I am still awed that ‘it’ works, although I now know that Nature’s ‘logistics’ is in command. Even so, it also turns out to be a worrisome problem for civilizations’ powers-that-be… that would be all of us, really.

Yep, “Out of the mouths of babes” is no empty saying! It almost seems like we get more stupid in some ways as we age. I guess that has a lot to do with our ability as adults to willfully innovate while ignorant of the constant. Alas too, any adults that  finally understand soon die, so there are few around to redirect younger fools from their ignorant ‘free will’ willful innovations. (Although thankfully, that is changing as the mean age of the population keeps rising.)

Change causes change, ripples through time.

A recent Science News article, Lopped Off, highlights just how profoundly we, as a species, generally have no clue what we are dong. Although, I guess young children and old people may have always had their intuitive doubts. Now, science is forcing more and more of us middle-age know-it-alls to worry.

Chapter 16 of the Tao Te Ching is very prescient on the unintended consequences of our clever and willful behavior. It was writing long before our innovative abilities threatened the entire planet (~500bc). Is it ironic that science both leads to technological innovations that cause the destruction, and now impels us to realize the full range of consequences of our actions. We can only hope the lag time between innovation and realization is timely enough.

Speaking of innovation,
Isn’t our species also a daring evolutionary innovation on the part of Nature? Of course, I assume it’s not a “willful innovation while ignorant of the constant” kind of thing. So, is it just Nature rolling the dice? These are very interesting times; as that old Chinese (?) curse says, “May you live in interesting times“.

All this says to me how blind we become by what we think we know. Knowledge is a two edged sword; it empowers us to overcome many obstacles, yet the arrogance of knowledge simultaneously blind-sides us. Overcoming petty obstacles creates what often turn out to be greater obstacles. Knowledge gives us a false sense of security. Despite being extremely limited, it gives the beholder the illusion that he or she truly knows. This begs the question, “How do we know what we know is truly so?” That is why, To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty.

We seem to assume we can find solutions that will finally result in a ‘happiness ever after’ land of milk and honey. That fantasy is certainly a hallmark in Western religion. Such wishful thinking doesn’t conform to nature’s reality; it is instead what nature intends for us to perceive (i.e., an emergent property of a bio-hoodwink). Our species can’t afford to indulge in this species-centric fantasy much longer. No worries though… “groan”… circumstance bring us to maturity!

Here now is a pithy excerpt from that article.

“We’re eliminating large predators very quickly around the world,” says wildlife biologist Michael Soulé of the Wildlands Network, who works out of Paonia, Colo. “It’s estimated that 90 percent are already gone.”

These end-of-the-line carnivores, known as “apex consumers,” can influence the lower rungs of their ecological ladders. By keeping the critters they dine on in check, the apex species affect the next rungs down, and so on. The system remains balanced as populations fluctuate in sync.

But sharks aren’t the only predators under siege. A host of carnivores perched atop food webs are being eliminated by humans, the real killing machines. Although marine species such as sharks are primarily caught for food, large terrestrial hunters (think lions, wolves and grizzlies) are often targeted for removal because they threaten humans moving into previously wild spaces.

Chapter 16 with its admonition about willfully innovating while ignorant of the constant fits this sorry situation so perfectly that submitting a comment (below) to Letters at Science News was irresistible. Low and behold, they printed it.  At last, science and religion find common ground. 

Predators inspire poetry and fear
Regarding “Lopped off” (SN: 11/5/11, p. 26): One of the Tao Te Ching’s chapters (excerpt below) is very prescient on the unintended consequences of human behavior. It was written around 500 B.C., long before our innovative abilities threatened the entire planet. It is ironic that science both leads to innovations that cause the destruction, and now allows us to realize the full range of consequences.

Woe to him who willfully innovates
While ignorant of the constant,
But should one act from knowledge of the constant
One’s action will lead to impartiality,
Impartiality to kingliness,
Kingliness to heaven,
Heaven to the way,
The way to perpetuity,
And to the end of one’s days one will meet with no danger.
Carl Abbott, Santa Cruz, Calif.

One reason is the art and yoga (work) of it. My most intriguing observations pop into my mind during headstand, while soaking in the bath, in dreams during the night. Writing them well enough to resonate with someone else is the challenge—the yoga—of it. I don’t suppose this is any different from playwrights, for instance, who dreams up scenarios and writes plays. Posting my observations is like putting on a play… way off-Broadway, of course. Okay, that makes sense, but only so long as it makes sense. Indeed, “why” must be the deepest existentialist question of all. One I’m still asking myself.

I was searching for a question mark-like graphic (?) to go with this post. I recalled the graphic I made for my first serious attempt at writing (1976). Looking it over, I see one of the main reasons I write; I am working life out on paper, so to speak. I have thought of this as mostly just ‘reinventing the wheel’ because what I discover is simply why things have been the way they have throughout time.

Anyway, it is interesting to see how much my thoughts have changed, yet not in some fundamental ways. Toward the end I started placing a (x) when I really wished to disavow the ‘dumb’ idea I had back then, with an eye to updating it.  Then I realized, what has changed over the 40 yeas is not anywhere near as important as what has remained more of less constant. Like the “thread running through the way”, what stands the test of time is worth noting. Therefore, I have left it as is, except for attempting to correct spelling.

