A few years ago, I wrote a piece in this space all about the road signs, bumper stickers and other pieces of priceless wisdom I gathered while out of town on vacation. Similarly, I recently returned from a fall holiday after visiting our nations tiniest state Rhode Island.

While traveling to any number of historic places and centuries old seaports, I once again decided to jot down some of the sage advice both funny and profound I witnessed in old country stores and cafs, public pubs and tiny taverns as well as country inns where I stayed. Heres a sampling of the discoveries I made along the way.

In a rural restaurant somewhere between an obscure village and the city of Newport, a hand-painted poster suggested Be a pineapple. Stand tall, wear a crown and be sweet on the inside. About the same time, on an old truck that looked like it must have seen much better days bore a bumper sticker which read: I wish Morgan Freeman narrated my life.

In a downscale wine shop, a sign declared: You may call it boxed wine we call it Cardboardeaux. Cute, dont you agree? In that same store, another sign really hit home: I have a good heart, but this mouth

Browsing a charming used book store I enjoyed this bit of advice hanging above the counter: Whisper I love you to a butterfly. It will fly to Heaven and deliver your message.

Then in a decades old (my favorite kind) antique shop with an equally old proprietor I noticed this statement which was hand-written on a piece of cardboard richly expressing the owners attitude: Due to unfortunate circumstances, I am awake.

Since Halloween was rapidly approaching, I was reminded of that fact with signs such as If you cant fly with the big girls, stay off the broom. