Fear

October 31, 2008 – 1:15 pm

Today is Halloween.  A holiday that is ripe with interesting topics to discuss.

Did you know that Halloween is derived from the Celtic festival of Samhain, which was conducted at the end of the harvest season?  It was believed that on October 31st, the boundary between the living and the dead weakened and allowed the dead to harm the living.  That’s where the masks came in, to scare away the evil spirits.  I find this curious. 

Would an evil spirit, who is already dead, really fear evil masks?

Fear is considered one of the four innate emotions.  The four emotions that are with us from birth are joy, sadness, anger, and fear.   Do evil spirits really have emotions such as fear, anger, sadness, and joy?  Let’s stick with fear for the moment, in the spirit of Halloween.

Fear is obviously a survival mechanism.  It is the emotion that triggers flight or fight in response to external stimuli.   The behavioral characteristics of fear are…

1.    Eyes widen.

2.    Pupils dilate to take in more light.

3.    Upper lip rises (baring the teeth).

4.    Muscles constrict and fill with oxygen.

5.    Heart rate increases.

6.    Perspiration occurs due to blood being pumped to the extremities, raising body temperature.

7.    Rise in adrenaline levels.

Like animals, which are also capable of fear, humans go through several emotional stages.  Like a cornered dog that will initially try to escape until it is trapped, at which point it becomes violent and fights to the death.   Fear also can result in intimidation, where an animal or human will go alone with another’s wishes regardless of their own thoughts or intentions.

I don’t think spirits will have any of these reactions.

Another interesting thing about fear is that, while all humans born with the ability to fear, the objects of fear vary from individual to individual.  That’s because fear is learned.  If someone who doesn’t fly very often experiences high turbulence on an airplane, combined with seeing images of plane crashes on TV and movies, then there’s a chance they will develop a fear of flying.

Take me for example.  I have a fear of snakes.  All kinds of snakes.  I can’t even see one on TV without dilating my pupils and raising my upper lip.  But when I was a kid, I used to catch them in my dad’s backyard.  Then I started mowing my dad’s yard.  Every time I mowed, I would either “hit” one with the mower (a disgusting and unpleasant experience), or one would slither out from under my feet.  Every time I mowed I was on edge, ready to jump or pull back on the mower so I wouldn’t get plastered with snake guts.  Now, that behavior has been engrained into my very being and I am struck with a bolt of fear every time I see a snake.

I have a friend who is afraid of Jesus and Angels.  She was raised catholic and is still religious.  But she noticed that in the bible, every time Jesus or an Angel appeared to someone, they always said “Be not afraid.”  So she assumed that it was a terrifying experience.  Not to mention Angels only appear to warn someone that something bad is about to happen.  She told me a story about how, when she was little, she would pray to Jesus not to visit her.

Moving on.

There is also something called Island Tameness.  Animals living on an isolated island lose their fear of predators.  That’s one of the reasons the dodo bird became extinct.  By the time humans arrived on the bird’s island, it had lost all fear of humans.  Combine that with the fact that it was flightless, and you have a recipe for extinction.

So, returning to my original question.  Can Evil Spirits be afraid?  Evil Spirits can harm us living creatures, but I’m assuming we can’t harm them.  So, technically, they don’t have anything to be afraid of even if we are wearing silly masks.  Then again, technically, garter snakes are harmless to humans, yet I’m afraid of them.  Then again, Evil Spirits inhabit the “world of the dead” which is sort of like an isolated island, isn’t it?

Add it all up, and I’m guessing that Halloween masks are generally ineffective against Evil Spirits.  But then again, I don’t believe in Evil Spirits to begin with.  This raises an entirely new question…

How come people are afraid of Evil Spirits?  I’m assuming it is similar to my fear of snakes, that they somehow are conditioned to be afraid.  Fear is contagious.  It is such a palpable emotion that you can actually FEEL when someone else is afraid.  Because of this, a parent’s fear will infect their children with the same fear.

