Happy Christmas to everyone!

A friend and neighbour of mine who is an Anglican minister proposed a pre-Christmas question of expressing what Christmas means for oneself using not more than 140 characters (as for the limit on text messages).
An intriguing idea. I’m eagerly looking forward to seeing the results since I’ve found this pretty challenging and have not so far come up with anything original, positive and so succinct. I wonder what readers of this blog think!

But I did stumble across a rather nice quote from Charles Dickens (or one of his characters) while looking for something else (I wasn’t trying to crib a contribution from the internet – honest!): “I will honour Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year.” Sounds good to me.
Since originally writing this little post a reader has sent me the following, which most closely matches what I feel myself:
"A time of year for inclusivity, joy, love, altruism and reflection about the real meanings in life. A place to step forward from with no fear and positive intent."


 

Let All Be Heard

I’ve recently been doing a bit of scribbling in one form or another and not wishing to overestimate my capabilities, I’ve been fairly cautious about estimating the value of any of these efforts. But at least this did cause me to reflect on the fact that we do not hear nearly enough from ‘ordinary people’ as to the views that they hold on important matters.

This is especially true when these views diverge from ‘expert’ opinion, received ‘wisdom’, what leaders (elected, unelected, members of special interest groups or simply self appointed) and the wealthy owners of the press tell us and what we are supposed to accept as true. All too often, the people are manipulated by these privileged individuals and are not respected. This is not how it should be.

I for one would like to hear more from this needlessly silenced majority drawing on the wealth of experience that they hold and the abundant common sense that they have acquired. I say ‘silenced’ rather than ‘silent’ for good reason. People tend to be reluctant to say what they think on many subjects of substance, sometimes because they have been made, by various social pressures, to feel inhibited or embarrassed about expressing their own sincere views.

It is unfortunate that there are many people who may have very interesting things to say but who are silenced by this sort of anxiety, a fear that is often, sometimes deliberately, put into them by critics who, superior beings that they no doubt are, would much rather hear echoes of their own voices.

There are those with power and influence who without a second thought imagine that they speak for the people at large and take the liberty of doing so, invited or not, whenever they feel like it and who do not relish being told to ‘hold on a bit’.

But each person is distinct from all others and accordingly will have a unique perspective on life and singular experience of the issues that it inevitably raises. It is true that one risks looking rather odd when, at a certain stage in life, putting personal understandings and judgments into the public domain. To this I simply say ‘If this is the case, then so be it!’ No doubt I will find myself amongst those people who I believe should be suffered gladly!

In my own case (happily devoid of power and influence I hasten to add!) the stray reader may also detect what might be seen as my tendency to attempt to square circles! I admit that I find such exercises irresistibly tempting but, this said, I am not sure that the strict geometric impossibility is the best metaphor.

Perfect circles and perfect squares exist only as abstract concepts. What’s more, I enjoy making seeming impossibilities possible. In the end, this may be so only in some respects, or when viewed from unconventional angles. But once ‘imperfection’, albeit slight, is allowed to enter the picture so also do far richer possibilities come into being ‘amidst every perfection is a measure of imperfection’.

Furthermore, conducting the circle ‘squaring’ exercise can itself be revealing, and elements that may in abstract have appeared to be irreconcilable are usually not quite so in practice. Unsuspected affinities may come to light, and our understanding of each may be much enhanced.

All this, of course, being the exact opposite of, for example, tribalistic party political propaganda, commercial lobbying or certain religious recruitment and conversion processes – and so much the better for that. The divisiveness that these groups can create damages and diminishes our society.

In this light, I firmly believe that we should all take courage and make clear what we think regardless of the pontifications of leaders. We should do this whenever we can and in ways that suit each of us best, since all of us will have something distinctive and worthwhile to contribute and our society will be all the better for it.

Principles for a Virtuous Economy

I’ve often spoken of the desirability of the country benefiting from a Virtuous Economy rather than the exploitative, extractive, grotesquely unequal, cartelised, profiteering, shareholder obsessed and anti-citizen economy that we now endure.

I do not accept the view that base motives are acceptable and that the economy will automatically translate them into benefits for everyone. The worse the motive, the worse will be the outcome – either absolutely or relatively. This is the normal consequence of malign actions. A virtuous economy would see better motives and, I firmly believe an improved and much fairer set of outcomes to the immense benefit of the common good.

But while the general tenet of the social value of virtuous motivation should at least be appealing if not patently obvious, what should be the actual principles and the specific virtues that underpin a virtuous economy and by which companies, governments and individuals should abide? I suggest that they should include the following:

·     Loyalty – This is rapidly becoming a near forgotten corporate virtue. Loyalty to longstanding and decent principles, to the country, to the community, to fellow citizens as customers, to vulnerable individuals and to the workforce and, I almost forgot, to the shareholders.

·     Moderation – Meaning, for example, companies making good and useful products sold at fair and moderate prices for a reasonable profit to which no-one could object.

·     Respect – Companies, Governments and other organisations showing through their actions respect to all citizens, in particular their customers or electors, the workforce and the environment.

·     Truthfulness – Displayed, for example, by not promoting deceptive products or using confusing or concealed pricing, no ambiguous or misleading advertising (for example, as is so often the case with ‘health’ products). No breaking of promises. No claims for credit where it is not due.

These to be exhibited in place of the all too common current vices of disloyalty, contempt, greed, deception and selfishness. We are into the realm of misinformation and indeed conspiracy - for example with ‘industries’ acting, and being allowed to act, as cartels in respect of pricing, barriers to entry and much else besides.

Corporate disrespect involves treating customers, especially and inexcusably elderly and more vulnerable people, as profits fodder. There is also bribery by vested interests - for example, of political parties to adopt policies that intentionally inhibit legislative reforms which would be in the public interest but which would also decrease private profits.

When properly implemented, virtuous consequences could be thought of as being exhibited by the economy itself through its structure, but it is the actions, rules and, to link to another topic, the dispositions of the people that implement them that are ultimately responsible for the economy’s moral quality. So it is on these that we should focus our attention. What might these dispositions be? In my view they would certainly include:

·     Seeking to eliminate economic injustice, exploitation and unfairness. This relates to the classical virtue of justice.

