What neuroscience has to say about Romans 7

I recently listened to a couple of interesting podcasts on neuroscience that gave insight into a hard passage in Romans. Read Romans 7:15-25 and then take the time to listen to a couple of episodes from the Stuff to Blow Your Mind podcast put out by How Stuff Works.  The 9/15/11 podcast "Is free will an illusion?" which lasts about 40 minutes and the 11/8/11 podcast "This is your brain on art" which lasts about 44 minutes are both worth listening to. The first gives insight into how our subconscious can be at odds with our conscious mind and the second describes how we can force ourselves to re-evaluate what the subconscious presents and make different choices.  Of course, both over state the case of what the science actually reveals, but the relevance to the passage in Romans was interesting to me.

Stuff To Blow Your Mind on iTunes

Your clothes are talking to me

An article posted recently on the Christianity Today website speaks rather well to the issue of clothing people wear to church.  There is an idea sneaking into the more contemporary religious mind that the clothing you wear to church makes no difference at all.  It would seem that anyone who has something to say about your dress is simply guilty of judging you.

Some point to passages like 1 Peter 3:3-5 that say your adorning should be from the inside out and pretend this means your clothes are irrelevant.  Others would point to the words of Jesus, such as Mark 12:38-40, which point out that fancy clothes are not signs of true righteousness.  But neither of these passages are really addressing clothing.  They are addressing your heart.  A fancy outer shell will not make up for a dirty heart.

Maybe someone can show me where the bible says a clean heart is best recognized by shabby clothes?

People seem to forget that your clothing speaks.  Clothing is not personal.  Clothing is what you are showing everyone else.  If you follow the warnings of the previous scripture references, it will show up in your clothing.  Non-verbal communication is still important when you go to church.  The apostle Paul obviously thought non-verbal communcation as it applies to clothing absolutely did matter.

Here is the conversation we have when someone walks up to lead worship wearing tennis shoes and faded jeans:
"I'm lazy and can't be bothered to show you any respect."
"You seem lazy and can't be bothered to show me any respect."
"Hey! Don't judge me!"

My dad addressed this same issue in a few handwritten paragraphs I found that were meant for his short lived blog.  What would you think if you walked into the doctor's office and the person who was supposed to be the authority on healing your body was dressed in a Hawaiian shirt and sandals?  You want your doctor to be dressed professionally.  It shows that he respects you, that he is serious about being a doctor, and implies that he can be trusted.  Walking around UVA there is no doubt which students are in the medical school.  Even underneath the clean white coats they are all dressed very well.  They obviously realize that non-verbal communication matters.

Remembering that clothing matters doesn't directly translate into a coat and tie in every situation (I have no idea how to describe fancy women's clothes, sorry).  There are cultural norms to consider that will be different in every place and that change over time.  It obviously doesn't mean booting visitors or treating them poorly because their clothing isn't nice.  But that does not make your clothing irrelevant.

Let your clothing reflect your heart appropriately for your situation instead of hiding or disguising your heart in a lazy dress code.  In doing so you will show respect to those around you and better reflect what these passages of scripture are teaching.

You will never "find yourself"

I have heard it a million times.

"Teenagers are just trying to find themselves."
"You just have to let people find themselves."
"Young people are just experimenting to find themselves."

I have always thought that was one of the dumbest things people say as it has no practical meaning, serving only as an excuse for poor behavior.  Thank you to Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn and author of The Start-up of You, for finally talking some sense:

“Contrary to what many bestselling authors and motivational gurus would have you believe, there is not a ‘true self’ deep within that you can uncover via introspection and that will point you in the right direction,” Hoffman writes. “Yes, your aspirations shape what you do. But your aspirations are themselves shaped by your actions and experiences. You remake yourself as you grow and the world changes. Your identity doesn’t get found. It emerges.

