Today we examined Erik Erikson's Psychosocial Stages, and we looked at the life span from birth to death. We considered some common issues for people of all ages, including older adults.
What does it mean to "age well"? How would you define this? Are there things you can be doing now that will help to ensure that you age well?
Friday, February 29, 2008
Friday, February 22, 2008
Does Spirituality Affect Behavior?
Last Tuesday I attended an interesting lecture on Hinduism and Catholicism at Loyola Marymount University. The lecture was given by Daniel L. Smith-Christopher who is a Professor of Old Testament and Director of Peace Studies at Loyola, and also by Graham Schweig who earned his doctorate in Comparative Religion from Harvard University and is currently Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Christopher Newport University in Virginia.
The lecture focused on exploring themes of war and peace found in the Old Testament and also in the Bhagavad Gita, the ancient religious texts used in Christianity and Hinduism.
Professor Smith spoke first, and he immediately stated that in the interest of "full disclosure", he told the audience how he was born a Quaker and was raised a Quaker, and that he emphatically believes that killing is wrong. To a peace activist like myself, this was music to my ears. I looked around and saw many nodding their heads in agreement. Clearly, this was a friendly audience made up of what looked to me like priests, Hindus, peace activists, and yogis. Professor Smith discussed a few stories from the Old Testament, and he made the point that the Old Testament was not intended for ethical instruction or military strategy, but is largely allegorical and symbolic. He also touched upon the "just war" theory, and pointed out that this theory was based more on Roman politics and not on scripture.
Next Professor Schweig spoke about the Bhagavad Gita and how it is a 700 verse subtext of the larger text the Mahabharata, but that the Bhagavad Gita is often read as an independent text. He describesd how in the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna is the main speaker while Sanjaya is the narrarator. Professor Schweig, who recently published his own translation of the Bhagavad Gita, interpreted many of the individual verses. He explained that one of the main themes found in the Bhagavad Gita surrounds the idea of conflict and how there will always be conflict in the world. He stated that the question is not how do we get rid of conflict but how do we process it? Do we process conflict towards violence or peace? Professor Schweig expressed the idea that conflict is part of humanity learning how to love, and that conflict can lead to either dissolution or resolution.
After both professors spoke, there was time for questions from the audience. The first question came from a man asking the professors to explain the Hindu idea of reincarnation versus the Christian idea of the soul. Professor Schweig said that one difference is that in the reincarnation belief system, we get more than one chance to get it right in that we are not doomed to hell based on one immoral life but get to have another chance in multiple lives. This was contrasted with the Christian idea of having one chance to live a moral life which will determine whether one spends eternity in heaven or hell.
This prompted a couple of women from the audience to raise the idea that there are words in the Bible that hint at the idea of reincarnation, and that because the Bible has been frequently altered and edited by various popes and leaders of the Church over time, that it is difficult to truly rule out the idea of reincarnation in the Christian faith. Professor Smith strongly responded that this is an uphill argument in the Christian fatih.
Another concept that arose during the questions and answers was the sanskrit term ahimsa, which translates to "Harm none" or nonviolence and is a tenet of yogic philosophy. Members in the audience and also both professors clarified that there are different levels of violence and ahimsa asks us to reject all levels of violence. Professor Schweig reminded the audience how we are called to practice ahimsa even at the level of conversation, and that we should strive to speak with others in a nonharmful peaceful way.
This led me to reflect on my own life and the way in which I converse with others including my family, neighbors, friends, colleagues, and yes, even in the blogosphere. Am I able to practice ahimsa when conversing with someone I disagree with? Can I clearly voice my views but in a nonviolent way? How about when I am tired and low on patience or angry, do I still practice ahimsa? Truly practicing ahimsa at every level is indeed challenging.
In psychology class we learned that psychology is the study of behavior and mental processes. Attending this lecture has caused me to reflect on the way in which one's spirituality affects one's behavior. In my case, my spiritual beliefs affect every aspect of my life including relationships, career, diet, political beliefs as well as every purchase I make.
My question is: do you believe that one's spiritual beliefs affect one's behavior and if so,in what ways does spirituality affect behavior? Feel free to speak from your own spiritual beliefs and experiences if you like.
The lecture focused on exploring themes of war and peace found in the Old Testament and also in the Bhagavad Gita, the ancient religious texts used in Christianity and Hinduism.
Professor Smith spoke first, and he immediately stated that in the interest of "full disclosure", he told the audience how he was born a Quaker and was raised a Quaker, and that he emphatically believes that killing is wrong. To a peace activist like myself, this was music to my ears. I looked around and saw many nodding their heads in agreement. Clearly, this was a friendly audience made up of what looked to me like priests, Hindus, peace activists, and yogis. Professor Smith discussed a few stories from the Old Testament, and he made the point that the Old Testament was not intended for ethical instruction or military strategy, but is largely allegorical and symbolic. He also touched upon the "just war" theory, and pointed out that this theory was based more on Roman politics and not on scripture.