·     Valuing the individual. Society consists, in the overwhelming majority, of individual people who are worthy of respect and who are entitled to freedom, security, useful employment and a good measure of happiness.

·     Beyond the individual and family, valuing community and nation through consideration to other citizens and seeking to enhance the common good, beginning with those who have least.

·     Valuing and respecting democracy, its institutions and its procedures. The most valuable 'institution' we have is democracy itself. If our version of democracy is constructed to deny the electorate proper choices, if it is manipulated and abused to further commercial interests there will be a lack of respect for it. And if democracy is undermined, so is the economy that operates within it, so also is society and the individuals that comprise it.

·     Being truthful, accountable and living with integrity. Integrity can be seen as honest self-accountability. More widely, accountability should be to the whole of society not just to particular groups (such as political party supporters, donors or co-religionists). Truthfulness, another of the classical virtues, would be rewarded by ordinary citizens far more often than is generally recognised, although it does call for considerable courage.

·     Respect and loyalty are integral to a virtuous economy. Respect and truthfulness are essential for a virtuous polity and for a healthy democracy.

·     Helping to create harmony and cultivating inclusion. A harmonious common life is the core of a unified society. Exclusion diminishes those who do the excluding every bit as much as those who are excluded.

·     Recognising the value of stewardship throughout society. Stewardship – helping to look after and preserve what is important to community and country - by all the members of a society can contribute more to the common good than most top down 'leadership' which, in fact, has much to answer for.

These dispositions along, no doubt, with a number of others, would be held by a ‘citizenry of good intent’ and put into practice in both their private and professional lives. They would also be reflected in the economic and social policies of government.

But all this, of course, we do not have in today’s society. The state of the economic and social system in this country is at root a problem in morals and morale and it is up to us, we the people, Everyman and Everywoman, to do something about it.

The political class that became established through this system and which clings to its power relationships and questionable practices (while pressing change on others) will never change itself or the system from which they profit despite their oft-repeated promises which, as we have seen, are all too easily broken.

And we should be clear that there is no magic 'invisible hand' of market self-regulation that we can rely on to steer us clear of the consequences of this value-free condition. There never was - this has been one of the biggest economic hoaxes of all time. To suppose there is some wondrous economic system that will transmute base motives - such as extractive greed - into golden benefits for all of society is a convenient fiction equivalent in truth to the medieval belief in Alchemy.

One is also reminded of the computer metaphor GIGO, Garbage In - Garbage Out in relation to the quality of data input and the worth of the subsequent output when the program has run. In the present context we will also have GIGO, read as Greed In – Greed Out or, in terms of notorious personalities, Geckos In – Geckos Out.

In view of the constant references to growth as the way out of our problems it should be understood that economic growth at any given percentage rate cannot be sustained indefinitely, as we should have known, since percentages are an exponential phenomenon. No economy can be above the natural order of things – nature abhors exponentials as much as vacuums.

And it should be clearly understood that the ‘market’ is not a part of the natural order either – the dominant western conception of which is not an absolute, it is an entirely human concept – one constructed by the private beneficiaries - rather than one that should have been shaped to serve wider purposes rather than frustrate them.

The economy should operate as a social market. A capitalist model will only operate in the general interest if, as Keynes pointed out, it is governed by 'gentlemanly codes of behaviour' rather than the exploitative culture that has been so evident in recent times. Nor should the pursuit of personal wealth be an end in itself. The end, as Keynes also said, should be to live 'wisely, agreeably and well' - qualities which, if not wholly describing it, are certainly consistent with a virtuous economy.

The economy should be at the service of society rather than a cosseted entity existing independently of it to which society is expected to bow the knee and take the consequences. It should be an honour system in which respect, trust and regard for the individual form the bedrock. Individual citizens, private companies, the public sector, voluntary organisations and Government, both national and local, should share a vision of the good of the nation and take personal, policy and commercial decisions accordingly, seeking to operate always within the Common Good to move towards a land of found content.

The virtues of Loyalty, Respect, Truthfulness and Moderation along with the associated dispositions, a citizenry of good intent, the concept of stewardship, commonly held and socially oriented values and even, with due consent, some ancillary ‘leadership of good intent’ in certain areas, will be the secure foundations of the Virtuous Economy and the basis on which it operates to enhance the Common Good.

Reflections on Dreams

Dreams, their origins and their interpretation, have been a subject of intense speculation for people at all levels of society since ancient times. However, unlike the prevailing views that were held in antiquity, in modern times relatively few of those people having an active interest in brain activity have thought that preoccupation with the meaning of dreams is justified, but the purposes and process of dreaming have intrigued even the sceptics.

Here, however, as someone who has always taken a keen interest in the subject I do want to say something about the content of dreams, my understanding of their possible meaning(s), how these might be accessed and what we may infer from them about our personal lives, our nature - and also about reality, particularly in respect of time and communication.

The first point to clear up is that in my opinion at least, although some interesting things may be learnt, unless you are neurotic your dreams will not tell you very much that is absolutely fundamental about yourself that you do not already know.

Your dreams may however reflect what you do know about yourself in a variety of ways and employ a wide variety of images and settings in so doing. And there will be especially rich dreams that can be seen as having more than one level of meaning. The connections between these layers can be interesting.

Much of the classical imagery of dreams was set out by Sigmund Freud, particularly in his monumental and path-breaking work The Interpretation of Dreams. Quite a few people today are no doubt still unhappy about some aspects of Freud’s analysis and the erotic imagery (trains, tunnels, piers, clock towers, trees etc.) of which he wrote but I think that at one level it tends to be correct (but why a clock tower rather than a train you might fruitfully ask).

Some dream images may have more than one personal association and they may evoke more than one emotion – for example involving anxiety (as may be instanced by the possibility of missing a train) as well as more pleasurable sensations. There is usually some food for thought there I think.

Carl Jung, once a colleague of Freud, gave less prominence to sexual imagery than Freud himself and some of what he said added richness to Freud’s perceptions on dreams. Jung introduced other images too, such as the well known mandalas.

