Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Is Philosophy a Luxury? by Pierre Hadot

This is part 12 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

"In general, nonphilosophers consider philosophy to be an abstruse language, an abstract discourse, which a small group of specialists, the only ones able to understand it, develops endlessly on the subject of questions that are incomprehensible and bereft of interest.  It is an occupation reserved for a few privileged people who, thanks to money or to a fortunate concourse of circumstances, have the luxury to engage in it: in other words, a luxury" (p. 186).

He notes that, like art or poetry, philosophy is not a useless luxury.  Rather, it frees us "from utilitarian urgency."  "And it is true that leisure is necessary for this, as leisure is necessary for painting and for composing music and poetry" (p. 187).

"It is precisely the role of philosophy to reveal to men the usefulness or the useless, or, if you will, to teach them to distinguish between two meanings of the word useless.  There is what is useful for a given particular goal: heating, or electricity, or transportation, and there is what is useful to human beings qua human beings, qua thinking beings.  The discourse of philosophy is 'useful' in the latter sense, but it is a luxury if one considers as useful only what serves for particular and material ends" (p. 187).

"What is ultimately the most useful for human beings qua human beings?  Is it discourse on language, or on being and non-being?  Isn't it, rather, to learn how to live a human life?" (p. 188).

"The philosopher was not especially a professor or a writer, but a person who has made a certain choice of life, who has adopted a style of life ... the choice of life was expressed in dogmas" (p. 188).

"Proposing to people the art of living as a human being, they addressed all human beings: slaves, women, and foreigners.  They were missionary and sought to convert the masses" (p. 189).

"But worries, necessities, and the banalities of daily life prevent us from acceding to this conscious life of all its possibilities.  How can one harmoniously unite daily life with philosophical consciousness?  It can only be a fragile conquest, always threatened.  'All that is beautiful,' said Spinoza at the end of Ethics, 'is as difficult as it is rare.'"  And how could the billions of human beings crushed by poverty and suffering achieve this consciousness?  Might not being a philosopher also mean to suffer from this isolation, this privilege, always bearing in mind this drama of the human condition?" (p. 190).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - What is Ethics? by Pierre Hadot

This is part 11 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

Regarding the quest to be your best self -

At the end of the Timaeus, Plato speaks of the most excellent part of ourselves, which we must place in agreement with the harmony of the All.  I was struck, moreover, particularly when commenting on the Manual of Epictetus, to see how the notion of going toward the best, or turning toward the best (p. 176).

...

one might say that it is a quest for a higher state or level of the self (p. 176).

...

All Epictetus' labor consists precisely in trying to make the disciple aware of the fact that we must begin, above all, by sticking with things as they are, that is, with an objective representation ... One very often find lived logic in Marcus Aurelius, but also in Epictetus.  It means becoming aware of destiny, for Stoic philosophy, or else of becoming aware of physical realities, for the Epicureans (p. 177).

...

duties of everyday life ... duty of taking the common good into account (p. 177).

...

there is no separation between everyday life and philosophy (p. 179).

...

One might then speak of silent ethics.  In fact, I have always tended to understand that at the end of the Tractatus, Wittgenstein considers that his reader has learned enough to leave philosophy behind and enter into wisdom, since wisdom is silent (p. 181).

...

Bergson: 'Philosophy is not the construction of a system, but the resolution, taken once and for all, to look naively within oneself and around oneself' (p. 181).

...

There is no end to philosophy, and it always oscillate between two poles: discourse, and decision about a way of life (p. 181).

...

Nietzsche also says, in a very interesting way, that one must not be afraid of taking a Stoic recipe and then, according to the needs of life, an Epicurean recipe (p. 183).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - The Present Alone is Our Happiness by Pierre Hadot

This is part 10 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

Regarding which attitudes and spiritual exercises Hadot prefers and practices - 

meditation on death ... give, as it were, absolute value to every instant of life ... The thought of death thus led me to this exercise of concentration on the present (p. 162).

Regarding the balance between concentration the present and action and orientation to the future -

implies a double liberation: from the weight of the past, and from fear of the future ... concentration on the present is a concentration on what we can really do (p. 163).

Goethe's Faust II says, "Then the spirit look neither forward nor backward.  The present alone is our happiness."  Hadot is asked "how can one say that the present alone is our happiness?"

He cites a portion of the poem in response, "Do you want to mold yourself a pretty life?  Do not let the past worry you, get angry as little as possible, rejoice in the present, rejoice without ceasing, hate no one, and abandon the future to God" (p. 164).

...

it consists in knowing how to recognize the infinite value of every moment.  In fact, this is very difficult, but it is good to regain awareness of the wealth of the present instant as much as possible (p. 165).

...

Ordinarily our life is always incomplete, in the strongest sense of the term, because we project all our hopes, all our aspirations, all our attention into the future, telling ourselves that we will be happy once we have attained this or that goals.  We are afraid as long as the goal is not attained, but if we attain it, already it no longer interests us and we continue to run after something else.  We do not live, we hope to live, we are waiting to live (p. 166).

How do we overcome this?

an action that is well done [is] done for itself, with attention and consciousness. ... we can tell ourselves, I am here, alive, and that's enough ... we can even add, Here I am, in an immense and wonderful world.  It is this present instant, Marcus Aurelius said, that puts us into contact with the whole cosmos.  At every instant I can think of the indescribable cosmic event of which I am a part ... wonder before the world (p. 166).

Regarding the look from above -

the existence of a look from above is indeed attested among the Greeks and the Romans (p. 167).

... 

this exercise consists in imaginatively traversing the immensity of space, and in accompanying the movement of the stars (p. 167).

...

The contemporary period has achieved flight in space.  And those who have lived this experience underwent an unforgettable shock, and reported ideas and sentiments analogous to what was felt by those who had lived it merely as a spiritual exercise (p. 168).

...

aim for objectivity, the impartiality, of the historian and the scholar, but it is also to detach oneself from oneself, in order to open oneself to a universal perspective ... detach oneself from his egotistical point of view ... leave behind a unilateral view of things, to put onself in the place of others.

He quotes Einstein, again, about the human being as a part of the whole (see quote here).

in order to know the authentic value of a human, one must ask to what degree and to what end he has freed himself from himself. ... an awareness of the duty to put oneself in the service of the human community (p. 169).

...

Socrates, in Plato's Apology, insists a great deal on the fact that he neglects all his personal interests to occupy himself only with others (p. 172).

Regarding wonder and the splendor of existence - 

[seeing the world] for the first time is to get rid of the conventional and routine vision we have of things, to rediscover a raw, naïve vision of reality, to take note of the splendor of the world (p. 173)

...

He quotes Seneca, "it often happens to me to look at is as if I were looking at it for the first time" (p. 173).

...

A true connoisseur of nature must also love its repugnant aspects.  In all the works of nature, he said, there is something wonderful (p. 173).

...

Certain human beings, sometimes, very simple and 'ordinary' ones, as Montaigne remarked, have this courage, and thus gain access to the philosophical life.  Even when they suffer and find themselves in a desperate situation, they sometimes manage to consider existence as something splendid (p. 174).

...

One does not produce this sacred quiver at will, but on the rare occasions that it takes hold of one, one must not attempt to get away from it, because one must have the courage to confront the inexpressible mystery of existence (p. 174).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Unacceptable? by Pierre Hadot

This is part 9 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

Regarding how to communicate suggestions for a way of living, he says,

the method of indirect communication.  If one says directly, do this or do that, one dictates a conduct with a tone of false certainty.  But thanks to the description of the spiritual experience lived by another, one can give a glimpse of and suggest a spiritual attitude; one allows a call to be heard that the reader has the freedom to accept or refuse (p. 148).

Regarding memento mori

The exercise of death is in fact an exercise of life (p. 149).

...

to train for dying is in no way to torture one's body; it is 'to train for dying to one's individuality, to one's passions, to see things from the perspective of universality and objectivity ... this does not imply repulsion with regard to the flesh (p. 149).

Regarding the Christian connection to ancient philosophy

the Christians, wanting to seem like a philosophy, generally adopted Platonic philosophy, sometimes tinged with Stoicism (p. 152).

