Monthly Archives: May 2009
|Down through the years I have collected information and data that indicates that immature cataracts can be gradually, effectively shrunk (and even obliterated) when two natural OTC products are judiciously taken over a 6-18 month period of time:
International Antiaging Systems, a private pharmacy firm in the UK has posted a comprehensive article on N-acetyl-carnosine eye drops for cataract prevention and treatment: http://www.antiaging-systems.com/extract/nac.htm
In addition, here are links to two abstracts concerning N-A-Carnosine on PubMed:
And with regard to the CTM Herbal Phytodrug:
A CASE OF SUCCESSFUL CATARACT TREATMENT IN A DIABETIC WOMAN
In an article from Japan , published in the American Journal of Chinese Medicine (5), three physicians report on a successful case of cataract treatment with a traditional herb formula. This involved a 68-year-old woman with diabetes having a cataract in one eye. The cataract had been present for more than four years at the time of treatment with the herb formula. She was given Achyranthes, Plantago, and Rehmannia Formula. She had been taking Catalin eye drops and Tathion eye drops (glutathione eye drops, another antioxidant strategy), with only slight effect, but when she began taking the herb formula, her vision began to rapidly improve within 10 days, and continued to improve over three months of therapy. The affected eye then remained in improved condition thereafter, with continued use of the herbs (dried extract granules, 7.5 grams per day).
Here is one source for the Rehmannia Eight Formula:
http://eastearthtrade.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=114 à Rehmannia Eight Formula (Chinese: Ba Wei Di Huang Wan, Japanese: Hachimi-jio-gan) is the most popular herbal treatment in Japan for diabetes. The formula aids insulin regulation and halts the progression of diabetic nerve damage and prevents eye and circulation problems1. May also help with memory loss. Research has also shown it helps delay the formation of cataracts. Use 2-4 capsules three times per day.
Contains: Rehmannia, Cornus, Chinese Yam (Dioscorea), Hoelen (Poria), Alisma, Aconitum, Cinnamon twig, Moutan.
Size: 100 capsules
NOTE: I have no commercial, financial or other ties to the aforementioned companies or products.
© 2009 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved.
The information contained in this article is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice or instruction. Readers are advised to consult a licensed health care professional concerning all matters related to their health and well being.
There is evidence that emotions facilitate quick judgment in humans (This probably holds true for other animals as well). If anything like a Vulcan were to evolve to a conscious state in our cosmos, they might well lack the critical capacity to make rapid-fire judgments. No problem, of course, if you live in an environment where quick decisions are not essential to survival. Say, a planet or environmental niche in which threats to life and limb are few or virtually nonexistent or are in some way never imminent.
Of course, other mechanisms could evolve and be selected for to facilitate quick judgment without the element of what we know as emotion. If on planet V high temperature emitting life forms pose a threat, then the simple capacity to perceive and steer clear of such life forms would favor one’s survival. Networks and clusters of these “circuits” might keep your species going strong without any emotion (as we know it) whatsoever entering into the picture.
Assuming that complex life has evolved elsewhere and some forms have reached a level of self-awareness and reasoning we would categorize as “sentient”, would we be able to relate to one another? Especially a species that lacks what we call emotion? At some level – probably so, simply because there are some things all intelligent creatures would figure out – patterns in nature that can be quantified (mathematics), assignment of symbols to objects so as to make some form of communication possible. Given time, we’d match-up language or communication equivalents involving shared concepts and ideas and principles. But if our new friends happen to lack emotion, we’d be hard-pressed to communicate, much less explain “love” or “hate” or anger”. We might have better luck explaining physical sensations to a pocket calculator.
So what would we have? A gap or “failure to communicate”, obviously. No doubt our sentient alien friends would be in a predicament over how to go about telling us about faculties they evolved but that we utterly lack and have no equivalent to on our world. We might well end up only able to really communicate about shared features or abstract concepts, while the rest is “left for another day”.
Now for the really big question: Would we embrace such a species and be “friends”? Accept the differences between us and forge a meaningful relationship that is mutually beneficial? Why, of course, we would (you say). We are up to the challenge. Really? Reflect for a moment on human history. We have a long, dismal record of accepting and being decent to our own kind. People have been marginalized, isolated and even intentionally eradicated simply because of differences in religious faith, skin color, creed or political affiliation. Some because they differed insofar as they were sick, weak or old. And these were fellow humans who share a common genetic heritage and basic features of heart and mind. Now ask yourself honestly: After the novelty has worn off, how long would it be before some factions among us began to exploit the aliens — or worse?
Maybe it is a good thing that we have not spread to the stars and discovered sentient life forms yet. We really should get our own house in order before visiting any neighbors out there.
© 2003 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved.
By Choctaw Doc
Alcohol-induced disease is fairly commonplace among individuals who abuse alcohol. Fibrosis and cirrhosis by-and-large head the list. In both cases, abnormal changes take place in liver tissue that compromise this vital organ’s ability to function optimally. For many people who drink, a doctor’s finding of liver pathology (disease) is sufficient to get them to either curtail their drinking or abstain altogether (Whether on a temporary or permanent basis).
For others, however, a diagnosis of cirrhosis or other alcohol-induced disease does not put “the fear of God in ’em” with sufficient force for them to overcome the craving to elbow bend. What follows is information concerning a “dose of prevention” that may just spare the heavy drinker some grief down the line (Albeit this is by no means an argument to continue excessive drinking!)
This said, I would urge consistent moderate drinkers to pay attention to what I am about to share as well, as they too have the potential to experience liver damage over time that may not be readily repaired (and which could set the stage for problems later on in life).
A Dose of Prevention
In at least two separate animal studies carried out during the past fifteen years, a natural compound called lecithin protected animals who consumed booze in great quantities. Indeed, the animals were protected from developing many of the pathologic abnormalities common when alcohol is abused. Here are the details of this very compelling body of research:
In a study involving rats, 28 male littermates were pair-fed liquid diets containing 36% of energy either as ethanol (alcohol) or as additional carbohydrates for 21 days. Half of these rodents were given polyenylphosphatidylcholine (A component of lecithin) at 3 grams per liter of their food substrate (Liquid meals). The other group was given safflower oil (3 grams/liter) and choline (A chemical part of lecithin) as a bitatrate salt. The polyenylphosphatidylcholine (PPC) did not influence diet intake or alcohol consumption, but the booze-induced liver enlargement and accumulation of specific fats (lipids – triglycerides and cholesterol esters) and proteins were about half those in rats not given PPC. In rats that consumed PPC, post-eating rise in serum lipids was lower than was true of their littermates who had no PPC. The researchers, who worked at the Alcohol Research and Treatment Center, Bronx Veteran Affairs Medical Center (New York City), concluded that “These beneficial effects of PPC at the initial stages of alcoholic liver injury may prevent or delay the progression to more advanced forms of alcoholic liver disease” (1).
In a separate 10 year-long study involving baboons, also carried out at the Bronx Veteran Affairs Center (Section of Liver Disease and Nutrition), the suggested benefits of lecithin ingestion were even more encouraging.
In the study, twelve baboons (eight females, four males) were fed a liquid diet rich in alcohol supplemented with polyunsaturated lecithin (50% of total energy) or isocaloric carbohydrate. This group was compared with another group of eighteen baboons who were fed an equivalent diet (with or without alcohol), but without of lecithin. (2) Both groups developed increases in specific lipids (associated with alcohol use), but there were significant differences in the degree of liver injury (fibrosis) seen. For one thing, septal fibrosis (with cirrhosis in two animals) and transformation of their fat cells (lipocytes) into transitional cells developed in seven of the nine baboons fed the regular diet with alcohol. Septal fibrosis did not develop in any of the animals fed lecithin! In fact, they did not progress beyond the stage of perivenular (area around veins) fibrosis and had significantly lesser activation of fat cells to transitional cells. (3) The clincher came when the scientists took three of the lecithin-consuming animals off same, but maintained their customary diet and alcohol mix. They very rapidly progressed to cirrhosis, accompanied by an increased transformation of their fat cells to transitional cells!
The fact these researchers found that choline exerted no protective effect in animals ingesting large quantities of alcohol led them to conclude that the polyunsaturated phospholipids might be responsible for the protective effect. This is underscored by the rodent study cited above, in which choline did not protect the animals from alcohol-induced liver damage, whereas PPC (Lecithin component) did. (4)
Baboon livers are remarkably similar to human livers (This is one reason an attempt was made many years back to transplant baboon livers into humans whose livers had failed). Given this, it seems logical that lecithin should provide human drinkers at least some of the benefits seen in the baboons. Accordingly, for those who drink — especially heavily — lecithin may be an invaluable form of health insurance. It is also easy on the pocketbook, being sold “dirt cheap” in health food and grocery stores plus pharmacies across the land.
In addition to lecithin, there are other compounds that if taken by drinkers should help reduce the damage to their livers.
For example, in alcoholics the conversion of the amino acid methione to S-adenosylmethionine (SAM-e) is significantly reduced. In baboon models of alcoholism, the animals experienced alcoholic cirrhosis that was opposed by replenishing SAM-e. Other lines of research indicate that bolstering SAM-e levels in human alcoholics decreases mortality, and offsets oxidative stress resulting from alcohol and alcohol byproduct induction of a liver detoxification enzyme designated cytochrome P4502E1 (CYP2E1).