Furthermore, most people will have their own set of visceral images, but I will not go into any detail here. I forget whether it was Freud or Jung who pointed out that in dreams some groups composed of three elements may refer to the male genitalia - these could be trios of people or animals for instance.

But in my opinion there is a lot more to the understanding of dreams than this. One of Freud’s perceptions was that the elements used in the composition of one’s dreams make use of what he termed ‘the day’s residues’. These are bits and pieces of our mostly mundane experiences during the preceding day that, as the modern understanding goes, the brain is likely to be sorting out for longer term storage or eventual removal. But these residues may be combined and built on to produce a particular story-like dream.

How may dreams be interpreted? The first thing to make clear is that an off-the-shelf guide book approach to images and their supposed significance simply will not do. There is in fact only one person who can interpret a dream properly and thoroughly, and that is the dreamer themselves since the dream uses their residues and personal images, and its meaning relates to their experiences either recent or from years ago – quite often childhood, puberty or experiences with a high emotional charge.

Other parties may gently aid in the dream interpretation, usually by way of a well placed suggestion or two, and by being generally supportive and encouraging in the process but, importantly, directly intervening no further than to ask the occasional question such as: “What were you feeling at this point in the dream?” or “Have you had this dream before?” If you do this, my advice is not to have eye contact with the other person – sit at an angle.

One factor that is very important in interpretation is the feeling tone in dreams. What emotions accompanied the dream or certain parts of it – excitement, anxiety, awe or typically a fusion of many feelings? This is the area where the unravelling is likely to be especially productive. Productive, that is, primarily in terms of interest rather than dramatic revelations.

Centuries ago dreams were given great weight when they related to major events that were supposedly coming down the track from the future. I’m profoundly suspicious about the verity of such reported historic or religious dreams and suspect that many of them in fact never occurred but were stories aimed to further self-interest, promote an agenda, manipulate either the ‘masses’ or Kings (in which case it’s best to be positive and right!)

I must say that have no time for seeing dreams (or anything else for that matter) as ‘omens’ with their predominant focus on the negative, on helplessness and thus the diminishment of the role of free will and the effectiveness of action to counter possible very real threats such as impending war.

But I expect many of us have had what appear to be glimpses of future events in our personal lives. I’ve had a few of these myself but before going overboard one should realise that there are seven billion potential dreamers every night, making some two hundred trillion dreams that occur worldwide in a lifetime! Some of these dreams will surely look like predictions but, as rational analysis reveals, could also be a product of chance. But maybe not all of them – and there is another sort of future related dream too.

These are those dreams where, on waking, you do not sense a reference to the future or even remember the dream unprompted. But an apparently run of the mill (if slightly odd in feeling) and maybe forgotten dream may leap back into mind when an event occurs in the future that was ‘seen’ in the dream. In my case these always have several characteristics in common – the time period is always the following day, the matter is always utterly trivial, it always has a ‘visceral’ nature, it is highly visual, and there is no way of seeing that a particular dream may be of this nature or of nurturing one.

As an aside, this question of timing seems, from my experience at least, to be important in such direct interactions as there may be between people’s minds. Years ago there were many instances where the first few words that a close relative was going to say came into my head. These always made up just a short phrase and the time gap was always one or at most two seconds. This phenomenon no longer occurs however. The tenuous connection with dreams was the relaxed state of my mind at the time of occurrence. But I digress.

It is as if, to extend Freud’s concept, such future-perceptive dreams include some of tomorrow’s residues. If there is anything to this, and of course there may not be, there are profound implications for the nature of time. But then, there have to be profound differences from our day to day impressions of time. A straight line, clockwork time simply cannot be. It is woven in with space and space time is warped by matter and there cannot have been a straight line infinity of time preceding the present.

I have sometimes though that of the temporal triumvirate of the past, the present and the future, the only one with a questionable reality is the present. This may sound surprising but by way of explanation, if you imagine yourself sitting in a room opposite someone, the sound of their voice comes out of the past as does their visual image (at a different, much faster speed) since both take a time to reach you. The processing of this information and your thoughts also takes time so that ‘the present’ is a smeared combination of incoming information and the brain’s work to render it comprehensible. This will apply to other sensory inputs too. In terms of the reality of the future, we have previous experience of reaching futures 100% of the time so, hopefully, we can expect this to continue.

My subjective experience suggests the possibility of tonight’s dreams including some of tomorrow’s residues as well as today’s so that ‘dream time present’ would also include elements of the very near future to be reached following the exercise of albeit constrained free will. One can envisage a sort of asymmetric bell-type curve of the probabilities of residue inclusion in dreams with the much greater probabilities being from the preceding day.

One other thing to look out for when interpreting a dream which appears to be significant is that the true focus of the dream may not be on the central character but one who is either less well defined or apparently in a lesser role.

To give one example, I had a dream when on holiday which caused me great concern about the welfare of a colleague who was the central character in the dream. In parts of the dream I was accompanied by a figure to my left and slightly behind me as we rushed to find my friend. The concerns I had did not evaporate and on my return to work I felt I must ask my colleague if she was alright. She said that she was fine but asked if I had heard about Godfrey. It turned out that poor Godfrey had committed suicide whilst I was away. It was then that I recognised the figure beside me in the dream.

Returning to Freud’s views on dreams, he placed great emphasis on the role of wish fulfilment even when the ‘wish’ coming to light may appear to be a highly negative or embarrassing one - and one which may be steadfastly denied by the dreamer. This idea can be revealing and we should pay close attention to it in the interpretation of dreams even though its presence is not always obvious and the supposed ‘wish’ is not always palatable.

So there is, after all, the potential to learn something from our dreams although I would emphasize that in my opinion it is more a question of there being a number of aspects of interest rather than dreams being of central importance for fundamental and heretofore unrealised self-understanding.

The Question of Free Will

Do human beings have free will – or are what we see as our ‘choices’ and our future in fact strictly determined? I don’t see people running amok if the ‘wrong’ answer is given but it is important nonetheless to have some idea of where we stand and to give reassurance as to our independent identity.

This is a fundamental question that has, through the ages, received the attention of some mighty thinkers and it is still being posed today, informed opinion, as so often in other matters, taking its familiar oscillating trajectory. But, in my opinion that the answer to this question is a little more involved than simply a bald yes or no. Rather, I see the ‘dilemma’ as artificial.

