Flushed Away: Water Conservation and Buddhist Philosophy

After four weeks (in the Outback), we’ve reached Cooper Pedy and I never thought I’d be so happy to see civilization in my life! Although it’s a stretch to call this civilization…everything is so run down and dusty, but it’s cool how the buildings are 3/4^th buried. We got out of the Jeep and bought fresh bottles of water at a corner store – nearly $5.00 for a liter! – but never has anything tasted so good! We were standing outside laughing as we drank, and for some reason, I splashed some of my water at Mike. This woman walked out of the store just as I did so, with a little boy holding her hand, and she looked at me horrified, shouting “What are you doing? That’s precious drinking water!” I mean, after four weeks of living on three liters of water a day per person I know damn well how precious drinking water, especially ice-cold, fresh, unboiled and unsterilized water is, but sheesh! To get all bent out of shape over a small splash! I think that was over the top for her… but still… somehow, I feel, um, I don’t know… ashamed.

Personal Diary Entry, December 2, 1993[1]

Australians, especially Aboriginal Australians, understand the significance of water in a way the average American may never know. Their understanding of water’s importance to life, much less the frailty of the earth’s still-abundant water supply, along with their attitude of preciousness towards water is distinctly Buddhist, although it is unlikely they would ever claim it as a Buddhist viewpoint. More likely, Australians would say they are simply being smart and pragmatic. From ultra-low-flow toilets to grey-water recycling, Australians use technology in simple and ingenious ways to best use and preserve their limited water supply. While their reasoning may be simple survival, their attitude and outlook towards water is not only distinctly Buddhist, it is one that should be emulated by Americans, if not all of the world.

Does He or Doesn’t He?

Sextus Empiricus, a physician and Skeptic philosopher (c. AD 200) created a rather lengthy argument against the arguments for the existence of god(s) that, despite his stated belief that god exists, is intended to neither prove nor disprove the existence of god(s), but is instead intended to point out the problems inherent in other philosophical school’s logical reasoning for the existence of god(s). While the argument against the dogmatists’ arguments is craftily worded to avoid contemporary criticism, much less make an affirmative statement one way or the other, Sextus creates a very strong argument for the non-existence of god(s), while conflicting with the Skeptic goal of freedom from disturbance and avoidance of dogmatism.

Elucidating Electra

Within the myth of Electra, multiple elements of virtually all theoretical approaches to mythology are found. The various incarnations of the Electra myth generally go like this: Agamemnon marries Clytemnestra and together they have three children: Iphigenia, Electra, and Orestes. Agamemnon goes off to fight in the Trojan War; he and his men get stuck – the wind won’t blow so their ships won’t sail – so he sacrifices his daughter, Iphigenia, as restitution for killing a stag sacred to Artemis. Clytemnestra is so angry at her husband for killing her daughter that she takes up with another man (Aegisthus) and, upon Agamemnon’s return, murders him. The murder of the father angers Orestes and especially Electra. The god Apollo orders Orestes to avenge his father’s death by killing his mother and stepfather, which he does so with the help of Electra. In summary: father kills daughter, wife kills husband, son kills step-father and mother. While the psychological approach seems to apply most fully, to gain the fullest possible understanding and appreciation for this (or any other) myth, one must approach it from multiple perspectives.

Exploring Death in Epictetus

Epictetus’ teachings provide significant amounts of clear, easy-to-understand practical advice on living day-to-day life. One of the strengths of Epictetus’ teachings is in dealing with suffering, pain, hardships and other negatives of live. Epictetus views the various sufferings of one’s body as something to be viewed as outside of our control; in fact, one is to carry one’s pain with equanimity. For Epictetus, death is not to be feared, as it is inevitable. Epictetus also views suicide and euthanasia [1] to end unendurable suffering as acceptable and good. Throughout his teachings, Epictetus provides many logical foundations to help his followers endure suffering with equanimity, especially when facing death. However, despite his belief in the existence of god, Epictetus does not provide for any sort of rebirth or afterlife. In a philosophy heavy on providing people with the means to face the hardships of life with a certain level of comfort, the lack of an afterlife to provide hope and comfort to both the dying and their survivors is a serious weakness.

Redemption: The Ultimate Prize - Freedom

In the Fall semester of 2006 at the University of Colorado - Colorado Springs, I enrolled in a class entitled "History of TV Programming." In this class, which was surprisingly academic, we learned about TV scheduling, budgeting, programming, contracts, market research, and audience appeal, along with other related information.

There was a number of assignments and practicals we had to accomplish in the class, but one project really stood out: We had to invent a new television show and "pitch" it to the class as if we were pitching a show idea to a real television network. This was a group project, which I and my fellow classmates, DeEtte Atwood and Aaron Muncy, decided to work on together.

After much debate, we choose to jump on the "reality show" bandwagon and invented a show called Redemption, where convicted criminals compete for full pardons. Needless to say, our show idea garnered the most heated debates of all the invented TV show ideas.

Below is posted the PowerPoint presentation we created to pitch Redemption. Please note that other than our imaginably selected host, "Dog the Bounty Hunter," whose name and image is used solely for academic purposes, all names and backgrounds are fictitious and products of our imaginations.

Redemption: The Ultimate Prize - Freedom!

Greek Creation Myths: What’s Love Got To Do With It?

Without doubt, every culture has a creation myth of one sort or another, most with remarkable similarities and parallels. These myths – especially their parallels - reflect not only their originating culture, but also demonstrate elements of the cultures they came into contact with. By comparing creation myths of separate cultures, one can discern social and cultural elements of both cultures. One overwhelming parallel within otherwise differing creation mythologies is the concept of all creation involving some sort of love figure/character. In the Greek creation myth as presented in Hesiod’s Theogony, love in the form of Eros is not only the primary creative force, but also the primary origination of all self-awareness.

The Epicurean Foundations of Atheism

Epicurus (341BC-270BC, the founder of Epicureanism, a philosophy mostly known for its pleasure-based ethical viewpoint, discussed the existence and nature of god[1] extensively. However, his heavy emphasis on the atomic nature of the universe and importance of sense-perception for determining reality and truth conflicts with the very argument he uses for the existence of god. The tenets of Epicureanism create a cosmology, worldview and ethical system that has no need for god, by any definition, and may have created the rational foundation for later Atheistic thought.

The Means to the Ends of the Means

Throughout the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle discusses deliberation, choices, and results, specifically “means” and “ends.” For Aristotle, how one gets to a final result matters, not the actual result itself. The means to the ends are of utmost importance and are what require the most deliberation. The concept of deliberation and responsibility for the choices one makes (not necessarily the results of those choices) is a difficult, if not nearly alien, one for the modern day reader to comprehend. Yet it may be perhaps the most important of all points made by Aristotle throughout the Nicomachean Ethics. How, when so much of Aristotle’s teachings have survived and thrived through the ages, has this one failed to hold weight? Our success-at-any-price consumer-driven culture, our insistence on a “what’s in it for me” attitude towards good choices, is completely contrary to Aristotle’s view. In light of the Enron scandal (and others), it is imperative that our modern-day attitudes be reoriented towards Aristotle’s understanding of means and ends.

"Saved" and "Satire": A Critical Introduction to a Critical Reintroduction

Dustin Griffin’s Satire: A Critical Reintroduction thoroughly explores the elements and nature of satire, especially concentrating on historic examples of the genre. According to Griffin, for a text to be considered satire it must contain four essential elements: inquiry, provocation, display and play. The movie Saved displays elements of Griffin’s theory, and also highlights weaknesses within his theory.

Critical Response: "Saved"

The movie, Saved, a farcical satire of Evangelical Christians and Christian high schools, addresses multiple cultural and religious issues. The biggest issue, however, is not necessarily religious or cultural, but humanistic: Whatever you believe, it is not enough to just believe, you must also live it daily.

