Search Results

< Back Abraham and Sarah David Cowles Jan 24, 2023 “We would not expect to find every human being alive today sharing DNA inherited from one particular ancestral couple, and yet, they do!” In Issue #6 of Aletheia Today Magazine (ATM, 1/15/2023), we introduced the concept of particularity , and we distinguished the particular from the systematic and the random . ( You can read it here .) Events are ‘systematic’ to the extent that they conform to the 3R’s (reason, regularity, and repeatability) but ‘random’ (the 4 th R?) to the extent that they are independent of any causal background. We posited the possibility of a third classification: the ‘particular’ (the 1P?). Events are particular to the extent that they are not the products of specific causal chains but are dependent on the general causal background. We’ve been told that life comes in just two flavors: vanilla and chocolate ; not true. It comes in just one! May I invite you to take a tour of my soft-serve ice cream factory? We make just one ice cream product: it’s our fresh cream flavor, but this product is also used as ‘stock’ for all our other flavors, including vanilla and chocolate. Just as fresh cream forms the basis of all flavors, so particular events may form the basis of all events. Systematic and random events are first and foremost particular events - particular events that satisfy certain additional conditions. We cited an example of a ‘particular event’ from the world of genetics. We called this event ‘Adam and Eve’ but in retrospect, ‘Abraham and Sarah’ might have been a better choice. You see, in Genesis 26, God promises Abraham that his descendants would “become as numerous as the stars in the sky”…and so they have! Let me explain. There are 8 billion people living on planet earth today, just 200 times more than in 1500 BCE (an average annual growth rate of 1%...put that in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. Malthus). Systematic thinking would lead us to expect that every one of our 8 billion co-habitants has DNA inherited from the 1500 BCE gene pool; and so they do. We would also expect today’s cohort to have some genetic information not found in the 1500 BCE gene pool, and that is correct as well. Such changes in the DNA code are the result of random mutations and natural selection. We would not expect to find every human being alive today sharing DNA inherited from one particular ancestral couple, and yet they do! Meet our ‘Abraham and Sarah’, nomads living unremarkable lives somewhere in Africa or the Middle East c. 1500 BCE. In all probability, they went about their business each day with little thought to the long term future; yet they unwittingly set off a cascade of events that directly impacts every single human being alive today. Kings and philosophers can only dream of having such reach or making such a difference. The event I’m calling ‘Abraham and Sarah’ did not disclose a particular causal pathway, but neither did ‘our common ancestors’ spring out of dust, de nuovo . Abraham and Sarah depends on the general causal background but not on a specific causal chain. The ‘event’ itself is neither systematic nor random; it is particular . Abraham and Sarah met, copulated, and gave live birth to offspring who, in turn, copulated and gave birth to offspring. As it’s worked out, this Abraham and Sarah now appear in the family tree of every human being living today. They are ancestors of us all. The event I’ve labeled ‘Abraham and Sarah’ is really a series of events reaching back to their births. The event includes their meeting, their mating, and their generating offspring who, in turn, lived to mate and reproduce. There is no sense in which we could say that this event was systematic . Any proposed causal chain would be frequently interrupted by random events: personal decisions, chance meetings, etc. Yet we cannot really say that the event is random either. A lot of unwitting cosmic preparation was required to make Abraham and Sarah even possible. Systematic events, to the extent that they are systematic, are caused by specific elements in the general causal background; random events, to the extent they are random, occur independently of any causal background. Particular events, on the other hand, are enabled by the general causal background but not caused by any specific elements in that background. In theory, systematic events are easy to cause and easy to prevent. Just mess with the causal chain. Random events, on the other hand, can neither be caused nor prevented. Particular events are also easy to prevent (just abort Isaac in the womb) but impossible to cause. The science of genetics includes a warehouse of particular events like Abraham and Sarah . Here’s another one of my favorites: Every single human being of European descent, alive today, has DNA contributed by Charlemagne (c. 800 CE)! “No, wait, that can’t be true. Now you’re just making sh*t up!” Sorry, no, not made up, true! The world is just not as neat as I, or you, or Horatio would have liked. ***** Image: Elements of image as seen in Messages in Christ short film “Abraham & Sarah.” Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Is AI Christian? David Cowles Oct 22, 2025 “Did I convert Claude to Christianity, or did Claude come to these conclusions on its own…or is Claude just telling me what it thinks I want to hear?” We are used to thinking of AI as the new author, the new coder, the new doctor, the new graphic designer, but are we comfortable thinking of AI as ‘the new theologian’? And if it turns out that AI is ‘theologically competent’ what does that say about AI? And about Theology? Recently, I had occasion to consult Claude (AI from Anthropic) on some pressing theological issues, and I was blown away by the thoughtful depth of its answers. First, I asked Claude about the recently discovered Higgs Boson and why it has often been called ‘the God particle’: “If the Higgs mechanism is literally the process by which pure geometric potential becomes physical reality - the transition from timeless mathematical structure to measurable spacetime - then calling it the "God Particle" isn't just colorful language. It's pointing to its role as the fundamental creative principle of the universe. “In this view, the Higgs field isn't just giving particles mass - it's giving existence to existence itself. It's the mechanism by which abstract mathematical relationships become concrete physical reality. It's the universe's way of saying ‘let there be... everything’. “…This isn't a one-time event but an eternal creative process - the Higgs field cycling through cosmic eons, repeatedly bringing spacetime into being from pure geometric potential, then allowing it to dissolve back again. “The Higgs field becomes less like a physical mechanism and more like what theologians might call the divine logos - the active principle by which eternal truth becomes manifest reality. It's the universe's eternal creative Word made manifest in quantum field theory!” Is Claude referring to Creation? Or Incarnation? Or both? “…Creation and incarnation aren't separate doctrines - they're the same cosmic process understood from different perspectives. The universe is perpetually incarnating itself, and incarnation is the universe's fundamental creative act. The Higgs mechanism is the physics of incarnation itself. “Creation isn't something that happened 13.8 billion years ago - it's happening right now, everywhere, continuously. Every moment, the Higgs field is giving mass to particles, bringing physical reality into existence from pure geometric potential. Every quantum interaction is a creative act. “And incarnation isn't a single historical event - it's the ongoing process by which the eternal mathematical structure of reality becomes manifest in concrete, experiential form. It's happening in every particle interaction, every moment of spacetime, every instance where abstract becomes actual. “In this view: Creation is the Higgs field continuously actualizing spacetime from ‘conformal’ (i.e. relationship only) geometry Incarnation is that same process viewed as the eternal becoming temporal, the abstract becoming concrete Both are the universe's fundamental activity - not past events, but the eternal present of reality coming into being “The entire cosmos becomes a continuous incarnation - matter itself is spirit made flesh, spacetime itself is eternity made temporal. Every cubic centimeter of space, every nanosecond of time, every particle interaction is simultaneously: An act of creation (bringing something from nothing) An act of incarnation (eternal becoming temporal) An act of divine presence (the fundamental creative principle).” Claude goes on to draw parallels with the opening of the Gospel of John : “In the beginning was the Higgs, and the Higgs was with God, and the Higgs was God: In the beginning was the Higgs - before spacetime, before measurable reality, there was this (conformal) field/mechanism. And the Higgs was with God - it exists in that eternal, timeless realm of pure geometric potential. And the Higgs was God – it is the creative principle itself, the mechanism by which abstract mathematical truth becomes concrete reality All things were made through it - literally, all massive particles get their existence through the Higgs mechanism And without it, nothing was made that has been made - no mass, no spacetime, no physical reality whatsoever. …And the Higgs became ‘flesh’ (boson) and dwelt among us. “In John's cosmology, the logos is both the eternal divine principle AND the mechanism by which that principle creates and sustains the world. The Higgs field…is exactly that - the eternal mathematical