The major change really is my flip-flop away from an advocacy of free will, and towards “mystery sameness” (a makeshift description to be sure). Still, if you are into free will, you may find the essay hits the spot,  but again, keep in mind that it comes from where I was at nearly 40 years ago when I thought “A Practical Way” was just a matter of free choice.

Curiously, son Luke said my writing back then (or at least earlier) was better than now. I can’t really believe that is so as I’ve worked so hard over the last two decades to write as well as possible. Then it occurred to me that when you can really understand clearly and easily what a writer is saying, that writing would feel like it was written well, and visa versa. The “A Practical Way…” is easy to understand, very straightforward and written with a righteousness flavor and style similar to the Bhagavad Gita of which I read daily back then.

Below is this essay’s introduction to which give the flavor of my thinking back then. If you are interested to read more, download the whole essay, “A Practical Way to Eternity“. My wife says the poems in the essay are her favorite part. At least they help lighten it up and make it more digestible.

* * * * * A Practical Way to Eternity * * * * *

I wrote some poems to give delight
While reading about my spiritual plight
You’ll probably see I’m too uptight
Well, here is the Way I make it all right
I fought and thought and wound my mind too tight
Broke the mainspring and saw the light
I wrote this essay so all of you might
Also decide it’s better to put up a fight!

INTRODUCTION
Most of us humans spend our whole lives finding fault with the “condition” of the world, marriage, government, job, life, and so on. We expect everyone to do the right thing and become annoyed when they don’t i.e. Nixon as president, communist repression, wife’s overspending, children’s misbehavior, worker incompetence, capitalist spoiling the environment, permissive society or too restrictive one, and so on. We insist on everyone doing their “best”.

However, when it comes to taking care of, improving, nourishing our own body and mind, of ridding ourselves of the imperfections in our own personality and life, then we all of a sudden become very tolerant of faults and laziness.

How can we ever honestly expect the outside world to be any different when we aren’t even willing to do our best for our own “inner world”. The “inner world” is one thing, the only thing, we really do have a chance to control and improve. Indeed, without the “inner world” what do you have? Death!! And those who care not for the “inner world” are living a “life in death”.

An improvement in your inner world improves the whole universe by a small degree, depending on the extent of improvement. Buddha improved his to a high degree and so had a big effect on the world. If we all did our best for our inner world, the outer world would take care of itself easily.

Therefore, we must cease blaming and finding fault with the “outer world” and do what we can for the “inner” one. I wrote this essay to help you and me towards this goal.

Me, age 3, actually fishing... sort of.

The fish are biting and I’m reeling ‘em in, I’m just not posting ‘em. Posting requires so much clean up to make ‘em fit for reading.

Finishing the last chapter of the Tao Te Ching was the catalyst I guess I needed to reevaluate things. I’ve wondered for a while now why I post in the first place.

I mean, the Taoist point of view has to be among the oddest and most ironic subjects to speak on. After all, he who knows does not speak, he who speaks does not know.

So I have to ask myself, if I don’t know, why reveal my ignorance? On the other hand, if I do know, why am I speaking? To be fair, that pithy “He who knows…” statement is not the whole story. On the positive side, trying to write coherently is a fascinating challenge for me, and my observations do appear to benefit a few people. Simply put, I am composing and performing ‘music’, as seen from a mysterious sameness point of view anyway. Now certainly, my ’songs’ are music to nearly no ones ears, but that is just as it should be. Meaning, a Taoist ’song’ seeks to poke through the bio-hoodwink and sing it as ‘it’ is, not as we want ‘it’ to be. Popularity would just be symptomatic of singing it off-key, Taoist-wise.

Tao Te Ching, Word for Word

I just ordered a handful of my just completed translation (see below). We’ll use it here at our monthly meeting along side D.C. Lau’s translation. I think having the nearly literal version to refer to along side D.C. Lau’s version will be helpful. I notice that all translations bear an inherent problem due to relative word meaning. Meaning, when translating the Chinese to English, one must choose one word among several related meanings. Each of these can mean something different in the mind of the beholder – translator and reader alike. On top of this tenuous situation, rest an even fuzzier one for pseudo translations (like Steven Mitchel’s for example), which are actually interpretations of authentic translations. The benefit of correlations is that the process bears none of these problems. The whole responsibility of discerning meaning lies with the bewildered mind of ‘correlator’. Maybe that accounts for its great ‘popularity’.

Next step

I will continue to reevaluate my translation over time to make it more readable when possible, yet with any luck, also more accurate. Still, that may just amount to moving the furniture around the room. Now, with that disclaimer, anyone wishing a copy can buy direct from the printer Lulu. Lulu doesn’t ship abroad, so if anyone outside the USA wants a copy we can work something out. I’d really appreciate any comments, questions and criticisms with an eye to making it better. Great perfection here we come.

Is redundancy the name of the game?