A cynic might suppose that long established religions have a vested interest in the existence of free will (or else there would be no sin, no punishment and one less need to belong to religious groups) while science has, in times past, from time to time seemed to point towards the deterministic alternative as, surprisingly, have some more recent philosophers.

Towards the end of the nineteenth century at the highpoint of development of the world view of Newtonian Mechanics (which I will here caricature as quantified forces acting on particles like billiard balls) it seemed that given enough information about the relative positions and movements of the particles at any one time (and some kind of external and utterly vast computing capacity) the future could be predicted with certainty.

But the Romantic Movement had already reacted against the classical scientific mechanistic picture, and the ‘clockwork’ model was finally shattered by the advent of Quantum Mechanics and Field Theory. Even though the approach of quantum mechanics with its irreducible uncertainties has replaced the classical mechanics, it is not entirely clear that the classical conclusion regarding free will cannot be re-cast within this framework.

The great scientist Albert Einstein, although a co-founder of quantum theory, did not find its philosophical implications consistent with the world view that he preferred, and accordingly he expressed the opinion that – if we but knew it – the future was as entirely determined as the past.

I must say that while I heartily yearn for Einstein’s world view in general to be proved right (caricatured as ‘God does not play dice’ – i.e. there is something with a more defined structure underlying quantum mechanics) the free will conclusion is the one aspect that I would least wish to be true.

Einstein however, positioned himself away from the mainstream of developments in quantum theory. Even so, excursions into the weird world of the quantum have a tendency to produce a mystical train of thought- such for example as this: Perhaps the quantum world is the substrate of the mind of God and ‘reality’, and we ourselves, are thoughts within it.

There may be world views finding their origins in quantum theory that bear striking comparison with some (admittedly selected) of the assertions of eastern religions. These were presented very eloquently by Fritjof Kapra in his still popular book The Tao of Physics some years ago. The essential understanding that is relevant our subject here is that all times may merge into an eternal present. Kapra also draws our attention to the eastern view that opposite poles are manifestations of an underlying unity.

The apparent opposite poles that we are considering here are of course free will and determinism. I say ‘apparent’ since there is a unifying idea - the notion of constraint. Determinism would then be seen as perfectly constrained choice, there being only one possible outcome. Complete free will on the other hand would be the absence of any constraints – or would it?

It has been pointed out many times that without rules, without the ‘laws’ of physics (or indeed the Highway Code) there would exist only choiceless chaos. In fact we would not be here to make any choices at all, and even if in some Poincare event of unimaginable unlikelihood (now more often thought of as the question of ‘Boltzmann Brains’ arising if there was an infinite universe) an individual was accidentally and randomly assembled that individual would be unable to predict, even statistically, the outcomes of his actions and thus have no paths at all to follow.

So both determinism and free will can be seen as involving choice under constraint. The questions that remain are how much constraining is going on and is there an ideal level of constraint. In some ways the situation here is similar to one of the points that I made in Arne Saknussem. Different mixtures of constraints give rise to differing richness of choice possibilities and the ideal would produce a maximal range of high quality choices.

When you consider the orderliness of Nature and the small number of types of physical forces and constraints that there are (with the prospect of even fewer given the ongoing work of physicists to produce a unified theory) it seems likely to me that we are already close to that ideal level – a highly desirable circumstance with minimal, though essential constraints.

These are the main reasons why I think that the supposed dilemma between free will and determinism is an artificial and unproductive one. We can regard ourselves as having, as it were, freedom under the law (s of nature) and making choices accordingly. All roads do eventually lead to the Rome of choice.

Furthermore, in practical terms we must surely act as if we have genuinely free choices, constrained or not. Without this perspective there would be no sense of responsibility that extended beyond the self. So my position is that we can confidently go out and make our own (though hopefully not always immediately self-serving) choices and take responsibility for them.

Interior Odyssey…Into the depths…

This image, which I have included in Ruminations, was published in the edition of Jules Verne’s famous story ‘A Journey to the Centre of the Earth’, a book that I first read as a child. The picture shows the adventurers on their initial descent into the Snaefells volcano of Verne’s imagination. I have since come to understand that the story can be read on more than one level – as it were!

Verne’s explorers made their descent into the depths of this immensely atmospheric Icelandic volcano as Verne imagined them and plumbed the passageways therein. These led ever downwards, eventually to an undiscovered primeval world. Given what is known about human brain structure, need this, I ask, be so very unlike a journey into our own minds?

The famous psychologist / analyst / healer / writer Carl Jung made just such an epic (and hazardous) descent into his own personal unconscious and described his interactions with the ‘archetypes’ that he believed that he discerned therein. He also made his 'discovery' of the Jungian collective unconscious and gave a description of it.

This was an interior odyssey, a Snaefells journey par excellence. Fortunately, for us lesser mortals, it is not necessary to imitate Jung’s high risk exercise to find what we may be looking for within the depths of ourselves.

Our own interior odysseys should be conducted with open-minded awareness and could use some of the approaches mentioned in earlier posts. With the addition of observations from trusted others, we will surely find abundant imperfections - and lopsidedness too - but some of these aspects will also have good positive possibilities if integrated into the personal whole. And some of our own lost worlds may be rediscovered.

Such an inward, integrative journey of rediscovery, transcendence or integration of self is likely to be a long one, but don’t expect it to be a ‘Road to Damascus’ experience - mistrust it if it seems as if it is. Outside of tales meant to inspire, nothing that good is likely to be instant and effortless. Simply remind yourself that: ‘the road is hard, but I am strong’ and you will complete your own interior odyssey as Jules Verne’s adventurers completed theirs.

Atmosphere

I have long noted that certain places, for me as also for many other people, have what I would describe as an ‘atmosphere’ – a psychological sense of something other, an eventful presence, a lingering memory. I have placed the word atmosphere in quotation marks not to belittle it but to indicate that we may not all have the same appreciation of this ‘out of the ordinariness’ and what it might mean. Out of the ordinary certainly, but by no means ‘spooky’ in my opinion – the location with ambience is nearly always in the open air and is always experienced in broad daylight.

