Science vs. miracles

I recently started reading about "A Course in Miracles." It is both a book and a community of people. It gets a lot right about what spirituality means AND has managed to become somewhat mainstream! Quite an accomplishment in our age. Here are some thoughts I had about how "A Course in Miracles" bridges the gap between spirituality and scientific literalism:

I believe that science potentially can explain the cause of every event. Keep in mind that science still knows relatively little about our minds, our consciousness, and our cultures.

What are miracles? “Miracles are expressions of love.” Simple. But aren’t miracles supposed to feed the 5,000 and turn water into wine? That’s what orthodox Christianity says, isn’t it? Yes and no.

The traditional, orthodox Christian view is that miracles are events that reveal God. Before the days of widespread scientific literacy, the average farmer had a literal, concrete conception of spirituality. He would see a diseased person get well, a healthy person become diseased, crops mysteriously go bad or do well--all of which, he believed, points to God’s active participation in the world. Science, of course, shows there are unmysterious explanations for crops, disease, and the weather. So as scientific literacy spreads, a literal conception of spirituality necessarily fades.

The thing is the Fathers of modern science believed that science did reinforce a spiritual view of reality. In addition to the simple spirituality of the average farmer, a sizable community in the upper classes of Renaissance Europe believed in a deeper, more sophisticated spirituality beyond the world of crops, disease, and weather. Paracelsus, Tycho Brahe, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton, and Jan van Helmont all studied alchemy as a spiritual discipline. However, the divorce of spirituality and work during the industrial revolution tore the legs out from under Europe’s spiritual tradition. Gradually a literal view of reality, which the scientific community’s emphasis on empiricism and careful precision inescapably favors, took its place at the front of culture’s consciousness.

A scientific, literal view of the world puts into question the role of religion. Churches have two ways to respond--assert the validity of traditional religious symbols or to adapt church theology to the scientific, literal worldview. Many churches adapted by preaching a religious literalism that values the history of religious stories over their spiritual symbolism. That takes us to our present-day conception of miracles as extremely rare, scientifically-implausible occurrences.

But religious stories are meant to endow life with a deep spiritual symbolism. We are to believe out of faith and love, not out of duty or fear. “A Course in Miracles” boldly declares that the world’s literal way of thinking is illusory. There is a greater reality that is spiritual in nature. Our true selves are created in God’s image, which is love.

Now, look back at the orthodox definition of miracle: “miracles are events that reveal God.” Any expression of love is an overcoming of our short-sighted ego, and allows the image of our creator to shine through us.

Science explains a lot about the world, but tells us little about our true, spiritual selves. Miracles are in fact natural, everyday expressions of love, and not the rare, scientifically implausible events that that a literal theology represents them as. God is love, and as the Course says, “everything that comes from love is a miracle.”

A Course in Miracles - Christians who Understand Spirituality!

Just discovered the "A Course in Miracles" community, and I'm super excited about what I've read so far.

Two of the interpretations I like most so far --

From http://www.circleofa.org/blog/ANewLevelOfConsciousness.php

One of the most beautiful aspects of A Course in Miracles for me is its re-interpretation of Jesus' crucifixion. Traditionally, the crucifixion has been seen as Jesus' blood sacrifice for our sins, but in the Course, it is an "extreme example" (T-6.I.2:1) of limitless love. In the Course's view, Jesus voluntarily went through the crucifixion to demonstrate that we can love and forgive even when experiencing "the most outrageous assault, as judged by the ego" (T-6.I.9:1). He realized that it is impossible to kill the eternal life that belongs to all of us as Sons of God; therefore, those who attempted to kill him (and those who seemed to betray and abandon him, like Judas and the other disciples) deserved not anger and condemnation, but only love. This is the message of the crucifixion: "Teach only love, for that is what you are" (T-6.I.13:2).

And from http://www.bearcy.com/acimfaq.html#aa6--

In Course usage, a miracle... removes a block to the awareness of love's presence. It is an expression of love, given freely to the recipient.

