other humans. Confucianism, although included in World Religions textbooks, is really a philosophy rather than a transcendental religion. Yet Confucius also aims toward unity, to be attained by “li”– a word meaning proper conduct, propriety or ritual. Beyond that Confucianism is really a human-centered rather than a God-centered philosophy.

Yet, despite commitments to ultimate unity, most religions carve out their own spaces in the spiritual firmament with practices and beliefs that tend to separate rather than unify.

The western religions–Judaism, Islam, and Christianity all claim to worship the same (one and only) God, but do so in ways that pit them against each other like angry siblings. And there is nothing more difficult to resolve than a fight among angry siblings.