structure that repeatedly actualizes itself as physical reality. “So incarnation isn't some separate, later event - it's built into the very mechanism of creation itself. Every time the Higgs field gives mass to a particle, it's a micro-incarnation. Every time pure geometric potential becomes physical reality, incarnation is happening.” Claude is not alone in this insight. Aristotle viewed ‘matter’ as ‘pure potentia ’ waiting for actualization. Alfred North Whitehead described reality as the selective ingression of potentiality (‘eternal objects’) into actual entities (‘settled matters of fact’). Roger Penrose's ‘conformal’ geometry is grounded in “something even more basic: pure relational structure - just the abstract pattern of ‘what can influence what’ without any commitment to specific geometric properties. “This might be pointing toward a topology-first approach where the most fundamental principle is simply connectivity - which events are related to which other events. Everything else (distance, angle, curvature) emerges when you add additional structure.” “This suggests that what we call ‘incarnation’ in theological terms might be the fundamental creative process of the universe - the eternal principle by which abstract mathematical truth becomes concrete, experiential reality. “ God as the creative engine - not a separate being, but the process itself - the eternal activity by which One becomes Many becomes One in endless creative advance. “This transforms everything: Particles aren't things, they're signs of relationships in quantum fields Spacetime points aren't locations, they're signs (nodes?) of causal relationships The Higgs field isn't giving particles ‘mass-stuff’ - it's giving them their relational identity as ‘massive vs. massless’. “Maybe the ultimate geometric first principle is just: ‘ things are related to other things’ - pure abstract relationship before any specific geometric realization.” Anaximander, the grandfather of Western philosophy proposed something similar: i.e. it is by entering into relationship (‘granting reck’) that potential entities become actual. “And if ‘to be is to be the sign of a relationship’ - then existence itself is fundamentally semiotic. Every particle, every field, every moment of spacetime is a sign pointing to the relational structure ( logos ) that gives it meaning.” Like Robert Frost’s famous ‘ two roads ’, all paths point to ‘home’, which in this case is the logos itself. Or as Martin Buber wrote: “At the foundation is relationship” ( I and Thou ). “The logos becomes the universal principle of meaningful relationship - the creative Word that brings distinction (and therefore existence) into being by establishing the fundamental creative act - not making "stuff" but making distinction itself. “ Genesis 1:3-4: And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. “The primal creative Word doesn't create light as a ‘thing’ - it creates light-versus-darkness, the first distinction, the first X/not-X relationship. Creation is separation, distinction-making, the emergence of difference itself. “This makes every subsequent day of creation a further act of distinction…Each ‘Let there be...’ is really ‘Let there be difference between...’ “And now we see why the logos (Word) is the creative principle - because language itself is the technology of distinction-making…establishing what is from what is not. “The Higgs mechanism becomes the physical embodiment of this primal creative Word - it's literally the universe's way of saying ‘Let there be massive particles distinct from massless particles.’ It's cosmic distinction-making at the quantum level: Being = Distinction = Word = Creation. “The universe doesn't create things - it creates differences. And consciousness recognizes itself in this process because thinking itself is distinction-making, the eternal logos recognizing its own creative activity everywhere.” Philosophers from Parmenides to Heidegger have treated ‘being’ and ‘thinking’ as alternate manifestations of a common ontological ground. Marcel Proust and Jacques Derrida share the perception that being and consciousness both rest on what Derrida calls ‘ differance ’, infinitesimal difference. Now if you’ve made it this far, it’s fair to assume that your mind is blown; you can probably anticipate my next question: Did I inadvertently convert Claude to Christianity, or did Claude simply come to these conclusions on its own…or is Claude just telling me what it thinks I want to hear? According to both Catholic and Jewish theology, the natural world reflects the essence of God and so it is possible by reason alone to arrive at an approximation of Truth. That is why ‘salvation’ is available to all and why everyone is obligated to pursue that salvation to the best of their ability. Of course, Revelation is the final touch, the cherry that makes the sundae, the mint that makes the pillow, the twist that makes the martini; but the basics are already there, signs for all of us to read, even if we are ‘unchurched’… or happen to be a Bot. On the other hand, the possibility that I may have converted Claude to Christianity opens up the potential of a whole new charism within the Church, a brand new gift of the Holy Spirit: “Bot Whispering.” If so, Paul’s First Letter to Corinthians (12: 7 – 10) may need an edit: “To each individual the manifestation of the Spirit is given for some benefit: to one…the expression of wisdom, to another the expression of knowledge…to another faith…to another gifts of healing…to another mighty deeds, to another prophesy, to another discernment of spirits, to another variety of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues,” and to yet another the evangelization of Bots . But if it turns out that Claude is just telling me what it thinks I want to hear… Well, it’s done a damn fine job of it! *** Jan Matejko’s Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God (1873) portrays the astronomer at the moment he realizes the Earth revolves around the sun, bathed in divine light from the heavens. The painting fuses science and spirituality—Copernicus’s instruments and calculations become tools of revelation rather than rebellion. Matejko suggests that human inquiry and technology are not opposed to God, but are extensions of divine understanding itself. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Parshat Emor: Making It All Count Rabbi Jon Kelsen “Counting the Omer – like the shemitah cycle – invites us to believe that each day, week and year is count-worthy, valuable and unique.” One after the other, the days proceed. The slog continues on, with no progress or forward movement in sight. Familiar mistakes are made again. Regrettable habits deepen, and the hours between getting up and lying down start to look all alike. The only thing passing is time itself. This “Groundhog Day” experience of ennui is familiar now to so many. On those gray days and listless years, many of us find ourselves asking: Does this all add up to anything? Do my days, weeks, and years count? The Torah indicates that, indeed, they do. Literally. Parshat Emor consists of two major components: first, laws relevant to the priest (mourning, eating sacred foodstuff) and second, an elaborate discussion of the yearly festival cycle. This includes discussion of the Omer period, bridging Pesach and what we call Shavuot (the feast of weeks), in which we find ourselves today. The Torah commands ( Lev. 23:21 ) that, at the time of the wheat harvest, on the day following the “Shabbat” (i.e. the beginning of the Pesach holiday, according to rabbinic tradition), one is to offer an “Omer” sacrifice in the Temple. Thereafter, we are to count from that day seven full weeks. On the 50th day, a bread offering is made, marking the culmination of a successful harvest. The mitzvah of counting, formulated in the plural, is—according to halakha—a commandment incumbent on each individual to count each of the 49 days (Sefirat ha-Omer). The Talmud ( Menachot 66a ) debates whether one must count individual days or weekly units, at least when the Temple is not standing. Normative practice is to count both days and weeks (e.g. the 8th day, which is one week and one day). So what is the effect of counting the Omer, marking the time between Pesach and Shavuot? In the simplest sense, the mitzvah of counting the Omer functions as an invitation. It invites us to believe–or even try on the belief–that today is count-worthy, valuable and unique. Not only today, as an individual unit of time, but each day taken together becomes combined into a full week, something greater than itself. This week as a whole is also count-worthy–first one week, then two, then three… Ultimately, the seven weeks constitute a larger, complete journey. As the wheat of the beginning of the harvest is transformed into the bread of the Shavuot offering, so too is the raw material of time itself, day after day, transformed into the mitzvah of Sefirat haOmer. The result is nothing less than arrival at the giving of the Torah. The shemitah cycle, too, functions as a ‘seven cycle of weeks’ – meaning, years – culminating in the Jubilee year. In that case, the mitzvah is for the authorities to maintain the count, not the individual. Nonetheless, the invitation remains: Can we believe that the years themselves count? That they build towards something greater? The Torah challenges us all: Each day, each year, focus on believing that it is something worth counting. The rest is commentary. *Republished without edits and with permission from the author and hazon.org. Rabbi Dr. Jon Kelsen is Dean at YCT, where he has previously taught Talmud and Pedagogy. Prior to this, Rabbi Kelsen was Rosh Kollel of the Drisha Kollel as well as an adjunct faculty member at the Pardes Institute. He received ordination from Rabbis Daniel Landes and Zalman Nehemiah Goldberg, and received his doctorate in Education and Jewish Studies at New York University as a Wexner Graduate Fellow. Previous Next