SAM-e can readily be replenished by taking an oral form that is bioavailable (Not all forms are!)
As the liver is a prime site for manufacture of one of the bodies most powerful antioxidants, glutathione, it logically follows that heavy use of alcohol would impact synthesis of this compound. And indeed, at least one animal study indicates this to be the case.
Fortunately, glutathione can be orally supplemented. However, not just any form of glutathione will work, as most forms are broken down in the gut and thus never reach the bloodstream intact. There is patented forms that resist breakdown until the glutathione has reached tissues throughout the body.
Of course, when it comes to drinking to excess – be it binge drinking or habitual heavy imbibing — curtailing or quitting is ideal. Those caught up in this sort of drinking pattern should seek professional help. But for addicts, alcohol abusers, and just plain ole social drinkers, offsetting some of the injury boozing does to the body (liver especially) is a prudent measure. The judicious use of lecithin, SAM-e and the right form of glutathione should readily help in this regard.
If only a small fraction of those who imbibe heavily take lecithin, SAM-e and glutathione benefit in terms of staving off the many diseases linked to alcohol abuse, the savings in terms of payouts for medical care and lost time from work alone could prove very substantial! This is a blessing to both the individual drinker and society at large.
1. Navder KP, Baraona E, Lieber CS. ‘Polyenylphosphatidylcholine attenuates alcohol-induced fatty liver and hyperlipidemia in rats’. J. Nutrition, Sep;127 (9): 1800-6.
2. Liber CS, DeCarli LM, Mak KM, Kim CI, Leo MA. ‘Attenuation of alcohol-induced hepatic fibrosis by polyunsaturated lecithin’. Hepatology 1990 Dec;12 (6):1390-8 3. IBID 4. IBID
3. Liber, CS, ‘New Concepts of the pathogenesis of alcoholic liver disease lead to novel treatments, Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2004 Feb;6(1):60-5
4. Kessova IG, Ho YS, Thung S, Cederbaum AI, ‘Alochol-induced liver injury in mice lacking Cu, Zn-superoxide dismutase,’ Hepatology. 2003 Nov;38(5):1136-45
Original article upon which this piece is derived © 2003 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved. This article © 2010 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved.
The information contained in this article is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice or instruction. Readers are advised to consult a licensed health care professional concerning all matters related to their health and well being.
Why are some folks naturally multiorgasmic? Female biologic advantages aside, the key player appears to be prolactin. Various studies have shown that prolactin is released at orgasm and plays a role in post-orgasmic sexual “repose”. Conversely, various other studies have shown that people with low or almost nonexistent prolactin levels can have orgasm after orgasm after orgasm ad infinitum. Is there any way in which to safely lower prolactin levels and thus help facilitate becoming multi-orgasmic? Perhaps so (The drug bromocriptine can accomplish this, but has side effects that may argue against its use in many folks). The medicinal herb Chaste Tree Berry (Castes Agnes-Vitex) has been shown to reduce prolactin levels in human users.
Kruger TH, Haake P, Haverkamp J, Kramer M, Exton MS, Saller B, Leygraf N, Hartmann U, Schedlowski M, ‘Effects of acute prolactin manipulation on sexual drive and function in males,’ J Endocrinol. 2003 Dec;179(3):357-65.
Haake P, Exton MS, Haverkamp J, Kramer M, Leygraf N, Hartmann U, Schedlowski M, Krueger TH, ‘Absence of orgasm-induced prolactin secretion in a healthy multi-orgasmic male subject’, Int J Impot Res. 2002 Apr;14(2):133-5.
Wuttke W, Jarry H, Christoffel V, Spengler B, Seidlova-Wuttke D,’ Chaste tree (Vitex agnus-castus)–pharmacology and clinical indications’, Phytomedicine. 2003 May;10(4):348-57.
If you have recently been jilted or otherwise had a close relationship severed, you are undoubtedly feeling the loss and perhaps even a wee bit of rage (Which actually serves a purpose insofar as it helps one purge the other from one’s life). Your brain is actually going through withdrawal involving the selfsame neurochemical players and brain centers that are involved in reward and addiction. In a nutshell, your dopamine levels are plummeting (sets off cravings), the mood modulator serotonin has taken a nose dive (Blue Funk time), stress hormones are up and there may even be withdrawal symptoms associated with opioid compounds you produced (and augmented via behavior & diet) which you body is now clamoring for. The passage of time in concert with physical activity will help take the punch out of this biochemical maelstrom (More on this can be found in chapter 8 of Anatomy of Love: A Natural History of Mating, Marriage, and Why We Stray )
Here are a few non-pharmaceutical measures that may help:
To help raise dopamine levels in the brain:
Muncuna (Mucuna pruriens) products such as http://www.iherb.com/Mucuna
Diet: Eat prepared Fava beans (A legume)
To help raise serotonin levels in the brain:
5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HTP) http://www.biopsychiatry.com/tryptophan-5htp.htm
Diet: Eat lots of turkey (Tryptophan source – precursor used to generate serotonin)
Take with pyridoxal-5 phosphate – 10 mgs. (A form of B6)
To help modulate stress hormones:
Standardized Ginseng Extract (Panax ginseng)
To help curtail endogenous opioids (Compounds generated in one’s body that influence reward and addiction):
Follow the Paleodiet (Fava beans excepted) http://14ushop.com/wizard/living-longer.html
Ask your doctor about putting you on low dose Naltrexone
N-acetyl-Tyrosine, DL-Phenylalanine http://www.lef.org/protocols/prtcl-089.shtml (Folks with PKU or hypertension should avoid DL-Phenylalanine)
Manyam BV, Dhanasekaran M, Hare TA, ‘Neuroprotective effects of the antiparkinson drug Mucuna pruriens’, Phytother Res. 2004 Sep;18(9):706-12
Apaydin H, Ertan S, Ozekmekci S, ‘Broad bean (Vicia faba)–a natural source of L-dopa–prolongs “on” periods in patients with Parkinson’s disease who have “on-off” fluctuations’, Mov Disord. 2000 Jan;15(1):164-6
Kaneko H, Nakanishi K, ‘Proof of the mysterious efficacy of ginseng: basic and clinical trials: clinical effects of medical ginseng, korean red ginseng: specifically, its anti-stress action for prevention of disease,’ J Pharmacol Sci. 2004 Jun;95(2):158-62.
Kim DH, Jung JS, Suh HW, Huh SO, Min SK, Son BK, Park JH, Kim ND, Kim YH, Song DK,’ Inhibition of stress-induced plasma corticosterone levels by ginsenosides in mice: involvement of nitric oxide,’ Neuroreport. 1998 Jul 13;9(10):2261-4.
Zioudrou C, Streaty RA, Klee WA, ‘Opioid peptides derived from food proteins. The exorphins,’ J Biol Chem. 1979 Apr 10;254(7):2446-9.
Fukudome S, Yoshikawa M., ‘Opioid peptides derived from wheat gluten: their isolation and characterization,’ FEBS Lett. 1992 Jan 13;296(1):107-11
‘Neuroendocrine effects of SAMe, a novel putative antidepressant,’ J Psychiatr Res, 1990, 24:2.
De Vanna M, Rigamonti R, ‘Oral SAMe in depression’, Curr Ther Res 1992, 52: 478-485.
|At the heart of each of us are 3 primal drives that give rise to and inform most, if not all of the human behavior (Individually and collectively). Click here to read http://14ushop.com/wizard/3PrimalDrivesEssay.html. In science and many other fields, reductionism of this sort helps us see what is fundamental to many aspects of reality. However, while “unified field theories” in physics, psychology, or what-have-you make explicable what was previously inexplicable, unveiling a beauty and simplicity beneath the surface that is awe-inspiring and even fruitful at many levels, it isn’t always possible to take mechanism (however meaningful or purposeful) and forge tools or methods from it that advance human culture. We can take physical elements and build skyscrapers on the one hand, and thermonuclear bombs on the other. And with words we can fashion social orders that champion freedom, fairness and tolerance on the one hand, “empire and death camps on the other, “and many permutations in between.
However, knowing the underlying or fundamental mechanisms or laws from which our world proceeds can favorably influence the social, political and economic tapestry we weave. Consider the 3 primal drives: All of us want to acquire certain basic things crucial to survival (and more), preserve what we manage to gather about us, and perpetuate it so as to benefit our progeny and the community that nurtures and protects them. We can do this using rational and moral means so that fairness and mutual benefit are emphasized, or we can opt for something else entirely.
However, they all deal with meeting or satisfying some aspect of the human condition, and this most often through the allocation and judicious use of material and/or human resources.
In a way, all these various local entities and networks of entities (state, national or transnational) are functional algorithms of a sort– means of solving problems and/or meeting needs and/or helping folks cope — through semi-invariant procedures. Some merely point the way to viable solutions and are thus more heuristic in nature. And some combine elements of both (Known as a “heuristic algorithm” or of being “algorithmic” in scientific parlance).
A church, synagogue or mosque that provides money or food to the disadvantaged often adds a needed “human touch” missing from government offices.
Somehow we hope that between local efforts and national ones, the resultant symphony will be a harmonious and beautiful.
