#OccupySomething
Berlin Wall @ Newseum
Music: Bird’s Lament/Moondog
You Do You Tuesday.
Music: Gifted, N.A.S.A. (Treasure Fingers Epicwave Remix)
Art: rhondaforever.com
"If we strain out the differences, personal and philosophical, they had with one another, we can say that what these four thinkers [Oliver Wendell Holmes, William James, Charles S. Peirce, and John Dewey] had in common was not a group of ideas, but a single idea - an idea about ideas. They all believed that ideas are not “out there” waiting to be discovered, but are tools - like forks, knives, and microchips - that people devise to cope with the world in which they find themselves. They believed that ideas are procured not by individuals, but by groups of individuals - that ideas are social. They believed that ideas do not develop according to some inner logic of their own, but are entirely dependent, like germs, on their human carriers and environment. And they believed that since ideas are provisional responses to particular and unreproducible circumstances, their survival depends not on their immutability but on their adaptability."
—
Louis Menand in The Metaphysical Club describing the prevailing attitude toward ideas shared by the four post Civil War protagonists in the book - Holmes, James, Peirce, and Dewey.
This understanding seems to dovetail well with Newton’s famous quote, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” In other words, there is no such thing as a purely organic individual idea since every idea originates - at least at some fundamental level - from the work, thoughts, observations, expressions of others.
The Sanctity of Quranic Text
Sacred or So What?
Interesting take by gospelofmoll via J.E.H. Smith’s blog about why burning the Quran is no different than burning an old newspaper since you’re not burning “the” actual revelations of God per se. They’re just copies of copies, and translations of the actual and more authentic arabic text at that. This provokes an interesting counterfactual: would people feel as disgusted with Pastor Jones if he busted out 10,000 USB flashdisks containing PDF files of the Quran? Are those versions no less sacred than the translated Penguin edition that I have sitting on my shelf?
Although the Qur’an brouhaha has passed, I wanted to share this snippet from philosopher (and all-around interesting dude) J.E.H. Smith:
For better or for worse, the sacred texts of the Abrahamic faiths are of the same ontological variety. You can’t really do anything at all to them, because they are not physical objects. It follows from this more general fact that some cheap paperback English translation of the Qur’an is not the Qur’an. And it follows from this that it is not holy, or any more holy than old newspaper, and so also that the Rev. Jones could not have done anything particularly unholy no matter how hard he tried. The dignified response, therefore, would have been to ignore him.
Do yourself a favor, if you’re not already religiously reading Smith’s blog, then start now.
Indeed, the physical book form of the Quran did not even exist during Prophet Muhammad’s time, but was commissioned into a single book over a decade after his death by the first Muslim Caliph Abu Bakr. Until then, revelations the Prophet received over the span of 23 years were memorized by him and his closest companions. Suffice to say, the Quran’s early existence in purely oral form suggests that its actual significance is not in print form, but in the hearts and minds of followers who read it and are inspired by the message.
Perhaps that’s why I wasn’t terribly offended when I first heard about Pastor Jones’s stunt. But I did wonder, should I be? After all, I’ve been taught that it is blasphemy in Islam to desecrate or intentionally insult the Quran. I’ve always grown up to venerate the physical book itself, ritualistically performing a required cleansing routine known as wudu before reading it. (sura 56:77–79: “That this is indeed a Qur’an Most Honourable, In a Book well-guarded, Which none shall touch but those who are clean.”) Unlike the modest stack of newspapers, magazines and books sitting in my bathroom for my toilet reading pleasure, I would never dare bring any form of the Quran in there.
So while I agree with the overall point that some random edition of the Quran is not intrinsically significant in the way, say, an original painting is, I still consider its textual form - whether in PDF print out, on a USB disc or Ipad screen - as a holy and sacred communication. As any Muslim will tell you, the communicated words are the direct and actual words of God - not some human generated article in the New York Times or Maxim, or a symbolic object like the flag as Fox news suggests. Sure, it may be an English version downloaded for free read on a macbook screen, but the connection made between a follower and God as the words are read is arguably no less profound or meaningful than if it were read from the parchment of very first version ever compiled. Obviously one might feel a heightened connection in the latter example, but the connection made in the former is no less sacred to the reader.
The “dignified response” then would not have been to simply ignore Pastor Jones. This even assumes that it would have been possible to have done so in the first place. In an age of rapid global communication, it’s dubious to think that Muslims in America or other parts of the world would not have found out about the burning if the media had just ignored it. It’s not like youtube, twitter, group forums, google or facebook don’t exist on computers owned by Muslims. All it takes is a camera phone or a facebook group to publicize an act or agenda to the world.