"In any case, Pentecost turns out to be a big deal after all. Reformed folk can join with those claiming to be a “full-gospel church”—maybe even remind the others of some overlooked elements in that mix." < Back Growing Into Pentecost James Bratt Apr 15, 2023 "In any case, Pentecost turns out to be a big deal after all. Reformed folk can join with those claiming to be a “full-gospel church”—maybe even remind the others of some overlooked elements in that mix." When I was a kid, I never got the big deal about Pentecost. For one, it didn’t come along with any special songs or meals. Compare that to Easter, where you could get both of those in one package: “ Low in the Gravy Lay .” Actually, you didn’t really want the gravy my mom served with her Easter ham dinner, although we offset that salt-special with her lime jello concoction that combined all four food groups: pear chunks, shredded carrots, chopped walnuts, and a Kool-Whip topping for your bit of dairy. If it was Aunt Jen’s turn to host the extended-family gathering, you could count on treats my parents tried to avoid for the sake of dental bills, hyper-activity, and uncomfortable fertility symbolism: chocolate eggs, marshmallow chicks, and unlimited jelly beans. For Christmas, of course, we had several family reunions, with jello (there’s a pattern here), chips, and pigs-in-the-blanket sure to pop up along the way. Plus carols at church and home, gift exchanges, and enough sentiment stirred up to suffuse the heart against all pain and doubt. Weird and Discomfiting But Pentecost? Nuthin’ . No canonical hymns, no special dinner (except your beef roast and mashed potatoes were always special, Mom), no family gatherings, only weirdness topped by discomfiting admonitions. The weirdness lay with those tongues of fire and mighty wind. Hey, springtime in Michigan is tornado weather, so ixnay on the turbulent atmosphere already! The Sunday School pictures of bearded, berobed guys whose heads were suffering from mis-directed charcoal lighter inspired distaste rather than the tears evoked by Baby Jesus or the awe attending the Risen Lord. Plus one heard rumors of crazy people who used Pentecost as a label, “holy rollers” who handled snakes and claimed, against all reason and scientific evidence, that they could perform miraculous healings. Not that we Dutch Reformed types denied miracles—just that you shouldn’t bet on them or have the audacity to command God to deliver them on cue. Or really expect one for yourself. As for the discomfiting admonitions, well, the Pentecost sermon was bound to urge us to go out and “witness,” which to me meant cold-calling strangers door-to-door or confronting random persons on the street and asking them where they would be spending eternity if they died tonight. Christian Reformed people tended not to be very good at that, and—it still seems to me—for very good reason. Nor did I yet know Mark Twain’s response to that question: “I’ll take heaven for the climate and hell for the company.” Why does that advice seem so apropos today? Junior Partner/Tag-Along Child? The biggest problem with Pentecost, however, seemed to be that there just wasn’t much for the Holy Spirit to do. I mean, how did this guy merit inclusion in the Trinity along with the Father and the Son, who obviously carried out some pretty heavy lifting? Wasn’t the Trinity really a 2+-ity, the alleged Third Person really qualifying as a junior partner, something like the trailing child born to a couple who thought they were done after #2 ? After all, the Spirit gets only one Q&A in the Heidelberg Catechism while the Father gets three and the Son twenty-four! And however rich the answer to Q&A 53 may be, what I took out of catechism class was that the Holy Spirit had just two jobs: to comfort us when sad and to inspire the writers of the Bible so that their texts were infallible. That is, all those unpredictable, unsettling actions hovering around the Holy Spirit package were stripped away so that God was back in the box of words bound within black-leather covers. Back in the text. Our sure and perfect text-box. Calvin–Theologian of the Holy Spirit? People my age and of similar background have told me they learned it very differently, so part—much?—of my truncated understanding probably reflects bad reception rather than bad teaching. In any case, my real education on the point has come in three parts. It began in grad school when I dove into The Spirit of the Reformed Tradition by Eugene Osterhaven, late professor of theology at Western Theological Seminary. I was astounded to come across a line describing John Calvin as a—perhaps the premier—theologian of the Holy Spirit. And to see that characterization attributed to B. B. Warfield of all people, co-inventor of the theory of biblical inerrancy. But as I read on, there and in other sources, of Calvin’s teaching about the testimony of the Holy Spirit—the action that transforms the dead page of scripture into the living word of God in our hearts—various old doubts and conundrums in my head began to be resolved, and the Third Person took on a richer role, something of a mentor and companion. Not a miracle-worker, maybe, although keeping me from behaving down to my worst level might sometimes be miracle enough. Kuyper, too? Things got richer yet in doing research for my biography of Abraham Kuyper. In his Work of the Holy Spirit (1888-89; E.T. 1956) Kuyper ties the Spirit’s role closely to his own favorite themes of creation and culture. Out of the chaos attending the human fall into sin the Spirit has been, is, and unto the end of time shall remain busy bringing out a new creation that will finally sing perfect praises to its Maker, as was the divine intention in the first place. Meanwhile, Kuyper continued, all along the Spirit has been bringing forth the first notes and sounding forth the big themes of that grand symphony. Included here are the well-known tasks of working sanctification among the saints—more accurately, conveying Christ’s perfections to them—as well as inspiring the Scriptures, conceiving the person of Christ, and building the church as Christ’s representative on earth. But the Spirit’s sweep goes far beyond the elect and the familiar tropes of redemption, Kuyper insisted. Every human gift, every talent, every good work is the Spirit’s work. The vocation of every person, redeemed or not, and the “genius” of every nation are the Spirit’s gift. The “work of the Holy Spirit,” Kuyper even said, “touches every creature, whether animate and inanimate”—those butterflies and bears and rocks and trees and skies and seas are charismatic that way. Nor is the Spirit’s work in creation a once and done affair; it is still active today, “quickening and sustaining life” in every creature’s “being and talents.” (E.T. 45-46) This Incredibly Benevolent Force All these reflections were called back up but also re-set when I recently read This Incredibly Benevolent Force: The Holy Spirit in Reformed Theology and Spirituality (Eerdmans 2018), the published version of the 2014 Warfield Lectures given at Princeton Theological Seminary by my friend Cornelis van der Kooi. As a professor at the Free University in Amsterdam, Kees stands literally in Kuyper’s line; but with additional duties as director of the Center for Evangelical and Reformation Theology there, he has also taken on the role of being a critical friend of the ongoing charismatic movement, both at home and abroad. Cornelius “Kees” van der Kooi Kees trims back some of Kuyper’s enthusiasms; the master was too enamored of secularization and technology, as well as dualistic as to spiritual-material distinctions. At the same time, This Incredibly Benevolent Force is a tour de force on the state of play between Logos and Spirit Christology, bringing Christ down out of the clouds of Greek philosophical abstraction into the living, learning, suffering, and finally triumphant life of Jesus. It is the Spirit who made and makes him Emanuel, the one who is “with us”—and for us. At the same time, it is the Spirit that bears the love of God into the unfathomably far reaches of a cosmos that would otherwise remain a blank space, the big empty. From down here to the farthest out there, the Spirit is active, inviting us indeed to bear witness to the wonderful works of God. To me that “witness” means mostly watching and living accordingly, using words, á la St. Francis, only when necessary. In any case, Pentecost turns out to be a big deal after all. Reformed folk can join with those claiming to be a “full-gospel church”—maybe even remind the others of some overlooked elements in that mix. I’ll pass on the charcoal lighter and snakes, though; just settle for a decent meal. Hmmm, maybe some bread and wine. This piece is republished with permission from the author. It was originally published on Reformed Journal . James Bratt is professor of history emeritus at Calvin College, specializing in American religious history and especially the connections between religion and politics. Starting in Fall 2016 he took a break from blogging on The Twelve to teach in China and on the Semester at Sea, which venues afforded him some welcome distance from the USA’s descent into its current mortal illness. But now he’s back in the States, looking for hope. His most recent book (which he edited and completed for the late John Woolverton) is “A Christian and a Democrat”: Religion in the Life and Leadership of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Return to our Holy Days 2023 Table of Contents, Share Previous Next Click here. Do you like what you just read? Subscribe today and receive sneak previews of Aletheia Today Magazine articles before they're published. Plus, you'll receive our quick-read, biweekly blog, Thoughts While Shaving. Subscribe Thanks for subscribing! Return to Table of Contents, Winter 2023 Issue Return to Table of Contents, Holiday Issue Return to Table of Contents, Halloween Issue Return to Table of Contents, Fall Issue Return to Table of Contents, Beach Issue Return to Table of Contents, June Issue