The atmosphere that comes to awareness may have a feeling of events past, though still in some way evident, a characteristic of heightened emotionality or a significance in the light of a person’s particular understanding of the nature of the Cosmos. Other people sensing the atmosphere of a place may also experience a feeling of déjà vu along with the ambience of the location, although this does not apply in my case.

While the presence of an atmospheric location for an individual person will always be affecting for them - and is sometimes disquieting too, for me at least there is a relatively small number of significantly atmospheric places, possibly because I have not deliberately sought them out. Perhaps this is just as well, one would not wish to be overwhelmed. In those atmospheric locations that I have come across however the atmosphere is strong, consistent and persistent over time. Certainly for my part I have no intention of playing down this personal experience and so declining an opportunity to share with others and the insight that may be present as a result.

I think that a lot of people who have had similar experiences of atmosphere are deterred from talking about them for fear of being made to appear foolish by those people who are easily unsettled by any questioning of the ‘ordinariness’ and comprehensibility of their world. If this is so, then let me be the fool on their behalf. In my view the world is very far from being an ‘ordinary’ place and although it cannot be an inconsistent or illogical one, there are many properties that can seem strange to our current understanding, there are multitudinous unplumbed depths and our present knowledge of time, space and matter is far from being complete and is also subject to periodic upheavals as research progresses.

Two of the most atmospheric places that I know are, not surprisingly, quite near to where I live in Birmingham and they are also close to each other. The first location is Wychbury Hill. I’m not referring here to the unusual and precarious obelisk or to the notorious crime that took place near there but to part of the woods further back and some way down from the top of the hill.

Whenever I go to this place I have the sense of a lot of people, as a mind’s eye impression from many centuries ago, possibly during the Iron Age, running chaotically - presumably to save themselves from some threat, real or presumed, emanating from what or from whom I do not know. Although I would dearly like to understand more, I am in truth aware of little else and it doesn’t change.

The second nearby place with a distinct atmosphere is Clent Hills, which is very close to Wychbury and is also possibly connected in its atmosphere since this is the direction in which the ‘runners’ appear to be headed. It is not all of Clent that has the ambiance that I sense, but two particular parts – within the beech trees at the top of Nimmings Hill and an area near to a pool located much lower down. I first noticed this atmosphere when taken there as a child and it has always coloured my thoughts about Clent and conditioned my enjoyment of this beautiful area in the Midlands of England.

Much grander locations possessing an atmosphere that I have sensed at further remove are on a substantially larger scale. They include what little remains of the city of Carthage. The original city was vindictively razed by the Romans, but a fragment of a residential area is still preserved in which you are able to walk and look around, gaining a sense of the time and it certainly does have a distinct atmosphere – for me at least.

But, out on its own for atmospheric magnitude, is Snaefells in Iceland. Snaefells is an ancient volcano with the distinctive cone shape, its own glacier and which last erupted many centuries ago. Many people sense that the whole of the Snaefellsness area is somehow psychologically special and I understand that the mountain itself has been placed on a ‘Ley Line’ alignment, although I am not into this sort of thing myself. But such is the strength of the ambience that it is hard to see how anyone could visit the Snaefells area and not notice something out of the ordinary here. Although it is not clear to me what its character is, there are those who relate its special atmosphere to what they describe as energy.

I suppose that in my case having read and re-read many times since childhood Jules Verne’s captivating novel ‘Journey to the Centre of the Earth’ I could have gained an expectation of there being an atmosphere surrounding Snaefells from that source. But I think there is more to it than a childhood impression. The atmosphere surrounding Snaefells is certainly compelling and people who have never read Jules Verne’s work also sense that atmosphere strongly. And the question naturally arises as to why, in the first place, Verne chose Snaefells as his location for his story of the heroic descent into the depths.

How could all of this come about and what might its meaning be? Of course, there is always the possibility of self deception – an unconscious effort to achieve personal significance and a special position as a human being. If this were the case however I would probably have gone to more impressive lengths to find something of wider and more unusual scope on which to claim authority! But mention of the unconscious brings to mind C. G. Jung’s concept of the collective unconscious and its connections, one human being with another, which conceivably could take place over time as well as space.

Feelings of oddness could also arise from more mundane causes - an unusual lie of the land, exposure to the elements, the particular flora, an absence of fauna (particularly birds), the behaviour of other visitors or prompting by other characteristics of the immediate natural environment or one’s own personal history. But if any of these elements are present, they may also be connected with things that are deeper and more obscure to which I refer - albeit indirectly. One does not rule out the other.

I think that my personal impressions of atmospheric locations, and those of many other people, are authentic and that this has implications for the nature of reality itself and the part that we can play in it. One thing is certain, the world is not a straightforward, linear, billiard ball sort of place. Nor can there be an infinite, straight line, past to time (or else we would never be able to complete an infinity and arrive at the present) although, in logical if not in cosmological terms the future itself is not limited.

The oddities of the quantum world are legion and include the strangest of connections, such as entanglement. Our stable, consistent, ‘ordinary’ experiences in everyday life amazingly have this profoundly counter-intuitive underworld as a foundation, so should we not be expecting the unusual, or experiencing phenomena that will challenge us for an explanation?

But how could such past events still be perceivable by people today? Is there a record that is laid down in some way that can be accessible to sharing? This may be ethereal or otherwise, perhaps via transmission to a Jungian collective unconscious or etched onto a universal ‘stone tape’ as it were and of which, in certain special circumstances people can become aware.

But these admittedly rather stretched possibilities may not be required if time is not all that it seems. We are in our today. Those runners at Wychbury Hill were in their today but there is a sense in which it is always today – a superimposition of times usually veiled from each other - but perhaps not always and not impenetrably.

That’s about it. I readily admit that my personal perceptions cannot be all that sharp since at Clent I can see nothing specific although I do sense from the definite atmosphere that a dark echo lingers, that there are murmurs from the past, which something profoundly unhappy has marked its presence there. And I am equally sure that other people have had much clearer experiences of atmospheres like this and I shall retain an open mind as to what is signified.

Rollo

Here is the second image selected from Ruminations – my compilation of some recent items on this blog. All of the images have a significance for me beyond the purely literal, but I’ll give a few thoughts on the latter here.