Regarding becoming invulnerable

philosophy is a mode of life ... does not mean that one must slavishly adopt all the attitudes (p. 153).

...

Socrates sincerely loved his children, but he also accepted the order of the world, the will of the gods (p. 153).

...

passions [are] a profound upheaval of intelligence, of insanity ... false judgement ... passions are false judgements ... make [people] lose their head, and [become] incapable of acting (p. 154).

...

the virtues imply respect for the other, whereas the passion of pity basically implies contempt for the other ... one must not allow oneself to be induced into the passion of pity, which disrupts the soul and obscures reason (p. 154).

Regarding desires

All the misfortune of our current civilization is indeed the exasperation of the desire for profit, in all the classes of society, for that matter, but especially in the ruling class.  Common mortals can have simpler desires: work, happiness at home, health (p. 156).

...

To be happy, therefore, one must diminish as much as possible the causes of suffering, that is, desires.  [Epicurus] wanted to heal the misfortunes of humans, and therefore recommended renouncing desires that are very difficult to satisfy, in order to try to be content with the desires that are easer to satisfy ... to eat, to drink, to clothe oneself (p. 157)

Regarding Providence

in the Stoics, one must represent providence not as a divine will interested in all the particular cases, but as on original impulse that instigates the movement of the universe, and the links between cause and effect that constitute destiny (p. 157).

Regarding "anthropological regularities" (e.g. criminal injustices, massacres, provoked famines, misery of the billions)

the Stoics considered there was no evil except in human will.  Thus, for them, what you can anthropological regularities do not belong to the order of the world, and thus, when they speak of collaborating in the work of the Whole, that meant for them recognizing themselves as a part of the universe; a part that, through its existence, contributes in its own way to the general movement of the universe.  It is not that one should consent to everything that is a moral evil, such as injustice and the exploitation of humans by humans, but one should combat it (p. 159)

...

But if action against evil fails, the Stoic is in this case obliged to recognize reality such as it is ... If he is absolutely reduced to powerlessness, he must not revolt uselessly against destiny, but believe that universal Nature and Reason, which here seem to suffer a defeat, since evil seems to be victorious, will be capable of turning what obstructs their path to their favor.  To believe this is to believe in the final triumph of Reason in the World (p. 159).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - From Socrates to Foucault: A Long Tradition by Pierre Hadot

This is part 8 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

The modern day problem of philosophy is a matter of getting it out of the books and into our way of life.  Hadot quotes Merleau-Ponty:

Philosophy put into books no longer accosts people.  What is unusual and almost unbearable in it has hidden itself in the decent life of the great systems (p. 121).

...

if Socrates was a philosopher, it was by walking with his friends, eating with them, discussing with them, going like them to war, and finally drinking the hemlock, not by teaching from the height of a podium.  Thus he showed that everyday life makes it possible to do philosophy (p. 121).

...

Socrates' greatness was to be able to play with children, and to consider that this was time well spent.  Montaigne admires Socrates' capacity to adapt to all circumstances of life, to war and to peace, to abundance and to famine, to ecstasy and to play ... [this example] gives humble and simple folks the courage to live and to die, without need for all the philosophers' discourses.  Socrates lives a human life fully and simply (p. 122).

... 

When Socrates says, 'We owe a cock to Asclepius' it "suggests that Socrates wants to make a sacrifice of gratitude to the god of medicine, for having cured him of life.  Could it be that life, existence, is an illness? ... is not that life in itself is an illness, but that the life of the body is an illness, and that the only true life is the life of the soul (p. 122-123).

Hadot notes that Montaigne is the one "who best understood the essence of Socrates" (p. 124).

Montaigne "opposed well-made heads to head that are well-filled."  He imagines a person who had done nothing all day long, and he responds, "What, you have done nothing, but have you not lived!  Is that not the most illustrious of your preoccupations!"  Hadot continues, "Nietzsche echoes him in this respect, in his claim that human institutions aim at preventing human beings from sensing their lives.  One finds in this passage from Montaigne the recognition of the infinite value of life itself, of existence; this reverses all habitual values, and especially the pervasive idea that what counts above all is to do something, whereas for Montaigne what is more important is to be" (p. 125).

Regarding clarity, Hadot states, "Sometimes one also has the impression that it is a game for the philosopher, who, as we were saying, always has a natural inclination to listen to himself talk and to watch himself write" (p. 130).

Hadot does not prefer the notion of the existentialists about the notion of the absurdity of life.  He finds it "repulsive" and goes on to say, "As soon as God is dead there is no longer any justification of existence; therefore existence is absurd.  Personally, I do not perceive it absurd.  I prefer Merleau-Ponty's position ... 'The world and reason do not pose a problem; one might say that they are mysterious, but this mystery defines them.  There can be no question of dissipating it by some solution; it falls short of solutions.  Real philosophy is to learn to see the world again."

Hadot continues, "Astonishment, wonder before an inexplicable outpouring: I agree - but why nausea?" (p. 131).

Spiritual exercises are often language games, in which one tells oneself a phrase to provoke an effect, whether on others, or on oneself (p. 135).

...

The Stoics would have rejected this idea of an ethics of pleasure.  They were careful to distinguish pleasure and joy: joy, for them - joy, and not pleasure - was to be found not simply in the self, but in the best part of the self.  Seneca find joy no in Seneca, but in Seneca identified with universal Reason.  One rises from one level of the self to another, transcendent level (p. 136).

...

For me, what counts is above all the effort to pass from one perspective to another (p. 137).

...

It seems to me that seeing things in a universal perspective necessarily lead to recognizing certain permanent values: respect for the human person, respect for life, respect for the gift of language, to mention only a few (p. 139).

Regarding philosophies in other cultures, he says, "Now I have changed my mind somewhat, by observing undeniable analogies between Chinese thought and Greek philosophy.  I have spoken about the attitude of indifference toward things, a sort of Stoic attitude; one might also add the notion of instant illumination.  I explain to myself these analogies, not in terms of historical relations, but by the fact that analogous spiritual attitudes can be found in different cultures" (p. 144).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Philosophy as Life and as Quest for Wisdom by Pierre Hadot

This is part 7 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

Regarding 'living philosophically' as a choice and in every day life ... a few quotes.

The Stoics of the Scaevola family were, moreover, the only ones to apply themselves the laws decreed against luxury.  Thus, in everyday life they had an austerity, a moral rigor that the others lacked (p. 98).

...

The Stoics were regarded as excessively austere people (p. 99).

...

Platonism was the movement toward separation of the soul and the body, detachment from the body, and even a tendency to transcend reasoning ... the Neoplatonists [had] the idea that life should be a life of thought, a life of the mind (p. 99).

...

in Antiquity the philosopher was always regarded somewhat like Socrates himself: he is not 'in his place'; he is atopos.  He cannot be put in a particular place, in a special class.  He is unclassifiable (p. 100).

...

Nothing is more opposed to the cult of profit, which is progressively destroying humanity, than this Stoic morality that requires of everyone absolute loyalty, transparency, and disinterestedness (p. 101).

...

It is the problem of the philosopher who should, theoretically speaking, separate himself from the world, but in fact must return to it and lead the everyday life of others. ... Socrates was a philosopher not because he taught from a pulpit, but because he chatted with his friends and joked with them; he also used to go to the agora, and after all this he had an exemplary death.  Thus Socrates' real philsophy is the practice of everyday life (p. 101).

There there is this question posed to Hadot: Can one mix the Stoic attitude with the Epicurean attitude, as did, for example, Goethe, Rousseau, or Thoreau?

"Kant declares that the exercise of virtue must be practiced with Stoic energy and Epicurean joie de vivre."  Of Rousseau, he says, "one finds both the pleasure of existing, and the awareness of being a part of nature."  In Goethe, Hadot notes "half Stoic and half Epicurean."  And of Nietzsche, he says, "one must not be frightened of adopting a Stoic attitude after having benefited from an Epicurean recipe" (p. 102).

Regarding choosing a philosophy, Hadot notes one must try it to be able to learn. He supplies an analogy - riding a bike in the dark, and the light on the bike (which illuminates the path), is connected to the turning of the pedals.  In order to see, you must pedal!

