Tell me and I'll forget.
Show me and I'll remember.
Involve me and I'll understand.
-Chinese proverb
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Home is Where the Heart Is...
Home is the one place in all this world where hearts are sure of each other. It is the place of confidence. It is the place where we tear off that mask of guarded and suspicious coldness which the world forces us to wear in self-defense, and where we pour out the unreserved communications of full and confiding hearts. It is the spot where expressions of tenderness gush out without any sensation of awkwardness and without any dread of ridicule.
~Frederick W. Robertson
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Loving Christmas
Sometimes the holidays provide the ingredients for a perfect storm of stress, family problems, pressure to do, do, do, a tendency to be excessive (in expenses, food, etc), and anxiety. Instead of being the 'most wonderful time of the year,' it can quickly become the worst and most dreaded time of the year. But we don't have to succumb to inner strife and outward distress this season if we can keep things in perspective...afterall, what is the reason for Christmas? It is so much more than a holiday for children, indeed, the holiday should be about contemplating God's love for us and the incredible way in which life as we know it was changed the night His Son was born. Christmas is about love - God's incredible love for us and what Jesus' entry on this earth meant for all mankind. In his, "The Purpose of Christmas," Rick Warren says, "That's what God did at Christmas...There is nothing you can do that will make God stop loving you. You could try, but you'd fail - because God's love for you is based on His character, not your conduct. It's based on who He is, not what you've done. The Bible says, "Christ's love is greater than anyone can ever know, but I pray that you will be able to know that love."'
The following verse has lately been a source of great comfort to me, and it has become my token verse for the Christmas season...
Zephaniah 3:17(NIV) The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, he will quiet you with his love, he will rejoice over you with singing.
The following passage is from a blogger Matthew MacDonald...
'When I was just a little boy, I can remember that feeling I had when I was in my dad’s arms. For me, it was the safest place of all. I remember, with great fondness, looking up at his face, as he smiled down towards me. Even now as I close my eyes, I can almost picture my dad looking at me, and smiling over me. In those moments that I spent in his arms, he would sing over me. His words were so soothing to me. They brought me peace. He would take great delight in me. He always told me that he loved me. When I was afraid or even a little scared, he would quiet me with his love. He would say, “Son, I love you, your daddy is here. Everything is going to be all right now. Daddy’s here just for you.” There were days when his touch upon my head made me smile, because I knew that he was there watching over; encouraging me, and rejoicing over me, telling me how happy I made him feel just because I was his son.
My father past away a number of years ago now. There have been days that I’ve wished I could have turned back the clock, just to tell my dad one more time that I love him. I really do miss my dad. On the day that he past away, this verse of scripture came into my heart: Psalm 68:5(NIV), “A father to the fatherless”.
My ABBA Father in heaven says to me, in Zephaniah 3:17 (NIV), “The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, he will quiet you with his love, he will rejoice over you with singing.”
My friend, my heavenly ABBA Father, is watching over me. He calls me His treasured possession, the apple of His eye. There have been times when I have felt as if His hand is upon my head, letting me know that He is watching over me. To be in the loving arms of my ABBA Father is safest place of all. He takes great delight in me, just because I am His son. When I feel afraid or even a little scared, He quiets me with His love. He says to me, “Everything is going to be alright. Your ABBA Father is here just for you.” His words are so soothing to me. They bring me peace. He rejoices over me by singing songs of His never-ending love for me. ABBA Father, “I love you.”'
My friend, my heavenly ABBA Father, is watching over me. He calls me His treasured possession, the apple of His eye. There have been times when I have felt as if His hand is upon my head, letting me know that He is watching over me. To be in the loving arms of my ABBA Father is safest place of all. He takes great delight in me, just because I am His son. When I feel afraid or even a little scared, He quiets me with His love. He says to me, “Everything is going to be alright. Your ABBA Father is here just for you.” His words are so soothing to me. They bring me peace. He rejoices over me by singing songs of His never-ending love for me. ABBA Father, “I love you.”'
May He quiet you with His love this Christmas. :)
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Election Day 2008; A New Restoration?
Today is election day. I'll let the pundits and everyone else tell you why they think it is such an historic day in American History. For me, it is very telling about the direction of our country. Will we continue forward on this downward moral spiral? Or will we be uplifted and return to our core values that originally shaped American society?
Last night I had an opportunity to reflect upon both candidates. The blatant dishonesty, deceptive politics, lack of integrity, and obvious avoidance of all things relevant in the Obama campaign reminded me of a paper I once wrote while a Freshman in college. It reminded me how we as a country are spiraling down hill and out of control. It reminded me that the American electorate is so blinded by race and being part of something that may be percieved as cool, regardless of how rediculous Obama's entire campaign is. They've forgotten how important respect, honor, integrity, truth, and decency is and instead have foregone all those core principles to vote for a man who holds none of them, simply because it is the in thing to do.
Below is that very paper. I will say ahead of time that its contents may be a bit disjointed, and even controversial to some, but I will preface it by saying that while I truly believe in the core concept of the paper, there are some statements I had written at the time that may not necessarily still hold true today, or that I necessarily believe in---after all, I am 10 years older...and wiser, the world has changed drammatically, and, well, I was trying to be combative with my professor. ---ALWAYS the rebel!!! I also realize that these views are likely attributable to a Midwestern-style upbringing and may be completely irrelevant to everyone else.
Enjoy!
----------
The tale of how as a boy, George Washington confessed that he cut down the cherry tree, is the prototypal lesson in truth, honor, and the "American Way." Annexed with truth, there is plenty to be said in referenceto the good manners and social decorum that were so prevalent in the earlier America; common values made the world a friendlier and more appreciated atmosphere for all of us. If the father of this grand country would not lie even to avoid punishment, one would expect that his progency would be influenced by his example. But, that is not the case. In fact, the negative deviance in today's society has transformed our culture into that of self-absorbed, ill-mannered, and scheming individuals.
When paying for gasoline at a convenience store, I generally receive an effortless "Thank you, have a nice day!" But is the clerk genuinely bestowing upon me his warmest wishes and interest in my life, or is this what he is required to say to maintain a false sense of a friendly and appreciative environment? I linger and listen to two more customers...same exact non-enthusiastic response to them after their transaction!
