always already

friend: what would you be if you couldn't be christian anymore?

LoA: a neoplatonist

friend: *sigh* but you already ARE a neoplatonist

belief-o-matic: hours of endless entertainment

Those "hours", btw, don't come all at once, but due to my continual return to this funny little survey. With all due respect to Aziz's blog, Belief-O-Matic is my favorite part of Beliefnet. The results vary, depending on when I take it and my overall mood, but the following are typical results for me (including only those results above 90%)...

1. Hinduism (100%)
2. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (99%)
3. Orthodox Quaker (92%)
4. Eastern Orthodox (91%)
5. Roman Catholic (91%)

or

1. Hinduism (100%)
2. Eastern Orthodox (94%)
3. Roman Catholic (94%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (94%)

For those of you who don't know, my home church is Melkite (which is Catholic), though I quite regularly attend the Orthodox parish immediately behind our house since the closest Melkite parish is about an hr away. Thus at some level, the results are quite satisfying. The tool clearly measures my deep identification with the Catholic/Orthodox tradition.

I do find several things amusing about the tool though. First, while the rankings vary almost every time I take the test (which keeps me coming back), Hinduism is regularly the first or second choice and I can never remember it coming in lower than 90% (unless I was playing with the survey, trying to get a specific result). This is true despite the fact that I have no real interest in or attraction to Hinduism (ok, I love Bollywood, but that never struck me as in any way Hindu-specific). I did my coursework on it when I had to, with a professor I liked a great deal and who really loved India and Hinduism...but for me...nada. So, the survey, while it did describe my own self-understanding with Catholicism/Orthodoxy, is also measuring something I am not entirely aware of and which runs counter to my own explicit self-description.

At one level I know why and how this happens. At the end of the day I am a Platonist who read too much Hegel. I am very comfy with language of the Absolute, etc., and find the answers which explicitly use the word "God" in the survey to be too mythological for my taste most of the time. Moreover, Hinduism, as it is understood by this survey, is compatible with Christian claims, as understood by this survey, concerning the Incarnation and Trinity. In reality I think that the two are theologically fairly distant from one another and that the survey is capturing a possible similarity in language that is fairly thin in reality. If, realizing this, I try to answer the questions, esp. concerning God, in a manner that stresses the One, Hinduism falls down the list, but so does Catholicism/Orthodoxy for whom the doctrine of the Triune God is central. In fact, because Hinduism shows a great deal of flexibility concerning talk about God, Catholicism and Orthodoxy fall even further down the list than Hinduism does, thereby defeating the purpose of changing my answer.

25. Islam (31%)

Ok, so if Hinduism gets overrated by the survey, Islam gets hammered, despite my deep love and active interest in Islam. Again the reasons should be obvious. Say "Incarnation" and watch Islam plummet down the list. Say "Trinity" and watch Islam literally beg the survey to no longer be included for possible consideration. Still...Islam gets ranked, almost every time I take the survey, down at the bottom of the list with the JWs and nontheism (two which definitely belong at the bottom of my list), and it makes me wonder why.

Clearly, at some level, Islam is simply a category that does not contain a lot of nuance in the survey. In fairness, neither is Hinduism. We are all aware how broad religious practice and belief can be in Hinduism and one category covers the whole spectrum for this survey. It is my impression, though, that in the case of Islam, the category is narrow, not broad, i.e., it does not include a lot of variety in religious practice and belief that are clearly also present in Islam.

In any case, we come to one of the fundamental decisions made by the designers of the survey regarding Xty...or at least my Christianity. The fact that I affirm Christ as God (the Incarnation) places me closer to those who affirm various manifestations of God (and this includes neopaganism and new age, etc.) than it does to Islam or Judaism. This strikes me as fairly poor understanding of Christianity and its history, to say the least, even if it does raise interesting questions, e.g., if a Christian decides that, despite their belief in God, Jesus is not God, do they enter into a world where there are many incarnations (e.g., Jesus is one of many beautiful souls who manifest God) or a world where the prophets, of whom Jesus might be one, point to something Other?)

In any case, I left curious about how other people score on the Belief-O-Matic and what unexpected kinships (or distances) they might find.