At the same time, fear can be fun and exciting.  The increased blood flow pumping adrenaline and other chemicals through the body creates a rush and an emotional high that is addictive.  Sort of like eating a chili pepper, how the tongue registers the spice as pain and releases endorphins.  But is the “pleasure” of being afraid really worth the consequence?  Halloween is fun, and I don’t mean to diminish the experience, but wouldn’t it be MORE fun if we as a society were no longer afraid?

On one hand, fear is a built in emotion for a reason.  A lack of fear can be dangerous, as the dodo bird so tragically illustrates.   But on the other hand, most of our fears are irrational, whether it is my fear of snakes, the fear of evil spirits, the fear of Jesus, or the fear of terrorism.  Our response to irrational fear is often just as irrational, like wearing masks to scare away Evil Spirits.

In the end, the emotion of fear is more dangerous than the object we fear because it promotes irrationality, gullibility, and hostility.  So I ask… is being afraid worth the price of admission?

 

Chris

Is this really happening?

October 30, 2008 – 12:38 pm

Remember that saying, a picture is worth a thousand words?  Is that still true in the age of Photoshop?  Once, in the not too distant past, people could trust what they see with their own eyes.  Or, at least they thought they could.

My dad emailed me a video today.  If it is real, it is one of the most amazing things I’ve ever seen.  My initial reaction to the video was, “that’s not real.”  I’m sure most people had the same reaction.

Is the video real?  I don’t know.  Quite possibly, but that doesn’t mean I believe it.  Was it Photoshopped?

Photo manipulation is as old as photography itself.   Joseph Stalin would frequently alter photographs to remove unwanted faces, mostly for political and propaganda purposes.  This is something completely different than the video above.  The video above is intended to impress, while these photographs were intended to PROVE. 

In 2005, when Martha Stewart was released from prison, photographs of her were altered to make her appear slimmer, as though she lost weight while behind bars.  Time magazine changed the color saturation of OJ Simpson’s mug shot to make his skin appear darker.  National Geographic moved the Pyramids closer together so they could get all three to fit on the cover of their magazine.

While the plane video was intended to impress, the Stalin photographs to prove, these last three examples were presented as FACT.  People had no reason to question them, and the effects were mostly subliminal. 

All examples of photo manipulation are harmful in one way or another.  The photographs presented as fact are dangerous because people don’t question them.  A doctored mug shot of OJ with darker skin only heightens racial stereotypes.  Same goes for the Stalin photographs, where he was able to remove people who disagreed with him to present a unified front. 

The plane video, if false, is dangerous for a different reason.  Okay, let’s assume the video is real.  Videos LIKE the one above that ARE doctored are dangerous specifically because people are so used to them that they don’t believe video evidence.

All three examples are dangerous because some people can’t tell which is the real and which is the fake.  Some Stalin supporters believed the original photographs were fakes.  Another example is a couple of Frenchmen who took the 911 videos of the planes crashing into the Trade Center and removed the planes, leaving only the explosions.  Conspiracy Theorists then saw these videos, believed them, and then went on to believe that the videos that DO show the planes were the ones that were doctored.

Now, I don’t know if this post fits the new direction I talked about yesterday, but it is something that has been on my mind for a while.

Belief.

What do we believe in, what do we base that belief on, and how do we know that belief is grounded in reality when reality is so easily manipulated?  Substitute reality with truth and the question works just as well.

Take the political elections as an example.  Emails have been floating around claiming Obama is a Muslim.  Some people actually believe a chain email over physical evidence.  They’ll even believe that chain letter over their own Presidential nominee.  Or take this video.  One that is NOT real.  One that is not only ridiculous, but absolutely disgusting.  Yet, as we all know, some people will believe it is real.

Has perceptive reality become actual reality?  The surreal become real?  Fiction become truth ?  Vice become Versa?