Next Professor Schweig spoke about the Bhagavad Gita and how it is a 700 verse subtext of the larger text the Mahabharata, but that the Bhagavad Gita is often read as an independent text. He describesd how in the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna is the main speaker while Sanjaya is the narrarator. Professor Schweig, who recently published his own translation of the Bhagavad Gita, interpreted many of the individual verses. He explained that one of the main themes found in the Bhagavad Gita surrounds the idea of conflict and how there will always be conflict in the world. He stated that the question is not how do we get rid of conflict but how do we process it? Do we process conflict towards violence or peace? Professor Schweig expressed the idea that conflict is part of humanity learning how to love, and that conflict can lead to either dissolution or resolution.
After both professors spoke, there was time for questions from the audience. The first question came from a man asking the professors to explain the Hindu idea of reincarnation versus the Christian idea of the soul. Professor Schweig said that one difference is that in the reincarnation belief system, we get more than one chance to get it right in that we are not doomed to hell based on one immoral life but get to have another chance in multiple lives. This was contrasted with the Christian idea of having one chance to live a moral life which will determine whether one spends eternity in heaven or hell.
This prompted a couple of women from the audience to raise the idea that there are words in the Bible that hint at the idea of reincarnation, and that because the Bible has been frequently altered and edited by various popes and leaders of the Church over time, that it is difficult to truly rule out the idea of reincarnation in the Christian faith. Professor Smith strongly responded that this is an uphill argument in the Christian fatih.
Another concept that arose during the questions and answers was the sanskrit term ahimsa, which translates to "Harm none" or nonviolence and is a tenet of yogic philosophy. Members in the audience and also both professors clarified that there are different levels of violence and ahimsa asks us to reject all levels of violence. Professor Schweig reminded the audience how we are called to practice ahimsa even at the level of conversation, and that we should strive to speak with others in a nonharmful peaceful way.
This led me to reflect on my own life and the way in which I converse with others including my family, neighbors, friends, colleagues, and yes, even in the blogosphere. Am I able to practice ahimsa when conversing with someone I disagree with? Can I clearly voice my views but in a nonviolent way? How about when I am tired and low on patience or angry, do I still practice ahimsa? Truly practicing ahimsa at every level is indeed challenging.
In psychology class we learned that psychology is the study of behavior and mental processes. Attending this lecture has caused me to reflect on the way in which one's spirituality affects one's behavior. In my case, my spiritual beliefs affect every aspect of my life including relationships, career, diet, political beliefs as well as every purchase I make.
My question is: do you believe that one's spiritual beliefs affect one's behavior and if so,in what ways does spirituality affect behavior? Feel free to speak from your own spiritual beliefs and experiences if you like.
Friday, February 1, 2008
The Crowd Outside the Los Angeles Democratic Debate
Last night the Democratic debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama took place at the Kodak Theater in Hollywood. For a political junkie like myself, I was irrisistably pulled to the action outside the theater. I picked up my children, Trevor age 8 and Taj age 5 from school, and off we went to witness history in the making firsthand.
I parked in the underground parking lot of the mall at Hollywood and Highland where the Kodak Theater is located. As we ascended up the escalators, I could hear the crowd roaring with applause at the pre-debate coverage. We could feel the electric excitement in the air.
We stepped out into the courtyard where a gigantic screen was set up for the crowd to watch the debate. All around us were people bustling around with their signs of support for Obama or Clinton. I carried my "Impeachment is Patriotic" sign while Trevor and Taj carried identical "U.S. Out of Iraq Now!" signs. When we stepped into the action, we were immediately approached by several people addressing Trevor and Taj with "We are so glad you are part of the process!" and "You are our future and you give us hope!". Throughout the night several photographers asked for permission to take pictures of Trevor and Taj holding their signs. One asked for our names and said we might be in a magazine, which the kids thought was so neat.
All the heavy hitters from the progressive movement were there including ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), the Progressive Democrats, and Code Pink to name just a few. The impeachment movement was out in full force. When we first arrived at the courtyard, they were walking around with an enormous banner calling for impeachment. With my sign and my "Impeach Cheney" cap that I was wearing, I noticed that I was receiving so many positive remarks towards impeachment from both Clinton and Obama supporters.