Of course, in order to create a wondrous symphonic work, the members of the orchestra (people and the society they comprise) must agree on how the orchestra will be run, how the music will be written and revised, and who will set the pace for the ensemble (The orchestra leader). In the United States, we advocate specific mechanisms for both preserving individually, maximizing creative freedom, and yet steering the whole towards a harmonious work as opposed to a raucous “noise fest”. The American way, as it were, is built on democratic principles and capitalism. The Japanese way, on the other hand, embraces democracy and capitalism, but has a strong element of conformity to what “the group” (society) deems in the best interests of all. Many countries in the EU favor a social democracy approach that offers varying degrees of “cradle to grave” care for its citizenry. Singapore is authoritarian in orientation. Iran embraces an Islamic theocracy. Cuba has a dictator.
The American system appears poised to fulfill Karl Marx’s prediction that capitalism corrupts, implodes, and then collapses (This is not to argue that necessarily offered a better set of devices for meeting a peoples needs and potentialities. But his extrapolations – his predictions – do seem uncannily accurate).
The Japanese democratic experiment, on the other hand, has managed to create and sustain a middle class that encompasses 95% of her people, made comprehensive national health care available to most, and has forged a social order that has one of the lowest crime rates in the industrialized world. There are signs that these devices are beginning to falter, but even so the Japanese willingness to adapt to contingency coupled with the group-driven ethic of their hardworking people may patch up and keep the Japanese sociopolitical engine running far into the future.
Most of us belong to a local band (Think back to the symphony analogy) – a small collective or branch of a larger one whose devices we utilize or become a part of in order to achieve certain ends (Material and otherwise). So long as these bands do not inflict harm or violate the laws the citizenry has agree to live by, such devices thrive and fulfill the purposes ordained by their constituency (They are “moral”). Up to and including providing meaning in life or facilitating finding such meaning. They may be playing different tunes, yes, but as they compete in the “marketplace of ideas” most wisely choose not to play a tune that attracts rather than offends those outside the band (If not for the sake of tolerance, then to keep from scaring off prospective converts or members).
The question arises, could all the bands (peoples) of the world tool together a musical piece that would be played by all – without sacrificing or compromising their individual, favored anthems and tunes? Can the world community achieve a utopian harmony and maintain it?
I’d Like To Teach The World To Sing
During 1971 Coca Cola launched a commercial that featured a musical group called “The New Seekers” singing a cheery, upbeat tune titled “I’d Like To Teach the World To Sing (In Perfect Harmony).” The lyrics include ones that beautifully capture the appeal of a utopian kind of harmony:
I’d like to teach the world to sing
Exactly what is involved in collectively writing (as it were) a global song of harmony? Which is to say, transcending the many differences, xenophobic and ethnocentric tendencies, religious quarrels, and such within and between nations and groups, in order to achieve a peaceful, peace-loving and peace-preserving global community?
Too,well,utopian?! I’m sure the creation of an enduring democracy in a land of people boasting a multitude of languages, cultural traditions, and religions must have seemed just as unlikely back in the 18th century. But the American experiment took root and flourished. How did a nation of diverse nations succeed in forging a viable social and political order that basically (though gradually and haltingly) subsumed and bound together all its constituents, worked to transcend differences (though not without great pain), and maintain a species of harmony that (though often frayed) has yet to come unraveled?
Is the American system the end result of good geography, good ideas and good luck (As in seizing opportunities)? In part, yes. But from its birth there was laid a foundation without which the many strands would have been unlikely to be wound together to form the one strong rope it has become: An express vision or template that all who call themselves Americans would embrace and defend. This vision or template included many elements such as the preeminence of basic articulated freedoms and rights for all; the rule of law; a democratically elected, representative government with constraints on the power exercised by its main branches; and so forth.
Now this is not to say that the success of the “American way” is a mandate for it to become the “Global Way”. But there are principles and ideas that can be extracted from the American experience, as well as that of other successful nations and collectives, which could form the core of a global vision or template.
If it is not a universal symphony, “..it may well be a funeral dirge.
Submitted for your consideration on Memorial Day (USA) – a day for reflection and moving forward – by Dr. Anthony G. Payne
Original copyright 2004 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne – All rights reserved.. This version copyright 2009 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved.
Acquisition, Preservation against loss, and Perpetuation: The Basic Drives Underlying Biology & Evolution As Expressed in Human Psychology & Culture
Are there certain primal (core), universal traits or drives which act as a kind of behavioral template for our species? Which give rise to and are expressed in terms of our basic individual and collective behavior? A biological version of the Holy Grail of Physics – Grand Unification? (In a word, a small number of natural drives or instincts that undergird and give rise to much of human behavior)
In concert with Darwin, William James, E. O. Wilson, and innumerable others, I would respond with a resounding “yes”. And like them, I believe that the origins of the “psychobiological template” were forged in the crucible of evolution.
In June of 1998, the notion of fundamental or primal drives was big news. Researchers at Ohio State University conducted an extensive study and concluded that there are 15 desires which underlie most human behavior. “Nearly everything important a human being wants can be reduced to one or more of these 15 core desires, most of which have a genetic basis,” said Steven Reiss, co-author of the study and a professor of psychology and psychiatry at Ohio State University. “These desires are what guide our actions. In a sense, we are studying the meaning of life.”
This body of research was published in the June 1998 issue of the Journal of Psychological Assessment.
These are the 15 basic or fundamental human desires and values revealed by the Reiss et al study:
Curiosity – desire to learn
Food – desire to eat
Honor – (morality) desire to behave in accordance with code of conduct
Rejection – fear of social rejection j
Sex – desire for sexual behavior and fantasies
Physical exercise – desire for physical activity
Order – desired amount of organization in daily life .
Independence – desire to make own decisions
Vengeance – desire to retaliate when offended
Social Contact – desire to be in the company of others
Family – desire to spend time with own family
Social Prestige – desire for prestige and positive attention
Aversive Sensations – aversion to pain and anxiety
Citizenship – desire for public service and social justice
Power – desire to influence people
I, on the other hand, would argue that there are 3 basic or core drives which include and subsume Reiss’s fifteen. Briefly:
Life at it’s most fundamental level involves acquisition of resources to insure survival, prevention of loss or compromise of resources vital to life, and the perpetuation of the genome (Reproduction). Those traits and behaviors which help an individual satisfy these life-sustaining and preserving “essentials” are selected for; that is, they get the job done – are adaptive – and thus lend those who possess them to leave behind viable offspring (This is known as differential reproduction in biological parlance).
Acquisition, prevention of loss (defense), and perpetuation lie at the heart of biology and it’s explosive success on this planet. As such one would expect to see them conserved throughout the course of biological evolution with discernible expression in the individual and collective behavior of “higher” animals. This does indeed appear to be the case.
The acquisition of adequate food, water, shelter and warmth to sustain life is obviously a fairly high priority. If not tended to, we die off. It is that simple. How we secure these necessities is the stuff of which everything from clans to tribal cultures to first world nation-states and economies are built on. In the long run it behooves a collection of social creatures (people) to cooperatively nail down the basics of life. If each person is left on their own – or selfishness or cheating is considered a virtue – human survival on the whole is adversely affected. In this sort of society a few survive and thrive at the expense of the less capable, but theirs is an existence which is given to conflict and xenophobia, if not downright paranoia. One-upmanship can be carried to the point of mutual extermination.
Humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow rather brilliantly and succinctly captured this in his various works on human conduct and psychology. The first order of acquisition is the physiological basics. Once these are met, we are individually and collectively more at liberty to explore other wants, desires and needs (Internet keyword phrase: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs).
The man or woman who goes out to work in order to provide for self and family is satisfying the biologic imperative to acquire that which will help guarantee survival. It is universally recognized and in our culture elevated to the level of being a virtue (Protestant Work Ethic).
In most cases, mature humans concurrently seek to satisfy the physiological basics and reproduce. Both are expressions of resource acquisition. Procreation is fundamental to the preservation of the species. It also furnishes the parents with both an investment and a resource; that is, an investment in the sense that the necessities of life, love, nurturing, etc., are directed at producing healthy, viable progeny who will not only carry the family germline into the future, but provide the parents with “dividends” (resources) in terms of psychological, (possibly) material support, comfort, grandchildren, etc.
But not every parent does a great job of child rearing and not every child comes out right. Acquisition is the drive, but its expression can be thwarted, perverted or nullified. Adaptive traits such as ambition, competitiveness, willingness to negotiate and compromise for mutual benefit, the quest for power over circumstances, etc., can become maladaptive if pushed to extremes, seriously thwarted or otherwise corrupted. The ambition/competitiveness which encourages a father and/or mother to secure employment and work hard can become unbridled and give way to negative manifestations of same: Workaholism, coworker envy, greed, etc. The flip side of emotional satisfaction and sexual gratification (Acquisition) can be obsession, sexual addiction, narcissism, and neurosis. If these defects do not destroy the family structure or sacrifice the ability of progeny to cope with the world and lead successful lives, the family unit limps on. If the degree of dysfunction is seriously pathological, the family unit disintegrates and the effects ripple through the ensuing generations. If transgenerational maladaptive behaviors are not altered and more healthy patterns established, the dysfunctional line may go extinct through various adverse means : Suicide, homicide, infertility, socioeconomic marginalization to the point of starvation, compromise of hygiene and health with resultant onset of acute and/or chronic disease, et cetera.
Maladaptive traits can, in a social context, bring about conditions and responses (both within and outside the family) which essentially select the dysfunctional family member or unit out of existence. Of course, a society can enact programs which blunt this selection or winnowing process. When looked at as an investment which may return dividends to a given society down the line, this species of altruism is probably a wise form of cultural, if not species ” insurance.”