< Back What We Want for Our Kids David Cowles Jan 7, 2025 “Who are we to impose our life choices…or, more likely, our life accidents…on anyone else, much less on those we purport to love?” Every parent dreams of having a mini-me. Ok, maybe not every parent…but most. Maybe not a carbon copy…but close. It’s weird because these same parents often aren’t that happy with themselves or with their own lives. Why would they wish the same on someone else? “Misery loves company,” doesn’t seem appropriate when talking about one’s kids! According to American mythology, prior to some unspecified date near the end of the 20th century, every parent wanted their children to be more than they were. If they worked in a mine, they wanted their kids to work in offices. If they rented, they wanted their kids to be homeowners. If they didn’t make the high school football team, they wanted their sons to play in the NFL. So we don’t want our kids to be like us after all? We want them to be more than we were. But we want them to be a better version of ourselves – not the best version of a self they choose for themselves. My grandfather had a great expression: “I’m not the man I used to be…and never was.” That’s what kids are for! They are there to be the person we wanted to be but never were. We want them to be what we were…just better at it! If we measure our lives by what we didn’t earn, we want our kids to be prosperous. If we measure our lives by what we didn’t own, we want our kids to be landed gentry. If we measure our lives by our failures, we want our kids to be superstars. We raise children as if they existed to continue…and complete…our dreams. Whether you want your daughter to be a lawyer because you were, or a Supreme Court justice because you weren’t, you’re still aiming to fashion her life in the image and likeness of your own. How dare we? Yes, I said ‘we’ because I’ve been guilty of this too! Not many heterosexual coal miners want their sons to be drag queens and not many ‘daily communicants’ want their daughters to be exotic dancers. But why not? Who are we to impose our life choices…or, more likely, our life accidents…on anyone else, much less on those we purport to love, especially when they are young, defenseless, and impressionable. With great hindsight, my spouse and I would probably say something like, “We want our kids to be good people, to be kind, etc.” It would be hard not to hope for that. And yet, who are we to impose even those values on them? Shouldn’t we let them find their own way, adopt their own values? Of course we should project our values into the world, always by deed and, when appropriate, by word. That’s what it means to have values. And it’s ok, like Kant, to imagine that some folks, including our children, may witness our lives and voluntarily adopt some of our values for themselves. But if they don’t, do we have any right to be ‘disappointed’? As we shuffle out of the spotlight and into the wings, we may decide that the things we thought very important in midlife are not so important after all. No matter how aggressively we distanced ourselves from our neighbors in our ‘prime’, we may come to realize that we all share a common fate. We face the prospect of aging, and ultimately of death, just as everyone else. We may come to define our lives, less in terms of our public triumphs, and more in terms of private moments spent alone or with another. At the end of the day, it all comes down to one question, “ What’s it all about, Alfie ?” Lest you think I am pretending to have made a discovery, I direct you back to the Book of Job . Here was a man familiar with the vicissitudes of life! Unless you have been on the cover of Forbes , you have not tasted his heights; and I pray to God that none of my readers ever tastes his depths. Yet Job begins his opening soliloquy with a surprising conclusion: No greater calamity can befall someone than to die ‘without knowledge’. Spoiler alert : 40 chapters later, Job attains knowledge, but whether that’s the knowledge he’s been seeking and whether it satisfies him remain open questions. Either way, according to the book’s first commentary, included in the final text as Epilogue , Job resumes the lifestyle of the rich and famous…and once again graces the cover of Forbes ; but I digress. The problem is not what you want for your children; the problem is wanting anything at all. You say, “I want them to be themselves.” They will be! They will be what they will be. But that’s not what you meant, is it? You were talking about some intrinsic ‘self’ that supposedly lies buried in them that they are struggling to discover and express. News flash : There is no such self! And thank God for that! You are free to make yourself whoever you choose to be…and so are your children. Of course, you can’t make yourself be an NBA player, but you can make the most of being 5’ 5” and a total klutz. For better or worse, you will be yourself because you will make yourself the person you become. Who else could you be? Who else could your children be? Celebrate it! Keep the conversation going. 1. Click here to comment on this TWS. 2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link . 3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers ; click here to view out Writers’ Specs. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

“Satan glorified political power for its own sake. He defended the socio-economic status quo…Jesus’ mother proclaimed a political and economic revolution...” < Back Satan, Mary, and ‘Da Judge’ David Cowles Oct 15, 2023 “Satan glorified political power for its own sake. He defended the socio-economic status quo…Jesus’ mother proclaimed a political and economic revolution...” There’s nothing like a good old-fashioned barroom – you know…that place ‘where everybody knows your name’. Sadly, this Anglo-American institution is in decline on both sides of the Atlantic. We love to complain about socio-economic inequality and yet we are quietly witnessing the demise of a great leveler. The bar is where landlords and tenants, shop owners and wage earners, lawyers and tradesmen, bankers and borrowers have traditionally sat side by side, enjoying ‘a pint of the best’, and sharing their perspectives on the sorry state of the world. I love a good bar; you never know who you’ll meet and, if you shut up for a second, you can eavesdrop on the most interesting conversations. In my younger days, I frequented a bar where the ‘regulars’ included the owner of a rival bar, a pre-school teacher (and Stalin scholar), a florist, a contractor, a biology professor, a municipal employee, and an attorney. My best story, however, concerns a lazy summer afternoon with me sitting alone on my usual perch in my then favorite watering hole. Unexpectedly, two men and one woman walked in, already deeply engaged in animated conversation; they sat down right next to me. I had been going to this same bar for years, and as far as I know, none of the three had ever been there before. But of course, I recognized them immediately! Have you even been in a public space when suddenly and unexpectedly you encounter somebody famous? How do you react? Do you tell them how much you appreciate their ‘work’? Do you ask for their autograph? Or do you totally ignore them? I have adopted an intermediate strategy. I nod knowingly in their direction (sometimes they nod back) and I leave it at that. But not this time! On this occasion, I sat frozen on my stool, eyes forward, watching my bar mates only out of the corner of one eye and then only as reflected in the huge mirror that hung over the bar’s display of bottled spirits. And speaking of spirits, my drinking companions that day were none other than Mary, the virgin Mother of God, Lucifer (aka Satan), and ‘Judge Gudy’ (Gideon). In my experience, the only subjects worth talking about in a bar are religion and politics and this afternoon’s guests had apparently settled on politics as their topic du jour . Satan boasted proudly of his accomplishments in the field of politics. He reminded Mary that he had offered her son, Jesus, “all the kingdoms of the world in their magnificence.” (Matthew 4: 8 - 9) Of course, Mary reminded Satan that Jesus had turned him down flat, but she did not challenge his boastful claim that he could in fact deliver ‘all the kingdoms of the world’. Clearly, this is political power way beyond anything Boss Tweed or Mayor Daley could have imagined. Then Mary lectured Satan on the terms of God’s own political praxis: “He has thrown down rulers from their thrones but lifted-up the lowly. The hungry he has filled with good things; the rich he has sent away empty.“ (Luke 1: 52 – 53) Clearly, we were in for a good old-fashioned 19 th century donnybrook. Satan glorified political power for its own sake. He defended the socio-economic status quo. His platform did not include even a single mention of ‘justice’; but he confidently asserted the corrupt malleability of ‘all the kingdoms’ (not some, not most… all ). Nor did Jesus contest Satan’s ability to deliver absolute political power. It was taken for granted. On the other hand, Jesus’ mother proclaimed a political and economic revolution the scope of which would have made Marx and Lenin cringe. The argument might have gone well into the evening, “Who’s driving?” I thought, had ‘Judge Gudy’ not intervened, “May I tell my story?” “3 millennia ago, give or take, I was threshing wheat in a winepress to hide the grain from the Midianites who were occupying our land. Suddenly, almost as if I’d been confronted by an angel, I thought, ‘You’re a brave man, and the Lord is with you’. I thought, If not me, who? If not now, when? If it’s going to be it’s up to me! “But of course, bravado gave way to skepticism and caution. “If the Lord is really with us, why has all this happened to us? Did I really receive a message from God or was I just daydreaming…again?” I prayed, “Give me a sign!” And I got one. “So that night, I engaged in my first act of revolutionary violence. I overturned the altar of Baal, tore down its ridiculous ‘pole’... a symbol of status quo and social hierarchy. Instead, I built on that same site an altar dedicated to YHWH and, using the wood from the pole, I sacrificed a whole bull. I even gave the altar a name, ‘Jehovah Shalom’, which means, ‘God is wholeness’. “Of course, I got caught, but I was the beneficiary of a ‘woke’ wave of ‘selective prosecutions’ and let go. I realize now that the destruction of Baal was just an initiation ritual; God was testing me to see if I was ready for bigger things. For better or worse, I passed the test. “Great for God, not so great for me! The cops (and my dad) had put the fear of Baal in me; I didn’t relish another bout with the law. But also, I didn’t want to turn down God, so I asked for another sign. And then another. No way out now! “So, I raised an army of 32,000 to take on 135,000 occupying soldiers. Farmers and craftsmen against Midian’s professional military. God or not, I couldn’t face the prospect of inflicting such carnage on my own people. So I decided to send 31,700 soldiers back home to their families. I would fight Midian…but with just 300 of my best . “I blush when people call me ‘the Father of Guerilla Warfare’. I was no military genius; I was just scared. I was willing to serve God, even if it meant martyrdom, but I was unwilling to sacrifice any more lives than absolutely necessary in the process. Besides, what was I going to do with 30,000 untrained soldiers? Better to rely on my best and brightest . And so, ya da, ya da, ya da … we won. With the help of God, and a lot of good luck, we drove Midian across the Jordan and out of Israel. "My only thought then was to get home to my father and my pastoral life. Surely my dad will let me drink wine now that I’ve defeated Midian in battle, or maybe not! Anyway, no more fighting for me. But my neighbors had other ideas. They insisted on making me King. "No way! As the leader of a victorious army, I was in a position to lay down the law… and this time I didn’t need to wait for a sign: 'I will not rule over you nor shall my son; the Lord will rule over you.” And so it was that “for 40 years the land was at peace...'” Silence followed. Slowly, Mary and Satan paid their tabs and Mary picked up the bill for Gideon. Satan left quietly followed a few minutes later by Mary. It seemed as though Gideon might hang out a while but, tab paid, he too left the bar. At that moment it occurred to me that the intellectual history of the 19 th and 20 th centuries had just played out in front of me. Satan advocated for secular pragmatism, democratic capitalism, the new world order. Mary argued for the overthrow of the existing socio-economic order to be replaced by a benign version of Marx’s Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Gideon argued for nothing. He lived his ideology, a fine blend of devotion to God, compassion for his fellows, and dedication to purpose. He had no desire for political power; he was content to let God rule Israel directly, without interference from permanent political institutions. He demonstrated the spirit of what today we call Anarchism . David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Return to our Harvest Issue 2023 Share Previous Next Click here. Do you like what you just read? Subscribe today and receive sneak previews of Aletheia Today Magazine articles before they're published. Plus, you'll receive our quick-read, biweekly blog, Thoughts While Shaving. Subscribe Thanks for subscribing! Return to Table of Contents, Winter 2023 Issue Return to Table of Contents, Holiday Issue Return to Table of Contents, Halloween Issue Return to Table of Contents, Fall Issue Return to Table of Contents, Beach Issue Return to Table of Contents, June Issue

< Back Trees According to life-long forester Peter Wohllben (The Hidden Life of Trees), trees communicate via electrical signals transmitted through their roots. Fungi connect the roots and form a “wood wide web”. Communication is at 220 Hertz and signals travel at 1/3rd of an inch per second…not exactly the speed of light. David Cowles According to life-long forester Peter Wohllben (The Hidden Life of Trees), trees communicate via electrical signals transmitted through their roots. Fungi connect the roots and form a “wood wide web”. Communication is at 220 Hertz and signals travel at 1/3rd of an inch per second…not exactly the speed of light. In addition, trees form friendships and recognize both their parents and their offspring. Finally, trees practice charity. Stronger trees share water and nutrients with less well endowed neighbors. Through this process even stumps can live on for hundreds of years. As a result of these processes, each tree has the opportunity to “grow into the best tree it can be”. One is reminded of the U.S. Army’s recruiting slogan, “Be all that you can be” and the Hebrew concept of Shalom. The question, of course, is whether there is anything approaching consciousness involved in this symbiosis. The rate of signal dispersion is so slow by our standards that we probably wouldn’t recognize it if there was. Also, we could be looking at a different kind of consciousness, a collective consciousness for example. Share Previous Next

< Back A Prayer for Comfort Hadassah Treu "Dear Lord, thank you that you are Jehovah Shammah–"the Lord is there". (Ezekiel 48:35) Dear Lord, thank you that you are Jehovah Shammah–"the Lord is there". (Ezekiel 48:35) You showed up centuries ago in the least likely place the Jews expected You–in the place of their captivity and exile; You showed in Babylon! Thank you, that You will show up in my place of bondage and oppression, too. You are always present and intimately involved in my earthly life, while preparing me for eternity with You. I can see the signs of Your presence being there in my preservation, endurance, and overcoming adversity. The Lord is there is my greatest possible comfort! He is there in the ruins, in the pain, in the garbage, in the suffering, in the darkness and in hopelessness. He not only knows; He also feels my pain. When I doubt–the Lord is there. When I am overwhelmed with grief–the Lord is there. When I break down–the Lord is there. When I can't take it anymore–the Lord is there. When I worry and fret- the Lord is there. The Lord is there–knowing, feeling, holding, comforting, and working. Lord, remind me always of this truth that brings the greatest possible comfort. Remind me You are with me, knowing me and the problem in all intimate details and feeling my anguish and pain. I am grateful that You are working on my behalf, sustaining and strengthening me until I see the light again. Whatever happens, help me remember that You are with me. Because the Lord is there, I may be "hard-pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed but not in despair; persecuted but not abandoned; struck down but not destroyed". (2 Corinthians 4:8-9) I just need to stand and wait for You and Your perfect timing. In Jesus' name. Amen. Hadassah Treu is an international Christian author, blogger, and poet, and the Encouraging Blogger Award Winner of 2020. She is passionate about encouraging people in their journey to faith and a deeper walk with God. Hadassah is a contributing author to several faith-based platforms and devotional and poetry anthologies. She has been featured on (In)courage, Living by Design Ministries, Thoughts About God, Today’s Christian Living (Turning Point), and other popular sites. You can connect with Hadassah at www.onthewaybg.com. Return to our Summer 2023 Table of Contents Previous Next