Instead, the dignified response was collectively made by Americans when Pastor Jones was widely condemned and he retreated back into his hate hole surrounded by boxes of unopened Qurans. Although for secularists, non-Muslims and even some practicing Muslims it wouldn’t have been a big deal had he gone ahead with the burning, it was nevertheless important to decry the act. Not because it was necessary to prevent inflaming jihadists even more - frankly, speech liberties shouldn’t be curtailed on their account - but because a democratic and tolerant society ought not casually accept an act inspired by extreme religious hatred and attempt to intimidate.
Lighting and Maintaining the Fire
We’ve all heard the adage: man who go to sleep with itchy butt wake up with smelly hand practice makes perfect. With massive amounts of “deliberate practice” - say around 10,000 hours give or take - you too can achieve the status of excellence. For those who have read Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers, this might sound familiar. He argues that there is no such thing as “genius;” rather, excellence/expertise is derived from intense and constant practicing. Much like a champion weightlifter may enlarge his biceps with steroids by methodically performing bicep curls, the human brain becomes more adept at performing functions that are routinely practiced. The brilliance of prodigious talents like Bill Gates or Mozart at such early ages was therefore not so much the result of some uncanny freak ability to grasp skills at lightening speeds, but the fact that they obsessively learned and practiced their crafts early and often.
Yet, for as obvious as it is that practice makes perfect, perfection more often than not seems fleeting. If you want to get all existential about it, yes, perfection in many regards is arguably impossible to achieve. The more salient point, however, is that willpower and discipline are virtues people struggle to consistently maintain. Even if the aim is not to be perfect, try losing weight or learning a new language or becoming a ninja and it’s not hard to feel the force of monotony compelling you into complacency. A couple days or weeks of taking it easy, and the focus begins to drift from practicing, learning or exercising to figuring out shortcuts or finding get rich/learned/fit/attractive schemes or quitting the endeavor all together. Unless you are driven by fear (like I was this summer when studying for the bar exam) or benefit from inspiring relationships or experiences that have dug deep reservoirs of motivation within your psyche, it is downright difficult to spark and maintain the fire necessary to work hard enough to attain success/perfection. Call it the human condition or just laziness, but whatever chemical interactions that occur in our brains that weaken and break our resolve, the effect is often frustrating and at times maddening.
I always find it interesting to learn what motivates someone to work hard in the pursuit of a goal or to generally do well for themselves. Sometimes it’s pure passion that motivates. Some carry a chip on their shoulders and want to prove naysayers wrong, while others simply have no choice but to work hard. Often, a variety of reasons not limited to the ones mentioned keep people motivated. But whatever the impetus, I’ve found the common nexus to be a confidence and willingness to embrace challenges. It’s a psychological impulse that entails more than just the mere acceptance of a challenge, but a profound ability to actually relish in undertaking a difficult endeavor in the face of failure. When exercised, the effort is anything but casual and takes on a methodical zeal for not only the end goal, but maintaining the sanctity of the process necessary to achieving the goal. Ultimately, it’s this type of raw energy that results in the kind of pure competition necessary to anoint greatness.
We are not born with the innate ability to work hard, sacrifice, be disciplined, and delay self-gratification. Otherwise, we would be robots or some sort of Chuck Norris creature. The process of figuring out why these values are so important and how to maximize them is part of what has made growing up at times harrowing and at other times exhilarating. And so with every new challenge that presents itself, the basic process of figuring out how to become motivated and maintain our focus will remain persistent. Mastering this process will be vital to our success as citizens, professionals, and family members. The question is, will you begrudgingly accept or embrace the challenge?
Related:
9 Years Later
NYC
On this 9 year anniversary of 9-11, a few choice commentaries on the state of our nation:
- 9-11 and the Nine Year War, George Friedman
- Should the Dream Ever Sour, George Packard [The New Yorker]
- Al Qaeda’s Post 9-11 Surge, Bruce Riedel [The Daily Beast]
- Post 9-11 We’re Safer Than We Think, Fareed Zakaria [Wash Post 9/13]
- Nine Years Later, is Al Qaeda’s Threat Overrated, Tony Karon [Time]
- The Genteel Nation, David Brooks [Nytimes]
- 9-11 Inc., Suzanne Merkelson [FP]
"The really important kind of freedom involves attention, and awareness, and discipline, and effort, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them, over and over, in myriad petty little unsexy ways, every day. That is real freedom. The alternative is unconsciousness, the default-setting, the “rat race” — the constant gnawing sense of having had and lost some infinite thing."
— David Foster Wallace
Detroit, MI
The slow curve is the natural line of the footwalker, as anyone can observe as he looks back at his tracks in the snow across an open field. - Lewis Mumford