Individuals seem to be afraid to contribute to a legitimate, meaningful conversation on a personal level nowadays. In the past, everybody knew everyone else's business, not necessarily because they were prying, but because people actually had meaningful dialogue in their conversations and everyday interactions.
There's nothing wrong with taking a little extra time out of one's day to genuinely be interested in one another, nothing wrong with some simple courtesy towards others -- yet it has been lost. The automatic "have a nice day," apparently represents the present day view of courtesy. Rather than the modern command of wishing someone a nice day, the common courtesies and genuine appreciation of the past actually made it a nice day. Like when the hardware store owner gave you a treat to take home to your dog, or when a general store owner told you to take a lollypop home for the children---that made it a nice day!
Americans used to be be concerned with wealth, display of oneself and family, status, and particularly everyday manners. There was a correct way of doing everything. From eating, dressing, talking, dancing, and courting, to respectfully talking with someone. The correct way was very likely to be complicated, unnatural, and inconvenient (Schlesinger 186). However, it helped create a quality society in America where common values were the cornerstone of good behavior and the essence of our nation. Americans, I believe, have lost all concern for these values. It is, without question, in part due to the loss of the necessary maternal role model involved in the crucial upbringing stage of adolescence. Social necessities that are taught early in life are less strenuous that those attained in later stages.
It is apparent to me that the concerns and practices of early Americans have all but vanished. The actual practice of being courteous and being well-mannered has somehow escaped our culture, and the feminist movement, or "liberation" of women has played an essential role in this tremendous and regretful shift of cultural norms. It seems quite necessary to restore and maintain a feminine-led household in order to restore the early American traditions which allowed society to live in harmony.
Women are the civilizing influences in this society. By nature, they are more virtuous and, therefore, are better equipped and able to maintain a moral and well-mannered family. We must reinstate the woman's influence back into the household environment for leadership, reasoning, and a sense of what's right and wrong. A reinvigorated emphasis on family values within every home will eventually get us back on track and pay dividends to our declining society as a whole, and perhaps even lead to the abolishment of our expanding progressive culture of immorality.
In the 1800's, the true Victorian woman required: purity piousness, submissiveness, and domesticality. Respectability for a woman meant she would stay at home, be a mother, establish a herself as a role model for manners and courtesy, get involved in church work, women's clubs, or a reform movement like temperence (Thornstein 192). Women were expected to carry the burden of translating income into comfort, decorum, and elegance in the home. Women always presented themselves to the world as models of purity and innocence, as they were precious to the success of the family. Their appearance, properness, and homes brought about respect to the family name. In truth, women defined the family.
Contemporary women, on the other hand, do not tend to respect themselves, their homes, appearance, or the opinions of society as their predecessors did, and therefore decline the respect of the family name. Modern women have denounced their character of manners, etiquette, and respectability to ensure the world that they are their own "individual," and will not be characterized as suppressed under a man. They now feel their place in the family should not necessarily be confined to the home and its maintenance. They now feel as though they need something different, something that is uniquely theirs away from the home. Suppression of women should not be the man's objective, nor should women believe that is the male's intent. Respect of them and what they offer within the family circle should be pointed out as unique to them and glorified.
Subconsiously, the American male has rebelled against the modern woman. in the 1800's, men were sincere and willing to treat a woman as a gemstone. He would court her, offer her the inside of the sidewalk to protect her from runaway carriages, hold the door for her, offer her his seat, stand up when she entered as well and departed, and doffed his cap when speaking to her. He was not crude in her presence, and she refrained from vulgarities as well. This was out of mutual respect. Man wore coat and tie, and women wore hats and gloves. These customs were bestowed upon a man out of respect of oneself and his beautiful wife. How he presented himself only added to her beauty and their respectability.
However, since the advancement of the feminist movement, these customs and common courtesies have all but vanished. This is due in part to a man feeling respect and faith in him has been lost by the female as she now wishes to be referred to as his "equal," rather than his partner in the grander scheme of things. What is not equal about her running the home while he earns money to do so? Her investment within the home and with the proper rearing of their children is certainly equal to--if not more--than the income he brings home. The only difference is that he leaves home to go to work.
In response to the newly acquired ideals of the liberal woman, men have lost a great amount of respect for their wants and expectations. The view of the modern man is that if she is my equal, she can open her own door as I would, she can carry that heavy box as I would, and she can stand on the bus while I relax on this nice comfortable seat and read the paper. Liberation is an absolute, right? It is equality amongst individuals. And, in a stubborn man's mind, equality is all or nothing. But women don't want to give up the benefits of being a woman. they want their cake and eat it too. They want to be treated equal to a man, but yet, they don't want to lose their feminity nor the man's willingness to treat them in a special way that suggests they indeed are not equal.
As President George Bush once said, we need to return to "kinder, gentler days." Men need to offer our arms to women, and offer genuine help. Not to gain something from them, but out of respect for them. Women are precious, and the good ones are few. We--both men and children--desparately need them and their intuity to influence our respectability. We need them to influence the upbringing of future generations, so that we may return to a more respectable society. A woman's influence directs societies ideals of being proper, and this same idealism needs to be instilled in our youth.
One must conclude that the liberation of women has indeed affected society's moral standards and our children's upbringing. Women can be equal in the home. Home is where they are most needed and the outcome of this world truly depends on them. Their contributions to the home, family, and society as a whole are unequalled in the working world and they should be proud that their influence in the home has such a tremendous affect on society and how it works together.
If women reestablish faith faith in the male and teach them, in addition to our children, how to once again be courteous and well-mannered, nothing but a positive outcome for society can be expected.
Last night I had an opportunity to reflect upon both candidates. The blatant dishonesty, deceptive politics, lack of integrity, and obvious avoidance of all things relevant in the Obama campaign reminded me of a paper I once wrote while a Freshman in college. It reminded me how we as a country are spiraling down hill and out of control. It reminded me that the American electorate is so blinded by race and being part of something that may be percieved as cool, regardless of how rediculous Obama's entire campaign is. They've forgotten how important respect, honor, integrity, truth, and decency is and instead have foregone all those core principles to vote for a man who holds none of them, simply because it is the in thing to do.