Lawrence the Hindu, signing off....

you are what you read

You're The Guns of August!

by Barbara Tuchman

Though you're interested in war, what you really want to know is what
causes war. You're out to expose imperialism, militarism, and nationalism for what they
really are. Nevertheless, you're always living in the past and have a hard time dealing
with what's going on today. You're also far more focused on Europe than anywhere else in
the world. A fitting motto for you might be "Guns do kill, but diplomats are usually pulling the trigger."


Take the Book Quiz
at the Blue Pyramid.

snagged from ayesha

Reason #67 We Don't Have Children

We can't even make our cat behave!




We haven't been able to keep her off the kitchen counters lately and last night she jumped up on them right in front of us!!

Al Faisal University, Riyadh KSA

LoA: Honey, Look! They are opening a brand new University in Riyadh.
She: I will divorce you. *serious stare*
LoA: Shall I make chicken for dinner?
*She goes back to what she was doing*

ALFAISAL UNIVERSITY is a private, not-for-profit research university that will be self-governing and internationally recognized in education and research, and that will produce capable trained professionals who lead their fields. Students will begin their programs in Colleges of Business, Engineering, Medicine, and Science and General Studies in Fall 2008. Eventually, the University will enroll 1,000 students per class. The initial class will be much smaller with a gradual build up thereafter. The campus is being constructed on the beautiful grounds of the late King Faisal’s Palace in Al Maather in the center of Riyadh. The Palace will serve as the administration quarters; the other buildings will form an almost complete circle around it. Instruction will be in English. The University was founded by the King Faisal Foundation and organizations such as Boeing, British Aerospace, THALES, and King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center, whose representatives serve on the Board of Trustees. Before entering the University, students will complete a rigorous one-year preparatory program that emphasizes English language, study skills, math and science. The College of Science and General Studies offers a four-year degree program in genetics and life sciences. In addition, the College provides core courses in the sciences, humanities, and social sciences for all university students. The curriculum of the College will involve problem-based and technologically-enhanced learning. Graduate programs will be added in the near future. The goal of these programs is to train students to use systems- and critical thinking, problem solving, and teamwork. Our programs are designed to meet high international standards with collaboration from major western research universities. The College of Science and General Studies seeks faculty with teaching and research expertise in English Literature and Language; Philosophy and Ethics; Arabic Literature and Language; and Islamic Studies. Attractive salaries and generous benefits will be provided. Queries and applications should be sent to humanitiesrecruitment@alfaisal.edu and should include a cv and the names of three references. The subject line should specify the discipline, position and advertisement reference. The deadline for applications is 15 January 2008. Off-site interviews for leading candidates will be conducted in early 2008 in the US, Europe and/or the Middle East.

pour it early and often?

just one of the amusing sights downeast...



LoA, "What Drinking Problem? (Marshallberg, NC)" (4 January 2008)


oddly, it appears to have gone out of business.

let them eat pie

Every nation should have a national holiday on which they celebrate the fact that they were welcomed warmly by strangers who nurtured them to health until they were ready to engage in a rather successful 200+ year genocidal campaign against said strangers. You would think it would be day of national mourning maybe?, but if that's what you think you seriously misunderstand how nations work. Nations are little (or in our case not-so-little) bands of we-ness with their guns pointed at everyone else's they-ness. So, your national celebration of successful genocide should be....a celebration. We here in America call ours Thanksgiving. "God are we ever thankful that you gave us the military superiority to clear most of the continent of its indigenous inhabitants."

The food you eat on such a holiday should reflect the national character: therefore the food of choice in our case is Turkey; after all, you are what you eat. I like to follow up my holiday gorging with some fun reading. I highly recommend a happy novel, like Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian, Or the Evening Redness in the West. If more people read this book they would have a better understanding of American foreign policy (we are so misunderstood).

Finally one should not forget dessert. Seriously. I am from the South so therefore my dessert of choice is pecan pie. Sure pumpkin pie is nice too, and I will be making one of those as well, but nothing matches the pure super-caloric consumptive delight that is pecan pie. A slice of heaven. Seriously.