Philosophy is an exercise of awareness.  As stated many times before, it is an exercise of preparing for death.

one had to pass from the empirical and lower self destined to die, to the transcendental self ... one had to detach oneself from sensible life (p. 105).

...

It is a matter of becoming aware that the moment one is still living has infinite value.  Because death may interrupt it, it must be lived in an extremely intense manner as long as death has not arrived (p. 105).

...

This is Horace's well-known carpe-diem: harvest today without thinking of tomorrow (p. 105).

...

one must live every day as though one had completed one's life, and hence with the satisfaction of telling oneself in the evening, 'I have lived' ... one tells oneself that one already has had everything in a single instant of existence.  It is always a matter of becoming aware of the value of existence (p. 105-106).

He is asked if spiritual exercises are a form of egoism.

First, spiritual exercises are intended to let one disengage oneself from egoism. ... detach themselves from the partial and biased self, and to elevate themselves to the level of the superior self.

...

as soon as one attempts to subject himself to reason, one is almost necessarily obliged to renounce egoism (p. 107).

...

The second argument ... ancient philosophers have a very strong concern for others ... take care of others, to make them decide to have concern for themselves. ... the care of the self consists in becoming aware of what one really is, that is, finally, of our identity with reason, and even, among the Stoics, with reason considered as God.  Thus, philosophers have always had concern for others (p. 107).

... 

discipline of action contains a very important element, which is the concern for the common good (p. 108).

...

"Live for others if you want to live for yourself" (Seneca) ... self-transformation consists precisely in being attentive to others (p. 108).

To practice philosophy means to practice living.  He speaks of an ellipse with two poles - "a pole of discourse and a pole of action" (p. 110).

He is asked how does one explain the recession of the practice of spiritual exercises after Antiquity?

I think that the triumph of Christianity played a very large role in this recession.  Confronted by pagan philosophers, revealed Christian theology replaced philosophy as early as the end of Antiquity, and absorbed both ancient philosophy and ancient philosophical life.

Philosophy must be action oriented.

The passage from discourse to life is a tightrope to walk that it is hard to make up one's mind to try.  I will allow myself to cite Kant: 'When you are finally going to begin to live virtuously, said Plato to an old man who was telling him that he was attending lessons on virtue.  You cannot always keep speculating, but you must finally think of passing into action.  But today we consider one who lives in conformity with what he teaches to be a fanatic' (p. 116)

Hadot identified the qualities of the sage.

The first is his love for mankind. ... A second characteristic ... is the audacity of his cosmic wisdom ... a third trait, finally: he is free, without fear, with an inner peace analogous to that of the gods.

Note the three disciplines in the above ... action, desire and assent.

Hadot also quotes Georges Friedmann who said, "the modern sage (if he existed) today would not turn away from the cesspool of men" (p. 118).

the concern to act well without being misled by hatred, anger, or pity, that will oblige one to conquer peace of mind (p. 119).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Unitary Experience and Philosophical Life by Pierre Hadot

This is part 5 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

Hadot, early in his life, pursued a deeply spiritual and mystic life.  He mentions Pascal's experience, which had such a profound effect on Pascal, he sewed a 'memorial' into his coat pocket.  It seems Hadot pursued a similar experience.

I felt the desire to have analogous experiences.  In my eyes, this was the highest point a human life could attain.  I naively believed myself capable of reaching it, as every Christian does, for that matter (p. 75)

Hadot's admission resonates with me.  I recall times from my teenage years, as well as in my 20's and 30's having a desire to see God or at least be visited by Jesus Christ as a way of receiving the Second Comforter (see also this link).

Later in his life, he was disabused of this notion.

The prior of the Carmelite monastery of Avon, not far from Fontainbleau, where I went on a retreat, helped me understand that the desire for direct contact with God was a mistake, and that it was impossible to omit Jesus Christ.  One can wonder, moreover, whether the Christian message is ultimately compatible with mysticism, because mystical experience, as I was saying, is supposed to afford direct contact with God, whereas in Christianity, Christ is the indispensable mediator.  But this is not the occasion to tackle this difficult problem.  In any case, I did not have even the slightest mystical experience (p. 76).

His pivot toward Plotinus began.  He mentions Maritain's book and learning of Plotinus' mysticism and "discovered the existence of a purely philosophical mysticism" (p. 76).

This philosophical mysticism becomes a lesson in the proper and universal perspective.

When one says that the human self life according to the Intellect or the Spirit, or identifies with it, this means it has a perfect transparency in its relation to itself, that it transcends the individual aspects of the self, to attain the level of universality and interiority (p.77).

Regarding mystical experiences via drugs, he says,

they are artificial experiences ... not based on an effective transformation of the individual in the framework of a moral and ascetic preparation ... [drugs] are rather destructive experiences.

Whereas the experiences he has in mind are 

a greater sensitivity to nature, to the universe, and to existence ... feeling of a presence or a fusion with something else ... often expressed in terms borrowed from the vocabulary of love (p. 78).

Hadot is asked, "It seems as though philosophical preparations - ascetic, moral, intellectual - have become just as important for you as unitary experience.  Even if this experience is never produced, the behaviors that prepare for it have value.  What is the relation between the possibility of a unitary experience and the overall necessity of a philosophical life?"

He replies, speaking of Plotinus,

I believe that, for him, if philosophical life in fact prepares one for an eventual mystical experience, this philosophical life has value in itself.  All things considered, Plotinus' mystical experiences were extremely rare.  Porphyry tells us that the rest of the time - that is, almost all the time - he tried 'to be present to himself and to others,' which ultimately is an excellent definition of what every philosophical life should be.

If we now consider the problem in general, we must also say that ecstatic experiences, of whatever kind, are not an integral part of a philosophical life.  If they occur, in one form or another, it is true that they can open perspectives on the mystery of existence for the philosopher, but they cannot be an end in itself, and seeking to provoke them would be useless (p. 81-82).

Thus, another pivot for Hadot - from an ecstatic mystical experience, to in-the-present-moment mystical experiences.  He cites Hugo von Hofmannsthal, who discovers a watering can beneath a tree during one evening, and upon looking in it, discovers an insect crisscrossing the water.  He observes,

all this assemblage of insignificant things communicated the presence of the infinite to me so strongly that a chill ran through me from the roots of my hair to the base of my heels (p. 82-83).

Hadot observes that daily life can be a mystical experience and quotes Seneca: "Man is a sacred thing for a man."  He then insists,

a call not to slavishly reproduce the Plotinian experience, but simply to welcome the mysterious, the ineffable, and the transcendent in human experience with courage (p. 83).

Perhaps the goal of a mystical experience is losing the self in order to see the self as a part of the Universe.

At the moment of ecstasy, the self leaves its limits behind and dilates itself into infinity.  This is both a loss and a gain, the self's accession to a higher mode of being.  One might say that the highest point the self can attain is the point at which one has the impression of losing oneself in something that totally transcends it (p. 84).

What is the true self?  Hadot mentions three levels, plus one: the sensible consciousness (indistinguishable from the body); the rational consciousness (awareness of the soul; discursive reflection); and then spiritual consciousness (it has always been Spirit or Intellect); the plus one level would be the mystical experience of the One - a state of absolute unity and simplicity (p. 85).

He is asked about this quote from Paul Claudel, who said, "Someone within me who is even more myself than me."

Hadot responds that this someone is from a Christian perspective and not from a Plotinian mysticism.  Claudel's idea is that the Creator is more ourselves than we are "because he is at the origin of the self" (p. 85).  Hadot clarifies "the Plotinian One is not personal."

The last question from the chapter discusses the true self - how it is "both inside and outside; it is a continual search for the best part of oneself, which is a self-transcendence as well as a recognition of the fact that one part of ourselves is our true self.  This is the case in Stoicism, in Aristotle, and in Plotinus."

Hadot responds,

What constitutes the essence of the human is thus something that transcends its. ... Marcus Aurelius speaks of the daimon, in inner divinity that is ultimately none other than reason, and is both ourselves and above ourselves.  When the philosopher attempts to attain wisdom, he tends toward this state, in which he would be perfectly identical to the true self, which is the ideal self.