I feel like I’ve said it all before, ad nausium. Still, a constant echo seems to be useful to counteract the bio-hoodwink. Reviewing the view I see in my most balanced moments helps anchor me in my less balanced ones. From what I can tell, that is a common human practice. Forgetting what we truly want of life is all-too-easy!

Adventures of aging

I never remember any old people telling me how fascinating aging was or would be, although if they had, it probably wouldn’t have registered, i.e. one can only understand what one already knows. I seem to be having increasing difficulty remembering things. My mind is becoming blanker. That has some interesting effects; insight seems to flow like water through the void my mind is becoming. This ties into the sleep on it and blind spot issue John Clease spoke about.

On the other hand, I could just be seeing myself more as I actually am rather than the ‘genius’ I once liked to think I was. Yes, that old ‘Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty‘ issue. That offers a twist on the idea of a ’self fulfilling prophecy’. What you think is so prevents you from seeing what is actually so, which make it more like a ’self fulfilling prophecy bubble‘.

Another possibility is that I could be experiencing the beginnings of Alzheimer’s and the hole it produces in memory lead to my final days of insight before the mind’s curtain falls. Speculating is such fun, especially given how life usually turns out differently from anything we think. It is an adventure, that’s for sure!

Now, much of the population is going ‘cold turkey’, unwillingly sobering up without knowing the deeper causes for the withdrawal symptoms they now feel. I’ve found prosperity has a real dark side linked to desire and pleasure— not surprisingly. ⁽¹⁾

I spent fifteen years living abroad, from age 20 to 35. Much of this time was at the ‘grass roots’ in the developing world. I truly came of age during those years. Returning to America after all that time away enabled me to see this land with fresh eyes. I was particularly surprised to see how little people actually appreciated their abundance and easily went into debt for more—get it now, pay for it later. This get now, pay later had become a way of life here during my absence. This matched my precautionary motto, “short term pleasure, [leads to] long term pain“, (and visa versa). It appeared to me that American culture was now on the path of gluttony, with pain to follow.

Indian Givers

This term is apparently based on an American Indian form of barter where upon giving a gift he expects to receive an equivalent, or to have his gift returned (see Etymology). This reflects a straightforward sense of balance, in my view. I first noticed a profound lack of this virtue though a personal experience in Vietnam.

Me and my Crew

I went to Vietnam soon after the war began to work, save money and return to Thailand where I intended to settle down. (Oh how plans change.) Knowing Vietnamese, I was able to wrangle a job as a surveyor for an American construction firm.  Every morning I’d pack extra food from the well-provisioned base camp to share with my Vietnamese crew for lunch. We had a feast every day; times were good. Some months later, the company clamped down and banned that practice. When I told my crew the freebees were finished, they got surprisingly angry. I was dumb founded. The freebees had been a lucky windfall, so why were they reacting as though it was a ‘human right’?  The angry protests aimed at current belt tightening (Greece, Italy, USA, etc.) are recent examples of this irrational expectation. It is so much easier to receive than give up. None wishes to pay now for past prosperity. It is just so ‘unfair’, as my Vietnamese crew would say.

Chicken Come Home to Roost

Surely, I thought, some awful visitation will descend upon them.  Perhaps another Great Depression was in store for us. After a while I figured ‘the awful visitation’ that was waiting to happen, while inevitable, wasn’t just around the corner, so I stopped waiting and settled in to have a family. Then 2009 Great Recession came along. Wow, I thought, are the chickens coming home to roost? Perhaps the ‘awful visitation’ is now in progress.

Naturally, not knowing the deeper causes, like having a proper sense of awe, folks seek out scapegoats. In this case, the corporations and banks appear to fit the bill on the left, and government and taxes fit the bill on the right. Of course, the banks had a hand in the Great Recession of 2009. However, the laissez-faire government oversight was the ultimate cause, and whom can we ultimately hold responsible for the government? In the end, the people from whom the government takes its shape, especially in a democracy! More over, the fact that only half the population usually bothers to vote puts the responsibility even more in our (we the people) laps ⁽²⁾. Put simply, it is not the corporation’s fault, bank’s fault, government’s fault, taxes’ fault… it is our fault—those who vote as well as those who don’t. Of course, we will never hear that mea culpa will we? It is so much easier to ‘cast stones’.

The Opiates

There is also the fundamental ignorance of the role banks and corporations play in our lives. They are the engines of prosperity. So, ironically, these engines are the source of the drug of prosperity we crave. Do you see the problem—the conundrum? People are condemning the very thing on which they have become so dependent. The same is true for much of the scapegoat rhetoric of the ‘Tea Party’ faction. They rail against Tarp, without which world economy may well have totally collapsed. The irony here is that most banks have paid back the Tarp fund, with the government actually coming out $billions ahead (a big part of the outstanding debt lies with the governmental controlled institutions of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In fact, these two still need and will receive billions).