As indicated (above) , acquisition is derived from and informed by biology. We can see this very readily in human mating patterns: Men and women exhibit courtship/mating preferences and post-marital patterns which reflect differential parental investment in offspring. Women, who invest more biological and personal resources into bringing children (gestation) into the world, would tend to seek out a mate who will produce genetically healthy children and help sustain them (Bring home at least part of the bacon). And since it is often women who invest the most in terms of time and energy in rearing progeny, they would naturally be inclined to select a mate who will be both emotionally faithful and actively involved in the support and protection of the family unit. Men, on the other hand, who invest little in the reproductive process (“sperm donors” is an apt term) and are apparently hormonally driven to maximize reproductive opportunities, would be more inclined to get progeny into the world and on their way through life, then seek out other mating opportunities. This is exactly what cross cultural statistics indicate. Most divorces occur during or following the fourth year of marriage, just after the first child or two has been born and reached a sufficient age to suggest that “smooth sailing” is ahead, i.e., the child(ren) are healthy and viable, and will most likely remain so. Of course, this isn’t fair from most religious and ethical perspectives. Indeed, our society has enacted legislation to penalize men who abandon their family and eschew material (and possibly some degree of emotional) support for the children they have sired. But it (divorce) is a fact which appears to reflect a pronounced biological tendency in males.
Societies have various solutions to keeping men committed to the marriage and family. In over 85% of human cultures, polygamy is the order of the day. This is obviously one way in which a man can “have his cake and eat it to”, i.e., stay true to his first mate and offspring – while maximizing his reproductive opportunities. ( Of course, polygamous unions have their built in limits – namely, resources. If the resources necessary to sustain the family are seriously compromised, the intrafamily dynamic can be strained and even ruptured ). In some of the societies which have outlawed polygamy, women tolerate their men having mistresses and “one night stands”. This is not to say either approach is ethical in the classic Judeo-Christian sense, but it does bear testimony to what men and women will do to accommodate biological propensities. Again, this “battle of the sexes” (or battle for sex) reflects the basic acquisition drive (mates, progeny, security, protection, etc.) informed by biology.
Once women and men fully comprehend the desire to acquire through a biological/Darwinian lens, certain behavioral traits and tendencies become not only explicable, but potentially amenable to intervention and modification.
On a larger scale, acquisition finds expression in the activities of nation-states. Many of history’s most successful conquerors were expressly bent on expanding the economic and other resources available to the nation or confederation of nations they led. Other members of this fraternity apparently had in mind their own glorification, if not deification. However, the people who followed these megalomaniacs on wars of conquest did (and still do so) so for reasons more often practical or “down to Earth” then not: The major player being patriotism/nationalism, which boils down to protecting existing resources from real or perceived enemies and/or acquiring more resources (In the past, war and voyages of exploration/conquest and commercial gain brought a welcomed human resource to many nations : Namely, slaves). The justification for bloody conquest can be as straightforward as the desire for booty – xenophobic clashes born of differences in culture, language, etc. – or as esoteric as assumed racial or ethnic superiority packaged as a mandate to conquer and even exterminate the untermensch [The race(s) and/or ethnic group(s) deemed inferior]. The manifestations are many and varied, but the underlying drive is biological (Acquisition).
Consider the embrace of virulent racism and dictatorship by technologically advanced, seemingly “civilized” cultures in the early to middle part of this century:
The rise of fascism in Europe and the Far East in the 1920s and 1930s was the stepchild of economic depression and resultant privation (Loss and compromise of resources). Whether men such as Adolf Hitler truly cared for the people they led is both doubtful and irrelevant; that he possessed the insight to artfully exploit the human desire to protect resources and acquire new ones (to flourish) is born out by the slogans and propaganda he and his cronies employed to garner popular support for the Nazi Party (NSDAP). One example: Fur freiheit und brot! (For freedom and bread). The fact the Nazis passed out free bread to hungry, unemployed Germans – thus linking Nazism with the acquisition and distribution of resources – was not lost on the common people. The interplay of post-WWI political unrest, loss of resources and national pride, scapegoating fueled by long-standing xenophobia and prejudice, and a national tendency towards fervent militarism set the stage for the ascent of the Nazis. The almost idolatrous homage paid the Fuhrer (Hitler) by a nation-state grateful to have its glory (Resources) restored and expanded becomes perfectly explicable when viewed as a manifestation of human evolved nature. The Nazis, of course, took adaptive traits to unhealthy, maladaptive extremes. This flip side of acquisition – blatant evil – was proximally successfully, but ultimately catastrophic [And thus Nazi Germany decisively armed the history-based observation/axiom that oppressive dictatorships, especially those predicated on elitism and calculated violence, actually exploits (in the name of liberation) and then stifles the basic human drive to acquire, retain and protect resources. What begins as a successful shortcut to gain for the masses and its leaders succumbs to the maladaptive extremes it was both born of and generates. e.g. sadism, conflict, perversion].
The democratic approach to generating opportunities for resource acquisition and distribution exemplified by the American sociopolitical and economic system would appear, despite all its pitfalls and failings, to offer the most benign and yet productive framework for expressing the basic human drive to acquire. That is, adaptive traits are actually accommodated if not nurtured by the law of the land, i.e., freedom is granted to the citizenry to pursue material gain, a mate of one’s choice, sire progeny, etc., while the law concomitantly penalizes those who attempt to usurp or monopolize resources, blatantly steal them or employ them in such a way as to bring greater harm than good. This is not to say there are not inequities, injustices, and the marginalization of many citizens. However, the sociopolitical means exist to redress these, up to and including completely voting in a new form of government. It is conceivable that one day Americans may elect to marry political democracy to economic democracy, so as to more equitably distribute resources and thus insure that the existing poverty-stricken, marginalized underclass does not grow or become a permanent sociopolitical feature. Many European nations have been and are experimenting with various permutations of social democracy or democratic socialism to achieve this very end. Whether Americans will find wisdom in this trend and thus adapt some form of it as national policy remains to be seen. At any rate, the American political experiment would appear to both free and restrict the drive to acquire in such a way as to favor the common good.
- Protection from Loss
What we acquire (develop or inherit), e.g., good health, resources (tangible and intangible), progeny, esteem, etc., we naturally seek to protect from loss or compromise. This is a basic, fundamental human activity, akin to if not derived from the survival instinct. What we as individuals and as social collectives (even nation-states) carve out we seek to insure against loss; to preserve, if not expand.
At the family unit level, men and women employ posturing, strength, the law or what-have-you to protect their mate, children, possessions, and possibly kin from inflicted loss or compromise (Whether on the part of others or nature). The rifle over the fireplace mantle and the insurance policy in the family strongbox are both tools for protecting the family against grievous loss. If one’s progeny, in particular, succumb to violent acts inflicted by others, the genetic imperative to produce and leave behind viable progeny is compromised (In essence one’s representation in the gene pool – the continuity of the family germline – is threatened).
In certain tribal communities this propensity to protect may take the form of ruling counsels and military chieftains. Field commanders essentially lead villagers to fend off attacks aimed at compromising the village’s integrity (Both it’s existence & established resource base). In larger collectives such as the nation-states, we have professional armies and navies whose sole task is to defend the populace against aggression from other nations bent on conquest (Acquisition of resources).
The adaptive role of protection is so self-evident, most peoples have written it into their religious and national codes of law. For example: If a man or woman kills an intruder who is perceived to threaten life or limb, that person is held blameless.
Of course, the basic drive to protect can be pushed to or assume maladaptive extremes. People can and do twist “protecting what’s mine” into a pretext for smothering possessiveness, greed, envy and even the pathological control of others. Fear of loss or a desire to limit the possibility of it occurring – say, a mate taking a lover or running off (Read: Resource compromise or loss) – can turn a protective stance into a “fortress mentality”. Authoritarian-prone leaders of nations sometimes fall prey to a similar mindset – played out on a grander scale. The end result of both is predictably bleak.
To seek to perpetuate one’s germline and resources (material gains/immaterial contributions & legacy) into the future is a natural partner and outgrowth of both acquisition and protection. One acquires resources, a mate, and has children, all the while engaged in trying to protect this accumulated treasure-trove in order to perpetuate biological (and personal) presence in the world of today and far beyond. In most other animals, the drive to acquire and protect biological and material resources is instinctive and perpetuation the reward for success. In humans, perpetuation is all this and more: It is distinguished by being simultaneously a natural drive and a conscious objective. This is, I contend, an outgrowth of our unique cognizance of our own mortality (Something no other extant animal species shares).
Consider: While religious faith comforts and reassures believers concerning a transcendent postmortem reality (Afterlife)* – which is adaptive in terms of reducing anxiety surrounding death, dissolution of self, etc. – it seldom totally liberates individuals from the deep-seated notion that the only certain immortality is found in progeny (and/or kin – especially for those sterile or not given to reproduce for whatever reason) and in acquiring those resources which nurture the familial germline and thus better insure it’s continuity. This unconscious element no doubt finds expression in conscious planning with regard to perpetuation of self in various guises: Offspring (being primary); ideas and memories passed down through kin, friends, and others; businesses or other enterprises which bear one’s name as both legacy and “physical presence” in the world that lies beyond our demise; et cetera. No doubt the modern cryogenic preservation of the dead in hopes of future reanimation reflects this very human drive to both perpetuate and be perpetual.