Generally speaking, I personally tend to conceive of the fundamental philosophical choice, and hence the effort toward wisdom, as the transcending of the partial, biased, egocentric, egoist self, in order to attain the level of a higher self.  This self sees all things from a perspective of universality and totality, becoming aware of itself as part of the cosmos and encompassing, then, the totality of things.

He quotes Anne Cheng,

Every form of spirituality begins by 'letting go,' a renunciation of the limited and limiting self.

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Interpretation, Objectivity, and Mistakes by Pierre Hadot

This is part 4 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

He describes, simply, the structure behind Marcus Aurelius' Meditations.

The disciplines of desire, action and assent (judgement) "consist, respectively, in making one's desires, actions, and judgements conform to reason. ... For Marcus Aurelius, the point is to reactualize and awaken for his own sake the dogmas that must guide life.  The manuscripts entitle Marcus Aurelius' book 'For himself,' and this corresponds perfectly to the author's intention" (p. 63).

Regarding the collision of ideas and philosophy, he says, "One might wonder whether the archaic authors or the founders of the schools were also conditioned by a tradition of preexisting literary genres.  I believe so.  There is never an absolute beginning of history.  Oriental models influenced the first Greek thinkers.  Gerard Naddaf has shown the importance of triadic structure in the writings of the pre-Socratics - genesis of the gods, genesis of humans, and genesis of the city - inherited from Babylonian cosmogonic myths, the literary genre in which the biblical Genesis is situated ... I believe it was Bergson who said that every philosopher thinks in reaction to another thinker" (p. 64).

"Latin Fathers and the Greek Fathers sometimes wanted to illustrate their sermons with beautiful thoughts borrowed from pagans.  Thus they cited Plotinus, but without saying so and often for one single sentence" (p. 65).

Regarding being objective, he said, "Thus, the scholars who have the rare courage to admit they they were mistaken in a particular case, or who try not to let themselves be influenced by their own prejudices, are carrying out a spiritual exercise of detachment from the self.  Let us say that objectivity is a virtue, and one that is very difficult to practice.  One must rid of the partiality of the individual and impassioned self, in order to elevate oneself to the universality of the rational self" (p. 66-67).

Late he says, "there is no point in distorting the meaning of a text to try to adapt it to the demands of modern life, or to the aspirations of the soul, and so on.  The first duty is above all the goal of objectivity" (p. 67).

I liked this particular quote he cites from Nietzsche who notes the "good sentence, too hard for the tooth of time, imperishable in the midst of everything that changes."  I think this would describe a good hypomnemata.

I won't quote anything on this thought, but will note on page 70, he gives an example of living with perfect indifference as appearing in China, by Pyrro and by the Stoics.  The idea of consenting to Destiny can be found in the Stoics, in ancient China and in Hindu thought.  The point is: these practices are universal.

At the end of the chapter, he notes the need to know history if one is to practice and understand philosophy.  "It seems to me that the primary quality of a historian of philosophy, and no doubt of a philosopher, is to have a sense for history" (p. 74).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Philosophical Discourse by Pierre Hadot

This is part 3 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

In this chapter, Hadot continues to explain one of his big purposes: to understand historical, philosophical texts in their proper context.  He notes that over time, philosophical writings such as letters, consolations, and hypomnematas to oneself, gradually disappeared and were replaced by "systematic treatises."  The key loss in this change, is philosophy as a mode of life.

He says, "You ask if there has not been a loss from this point of view.  We will return to this question later, but there is the partial but very real loss of the conception of philosophy as a mode of life, as a choice of life, as therapy as well.  We have lost the personal and communal aspect of philosophy.  Moreover, philosophy has progressively entrenched itself in this purely formal path, in the search for novelty in itself at all costs.  The philosopher must be as original as possible, if not by creating a new system, at least by producing a discourse that tries to be highly complicated in order to be original.  The more or less skillful construction of a conceptual edifice has become an end in itself.  Philosophy thus has progressively distanced itself from the concrete life of humans" (p. 56).

It was "Thomas Gataker and Meric Casaubon [who] both saw right away the real literary genre of the works of Marcus Aurelius; they used the Greek work hupomnemata, which designates notes one takes for oneself.  Furthermore, they saw that they were exhortations that Marcus Aurelius made to himself" (p. 57).

This works has lead to the "recovery of the idea that Marcus Aurelius was attempting to awaken in himself the Stoic dogmas that were to govern his life, but that had lost some of their persuasive force; thus it was necessary to attempt to constantly to persuade himself anew.  His goal was to have the Stoic dogmas at hand in an efficient manner - in particular, the three fundamental precepts of Epictetus: never let anything into the mind that is not objective, always take the good of the human community as the end of one's actions, and make one's desires confirm to the rational order of the universe" (p. 57).

Also, these hypomnematas need to be "short and [produce a] striking formula that gives them life again" (p. 58).

Later he states, "the philosophical works of Antiquity were not written to set forth a system, but in order to produce a formative effect" (p. 59).

These are written to "change [one's] mentality and transform his way of seeing things" (p. 59).

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Researcher, Teacher, and Philosopher by Pierre Hadot

This is part 2 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

In this chapter, Hadot explains a bit of his journey from his early spiritual experiences toward becoming a researched, teacher and philosopher.

He mentions how he was "attracted to Plotinus' mysticism" which lead him to "a better understanding of the importance of reflection on the notion of nature" (p. 33).

It seems the next stepping stone was in meeting his future wife (ilsetraut Marten), who was "writing a doctorate ... on the theme of 'Seneca and the tradition of spiritual direction in Antiquity'" which he noted "was very close to my own interests, which had been oriented for some time toward the definition of philosophy as a spiritual exercise and way of life" (p. 34).

This was the genesis of the idea of actually living philosophy rather than learning of it as an academic interest.  He said, "I tried to ask myself the questions, What is a philosopher?  Of what do philosophical schools consist?  This is how I was led to conceive of philosophy not as pure theory, but as a way of life" (p. 35).

He read a "book entitled [Guidance of the soul] by Paul Rabbow, which set forth the different possible forms of these practices among the Epicureans and the Stoics, and which also had the merit of marking the continuity that exists between ancient spirituality and Christian spirituality" (p. 36).

He later continues, "Yet Christian spiritual exercises appeared in Christianity only and precisely because of its will, beginning in the second century, to present itself as a philosophy on the model of Greek philosophy, that is, as a mode of life comprising spiritual exercises borrowed from Greek philosophy" (p. 36-37).

Then he observes the positive influence philosophy had on religion.  "From its origins, philosophy developed as a critique of religion: a destructive critique - for example, that of Xenophanes, who said that men made gods in their own image - or a purifying critique - such as that of Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, the Epicureans, and finally the Neoplatonists.  It was a purifying critique in the sense that philosophy finally tends to transform religion into philosophy, either by developing a theology, albeit a purely rational theology, or by using allegory to think about the different divinities in a philosophical way, as did the Stoics, for whom Zeus was fire, Hera air, and so on" (p. 37-38).

The next quote I'll share, should have a bit of the question that was posed to him, included.  In the question, Carlier asks if most religions are simply supplicating gods and includes this tid-bit in the question: "The God of the Bible and the Greek gods let themselves be swayed.  The god of the philosophers does nothing of the kind."  To which Hadot replies, "Yes.  One of the aspects of the philosophers' critical purification indeed consists in denouncing the vanity of prayers of request, and in underscoring their absurdity, because the most contradictory invocations are raised towards the gods, as men ask at the same time for rain and for good weather, for their victory and the defeat of the adversary" (p. 39).  Ancient Greek philosopher would pray to the gods without such requests and this was included an a form of spiritual exercise (e.g. the Hymn to Zeus).

Furthermore, the Stoics would have viewed it as one of their duties to accept the will of the gods, rather than attempting to sway them.

"During the Middle Ages, everything changes, because philosophy is no longer anything by religion's servant" (p. 40).