You cannot "find yourself."  You will never find a "yourself" somewhere that you don't already know about.  What you can do is... do something.  By doing something you put experience to your ideas and find what is possible and what is not possible right now.  You do not find some "yourself" and a magical path that will allow your "yourself" to blink happiness and success into existance.
Like the quote above says, what you do shapes your aspirations.  If you let your peers or children or whoever choose foolishness in the name of "finding themselves" then you are letting them shape their aspirations with foolishness.  What kind of person can we possibly expect to emerge then, but a fool?  When a person's real choice is to do something, instead of "find themselves," we have a responsibility to try and guide them in a wise manner so that their aspirations are shaped by a solid foundation, not tossing waves.

Related articles

• 8 Job Search Tips From the Co-Founder of LinkedIn (mashable.com)
• 10 Memorable Quotes from the Start-up of YOU (forbes.com)

Online options for organizing your books

Multiple trips to the book fair and bringing home books from my dad's collection has on several occasions left me wondering, "Do I have this book already or did I just see it here last time?"  It is getting harder to keep track of what I already own.  My wife thinks this is good reason to get rid of the books.  I think it is good reason to find a way a better way of cataloging and keeping track of everything so all of the books become useful instead of temporarily forgotten.

 

I have had to reinstall all the software on my computer far too many times this year to bother with a downloaded program (especially when the most recommended software is completely unfree).  In looking around online for the best solution I found four websites that were worth looking at:  LibraryThing, Goodreads, aNobii, and Shelfari.  Most of the reviews of these sites were at least a year old which is approximately one eon in internet time.  So I took a look for myself at how each of these sites are laid out and what they could do for me.

 

All four of these sites have successfully differentiated themselves from each other and it is no random choice as to which one you will want to use.  The comparison most often made is between LibraryThing and Goodreads.  I don't think this is the proper comparison anymore, if it ever was.  The purpose of these two sites is very different which is probably why so many people don't ever chose and just use both.

 

The two comparison groups now are LibraryThing vs. Shelfari and Goodreads vs. aNobii.  The first two are websites that focus on being a good personal library catalog for all of your books, the second two focus on being a social network for people who read books.  This is a big distinction.  In the first case, the focus is on organizing all of your books.  In the second case, most of the focus is on interacting with other people.

 

I wrote up excruciatingly detailed descriptions of each one of the sites, but here is a small summary of what I found.

 

LibraryThing vs Shelfari

These two options are where you should look if your primary goal is to organize the books you have.  Both were able to locate every book I tried to enter.  LibraryThing was more flexible in your choices for organizing and labeling the books and it was very accurate in what edition of the book you were allowed to enter.  LibraryThing's advantage here is being able to search Library of Congress data to identify the book you own.  It is also extremely customizable in what is shown on your home page when you log in, giving you a lot of choice in how to make the site most useful to you.  Shelfari is a much prettier site, but also a much simpler site.  The options for customization are very limited and there is no way to connect with your facebook or twitter accounts.  Shelfari's advantage is its close integration of Amazon.com.  It automatically loads into your account every book you have ever bought online from Amazon.  If you want a record of your books, including the specific editions owned, and would like to be able to customize your log in page, then LibraryThing is the site you want (and the one I chose).  If you bought all or most of your books on Amazon.com and care more about good looks than customization, then Shelfari is likely to be what you will prefer.

 

Goodreads vs. aNobii

These two options are social networks designed for interaction with other people.  Neither were able to locate all the books I tried to enter and didn’t handle multiple editions of the same book very well, but they found all of the more recently published books.  Goodreads is stuffed full of information and borders on being cluttered, but currently has the better system for interaction of the community.  The goal of this site seems to be discussions about what you have read and staying a while to digest what you see.  aNobii is a much simpler site, but still has almost all of the functionality of Goodreads.  It is not so focused on interactive discussions, but in making the book collections of other people visible to you so that you can find other books you might want to read.  Both of these tie in closely with facebook and twitter and provide plenty of options for keeping track of what your friends are reading.  The decision between these two sites will likely be down to whether you like a simple interface with no advertisements and a focus on new books you may want to read with aNobii, or do you want interactive discussions about what you are reading and other interactive features like polls and trivia quizzes with Goodreads.  Goodreads seems to have been people's default choice for a while, but aNobii has a distinct look with a lot of customization available that I think people should definitely consider.