Given this human tendency rooted in biology, it should come as no surprise that “To die to self’ is no easier to achieve in our day than when first articulated by Ribbi Yehoshua (“Jesus of Nazareth”) nearly two thousand years ago. Yes, we do have many examples of people who die for strangers. St. Maximilian Kolbe took the place of a married man condemned to be starved to death at Auschwitz death camp during World War II. Newspapers routinely contain accounts of people of all ages sacrificing their own lives to spare others certain death. Are these acts consonant with our nature or do they transcend them? Perhaps both. Kolbe laid down his human life in order to acquire what he counted a greater reward: A place in God’s realm. He compromised the drive to “preserve” in order to “acquire” something of far greater value. Many who sacrifice themselves no doubt have internalized (and act out of) similar religious beliefs and convictions. While on the other hand, the sacrificial and heroic acts of at least some are born on the heels of a deep seated desire to gain more tangible rewards, such as recognition, honor, and material compensation. Some folks probably blend the two. At any rate, self-sacrifice would appear to both harmonize with and transcend the basic or primal drives.
As perpetuation is an adaptive trait, it follows that it has a dark side. We need look no further than individuals who build business empires and continue seeking to acquire more, even when this actually uproots and destroys other business and their employees. The reasons given include “it is challenging”, “the quest for more is an end in itself*, “it benefits the economy and thus society at large” etc. Are these the underlying motivations or mere rationalizations offered for a much deeper desire? That is, are we not witnessing the conscious desire to perpetuate oneself turned full throttle? Is the flip side of perpetuation an insatiable appetite for a species of influence and malignant self-aggrandizement which “immortalizes”? Do we see in history’s supreme narcissist, Adolf Hitler, the quest to perpetuate pushed to a lethally pathological level?
The 15 basic Desires/Values of Dr. Reiss et al as Expressions of the 3 Primal Drives
NOTE: Actually there is a great deal of overlap possible here. Power over others, for example, can help one acquire, preserve against loss, and perpetuate one’s legacy. The main point is: All 15 are expressions of the three fundamental or core drives.
- Concluding Polemic & Summation
Our brains were shaped over many millions of years in an environmental context few humans experience today (Gatherer-hunter). Our neurological wiring, so to speak, is a prosaic mesh of domain-specific adaptations which give rise to the complex faculties we call “mind”. Given the survival advantages conferred on life by acquisition, prevention against loss (defense), and perpetuation – it follows that primate behavior should to some reflect a brain “wired” with these core or primal (adaptive) drives. And indeed, various primatological, ethnological, and anthropological field studies tend to validate this prediction. Our evolutionary siblings, the Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), form communities whose members engage in the sort of social interaction, competition, aggression, peacemaking, food gathering activities, hunting, play, and so forth which would be expected to have arisen (at least in part) from the underlying primal principles or drives outlined in this essay. The same can be said of the Bonobo (Pan paniscus) chimpanzee “culture”, which is characterized by an incredible degree of egalitarianism (though favoring matriarchy), sexual activity that is somewhat casual, and the defusing of aggression via sexual overture. The nature and scope of acquisition, protection from loss, and perpetuation may be more subdued than is true of Pan troglodytes, but it is expressed nonetheless. That the primal drives are varied in terms of expression within and between primate communities (as well as human cultures) no doubt reflects biologic and environmental influences. Consider: Anger is a universal emotion in primates – an adaptive feature of our brains – which varies considerably in terms of expression. Biology and context both influence the degree of anger elicited and its discharge.
Human cultures vary too in terms of the influence and expression of the primal drives. In the Kung! San tribal culture (Kalahari), the community is essentially peaceful, there is a division of labor, e.g., men hunt, women gather plant foods, and disagreements are basically resolved via discussion. Families share possessions to a great degree with ownership per se being a “non-issue”. However, it should be noted that the Kung! have few material resources and live in a setting where natural resources are available, but do not readily facilitate the accumulation of “wealth” (They are also highly mobile – moving in order to more readily harvest seasonal plants and animals. As such, the Kung! peoples must literally pack up and carry their world about from one geographic locale to another. This discourages accumulating material goods not essential to survival). Historically, as various cultures situated in resource rich areas began to cultivate and exploit same, e.g., plant crops, create novel labor-saving implements, exploit minerals and gems to fashion tools, jewelry, etc., and thereby benefit in terms of material enrichment (intra- and extra-community trade), population growth, etc., conflicts were more likely to ensue. Thieves sought to steal food and goods. Armies sought to capture regions rich in material and human resources. Defensive strategies and technologies had to be created to protect people and assets. In short, acquisition, protection against loss, and perpetuation found more overt expression in step with resource growth (Material and human). This is true both of individuals, families, communities, and nation-states.
So there you have it. Acquisition (resource), protection from loss (defense), and perpetuation – the primal drives. A two edged sword, being both blessing and curse. It is what lends most of us to work, build, have families, buy fire alarm systems and insurance policies, serve in civic organizations and the armed forces, etc., and in so doing create a valuable and enduring legacy. And for some that which builds gives way to the opposite – workaholism which robs children of one or both parents, material greed, envy, strife, power plays, manipulation, conflict and a whole host of other evils.
In a world awash in sophisticated weaponry, ancient hostilities, xenophobia and intolerance, we must not only recognize the primal drives and their expression, but identify (and employ) the best means to resist veering too far into the dark side of our evolved nature.
*Matters such as an afterlife rest on faith – which lies outside the purview of science.
Original copyright 1998, revised version copyright 2002 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved.
In one especially poignant scene in the movie “Shadowlands”,* famed English writer and Oxford University professor, C. S. Lewis (played by Sir Anthony Hopkins) has gone to a pub with his brother, Wally (Major Lewis). Having just lost his wife, Joy Gresham Lewis, to cancer, Mr. Lewis is met with expressions of sympathy offered up by friends and colleagues who are attempting to console him. An interesting exchange ensues between an Anglican vicar and Mr. Lewis:
Vicar: Only God knows why these things have to happen, Jack.
C. S. Lewis: God knows, but does He really care?
Vicar: Of course. We see so little here. We’re not the Creator.
C. S. Lewis: No, no. We’re the creatures, aren’t we? We’re the rats in the cosmic laboratory. I have no doubt that the experiment is for our own good, but that still makes God the vivisectionist, doesn’t it?
“Rats in the cosmic laboratory.” An apt analogy if the universe is an experiment in process. But is this the case? If God were running an experiment or cluster of experiments (some embedded in others), it would indicate that something is being tested — an hypothesis or many hypotheses — whose outcome is unknown. While some religious traditions might accept a God who is not all knowing, and hence might need to perform such experiments, this is conjecture. (Actually, God is conjecture, insofar as His/Her/It’s existence lies beyond the purview of science; which is to say, belief in God is not based on provable fact, but on faith) Bearing this in mind, what follows is pontification built on conjecture, albeit hopefully both informed and thought-provoking.
What we do know of the cosmic cauldron and the processes that gave rise to us can be succinctly summed up thusly: The universe we can measure and probe appears to be the expression of physical laws in operation. The Big Bang happened, stars and galaxies formed, planets formed, and on at least one world, this one, life arose and evolved to that state which we call “consciousness.”
For we who believe in God, the laws that set all this in motion and govern it are the handiwork or signature of the divine. This is not something scientifically provable, but like the concept of Providence, is based on faith.
And while some people might still cling to the idea that humankind is the center of the universe, the scale and grandeur of our universe would suggest otherwise. We are rather insignificant, at least in terms of our impact on the cosmos. We are, at best, perhaps big fish in a very, very small pond. And least we get puffed up about this exalted position, the dinosaurs held a similar role for about 170 million years before going belly up. Mass extinction, in fact, has occurred no less than five times during geologic history. We are but a massive comet or asteroid strike, nuclear war, or the like away from joining the dinosaurs. (A compelling enough reason to take out some “species insurance”, as in set up a human presence elsewhere in our solar system. Mars seems a likely prospect.)
We are the tentative king of a very, very small hill. And what natural processes produced and govern, God seeks to relate to. At least this is the basic message of most extant (as well as extinct) religious traditions. And within the constraints posed by our individual limitations, i.e., our genetic-based propensities as amplified by environmental and other situational factors, the ancient brain wiring or paleocircuits in our brains, etc., we go through life making choices and exercising that which we know as “free will”.
Is the universe thus an experiment and we it’s aim? While the universe may well an experiment, it seems doubtful that it designed specifically to produce conscious life forms like us. Which is to say, life forms capable to distinguishing “I” from “other”, and of contemplating its own mortality (It is unlikely that God can relate to a life form lacking these 2 cognitive features. Only a self-conscious creature that knows it will someday die would be capable of responding to anything God shared concerning an existence beyond the grave). Even if we accept the Weak Anthropic Principle, which asserts that the laws that govern our world would tend to give rise to life and something like us, it still seems unlikely that the “local phase” of the grand cosmic experiment was designed to produce us. Indeed, as the late paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould was fond of pointing out, if we were to go back and rerun the history of life, it is doubtful anything like us would emerge at all.