During Hadot's career, he was nominated and elected to an honor.  He ends up philosophizing about 'elections.'  "An election is very often a matter of luck, of the fortuitous meeting between different interests and different politics ... The fact of having been elected to an institution, however prestigious it may be, in no way proves that the person elected is himself prestigious.  One often speaks of elitist systems, of elitocracies, or of meritocracies" (p. 43).

Later is reflects on exams.  "(a young man's success in a competitive exam, [Balzac said], gives no certainty about the value of the grown man he will become."  He then quotes Father Festugiere, who said, "It is saddening that French students are completely devoid of curiosity.  One sinks into the emptiest routines and watches the essence of the humanities, which is to train minds, disappear" (p. 44).

We are lucky enough to have him asked which books and authors he has read and reread throughout his life.

• Montaigne
• Rilke
• Heidegger
• Albert Beguin
• G.W.F Schelling
• George Lichtenberg
• Goethe
• Nietzsche
• David Lodge

See pages 49-51 for books he notes with the above authors.

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Tied to the Apron Strings of the Church by Pierre Hadot

This is part 1 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

Early in the chapter, Hadot is asked if he was a pious child.  He gives an extraordinary account of an experience he had in his adolescence.  And then explains he felt the same feelings multiple times again later in life.

Indeed, I have long had the impression of having been in the world only from the time I became an adolescent.  I will always regret having thrown away - out of Christian humility - my first handwritten notes that were an echo of the birth of my personality, for it is very difficult for me now to rediscover the psychological content of the overwhelming discoveries I made then.  I do remember their context.  One happened on rue Ruinart, on the route I took home to my parents' house every day from the Petit Seminaire.  Night had fallen.  The starts were shining in an immense sky; one could still see them at the time.  Another took place in a room of our house.  In both cases I was filled with an anxiety that was both terrifying and delicious, provoked by the sentiment of the presence of the world, or of the Whole, and of me in that world.  In fact, I was incapable of formulating my experience, but after the fact I felt that it might correspond to questions such as What am I?  Why am I here?  What is this world I am in?  I experienced a sentiment of strangeness, of astonishment, and of wonder at being there.  At the same time I had the sentiment of being immersed in the world, of being a part of it, the world extending from the smallest blade of grass to the stars.  This world was present to me, intensely present.  Much later I would discover that this awareness of my immersion in the world, this impression of belonging to the Whole, was what Romain Rolland called the "oceanic feeling."  I think I have been a philosopher since that time, if by philosophy one understands this awareness of existence, of being-in-the-world.  At the time I did not know how to formulate what I felt, but I felt the need to write, and I remember very clearly that the first text I wrote was a sort of monologue in which Adam discovers his body and the world around him.  From that moment on, I had the feeling of being apart from others, for I could not imagine that my friends, or even my parents or my brothers, could imagine those kinds of things.  It was only much later I realized that many people have analogous experiences, but do not talk about them.

I began to perceive the world in a new way.  The sky, the clouds, the starts, the "evenings of the world," as I would say to myself, fascinated me.  With my back to the window ledge, I looked toward the sky at night with impression of plunging into the starry immensity.  This experience has dominated my entire life.  I experienced it many times again - several times, for example, in front of Lago Maggiore at Ascona; or at the sight of the chain of the Alps from the shore of Lake Geneva at Lausanne, or from Salvan, in the Valais.  In the first place, this experience was for me the discovery of something overwhelming and fascinating that had absolutely no connection to the Christian faith.  It therefore played an important role in my inner development.  Moreover, it considerably influenced my conceptions of philosophy.  I have always conceived of philosophy as a transformation of one's perception of the world.

Hadot then goes on to note, based on Bergson and Heidegger, that there are two levels of the self.  The one that remains at the level of the "they" and "the one that rises to the level of what [Heidegger] calls the 'authentic.'"  He then notes that what is most essential cannot be expressed (pgs. 5-7).

Returning to the "oceanic feeling," he clarifies that to experience it is like "being a wave on a limitless ocean, of being part of a mysterious and infinite reality."  A bit later, he write, "What is crucial is the impression of immersion, of dilation of the self into Another to which the self is not foreign, because it is a part thereof" (p. 8).  I've seen him quote Seneca in this context many times and he does so again in this book  Seneca writes, "toti se inserens mundo" which Hadot translates as "plunging into the totality of the world."  The translation from which I read Seneca's Letters translates it like this: "the soul that penetrates the whole world" (Letters 66.6).  I think I prefer Hadot's translation.

Thus, we can see from very early on, Hadot was influenced by these profound, spiritual experiences, which he later identifies as he studies ancient philosophy.

His accounts of the "oceanic feeling" left me pondering the times I have felt something vaguely similar.  For me, it has been sunshine.  The times I recall from my early childhood have involved spending time in our vegetable garden at our home, picking peas from pea-pods while gazing at the rays of of the 10am sunlight streaming through the white birch trees.  Or when I sat next to my mother in church, and looking to the glass windows of the church building and seeing the rays of light touch the hairs of peoples' heads and the church carpet or the wooden floor of the basketball gym.  In those moments, time seemed to stop and I felt a shiver of connectedness of everything around me and extending, as if through those sun beams, up to the sun itself and beyond to the wider universe.  I felt small and at the same time, unified with the Whole.

On another occasion, while vacationing in the mountains of Colorado in the summer of 2019, our family went outside on a cold night and gazed up.  This time, the feeling was more similar to standing on a tall building and looking down; as if I was going to fall endlessly.  The feeling was so real and breathtaking, that I could not tolerate looking into the vast sky for more than a few minutes.  It was quite similar to what Hadot write about when he references Lucretius who "speaks of the shiver and the divine pleasure that seized him when thinking about infinite spaces" (p. 9).

In all his experiences, the common thread was approaching the idea of "direct contact with God" (p. 11).  But he has since pivoted from the idea when he asked himself the question, "If one considers God to be the Absolute, how can there be contact, and especially identification, between what is relative and what is absolute?" (p. 11).

Another "theological formation" for Hadot, which has lead him to his excellent work has been the fact that "one must take into account the collective mentalities that had influenced the authors of the sacred books.  For me, this was a first stage in my training for the labor of interpretation of texts, to which I have devoted a large part of my life" (p. 12).  Indeed, as I've read a few of his books, he stays true to hi theme of understanding the full historical context of the authors.  For example, Marcus Aurelius was simply not a dour, pessimistic Roman Emperor, but rather, his hypomnemata were a practice, based on a structured thought process stemming from the teachings of Epictetus.

The rest of the chapter did not evoke any strong thoughts in me.  Much of it, from page 12 to 29 was simply him talking about various aspects of his schooling and some of the authors and lecturers he rubbed shoulders with through those early years of his studies.

Thoughts on Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirsig

Chris & Robert Pirsig

If anyone saw me sitting in my truck, in a parking garage on Valentine's day at 5:43am in the morning, they would have found a grown man crying.

I had just finished listening to the Audible version of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

The book is about living a good (quality) life.  There are a number of stories in this book.

There is the story of the first person, who is taking a cross-country motorcycle trip with his son and friends.

There is the story of Phaedrus who is the previous "version" of the first person.

There is the story of actual motorcycle maintenance.

And there is a story of the chautauqua - which ties all of the above stories together.

Some Thoughts on the Book

One problem he is trying to solve is the alienation of people ... conservatives, liberals, hippies, etc.  Somewhere along the line, people began to culturally reject the way society was living.  He tries to understand why and how can we (re)bridge the schism.  This is where he gets into the Romantic and the Classic view of the world.

The question that really got him thinking was from a teacher colleague about if he was teaching his students quality.

The Romantic view is enamored with the final product, as it were.  While the Classic view loves the inner workings.  Quality is a unification of the two perspectives.

The motorcycle, throughout the book is symbolic of any hobby, or career, or job or even the way of living life itself.  The motorcycle is symbolic of technology and modernization.  It's interesting to note, as I'm reading John Sellars' Stoicism I learned the Greek word technē is translated to art and is defined as "a practical skill requiring expert knowledge" (p. 163).