Rollo was a Norse Viking who was the founder of the Viking principality that later became Normandy, of which he became the first ruler and of course his descendents eventually became kings of England. I understand that there is an ancestral connection with our present day Royal Family.

Vivienne and I came across a commemorative statue of Rollo on a visit to Olesund in Norway some years ago. It was a very strange experience to see a figure having such a strong likeness to myself - the sculptor’s envisioning of him bearing a striking if imaginative and co-incidental resemblance.

But could other parallels be formed I am, as ever, tempted to wonder? It is sometimes enlightening and helpful to inter-personal understanding and tolerance to look for something of ourselves in others – but in this case I suppose it would be stretching things a good deal!

But I have nevertheless found it intriguing to look for parallels and correspondences between people, places or situations where there is no purely rational reason to expect them to exist. Some surprising and illuminating insights can arise from undertaking such exercises.

I claim no Norman blood and in fact have always much preferred the long lost Anglo-Saxon culture and its stirring language and heroic tales. But the classical virtue of courage in the face of challenge that was demonstrated both by Rollo and the Anglo Saxons is something that I will always find worthwhile developing further in my own life.

Meanwhile, I have immodestly adopted this image of the statue of Rollo as my current profile picture on Facebook – the original being a version I can scarcely recall! So comes Rollo into the modern age!

Cogitas Ergo Sum

In my last posting I mentioned ‘Ruminations’ which is a spiral bound collection of finalised versions of some of the more, for want of a better description, philosophical items that I have produced recently for this blog. As an integral part of this composition there are a number of accompanying images a few of which I intend to post in separate brief items here.

The first of these is a sketch that I came across many years ago – decades ago in fact. I have no remaining record of the source of this intriguing drawing and as far as I can recall it did not have a title attached to it. So for my own purposes I called it ‘Cogitas Ergo Sum’ which, if my feeble Latin suffices translates as ‘You think therefore I am’.

This is for very interesting reasons that I think are there to be seen, as it were, inspired of course by Descartes’ famous philosophical proposition of 1637 ‘Cogito ergo sum’ – ‘I think therefore I am’ which implies that an ‘I’ exists to do the thinking.

But, you may wish to consider, can we take a further step towards identifying the presence of entities that we think about other than ‘I’? Probably not in the strict terms that were laid down by Descartes, but if people act as if such an entity has an existential standing then in so doing they effectively imbue it with power and creativity in our world so that its status is in at least in one important respect equivalent to existence. Since we come across this phenomenon every day, we should at least ensure that we use it for the better.

Other substantial questions around the Cogitas ergo sum idea will remain of course, perhaps notable amongst these is this: ‘Who is the speaker and who is ‘I’? A fruitful question to contemplate - I think.

Ruminations

It has now been quite a while since my last posting on this blog. The main reason is that I’ve been concentrating my available energy on producing a printed and bound compilation of finalised versions of recent items on the blog. To these I’ve added various images that are meaningful to me and which have deep level relationships to the text. If this sounds a bit mystical then it probably is, since my personal and highly tenuous understanding of the Cosmos is that there is something about it that goes beyond the solely rational – it is not irrational, but is simply more.

I’ve called the collection ‘Ruminations’, a title that reflects my cud-chewing thought processes. Unfortunately Blogspot doesn’t allow the uploading of PDF files – a serious limitation. Nevertheless I’ve produced PDF versions (files that you can read or print out from Acrobat – on most computers) of the complete text and images and I’d be happy to send anyone interested copies by email. My address is MWi8327963@aol.com  

If you decide to have a look at Ruminations you may feel that some of the phrases I’ve chosen to use are interpretable at more than one level. Unintended instances apart, this is because I want them to be this way. Doubly so in terms of the images where, beyond attaching brief personal descriptions of them, I don’t go into detail as my intention is that readers should be free to come to their own understanding of the significance and attach their own labels.

In my view strict requirements for narrow precision and restriction to a single layer of meaning in some topics in Ruminations would produce an incomplete understanding of human qualities and the nature of the Cosmos of which we are an integral part. Like other dreams, memories and reflections, there are times when depth of meaning flows from richness of interpretation, which can bear fruit at many levels.

I want to set out a few thoughts and intuitions on life and its meaning, my views on our place in the Cosmos, on morality and mortality, on our society and some other deep questions that have intrigued me over the years. Wildly ambitious no doubt, but I’m talking about views rather than comprehensive analyses.

In doing this, even at a very short length, my hope is that I may connect with other people ‘out there’ puzzling over the same things but for whom useful discussions are hard to find. Certainly, I’ve found this to be the case myself. I’m sure I stand to be corrected on a number of matters, but my hope is that, nevertheless, there may be one or two points that people will find interesting and helpful in their own explorations.

One risks looking foolish when, at this stage in life, putting out something like this. If this is so, then so be it and I hope that I will find myself amongst those who I think should be suffered gladly! It is unfortunate that many people who may have interesting things to say are silenced by such anxiety, a fear often put into them by critics who, superior beings that they are, would much rather hear echoes of their own voices.

But each person is one-of-a-kind and has a unique experience in life. So I believe we should take courage and say what we think, since we all have something to contribute. So, for what it is worth, Ruminations is my personal offering.

To conclude this piece, I’m not sure how many more postings I will be able to make on this blog, but we will see as time goes on. Thanks for taking an interest.

Omar Khayyam

Omar Khayyam was an 11^th/12^th century Persian philosophical poet, astronomer and mathematician. He wrote many short poems some of which were translated and gathered together as if one piece by Edward Fitzgerald and termed by him a Rubaiyat. Khayyam advocated charity towards all and warned of the temporary nature and dangers of wealth – a message fitting to our times if ever there was one. He was not afraid to depart from orthodoxy and express doubt on fundamental issues – a hazardous pursuit in that part of the world then as now – though broad learning was greatly valued at that time in his culture.

The Rubaiyat has been one of my favourite poems all of my life. Oddly, I was introduced to this by my mother who in all other regards departed little from her standard religious creed. It clearly has a deep resonance with partly conscious and unexpressed uncertainties about life and its meaning. This speaks to my own condition and outlook and I have always turned to the poem if in need of  what I think of as ‘angry consolation’. If you read the whole, I think you’ll see what I mean by this expression.