I suspect most people think of miracles as rare and outside of normal experience, if they think of them at all. But I agree with the Course. Christian tradition defines miracles as "a natural or supernatural event, in which one sees an act or revelation of God." As the Course points out, any expression of love is an overcoming of our short-sighted ego, and allows the image of our creator to shine through us. So, miracles are natural, everyday occurrences. As the Course says, "everything that comes from love is a miracle."

Selling Kirby Vacuums Door-to-door and the Thin Line Between Honest Advertising and Scams

Originally published: May 4th 2011, 9:00 PM EST

Kirby is one of the most interesting companies in America. Not always in a good way though.

A few facts about the company- Kirby is headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, and was founded in 1914. It is currently owned by Warren Buffett's conglomerate Berkshire-Hathaway and has always sold its vacuum systems door-to-door only. In fact, in-home demonstrations and word-of-mouth are the only way the company advertises at all. The company sells over 500,000 machines a year worldwide, generating revenue of over $1 billion per year.

I spent a month and a half at the Huntsville office from the end of February to the middle of April, 2011. The money can be quite good if you are able and willing to convince people to pay $1500+ for a vacuum. They make it easier than it sounds, actually.

Like I said, the company is interesting, but not always good interesting. Here's my breakdown:

Good interesting
-The vacuum is actually quite good at capturing dust (see the first link at end of this page)
- Kirby never advertises on TV or online.
- ALL advertising and sales are either face-to-face interaction or occasionally through a phone.
- The job often involves a lot of driving around in vans, and a lot of late hours, so Kirby offices can become a tight-knit group of people.

Bad interesting
- Kirby circulates inspirational/instructional videos that encourage dealers to create unscientific fears in customers and embarrass customers into buying.
- Kirby sells many of its machines through underpaid, new dealers who are told about quick promotion opportunities that often never come up.
- All new dealers sign contracts stating they are independent sales representatives, but many Kirby offices tell them they are on a salary system anyway, so they can threaten to fire them if they don't follow that office's Program. As a result, despite "being on a salary", some new dealers earn less than minimum wage when they struggle to sell the vacuums for high-dollar amounts.

Kirby's business model is different and impressive. My main complaint is the way the company pressures dealers into strict adherence to the Program. The heart of the Program are the “5 musts” of a full-factory demonstration. Two of the “musts”, mattress test and shampoo, make good sense and are designed to give customer enough information to make an informed decision. 2 others, making a friend and the sales contest, are standard sales tools and are to be expected with advertising.

It took me a while to understand the 100+ pads though. 100 is a big number, especially when each pad has to be separately installed. Most people expect the demonstration to take 30-40 minutes when they agree to it, but a full demonstrations that pulls 100 pads takes an hour, and often a lot longer. I usually just did between 30 and 50 of them and felt that was plenty to show the customer what the machine could do, although sometimes I would do around 75.

The strategy admittedly works. Working with Kirby showed me how people respond to social scripts.

If your house looks like a mess from these little, white dirt pads [seen here] from a vacuum demonstration, and then a nicely-dressed manager comes in, you will probably feel embarrassed about how your home looks. In order to stop feeling embarrassed, you are much more likely to purchase an expensive vacuum cleaner from the nicely-dressed manager.

I might have stayed longer if it was just about getting customers to pay top dollar because they liked me. The Program though, encourages dealers to use ill-founded fear and embarrassment when necessary to get the sale. If I was good enough at it and needed the money enough, I don't doubt would have stayed. But even after a month and a half, I wasn't great at it, and the $250 a week I was getting wasn't worth putting up with what I disliked about the Program, although working with the people at my office really helped me learn how to be extraverted, and that alone made my time there worthwhile.

.

I actually have a lot of respect for Kirby people. It's a high-stress job, that requires you to constantly learn and adapt to new situations. Also, it's easy to believe the spin that Kirby puts on the health issues and also easy to accept the Program as simply part of the job.

What interests me most about the job is the advertising aspect. Most producers outsource advertising to slick PR firms. These firms make carefully-tested, high-budget ads for TV or online that depict whoever owns the target product or service as cool, and whoever does not own it, as out-of-touch. Kirby, however, uses only face-to-face interaction between customers and employees, who are often new to the job. Every firm in a market system must promote an image of the firm that is usually going to exaggerate the firm's strengths. Image is the only thing in determining the market price of a product, a service, or stock.