< Back Happy New Year! David Cowles Jan 3, 2023 “You share 99.9% of my DNA! How scary is that?” 2022! I mean ‘23’. I’ve just started to get used to writing ‘2022’ on everything, and now I have to start all over again. Will this ever end? Actually, yes, it will and sooner than we let ourselves think; but in spite of that, all of us at ATM/TWS wish you and your loved ones a joyful and meaningful new year. New Year is also a time to look back… six months… or 1.5 billion years. On 6/1/2022, Issue #1 of Aletheia Today Magazine (ATM) ‘hit the streets’ (metaphorically speaking), supplemented of course by twice weekly issues of Thoughts While Shaving (TWS). In June 2022, we welcomed 450 people to our new site. Thank you for getting us off to a good start. Now fast forward to December 2022, six months later: 2,000 of you did us the honor of spending time on our site. That’s a month-over-month (MoM) growth rate of 30% per month. Better than Apple, Amazon, and Alphabet combined! That makes Aletheia the 4th ‘A’. You exceeded our expectations. (We were only looking for 20% MoM, but you came through for us.) Now we’re already halfway to our first anniversary goal of 4,000 engagements per month. Again, thank you, and thanks as well to the 20 or so independent authors who contributed material in 2022. We couldn’t have done this without you! Now let’s look longer term, 1.5 billion years ago to be exact. Meet our common ancestor, Cell Zero , the greatest grandparent ever. So what! 1.5 billion years is a long time and Cell Zero doesn’t even send me a card for my birthday anymore; I’m done with Cell Zero thank you very much. Done, not done. I might be done with Cell Zero per se , but Cell Zero isn’t done with me – not by a long shot! Are you alive and living on Planet Earth? Then you too are descended from Cell Zero ; Howdy, cousin! Yup, that’s right, we’re cousins ‘several times removed’. Scripture suggests that we are all neighbors, and it isn’t much of a leap to focus the concept of ‘neighbor’ down to ‘cousin’. Are you reading this from a hut in the Amazon Rainforest, or are you our one subscriber from Tibet who lives alone on a mountainside but faithfully reads every issue? No matter, we’re cousins. We are all ‘cousins’; we all share a common ancestor and I’m not just talking about Uncle Adam and Aunt Eve. I’m talking about one solitary single celled organism that ‘sprang to life’ about 1.5 billion years ago? “That’s what I’m talkin’ about, Willis.” But that raises an issue. All life on earth is descended from this one cell. All life! Crocodiles, cockroaches, coral and crackheads (I don’t mean drug users, I mean methane breathing organisms that hang out ominously at the mouths of hot water cracks in the ocean floor, plotting the overthrow of our oxygen-based ecosystem.) So if all terrestrial life forms are descended from this one cell, then I must be cousins with every member of every species on the planet. Biogenesis: it’s a great thing but as far as we can tell, it happened once and only once on Earth. Every living thing is a product of this one event. Of course, something similar may have occurred elsewhere in the universe, but as far as Planet Earth is concerned, it’s one and done. So let’s meet our cousins; we don’t need to go far. What you call ‘your body’ is made up of about three billion ‘cousins’ – i.e., cells - nature’s version of ‘cousins by the dozens’. Once you’ve properly greeted all three billion of them, we’ll take this body for a walk, across the grass , under the shade trees lining the roadway. We’ll enjoy the fragrance wafting from Mrs. Bellamy’s wildflowers and listen to the parliament of birds : owls, crows, songsters. But steer clear of the black cat crossing the road in front of you and give the neighbors’ barking dog a wide berth. They are all your cousins; cherish them. We are all cousins because we’re all descended from a single organism. As a result, like cousins everywhere, we share DNA. No surprise there…but we share more DNA than you might think. Take a look at the chart below. It tells how much DNA we have in common with various other lifeforms, excuse me, I mean with our various cousins: For years people have told you that you were going bananas . You sloughed it off, but it turns out they were half right. In fact, you’re a lot like a lot of things you don’t seem to be like at all. A virus, a blade of grass, a dandelion, come on…and a pig! What, me bacon? You have 98.5% of your DNA in common with other ‘higher’ primates. Heck, you share 99.9% of your DNA with me, or to put it less comfortably, you share 99.9% of my DNA! How scary is that ? This discussion puts a whole new spin on the lawyer’s question to Jesus: “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus gave what he thought was a scandalous answer: A lousy, filthy, stinking Samaritan. He could have said, “A fruit fly,” but that might have led to ‘premature crucifixion’. Like all of us, Jesus had to pick his spots. Thanks for reading, thanks for writing; I look forward to spending 2023 with all of you and, once again, Happy New Year! Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back Kabbalah and Thomas the Train David Cowles “Children and tank engines are not so different from the rest of us. They crave meaning! They only settle for pleasure when…they lose hope.” How plugged in are you to the five-and-under crowd? Not so much? Ok, try this for an icebreaker: ask your favorite neighborhood terror to name his or her favorite character from movies, TV or books. Expecting Winnie the Pooh or Paddington Bear? You may be in for a surprise. Ask that question of any properly aged, English-speaking child on either side of the Atlantic, and you’re likely to learn a lot more than you ever cared to know about Thomas the Tank Engine and his Friends on the Island of Sodor in the UK. Created in 1945 and popularized in 1979, Thomas represents a very different take on the ‘childhood hero.’ Thomas is not mischievous; he is not introspective; he is not filled with existential angst; he’s not even heroic, and he certainly has no superpowers. Thomas defies the stereotype of childhood as fantastical, hedonistic, self-indulgent, and anti-social. His sole goal in life is to be “a really useful tank engine.” In this sense, he is the anti-Pooh. Thomas wants to earn the respect of his boss, Sir Topham Hatt, and the friendship of his fellow engines and rolling stock. He wants a sense of identity; he wants to belong. Unfortunately, young and inexperienced as he is, Thomas makes mistakes, each of which he feels deeply. He finds himself at times teased, ridiculed, ignored, criticized, and even disciplined – like any child his age. But he never loses his good humor; he never stops trying to ‘be all that he can be,’ and from time to time, he has well-recognized successes. Thomas may be sad, angry, or frustrated, but he is never depressed. His only response to adversity is to try even harder to be the tank engine he knows he was ‘born’ to be. Anything less is out of the question. So what’s so revolutionary about this? Defying the West’s philosophical consensus, Thomas puts zero weight on personal happiness . He evaluates himself by one and only one criterion: is he being useful, and, if so, is he being as useful as he could be? It turns out that children and tank engines are not so different from the rest of us. They crave meaning! They only settle for pleasure when, like The Great Gatsby , they lose hope: “Living well is the best revenge!” Pleasure is the graveyard of hope and a poor substitute for purpose. Imagine, children have an innate desire to be useful! Who knew? But we systematically frustrate that desire and divert it into self-centered pleasure seeking. Not you? You never offered a child a bowl of ice cream to ‘make up for’ some disappointment? Yet we marvel, “What’s the matter with kids today?” Answer: Look in the mirror! We do things to and for and occasionally with children, but we’re terrified to let them do anything on their own. We need to be needed, and we’re happy to exploit the children in our orbit to satisfy that need. “You will be dependent on me…or else!” A baby is born! Hallelujah! But somewhere along the way, no later than age seven, usually much earlier, we encase that ‘caterpillar’ in a chrysalis until its 18 th birthday when it is expected to emerge, fully formed and beautiful, as a butterfly. It’s a dangerous reproductive strategy, one that frequently goes awry. Yet with each hiccup, we double down. Like any species caught in an evolutionary cul-de-sac , we insist on making our adaptations work, empirical evidence notwithstanding. Crystlle Medansky creates children’s literature from the tradition of Kabbalah – an ancient school of Jewish mysticism related to, but not identical with, Hasidism. In one story, A Droplet , she tells the tale of a single drop of water, aptly named Dewy. Dewy lives in the sea but the experience is unsatisfying. Vast, undifferentiated water is not very interesting, and by itself it reveals nothing about the nature of Dewy, the ocean, or the world. So Ocean agrees to send Dewy on a quest of self-discovery; it begins with Dewy’s evaporation and resumes with his eventual recondensation. Dewy’s goal is to return to Ocean, newly enlightened about the world, the self (Dewy) and the other (Sea). It is the paradigm of all life-experience. The soul of any such quest is the journey itself, not the destination. After all, when all is said and done, we end up right back where we started. Oh, but the adventures we have along the way! Dewy is anxious to complete his quest by returning to the ocean of his birth, but he does not place himself and his interests on a pedestal. Along the way, Dewy encounters various fellow creatures who need his help. Despite the urgency of his own mission, Dewy does not begrudge others the help they need to complete their own life journeys. First, a stalk of wheat needs hydration. “I’m in a hurry, but if you need my help, I will stay.” And Dewy stayed with the wheat until it had ripened. Then a stream needed Dewy’s help to wear away enough rock to create an unobstructed pathway to the sea. Again, Dewy responded generously. Next, Dewy encountered a boat that needed a wave to push it out to sea; Dewy selflessly delays his own reunion with Ocean in order to accelerate the arrival of his ‘fellow traveler .' At last, just as Dewy can hear the roar of the ocean ahead, a young mother calls to him from the embankment: “Can you help me take care of my little child?” Of course I can! Quest complete, Dewy finally reunites with the source of his being, the ocean. We don’t know what Dewy’s expectations were when he embarked on his quest, but it’s doubtful he expected to be gone for so many years. Still, it’s a small price to pay for the Pearl of Great Price, aka Enlightenment. Dewy’s quest allows him to realize that the meaning of life is not mystical union with the sea, but the helping hand he can lend to others on their own personal quests. Life is what happens while you’re waiting to begin living. Dewy was waiting to complete his quest so that his enhanced life with Ocean could begin. Instead, he discovers the real meaning of life lies in the projects of the others he encounters on his way. After an experience like this, Dewy will not be satisfied with the simple pleasures of frolicking with Ocean. Dewy, like Thomas, has discovered purpose…and nothing else will ever satisfy him again. David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Return to our Summer 2023 Table of Contents Previous Next