Below is that very paper. I will say ahead of time that its contents may be a bit disjointed, and even controversial to some, but I will preface it by saying that while I truly believe in the core concept of the paper, there are some statements I had written at the time that may not necessarily still hold true today, or that I necessarily believe in---after all, I am 10 years older...and wiser, the world has changed drammatically, and, well, I was trying to be combative with my professor. ---ALWAYS the rebel!!! I also realize that these views are likely attributable to a Midwestern-style upbringing and may be completely irrelevant to everyone else.
Enjoy!
----------
The tale of how as a boy, George Washington confessed that he cut down the cherry tree, is the prototypal lesson in truth, honor, and the "American Way." Annexed with truth, there is plenty to be said in referenceto the good manners and social decorum that were so prevalent in the earlier America; common values made the world a friendlier and more appreciated atmosphere for all of us. If the father of this grand country would not lie even to avoid punishment, one would expect that his progency would be influenced by his example. But, that is not the case. In fact, the negative deviance in today's society has transformed our culture into that of self-absorbed, ill-mannered, and scheming individuals.
When paying for gasoline at a convenience store, I generally receive an effortless "Thank you, have a nice day!" But is the clerk genuinely bestowing upon me his warmest wishes and interest in my life, or is this what he is required to say to maintain a false sense of a friendly and appreciative environment? I linger and listen to two more customers...same exact non-enthusiastic response to them after their transaction!
Individuals seem to be afraid to contribute to a legitimate, meaningful conversation on a personal level nowadays. In the past, everybody knew everyone else's business, not necessarily because they were prying, but because people actually had meaningful dialogue in their conversations and everyday interactions.
There's nothing wrong with taking a little extra time out of one's day to genuinely be interested in one another, nothing wrong with some simple courtesy towards others -- yet it has been lost. The automatic "have a nice day," apparently represents the present day view of courtesy. Rather than the modern command of wishing someone a nice day, the common courtesies and genuine appreciation of the past actually made it a nice day. Like when the hardware store owner gave you a treat to take home to your dog, or when a general store owner told you to take a lollypop home for the children---that made it a nice day!
Americans used to be be concerned with wealth, display of oneself and family, status, and particularly everyday manners. There was a correct way of doing everything. From eating, dressing, talking, dancing, and courting, to respectfully talking with someone. The correct way was very likely to be complicated, unnatural, and inconvenient (Schlesinger 186). However, it helped create a quality society in America where common values were the cornerstone of good behavior and the essence of our nation. Americans, I believe, have lost all concern for these values. It is, without question, in part due to the loss of the necessary maternal role model involved in the crucial upbringing stage of adolescence. Social necessities that are taught early in life are less strenuous that those attained in later stages.
It is apparent to me that the concerns and practices of early Americans have all but vanished. The actual practice of being courteous and being well-mannered has somehow escaped our culture, and the feminist movement, or "liberation" of women has played an essential role in this tremendous and regretful shift of cultural norms. It seems quite necessary to restore and maintain a feminine-led household in order to restore the early American traditions which allowed society to live in harmony.
Women are the civilizing influences in this society. By nature, they are more virtuous and, therefore, are better equipped and able to maintain a moral and well-mannered family. We must reinstate the woman's influence back into the household environment for leadership, reasoning, and a sense of what's right and wrong. A reinvigorated emphasis on family values within every home will eventually get us back on track and pay dividends to our declining society as a whole, and perhaps even lead to the abolishment of our expanding progressive culture of immorality.
In the 1800's, the true Victorian woman required: purity piousness, submissiveness, and domesticality. Respectability for a woman meant she would stay at home, be a mother, establish a herself as a role model for manners and courtesy, get involved in church work, women's clubs, or a reform movement like temperence (Thornstein 192). Women were expected to carry the burden of translating income into comfort, decorum, and elegance in the home. Women always presented themselves to the world as models of purity and innocence, as they were precious to the success of the family. Their appearance, properness, and homes brought about respect to the family name. In truth, women defined the family.
Contemporary women, on the other hand, do not tend to respect themselves, their homes, appearance, or the opinions of society as their predecessors did, and therefore decline the respect of the family name. Modern women have denounced their character of manners, etiquette, and respectability to ensure the world that they are their own "individual," and will not be characterized as suppressed under a man. They now feel their place in the family should not necessarily be confined to the home and its maintenance. They now feel as though they need something different, something that is uniquely theirs away from the home. Suppression of women should not be the man's objective, nor should women believe that is the male's intent. Respect of them and what they offer within the family circle should be pointed out as unique to them and glorified.
Subconsiously, the American male has rebelled against the modern woman. in the 1800's, men were sincere and willing to treat a woman as a gemstone. He would court her, offer her the inside of the sidewalk to protect her from runaway carriages, hold the door for her, offer her his seat, stand up when she entered as well and departed, and doffed his cap when speaking to her. He was not crude in her presence, and she refrained from vulgarities as well. This was out of mutual respect. Man wore coat and tie, and women wore hats and gloves. These customs were bestowed upon a man out of respect of oneself and his beautiful wife. How he presented himself only added to her beauty and their respectability.
However, since the advancement of the feminist movement, these customs and common courtesies have all but vanished. This is due in part to a man feeling respect and faith in him has been lost by the female as she now wishes to be referred to as his "equal," rather than his partner in the grander scheme of things. What is not equal about her running the home while he earns money to do so? Her investment within the home and with the proper rearing of their children is certainly equal to--if not more--than the income he brings home. The only difference is that he leaves home to go to work.
In response to the newly acquired ideals of the liberal woman, men have lost a great amount of respect for their wants and expectations. The view of the modern man is that if she is my equal, she can open her own door as I would, she can carry that heavy box as I would, and she can stand on the bus while I relax on this nice comfortable seat and read the paper. Liberation is an absolute, right? It is equality amongst individuals. And, in a stubborn man's mind, equality is all or nothing. But women don't want to give up the benefits of being a woman. they want their cake and eat it too. They want to be treated equal to a man, but yet, they don't want to lose their feminity nor the man's willingness to treat them in a special way that suggests they indeed are not equal.