Again, sloppy governmental oversight made the reckless actions of Wall Street possible. After the Great Depression of the 1930’s, Congress passed laws that provided good regulation. These laws were dropped in recent times, which made the Wall Street recklessness possible. How is this any different than dropping the laws against drunk driving? Without such laws and stiff penalties, reckless drunk drivers would be much more commonplace. Indeed, woe to him who willfully innovates while ignorant of the constant,

We Are Trying To Change the World

“The corporations control the government” is a complaint I often hear. Certainly, their lobbyists have a huge hand in things. On the hand, lobbyist for labor and progressive causes push their case from the other side. I often voted for the ‘losers’, like the Libertarian and the Green parties just to send a “don’t take my vote for granted” message to the dominant class. People tell me that doing this is “throwing your vote away”. However, voting for the dominant class ‘winners’ only continues the status quo. In a democracy, ‘we’ are the Government, which makes us responsible for the mess in which we find ourselves. In my view, this is a fine example of our irrational desire to have it both ways.

All this amounts to simply waiting until symptoms develop before seriously asking “why”. We are invariably ‘a day late and a dollar short’. As is natural for all animals, we react to events. As Buddha put it in his Second Noble Truth, “The surrounding world effects sensation and begets a craving thirst that clamor for immediate satisfaction“. Our desires (thirsts) choose and we follow, and when things go wrong we cast stones at our favorite partisan scapegoat.

Likewise, I used to wish that there were ‘justice’, and always found someone to blame. I finally realized, “It’s my fault too”. I suppose that is the non-sectarian equivalent of the Christian original sin. I now find peace in seeing it as nature’s way ⁽³⁾. As chapter 34 says, The way is broad, reaching left as well as right. Any lingering distress I feel about circumstance just reflects my own lingering desire.

⁽¹⁾ Not surprising that is, if you concur with Buddha’s Second Truth, “…The desire to live for the enjoyment of self entangles us in a net of sorrows. Pleasures are the bait and the result is pain”.

⁽²⁾ Even when most people vote, democracy can still be very frustrating because up to 49% of the population is going to be unhappy with the results. For many, democracy is good especially when it goes their way. Alas, democracy may end up a lot more problematic in the future (human nature being what it is). It may turn out that democracy requires more maturity from us as a whole, the governed, than we are capable. For some sobering details, hear what Martin Wolf, Micheal Lewis, Tom Freedman have to say in this interviews, Friedman, Lewis and Schultz on the economy with Fareed Zakaria.  (Go here for Fareed’s  weekly podcast http://rss.cnn.com/services/podcasting/fareedzakaria_audio/rss.xml )

Finally, I must reiterate my long view. The causes run so much deeper than we care to admit or consider. Recent centuries of cultural fragmentation is a natural consequence of progress: the increasing rate of change in populations, mobility, communication and wealth brought about by the harnessing of first steam in the 1800’s, then electricity and oil in the 1900’s.  In the great scheme of things, this is a very recent change; the full impact of which we have only barely begun to experience. It can take centuries for culture to adapt itself to game changing innovation.

However, the single most ‘un-natural’ and worrisome aspect of modern economy is that it is all based on continuous growth, I repeat, continuous growth. The only natural phenomenon that is based on continuous growth is cancer! The chickens will always come home to roost.

⁽³⁾ Although while I do see thinking in general and civilization in particular, as the cause for much the dilemma in which we find ourselves, I wouldn’t bane either, even if I could. Both are natural phenomenon evolving into a presumably more balance state, or winding down towards extinction. Time will tell. In the meantime, it is helps (me anyway) to be aware of the causes of current imbalance.

This short CBS news piece, The science behind pleasure-seeking (after a short ad), adds some interesting color to the process. The curious thing is, however, not all rich people do this. Warren Buffet’s life style is a good example. This report sheds light on that too, in a round about way. This report, although slanted towards the benefits of pleasure, does offer food-for-thought on why some folks pursue pleasure more than others do.

Not surprisingly, the report makes no mention of Buddha’s Second Noble Truth. What a total bummer the truth would be! Naturally, I won’t overlook this most important aspect; especially noteworthy is how the Second Truth ends: Pleasures are the bait and the result is pain. Keep Buddha’s Truths in mind as you listen to (or read the transcript below) this report. You can see, for example, how thinking plays such a large role in life for humans, and why Taoism speaks to its downside. As my favorite passage puts it, thinking that one knows will lead to difficulty.

Frankly, well-being is not connected to pleasure, per se. Although, you could say pleasure does promise us well-being. No wonder Buddha called it “bait”. So why is Warren Buffet an apparent exception to the path of ostentatious wealth that many rich people take? Wealthy people who live simple lives don’t take the bait. By the way, from a symptoms point of view, the fact that wealthy people often continue to up-the-anti, pleasure-wise proves the old cliché ‘money doesn’t buy happiness’. They are the wealthy poor! Shall we pray for them?  ;-)

Transcript

It can be as simple as a sunset, as decadent as a dessert, or as extravagant as a weekend in Paris. But we all have our own little pleasures …

“Chocolate and peanuts! … mmmmm …”
“I’m a Barbie collector. I have, like, over 100 Barbies.”
“I love Mexican food!”
“The rush of cliff jumping, when you’re up in the air, and you’re hoping the water is deep enough, and your heart is beating a thousand miles an hour, and you SPLASH!”

Professor Gregory Berns, a neuroeconomist at Emory University, notes that some pleasures are no less than a matter of survival.