 

For my book collection, LibraryThing will clearly be the most useful.  If I want facebook integration it is there, but I can be sure that I will be able to keep track of every book I have, even if it is an old edition.  It is harder for me to chose between Goodreads and aNobii because a social network of readers is not really what I care about right now.  I may try out aNobii to keep track of books currently read and reading goals for the year just because of the simplicity of the interface while keeping a lot of customization options available.

 

If you have a large collection of books, or just like talking about books, I hope this helps in showing you what is available on the web to meet your needs.  If you still can't make up your mind, just take a sample of your books and try out more than one site for a week or two.  The differences will be very apparent as soon as you start logging in and trying to use the systems.

Another blow to gene patents (a good thing)

Thankfully another blow has been made against the ridiculous practice of granting patents on human DNA.

http://bit.ly/drhv04

The Justice Department filed an amicus brief in a case related to patents held by a company called Myriad Genetics that claim ownership of a gene and two mutated forms of that gene which is correlated with the development of breast cancer.  An amicus brief is a document filed by a "friend of the court," someone not directly involved in the case but who has helpful knowledge relevant to the situation.  The DOJ took the position that naturally occurring genes are not patentable.

In the case in question, Myriad Genetics is trying to overturn an earlier ruling that struck down all of their patents related to a genetic test for the likelihood of developing breast cancer at some point in a person's life.  While that decision did go too far because it struck down all of the patents related to the test kit itself, part of the ruling should stand.  There is no unique intellectual property to be found in something that everyone has... DNA for example.  Products of nature are not patentable for this reason.  You cannot pick up a piece of coal and claim a patent on coal.  In the analogy that this DOJ brief makes, you cannot pull a cotton fiber out of a cotton plant and then claim a patent on cotton.  You did not invent the cotton.  Nature invented the cotton, you just picked it.

Myriad had claimed patents on isolated DNA sequences.  They did not invent the sequences, they simply isolated them from a longer strand of DNA.  What this ended up doing was binding anyone else from being able to test for that gene or use the gene in any manner.  If you wanted the breast cancer test, it had to come from Myriad and no one else.  Patents are supposed to spur innovation, not clamp down on it.  With a valid patent, once granted, all details of that patent are made freely available to anyone to inspect.  In recent years, several websites have been put up that let you do just this: search patents and look at their contents.  While you cannot commercially benefit from the information inside, you can use that knowledge to improve upon it, make it better, push forward the state of the art and then make money on your new improvement.  Patents allow you to benefit from your hard work, while still letting others become familiar with the technology so that innovation continues.  How is anyone supposed to push forward the state of the art of a strand of DNA?  DNA is not an invention of any research lab, nor is any segment of DNA.

Patents on human genes have been around for a long time.  It is expensive to isolate specific genes and prove that they have a specific function.  Some companies have claimed that patents on these identified sequences are necessary so they can recoup the money spent on research.  I call that view lazy.  If you want to recoup the money spent then patent a means of targeting the gene.  Patent a means of deactivating, activating, slowing down, speeding up, etc. the action of that gene.  Those are real inventions.  Discoveries, even important ones, are not inventions.

The valid patents in this case is the specific methodology used and physical means to test for the mutated gene in other people.  This is an invention.  This advances the state of medicine and can inspire others to improve upon this test.  The patents on the genes themselves should all be ruled invalid.  That is the position that the Justice Department is taking in this amicus brief.  It is completely rational and clear headed and I believe that all efforts to overturn patents on naturally occurring gene sequences should be supported.