We walked around and joined the Obama supporters who were rowdy and enthusiastic. Then we checked out the Clinton supporters who were equally raucous and excited. It looked to me like both campaigns had tons of supporters and were very well organized. Everyone was talking and socializing and having a rollicking good time. The Obama supporters were trying to outcheer the Clinton supporters but all were smiling and being good natured, as we are all Democrats after all.
We then walked down the steps to Highland Ave. which was closed off for the crowd. The ANSWER coaliton had gathered there and were chanting with their drums and noise makers for peace and withdrawal from Iraq. They want to continue pressuring the Democrats to let them know that we will not rest until the occupation of Iraq ends and our troops are brought home. The impeachment contingency was there and we received a warm welcome. Code Pink was there promoting their campaign "Don't Buy Bush's War" which is enlisting an army of people to refuse to pay a small percentage of their taxes as a form of protest for the war, Boston Tea Party style.
There were some extremely dramatic performance artists dressed in orange prisoner attire and masks over their heads who symbolized the prisoners being held for 5 years at Guantanamo Bay who have been denied their habeus corpus rights in that they have not been charged with a crime and have been denied their right to a fair trial. At one point, one of the artists whose face was painted white and was dressed in white, (maybe to represent death?), began a simulation of water boarding one of the "prisoners", spreading awareness about the Bush administration's condonement of torture.
Even though Dennis Kucinich formally dropped out of the race,there were many steadfast and devoted Kucinch supporters with signs criticizing the corporate media for systematically blocking him from the debates, and other signs announcing that Kucinich has the most integrity. Is it any surprise that CNN left them out of the coverage?
As for the Republican party, there was quite a large and boisterous group of Ron Paul supporters. I saw one lone Huckabee sign, and one man with a bullhorn yelling "God bless Bush,God bless our troops!"
As far as the demographics of the crowd, there were all kinds of people there including young, old, and all different ethnicities. I saw many young parents with small children and babies. I chatted with a young mom who I instantly recognized as a kindred spirit as she was there by herself with her two young kids just as I was. Her kids carried artistic Obama signs that they had painted themselves.
All of this political excitement took place against the backdrop of Hollyweird, with the usual Elvis impersonators, etc. that frequent Hollywood and Highland on a regular basis. Many entrepreneurs decided to cash in on the event as they hawked both Clinton and Obama paraphernalia side by side. I felt that the diversity of colorful Los Angeles really shone through.
We eventually found my husband Clifton who met us there, and we decided to go have dinner at one of the many restaurants in the Hollywood and Highland mall. We decided on Shabu Shabu, a Japanese joint where you cook your own soup at your table. (fun for the kids) They were playing the debate on the TV in the bar, and had the audio over the loudspeaker. Of course, the restaurant was filled with Obama and Clinton supporters. We were lucky to get a table, and when we sat down, Taj looked peeved and said, "We need a table by the TV. We can't watch the debate from here!" Trevor responded by saying "Well, we can still hear what they are saying." That did not satisfy Taj who responded, "But I want to see who is talking!". My husband and I could not help but crack up, as here is a five year old genuinely interested in politics!
After dinner although the debate had now ended, the crowd continued to party on. We watched the action from the third floor balcony as the Clinton/Obama supporters mingled with the peace activists, impeachment supporters, and yes, even the Elvis impersonator. It was about 8:00 PM and I was ready to call it a night, when much to my surprise Trevor announced that he wanted to go and rejoin the crowd and continue demonstrating. I was surprised because both Trevor and Taj have been attending peace marches and political events since they were in diapers, and so sometimes they are less than enthusiastic about their parents dragging them to yet another political activity. However, I guess the genuine excitement inspired them just as much as the adults.
I must express that once again I feel snubbed by the mainstream media. It seems that the common folk who took the time to rally outside the debate and express the wishes of the people, simply do not matter. For example, today's Los Angeles Times mentions that there were thousands of people outside the debate, but neglects to mention what messages those thousands of people were expressing. Why does the mainstream media not even mention the many different opinions represented by the crowd outside? What do we the people have to do in order to make our viewpoints heard?
I am looking forward to seeing the results of Super Tuesday. Until then, peace always!
I parked in the underground parking lot of the mall at Hollywood and Highland where the Kodak Theater is located. As we ascended up the escalators, I could hear the crowd roaring with applause at the pre-debate coverage. We could feel the electric excitement in the air.
We stepped out into the courtyard where a gigantic screen was set up for the crowd to watch the debate. All around us were people bustling around with their signs of support for Obama or Clinton. I carried my "Impeachment is Patriotic" sign while Trevor and Taj carried identical "U.S. Out of Iraq Now!" signs. When we stepped into the action, we were immediately approached by several people addressing Trevor and Taj with "We are so glad you are part of the process!" and "You are our future and you give us hope!". Throughout the night several photographers asked for permission to take pictures of Trevor and Taj holding their signs. One asked for our names and said we might be in a magazine, which the kids thought was so neat.