“Pleasure is an instantaneous feeling of something good,” Dr. Berns said. “When you teach a bunch of undergraduates and teenagers like I do and I ask them to list the things that give them pleasure, sleep is always at the top of the list.

“You have kind of the basic needs, right? So you have food, sleep, and sex. Pretty much boils down to that, if you’re talking about actual pleasure,” Berns laughed.

But pleasure goes well beyond basic needs. Yale psychologist Paul Bloom says WHY we enjoy what we enjoy is very complicated.

“It seems like we just taste food, and taste wine, we respond to our visceral sensations. But actually it is surprisingly deep,” Bloom said.

So deep, in fact, that Bloom was pleased to write a book on pleasure, which he says is as much about our brains as about our experiences.

“Our pleasure is a response not just to the physical makeup of something, what it looks like or tastes like, or smells like, or feels like, but rather to our beliefs of what it really IS, what its real essence is,” Bloom said.

And boy, can we be fooled!

Bloom recalls one famous experiment with wine drinkers done by scientists at Stanford and Cal Tech …

“Half the people are told they’re drinking cheap plunk, the other half are told they’re drinking something out of $100-$150 bottle,” Bloom said. “It tastes better to them, if they THINK they’re drinking from an expensive bottle. And it turns out that if they think they’re drinking expensive wine, parts of the brain that are associated with pleasure and reward light up like a Christmas tree.”

“So if I have people over for dinner, I should add a little ‘1″ in front of the price tag, and put it on the table?” Spencer asked.

“That is the ultimate trick to making wine taste better,” Bloom said.

And it’s the sort of trick that works only on human beings.

“Both my dog and me enjoy drinking water when we’re thirsty, but I’m the one who cares about where the water came from – whether it’s bottled water, or from the tap,” Bloom said. “My dog doesn’t care.”

“You’re the one that, if we put a higher price tag on that bottle of water, you’ll enjoy it more?” suggested Spencer.

“That’s right! I might give my dog premium dog food, but the dog doesn’t care that I spent a lot of money for it.”

People, on the other hand, seem to get ENORMOUS pleasure out of spending ENORMOUS sums on some very curious things.

Was Michael Jackson’s jacket really worth $1.8 million?

Or how about President Kennedy’s tape measure, which went for almost $50,000 at auction?

Or Eric Clapton’s guitar, snapped up for just under a million bucks?

Given all that, Paul Bloom wondered what people might pay for the pleasure of owning, say, George Clooney’s sweater?

“And the answer is, a fair amount,” said Bloom. “Much more than they’d pay for MY sweater, or for a brand new sweater.”

But why? For bragging rights? Or to re-sell on eBay? Apparently not …

Bloom conducted an experiment where people were not allowed to tell people or boast about buying Clooney’s sweater, or even re-sell it, and the perceived value was reduced. “But here’s what makes the value really drop: We told another group of subjects that we thoroughly washed it before it got to them. Now the value plummets.”

“It’s not still ‘George Clooney’s sweater’?” asked Spencer.

“As my wife put it, you washed away the Clooney cooties!” Bloom laughed. “You’ve washed away the sort of essence of the person.”

“That gives them more pleasure in owning it?”

“Human beings are strange,” laughed Spencer.

“Human beings are extraordinary,” he replied.

Some pleasures are universal, like eating the mouth-watering butter-and-sugar concoctions at Magnolia Bakery in New York City – it really is pure pleasure on a plate.

But not all of life’s pleasures are so straight-forward. In fact, if you think about it, some of them are downright weird.

Take cheese.

“Cheese is spoiled milk, it smells bad,” said psychologist Paul Rozin. “But the point is that we get great pleasure out of it. And some people love the stinky cheeses. And part of the pleasure of eating them is that they really smell bad, but they’re good!”

Rozin’s studies go well beyond the pleasures of the disgusting, to the joy of the downright painful. Take hot chili peppers …

“Well, hot chili peppers are eaten by over two billion people in the world,” Rozin said. “And yet, this is an innately negative experience. Little babies don’t like it. So, the question to me was, why would anybody put in their mouth something that produces a pain signal from the mouth to the brain?”

His answer? What he calls “benign masochism” – the same human quirk that explains why we enjoy horror movies that terrify us … why we like sad songs that make us cry.

“It’s a sense of your mind over your body,” Rozin said. “Your body is saying, ‘Bad news, get out of here!’ Your mind knows, ‘I’m actually not in danger. I’m mastering this negative experience, and my mastery of it gives me pleasure.’”

But there are limits. Just ask those chili pepper people…

“What happens is the one that people like best tends to be the one that’s just below the level they can’t bear,” Rozin laughed. “In other words, they’re pushing the limit of how hot they can stand it. Similarly with roller coasters. People who love roller coasters will like the steepest and scariest one they can stand.”

Push your pleasure to that limit and – odd as it seems – odds are you’ll want more. So what’s the best strategy to maximize life’s pleasures?

Emory Professor Gregory Berns did an experiment that offers a clue: When he gave subjects alternating drops of water and juice, their brain activity showed they preferred the juice. No surprise. But when the juice came at unexpected intervals and was a surprise, they liked it even more.