The experiment,..the universe,…did obviously tool us into existence. And God, it would seem, set about to interact with and relate to our bipedal twig on the primate branch of the evolutionary bush. Assuming that what we know and identify as “free will” is more real than illusion, the question naturally arises, “If God knows everything and is absolutely sovereign, how can humankind truly have and exercise free will?” And if God does not know in advance precisely what we will do or say, then He is less than omniscient and sovereign. If omniscient and absolutely sovereign, then while the universe may be a grand experiment in progress, we have been removed from it by God’s exercise of sovereignty. But if God is not omniscient and/or sovereign, or somehow attenuates or submerges either or both, then the give-and-take twixt God and humankind, the tests posed and our responses and God’s, do constitute a social experiment (of sorts) in progress. Logic and an abundance of scriptural support tend to argue for a divinity who works within and in response to contingency; who experiments and then blends our responses into the fabric of His grand designs . And this, I argue, makes God a scientist.
God as scientist: Support from ancient writings
Support for this view can be readily found in the Tanakh (Hebrew scriptures), which contains numerous stories and accounts that suggest that God is posing a test or permitting same, watching for the results, and responding accordingly. Consider the account of Abraham and his son, Isaac. In chapter 22 of Genesis, God has instructed Abraham to take his son to the land of Moriah and “offer him as a burnt offering on one of the heights that I will point out to you” (verse 2). Abraham, a man who trusts God implicitly, is facing perhaps the severest test of faith imaginable. But for whose benefit is this test for? Abraham, Isaac, or God? Maybe all three? In verse 12 we see that for sure God has benefited by way of gained insight: “And he said, ‘Do not raise your hand against the boy, or do anything to him. For now I know that you fear God, since you have not with held your son, your favored one, from me’ “(Gen. 22:12). “..now I know…”. Now. Before the test? The clear implication is that prior to the test,…this particular experiment,…..God did not absolutely know the outcome (albeit He probably had a good idea extrapolating from Abraham’s past acts of faith and obedience).
In the book of Ezekiel, we again see God conducting a test. In this instance, He goes looking for someone to divert judgment being executed:
“The people have practiced fraud and committed robbery; they have wronged the poor and needy, have defrauded the stranger without redress. And I sought for a man among them to repair the wall or to stand in the breach before me in behalf of this land, that I might not destroy it; but I found none. I have therefore poured out my indignation upon them;…(22: 29-31)
See also Exodus 15:25
If the future were closed, known and thus settled from God’s vantage point, He would learn nothing from these tests. But we are told repeatedly that God uncovers something unknown; that free will is being exercised and as such outcomes cannot be known until the person making a decision has made it.
The contingency element in human affairs is underscored by numerous biblical entries that imply conditionals such as “if/then”. One example is to be found in the account of God’s declaration to King Zedikiah in Jeremiah chapter 38 (Part of which is quoted herein):
“If you surrender to the officers of the king of Babylon, your life will be spared and this city will not be burned down. You and your household will live. But if you do not surrender to the officers of the king of Babylon, this city will be delivered into the hands of the Chaldeans, who will burn it down and you will not escape from them.” (verses 17-18. Emphasis mine)
We can also find supporting evidence of the (at least partial) tentativeness of history in the various accounts of God having changed his mind:
In the 32nd chapter of Exodus, God has told Moses of his intent to destroy Israel. Moses prays and we read “And the Lord renounced the punishment He had planned to bring upon His people.” (verse 14).
Among contemporary Christian theologians, the religious and philosophic notion that human-divine interaction is unfolding and not predetermined, is treated and perhaps best characterized in the writings of proponents of “open theism”. One very highly acclaimed introduction to this is a book by Dr. Gregory A. Boyd titled “God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction to the Open View of God” (ISBN: 080106290X) Content description of this book, as well as many others that delve into various aspects of Open Theism, along with pro & con articles and posted point/counterpoint exchanges can be found on the “Open Theism Information Site” (www.opentheism.org/) . It is well worth the proverbial ‘look, see’.
Within Judaism, an “open view” type of perspective can be found among many rabbis and scholars. Many aspects of this line of thinking can no doubt be traced back to the Pharisees. According to the Jewish historian, Josephus, the Pharisees, mindful of the fact that predestination precludes free will, essentially concluded that humankind is predestined to a certain station in terms of the material aspects of life, but has absolute free will in areas that impact spiritual life.
The Islamic faith also boasts a school of thought that leans towards contingency, and free will as a supreme player in human affairs and in God’s dealings with humankind. This perspective is supported by many passages in the Qu’ran, such as “Surely the Almighty changes not the condition of a people unless they change that which is in themselves.” (13:11), and “Whoever goes aright, for his own soul he goes aright; and whoever goes astray, to his own detriment he goes astray.” (39:41)
God as scientist: Methodology
The actual nature and extend of the experimental work God engages in is, of course, unknown. Judging from accounts recorded by ancient biblical writers such as that of Abraham and Isaac (above), many tests seem geared to gauge such human qualities and attributes as faith/trust, capacity for obedience, the mechanics of decision making, and various aspects of judgment and reasoning. Some appear to involve only a within subject, single variable design. Others reflect a between subjects design, some being single variable experiments and others multiple variable.
While we cannot ascertain the exact mechanics of the divine research program, it would seem from the glimmers of methodology we see reflected in the ancient record that God would use approaches that are not entirely removed from those we ourselves have found reliable in terms of generating meaningful approximations of reality. One logical possibility is Bayesian inference, a powerful method of analysis that involves comparing hypotheses. The Bayes theorem, worked out by Rev. Thomas Bayes (1702-1761), assigns probabilities to all the possible outcomes of an experiment, combines this with relevant knowledge obtained or known prior to performing the actual experiment, and then calculates the probability of each hypothesis being true given the actual observation. In a nutshell, the Bayesian approach readily facilitates the modification of existing beliefs or views in the light of new evidence.
According to the Bible, on more than one occasion God expected Israel to change course (repent), but they did not do so (Isa. 5:2; Jer. 3:6-7, 19-20). God apparently modified certain aspects of the divine agenda accordingly, though undoubtedly without compromising crucial long-term objectives. This process could reflect His use of Bayesian reasoning.
To learn more: A very concise lay level introduction to Bayesian inference is “In praise of Bayes”, The Economist, Sept. 30th, 2000 http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~murphyk/Bayes/economist.html
The many tests and conditional promissory statements found in ancient accounts of God-human interaction support the notion of free will as ascendant over predestination, and bespeak a future that is at least partially undetermined. They speak eloquently of God being an experimentalist who, after obtaining a result, weaves the new thread into the immense fabric that is His grand design.
It has been said that Albert Einstein had a plaque on his mantle that read, “God is a scientist, not a magician.”Whether or not this in any way reflected the great scientist’s sentiments, one can’t but marvel at how appropriate it was — and is.
“The most important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality.”
© 1993 Savoy Pictures, Inc. (distributed by HBO Home Video)
Scripture quotations from the Tanakh, 1985, Jewish Publication Society.
“Rats in the Cosmic Laboratory: Is God A Scienst?” Original © 2002 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. This Revised version © 2007 All rights reserved.
Day in and day out I wage war on the Great Grendel; that perennial, merciless foe of life that in all its incarnations makes a mockery of that innate desire in all of us to thrive and perchance depart this world full of years and wisdom. I speak of helping folks in their personal battles with disease, injuries, malignancies and such; incipient death in all her myriad manifestations and machinations.
In the midst of sharing a yoke with so many ailing people and their caregivers, I am sometimes struck by the element of futility to it all; futility insofar as the very best outcome is death deferred. When you think about it, we all wind up defeated as it were here in the physical realm. Even this world which most of us love so dearly and cling to ferociously — as well the cosmos of which it is a part – are likewise destined to die and enter a perpetual night (Barring what at this point appears unlikely – a “reverse course” and repeat big bang).
This “resistance is futile” state-of-affairs is rather obvious, yes and though true begs the equally obvious: What other recourse is there? One of the earliest and no doubt strongest drives to evolve is that of self-preservation (3 Primal Drives, Essay), without which this world would be for the most part a vacant planetary lot. So we strive to live and flourish, take a stab at leaving some kind of legacy — be it children or ideas or a body of work or some such monument — and hold death at bay until our strength is exhausted or we are otherwise left with little choice but to release our grip on this world. There is continuity in all this, but we all realize somewhere deep down that family and achievement do not confer immortality; that everything will be consigned to a vast, universal graveyard. And besides, there would be very little gratification in any sort of immortality predicated on familial or other forms of physical continuity, unless (of course) we were to find a way to actually become physically immortal, ageless and free of infirmity or debility.
Until we can confer immortality sans aging and debility — something that lies on the far side of tomorrow – we are left with but a single recourse: Resignation – with or without a belief in a postmortem spiritual life. This acknowledgement of inescapable inevitability can be a liberating, even positive thing for those who hold fast to a religious faith, as well as for those who do not. For example, the atheist who believes existence ends with one’s physical demise might tend to view death as freedom from infirmity, debility or such. Since he does not anticipate a postmortem life review and reckoning, there is little to fear other than the physical process of dying itself (If prolonged or painful). The “death as freedom from suffering” theme is a logical no doubt shared by most religionists, to which is tacked on the erstwhile conviction that there is a “life after life” that has a pleasant outcome (At least for those who share a specific set of beliefs or who otherwise are deemed or made worthy of sharing the Almighty’s presence).