1. Don't make your own pie crusts. Are you insane? Is there anything more depressing and annoying than the frustrating process of trying to roll out your own pie crust. No, no there isn't. Seriously. Buy a refrigerated pie crust. Thank you.

2. 28 caramels....be sure to eat the rest of the bag while you are unwrapping the other 28; there are starving children somewhere (Canada, I think).

3. 1/4 cup butter

4. 1/4 cup water

5. 3/4 cup sugar (now you're talkin')

6. 2 large eggs

7. 1/2 teaspoon vanilla extract

8. 1/4 teaspoon salt (yes, I said salt, don't argue with me)

9. 1 cup chopped pecans

___________________________________________

After you have baked your pie crust and you have set it out to cool, combine the caramels, butter and water in a large saucepan over medium heat. Cook, stirring constantly!, 5 to 7 minutes or until caramels and butter are melted; remove from heat.

Stir together the sugar and next three ingredients. Stir into caramel mixture until thoroughly combined. Stir in the pecans (it is a pecan pie, remember). Pour into the crust.

Bake the pie at 400 degrees Farhenheit for 10 minutes. Reduce heat to 350 and bake 20 more minutes, after you shield the edges of the crust with aluminum foil to keep them from over-browning. Remove pie and let it cool.

And let them eat pie.


-LoA

now, if only i could find my moral compass!

the folks at politicalcompass.org have designed a handly little quiz that is good for hours (depending on how obsessive you are) or at least minutes of fun.

i think this type of thing should largely be taken as a bit of whimsy, though i don't really dispute its conclusion. nonetheless how closely should one really align the politics of mandela and ghandi (and LoA)?

in any case, one should understand that the model is meant to describe the contemporary political climate and, using the insight that left/right is not adequate it attempts to add another dimension (authoritarian/anarchist) that judges how much one values order and security as opposed to freedom (understood in this model as negative freedom: the freedom from obstructions to one's will). as one can see in the first graph




this divides politics into four broad fields. the extremes of the axes represent "pure" forms of 4 major political ideologies in the 20th-21st centuries. along the left/right axis one finds communism and (economic-)liberalism. meanwhile along the authoritarian/libertarian axis one finds fascism and anarchism. i will point out that here one sees what i take to be the most glaring problem with this metric insofar as the creators use it to dispute the claim that communism and fascism were diametrically opposed to one another. whatever "diametrically" might mean in that sentence one needs some way of grasping the manner in which liberalism appeared as a progressive position to communists and a vapid and deathly system to fascist thinkers such as heidegger (who had no problem comparing it to communism in this regard). the problem here lies in the difficultly this metric has portraying the manner in which marxism and liberalism were united very strongly (in their respective theories) in their support of internationalism and universal freedom against the parochialism of the fascist movements which they found repugnant (and in marxist terms, decidely regressive). one can imagine a very different graphing for instance if the horizontal axis was internationalism v. nationalism with the individualist-liberalism marking the center of the axis. this graphing more accurately portrays the conflicts of the 20th c. in my opinion.

this is not meant to disparage the metric which definitely has its value in complicating our usual vision. here one sees its placement of some of the most significant figures of the 20th c.



or, again, here one sees the placement of recent world leaders. (i suggest another problematic placement for this metric might be musharraf, among others).



finally, i find their analysis of the american political scene interesting and largely correct insofar as they find almost the whole range of american political figures to be operating within a common field. that said, i think when one looks closely there is a clear axis along which the typical american language of "conservative" and "liberal" work. that axis seems to run diagonally from the top right corner down towards the center (and even kucinich falls along this axis). the only notable outlier is ron paul and let's face it he sounds like a non-sense voice in american politics. i would also say that this explains some of the difficulty and discomfort many catholics feel in the realm of american politics. when one looks at the previous graph at the placement of the supposedly conservative Benny16, one finds that the pope bears no relation to the axis of american political discourse and i would suggest that it is precisely for this reason that catholics find themselves, when they vote, at a severe impasse. likewise i would suggest that this impasse largely centers around the church's (often muted) skepticism towards capitalism.



and finally there is LoA. how exactly does one describe a right-marxist (a tongue in cheek reference to the 19th c. category of the right-hegelians), otherwise known as a catholic, with authority issues?

i will let She do it, since she does it so well?