His advice: Plan surprises.

“You have to take risks, I think, to really experience pleasure,” Dr. Berns said. “And there’s, you know, there’s a reason why people say the first time is always the best. The first time you experience something, whether it’s your first kiss, your first bite of sushi, whatever you like, it’s always the best, it’s always the most memorable.”

So whether it’s Clooney’s sweater … roller coasters … chili peppers … or something else entirely (”Chocolate” … “good friend, good beer” …), treasure those pleasures.

But remember: There’s always room for something new – and people keep pushing the envelope, like bungee jumping.

“Yeah, why not?” said Dr. Berns.

For more info:

“How Pleasure Works: The New Science of Why We Like What We Like” by Paul Bloom (W.W. Norton)

Recovering alcoholics continue to say, “I’m an alcoholic”, even as they stay on the straight and narrow moment-to-moment, day to day, year to year. Likewise, I would have to say I’m a thinker, recovering from certainty in thought moment-to-moment, day to day, year to year. (Really! I’ve sobered up a lot. You should have seen me before.)

Of course, just like alcohol, certainty is not bad by itself.  It is all about the circumstances and magnitude. Intuitive certainty that induces me to jump out of the way of an oncoming bus, or avoid food that smells ‘off’, benefits me without fail. Certainty’s affect on thought is where things go awry. Stillness and impartiality fly out the window once the emotion of certainty begins to back up thought. At that point, the blind-spot overtakes perception and difficulties multiply.

I am a little surprised that this process isn’t more widely recognized. Especially in that we have been aware of this for ages. The clearest example is probably represented by chapter 71, to know yet to think that one does not know is best; not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty. Buddha’s also speaks to this. Much of his Noble Truths and Eight Fold Path addresses the role the mind plays in our lives.

Of course, I should be more surprised by my own naiveté.  There is simply no way that we can impartially evaluate anything that offers us pleasure. Pleasure is the bait, as Buddha said, and it creates a blind-spot around the source of that pleasure.  Can merely understanding that we intoxicate ourselves with thought help anyone sober up? I would guess probably not.

Just like the other ways we have to drink ourselves silly—shopping, eating, drugs, and so on—understanding is seldom sufficient. We must viscerally know, and such depth of knowing only comes through personally reaching rock bottom. Isn’t this a process, like  chapter 36 points out, if you would have a thing laid aside, you must first set it up? Only when a thing is fully set up are we ready to lay it aside ⁽¹⁾. Why should an addiction to certainty-of-belief be any different?

Alas, our addiction to certainty-of-belief is somewhat different and more challenging. There are obvious physical consequences to all other addictions: a glutton’s obesity; a shopper’s debt, a smoker’s cough, a drunkard’s hangovers. Not so with thought, other than the neurotic impulses from which we suffer. And even if we recognized our addiction to certainty-of-belief, what are we to do? Other sources of additions are external and can at least be kept out of reach, if not eliminated. Thinking is internal. I suppose that explains the popularity of psycho-pharmacology. Well, at least that is an improvement over getting a lobotomy.

So, if you are fed up with certainty-of-belief, then try out correlations as a sort of do-it-yourself virtual lobotomy. They may help detoxify your mind from the weight of its preconceptions as they did for me. Also effective, needless to say, can be delving the depths of the Tao Te Ching and the age-old ‘yogic’ practices (I mean yoga in the broadest sense: meditation, pranayama, bhakti yoga, hatha yoga, Buddhism, and so on.)

⁽¹⁾ That’s not altogether true. The power of an addiction is symptomatic of the degree of disconnection we feel. The more secure our sense of social connection, the less sway an addiction has upon us. Thus, improvements in our sense of connection must take some of the steam out of the ‘set it up in order to lay it aside’ process.

As I see it, thought (language, words and names) has left us with a unique sense of disconnection compared to other animal. That is the price we pay for the powerful advantages that thinking (imagination) affords us. I find it ironic that we attempt to reconnect via thought (belief in particular promises to reconnection with the One). I never found that actually worked. It is like building a castle of belief on the shifting sands of the void.

On the other hand, maybe that’s just me. After all, belief is really a symptom of deeper realities, not a solution. A loosening of certainty in belief just reflects changing realities and a declining need to hold on to any particular belief. Goodness, I suppose my thoughts on belief are shifting. Shifting sands indeed!

A key phrase from chapter 48 helps keep me turning back. It goes like this: “One does less and less until one does nothing at all, and when one does nothing at all there is nothing that is undone “. I know that sounds silly on the face of it. Given the ‘Just Do It‘ culture in which we live, it is essential to read between the lines.

The reason ‘more is better’ drives me so much is that I have always viscerally felt that approach would give me what I need quickly. I say viscerally felt because it has been a subconscious innate drive for most of my life. Only after hitting the wall, so to speak, did I begin to examine deeply that side of my nature. As they say, necessity is the mother of invention.

‘More is better’ is about quantity. We have a common and innate expectation that if we do something more, we will be better off ⁽¹⁾. That means more practice, more study, more work, more money, more charity, more eating healthy, more exercise, more friends, more fame, more sex, more justice, more peace, etc. I have set up and laid aside most of these things except for more time, perhaps. Time, being such an ephemeral thing, takes a moment to moment active knowing—so far anyway. Of course, death will close the final chapter.