 

Chris

I’m back.

October 29, 2008 – 9:47 am

Sort of.

I haven’t posted in a while.  I haven’t posted consistently in forever.  There are reasons behind this.

1.    My career, however young it may be, is writing.  As strange as it may sound, it is rather difficult to write for fun when I’m behind writing professionally.  Think of Tiger Woods.  How often does TW hit the links for fun, riding around in a golf cart with some buddies and some beers?  That’s what this website is like, minus the golf cart, the buddies, and the beers.

 

2.    I’m not sure what to say.  This will take some explaining, but first, let me sum up.  When I write fiction, I dramatize (aka, disguise) my opinions and beliefs through characters, conflicts, and metaphors.  However, websites like this require the exact opposite sort of writing.  Plain simple English where I tell the world how I feel.  Now… let me explain…

I’ve been reading Meditations by Marcus Aurelius.  The Roman Emperor wrote Meditations for himself, as a source of self improvement and guidance, and apparently never intended them to be published.  They are basically a series of quotes where he expressed, rather clearly, his own personal philosophy.  Examples…

Not to feel exasperated or defeated or despondent because your days aren’t packed with wise and moral actions. But to get back up when you fail, to celebrate behaving like a human–however imperfectly–and fully embrace the pursuit you’ve embarked on.

Do not act as if thou wert going to live ten thousand years.  Death hangs over thee.  While thou livest, while it is in thy power, be good.

Here are some quotes ABOUT Meditations.(These quotes were found on Wikipedia, FYI.)

Marcus Aurelius wrote down what was in his heart just as it was, not obscured by any consciousness of the presence of listeners or any striving after effect.

Is as much intensity of feeling…as in most of the nobler modern books of religion, only with a sterner power controlling it.  People fail to understand Marcus, not because of his lack of self-expression, but because it is hard for most men to breathe at that intense height of spiritual life, or, at least, to breathe soberly.

My point:  While I’m proud of my skill in writing fiction, I fail miserably in exactly the sort of writing that is required in a website such as this.  I use the words website and post because I hate the word blog.  Too similar to the word blob. 

Most writing teachers use the phrase writing muscle to distinguish the difference between forms of writing.  Drama requires a different muscle than comedy.  Fiction requires a different muscle than non-fiction.  And blogs (ugh) require a different muscle than fiction AND non-fiction.  They require the exact same muscle Marcus used in writing Meditations.  A muscle that I have yet to develop, a muscle that is decidedly weak, and a muscle that I desperately want to strengthen.  One of the hardest things for me to do is to write down “what is in my heart just as it is, not obscured by any consciousness of the presence of listeners or any striving after effect.”

All of this was inspired by the elections.  People talk about who they’re voting for and who they’re not voting for.  I find this fascinating.  Most people can tell you why they’re NOT voting for someone, but they have a much harder time telling you why they ARE voting for someone.  The canidates are the exact same.  They can tell you why you shouldn’t vote for their opponent, but have a harder time saying why you should vote for them.  

I had a conversation with two people over the weekend about their choice for president (this wasn’t our first conversation on the topic).  They are both voting for McCain, even though they are two very socially liberal people.  They told me all the things they didn’t like about Obama, but not once did they mention one of his policies.  Now, some people might jump to the racism conclusion, but that’s not the case.  I’ll vouch for the social integrity of these two people, which is probably why we could have this conversation in a very civil tone.  The truth is they don’t KNOW why they prefer McCain.  They just do. 

Personally, I think this is because most people lack the skill of Marcus Aurelius.  Marcus was able to say exactly “what was in his heart” because he took the time and energy to DISCOVER what was in his heart.