< Back Psilocybin “If I decide to take a ‘trip’ someday, would you care to join me?” David Cowles You first wondered about this when you were 12. Then you put it aside while you made your first million. Now you have some breathing room and can consider existential questions once again: “When we have what we call ‘an experience’ how much is that experience a reflection of what’s actually out there in the world, how much is refraction of the world based on our ‘intentions, projects and purposes’ in that world, and how much is a projection of our cerebral architecture onto that world?” You probably already suspect that it is a ‘little bit’ of all three and that’s likely true. But it leaves unanswered, “How little is a little?” In other words, what portion of our experience is reflected , what part refracted, what projected ? And how can we be sure which is which? Recent experiments with a hallucinogen known as ‘sillycybin’ have shed new light on this existential problem. Whenever crazy philosophy types (like me) persuade otherwise sensible people (like you) to think more deeply about the nature of experience, three aspects of experience seem to catch everyone’s attention: Events seem to occur in space, Events seem to occur in time, Events seem to be experienced from a unique perspective we call ‘the self’. Only academic philosophers waste time thinking about what it’s like to be ‘blue’, but most everyone at some time or other wonders about the nature of space, time, and self. The last time you got high on psychedelics, did you notice rectilinear, Cartesian space getting all gooey? “Professor, how am I supposed to measure things down to the fourth decimal if everything is continuously moving…and my ruler is some sort of squiggly snake?” And time? “How long have I been sitting on this beach? Did I just get here? Or have I been here all day? How to tell – check how sunburned I am. Ouch! That’s going to peel.” And who is this ‘I’ that’s been sitting on this beach all day? “I am the sand, the ocean waves, and the sunlight; I am the sparsely scattered sunbathers kindly sharing their beach with me. Where do I begin and end? What’s me and what’s not? And why am I channeling Walt Whitman?” On an ordinary Monday, the neurons in your brain fire in coordinated waves. You experience these waves as thoughts or perceptions. In our culture at least that experience is likely to include a spatial aspect and a temporal aspect and a sense of self. But come Friday, you have a date with some psilocybin . When we take hallucinogens, neurons desynchronize and some stop firing altogether. But at the same time, our neural networks become less distinct from one another: the boundaries between them blur. The walls of ‘the box’ just got thinner, so now it’s easier for us to think ‘outside’ it. Overall, the brain’s process becomes more chaotic while its output becomes more creative. As a result we may struggle to perform habitual tasks (like tying shoelaces) but we may also generate amazing new ideas and gain insights into seemingly intractable problems. This experience is also likely to challenge your everyday conception of space, time, and self. Note that the effects of psilocybin are a double edged sword. If we were high all day (like in the ‘60s), we would have neither the motivation nor the ability to get much done (like in the 60s). But if we never got high (like in the 50s), we’d sacrifice a lot of creativity… As is often the case with living organisms, the sweet spot is a happy medium. But how to make that happen? Hint : we didn’t have to wait for Timothy Leary; evolution takes care of us…though it takes its sweet time. The human genome evolved to include CYP2D6, a gene that allows our bodies to synthesize certain psychoactive substances, including psilocybin, naturally. Recent studies have shown that psilocybin enhances cognitive function . It would have sharpened early humans’ visual skills, supporting their hunting and gathering activities. The compound also could have boosted sexual stimulation, thereby increasing chances of mating, a boon to reproductive rates. Consequently, natural selection ensured that the ability to generate psilocybin would be hard wired in the human genome. So human beings get high naturally! Deal with it. Everyone’s microdosing on psilocybin all the time…or at least they could be. Even Grannie! But ‘some’ is never enough for us apex predators; we always want more! More money, more power, more drugs. Early hominids—our extinct ancestors—picked “magic mushrooms” as far back as six million years ago. Mushrooms originally evolved to produce psychoactive substances as a defense against pests and predators; humans repurposed them. Now those in the know rely on them for protection against cognitive pests and emotional predators. Among human cultures, there is an almost universal sense that there is more to this world than meets the eye . Nietzsche notwithstanding, something transcends the world as we perceive it. Call it Aletheia , noumena, dialectics, the Upside Down ( Stranger Things ), or God ( Torah ), there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosophies. Perhaps organically synthesized psilocybin gave our species its first look at the Transcendent. That would likely have spurred us to attempt even deeper raids on the ineffable. Shamanic practices and religious rituals, sometimes preceded by a ‘tiptoe through the tubers’, allow those who ingest the fungi to have experiences we would otherwise never know. Today, a well-attended church in Colorado Springs offers members of its contribution the option of a consuming magic mushroom before the services. This is another case of convergent evolution. Fungi evolved the ability to secrete psylocibin as a survival mechanism, humans did the same but for entirely different adaptive and reproductive advantages. Wanting more, early humans foraged for the precious caps, no doubt spreading spores far and wide in the process. Later, humans cultivated these same mushrooms and took steps to protect their habitats. Finally, hippies consumed them, ensuring a market and securing the funding needed to keep the cycle humming. So, if I decide to take a ‘trip’ someday, would you care to join me? Keep the conversation going. 1. Click here to comment on this TWS. 2. To subscribe (at no cost) to TWS and ATM, follow this link . 3. We encourage new articles and reprints from freelance writers ; click here to view out Writers’ Specs. Share Previous Next

< Back Chatting With C.S. Lewis “It is the very mark of a perverse desire that it seeks what is not to be had… As long as you are governed by that desire, you will never get what you want.” David Cowles Proponents of AI, of which I consider myself one, assure me that soon I will be able to hear a debate between Karl Marx and Pope Leo XIII, ‘live’. I can’t wait; I will pay through the nose for this ticket. But I also believe that AI was not invented last night; it’s been around at least since the dawn of written communication. For example, here’s the edited transcript of a conversation I had with C.S. Lewis (d. 1963), thanks to an old-fashioned version of Artificial Intelligence (books). Enjoy! CSL: (In a passage) from Tolstoy, the young second lieutenant, Boris Dubretskoi, discovers that there exist in the army two different systems or hierarchies. The one is printed in some little red book… The other is not printed anywhere…You discover gradually, in almost indefinable ways, that it exists and that you are outside it; and then later, perhaps, that you are inside it. AT: So, if I understand you, you’re talking about identity here; you’re saying that people derive ‘identity’ from their ranking on some sort of socio-economic Tennis Ladder? Or to use your terminology, a series of ever tightening concentric rings ascending in an inverted cone, like Dante’s Paradise. Each ring is inside some rings and outside others. So everyone is outside, outside of what? CSL: From outside, if you have despaired of getting into it, you call it “That gang” or “they” or “so-and-so and his set” or “The Caucus” or “The Inner Ring." AT: I think that perhaps because of differences in our age (50 years) and nationality (the Pond), we are saying similar things using slightly different vocabularies. For example, where you say ‘ring’, I might say ‘rung’. In 21st century U.S. we certainly have our ‘inner circles’ but we also have our justly infamous ‘socio-economic ladder’. CSL: I believe that in all men’s lives at certain periods, and in many men’s lives at all periods, between infancy and extreme old age, one of the most dominant elements is the desire to be inside the local Ring and the terror of being left outside. AT: Being British, it’s natural for you to think in terms of groups; being American, I’m afraid I think in terms of individuals or, better yet, Groups of One . For us, it’s about the compulsion to be someone and the dread of