Driveway biology project

A little dead bird appeared on our driveway one day. Probably the work of our nimble and deadly cat Tassie. Anyway, this is the scene a couple days later (you might want to put down your bowl of cereal).

My wife knows me well

She knows me well enough to take a picture of this bumper-sticker for me.

I appreciate it when people advertise their scientific ignorance.  I try to keep my distance from drivers that believe a magical man is looking out for them.

The Deluded Mind: a review of "The Divided Mind"

Here is my next contribution to the Skeptic North blog. It's a book review of "The Divided Mind: The Epidemic of Mindbody Disorders" by John E. Sarno. Do you think I liked it? You'll have to read it to find out.

The Power of Now (or Obfuscation)

I am insane. I am unconscious. I am mind-identified, and embracing the pain-body. At least, that's how Echart Tolle would describe me. I just finished listening to an audiobook version of his book The Power of Now, and I am NOT on his wavelength. Or should I say, "vibrational frequency"?

Many people revere this book, and Tolle as some sort of Zen master. I just don't see it. To me, the book was like serving after serving of word-spaghetti. He lays out his view of the human psyche, explaining to us that the only real time we have is NOW; the past and the future are just human constructs (OK, but that doesn't make them irrelevant). He goes further to declare that anyone who is not present in the now is "unconscious". Such people are mind-identified... that is, they put too much stake in their own logic and explicit thought processes. Ironically, most people refer to one's logic and explicit thought processes as "consciousness". But Tolle -- knowing better -- decides to reverse the definitions. "Consciousness", according to Tolle, is to turn off your internal voice, power-down your logic, and simply be in the now.

There are many things that I don't like about this book, but I'll try to group them into themes.

I don't like his casual use of poorly-defined words and concepts.

He often uses phrases like "vibrational energy of the frequency field". I'm familiar with a few different definitions for each of those words, but I can't seem to figure out what it all means together. But I needn't worry. Early in the book, Tolle asks us not to get too hung up on the meanings of words. Given that it's a book, I'm not sure where else the meaning can come from. But I guess it's a good thing he starts with that disclaimer, because it takes the wind out of my sails when I want to take him to task on statements like "through becoming vulnerable, can you discover your true and essential invulnerability", or when he describes "a 'no' that is free of all negativity".

And how about this one? "Unless and until you access the consciousness frequency of presence, all relationships -- and particuarly intimate relationships -- are deeply flawed and ultimately dysfunctional." With a properly chosen definition, EVERY relationship could be labeled dysfunctional, regardless of anyone's "consciousness frequency".

I don't like how his convoluted framework prevents anyone from thinking for themselves.

While listening to this book, I felt like I was playing Cups with Chandler Bing; it seemed like every rule was a new rule, completely independent from those preceding. An example, "You cannot be conscious and unhappy, conscious and in negativity. Negativity, unhappiness or suffering in whatever form means that there's resistance, and resistance is always unconscious." He just says things, and people seem to lap it up uncritically.

I don't like his oversimplified solutions.

Question: How can we drop negativity, as you suggest?

Answer: By dropping it. How do you drop a piece of hot coal that you are holding in your hand? How do you drop some heavy and useless baggage that you are carrying? By recognizing that you don't want to suffer the pain or carry the burden anymore, and then letting go of it.

OK, but what if I'm holding the coal so that it doesn't land on my children? Ahhh, I guess I should be in the now, and let my kids deal with the burns. Makes total sense. It seems so simple now.

I feel sorry for Tolle's apparent lack of scientific literacy when he says things like, "Sexual union is the closest you can get to this state [of wholeness] on the physical level. This is why it is the most deeply satisfying experience the physical realm can offer." No evidence or further justification. He just says it as if it's patently obvious. Back here in reality, we have scientific theories explaining why sex is so satisfying; it's called the Theory of Evolution, and it's complete even without an extravagant, mystical pain-body or a "vibrational frequency energy force".

