Reality and our Memories of it A theory of Memory and Mind, and its Implications
Martin Squibbs
October 20, 2013
Martin Squibbs
I have introduced my theory regarding the form and nature of our minds and ourselves in previous talks. In this talk I want to focus on it and clarify it.
At its core, I propose that our brains not only hold our memories of our past, our knowledge, and our future; they actually form these memories in the first place. In fact, I propose the brain is the only place in reality where such memories are formed, exist and can be found. And we, ourselves, exist and live within our brain surrounded by this “world” of memories. I wish to consider the processes by which we form these and other different types of memory, along with distinguishing between our emotional and objective worlds. I wish to recognize the language and measurement systems we have abstracted from our memories in order to compare, consider, store, share and better understand them, and what methods we employ for storing and sharing them. Finally, I wish to consider some of the scientific and ethical implications of my theory, if it’s true. That is, beyond Philosophical curiosity, what difference does this theory make; to ourselves, to our human worlds, to life, and to reality as a whole? How does it help us to live more ethically, more truthfully, more joyfully, and with greater integrity?
Dealing with Life
We remember them, wonderful, true,
Who gave us life, would see us through
We remember their love, kind and warm,
That’s cherished our worlds since we were born
And others too, of civilized means
Who created each country from fields of dreams
Who took the bitter anger of hate
And transformed it into a civilized state
And yet still more, with science in mind
Their dream, mysterious reality to find
They fill up time, with a Universe to know
Their job, true knowledge, to gently grow
Then those with a vision to improve our lives
With creative tools, and so they strive
To shape our science into technology new
And so, with computer, I write to you
And so many others, that live for our sake,
With the grain they grow, and the bread they bake
From constructing our houses, to packaging our tea
They’re shaping the dreams of the few into reality
And let’s not forget, the warrior soul
In honor and bravery, lies their role
From visions cruel, disturbed in offense
For their children above, they fight in defense
Yes, let us remember this human mind
Filled with this history of human kind,
And its dreams and its futures yet to come
Of so much work yet to be done
But my point, my friends, goes beyond these tales.
To nature, real, within which they are held.
So let us not forget where these minds persist
Within this body of life, is where they exist
Within this brain, with its billions of cells
Within this body, which poops and smells
Breathing in life, beating with heart
Walking on Earth, from the start
Relying on tree, and river, and vale
To know of now, and tell its tale
So for all the heroes remembered above
And joy and sadness, and fear and love
For all the stories we each proudly hold
Of dreams anew and pasts untold
They all depend on this living creation
Family, friends, company and nation
We must protect living nature real
To keep alive these worlds in which we deal
Relational Intelligence: Human beings are social animals, we live in systems of relationships, with nature, other people, objects, etc.
In this talk we will focus on 5 key relationships for human beings. We will also focus on the role of language and conversations in creating and maintaining effective relationships. Conversations for creating relationships, conversations for exploring possibilities, and conversations for effective coordination of actions. We will also look into the systemic relationship between emotions and conversations, and the emotion of love as the foundation to human relations.
Manga is the director of the Center for Evolutionary Leadership, which develops leaders for building a just, flourishing, and sustainable world. He is also a leadership coach and organizational consultant.
Center for Evolutionary Leadership: www.evolutionleader.com. “Homo sapiens-ethicus evolutivo: being ethical & choosing to bring forth relational systems that are loving, just, flourishing, & sustainable.”
John Rawls is the most influential Anglo-American political theorist of the past three centuries. In bestowing the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Rawls in 1999, Bill Clinton noted that he had put our liberties on a brilliant new foundation. That foundation is a refined version of the social contract as developed by early modern thinkers like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. It is of particular interest for Humanists since it provides an objective but workable basis for politics and ethics. It is neither objective, that is, in the sense of some transcendental foundation like God or Nature, nor purely subjective, with the nihilist dead end to which that leads. It is a contract, the basic terms of which, Rawls argues, we would (and do) accept as the basis of our politics and ethics. Besides presenting the basic method and principles for which Rawls argues, Carcieri will also present Rawls’ famous theory of civil disobedience, which builds upon the work of Thoreau, Gandhi, King, and others.
Martin Carcieri is an Associate Professor of Political Science at San Francisco State University, where he teaches courses and seminars on Constitutional Law and Political Theory. He holds a J.D. and Ph.D. from the University of California, and has published twenty-five journal articles and book chapters.
Bridging the God Gap:
How to Find Common Ground with Theistic Friends and Family Members
Dr. Chris Schriner
September 29, 2013
Dr. Chris Schriner
Did you know that atheists are the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry? According to a recent study, they are “seen as a threat to the American way of life.” The authors of a study of North American atheists were “astonished” that so many had paid a heavy price for disbelief. “Even in the San Francisco area – arguably the most tolerant part of the United States – [about half] reported that being a nonbeliever had produced difficulty with relatives and friends” (Hunsberger and Altemeyer, Atheists: A Groundbreaking Study of America’s Nonbelievers, p. 55). As one atheist commented, “. . . I keep quiet about it. People assume you are heartless, shallow, amoral, and it calls their own beliefs into question. Atheism greatly disturbs people” (p. 47).
No wonder it’s such a challenge for believers and non-believers to talk about religion!
Dr. Chris Schriner is Minister Emeritus of Mission Peak Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Fremont and a retired psychotherapist. Unitarian Universalism includes both theists and atheists, and Chris has emphasized positive communication between theistic and atheistic members of his congregations. He is the author of five books, including Bridging the God Gap: Finding Common Ground Among Believers, Atheists and Agnostics.