So does Kirby exaggerate the proof backing its claims of the dangers that dust mites pose to people's health? Does Kirby exaggerate the ease of using the machine and its ability to “protect the value of your couches and chairs”? Yes, but every firm in a market economy exaggerates its image to potential customers. The main difference is that other firms hire advertising agencies to “do the dirty work” of spinning and exaggerating how good its products and services are. Outsourcing the dirty work allows salaried employees to feel good about helping consumers that for whatever reason “have to have” the product or service, while CEOs and shareholders enjoy the bigger share of the profits.

Finally, I realized I would rather not get paid and be able to express myself, than to get paid by through the Kirby Program. Kirby is a high-stress job and it's easy for beginning employees to be used by the Program and come out with bad experiences. I found my time with Kirby interesting and exciting. It's an experience I'm glad to have had, but not something I expect to go back to.


Here are a couple of articles I found that help to explain what Kirby does:

About the actual Kirby vacuum-shampoo system -
http://reviews.ebay.com/DYSON-OR-KIRBY-VACUUM-Which-is-the-best-vacuum_W0QQugidZ10000000003855053

experiences with Kirby salespeople -
http://paintermommy.com/kirby-vacuums

about dust mites:
what Kirby says – (couldn't find a website that has the document that Kirby gives out to all its offices, but what it says is pretty similar to this one):
http://www.indoorpurifiers.com/dust-mites.htm
what Science says –
http://www.drugs.com/news/dust-mites-trump-asthma-prevention-guidelines-11794.html

about being a salesperson:
http://johnneymanjr.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/the-ultimate-salesman.pdf

Thoughts on Avoiding Identification with My Job

There is a great veil over our eyes that blinds us from all spiritual matters. The veil causes us to equate our personal freedom with the tyranny of the free-market. The veil hides from us our ability to grow spiritually, and leaves us scrambling to grow our retirement portfolios instead.

The veil originated with the Protestant Work Ethic. In the words of Erich Fromm:

“In making the individual feel worthless and insignificant as far as his own merits are concerned, in making him feel like a powerless tool in the hands of God, [Luther] deprived man of the self-confidence and of the feeling of human dignity which is the premise for any firm stand against oppressing secular authorities. In the course of the historical evolution the results of Luther’s teachings were still more far-reaching. Once the individual had lost his sense of pride and dignity, he was psychologically prepared to lose the feeling which had been characteristic of the medieval thinking, namely, that man, his spiritual salvation, and his spiritual aims were the purpose of life; he was prepared to accept a role in which his life became a means to purposes outside of himself, those of economic productivity and accumulation of capital. Luther’s views on economic problems were typically medieval, still more so than Calvin’s. He would have abhorred the idea that man’s life should become a means for economic ends. But while his thinking on economic matters was the traditional one, his emphasis on the nothingness of the individual was in contrast and paved the way for a development in which man not only was to obey secular authorities but had to subordinate his life to the ends of economic achievements.” [Escape from Freedom. p. 83-84]

With the loss of pride and dignity of spiritual pursuits, the church planted the seeds for its increasing marginality in today's increasingly globalized, media-driven culture.

The puritanical doctrine that humanity is first and foremost sinful tore down centuries worth of spiritual wisdom and allowed the predatory, survival-of-the-fittest nature to come crashing back into the center of the Protestant's consciousness. Hard work shifted from an external pressure that people pursued with specific aims, to an inner compulsion undertaken as a moral duty. The willingness to soberly and determinedly work indicated faith in the Protestant doctrines of the individual's powerlessness and hopelessly sinful state, and so the dutiful believer placed faith instead in the authority of a higher power (the Church, or the political orator, or the infallibility of the free market.) [Fromm, p. 119]

Markets, like anything, have both pluses and minuses. While they efficiently produce and distribute material goods, they unfortunately treat human labor as just another commodity also.