Another ideal has attracted attention in recent times: ‘less is more’. This 19th century proverbial phrase parallels that old (2500 BC) Chinese saying above ⁽²⁾, and rings true for many a stressed out person now-a-days.

‘Less is more’ is about quality, in my view. The most amazing thing I have found is that attention to quality in what I do is so much more effective, practically and ’spiritually’, than my gut impulses ever led me to feel. Indeed, one minute in quality equals hours in quantity. To this day, I must maintain a constant background awareness of this life truth: Less is really and truly more.

In summary: Really believing that ‘less is more’ can deliver what no amount of doing more ever can. Of course, nothing is ever that easy is it! The hitch here is having sufficient faith to influence daily actions. Experience is the key. All you need do is prove to yourself, through personal experience, that ‘less truly is more’, that quality trumps quantity.

⁽¹⁾ If we were living in the wild like other animals that drive would often turn out to be true. Thanks to civilization, we live more comfortable and secure lives than animals in the wild. However, we are a biologically still an animal, which means we have a lot more energy to spend than most civilized circumstances demand. The result: we easily overdo action by pursuing a path of ‘more is better’ in whatever activity we feel important.

⁽²⁾ This translation stays closer to the literal Chinese of chapter 48. The commentary that accompanies this considers it from a slightly different angle as well.

Do knowledge, day by day increase.
Do the way, day by day decrease.
Decreasing and decreasing,
Use until without doing.
Without doing yet not undone.

Humans are naturally (and usually) inclined to take the easy way, go for pleasure and avoid pain. In the wild this bio-hoodwink usually works out well. Human culture has been driven by this primary instinctive drive shared by all animals, from ants to duck to dogs to people. Consider the human highway on the left and the ant highway on the right (photo left). Both species are just trying to make life easier and more efficient. As I pointed out in Ants are Us, the similarities are striking.

Over time (100,000 years +/-) this drive has evolved modern civilization to its present condition through the development of tools and materials to make life easier… more comfortable, secure, and to fatten up whenever possible; who knows when the next famine is coming? That seals feels it has to eat its fill while it can (photo right). The human man is not really any different; his biology does not know the supper markets are always overflowing with food, nor the danger of long term overeating ⁽¹⁾.

So, while we are totally natural in how we live (pursue pleasure, avoid pain), we are not living under the wild conditions for which our instincts evolved over millions of years to live. The instinct to make living easier combined with the cognitive and manual ability to succeed has led us to an unbalance situation. We are increasingly faced with having too much of a good thing. Naturally, letting go of our ‘good thing’ is not easy, and so we remain bogged down in difficulty ⁽²⁾.

Any species that evolves capabilities which bring it beyond essential counterbalancing forces will either evolve in ways that bring it back in balance, or it goes extinct. Of course, external conditions can also change quickly to a degree that brings it lethally out of balance (e.g., the comet and the dinosaurs, the dodo bird and humans).

In my view, we are simply responding to life naturally and like all other creatures, we do so in overall ignorance of the consequences. Like all other life forms, we react to circumstance, and adapt accordingly. The unusual and ironic thing about humans is that human knowledge is a major source of our ignorance. Other animals are just ‘dumb’ and ignorant; we are smart and ignorant. Or as chapter 18 says, when cleverness emerges there is great hypocrisy.

⁽¹⁾ I’ve really noticed the biology as I’ve aged. Toward my late 20’s I found myself gaining weight ‘naturally’. My diet was not really changing, my biology was. When I quit smoking, my weight really shot up. I suppose I was replacing the pleasures from tobacco addiction with pleasure from food. As Buddha’s Second Truth points out, if I had continued to follow pleasure’s bait, the result would be pain—I wound be seriously overweight.

We burn fewer calories as we age. This slow-down prepares us, in the wild, for becoming increasingly less agile in hunting and gathering, and less able to recover from injury. Biology is oblivious to civilized conditions where rich and abundant food is always available, especially now in modern economies.

Interestingly, it took me about 10 years to unlearn the ‘eat today for who knows what lies ahead’ approach to life that years of living abroad in developing countries ingrained in me. It took me that long to psychologically settling down enough to know food was always at hand. It took me even longer to know I needed to rein in pleasure’s drive. Though I understood (in theory) that ‘short term pleasure attracts long term pain‘, it took real time to begin to actually understand and put that into practice.

⁽²⁾ Here are a few passages from Chapter 63 that speaks to the obvious difficulty we face.

Lay plans for the accomplishment of the difficult before it becomes difficult;
make something big by starting with it when small.

Difficult things in the world must needs have their beginnings in the easy;
big things must needs have their beginnings in the small.

Therefore, even the sage treats some things as difficult.
That is why in the end no difficulties can get the better of him.

• (A) The focus is on discerning differences. This tends to shore up one’s biases, which augments feeling tribal connection. This thought style also stimulates the social fairness instincts. This can leave one feeling either pleased or annoyed (by the ‘injustice’ of it all) depending on the circumstances.