The Wild Trees by Richard Preston

 

The Wild Trees by Richard Preston is another book I picked up a the Green Valley Book Fair, the same place I found Why Birds Sing.  Preston's book is an adventure through the world's oldest and tallest forests, with a big focus on the exploration of giant and coastal redwoods in California (two different species tree).  The narrative spans 20 years beginning in 1987 with Steve Sillet and Michael Taylor, unknown to each other at the time, but each finding the redwoods an irresistable wildnerness in need of exploration.  Taylor had a drive to find the biggest trees.  Sillet had a drive to climb them.  The book ends in 2006 with Sillet and Taylor, now close friends, finding and climbing the world's tallest tree, Hyperion, at just shy of 380 feet high.

 

The majority of the redwood forests have not been public land for very long.  It was only in 1978 that the government bought up most of the land on which the redwoods grow.  Ironically, it was this push to buy the forests and add it to national park lands that caused a lot of clearcuts.  The legislation for aquiring the land would allow the companies to take out any trees laying on the ground.  In response, the companies made sure that as many as possible were laying on the ground.  I'm not sure who learned a lesson there.  Probably no one.  Interspersed throughout the book, historical facts like this are thrown in as relevant to the exploration of the forests we still have.  Thankfully, the author does not drone on and beat a dead environmentalist horse at points like this.  The history is effectively given as a backdrop, not a sob story, actually adding to the book in a meaningful way without making detours into a fantasy wish-list of "what might have been" that journalists almost always fall into.

 

It was amazing to me how much of the redwood forests were and are still unexplored, beyond incomplete and inaccurate surveys by lumber companies.  This facet to the narrative is what I felt I could relate to and a part of the book I really enjoyed.  A lot of my weekends are spent hiking in Virginia's national forests, wilderness areas, and Shenandoah National Park.  Just recently I spent a Saturday afternoon trying to find a trail in St. Mary's Wilderness Area that the map said existed, but the real world refused to show me.  The adventures of Taylor in his search for the tallest trees put me right back into that wilderness area.  I could easily imagine Taylor crawling through all of that brush and trackless land, as the author's description was as close to my own experience in the wilderness as a second hand account could be.

 

The book is also about exploring the canopy of these tall trees.  Sillet became a pioneer of giant tree climbing, learning from others and coming up with his own techniques.  He would climb, study, and even sleep in hammocks at the top of the world's tallest trees.  The adventure in the sky was just as fun or more so to read as the adventure on the ground, sometimes keeping the pages turning like a crafted novel.  This section is from a September evening in 1994 when Sillet and a small climbing team were sleeping in a redwood named Telperion during a rain storm:

 

Steve Sillet couldn't get the Dyerville Giant out of his mind: that pancake of roots tipped up into the air, that crater forty feet across.  He was also concious of the fact that there were very few standing dead redwoods anywhere in the groves.  No rotting skeletons of redwoods standing upright.  The floor of the redwood forest was a maze of fallen trunks.  Now, in Telperion, the meaning of it became very clear: redwoods fall while they're still alive.

 

A heart stopping realization when your hammock is in the top a tree swaying to its breaking point in wind so loud you couldn't hear the guy next to you talking without yelling.

 

These sections of the narrative and the discoveries made in the canopy are what really kept me interested in the book.  The descriptions of what is actually up there in the tops of trees was so interesting that it has had me wondering for several days how I could get up into some of the trees in the forests here:  gardens of ferns, lichen, and moss; soil deep enough for colonies of earthworms, non-flying insects, and salamanders; bonzai-like trees growing in the crooks of branches creating mini-forests within a single top.  Of course, the top of a single redwood can be a huge place to explore:

 

"Adventure Tree is never exactly my first choice for a tree to climb," Antoine commented, as she got her stuff together in the garage. "My first experience climbing that tree was kind of scary."  I asked her what had been scary about Adventure.  "I got lost in it."

 

Some of what I learned just from this book has even made my local hikes more interesting.  I've been able to identify some of the strange lichen I was stomping through as something that originated in the tops of the trees, taking nitrogen from the atmosphere and returning it as fertilizer to the soil as the tree shed braches or as wind and wildlife knocked it from its perch.