The message is abundantly apparent throughout the plot, sub-plots, characters, dialogue, and setting. While there are many examples, the despicable character of Hillary Faye is the most obvious example. Hillary professes her Faith the loudest, most stridently, and most often, yet also lives her faith the least. While she may still be a virgin (and willing to shoot-to-kill to protect that virginity), she lacks compassion for others, especially her own handicapped brother, gossips with the intention to cause hurt/embarrassment, defaces school property and blames others, swears she is innocent to God, throws a Bible as a weapon, and looks down upon all others who do not believe as she does. All of these actions are decidedly unchristian, and very much against the basic teachings of the very faith she professes.

Regardless of what you believe, even if that belief system is “no” belief, Saved proposes that your belief system is meaningless if you do not apply it to your daily life and actually walk your own talk, practice what you preach. Without living your own belief system, you risk becoming a hateful spiteful person worthy of little except ridicule.

Written for Professor Campbell’s Religion & Pop Culture class at University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, 17^th April 2006.

A Trinity of Trinities in Plato’s "Republic"

In reading Plato’s Republic, it is abundantly obvious that Plato found some value and balance in presenting complex concepts and explanations in tripartite formats. From the soul to states themselves, trinities[1] are everywhere in the Republic. The three strongest trinities within the Republic revolve around individuals (souls), societies (cultures/groups), and states (governments). Each serves as a metaphor for the other and together forms a grand trinity of the whole, serving to provide understanding about human nature and the nature and purpose of humans, societies and states.

Critical Response: "The Watchmen"

In Alan Moore and Dave Gibbon’s “The Watchmen,” there are multiple themes and narrative arcs touching on a large number of societal ills, ethical and moral issues, and political issues. The most compelling of the many themes, the ethics of scientific and technological advances, is simply expressed through the use of graffiti: “Who Watches the Watchmen?” This tag line is on multiple pages, but does not refer to just “watchmen” – the “protectors” – but also to those in power and especially, those who create. Moore uses scientific and technological advances – some real, some fictional – to question not only the need for these advances, but the ethics of them. The ethical issues revolving around some scientific advances are obvious, such as the atomic bomb, but other seemingly innocuous advances also have negative repercussions. Through the use of his characters, especially the God-like Jon (aka Dr. Manhattan), Moore brings to bear the idea that there must be some sort of ethical oversight brought into play on scientific and technological creators. Someone – ultimately meaning everyone – needs to question not only the need for our continuing fast-paced scientific advance, but oversee the use of such advances. It is not good enough to just create for the sake of creating; there must be questions asked before creating as to the good and bad of such creation.

Scientific advances in “The Watchmen” created Jon, a being with God-like powers and vision. Jon did not ask to become God-like, nor was he necessarily comfortable with his powers, yet once he had them, he would use them or not as only he saw fit. There was no control or power over Jon, no one to oversee him, no panel or government that could manage the use or misuse of this created being, Jon. No one “watched” the scientists when they created the device that ultimately created Jon, and no one “watched” the creation from this device. In the end, Jon decides that he may create life – human life – himself in another galaxy. No one questions even this decision.

When Moore asks “Who Watches the Watchmen,” he refers not just to police-like authorities, political or scientific powers, he also refers to God him/herself. Ultimately, Moore is asking, “Who Watches God.”

Written for Professor Campbell’s Religion & Pop Culture class at the University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, 13^th March 2006.

The Wisdom of Time

For thousands of years, perhaps since the very first human walked on the planet, we have questioned the nature of the world around us. Where did it all come from? What – or who – made it all? Why did it all come into existence? These questions are still asked today, and while modern science has answered some of them, we still don’t have all the answers. Thales of Miletus (ca. 625-546), often referred to as the father of science and the scientific method, postulated several essential concepts of the world that are now not only scientific fact, but foundational concepts in science. With simple, elegant words and ideas, Thales postulated the existence of atoms, the abundance of hydrogen, and the most essential force in the universe: electromagnetic force.