It appears to be time to post a blog entry on the topic of my latest reads simply because I find myself thinking a lot about the one recently finished and the one in process.
I found Close to the Bone by Jean Shinoda Bolen, MD at the local resale shop. The subtitle is Life Threatening Illness as a Soul Journey. (I drop by this shop every week or two in order to peruse the used book selection for interesting titles.) Dr. Bolen cited a work by Bernie Siegel, MD in her book. As fortune would have it, I found that title (Love, Medicine, and Miracles) a few weeks later at the local library's used (read: "need to get rid of") book sale. The subtitle of Dr. Siegel's work is: Lessons Learned about Self-Healing from a Surgeon's Experience with Exceptional Patients.
I am not sure why I felt moved to lay out 99 cents plus tax for Dr. Bolen's book. I am inclined--No, I am driven--to avoid such New Age lingo as soul journeys, inner journeys, spirit guides, and dreamscapes. Maybe I just wanted to give a pass to one who describes herself as a psychiatrist and a Jungian analyst. I knew that I was in new territory when I read: "At the level of Soul we are all one and the same one" (Dr. Bolen) and when a miracle is described as "a self-induced cure." (Dr. Siegel) Maybe it wasn't new territory; it certainly was someplace that I hadn't visited for some time and then under circumstances quite different than those in which I currently find myself. By the way, Dr. Siegel's book cost 50 cents with tax included.
I did not come away from Dr. Bolen's book as a confirmed believer in Jungian psychology. I was very impressed how she addressed in a true and unabashed ecumenical style Christian beliefs, Greek and Roman mythologies, and the remnants of the pre-patriachical myths among others. She shed light on a question and its answer that I have not previously seen addressed, that is, the origin of the concept of the Christian Trinity or Triune God. The roots of monotheism can be found in North Africa before finding its way into the Middle East. A triune godhead is unquestionably out of sync with Jewish and Muslim thought. According to Dr. Bolen, the concept of a triune deity can be traced to the pre-patriachical myths of Mediterranean Europe. This forerunner was a female figure (mother, maiden/daughter, grandmother/wise one) before being transitioned to a male figure in Greek mythology. I accept Dr. Bolen's premise that a life threatening illness puts one on a soul journey. One doesn't get to choose whether or not to take such a journey; one's choice is how that travel will proceed and where it will lead.
Dr. Siegel follows in the tradition of Viktor Frankl assuring readers that we may not be able to control that which happens to us, but that we can control our response to that which happens thereby directly and significantly influencing the impact upon ourselves of that which happens. Furthermore, he proceeds to tell us how that can be accomplished.
A final word of caution: don't confuse Dr. Siegel's book with Louise Erdrich's book simply titled: Love Medicine. The latter is also a good read--a tale of inter-generational journeying.
Sunday, May 17, 2015
Sunday, May 10, 2015
It is curious how a reading on one topic prompts one to think of another topic. A recent article on the Religious Dispatches website did just that.
http://religiondispatches.org/nightly-news-turns-to-bishops-about-contraception-more-often-than-docs/
I found myself thinking about the upcoming, much touted, and equally maligned papal encyclical on the environment and, more specifically climate change. Can we or will we get it right this time? Will the best of contemporary science form the underpinnings of and serve as guidance for the discussion of environmental concerns and the proper responses by humankind? As we have seen in the six decades of discussion of reproductive health, social, political, cultural, philosophical, and theological perspectives have most often held sway over good science--the knowledge of how things are and how they work. The above article is evidence of how little emphasis is placed on a clear and thorough understanding of the nature of things before we go about crafting social convention, stake out political and moral positions, and fit new knowledge within the context of existing knowledge. There is little reason for confidence that any future discussion of reproductive health in the public square will be any different than the typical discussion seen to date.
Maybe we can get it done better this time. The public will need to challenge the press and those who propose to address the topic as experts. The challenge is to demand to see the evidence of the science that underpins their respective positions. If the science presented is not supported by an adequate evidence base, then it--the science--and the accompanying social, political, cultural, philosophical, or theological position are to be set aside in favor of those founded on the best science at our disposal. In recent years, there are those within the scientific community who are increasingly willing to confound those employing questionable science to support equally questionable positions. Anyone proposing to speak in the public square can and should expect a similar challenge.
http://religiondispatches.org/nightly-news-turns-to-bishops-about-contraception-more-often-than-docs/
I found myself thinking about the upcoming, much touted, and equally maligned papal encyclical on the environment and, more specifically climate change. Can we or will we get it right this time? Will the best of contemporary science form the underpinnings of and serve as guidance for the discussion of environmental concerns and the proper responses by humankind? As we have seen in the six decades of discussion of reproductive health, social, political, cultural, philosophical, and theological perspectives have most often held sway over good science--the knowledge of how things are and how they work. The above article is evidence of how little emphasis is placed on a clear and thorough understanding of the nature of things before we go about crafting social convention, stake out political and moral positions, and fit new knowledge within the context of existing knowledge. There is little reason for confidence that any future discussion of reproductive health in the public square will be any different than the typical discussion seen to date.
Maybe we can get it done better this time. The public will need to challenge the press and those who propose to address the topic as experts. The challenge is to demand to see the evidence of the science that underpins their respective positions. If the science presented is not supported by an adequate evidence base, then it--the science--and the accompanying social, political, cultural, philosophical, or theological position are to be set aside in favor of those founded on the best science at our disposal. In recent years, there are those within the scientific community who are increasingly willing to confound those employing questionable science to support equally questionable positions. Anyone proposing to speak in the public square can and should expect a similar challenge.
Monday, May 4, 2015
Another month has passed and another Tree Board meeting has been logged. There are pictures to prove it.
http://artsbayfieldalmanac.blogspot.com/2015/05/when-to-remove-support-stakes-from.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ArtsBayfieldAlmanac+%28Art%27s+Bayfield+Almanac%29
The tree puller never left the truck until Art was back home. The steel posts had not been driven that deep and there was enough moisture in the soil so post extraction by the pre-puller method worked just as well. It may also have proved to be a lot safer for me. The puller is designed so that it folds over onto itself, I suspect, to make it neat and tidy to store and transport. At the same time, there are lots of places to pinch one's fingers.
The pulled posts did not end up in my yard where they might be expecting a reincarnation as urban poultry fencing. They were returned to the landscaper, who had planted the trees and staked them at that time.
Reading Art's blog--not just looking at the pictures--will eliminate any excuse one has for improperly staking trees and failing to remove them in a timely manner. With a little information, anyone can pass as an arborist and possibly some day grow up to be a member of the local tree board.
http://artsbayfieldalmanac.blogspot.com/2015/05/when-to-remove-support-stakes-from.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ArtsBayfieldAlmanac+%28Art%27s+Bayfield+Almanac%29
The tree puller never left the truck until Art was back home. The steel posts had not been driven that deep and there was enough moisture in the soil so post extraction by the pre-puller method worked just as well. It may also have proved to be a lot safer for me. The puller is designed so that it folds over onto itself, I suspect, to make it neat and tidy to store and transport. At the same time, there are lots of places to pinch one's fingers.
The pulled posts did not end up in my yard where they might be expecting a reincarnation as urban poultry fencing. They were returned to the landscaper, who had planted the trees and staked them at that time.
Reading Art's blog--not just looking at the pictures--will eliminate any excuse one has for improperly staking trees and failing to remove them in a timely manner. With a little information, anyone can pass as an arborist and possibly some day grow up to be a member of the local tree board.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)