As President George Bush once said, we need to return to "kinder, gentler days." Men need to offer our arms to women, and offer genuine help. Not to gain something from them, but out of respect for them. Women are precious, and the good ones are few. We--both men and children--desparately need them and their intuity to influence our respectability. We need them to influence the upbringing of future generations, so that we may return to a more respectable society. A woman's influence directs societies ideals of being proper, and this same idealism needs to be instilled in our youth.
One must conclude that the liberation of women has indeed affected society's moral standards and our children's upbringing. Women can be equal in the home. Home is where they are most needed and the outcome of this world truly depends on them. Their contributions to the home, family, and society as a whole are unequalled in the working world and they should be proud that their influence in the home has such a tremendous affect on society and how it works together.
If women reestablish faith faith in the male and teach them, in addition to our children, how to once again be courteous and well-mannered, nothing but a positive outcome for society can be expected.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Response III to Anthropomorphism Question
No one has said that it is not noticeable how much personality and character pets have – we usual choose or bring one home based upon their individual characteristics that endear us to them. Yes, they do have a memory, or else training would be useless at all. Our dog Daisy is a little love-hog herself – she is manipulative, sneaky, dramatic, feisty, stubborn and even smiles when she’s happy. She is a very loyal dog and loves nothing more than to be close, have her belly scratched, or curl up in your lap. My question is whether animals have any real cognitive ability to “think”, recall any length of time, or experience heightened thought processes.
Their ‘love’ is based on an animalistic level – humans feed them, house them and provide company for them. Their loyalty is based upon their dependence of you – not that there is anything wrong with that. But unlike a human – who must love even when they are not being served, and who love on a higher, more complex and meaningful level – a dog/cat ‘loves’ the hand that feeds him/her and that is the basis for their devotion. Dogs at least are very sociable animals, and thus they enjoy attention and interaction with other humans and dogs.
I think we must be careful with the term ‘emotion’ when linked to animals for this term usually involves the soul as well. My belief is that God created humans in the “image of God” and thus with a soul; while animals are very wonderful things and to be enjoyed and protected by humans, I do not think they are existentially on the same level and thus cannot be fairly compared to them. Limited emotion in a human means that he/she is not living to their full potential…it is something that may be worked out through therapy, love, education and effort. Animals are limited simply because they are completely different creatures.
Their ‘love’ is based on an animalistic level – humans feed them, house them and provide company for them. Their loyalty is based upon their dependence of you – not that there is anything wrong with that. But unlike a human – who must love even when they are not being served, and who love on a higher, more complex and meaningful level – a dog/cat ‘loves’ the hand that feeds him/her and that is the basis for their devotion. Dogs at least are very sociable animals, and thus they enjoy attention and interaction with other humans and dogs.
I think we must be careful with the term ‘emotion’ when linked to animals for this term usually involves the soul as well. My belief is that God created humans in the “image of God” and thus with a soul; while animals are very wonderful things and to be enjoyed and protected by humans, I do not think they are existentially on the same level and thus cannot be fairly compared to them. Limited emotion in a human means that he/she is not living to their full potential…it is something that may be worked out through therapy, love, education and effort. Animals are limited simply because they are completely different creatures.
Response II to Anthropomorphism Question
I've been lectured to extensively on the limited memory of canines and their inability to recall given circumstances--such as urinating on the carpet.
I've been told that efforts to scold a dog for the release of its bladder is pointless--particularly if it doesn't occur immediately after the incident as they would not recognize their wrong-doing.
Personally, I do not believe this is true. Nor do I believe that they cannot experience similar emotions to that of man--though obviously not to the same extent.
Dog-lovers and cat-lovers alike appreciate their pets for the perceived emotion that we believe they translate. How many time have you heard about how much character a pet has, or how embarrassed they were after being scolded, or how sad they get when left alone? Are we imagining that emotion, or is it real? If you've ever bonded with a canine, lived with them and looked tehm in the eyes on a daily basis as you would your child, there is no question they experience emotion.
If one is going to argue that a canine has neither emotion nor memory of any substance, why then do we see animals get excited upon our arrival at home? Why then do they jump on us and lick our face? ---because they love us and are happy to see us! Why and how could they do this, if they have no memory or ability to express emotion? How then do they differentiate their owners from strangers or right from wrong?
To argue that a canine has no memory about urinating on the rug just 30 mins. ago, yet at the same time also acknowledge their ability to recognize and recall people seems a bit contradictory to me. What does the process we use in training our pets implement? Memory training, right? Much like in the rearing of our children. So how then can we say they have limited or no memory? How then can we lose our dogs for a month, then be reuinited with them and have immediate recollection of who you are? How then can a cat be completely removed from its environment yet find its way back?
Animals have a significant ability to remember as well as display emotion. Is it limited? Yes, but the levels of memory and emotion can and is limited in humans too!
To claim these attributes as non-existence in house pets seems a bit rediculous to me...
Response to Anthropomorphism Question
I’m sure you can guess what I think…that animals aren’t capable of higher thought. However, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t sensitive to pain, pleasure, fear or security.
I do think that Darwin’s speculation that “dogs in their old age might remember a particularly pleasurable chase and reflect on it. Or that a group of cows might just feel the loss of a herd member” is highly unlikely; every dog or horse trainer will tell you that when punishing after the animal acts out, you must swat or scold within three seconds of what occurred – otherwise they won’t remember and won’t understand why they’re being punished. As the article stated, even science says that they’re unable to think on a deep level and reminisce or recall something from the past. I think animals may have ‘emotions’ on their own level – such as horses getting depressed when isolated, etc. – but I don’t think they translate to the level of human emotion.
Bellcanto
I do think that Darwin’s speculation that “dogs in their old age might remember a particularly pleasurable chase and reflect on it. Or that a group of cows might just feel the loss of a herd member” is highly unlikely; every dog or horse trainer will tell you that when punishing after the animal acts out, you must swat or scold within three seconds of what occurred – otherwise they won’t remember and won’t understand why they’re being punished. As the article stated, even science says that they’re unable to think on a deep level and reminisce or recall something from the past. I think animals may have ‘emotions’ on their own level – such as horses getting depressed when isolated, etc. – but I don’t think they translate to the level of human emotion.
Bellcanto
Anthropomorphism: Are animal emotions valid or not?