I don't like that he makes claims without evidence.

At times, Tolle takes on a Freudian ideology, attributing human illnesses to mind-identified intelligence. He also says stuff like "Humans are a dangerously insane and very sick species. That's not a judgement; it's a fact." Oh, is it now? Too bad I'm not allowed ask what "insane" means. Here's another one: "All cravings are the mind seeking salvation or fulfillment in external things and in the future as a substitute for the joy of being." Just because he says it doesn't mean it's correct (just like Freud).


I will say one nice thing about the book. The book really seems to be about acceptance. "Being in the now" is about accepting your past instead of dwelling on it, and about letting go of unproductive worry. These ideas make sense to me. What I don't like is that the message is shrouded in a vague, spiritual, convoluted framework, complete with a disclaimer that the words should not be taken at face-value. I would much prefer a scientific explanation. Perhaps Tolle can find a place for his ideas in the right hemisphere of the brain. His "power of now" sounds a lot like the phenomenon that neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor wrote about in My Stroke of Insight; her left-brain was temporarily off-line due to a stroke. She describes her right-brain existence as a deeply satisfying feeling of oneness with the universe.

I suppose Tolle has made a lot of money from this book. If he really is living in the now, I wonder what interest rate his investments earn.

[From intelligent-falling.blogspot.com]

Flimflam inoculation 5: Inappropriate use of the word "energy"

To the scientifically illiterate, the word "energy" conjures up notions of warmth, life and goodness. However, a thermonuclear bomb delivers energy... at a very high rate.

Pseudo-scientific pursuits often misuse the word "energy". Take, for example, this snippit from the FAQ of the PCU College of Holistic Medicine

What are the fundamental differences between traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine?

With its origin in ancient Taoist philosophy, traditional Chinese medicine views a person as an energy system in which body and mind are unified. Western medicine, however, does not share this holistic view as it isolates and separates a disease from a person. Chinese medicine views the body as a small universe, while Western medicine views it as a planet in isolation.

Diagnosis of illness is also approached differently. In addition to finding information about the history of the illness, traditional Chinese medicine diagnosis looks at different parts of the body such to gain valuable information about internal organs and their energies. For example, the tongue is often carefully examined to give detailed patient diagnosis.

Upon diagnosis, a TCM doctor will prescribe a treatment to restore the balance of energy channels in the body. Treatments such as acupuncture, herbal medicine, food cures, massage and/or exercises will be used. The TCM doctor will treat the entire person, including both the physical and the mental aspect.

Restore the balance of "energy channels"? What does that mean?

As a first-order check, ask yourself if the energy can be measured in Joules or Calories. Those are the scientific units by which energy can be quantified. In that context, what is meant by "internal organs and their energies"? Is it the amount of chemical potential energy stored in the molecules? Is it the organ's kinetic energy (from movement)? I suspect it's none of those, but rather a feeble-minded surrogate for "magic".

In addition to its fallacious use of "energy", what else does the FAQ get wrong? Hmmm, last I checked, Western Medicine (which I interpret to mean "science-based medicine") DOES view the body as a system of interacting mass and energy (measured in Joules). And what's with the rather abstract metaphor of viewing a person as a universe, and not "as a planet in isolation"? A universe is in isolation, is it not? It's the planet that is influenced by other stars, planets, etc. Am I missing something here?

Contrary to the FAQ's implication, science-based medicine infers diagnosis (1) by considering the history of illness, and (2) by looking at body parts, (in addition to other sources of information such as test results, etc.). However, science-based medicine does not make wild claims like the health of one's liver is conveniently displayed on their tongue. But apparently that's part of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

Misuse of the word "energy" - or "force" for that matter - is often a sign that someone is trying to sell you something by employing science-sounding jargon. "Quantum physics" is another common import for con-artists. When you hear those terms with no obvious relation to their scientific definitions, seek a second opinion from a real medical professional.

[From intelligent-falling.blogspot.com]