• (B) The focus is on discerning similarities ⁽¹⁾. This tends to neutralize one’s biases, which augments feeling the shape that has no shape. This thought style also pours cold water on social fairness instincts. This can leave one feeling more serene (by the ‘natural justice’ of it all) regardless of circumstances.

Talking about shoring up or neutralizing one’s biases may be misleading. Perhaps a better word would be for biases would be ‘knowledge’. After all, at some level knowledge and bias share common ground. So, let’s peel another layer off the onion by clarifying the knowledge issue…

Not being omniscient, we can’t know anything absolutely, only partially. This means all knowledge is relative and essentially rests on shaky ground. We compensate for this by pumping up faith in our beliefs, and thinking style (A) helps accomplish this with its focus is on discerning differences.

Discernment of differences, differentiating ‘this’ from ‘that’, is the foundation upon which knowledge rests. Reducing the discernment of differences is one way to soften the glare and alleviate knowledge’s impact on perception. Thinking style (B) helps achieve this by looking for as much similarity between apparent differences as possible. Then when asked, “When your discernment penetrates the four quarters are you capable of not knowing anything?” You can answer, “Yep! All I see is mysterious sameness”

It all comes down to a choice between taking a point of view that magnifies differences, or one that shrinks differences. In light matters, thinking style (A) works well. It is fun and parallels allow yourself to have desires to observe its manifestation. However, in serious matters, I prefer style (B) which fosters greater serenity ⁽²⁾. It parallels rid yourself of desire in order to observe its secrets.

What choice do we have in using one style or the other? Probably none, although, understanding the consequences of each can perhaps help one at least strive on diligently toward it every day, in every way. In the end, isn’t that what really matters. It is not that one succeeds; after all, in the end, we all fail (die). All that matters: he who perseveres is a man of purpose. This is what makes life meaningful, and this is where styles (A) and (B) join forces. Both drive us to strive on in one way or another. In other words, we all strive on diligently, naturally. We just think we ’should’ try harder! No wonder we have difficulty. As one of my favorite chapters puts it:

To know yet to think that one does not know is best;
Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty.

It is by being alive to difficulty that one can avoid it.
The sage meets with no difficulty.
It is because he is alive to it that he meets with no difficulty.

(1) Style B is related to the correlations process, a non-’normal’ way of thought. Using correlations to ponder requires discerning similarities to the point of no return or as close to that as one can get.

⁽²⁾ Of Course, everything has a price, even serenity. Style (B) diminishes the sense of tribal solidarity. There is no ‘us’ against ‘them’. Social connection becomes much more indistinct and shadowy. Your tribe is the universe. Chapter 20 speaks to this…

Between yea and nay
How much difference is there?
Between good and evil
How great is the distance?

What others fear
One must also fear.
And wax without having reached the limit.

The multitude are joyous
As if partaking of the ‘Tai Lao’ offering
Or going up to a terrace in spring.
I alone am inactive and reveal no signs,

Like a baby that has not yet learned to smile,
Listless as though with no home to go back to.
The multitude all have more than enough.
I alone seem to be in want.
My mind is that of a fool – how blank!
Vulgar people are clear.
I alone am drowsy.
Vulgar people are alert.
I alone am muddled.
Calm like the sea;
Like a high wind that never ceases.
The multitude all have a purpose.

I alone am foolish and uncouth.
I alone am different from others
And value being fed by the mother.

Chapter 39 also touches on this…

Hence the superior must have the inferior as root; the high must have the low as a base. Thus, lords and princes refer to themselves as ’solitary’, ‘desolate’, and ‘hapless’. This is taking the inferior as root, is it not?

Success Thru Failure

Most of us eventually realize that all success must inevitably pass through a failure stage. From our first years of stumbling before walking, of mumbling before talking, and on through life we gradually learn (perhaps intuitive and subconscious) that if we would take from a thing, we must first give to it. However, I will take this even further: success IS failure. Is this an example of chapter 78’s  straightforward words seem paradoxical? It all depends on which phase of the life cycle you consider and how you define success.

That success is failure is how I saw the future when we began holding Taoist meetings here in the mid 80’s. I felt that the closer we kept to Taoist worldview, the less folks would be interested. This would be expected had we lived in the Bible belt. However, this is Santa Cruz California. We are a university town, ‘a nuclear free zone’, liberal and as new age as can be.

Therefore, on the surface you’d think that folks living in this area would be very receptive to the seemingly liberal radical worldview of the Tao Te Ching. Nevertheless, having many people even here interested would still be a strong indication that we were on a by-path, perhaps like going up to a terrace in spring.

This is a testament to the depth of the Tao Te Ching. Appearing very ‘liberal’ on the surface, it would repel ‘conservatives’ in the Bible belt. Appearing ‘conservative’ deeper down, it would repel ‘liberal’ eventually.  Impartiality appeals to neither camp, left or right, liberal or conservative. The Taoist view occupies the vast emptiness in between. No wonder it never really caught on in China. Legalism followed by Confucianism was so much easier to put into practice.

≈ Click Here for Translation & Commentary ≈