October 24, 2008 by oregonsunshine
In the past, I’ve been an In-home Basic Obedience Instructor. I taught people to train their dogs. In the past year, I’ve been working towards getting my Certified Pet Dog Trainer certificate through the Association of Pet Dog Trainers. This has involved a reading list that seems to grow and change every year. The focus of the APDT is on positive training methods, which I agree with for the most part.
However, there is one subject that seems taboo amongst all the animal training and animal science community. Anthropomorphism.
American Heritage Dictionary defines this as:
an·thro·po·mor·phism (ān’thrə-pə-môr’fĭz’əm) n. Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.
Do animals experience emotions like we humans do? Are animals capable of feeling love, loss, happiness and a myriad of other emotions? Or are we humans just trying to delegate our own emotions to other creatures? And if so, why?
It’s not unusual for a trainer to hear that an owner can’t get Little Fluffykins to do such-and-such because it hurts Little Fluffykin’s feelings or Mr. Twinkles peed on it’s owner’s brand new comforter out of anger at being left home alone all day. Or that Lightening the horse didn’t perform well at a show today because he was unhappy that his owner forgot his favorite treats or didn’t scratch him in the right spots, or whatever the magic button might have been.
It’s also not unusual for a pet owner to say that their pet loves them. Haven’t we all heard that Brutus loves his person? Is this really prescribing human emotions to our pets? Or are they capable of displaying emotions of love on their own?
So far, scientists from the animal community say that these things are simply not true. Animals don’t display emotions like people do. That Mr. Twinkles isn’t capable of enough higher thought to say “I’m going to pee on your comforter because you did ‘x’ and I’m mad at you”. Science explains the behavior as a dominance issue and that Mr. Twinkles is trying to say he’s top dog (or cat). And that Brutus isn’t really showing love to his owner, just that he is attempting to seek attention.
And then you have your extremes. The owner who swears that Mr. Twinkles was mad at her and that’s why it happened. And the trainers and behaviorists who say that animals don’t feel emotions, that people are the ones putting whatever emotion they are feeling off onto their animal.
How many of you have gone to the zoo and witness what appeared to be sad animals? The big cats that pace and pace? The orangutans that seem to be withdrawn and dejected? The ravens that are constantly searching for a way out? Are they or are they not experiencing real emotions?
In his book The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals, Charles Darwin speculated that dogs in their old age might remember a particularly pleasurable chase and reflect on it. Or that a group of cows might just feel the loss of a herd member.
Jane Goodall was criticized for using human-like terms to describe chimps. She used the words “childhood”, “excitement”, “motivation” and “mood”. And as she says, “Even worse was my crime of suggesting that chimpanzees had ‘personalities’. I was ascribing human characteristics to nonhuman animals and was thus guilty of the worst of ethological sins-anthropomorphism.” None of these thoughts were popular. They still aren’t popular with the scientific community today.
To some extent, humanizing an animal is still considered a great insult to mankind. Humans are at the top of the food chain. Religion and science say that humans are the only species capable of higher thought. But is that really true? How much do we really know about all the forms of animal communication and how the animal brain(s) work?
Do animals really feel such emotions as love? Why or why not?
What do you think?
In the past, I’ve been an In-home Basic Obedience Instructor. I taught people to train their dogs. In the past year, I’ve been working towards getting my Certified Pet Dog Trainer certificate through the Association of Pet Dog Trainers. This has involved a reading list that seems to grow and change every year. The focus of the APDT is on positive training methods, which I agree with for the most part.
However, there is one subject that seems taboo amongst all the animal training and animal science community. Anthropomorphism.
American Heritage Dictionary defines this as:
an·thro·po·mor·phism (ān’thrə-pə-môr’fĭz’əm) n. Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.
Do animals experience emotions like we humans do? Are animals capable of feeling love, loss, happiness and a myriad of other emotions? Or are we humans just trying to delegate our own emotions to other creatures? And if so, why?
It’s not unusual for a trainer to hear that an owner can’t get Little Fluffykins to do such-and-such because it hurts Little Fluffykin’s feelings or Mr. Twinkles peed on it’s owner’s brand new comforter out of anger at being left home alone all day. Or that Lightening the horse didn’t perform well at a show today because he was unhappy that his owner forgot his favorite treats or didn’t scratch him in the right spots, or whatever the magic button might have been.
It’s also not unusual for a pet owner to say that their pet loves them. Haven’t we all heard that Brutus loves his person? Is this really prescribing human emotions to our pets? Or are they capable of displaying emotions of love on their own?
So far, scientists from the animal community say that these things are simply not true. Animals don’t display emotions like people do. That Mr. Twinkles isn’t capable of enough higher thought to say “I’m going to pee on your comforter because you did ‘x’ and I’m mad at you”. Science explains the behavior as a dominance issue and that Mr. Twinkles is trying to say he’s top dog (or cat). And that Brutus isn’t really showing love to his owner, just that he is attempting to seek attention.
And then you have your extremes. The owner who swears that Mr. Twinkles was mad at her and that’s why it happened. And the trainers and behaviorists who say that animals don’t feel emotions, that people are the ones putting whatever emotion they are feeling off onto their animal.
How many of you have gone to the zoo and witness what appeared to be sad animals? The big cats that pace and pace? The orangutans that seem to be withdrawn and dejected? The ravens that are constantly searching for a way out? Are they or are they not experiencing real emotions?
In his book The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals, Charles Darwin speculated that dogs in their old age might remember a particularly pleasurable chase and reflect on it. Or that a group of cows might just feel the loss of a herd member.
Jane Goodall was criticized for using human-like terms to describe chimps. She used the words “childhood”, “excitement”, “motivation” and “mood”. And as she says, “Even worse was my crime of suggesting that chimpanzees had ‘personalities’. I was ascribing human characteristics to nonhuman animals and was thus guilty of the worst of ethological sins-anthropomorphism.” None of these thoughts were popular. They still aren’t popular with the scientific community today.
To some extent, humanizing an animal is still considered a great insult to mankind. Humans are at the top of the food chain. Religion and science say that humans are the only species capable of higher thought. But is that really true? How much do we really know about all the forms of animal communication and how the animal brain(s) work?
Do animals really feel such emotions as love? Why or why not?
What do you think?