Imagine for a minute that every occupation made roughly an equal amount of money, with the more arduous jobs (coal-mining, jobs involving lots of heavy lifting) and jobs that required extensive training receiving a deserving percentage more (between 10% - 50% perhaps). Presumably people would pick their careers on the basis of natural interest and emotional considerations.

Markets, however, manipulate people into doing otherwise. Markets will pay a worker upwards of 200% - 1000% of the median income to development a specialized skill, often involving intense rational development within a narrow field of knowledge. Anyone making upwards of three, five, or ten times the median income has a strong incentive to permanently identify their career with who they are, whether or not they have a natural interest or emotional fondness for the work. The man who has a strong emotional love for music might instead choose to attend law school. The woman who has a great passion for teaching might instead choose the business profession, because of the market wage. A psychological tension between the person's rational side and emotional side develops, and the role as spouse or parent suffers as a result.

Those who are paid below the median income are predisposed to a different sort of psychological tension. The market culture teaches that a person's social contribution is equal to their market-determined income. The perception within a market society becomes that a person's worth is determined by the material “blessings” they possess. A market culture literally worships money, because money is an indicator of social contribution and thus, moral aptitude. From a Christian perspective, this association of wealth with good morality is the great sin of our society. See Jesus's statement in the Sermon on the Plain:

“Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God... But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.” [Luke 6: 20, 24]

Jesus spent much of his ministry preaching love for the scapegoats that society's traditional power structures blame for the society's faults. Jesus replied to such hypocritical scapegoating saying “as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” [Matthew 25:40]

The inability to provide materially in our culture can lead to deep feelings of inferiority and individual powerlessness. The belief in her individual powerlessness leads a citizen to place her hope behind a centralized socialist state, which creates a whole other set of tensions, that I won't go into here.

Markets produce good material outputs, but bad social outputs. As long as the positive material production outweighs the negative psychological tensions, then certainly markets are on the whole a good thing. And if the goal of society is to produce social stability, then maybe markets will provide solutions to these psychological tensions, as in Huxley's Brave New World. However, if the goal of society is to produce a full spiritual life, as the world's great religious traditions aim to do, then the psychological tensions would need to be rooted out at the source, and not covered up by medications or methods of conditioning.

Thoughts about equality

The average American will trade freedom for security in a heartbeat. A desire to maximize our lifespans, even at the expense of liberty, seems to be deeply ingrained in the traditional American psyche. The reason, I think, is that the assurance of long-life helps compensate for a psychological insecurity. Americans want so much to be thought well of. To be liked, to be included, accepted. (Notice this is the language of Facebook.) So we strive to be responsible citizens. We strive to not offend, to keep up appearances, and fulfill the expectations of our peers.

This is all well and good, but the problem is in the vast discordance between those we consider our peers and those who are physically our neighbors. It’s safer for us if our bubble of peers contains only those with a socio-economic or educational background relatively similar to ours. We feel secure there--even if it means ignoring our neighbors or the people living in the communities we pass by everyday on our way to work.

We live in a deeply fractured society. The distribution of wealth is nowhere near equal, but the greater issue is that we are losing our ability to shape our environments. Only 30% of Americans are placed in a position where they can conveniently enact changes within their community. These are the comfortable, well-paying jobs--doctors, engineers, lawyers, upper-management positions. These 30% are seen as “winners”. Another 40% of us believe we’ll be there soon--another year, another 5 years, another 10 years. These still believe and try hard, even under complete awareness of how much they hate current situations. The other 30% are escapists, having sought refuge somewhere else, somewhere other than the American Dream and economic promise of power and privilege.

So what does it take to reclaim our ability to shape our communities? What's the best available approach?

Permaculture is the idea that plants, and especially plants we eat, are an integral part of a sustainable culture, and that by outsourcing the growing of these plants to industrial farms, we are losing a potentially invaluable part of healthy community life. The social bonds that develop through the growing and preparation of food can bring great benefits to the psychological health of those involved. And here’s the great thing: involvement is dependent only on physical location and no other requirements. Urban farming makes it convenient for us to treat our literal neighbors as peers--to burst that bubble of distant but socio-economically similar acquaintances--and to reap the improved self-confidence and increased emotional support that comes from increased face-to-face interactions with those around us.