I once had the good fortune to be able to refer to Khayyam’s mathematical work in an academic paper of my own and have had a lifelong interest in astronomy so I have these reasons too to connect with his great work. This, and Khayyam’s critical approach to riches and his view of their distribution I hope have found an echo in some of the pieces I’ve written and in my own political and moral philosophy. Here I want to share with you just three verses (not in order – they are verse 32, the famous verse 76 and verse 35). They speak profoundly of life and repay the investment of much thought.

Into this Universe and Why not knowing,

Nor Whence, like Water willy-nilly flowing,

And out of it, as Wind along the Waste,

I know not Whither, willy-nilly blowing.

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,

Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit

Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,

Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.

There was the Door to which I found no Key:

There was the Veil through which I could not see:

Some little talk awhile of ME and THEE

There was – and then no more of THEE and ME.

A Citizenry of Good Intent

What makes for a ‘Good City’? Is it architecture? No. Its plutocratic wealth? Certainly not. Where power is concentrated? No. Rather, it is a citizenry of good intent. What makes for a citizenry of good intent? Shared values, harmonious relationships between individuals, cultures and communities, and their joint endeavours towards the common good.

For one instance of a city that possesses this enormously important but almost always overlooked quality and one which has many other fine characteristics, I would say that Birmingham stands out. It is a good city, and a cosmopolitan world city. These qualities mean that it is growing steadily, and Birmingham is home to 1.1 million people, covering 150 square miles and including much that is green with over 100,000 publicly owned trees and 150 public parks. The Greater Birmingham area has more than double this population.

Although there are local archaeological finds going back to the stone age, far as we know, the continuous population began about twelve hundred years ago when a group of people led by a man called Beorma first settled here. The name ‘Birmingham’ means ‘Home of the people of Beorma’ (Beorma Ingas Ham) and ever since those earliest times the city has welcomed people from all over the world who wish to make their home here too and enrich the community through their work and culture and achieve fulfilment as individuals.

It is on these principles that Birmingham has become the country’s premier city outside the capital. It is the largest local authority in Europe, or, put even more expressively, the largest local authority this side of the Urals. This is something to be proud of rather than, as we're told by those intent on needless change and the further diminishment of local government, a bit of a problem.

Birmingham also has one of the youngest populations of any major city in Europe and there is pride in the open and democratic traditions on which the city’s prosperity was founded. Over 130 years ago the Council made clear that Birmingham knows: “No distinction between her citizens by birth or adoption.” And, as a city of tolerance and respect for all of its citizens, this is constantly reaffirmed. To adapt a famous expression: ‘E Pluribus Birmingham’, ‘From many – Birmingham’.

The city's motto is ‘Forward’ and it lives by this. So even in difficult times when the common good is not to the fore nationally, there will be more opportunities to improve the quality of life for everyone and preserve the city's extensive heritage. This would be in addition to an excellent cultural environment both at the highest level and throughout its communities. The city will continue to do all this along with other beneficial developments while remaining, by all objective accounts, one of the friendliest cities in the country.

All Birmingham’s citizens are encouraged to embrace the common values of our society. For example, our faith communities can maintain their essential traditions and beliefs while integrating into, and fully contributing towards, the common good of the city -  just as their predecessors have done throughout Birmingham’s vibrant history. Community has many dimensions, locality obviously but it is on the faith aspect of community that I wish to focus here.

I have taken part in a number of multi-faith events and have seen the good work of faith leaders and communities throughout Birmingham. While in my personal outlook on life and its meaning I choose to hold a greater degree of uncertainty than most people, like everyone else I seek knowledge, understanding and, where possible, personal meaning.

I am also a harvester of wise sayings – the concise wisdom of others! I take the view that we should accept truth from whatever quarter it may come and however uncomfortable it may be, revising our outlook in the light of the facts. As J. M. Keynes put it: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?” So tradition should have a vote but not a veto. The main challenges are how to be part of modernity without losing essential values and how to fully incorporate in wider society without losing cultural identity.

In terms of common ground it is worth looking for what I call the ‘sentiments within’. What I have in mind here is a constructive 'reading between the lines' of scripture or other significant texts which can expand the range of those who are reached by the essence of the message. This can certainly be unifying. In any text, we should ask ourselves what is the core intent rather than be distracted by the surface wording or contextual particularities. As Shaw expressed it: 'There is only one religion though there are a hundred versions of it.'

In most cases the principal divisive factor turns out to be ignorance, but the good news is that that part of ignorance that is not wilful or deeply indoctrinated can be dissolved – much more by friendly and informal contact than through formal education. The residual prejudice that is not dissolved by the removal of this lack of understanding is a deeper seated problem, but numbers will be reduced as communities as a whole move forward. The key questions remaining are what creates such prejudice in the first place and what sustains it.

At both individual and community levels there is much to be gained by distinguishing carefully between identity and belief. So faith and the traditions associated with it should not represent the whole of identity. The same consideration applies to those individuals with a truculent atheistic outlook – it does not make for a harmonious society, nor does it promote understanding or the common good if people see themselves or others as being defined by these positions and need constantly to put up aggressive challenges.

The question also arises as to what extent identity can be sufficiently secured with a tempering of the surface elements of religion – what I term the 'particularities'. With this in mind, there is also the question as to what extent can the initially disparate identities of communities converge over time? This would be a gradual process in which individual freedoms would have a major role.

And common to all groups, every generation needs to relearn how to live in ways that both satisfy themselves, their communities and promote the common good. In these distracted days when we can so easily become preoccupied with inessentials and become the 'tools of our tools', a highly relevant question is whether or not human beings are related to the infinite.

Birmingham has always seen good interfaith relations as vital. Opportunities for people of different faiths, or none, to learn about each other and overcome suspicions are to be welcomed. So many good things can be achieved by working together in which it soon becomes evident that the core values of the world religions (and those of many thoughtful agnostics) are common ground. Broad based knowledge and understanding are important – those who know only their own side of the case know insufficient of that.