Friday, October 17, 2008
Ray Ray LaMontagne
The obvious: I am a HUGE fan of Ray L.
The not so obvious: His newest album "Gossip in the Grain" is wretched.
This is not to say the music is necessarily bad. Ray is popular not only for his great lyrics, but his raspy, soulful, heartfelt voice. I like Ray for his unconventional recordings without too many extras; without too much production. That's what originally drew me to him.
His new album, however, is so over-produced and influenced by the studio, that one might not even recognize it as his. Was this his point? Is he trying to reach-out and expand his audience? Perhaps. But I liked the old Ray Ray better. The guy who had a passion for HIS music. The guy whose voice and music was unmistakeable.
I attended his live performance at the Strathmore Auditorium in Rockville, MD, this week. Live, his music was as expected--same old Ray. On the way home, however, I put in his new CD purchased at the show, and was...well...shocked! No more raspiness. No more "Ray." His voice was clean and smooth---Say whaaaa!? Digitally enhanced music is not what I was expecting, nor wanting.
Of the 10 songs on the new CD, I found just 3 that I could appreciate as the Ray I know. I hope he will get back in the studio to cut a new record soon, otherwise I'll be listening to and appreciating his oldies for a while---not that there's anything wrong with that!
Please, Ray Ray, stick to your roots. Keep the Digital Studio manipulations in the hands of the singers that really need it. We want YOUR voice, not a computer's interpretation of it.
http://www.expressnightout.com/content/2008/10/ray_lamontagne_you_are_the_best_thing.php
The not so obvious: His newest album "Gossip in the Grain" is wretched.
This is not to say the music is necessarily bad. Ray is popular not only for his great lyrics, but his raspy, soulful, heartfelt voice. I like Ray for his unconventional recordings without too many extras; without too much production. That's what originally drew me to him.
His new album, however, is so over-produced and influenced by the studio, that one might not even recognize it as his. Was this his point? Is he trying to reach-out and expand his audience? Perhaps. But I liked the old Ray Ray better. The guy who had a passion for HIS music. The guy whose voice and music was unmistakeable.
I attended his live performance at the Strathmore Auditorium in Rockville, MD, this week. Live, his music was as expected--same old Ray. On the way home, however, I put in his new CD purchased at the show, and was...well...shocked! No more raspiness. No more "Ray." His voice was clean and smooth---Say whaaaa!? Digitally enhanced music is not what I was expecting, nor wanting.
Of the 10 songs on the new CD, I found just 3 that I could appreciate as the Ray I know. I hope he will get back in the studio to cut a new record soon, otherwise I'll be listening to and appreciating his oldies for a while---not that there's anything wrong with that!
Please, Ray Ray, stick to your roots. Keep the Digital Studio manipulations in the hands of the singers that really need it. We want YOUR voice, not a computer's interpretation of it.
http://www.expressnightout.com/content/2008/10/ray_lamontagne_you_are_the_best_thing.php
Editorial Influence
The Washington Express should be ashamed for printing such disgraceful jargon about the length of McCain's arms (Oct. 17,2008). see: http://www.expressnightout.com/content/2008/10/candidates_reveal_themselves_in_final_de.php
The paper's complete disregard for vetting such insensitive commentary displays the obvious political leaning and favoritism of the rag and its complete lack of editorial tact.
Aside from the recent decline in articles about Amy Winehouse--something I knew I could always count on at least 3 days a week-- the other very consistent and noticible trend in the Express, and many other network and paper media outlets (including the Presidential Debates), is that Sen. Obama's name is always referenced first, with Sen. McCain second. Either I'm crazy or my elementary school educators misled me into thinking that "M" comes before "O." Not to mention McCain is a senior Senator as opposed to Obama's mere 1+ year(s) actually "working" in the Senate. In which case, let's not make it so obvious that Obama is clearly getting preferential treatment from the vast majority of the media.
Pick up a newspaper, or log on to CNN.com, and what do you see? Obama, perhaps with a minor mention or thumb size picture of McCain next to Obama's 8x10. What do you say we stop feeding Obama's already super-inflated ego.
Why not give equal treatment, access, and exposure to both candidates during an election cycle as opposed to mearly promoting one candidate over another. Is there no longer any responsibility on behalf of the press to report fairly, to be balanced, to report realities rather than printing one-sided articles? Let's be fair and let the people determine who they want in the Casa Blanca; not allow Hollywood money and the media to determine the election.
How about equal access and an unbiased perspective of both candidates...? Nah...because that would be the right thing to do.
The paper's complete disregard for vetting such insensitive commentary displays the obvious political leaning and favoritism of the rag and its complete lack of editorial tact.
Aside from the recent decline in articles about Amy Winehouse--something I knew I could always count on at least 3 days a week-- the other very consistent and noticible trend in the Express, and many other network and paper media outlets (including the Presidential Debates), is that Sen. Obama's name is always referenced first, with Sen. McCain second. Either I'm crazy or my elementary school educators misled me into thinking that "M" comes before "O." Not to mention McCain is a senior Senator as opposed to Obama's mere 1+ year(s) actually "working" in the Senate. In which case, let's not make it so obvious that Obama is clearly getting preferential treatment from the vast majority of the media.
Pick up a newspaper, or log on to CNN.com, and what do you see? Obama, perhaps with a minor mention or thumb size picture of McCain next to Obama's 8x10. What do you say we stop feeding Obama's already super-inflated ego.
Why not give equal treatment, access, and exposure to both candidates during an election cycle as opposed to mearly promoting one candidate over another. Is there no longer any responsibility on behalf of the press to report fairly, to be balanced, to report realities rather than printing one-sided articles? Let's be fair and let the people determine who they want in the Casa Blanca; not allow Hollywood money and the media to determine the election.
How about equal access and an unbiased perspective of both candidates...? Nah...because that would be the right thing to do.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Holy Moly ------It's the 70's Playlist!!