I understand people have a general understanding of what they believe.  They know whether they are pro-life or pro-choice.  Either they believe life begins at conception or they don’t.  But WHY do they believe life begins at conception?  Or why don’t they?  Do they realize that this debate is as old as the bible itself?  Umberto Eco, one of my favorite writers, has a chapter in his book Turning Back the Clock called On the Soul of the Embryo where he chronicled this debate.  I’m paraphrasing, and probably missing Eco’s point, but originally, Origen claimed the embryo had a soul right from the beginning, but the Church initially disagreed because Genesis 2.7  says “And the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”  So the bible states we don’t have a soul until we take our first breath.  But obviously the Church couldn’t stand for that.  Tertullian then formed the idea that the soul was transmitted via semen (how do you like that, female readers?).  However, that idea was shot down because it implied that sex was holy.  So Thomas Aquinas decided that the human soul develops as the baby develops, that our souls have different stages.  This idea was again contradicted by… sigh… I’m going to avoid a debate I don’t want to start, and instead I will attempt to return to my point.   

I use the pro-life and pro-choice argument as an example of people looking for a simple answer to a very complex philosophical question that in truth has no answer.  How can we tell for CERTAIN when life begins?  How can we MEASURE when we first have a soul?  Do we have a soul?  What is a soul?  A lot of people have answers to these questions, but what FACTS support those answers?  And why do people believe one way and not another?  I guarantee you, that if the Romans had a debate on choice, Marcus Aurelius would not only know what was in his heart, but would be able to write it down with an intensity of emotion and spirit that would take your breath away even if you disagreed with him.

I said I would attempt to return to my point.  I halfway succeeded.  I’ll try again.  This post isn’t about people who are pro-life or pro-choice, it is about me.  Specifically, me as a writer.  I can tell you where I stand on the issue.  I can tell you when I believe life begins.  But I can’t tell you WHY I believe life begins when I think it does.  Worse, especially for someone who considers himself a writer, I guarantee I am unable to convince someone on the other side of the fence to come around and check out how green the grass is on my side.  Can you? Why can’t I do and write these things?  Because I’m not Marcus Aurelius.

Finally, after 1,200 words (or 700 words more than a post should have) I reach my point:  I want to be Marcus Aurelius.  I want to know what is in my heart.  I want to be able to say what is in my heart with the breath of clarity and passion that will force those who disagree to stop and listen.  If I can do this without the veil of fictional drama and metaphor, then that will only lift the drama and metaphor I write to the levels I aim to achieve.  I think this is the purpose of my website, or at least, the purpose I am now giving it.  This is the true reason why I haven’t posted consistently in well over two months.  That two month hiatus has probably lost the readers I was starting to build, but since I am taking this website in a new direction, perhaps it will lead me to new readers.

We’ll see.

 

Chris

I Want My 5 Grand

October 10, 2008 – 6:43 pm

I’ve been slacking on Formal Fallacy.  I have excuses, but I’ll keep them to myself.  What I will share is a strange thought that popped into my head earlier today.  I was reading the horror story that is the economic crisis and how AIG is going to receive another large chunk of change after AIG’s CEOs took the previous chunk of change to go on vacation.

I couldn’t help but wonder if there wasn’t a better way to spend 700 Billion dollars.  So I did some long division.  First, some numbers.

$700,000,000,000.  That’s how many taxpayer dollars are going to be funneled into Wall Street.

305,386,000.  The population of the United States.

138,000,000.  Taxpayers in the United States.

700,000,000,000 divided by 138,000,000 = 5072.46

$5072.46 per taxpayer.

Here’s my idea.  Instead of giving corrupt corporations like AIG a ridiculous amount of money so the CEO’s can go on vacation, why not give each taxpayer $5,072.46 dollars that they can either invest on their own in companies of their choosing, or they could take that 5 grand and buy a new TV, or use that 5 grand to pay rent on homes that are on the verge of foreclosing.

Now, I’m not an Economics major.  And I had to use my PC’s calculator to do the math.  But if you want to boost the economy, and if you are as concerned about “Main Street not Wall Street” as you say you are… then what’s wrong with this idea?

Chris