Sister: Do you know where LoA is?
She: Go 'til you see Lenin, and then keep going Left.
Sister stares with very puzzled look.


LoA:Left of Lenin

best wishes,
LoA.

now rated for your convenience

Mingle²

according to the site that issued the rating, i say 'shit' alot and discuss sexuality and violence in a graphic manner. consider yourself warned.

best wishes,
LoA.

upon having been vindicated like seven times that day...

She: why doesn't everyone just OBEY ME?!

...and i even had a pair of strappy sandals already picked out, too!

LoA: i am the one who showed an interest in her ring; i am the one who oooh'ed and aaaahh'd over her dress; i am the one who went shoe shopping with her; and YOU get invited to the bachelorette party?!?

She: gender discrimination sucks don't it?

the parental unit has arrived

She: You know why your dad likes me so much don't you?

LoA: Why is that dear?

She: I know how to use power tools, I build work benches, I plaster the wall when you knock a dent in it with the vacuum cleaner....

[momentary silence]

She: I am like the son he never had.

someone drew the short straw; or, things you shouldn't touch with a 10 ft pole

She: Who was that on the phone?

LoA: The Department Head

She: What did he want?

LoA: He was telling me the classes they wanted me to cover in the fall.

She: ....Well?

LoA: *sighs* Sexual Ethics.

She: What did you do to piss him off?

visualDNA

...'cuz everyone else is doing it.

Read my VisualDNA™ Get your own VisualDNA™

academics don't do it for money...

She: So, do you get anything for being the editor of an edited volume?

LoA: The satisfaction of a job well done?

[silence...]

She: I hear the post-office is hiring.

so much for the categorical imperative

So act that the maxim of your will could always hold at the same time as a principle in a giving of universal law.
Immanuel Kant, The Critique of Practical Reaon

She: [entering the door] you have to go to this yoga class with me next week.

LoA: i can't; lectures start back next week.

She: but there was this guy hitting on me during yoga class. i shouldn't have to be harassed during yoga.

LoA: introduce MB as your partner. that should shut him down.

She: [ponders] i'm sure not she could handle that.

LoA: was he cute?

She: uh, no.

LoA: that's too bad; if he is going to harass you he ought to at least have the common decency to be attractive.

She: it isn't harassment if they are cute. [evil grin]

LoA: [ponders on where to begin....decides to go back to reading kant...]

thoughts inspired by sitemeter

1. the easiest way to get hits from the middle east, apparently, is to write posts on nancy ajram. new ajram posts will follow soon in an effort to pander to my newfound blurker community. :D

2. as a professor i have never been a fan of the internet. students seem to constantly mistake doing a google search for doing research. that said, i do hope all those college students who keep hitting my site by searching for critiques of the grand odalisque are giving me footnote credits. plagiarism is evil.

3. yes, oh ye evangelicals, the gospel of luke does in fact say that having money is bad bad bad. it will send you to hell. stopping looking for ways around it. on the bright-side, the gospel of matthew just says you should be poor in spirit. that should help your poor spirit sleep better at night.

4. second thought inspired by the number of hits on the "grand odalisque" post: wow, this whole 'islam and women' thing is a big deal isn't it? just imagine how many hits i would get if i actually wrote about it.

5. most disturbing google hit ever: [and i am not making this up] "eastern european male foot worship"


best wishes,
LoA.

christmas cheer

my sister clarifies her feelings...


Christmas Bag, (Christmas 2006)

north carolina: its about the tobacco, stupid!

for those of you looking for something a little less likely to put you to sleep than an account of poverty in a 1st century christian author, i offer the following...

let us call the year 1980: it is a nice round number and my memory is not so good when it comes to years. my life is divided by events: before saudi, saudi, after saudi, college, masters, ph.d, now. this falls in the years just before saudi.

we referred to my maternal grandmother as 'granny'. now my granny was quite the character, and indeed i should start a new segment called "granny stories" just for nancy, because i know she loves them so much (yes, that's right, i know you are out there, even if you are just lurking). anyway, one saturday afternoon, granny drives into town (where my family is from, 'town' is anywhere with a stop light, but generally refers to the western half of the county) to go shopping at piggly wiggly (a grocery store) and eckards (a drug store). upon arriving she promptly proceeds to lock her purse in the car. so, she finds a pay phone (what did we do before cell phones?) and calls my father to come and help her.