Bridging the God Gap strongly affirms the legitimacy of secular humanism, and Chris will suggest ways of helping people see atheism as a valid and potentially positive life stance. He will also describe techniques for discussing theology without coming to blows, and ways of finding conceptual common ground with some liberal theists.
————–
Dr. Schriner’s handout at the Forum:
Practicing Positive Communication
Here are seven strategies that help disarm difficult conversations about theology, based upon Bridging the God Gap: Finding Common Ground Among Believers, Atheists and Agnostics, by Roger Christan Schriner, available at Amazon.com. For more information contact Chris at cschriner@uuma.org, or access his blogs:
Theists & Atheists: Communication & Common Ground, http://theistsandatheists.wordpress.com
Did God Really Say THAT!? A Blog about the Bible, http://didgodreallysaythat.wordpress.com
1. Pre-communicate. Talk about what you’re going to talk about. Say what you hope to accomplish. “There’s a distance between us because of our religious beliefs. I would like to take a little step toward bridging that gap.” You may want to frankly acknowledge that one discussion won’t fix everything.
2. Once you begin, keep your main goals in mind. Concentrate on the most important items instead of getting lost in a dust-storm of details. State one or two central points, and repeat them so that they stand out. Resist the temptation to veer off onto trivial tangents to make an impressive point.
3. Throughout the conversation, try to stay connected, heart to heart. Without knowing it we may approach a dialogue about religion as if we’ve entered a physical fight. When we smite someone on the forehead with a particularly weighty argument, we may expect this poor benighted soul to bow down in surrender, grateful for having been shown the light. How disappointing when people just resent us for making them look stupid.
Attitude is crucial. If you are sincerely interested in connecting with another human being, he or she will probably feel safe enough to open up. Even if you stumble and stammer, your good intentions will come across. But if your goal is to attack, debate, or dominate, it’s hard to conceal this agenda with handy-dandy communication techniques.
When you start to lose personal connection, you might say, “I can feel myself starting to treat this like a battle. But I care about you and I want to treat you right.” Be especially careful if you find yourself getting flustered. Do not blurt things out while you are upset. Take a breath, and remember that your goal is to reach out, not put down.
To help stay connected, be big-hearted about criticism. Refrain from firing back impulsively, shooting from the hip. When attacked, listen and reflect before responding. After pausing to regain clarity – and charity – show your critic that you can see how it looks from his or her viewpoint, even if you don’t agree. Then say what you believe.
4. Listen well, and ask to be heard in return. Think of talk radio as an example of how not to speak and listen respectfully. Be honest with yourself about your own conversational faults. Do you resort to sarcasm? Personal attacks? Name-calling? A condescending tone of voice or facial expression? If you catch yourself being hostile or demeaning you can admit it and apologize. People appreciate such candor and humility.
5. Treat this talk as an opportunity to practice clear awareness. Raise your antennae, and tune in to more than the obvious. Communication isn’t just kicking words around like a soccer ball. We also send messages with our tone of voice, how fast or loud we are talking, and what we do not say. Be aware also of posture, body position, facial expressions, movements, gestures, and eye contact (or the lack of it).
Talking about religion is an exercise in empathetic imagination. We communicate best when we notice what the other person is feeling and thinking, and what we will sometimes sense is pain. People are distressed when their religious views are questioned. When we become distressed we need to talk it out, to diminish the pressure we feel inside. Then we are able to think more clearly.
6. Practice meta-communication, communication about communication. Comment occasionally about how this chat is progressing. Express appreciation for what’s working well. Mention ways that you are trying to be constructive and ways your friend seems to be doing the same. Be gracious about admitting glitches and commit yourself to doing better.
7. Practice post-communication. After you say something important, check to see if your message was received. It has been said that the main problem with communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished. Don’t just make noises in the direction of your friend and assume that your message is getting through. Find out what he or she is hearing. “The main thing I’m trying to say is ______ Do you see what I’m driving at?” And make sure you are hearing clearly: “Basically, you are saying ______. Is that right?” “Are you saying ____ or are you saying ____?”
Before parting, thank your friend for sharing something personal and significant.
Few rules are absolute, and any set of guidelines can backfire under certain circumstances. Let each situation guide your actions. But these seven time-tested principles usually work just fine.
Theism and Atheism: A Matter of Degree
Both theists and atheists may think of reality in personal terms. Theists usually apply personal descriptions more literally, but there is no clear dividing line between literal and metaphorical language. Poetry and factual description shade off into each other:
God is a person who looks like us . . .
God is a person but does not have a human body . . .
Calling God a person is a human way of speaking
about something far beyond our understanding . . .
Ultimate Reality is trans-personal, but
we can metaphorically think of it as a Thou . . .
The universe is physical but it has personal qualities . . .
The universe does not actually have such qualities,
but we can speak poetically as if it does . . .
The universe, and whatever caused or created
the universe, should never be thought of as personal.
People often slide up or down this continuum with changing moods and social contexts.
——————-
For more on Dr. Schriner’s views see his two blogs:
Miharu Alison Sato (M.S., Registered Dietician, Certified Diabetes Educator, and a Health Educator for the Palo Alto Medical Foundation) will discuss what makes up a healthy diet. The extent to which different types of meat, dairy products, and eggs can be part of a healthy diet, and what easily accessible and healthier substitutes for these foods exist (if any), will also be discussed.