The Cosmos contains subtle and multi-faceted truths towards which religions are pathways, so they should not, at a deep level, conflict with each other. The seeming clashes of doctrine and practice need not be calamitous and may be in fact be opportunities. What would seem on the surface to be antipathies sometimes reveal hidden affinities. Apparent discord can be harmony not understood.

Peace is the greatest good and, like its dreadful opposite, is a human concept. Peace can only come into being when people are in touch with their humanity and this I think is what the mainstream religions seek to achieve. Beyond the political realm, peace depends on harmony between all religions and this is a goal in which we all share. Harmony will have amongst its sure foundations the qualities of knowledge, tolerance, respect and love as we strive towards a world without enemies.

There are those to whom faith is a stranger. Some have this as a preference. Some, while not seeking it, are at least at ease with this state but for others it is unsettling. Wise counsel can assist them, and prayer too since the process of and preparation for prayer is valuable to people of a devout disposition but without specific faith. Preparation involves a gathering of the self, and in providing a release from the urgencies of the moment, allows a focus on a point beyond the self.

All that we do, especially in commercial life, should be done with the guidance of a moral compass knowing that all individuals are important and should be respected and that a single act of generosity or brave intentions can change the course of a life or a part of the world. We should carry our moral values into community and representative life too and thereby continue to play a major role in making us the great city that we are.

Today Birmingham is home to many religious traditions, ranging from varieties of theism through to the many strands of Hinduism and the godless spirituality of Buddhism. There are also many degrees of agnosticism adjoined to core moral values, some of which combinations are difficult to distinguish from un-dogmatic versions of faith.

The power of the state and religious power are both enormous and in the same hands amount to far too great a concentration of authority. So while state and religion should be separate, this does not mean that faith should have no say in government or that government must necessarily be conducted by faithless people. What must be avoided is the situation where religious parties legislate for sectional interests. Faith based values can be advocated with passion but should not be imposed by legislation – a point that is taken up in Appendix A on Lord Justice Laws’ ruling. Appendix B suggests a possible elements in an inter-faith compact.

There is of course a great deal more that should be kept to the fore, for example the contribution of literature and the immense value of the aesthetic sense. Art is a universal language regardless of form. Art can take us to an inner place, hinting at the thoughts that lie hidden in our hearts. Art is a global language that knows no nationality and favours no race, creed, age, class or gender. So a good city will encourage art in all its communities – as does Birmingham.

Finally, in sum what is required from people for harmony? A warm decision by the intellect, and the most rational decision that the heart can take and magnanimity - greatness of heart and mind. These individual qualities are the keys to good relationships between all communities.

And amongst many broad issues there is the necessity of sustaining the good earth, locally and globally, restoring integrity and traditional decent values in politics as well as business and embedding them right throughout society today. And vital international relief and development work will flourish all the more on the foundation of harmonious communities and the generosity of the common good.

In all of this it is relevant to ask: what is the basis of belief? Why do we believe what we do? And, equally importantly: what represents a reasonable basis for changing our minds and what makes for a context in which this can be done? The sociological view is that belief rests on the foundations of family or culture. In psychological terms belief gives the individual a sense of meaning or purpose – but may also be constraining.

A scientific foundation for holding a belief is reason and evidence and, quite opposite to this, there is deference to authority – believing something when told to do so by a person held to be significant or through having read it in an authoritative text. The rational foundation for ‘belief’ requires this to be held provisionally, in the light of the current evidence. But these distinctions are by no means as sharp as may first appear. For example, as the Bible reportedly says: Test everything and hold on to the good!

I am certainly for the common good – the common wealth as it were – enhancing the well-being of everyone, with no-one being marginalised, where the meek get some inheritance today rather than promises for delivery much later, and where well-being is defined in a broad way to include all aspects of the quality of life, not just consumption. In fact we should dispense with the vain quest for emotional well-being to be gained through material consumption. In fact ‘consumption’ is a word that was once used to describe a state of ‘ill-being’ - a wasting illness – ironically still appropriate today.

And I am equally certainly against 'sin'! To my mind sin is socially pathological behaviour. Fundamentalist violence is the worst possible example, representing that which is all too literally mortal. I wish that our language had a secular word that was equivalent to ‘evil’ – for this is surely it. But more commonplace aggressive self-righteousness, intolerance, excessive consumerism and greed are examples of social pathologies that can detract from the well-being of all communities and diminish the qualities of a good city.

But any such negative impacts will be reduced to an absolute minimum and ultimately eliminated through shared values, harmonious relationships and joint endeavours oriented towards the common good. These are all much in evidence in the good city of which we have spoken, and long may it be so.

Appendices

A: Lord Justice Laws’ Ruling

Lord |Justice Laws’ wise words in a marriage guidance case merit careful study. In his ruling Lord Justice Laws wrote:

“We do not live in a society where all people share uniform religious beliefs. The precepts of any one religion – any belief system – cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of any other. If they did, those out in the cold would be less than citizens and our constitution would be on the way to a theocracy, which is of necessity autocratic.

The law of a theocracy is dictated without option to the people, not made by their judges and governments. The individual conscience is free to accept such dictated law, but the state, if its people are to be free, has the burdensome duty of thinking for itself.

In a free constitution such as ours there is an important distinction to be drawn between the law’s protection of the right to hold and express a belief and the law’s protection of that belief’s substance or content.

The conferment of any legal protection or preference upon a particular substantive moral position on the ground only that it is espoused by the adherents of a particular faith, however long its tradition, however long its culture, is deeply unprincipled”

“It (a faith) may of course be true; but the ascertainment of such a truth lies beyond the means by which laws are made in a reasonable society. Therefore it lies only in the heart of the believer, who is alone bound by it. No one else is or can be so bound, unless by his own free choice he accepts its claims.”

B: Possible elements in an inter-faith Compact

1. We accept each other for what we are without trying to change one another.

2. We will identify and promote our common core values and resolve to be people and communities of reconciliation.

3. We commit ourselves to work together for a cohesive society in the spirit of mutual respect and openness.

4. We will work together for understanding, respect, justice and peace.

5. We seek to promote the common wealth, the common good and a harmonious common life within a good city and a virtuous economy.