Until my recent resurgence into the fabulous world of Pandora.com, I had forgotten how truly awesome (I know, I'm talking like a young Hipster Doofus) music was in the 70's. Accordingly, here is a brief listing of some of the best to come out of that very special decade:
1) Bluer than Blue - Barry Manilow
2) The Old Songs - Barry Manilow
3) I'd Really Love to See You Tonight - England Dan & John Ford Coley
4) Close to You - The Carpenters
5) Laughter in the Rain - Neil Sedaka
6) Can't Smile Without You - Barry Manilow
7) Without You - Harry Nilsson
8) Your Song - Elton John
9) Sometimes When we Touch - Dan Hill
10) Without You - Air Supply
11) Hard to Say I'm Sorry - Chicago
12) You Are - Lionel Richie
13) Sailing - Christopher Cross
There are soooo many more, but I think this initial playlist will help you get started reminiscing along with me. Enjoy!
1) Bluer than Blue - Barry Manilow
2) The Old Songs - Barry Manilow
3) I'd Really Love to See You Tonight - England Dan & John Ford Coley
4) Close to You - The Carpenters
5) Laughter in the Rain - Neil Sedaka
6) Can't Smile Without You - Barry Manilow
7) Without You - Harry Nilsson
8) Your Song - Elton John
9) Sometimes When we Touch - Dan Hill
10) Without You - Air Supply
11) Hard to Say I'm Sorry - Chicago
12) You Are - Lionel Richie
13) Sailing - Christopher Cross
There are soooo many more, but I think this initial playlist will help you get started reminiscing along with me. Enjoy!
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Winning and Losing Strategies
I just ran across this helpful yet simple advice from relationship coach Dr. Terrence Real and thought I'd share...here are some of his strategies for relationship empowerment...
The five losing strategies:
• Being right
• Controlling your partner
• Unbridled self-expression
• Retaliation
• Withdrawal
The five winning strategies:
• Go after what you want
• Complain constructively
• Listen and respond generously
• Empower one another
• Cherish what you have
The five losing strategies:
• Being right
• Controlling your partner
• Unbridled self-expression
• Retaliation
• Withdrawal
The five winning strategies:
• Go after what you want
• Complain constructively
• Listen and respond generously
• Empower one another
• Cherish what you have
Monday, September 29, 2008
Quotes on Love
Perhaps love is the process of my leading you gently back to yourself.
- -- Antoine De Saint-Exupery
Dost thou love life? Then do not squander time, for that's the stuff life is made of.
- -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
- -- Antoine De Saint-Exupery
Dost thou love life? Then do not squander time, for that's the stuff life is made of.
- -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Thursday, September 25, 2008
The True Emotional Power of Music
In case you haven't noticed, I've been posting a lot more about music lately than anything else--which is somewhat a departure of the original intent of this blog. But is it really?
I've always enjoyed music. My tastes range from the soft and subtle lyrics of mi francaise amoré Madeleine Peyroux to some of the great impressionable rock ballads, from Kenny Rogers and Lyle Lovett to hard-core Metallica. Throw in some classical and a little indie punk to the tune of Kate Nash and I'm definitely a well-rounded music and lyrical fan--though far from an aficionado.
But, having said that, I've never really been a live concert type of fellow--until now, that is! I've seen more concerts in the past year than in my entire life and I've gotta say, I'm diggin' that!!!
My appreciation for music has grown exponentially in that time, and I've truly embraced the true emotional power of music. It is amazing how much can be pulled from your soul and how much you can be inspired (or saddened for that matter) when you connect with a tune. But, regardless of the positive or negative emotion that comes from hearing a given song, it is still remarkably powerful nonetheless.
Fortunately for me (and all of us) there's plenty of it out there. For a sample of the music that I find most powerful on a personal level (with the exception of the Llama song--that's just plain silly!), please see the sidebar on the right.
I will certainly be posting more of my favorites--especially those that I really connect with. Did I mention I love Pandora!? Such a great way to finely tune and feed your musical mood of the moment.
I've always enjoyed music. My tastes range from the soft and subtle lyrics of mi francaise amoré Madeleine Peyroux to some of the great impressionable rock ballads, from Kenny Rogers and Lyle Lovett to hard-core Metallica. Throw in some classical and a little indie punk to the tune of Kate Nash and I'm definitely a well-rounded music and lyrical fan--though far from an aficionado.
But, having said that, I've never really been a live concert type of fellow--until now, that is! I've seen more concerts in the past year than in my entire life and I've gotta say, I'm diggin' that!!!
My appreciation for music has grown exponentially in that time, and I've truly embraced the true emotional power of music. It is amazing how much can be pulled from your soul and how much you can be inspired (or saddened for that matter) when you connect with a tune. But, regardless of the positive or negative emotion that comes from hearing a given song, it is still remarkably powerful nonetheless.
Fortunately for me (and all of us) there's plenty of it out there. For a sample of the music that I find most powerful on a personal level (with the exception of the Llama song--that's just plain silly!), please see the sidebar on the right.
I will certainly be posting more of my favorites--especially those that I really connect with. Did I mention I love Pandora!? Such a great way to finely tune and feed your musical mood of the moment.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Friday, August 29, 2008
Soul Mates & Twin Flames
Read this today and thought it was well worth sharing...