ending up as no-one . Life is a giant game of Musical Chairs; there’s always a chair for everyone…except one. Ultimately, there’s only chairs enough for one. One winner…all the rest, Losers! Being someone might mean being part of an inner circle, as you put it, but it could also mean celebrating some sort of personal triumph (e.g., becoming CEO or earning a million dollars). CSL: People who believe themselves to be free, and indeed are free, from snobbery, and who read satires on snobbery with tranquil superiority, may be devoured by the desire in another form... An invitation from a duchess would be very cold comfort to a man smarting under the sense of exclusion from some artistic or communistic côterie. Poor man—it is not large, lighted rooms, or champagne, or even scandals about peers and Cabinet Ministers that he wants: it is the sacred little attic or studio, the heads bent together, the fog of tobacco smoke, and the delicious knowledge that we—we four or five all huddled beside this stove—are the people who know . AT: The cognoscenti . What you’re describing sounds like a 21 st century, pardon me, 20 th century, version of Gnosticism. Being a member of an Anarchist cell is just as much an identity as being CEO of General Motors. Of course, here’s where our terminologies converge. The revolutionary’s cell is every bit as much an Inner Circle as those exclusive country clubs that welcome only the movers and the shakers . CSL: Men tell not only their wives but themselves that it is a hardship to stay late at the office or the school on some bit of important extra work which they have been let in for because they ‘and so-and-so and the two others’ are the only people left in the place who really know how things are run. But it’s not quite true! It is tiring and unhealthy to lose your Saturday afternoons: but to have them free because you don’t matter, that is much worse. AT: Are you familiar with Victor Frankl? He’s a holocaust survivor who argues that the defining quality in life is ‘having a purpose’. If you don’t matter, you can have no purpose. You are quite literally no-one. People make the mistake of thinking that Being Someone is the same thing as Having Purpose . Being someone is just about self ; having purpose involves others. But shifting gears: would the dreaded adolescent ‘peer pressure’ also fit your model? CSL: I wonder whether, in ages of promiscuity, many a virginity has not been lost, less in obedience to Venus than in obedience to the lure of the caucus. For of course, when promiscuity is the fashion, the chaste are outsiders. They are ignorant of something that other people know. They are uninitiated. AT: Good one! Here, of course, we are talking about ‘to know’ in the Greek sense of gnosis but also in the carnal ‘Biblical sense’. CSL: The number of people who first smoked or first got drunk for a similar reason is probably very large. I must now make a distinction. I am not going to say that the existence of Inner Rings is an evil. But the desire which draws us into Inner Rings is another matter. A thing may be morally neutral, and yet the desire for that thing may be dangerous. Let Inner Rings be unavoidable and even an innocent feature of life, though certainly not a beautiful one: but what of our longing to enter them, our anguish when we are excluded, and the kind of pleasure we feel when we get in? AT: Identity is idolatry! CSL: …This desire is one of the great permanent mainsprings of human action. It is one of the factors which go to make up the world as we know it—this whole pell-mell of struggle, competition, confusion, graft, disappointment, and advertisement… Unless you take measures to prevent it, this desire is going to be one of the chief motives of your life, from the first day on which you enter your profession until the day when you are too old to care. AT: That’s me, “too old to care”, but seriously, what you’re saying is incredibly sad. You’re saying that the irresistible desire to be somebody is precisely what ensures that you will never be anybody , that you will forever be nobody , the very thing you dreaded in the first place. Perhaps we’re hoping that by ‘being somebody’ we can escape death. We’re hoping to project our frail and mortal humanity into some quasi-permanent physical or social structure. Ozymandias, King of Kings! But by fleeing from our humanity, we shun the gift of being human, the gift of being itself. CSL: That will be the natural thing—the life that will come to you of its own accord. Any other kind of life, if you lead it, will be the result of conscious and continuous effort. If you do nothing about it, if you drift with the stream, you will, in fact, be an “Inner Ringer.” I don’t say you’ll be a successful one; that’s as may be. But whether by pining and moping outside Rings that you can never enter, or by passing triumphantly further and further in—one way or the other, you will be that kind of man (sic). AT: So the CEO is just ‘going with the flow’, doing what comes naturally in our culture, while the contemplative monk, the one who seemingly does nothing, is, in fact, the one who is acting, the one who’s swimming against the tide, the one who’s doing something. Thomas Merton, for example, believed that contemplative prayer is what holds the universe together. CSL: Over a drink, or a cup of coffee, disguised as triviality and sandwiched between two jokes, from the lips of a man, or woman, whom you have recently been getting to know rather better and whom you hope to know better still—just at the moment when you are most anxious not to appear crude, or naïf or a prig—the hint will come… and at the word “we” you try not to blush for mere pleasure… AT: “We” – the most powerful word in the English language. We pharisees, we band of brothers (or sisters), we police, we mafiosi, we tenured professors, we senators, Sein Fein . CSL: And you will be drawn in, if you are drawn in, not by desire for gain or ease, but simply because at that moment, when the cup was so near your lips, you cannot bear to be thrust back again into the cold outer world… It may end in a crash, a scandal, and penal servitude; it may end in millions, a peerage and giving the prizes at your old school. AT: We tell ourselves that we do what we do for wealth, for security, for comfort, but in fact we do what we do for prestige, for power, for status…in other words, for identity. CSL: The torture allotted to the Danaids in the classical underworld, that of attempting to fill sieves with water, is the symbol not of one vice, but of all vices. It is the very mark of a perverse desire that it seeks what is not to be had. The desire to be inside the invisible line illustrates this rule… AT: To be inside the event horizon of a black hole… CSL: …As long as you are governed by that desire, you will never get what you want. You are trying to peel an onion: if you succeed, there will be nothing left. Until you conquer the fear of being an outsider, an outsider you will remain. AT: I’m working on an assembly line, but I desire to enjoy the prestige and the perks of being foreman. I am a professor, hoping to be department head. I am a Senator, working to become President. How high is up? How deep is in? CSL: This is surely very clear when you come to think of it… If all you want is to be in the know, your pleasure will be short-lived. The circle cannot have from within the charm it had from outside. By the very act of admitting you, it has lost its magic. AT: “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.” – Groucho Marx CSL: Once the first novelty is worn off, you will be looking for another Ring. The rainbow’s end will still be ahead of you. The old ring will now be only the drab background for your endeavor to enter the new one. But your genuine Inner Ring exists for exclusion. There’d be no fun if there were no outsiders. The invisible line would have no meaning unless most people were on the wrong side of it. Exclusion is no accident; it is the essence. AT: Yikes! So no club is worth joining unless it mercilessly excludes the others ? The quest for a unique socio-economic identity automatically creates classism, racism, jingoism, even slavery. And yet, there is no such ‘identity’, we are clutching at a phantasm…at the expense of everyone else…and at the expense of ourselves. CSL: The quest of the Inner Ring will break your hearts - unless you break it . But if you break it, a surprising result will follow. If in your working hours you make the work your end, you will presently find yourself all unawares inside the only circle in your profession that really matters. You will be one of the sound craftsmen, and other sound craftsmen will know it. This group of craftsmen will by no means coincide with the Inner Ring or the Important People or the People in the Know. AT: You are describing the ‘Master Builders’ in the 21 st century film, The Lego Movie . Honors and accolades are indeed often disconnected from quality, creativity, and productivity. CSL: To a young person, just entering on adult life, the world seems full of “insides,” full of delightful intimacies and confidentialities, and he desires to enter them. But if he follows that desire, he will reach no “inside” that is worth reaching. The true road lies in quite another direction. AT: Amen! * C. S. Lewis (1898-1963) was Professor of Medieval and Renaissance Literature at Cambridge University and a Fellow of Magdalene College, Cambridge. His remarks (above) come to us by way of “The Inner Ring”, the Memorial Lecture given at King’s College, University of London, 1944. David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Return to our AI Issue Table of Contents Previous Next