All the heavy hitters from the progressive movement were there including ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), the Progressive Democrats, and Code Pink to name just a few. The impeachment movement was out in full force. When we first arrived at the courtyard, they were walking around with an enormous banner calling for impeachment. With my sign and my "Impeach Cheney" cap that I was wearing, I noticed that I was receiving so many positive remarks towards impeachment from both Clinton and Obama supporters.
We walked around and joined the Obama supporters who were rowdy and enthusiastic. Then we checked out the Clinton supporters who were equally raucous and excited. It looked to me like both campaigns had tons of supporters and were very well organized. Everyone was talking and socializing and having a rollicking good time. The Obama supporters were trying to outcheer the Clinton supporters but all were smiling and being good natured, as we are all Democrats after all.
We then walked down the steps to Highland Ave. which was closed off for the crowd. The ANSWER coaliton had gathered there and were chanting with their drums and noise makers for peace and withdrawal from Iraq. They want to continue pressuring the Democrats to let them know that we will not rest until the occupation of Iraq ends and our troops are brought home. The impeachment contingency was there and we received a warm welcome. Code Pink was there promoting their campaign "Don't Buy Bush's War" which is enlisting an army of people to refuse to pay a small percentage of their taxes as a form of protest for the war, Boston Tea Party style.
There were some extremely dramatic performance artists dressed in orange prisoner attire and masks over their heads who symbolized the prisoners being held for 5 years at Guantanamo Bay who have been denied their habeus corpus rights in that they have not been charged with a crime and have been denied their right to a fair trial. At one point, one of the artists whose face was painted white and was dressed in white, (maybe to represent death?), began a simulation of water boarding one of the "prisoners", spreading awareness about the Bush administration's condonement of torture.
Even though Dennis Kucinich formally dropped out of the race,there were many steadfast and devoted Kucinch supporters with signs criticizing the corporate media for systematically blocking him from the debates, and other signs announcing that Kucinich has the most integrity. Is it any surprise that CNN left them out of the coverage?
As for the Republican party, there was quite a large and boisterous group of Ron Paul supporters. I saw one lone Huckabee sign, and one man with a bullhorn yelling "God bless Bush,God bless our troops!"
As far as the demographics of the crowd, there were all kinds of people there including young, old, and all different ethnicities. I saw many young parents with small children and babies. I chatted with a young mom who I instantly recognized as a kindred spirit as she was there by herself with her two young kids just as I was. Her kids carried artistic Obama signs that they had painted themselves.
All of this political excitement took place against the backdrop of Hollyweird, with the usual Elvis impersonators, etc. that frequent Hollywood and Highland on a regular basis. Many entrepreneurs decided to cash in on the event as they hawked both Clinton and Obama paraphernalia side by side. I felt that the diversity of colorful Los Angeles really shone through.
We eventually found my husband Clifton who met us there, and we decided to go have dinner at one of the many restaurants in the Hollywood and Highland mall. We decided on Shabu Shabu, a Japanese joint where you cook your own soup at your table. (fun for the kids) They were playing the debate on the TV in the bar, and had the audio over the loudspeaker. Of course, the restaurant was filled with Obama and Clinton supporters. We were lucky to get a table, and when we sat down, Taj looked peeved and said, "We need a table by the TV. We can't watch the debate from here!" Trevor responded by saying "Well, we can still hear what they are saying." That did not satisfy Taj who responded, "But I want to see who is talking!". My husband and I could not help but crack up, as here is a five year old genuinely interested in politics!
After dinner although the debate had now ended, the crowd continued to party on. We watched the action from the third floor balcony as the Clinton/Obama supporters mingled with the peace activists, impeachment supporters, and yes, even the Elvis impersonator. It was about 8:00 PM and I was ready to call it a night, when much to my surprise Trevor announced that he wanted to go and rejoin the crowd and continue demonstrating. I was surprised because both Trevor and Taj have been attending peace marches and political events since they were in diapers, and so sometimes they are less than enthusiastic about their parents dragging them to yet another political activity. However, I guess the genuine excitement inspired them just as much as the adults.
I must express that once again I feel snubbed by the mainstream media. It seems that the common folk who took the time to rally outside the debate and express the wishes of the people, simply do not matter. For example, today's Los Angeles Times mentions that there were thousands of people outside the debate, but neglects to mention what messages those thousands of people were expressing. Why does the mainstream media not even mention the many different opinions represented by the crowd outside? What do we the people have to do in order to make our viewpoints heard?
I am looking forward to seeing the results of Super Tuesday. Until then, peace always!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)