Everyone is most affected by emotion. By far. That's why the Spock character in Star Trek is utterly implausible after a moment's thought. It's also why we call feelings "affections." We're not "affected" by reasoning. Reasoning can be very powerful, both in those that use it well and those who use it clumsily and fallaciously. But it still has a merely instrumental character, while emotion is the great ocean of response to the stimulus that is life.

Miles, Alan and friend. A good time was had by all.

Here's one of Number One Son, a.k.a. Spiderman.

Wonderful time trick-or-treating in the Portland area last night. Here's a picture of Alan, now 7 months old. Note the little Frankenstein's monster on his top.

The following is a critique which does not disparage mysticism itself, but rather says something about the limits of talking about it, and how people talk equivocally about both spiritual and intellectual pursuits. Many zaadzsters chatter a great deal about mysticism and often elevate it as an activity while tut-tutting about “intellectualism.” Now, there’s something to be said against hair-splitting and intellectual forms of escapism. However, I think that many dilettantes of the mystic tend toward their own types of escapism, narcissism and are often quite lazy and undisciplined intellectually. My point is that there's only so much that can be said about mystical experience itself, and that when we're not in the mystical realm, it's only too easy to devalue things such as consistency and other kinds of intellectual rigor. Many an argument is dismissed by the paradoxical claims of mysticism that are irresolvable on a level below mystical ecstasy. And many an objection to contradictory claims are dismissed by that ever-handy mystical snobbery that is usually expressed by the well-poisoning irrelevancy: "You were brought up in the West, so you couldn't possibly understand." Here’s an interesting passage from Ortega y Gasset’s "What is Philosophy?". It implies that while we’re talking, the intellectual dimension is important. The heights of mystical experience are largely outside of the realm of language. So while they can be celebrated and alluded to, our conversations about them must be limited. The realm of intellectual activity, by contrast, is highly communicable. He says, "My objection to mysticism is that out of the mystic vision no intellectual benefit redounds to mankind." He later says of the mystic sojourner, "the truth is that after going with him on his sublime voyage, what he manages to communicate to us is a thing of little moment." Of course doesn’t disrespect mystic experience, he merely indicates that little of it can be communicated. He concludes the chapter: "... I do not consider myself bound to deprecate the work of the mystic thinkers. In other meanings and dimensions they are of abundant interest. Today, more than ever, we must learn many things from them, including their idea of ecstasy—not the same as ecstasy itself—which certainly does not lack significance. "...if physics contains the total of what can be measured, philosophy is the whole of what can be said about the universe."

Encouraging greater intellectual discipline. Not because it's the most important thing to do, but because it is relatively important and it interests me. Partly it's a matter of humility (of the Socratic variety: realizing the limits of one's understanding), partly a matter of acquiring critical capabilities (cultivating techniques for detecting logical problems). I don't believe skepticism is valuable in itself, but the ability to discriminate between good (or at least strong) positions and weak ones is in short supply. Intellectual self-satisfaction and credulity thrive. A more important goal, but slightly less interesting to me, would be to promote a sense of honor, defined as a commitment to self-responsibility and duty to others, in trivial matters as well as great ones. To invert the above "causes," I'd like to see a decreased emphasis on a "whatever works for you" approach to philosophy and conduct. I'd also wish that people see the dishonor and perversity in expecting others to provide for you or in indulging in victimhood as a means of diverting one's own responsibility. Perhaps I could roll both of these ambitions into one cause: the promotion intellectual and moral virtue.

In high school, typing; in college, Spanish. The former prepared me for a life at the keyboard, the latter was the springboard for a second major, a study abroad experience and an entree into another world.

Every time I see one of these, I'm reminded of these lines of Wordsworth in "Tintern Abbey": And I have felt A presence that disturbs me with the joy Of elevated thoughts; a sense sublime Of something far more deeply interfused, Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns, And the round ocean and the living air

No, not the one outside Chicago. This one is in Central Oregon. Did a hike there a few weeks ago.