I can appreciate both perspectives, but must confess that some species of religious belief concerning the afterlife is antithetical to assurance, hope or anything positive. For example, many fundamentalist Christians believe that most (if not all) non-Christian folks will wind up consigned to Hell or something like it forever. Now this is not too disturbing if you belong to the minority whose beliefs and practices guarantee one a privileged slot at the Divine banquet table. But – and here is where things get interesting if only from a psychological perspective – many of these true believers go through life uncertain as to whether they will actually merit a place in Heaven. I know, because during my nearly half century sojourn through life I have met or otherwise dealt with scores of devoutly religious people, mostly fundamentalist Christians, who are plagued by fears that they will somehow far short at Judgment and be consigned to Hell. So consider: We have a segment of religious believers – possibly a large one – who believe that despite their faith and pious efforts, they will probably fall “short of the mark” and be tossed into a house of horrors for eternity (For those who read this who are religious and believe otherwise concerning these matters, set aside theological or scriptural arguments to the contrary and focus instead on what this spin engenders in those who harbor it). Among the things I have noted in these often “quietly tortured souls”: A deep seated pessimism and sense of hopelessness, though not of the sort to send them running amok in the streets armed with an AK-47 – if only because this would surely turn the likelihood of going to Hell into a certainty. So what we have here is an incarnation of religious faith – faith being by its very nature a vehicle for instilling values, imparting hope, inspiring love and charity, promoting worship and social responsibility, and so forth – that is suffused with an undercurrent of agonizing uncertainty and fear, self-loathing, and a maddening sense that one would probably have been better off not being born at all.
Interesting, most Christians I’ve interacted with down through the years hold to a “trust and obey and all will be well in the great by-and-by” expression of their faith, while often confessing that those who do not embrace this are probably going to Hell. Surprisingly, I have found few among them I would characterize as intolerant elitists who defend their faith in inappropriate ways. And while what they profess appears to infuse many in their ranks with abject uncertainty and fear for their own eternal fate — and portrays those outside their ranks as holding one-way tickets on the fire and brimstone express – these folks by-and-large do not seek to impose their beliefs on others or deny those outside their ranks the right to disagree with their views or reject them outright. This probably reflects the influence of America’s democratic values and traditions on religious folks, which is good all the way around.
And let me lay to rest the notion I am singling out fundamentalist Christians by widening the proverbial lens: To whit, various surveys taken down through the years here in America indicate that most people believe themselves to be essentially good and (among believers) bound for something upbeat after their mortal demise. Many of these no doubt feel that while this is true of themselves, it is not going to be the case for those who do not share their religious beliefs or spirituality. And this conviction is not exclusive to fundamentalist Christians by any means, for one can readily find abundant examples of the “I’m in, but you’re not” mentality among many Jewish and Muslim clerics and laypeople.
Whatever reckoning and subsequent purgation or punishment there is that follows this life, I can’t help but marvel over these two primary, interwoven futilities: We wage relentless warfare with disease, age, decline and infirmity that sometimes buys us time but not a reprieve from walking life’s final “green mile”. And then following death for some – many – maybe most – depends on who you listen to — there is consignment to purgatory or Hell; a fate which surely constitutes the grandest futility conceivable – that of ever having lived at all. And if most folks do go to perdition, does this outcome not signal that the divine experiment is a failure? “Rats in the Cosmic Laboratory: Is God A Scientist?
It can be argued that the experiment was by design geared to winnow out the wheat from the chaff, and is a success by virtue of the fact it is achieving this end. But if this is the case, then it is a success that truly is eclipsed by its horrific cost. And even though the responsibility for this colossal failure lies in human missteps and bad choices and not with the Almighty, it begs the question: Once it became clear that more folks were going to Hell than to Heaven, why not bring everything to fruition quickly and end the experiment? To do otherwise – to leave such an apparatus running – surely constitutes both a wanton cruelty… and the penultimate futility…in anyone’s book (“Good Book” or otherwise).
Is there a perspective more consonant with logic and fairness? (Both are crucial attributes of the Divine according to most religions). There are many, chief among which in my opinion is reflected in this positional statement from the Judaism 101 website:
Although there are a few statements to the contrary in the Talmud, the predominant view of Judaism is that the righteous of all nations have a share in the Olam Ha-Ba. Statements to the contrary were not based on the notion that membership in Judaism was required to get into Olam Ha-Ba, but were grounded in the observation that non-Jews were not righteous people. If you consider the behavior of the surrounding peoples at the time that the Talmud was written, you can understand the rabbis’ attitudes. By the time of Rambam, the belief was firmly entrenched that the righteous of all nations have a share in the Olam Ha-Ba.
- Submitted for your thoughtful consideration by Dr. Anthony G. Payne
© 2005 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved.
It seems these days you can’t turn on a TV, open e-mail or browse the Internet without being hit by ads for all manner of “lotions and potions” to enhance male sexual function and responsiveness or remedy Erectile Dysfunction. On one hand there are the FDA approved drugs like Viagra® and Cialis®, whose active chemical compounds have been proven to work in various clinical studies. These drugs are pricey and not without risk in some users. Then there that the herbal, amino acid and other pills, tablets and capsules which typically have little scientific validation, but which may actually bolster sexual responsiveness in some men. These are less pricey than the approved ED drugs, but typically require users to swallow pills, tablets or capsules on a daily basis. At the very least this can grow tedious. In addition, the mode of action and long term use safety of some of the compounds in these formulas is in many instances unknown.
Fortunately, there is a viable alternative; namely, a handful of ingenious devices or (in technical parlance) “medical appliances” that:
-Help remedy erectile dysfunction (Impotence)
-Maximize sexual pleasure and responsiveness
Here are three which have garnered considerable repute among users for helping remedy ED and for making erections harder and orgasms more intense:
The Blakoe Ring is a deceptively simple piece of technology that has garnered a powerful reputation for helping a great many men counter ED. Invented back in the 1950s by anatomist & physiologist, Dr. Robert Blakoe, the ring in its current incarnation (Mark III Blakoe Ring) is a one-size-fits-all device bearing small alternating copper and zinc plates along the inner ring (The part in contact with the wearers genitals). It purportedly works by increasing blood flow to the male penis via a combination of direct mechanical support plus a small electric charge generated by the zinc-copper plates (Thermocouple effect). The exact mechanism of action is unknown, but it has made its way from questionable novelty to a therapeutic device recognized by medical authorities in both Australia and the EU.
The Mark III Blakoe Ring current sells for $129.99 USD each. An electrolyte cream designed by Dr. Blakoe to complement the ring’s electrodynamic activity is also available for $37.99 (2007).
The official Blakoe Ring website is: BLAKOE RING HOME PAGE
Matthews &Wilson Ltd.
Oxon OX7 3HH
Email enquiries: firstname.lastname@example.org
Telephone: +44 (0)1608 811539
Fax: +44 (0)1608 81183
Vacuum Pump & Constriction Ring
One of oldest, simplest, and generally most cost effective ways to deal with ED is use of a penis pump and constriction ring (“Cock Ring”). The principle is deceptively simple: The male penis is basically a hydraulic system, which is to say erections are the end result of blood being pumped into spongy penile tissue and then being held in place long enough to achieve sexual satisfaction. When the mechanism fails and cannot be readily remedied by standard medical means, a penis pump can turn the tables on the situation.
In-a-word, the partial vacuum created when air is evacuated from the chamber of a penis pump causes blood to rush into the user’s penis and it becomes very turgid. Typically, the user has affixed a constriction band to the base of his penis prior to using the pump. Once the penis is fully engorged, the band keeps the blood from rushing back into the body. The user can now engage in sexual activity including coitus. There is one restriction that applies, however: The band must not be left in place more than 20 minutes, as this can cause damage to the blood vessels and adjoining tissues.
Want to share what has worked for you – or not? E-mail me at email@example.com
Also check out: OSTEOPOROSIS IN WOMEN: SEMINAL FLUID COMPOUNDS ABSORBED THROUGH MUCOSAL TISSUES HELP PROTECT AGAINST & REMEDIATE BONE LOSS (Idea/hypothesis) by Choctaw Doc
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice or instruction. Readers are advised to consult a licensed health care professional concerning all matters related to their health and well being.
© 2011 by Dr. Anthony G. Payne. All rights reserved.
|Citation: Payne AG. ,’Experimental regimen targeting the ependyma slows disease progression in four patitents with ALS,’ Med Hypotheses (2009), doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2008.12.032
Dr. Anthony G. Payne*
In this paper the author proposes that at least some forms of sporadic ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) arise due to the effects of neurotoxic compounds synthesized by defective ependymal cells in the brain. These cells produce cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) that is laden with neurotoxic compounds that bring about motor neuron die-off. Evidence is garnered from various animal studies to demonstrate the toxicity of CSF taken from ALS patients and by virtue of the proposed mechanism (defective ependymal cells). In addition, a regimen created by the author is introduced; a regimen that has been used by four (4) sporadic ALS patients since 2005 resulting in what appears to be a slowing of disease progression. All four patients have significantly outlived best estimates of their survival tendered by their neurologists. 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Rabbis and Christian theologians down through the centuries have wrestled with biblical accounts of the Almighty in which He imposed punishments or sanctions, as well as direct military and civil action that flies in the face of what is deemed fair, just or decent in most cultures, past and present: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/biblegod.html
Of course, contemporary religious experts tend to agree that a great many of these stories are fables or myths borrowed from ancient societies that predate the authors of the various books of the Bible. They also recognize the anthropocentric and ethnocentric biases and cultural filters of the writers and scribes who committed these biblical tales to parchment (as it were). But even with all these allowances and concessions, there remains a disturbing pattern of supposedly divinely ordered brutality towards and outright wholesale slaughter of foreign tribes and entire nations. These biblical “cleansing actions” and fiats have underlying premises and logic that appear to have informed some of the darker chapters of history, including the ideology and policies of the penultimate incarnation of evil, Adolf Hitler.