 

This book contains many good stories, adventures, and even useful information.  However, the first two-thirds is also filled with grating soap opera type disfunction.  The adventure and exploration is often broken up by the personal life of the explorers.  Most of this I could really have done without.  I got pretty tired of reading about how this guy or that guy didn't have a clue about how his personal life was collapsing and the daytime tv style arguments and bad decisions they would make.  I realize the information is important to getting to know the people he is describing and why they do what they do, but I found the writing in these sections to be extremely poor to the point of almost skipping entire pages from boredom.  The only good thing about the writing and descriptions of these guys' personal lives is that these sections are completely forgettable.  That way they don't hurt much when you think back over what you've read.

 

Though badly written, there is one good lesson to learn from what is told about these guys.  When you dedicate your hightest priorities, affection, and even worship, to something incapable of returning that love (in this case trees), your life will rot from the inside out.  The lives of these two men suffer greatly until they find an actual person to whom they decide to give some of the attention they had always given to the trees.

 

In the end, I think I can better appreciate the forests I have here because of this book.  They seem more interesting in their details and pull the beauty of the wilderness higher into the sky.  Together with my recent fascination with birds, this book has made areas I've hiked in for 10 years a place with new mysteries to explore.

 

Author: Richard Preston

Title: The Wild Trees: A Story of Passion and Daring (Paperback)

Genre: Science, Nature

Year: 2007, paperback 2008

 

These are some great photos of trees and people described in the book, a National Geographic video of measuring the world's tallest tree that features the people in this book, from Hulu an episode of National Geographic Explorer on the redwoods featuring some of the people in this book, and an October 2009 edition of National Geographic Magazine featuring redwoods.

 

 

 

The foolish message of Avatar

I would say beware of spoilers below, but if you've ever heard or read a speech by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Osama bin Laden you already know the climax and ending of the movie Avatar.

For most of the movie I was hoping to be able to brush off the underlying message as just another "nature is nice, people are bad" story put to into an attractive 3D setting. A big bad mining company (strip mining no less) has somehow hired on the Marines to be the muscle for their operation. In true cliché fashion the magic money ore is right below the village of the nice peaceful nature loving natives. The natives don't want to move, the marines just want to shoot people, and so they fight.  Did I mention that the earth by this time has no more green and is a dead planet?  Yeah.

Unfortunately the script of this movie made it all too clear that this predictable story, while present, was not the real point to be communicated to the audience. The unescapable message of this movie is that the US armed forces are the trigger happy tool of corrupt corporations, anxious to invade and destroy peaceful people who just want to be left alone. Schools that are built and infrastructure that is provided are just con jobs to get foreigners to lay down so we don't have to waste bullets. Reality is that we really do deserve all of the aggression that terrorists throw against us as we somehow started it all in the first place by exploiting the innocent populace. Pre-emptive strikes are a facade to cover our attempt to kill the weak natives so they don't have a chance to get back at us for tricking them with our schools while taking their land and stealing the valuable resources buried underneath. But don't be afraid to fight back, natives. In the end, if you are willing to attack the corrupt white people and face certain death, technological superiority and overwhelming firepower will fail because your god will protect you.

Sound familiar? The first place I remember hearing it was from bin Laden. More recently we've heard it from the floor if the United Nations from Ahmadinejad. That is the story of Avatar. Neither "terrorists" nor "pre-emptive strike" is something read between the lines. They are the spoken lines of the movie. All of the corporation and Marine commanders were white people who go out of their way to show no respect for any form of life.  They have nothing but a desire to kill and destroy a beautiful culture so they can make lots of money. Throw in a helping of euthanize-the-handicapped and you have the last 5 minutes of the movie to wrap up your evening. After all, what meaning does life have if you can't climb trees?  This last message tossed in at the end seems to me more destructive than all the rest.

It is sad to me that such a foolish message has been put into such an attractive presentation. The presentation of such a grand setting in 3D was done very well. Until the true point of the movie could be ignored no longer, it was quite fun to watch and I hope other (better) movies follow suit. Avatar will no doubt be a great success at the box office due to the new technology used in shooting the movie, but I hope the underlying message is seen for the garbage that it truly is.