One way to solve alienation is to fall in love with something (a job, a career, a hobby such as motorcycle maintenance) and all of life, and to care about it - to love it - to make an art of it.  Too many people have not fallen in love with acquiring expert knowledge of modern life or how to live a quality life.

One of the most important somethings a person should focus on and acquire expert knowledge is that of philosophy - the art of living.  When you read the book, just substitute his discussions on motorcycle maintenance with the art of living or philosophy, and you will gain a lot of insight.

Attentiveness is needed for quality; you have to give a damn (about the subject/hobby/career/life).

He gets into aretē which has been translated into virtue or excellence (of the soul).  And although Pirsig writes:

“Then Phaedrus feels a tugging to read the passage again, and he does so and then…what’s this?!…’That which we translate ‘virtue’ but is in Greek ‘excellence.’
Kitto had more to say about this arête of the ancient Greeks.  ‘When we meet arête in Plato,’ he said, ‘we translate it ‘virtue’ and consequently miss all the flavor of it.  ‘Virtue,’ at least in modern English, is almost entirely a moral word; arête on the other hand, is used indifferently in all the categories, and simply means excellence.’”

... he discounts the virtue aspect of it.  When I look at it from a Stoic perspective, I see aretē is virtue (courage, justice, wisdom, temperance) and a human shows these qualities no matter what the platform or technē / art he expresses himself in.  It is all-encompassing; in living as a quality father, a quality employee, a quality neighbor, a quality chess player, and on and on.

He later writes:

“Arête implies a respect of the wholeness or oneness of life, and a consequent dislike of specialization.  it implies a contempt for efficiency — or rather a much higher idea of efficiency, an efficiency which exists not in one department of life but in life itself.”

Pirsig (the first person of the book and Phaedrus) is learning to grapple with the art of being a quality father.  He doesn't do such a good job on the road trip, but by the end, he finally realizes it and we can see the immediate changes in his style of fathering.

The book is a love book.  The love of a practical skill; the love of art; the love of being a parent; the love of being a teacher; the love of quality itself - of workmanship; the love of wisdom - philosophy.

I cried at the end of the book after listening to the epilogue.  Chris (the son), was stabbed to death in San Francisco just before his 23rd birthday.  Pirsig describes the death in detail and then discusses where and what Chris is after his death.

And one more thought ... I loved his description of how we see the present, past and future.  It is as if we are walking backwards.  We see all that we have passed up to the present.  That is all we can see and know.  But the back of our body/head faces the future - it's unknowable.

the second world wars by victor davis hanson

the second world wars by victor davis hanson is an excellent resource for a complete review and analysis of what we now call world war two.  having been born over 30 years after the end of world war two and having heard my own father (who is 90 years old at this writing) speak of his experiences as well has his older brother's experience, i've always been fascinated with what life must have been like living in the 1930s and 1940s.  i love world war two movies from where eagles dare to patton to saving private ryan and band of brothers (book as well as hbo mini series).  my boyhood fascination with the war has largely been focused on the bombing of pearl harbor and the american efforts on the european western front of the war.  over the years, that fascination has turned to a chilling effect as i realized and comprehended the atrocities of both war in general as well as those specific to world war two.

the reason for the change from boyhood fascination to a chilling effect started in 1993 when schindler's list was released.  i quickly realized how frightening humans can act toward other humans.  other movies that portrayed the holocaust have had a similar terrifying effect.  six million souls lost to extermination!  it is shocking.

then in 2016, i stumbled across a website dedicated to visually showing, by the numbers, the human cost of world war two.  the website is called the fallen of world war ii.  if you have not had the chance, spend some time and even donate to the site.  victor davis hanson, in chapter 19 entitled the dead, cites some stats on the number.  low end estimates are around 50 million, with high end around 80 million.  his personal opinion is around 60-65 million dead.  what is really insightful of the fallen dead website is it shows where and how those millions of people died.  the numbers are mind-boggling when you look at the western front.  but what is haunting are the numbers on the eastern front where there germans and russians fought.  hanson goes into the why of this a bit in his book, in that, when two extreme ideologies meet in war (nazism vs communism) and both styles of leadership are of the mindset of win or die, then deaths add up very quickly.

the hatred between the germans and russians explodes on the battlefield and sieges.  in his sieges chapter, hanson says, "totalitarian ideologies framed the struggle in manichean terms unlike anything seen in the rivalries of the past.  hitler planned a war of nazi extermination to either kill off or enslave the supposedly inferior race of slavic untermenschen of russia and liquidate millions of jews in his eastward path" (p. 309).  and just to provide a bit of context of scale, the number of dead russians from just the leningrad siege were four times greater than all the american dead of the entire war! (p. 313).

between the fallen of world war ii website and hanson's the second world wars, i have gained a much greater appreciation of the epic scale of world war two.  my myopic american view of the war has been greatly disabused and i have a much greater appreciation for the exceptionally dire circumstances the french, british and americans were in by accepting an alliance with a communist state (russia).

the second really important point i learned about world war two, is tied directly with hanson's premise and title of the book.  world war one, as we know it today, was called "the great war" in the 1920s, 30s and 40s.  it really wasn't until around 1942 after japan attacked the united states and germany invaded russia that it turned into a global war.  up to that point, all during the 1930s and up to september 1939, it was largely viewed as a series of border conflicts between hitler and his neighbors.  once japan bombed pearl harbor and germany betrayed their former ally (russia), the war greatly escalated and exploded globally.  existential crises popped up across the world.  only years after, did the great war change names to world war one and the first truly global conflict was dubbed world war two.  which leads to the next point i learned from the book: hitler was equipped very well to win border wars, but he and his staff truly failed to appreciate the massive resources the americans and russians had at their disposal - hitler was absolutely not prepared to fight a global war.

in essence, the allies won due to innovation and production power.  the nazis and imperial japanese were technologically advanced in the late 1930s, but their failure to adapt and establish consistent, reliable production methods (food and war equipment), failed them.  the americans, british and russians, on the other hand, collaborated, innovated, adapted and consistently produced far more than the axis powers were able to.  russian production was moved far to the other side of russia in the ural mountains - far from hitlers bombers (who also never was able to develop a long-range bomber like the lancaster, b-17 or b-29).  american continental soil was never in danger and americans were able to produce and supply not only their army, air force and navy, but also they were able to supply russia with thousands of trucks and transports.  hitler may have thought he could attack quickly and overwhelm europe and russia, but when he was not successful against britain, he blundered big time by moving east to russia, where his armies were met by hoards of russian soldiers and t-34 tanks.  of course, by 1944 and the establishment of the western front, all those resources were spent and hitler could not sustain both fronts.

japan and britain had the largest navies in the world in 1939.  the americans had a sizable navy and adequate air navel power, but no where near the japanese strength.  but when american production power ramped up and japanese production faltered, the tide shifted to the americans.  also, the types of warships the japanese and americans decided to build largely shaped the war.  shipbuilding, coupled with slight changes in strategy in aerial bombing over japan and then eventually the technological innovation of the nuclear bomb forced the japanese to surrender.

hanson also does a great job segueing from end-of-war descriptions to post-war new world order descriptions.  understanding world war two and the end results, enables the student of history to understand world history for the next 70 years.  even today, the world is still reeling from the effects of the first global conflict.  hanson also addresses the historical question of: are 65 million deaths worth a 70 year "peace"?  did we truly get peace for the price of all those dead?  or would the world have been a bloodier place (or not) had hitler not invaded russia and held the gains made up to 1941?

one other thought (they keep coming to me) - churchill entered the world stage at just the right time.  britain was the only country to fight nazi germany from the day they invaded poland to their defeat.  churchill was largely responsible for keeping up the fight when more calls of appeasement and conciliation with hitler.  after having watched darkest hour last month during christmas as well as dinkirk last may, i've grown a desire to find a good churchill biography and read it.

overall - a phenomenal book, one that captures the breadth as well as complexity and detail of the first global war.  he cites lots of statistics and arrives at sound conclusions.  for someone wanting to grasp an appreciation and good perspective of the whole war, pick up this book, read it and refer to it often.

perilous journey the the house of the lord by mark housley and gordon allred

background & context
i served an lds mission to guatemala in the mid-90s; spending almost the entire time in the alta verapaz region; including 12 months in the polochic valley.