the drive into 'town' is about 15minutes from where my parents have their house (about 25 mintues from granny's house, for those who are trying to draw a map), and my father was working in the backyard. so let's say he took 7 minutes to clean up a little, and get the things he needed to get her car unlocked and then add the 15minutes to drive into town. this adds up to a grand total of 22minutes. so let us say my father arrives at granny's location 22minutes after she calls. he arrives to find her standing by the car, the driver's side window broken in. granny has thrown a brick through the driver's side window so that she could get into her car. "why?" you might ask, has she done such a thing. it would be a very natural thing for you to ask, and not surprisingly my father also asked this question. granny's answer: "my ciggies were in my purse."

just by the way, in the way of a post-script...granny called the police to report that someone had vandalized her car!

-LoA.

occupation: house-wife.....wait a minute here

I have been seeing the same eye doctor for several years now. Of course, it is an eye doctor, which means I have been to the office a grand total of three times. We are not exchanging Christmas cards or anything. Because it is so long between visits, each time I visit there is always paper work to fill out: something about insurance, blah, blah (I tuned out right after someone said "...and sign this one by the 'x'").

And then there is always this one last form: matters of personal history for the doctor's personal records. Most of this is useful information of course. But the last question on that little yellow page is, "what is your occupation?". My first reaction is usually paranoia: "who wants to know", the eyes narrowing suspiciously. Then I start to scan down the list.

Now just to be clear, I do "work" part-time, but let's also be clear, adjunct teaching pays...for my gas and a trip to Wendys on the way there. Given that I do it because I enjoy teaching, and also given how extremely flexible my schedule is, and that I do not do it for the money, I really consider it more like volunteer work. Some people go down to the Salvation Army, others to the Catholic Worker soup kitchen, others still to the Humane Society...I teach.

Education is on the list. But what strikes me is down at the very, very bottom of that list: at the very bottom of the list, the final answer is "house-wife". I cring. To the casual viewer, I do not look like much of a feminist. I do not own a bright pink, "This Is What A Feminist Looks Like" tshirt. I easily resisted the temptation to get the free tshirt the Women's Center was passing out: it said something to the effect of "I don't know what a feminist is, all I know is I get accused of being one every time I do something to distinguish myself from a doormat." They only had size-small left in navy blue. Alas. It is true, I do not shave my legs or underarms, but the real force of my social statement is lost once one recalls that I am male. In other words, I am what my wife laughingly refers to as "passing".

But the truth is, I cook, I go grocery shopping, I run the errands, I clean (some days better than others). She still does not let me near her laundry (you screw up one time....). I stare at the page. I harumph. I put an X next to house-wife, and turn it in. I figure someone will notice and see how silly this is, realize that familial care is not somehow beneath men, nor is it "women's work" and correct such a poorly designed question. Obviously not, because two years later, same questionnaire, same set of answers. This time I put the X in the same box, but when I hand it in I point out to the receptionist the poor choice of words. She stared at me like I had grown a second head...and was contemplating whether or not that meant she could charge me for two eye appointments. She asked what word I thought they should use. I suggested homemaker; she glared at me and sent me to the doctor. She did only charge me for one appointment though.

Two years later and visit three: same silly form, same silly answers. This time I take it up with that final question unanswered, and ask (as it turns out) the same receptionist what answer she thinks I should give. This is probably bad form, I freely admit; but c'mon! they have been using this silly form for four years now without changing it, and what does my occupation have to do with my visit to the EYE DOCTOR anyway? Once again she looks at me like I have grown two heads. I explain what I do. She looks at me, she looks at the list: "Looks like you are a housewife to me". I had to laugh. In the moment it was funny. Then she laughed a little. I filled it in. Then she laughed for real. Somehow I was satisfied.

Apparently now it is official: "House-wife" is gender neutral. In two years I will go and fill out that form yet again, and put an X in that very last box at the bottom of the page, and smile.

-LoA