One writer who very adroitly goes into how Hitler’s beliefs and actions parallel and mirror Biblical morality and standards is Jim Walker whose writings are found on a website bearing the moniker “Hitler compared to God/Jesus/Christians” http://nobeliefs.com/hitlerchristian.htm. Here are but a few of Walker’s insightful notations (Excerpts pieced together):
|Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have,
and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling,
ox and sheep, camel and ass.
-I Samuel 15:3
Hitler attempted to utterly destroy the Jews and all that they had and had millions of men, women, and infants executed. As for animals, Hitler had far more compassion than the Biblical God; he felt kindness for animals.
(Note: In no sense do I mean that Hitler fulfilled any prophesy, mind you, but rather that Hitler’s actions remained consistent with the actions of the alleged God described in the Bible.)
|I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Hitler created peace when it suited him and created death and destruction when it fit his needs, which by Christian standards means “evil.” Hitler did all these things in similar God-like actions reported in the Bible.
Not only did Hitler’s atrocities remain consistent with God and Jesus’ actions in the Bible, but his intransigent attitude parallels many of the fanatical beliefs of Right-wing conservatives of today. Hitler even used his faith in the same way as many mainstream American Christians. It appears clear from the history of Christianity that Hitler brought nothing new to Christianity, albeit he brought its violent nature to new heights.”
This is not to say Hitler didn’t distort and infuse such standards with perverse beliefs of his own, but this alone does not permit one to dismiss logical contradictions, conundrums and catch twenty-two’s between Nazi philosophy and the murderous campaign against “impurity” (Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, political dissenters, etc.) it gave rise to—- nor ancient Israelite beliefs and their wholesale slaughter of peoples that were designated as “defilers” of their culture & community. Slaughter attributed to HaShem.
If you look closely and resist facing what history and scriptures plainly disclose and declare, you will come to see more clearly than ever before the vast array of incredibly discomforting parallels between the reasoning of the ancients and the Nazis (and all other perpetrators of genocide). And while abundant apologetics exist that try to distance Biblical accounts and actions from the moral malignancy of the Nazis, the arguments given can be recast easily & readily to support the Nazis (And they were – by the Nazis — creating a movement with all the trappings of messianic fervor and religiosity).
http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/2000/4/004anti.html http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible3.htm, http://freethoughtfirefighters.org/a_wager_on_old_testament_atrocit.htm, http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/atrocities.html, http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/godbible.html, http://www.biblicalnonsense.com/chapter10.html
So moral reasoning and logic alone cannot (to my way of thinking) explain, defend or justify the many dark episodes and pronouncements in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Scriptures, of course, reflect the human element — ideas, interpretations, contradictions http://home.freeuk.net/jesusmyth/page5.htm etc. – they serve human needs (Social coherence and personal wholeness, according to religion scholar Prof. Loyal Rue in his thought-provoking book, “Religion is Not About God”) – and reflect more about human nature than that of the Divine. It is said all scripture is Misnah – commentary – and not so much history and especially not science. I agree wholeheartedly with this. And, of course, regional values, myths and views intruded everywhere and suffused and informed what the various scribes and religionists believed and recorded. But be that as it may, there is a recurrent theme of almost cold-blooded malevolence in the Hebrew scriptures: God appears to invoke the very arguments for cleansing conquered lands and peoples, as well as punishing those who deviate from keeping the Law (Oral & written) that were used by pagan religions, kings and later genocidal dictators like Adolf Hitler to reinforce and perpetuate their ideologies (And some of these ideologies, like Nazism, had some aspects of their belief system and practices Biblical beliefs, laws and such).
Of course, according to scriptures the Almighty’s agenda is one that will redeem and reconcile humankind (in whole or part depending on whose spin you agree with) while evil men tend to enact laws and take actions that lead to a life that is at odds with the program and objectives He sanctioned (And by so doing estrange people from Him). Yet while the ends are presumably different, the means to them seem disturbingly similar and in many instances are virtually identical. Indeed, the methods, language and some elements of reasoning attributed to the Divine and that voiced by various evil personalities such as Hitler differ little in kind or degree.
We must, of course, allow for the limitations imposed by human language itself, culture, as well as our neurobiology. We must also do our best to wrestle underlying truths and subtle messages from hyperbole, corrupted text, myth and legend in the scriptures.
That the scriptures are filled with borrowed, fallible, contradictory, and corrupted myths, legends and fables should not disturb us. Consider what the Almighty had to work with, as it were: A tribal people who were steeped in regional myths and superstitions. Some in the fundamentalist or Orthodox camp actually believe God dictated scripture pretty much like a boss might to a secretary or executive administrative assistance; at least with respect to the Torah (Pentateuch). This is nonsense, for had this been the case He would have given humanity a document or set of documents immune from flaws, and by so doing handed down proof of his own existence. In short, no faith would be needed to believe in the Almighty or his stated agenda. A set of flawless, infallible scriptures impregnated with scientific and historical truths centuries ahead of those He was inspiring or speaking to would remove all doubt as to origins and make it impossible for doubt to exist about the reality of the Divine. Indeed, “No faith needed” would have been axiomatic and there would be no legitimate grounds for agnosticism or atheism.
A fallible set of scriptures is not so disturbing really. It makes us dig and work and argue to arrive at what God meant and how we should respond. What is disturbing is not the flawed image of the Almighty nor the presence of various distorted or mythic things attributed to Him, all having been rendered by flawed men and women, but the seeming reliance of God on violence, cruelty and outright “ethnic cleansing” to forge and maintain His hold on the hearts and minds of the Jewish people of antiquity.
Was He so seemingly bloodthirsty and quick to punish because fallible, almost primitive men and women left Him little to work with in an ancient setting but this? Or was this just how these ancient people’s interpreted things and acted accordingly? Or could it be that the Almighty was both learning and growing with His people, and had His hands tied in terms of available means to preserve the Jewish people from corruption and conquest? (Limited in that He would not override human free will and also utilized human nature and social mechanisms rather then supercede them?)
To invoke a crude analogy: Picture a group of trainee mechanics standing before a car – hood up – a limited set of tools sitting before him – parts scattered everywhere — their goal is to create a harmoniously running engine. There are two instructors present – “good mechanic” and an “evil mechanic” — standing on either side of the trainees. The good instructor wants to help the students create a smoothly functioning automobile. The evil mechanic wants to thwart the good instructor by influencing as many of the trainees as he can to mess things up by doing things like putting useless or ill fitted parts into the engine. The evil instructor’s machinations quite naturally force the good mechanic to get those trainees who follow his lead to take and use some of the tools in the same fashion as the evil mechanic, doing violence as it were to extricate ill-fitting or even dangerous parts from the engine so that they can get the right and proper ones installed. This tug-of-war goes back and forth seemingly endlessly.
Scriptures depict God’s ultimate goal as being one of harmonizing and reconciling as many people to Himself and His sanctioned ways as possible. But in order to pull this off, He must rely on a limited set of tools and options,….as limited as we are. It is, in a very real sense of the word, a pitched struggle that is part of an experiment in-progress; an experiment with a goal, of course.
Indeed, the Cosmos and humankind in particular are, in my opinion, expressions of a divinely initiated experiment (Rats in the Cosmic Laboratory) whose ultimate goal is harmonization with HaShem and his being (“Holiness”) for as many as will “walk the walk”. As such, those impulses and elements and actions that lead to good or conversely evil ends would seem to represent the variables in the ongoing experiment — the “drugs” if you will — that by act-of-will (choice) leads to genuine harmonization between subject & experimenter (HaShem) — while the other appears to do so, but degenerates into greater disharmony and the ultimate chaos unleased by unbridled selfishness (Estrangement from HaShem and what this entails in this world and the next). This aspect of the Divine experiment constitutes a sorting mechanism of sorts; the one referred to by various biblical writers as “sorting the wheat from the chaff”. It tests both men and women, revealing to us individually and collectively our inner nature and the consequences of our choices along the way.
Because the tools, methods and sometimes even the reasoning employed by good and evil people are virtually identical, discretion becomes paramount. This is where many religious and political systems fail utterly — trading that which reconciles people to each other and the Almighty for that which winds up accomplishing the opposite.
In the end, scriptures indicate the experiment will run its course and produce a final result: Harmony twixt humankind and HaShem for many. Many who die in sin/error/missteps get redeemed and participate in this harmonious world (material and incorporeal), while an unrepentantly evil, unredeemable few are separated from this redeemed plane of existence — presumably for eternity. Or until obliterated, which some Jewish sages considered their ultimate fate. This is certainly more merciful than what many Christian denominations fancy for the unredeemed/unredeemable — Hitler, Stalin, Caligula, etc. A mercy more characteristic of the Almighty that sages like Hillel knew and championed by virtue of their faith, teachings and deeds.
Pulvis et umbra sumus
by Jim Walker