the polochic valley is comprised largely of kekchi natives.  the vast majority of them do not speak spanish and only know their native tongue.

the kekchi are poor farmers who work the land producing maize, coffee, cardamom, rice, beans and other crops.  interspersed among the poor are plantation owners who are guatemalans of spanish and german descent.  the kekchi are extremely humble and superstitious - child-like, in my opinion.

almost all mormon male missionaries know the rule of "lock your heart" during missionary service.  this stems from a discourse given by spencer kimball in the late 1960s.  it's understandable for a male missionary to 'fall in love', sometimes, during his mission and in some cases missionaries return to their mission, after their service has been completed and court a girl they met there.  and sometimes male and female missionaries will court after their service is finished.  all that is conceivable.  however, when it comes to missionaries marrying kekchis - the idea becomes twisted.

what i mean by that is - kekchis are very child-like.  they are aboriginal, uneducated, easily swayed, etc.  and for a white american lds missionary to marry a kekchi girl - it 'triggers' a negative response in most people who understand the context.  it's not unlike a 50 year-old man marrying a girl who is barely 18 years old or younger.

mark housley is that white american lds missionary who returned to polochic valley and persuaded a kekchi girl to marry him.  i was one of those missionaries who disliked the whole situation.  and there were other missionaries, closer to housley, who disliked the situation even more.

one of my fellow missionaries, who was my local missionary leader (zone leader), passed a sealed envelop to me and instructed me to pass it to the kekchi girl who housley was intending to propose to (this was december of 1995).  the letter was not written by him, rather it was written by a former companion to housley.  still being somewhat naive and not knowing the whole situation, instead of passing it along, i decided to open the envelop and read the letter.  the contents said, "this is a letter to say that if you do anything with angelina - or with any other kekchi - i will kill you!  this is not your culture - go home you loser!  there are people who will inform me if you did something with her - and i will kick your ass! you have no friends - no life - no brains!  repent you asshole!  never come back!"  i didn't pass it along as instructed.  i think i ended up burning the letter.  but this gives a sense of the kinds of opinion people had of housley.

mark housley and his parents visited guatemala in december of 1995 and fairly often between then and june of 1996.

by june of 1996, i was no longer living in la tinta (the town angelina kukul and her family were living in) and instead was serving in canlun - a small village on the other side of the river from teleman.  we knew mark and his family were coming to guatemala that day.  we knew they were going to get married in senahu (civilly) and then drive to guatemala city to be 'sealed' in the mormon temple.

the day was epic.  mark, along with gordon allred, later wrote a book (perilous journey to the house of the lord) about that day and the events leading up to it and the events after it.  the book also describes mark's mission years in guatemala.

book review
- the housley family flies to guatemala for the marriage
- they are detained at the airport (unusual)
- they drive from guatemala city to polochic
- along the way, bandidos fire at them with ARs
- kekchi farmers cut a ceiba tree down, blocking the road
- the road to polochic is blocked all day long
- the road to senahu washes out due to a biblical rain storm
- mark & angelina encounter many, many bureaucratic roadblocks
- mark's mom is detained by the guatemalan government several weeks after the marriage

that's a summary of the events surrounding the fateful day in june 1996.  as a missionary, the only events i observed were seeing the ceiba tree come crashing down on the one road in and out of polochic valley and then meeting the housley's in the long line of cars and hearing of their bandido attack and then later that night observing the most unbelievable rain storm i had ever seen in my life.

having only that bit of context, i later learned mark held firesides and then wrote a book about the whole experience.  i finally ordered the book and read it.

as a whole, it was a very enjoyable read.  it brought back so many memories of guatemala, the culture and the land.

my opinion of mark didn't really improve after reading the book.  quite frankly, i wonder if he isn't a little ... i don't know quite the word to use ... but the one word that comes to mind is 'autistic.'  and i don't know if that word quite fits the description.  honestly, i'm still trying to put my finger on it, but that is all that is coming to me now.  mark is quite brilliant (finished medical school, graduated with honors, etc), but also seems to lack some nuances of social interaction and appropriateness.  how else could he so easily have become fixated on a kekchi girl he saw in passing on the road?

my final reaction to the mark & angelina marriage, after reviewing my missionary experiences and reading the book is to say - the world is a very big place and anything can happen - including what happened to mark, his family and the kukuls.

it is also worth noting, about 10 years ago, i emailed the missionary who wrote that letter to mark, which i never gave to angelina.  if i recall correctly, i told him i didn't pass the letter along.  he was ok with that.  he had even 'forgiven' mark, in a sense.  i think he had visited mark and angelina in odgen.  also, i understand other missionaries have visited mark and angelina and say she wears jeans and speaks english.  i think her and mark have four boys - i would imagine the oldest is mission-age about now.

the other part of the book - the part he discusses his mission - i quite enjoyed.  i was very familiar with all the areas in which he served and visited, except his first area (galilea) and semarac and seritquiche - the last two areas i always wanted to badly visit, but never had the opportunity.  i was even familiar with chicoj and tanchi.  when i was serving in coban, my companion and i would visit the missionaries serving in the chicoj/tanchi area.  matter-of-factly, i sometimes wish i could have served there, but every one has told me it's not great there (cold, drizzly all the time and the people there are tough socially).

i enjoyed his telling of his first christmas in senahu and the obsession guatemalans have with fire and fireworks.  he did a great job describing the long, long hikes in the jungles - the heat - the mud - the rain - the cold; being stranded on those hikes and sleeping on beds of bamboo or cement.  i laughed at the lack of privacy people have in polochic - kids talking to you as you go to the bathroom!  all fond memories in my opinion.

i sometimes miss polochic valley.  i definitely miss coban - i love that place with all my heart.  and being able to re-live those memories of guatemala was indeed the best of this book.

the caine mutiny by herman wouk

queeg playing with his balls while testifying in the trial

i read the caine mutiny by herman wouk over my vacation last week.

good book - held my interest the entire time.  i don't know if the experience of willie keith or any of the other characters, was typical of the wwii sailor or not.  the book was quite popular when it came out in 1951, just a few years after the war ended.  shortly after the book came out, it was made into a movie with humphrey bogart.  with this in mind, it must have hit a collective nerve with the nation.

the movie has a 92% freshness along with an 87% liked rating.  i watched the movie from amazon after i finished the book.  similarly to the book, the movie held my attention, but i don't think bogart did a great job of portraying queeg.

the plot does a pretty good job of making the reader guess what is going to happen.  i could feel the 'set-up' when keith didn't like captain de vries (the first captain of the caine).  so it wasn't too surprising when keith seemingly wished de vries was the captain instead of queeg.  naturally, i felt that queeg was crazy - not clinically, but rather he was just a crazy captain in the sense that he was incompetent.  i would imagine that many people have seen other people similar to queeg.  queeg was "never wrong" and made any excuse possible to demonstrate he was right.

i was cheering when mayrk finally commandeered the caine and relieved queeg.  i felt confident mayrk would be acquitted ... until greenwald explained the nature of the situation.  the trial was the best part of the book.  i often wondered if "a few good men" received its inspiration from the caine mutiny.

the most shocking part of the book was when greenwald excoriated keefe.  i didn't see that coming.  i imagine that was put into the book to satisfy military meat-heads.  from a civilian perspective, mayrk did what any normal person would do.  but from a military perspective, respect for command is supreme.

after the trial, the book seemed to drag on too long.  the wrap up of the keith - may wynn relationship was kind of dumb.  they don't even get together at the end of the book.  in the movie, they seem end up together.

one other note - keith's dad was not in the movie.  but in the book, he seemed to play a quasi big role in persuading keith to stick it out with may wynn.  i particularly liked the letter his father wrote to him.

in summary - good book!  i'd give it 7 out of 10.