Soul Mates & Twin Flames - by Arianni Masters
Relationships are the most challenging and the most rewarding aspects of this life. The more intimate the relationship the larger opportunity for growth we are given. Relationships are mirrors for us to learn more about ourselves. There are three different types of relationship mirrors. One is the mirror of who you were. This mirror gives you the opportunity to see how far you have come, the chance to experience the karma that you have already cleared. So don’t get caught up in this relationship worried about why it is coming back at this time, thank it and let it go.A second type of relationship is the one that is mirroring where you are now on your path. If an issue or person has an emotional "charge" to it, then you still have work to do. This mirror is the hardest to look at because it reflects the things you have not yet finished in your karma. These are the things that we are the most blind to.The last type of relationship is the one that mirrors your potential. This allows you to have a glimpse at who you could be, if you wanted to. This person is usually someone that you idealize and put on a pedestal.So look at your various relationships and see which group they fall into. By knowing this you will gain insight into yourself. Self understanding is the entire reason for these mirrors, not to ‘fix’ the other person, but to look at yourself.Now there are two additional overarching categories of relationships that people always want to know about. The questions go something like this: "Is there a perfect mate out there for me?" or "Will I meet my Soul Mate?" These areinteresting questions.The entire reason for most relationships are so that you can work on your spiritual self and your karma! So with that said, the more you clear up issues for yourself, the more you ARE the ‘right’ person, the more you will attract the person you are looking for.Soul Mates and Twin Flames are not the same thing. Soul Mates are other souls that have agreed to connect with you on this planet for a purpose. In some cases it is to clear up karma, in other cases it is to finish unfinished business, and for some it is to accomplish a particular goal together. These relationships may bea joy to be in or these relationships may be a pain in your life. Either way they are here for a reason.When Soul Mates first meet they sometimes feel as if they already know each other. They may feel very familiar to each other. Soul Mates can have a beautiful relationship together, but it will take work. Soul Mate relationships may last a lifetime and others may only be for a particular purpose and be temporary. You can have more than one Soul Mate in a lifetime.Twin Flames are very different and very rare. Twin Flames are two people in two separate bodies that share the same Soul. Twin Flames meet each other in their first incarnation so that they remember the soul frequency of the other being. They are then usually reunited on their last time to this planet. If Twin Flames meet before they are ready they can be the total opposite and not at all compatible. When Twin Flames meet and are ready for each other, it is the most enjoyable experience possible on Earth.At this point, Twin Flames are almost identical. They truly compliment each other and it is a hardship for them to be apart. As an outside observer it is sometimes hard to distinguish the two people. They also have a very strong bond and often have telepathy with each other. Their lives even before meeting eachother have many parallels. Again, meeting your Twin Flame is very rare on this planet.So, all relationships serve a purpose and should be honored and appreciated for what they have to offer you in your personal spiritual growth. Thank the person and the experiences for all that you have had the opportunity to learn and clear. Know that ALL relationships are sacred, because they bring us closer to the Light of All That Is.
Soul Mates & Twin Flames - by Arianni Masters
Relationships are the most challenging and the most rewarding aspects of this life. The more intimate the relationship the larger opportunity for growth we are given. Relationships are mirrors for us to learn more about ourselves. There are three different types of relationship mirrors. One is the mirror of who you were. This mirror gives you the opportunity to see how far you have come, the chance to experience the karma that you have already cleared. So don’t get caught up in this relationship worried about why it is coming back at this time, thank it and let it go.A second type of relationship is the one that is mirroring where you are now on your path. If an issue or person has an emotional "charge" to it, then you still have work to do. This mirror is the hardest to look at because it reflects the things you have not yet finished in your karma. These are the things that we are the most blind to.The last type of relationship is the one that mirrors your potential. This allows you to have a glimpse at who you could be, if you wanted to. This person is usually someone that you idealize and put on a pedestal.So look at your various relationships and see which group they fall into. By knowing this you will gain insight into yourself. Self understanding is the entire reason for these mirrors, not to ‘fix’ the other person, but to look at yourself.Now there are two additional overarching categories of relationships that people always want to know about. The questions go something like this: "Is there a perfect mate out there for me?" or "Will I meet my Soul Mate?" These areinteresting questions.The entire reason for most relationships are so that you can work on your spiritual self and your karma! So with that said, the more you clear up issues for yourself, the more you ARE the ‘right’ person, the more you will attract the person you are looking for.Soul Mates and Twin Flames are not the same thing. Soul Mates are other souls that have agreed to connect with you on this planet for a purpose. In some cases it is to clear up karma, in other cases it is to finish unfinished business, and for some it is to accomplish a particular goal together. These relationships may bea joy to be in or these relationships may be a pain in your life. Either way they are here for a reason.When Soul Mates first meet they sometimes feel as if they already know each other. They may feel very familiar to each other. Soul Mates can have a beautiful relationship together, but it will take work. Soul Mate relationships may last a lifetime and others may only be for a particular purpose and be temporary. You can have more than one Soul Mate in a lifetime.Twin Flames are very different and very rare. Twin Flames are two people in two separate bodies that share the same Soul. Twin Flames meet each other in their first incarnation so that they remember the soul frequency of the other being. They are then usually reunited on their last time to this planet. If Twin Flames meet before they are ready they can be the total opposite and not at all compatible. When Twin Flames meet and are ready for each other, it is the most enjoyable experience possible on Earth.At this point, Twin Flames are almost identical. They truly compliment each other and it is a hardship for them to be apart. As an outside observer it is sometimes hard to distinguish the two people. They also have a very strong bond and often have telepathy with each other. Their lives even before meeting eachother have many parallels. Again, meeting your Twin Flame is very rare on this planet.So, all relationships serve a purpose and should be honored and appreciated for what they have to offer you in your personal spiritual growth. Thank the person and the experiences for all that you have had the opportunity to learn and clear. Know that ALL relationships are sacred, because they bring us closer to the Light of All That Is.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
Don't Bother Me, and I'll Return the Favor!
I'm a sports fan. I love the World Series, the Super Bowl, the Stanley Cup Finals, the Little League World Series, Ultimate Fighting, the Olympics, and March Madness.
But for me, the game and "sport" of National/Presidential Elections ranks above them all in intensity and excitement.
Having said that, I respect others' needs of seclusion, and desire to be left alone and not bothered during their preferred sporting events. I do not call just to say hello , to "check-in", or have a liesurely chat in the middle of the 4th quarter or the ninth inning. Accordingly, I would hope for the same respect during my big event.
However, as luck would have it, while I am lucky to hear from any of my family members once or twice in any given 12 month period, I can assure you, with absolute confidence and irony, that I will be bombarded with rando phone calls throughout my weeklong-once every four years-event; the conventions. Puhlease people!
I love my family and friends, but this really is not the time for chit chat. I have political merits to consider!
But for me, the game and "sport" of National/Presidential Elections ranks above them all in intensity and excitement.
Having said that, I respect others' needs of seclusion, and desire to be left alone and not bothered during their preferred sporting events. I do not call just to say hello , to "check-in", or have a liesurely chat in the middle of the 4th quarter or the ninth inning. Accordingly, I would hope for the same respect during my big event.
However, as luck would have it, while I am lucky to hear from any of my family members once or twice in any given 12 month period, I can assure you, with absolute confidence and irony, that I will be bombarded with rando phone calls throughout my weeklong-once every four years-event; the conventions. Puhlease people!
I love my family and friends, but this really is not the time for chit chat. I have political merits to consider!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