* exodus by leon uris

* i found a stash of my high school and college book reviews. any askterisked titles denotes a book review from this period.

february 21, 1994

exodus, by leon uris, is an exciting book about how the jews gained their freedom after hundreds of years of persecution by the russians, germans and many other countries, that tried to exterminate the jewish race.  anyone who reads this book will gain an understanding of the jews and see why is was so important that they should fight for a homeland of their own.

the novel starts out on cyprus with a reporter meeting up with a nurse and old friend - kitty fremont.  kitty was on vacation in cyprus, but later went to work in a british detained persons camp for exiled jews after world war two.  she later meets a man by the name of ari ben canaan, who is a leader of a jewish organization.  together with the report, mark parker, they get an old ship, the exodus, and train children and prepare them to go to israel.  mark writes a story about how the jews are treated by the british and sends it back to london in order to get the world on the side of the jews.  finally the british let the boat go to israel.  when they get there, the organization gets the children into camps and cities called kibbutzes.  kitty also goes with the children, but mainly for the reason of a girl named karen clement.  karen went mainly for a boy named dov landau, who was an excellent forger.  when karen and dov arrive there, karen stays with kitty and dov goes and joins the maccabees, a terrorist group fighting for the freedom of the jews.  later on, dov and a man by the name of akiva, who was ari's uncle, are captured by the british.  ari goes to the maccabees and helps them get akiva and dov out of th British jail.  their plan succeeds, but akiva dies and ari is shot in the leg.  at about the same time, kitty and karen were preparing to leave to the united states.  when kitty hears that ari is injured, she goes to him and nurses him back to health.  after all this time, the united nations votes on the issue of the jews obtaining a homeland or not.  the jews get their homeland.  the arabs did all that they could do to keep israel from becoming a state and they end up fighting the jews to do so.  the jews put up a miraculous fight to keep their homeland.  they end up keeping all their homeland at the end.

the theme of the book is nothing byt to show the world what the jews went through to get their state.  leon uris, just as his other books, puts fiction with reality.  in this book, he uses flash-back to tell the story of the jews before, during and after world war two.  the graphic disgust of what the germans did to the jews is also portrayed in this novel.  if there were any lesson to be learned from the book, it would be the reminder of what the jews went through and how no one should ever go through what they experienced.

exodus is an excellent book to read if one wants to lean the story of the jews.  leon uris is probably one of the best sources for this subject.  he spent many years researching, reporting and travelling through the countryside of israel.  exodus might also perhaps be one of the best books about the jewish story.

mr. puckett gave me a 46/50; with the comments, "don't tell so much of the story and devote more time to response and reaction"  reading this again, i vigorously agree with his assessment!

* fahrenheit 451 by ray bradbury

* i found a stash of my high school and college book reviews.  any askterisked titles denotes a book review from this period.

february 14, 1994

Fahrenheit 451, by ray bradbury, takes place in a distant future of the 1990's.  guy montag is a fireman who burns books rather than saving houses and other burning buildings.  one day he meets a girl who is carefree and looks at the simple pleasures of life.  she ends up talking to montag, almost every day, about the little things like looking at the dew on the grass in the morning or the smell of burning leaves.  montag starts to change from being a slave to the society to becoming an individual for himself.  later on, guy finds out that the girl and her family disappear and he becomes suspicious.  guy also starts to take books from the houses he is burning.  capteam beatty, the head of the firemen, comes to talk to montag.  beatty knows that montag is starting to question the society in which they live.  beatty ends up explaining the reasons behind burning the books.  guy ends up killing all the firemen in his unit during a burning and then goes on the run.  he escapes and just when he gets to a camp of runaways, just like him, another war breaks out and the city he left was obliterated.  the story ends with the runaways walking back to the city.

this book is well-written and has an excellent meaning to it when it talks about censorship and how far it could go.  this book also shows the change in guy montag at the end of the story.  at the beginning, guy was just another person, but as the story progressed he gradually changed from being a common villain, to a hero who has beaten the corrupted system.

the theme of the book is all about censorship.  ray bradbury's whole point was to avoid the censorship of anything pure.  he protests the whole idea of shortening plays and writing condensed versions of plays and books and whatever else is written by original authors.  he is against anything that cuts, destroys, or makes anything of the work, other than itself in its original form.

fahrenheit 451 is one of the best books that has been written by ray bradbury and has an excellent message that every person in american should learn and remember.  every person is himself and no one else should judge how he should express himself or take away the right to do so.

mr. puckett gave me a 49/50 on the report; with the comment 'a little too much story-telling but not bad.  what is the significance of the title?'

br: obstacle - the discipline of perception

over the course of my career, i've heard so many managers call a bad situation an 'opportunity' that it drove me nuts.  why could they not simply call it what it was - a menace, an annoyance, misfortune or whatever.  by why all this spin and political correctness?  for years this bothered me, then it simply became amusing and finally it became an attitude after learning of stoicism.

in the chapter entitled 'the discipline of perception' we learn of john d rockefeller and his secret to building an empire.  in the course of his life, through multiple obstacles, rockefeller developed an ability to keep a cool head in the face of adversity.  while his competitors would become fearful and anxious, and only see doom, and would cut and run, rockefeller would see opportunity and figure out a way to turn it to his advantage.

another phrase that has bothered me over the years is a phrase i often heard in the last couple of presidential elections: 'never let a crisis go to waste'  i guess it bothered me because the politicians who often used the phrase would exacerbate the social problems the crisis created.  however, i don't think the phrase only applies to one political party.  no matter the situation or crisis, we can choose to have an attitude that works t our advantage.

in summary, those who are overcome with fear and anxiety should heed the example of rockefeller.  seize the initiative; own the bad situation and train your attitude to figure out a way to make things work for you instead of against you.

let me wrap up with some advice from the author.

you will come across obstacles in life—fair and unfair. and you will discover, time and time again, that what matters most is not what these obstacles are but how we see them, how we react to them, and whether we keep our composure. you will learn that this reaction determines how successful we will be in overcoming—or possibly thriving because of—them.

there are a few things to keep in mind when faced with a seemingly insurmountable obstacle.

we must try:
to be objective
to control emotions and keep an even keel
to choose to see the good in a situation
to steady our nerves
to ignore what disturbs or limits others
to place things in perspective
to revert to the present moment
to focus on what can be controlled

br: "the obstacle is the way"

over the next several weeks, i will be sharing my thoughts and opinions about ryan holiday's book "the obstacle is the way"

i've been reading it for several weeks, mostly reading and re-reading several chapters.  this book is one of those books that is suited to be read at any point and at any time.  it is almost like a daily reader type book.

as i read it, i'd like to summarize the chapters, opine and discuss how it applies to my own life.

if you come across any of these posts, feel free to comment or raise discussion points.

Countdown to Zero Day by Kim Zetter

Countdown to Zero Day: Stuxnet and the Launch of the World's First Digital Weapon by Kim Zetter
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

really fascinating book. i read parts of this book when wired.com ran articles on it. i finally bought the book after reading "the intercept" article (https://firstlook.org/theintercept/20...)

in summary - nation states are using viruses/worms to infect programmable logic controllers (PLCs), which are pieces of smart hardware that open and shut valves along with a plethora of other activities in power plants and other types of manufacturing centers.

the book said this was the first time this has happened, but then it went on to give dozens of examples of how PLC hacks have occurred before.

in summary; when president bush didn't want to invade or start a war with iran, they found other options for taking out the nuclear activities in iran. they used reconnaissance hacking tools to gather information, including hacking legitimate digital certificates, and then created a missile type hacking tool and then launched it on iran. the US and Israel modified the hacking tools several times. The mission was so long, that Obama inherited it and even expanded and accelerated it.

but, unwittingly, symantec, adblokada and others discovered the hacking tools and were able to reverse engineer the hacking missile. when they published their findings, the US and Israel stopped the program (or at least the parts where they were still "gathering information"). Also, an inside source said that the revelations of symantec and others did not stop their missions; that the government has more advanced tools now.

bottom line - our digital world will becoming increasingly less stable as the Internet and Cyber Space have become battle grounds. this could eventually impact the general public in numerous ways, from loss of banking information to death (think nuclear plants or chemical plants or oil refineries or power infrastructure being sabotage).

these problems keep a lot of people up at night. and if you have a creative imagination, reading this book could keep you up at night too.

happy sleeping!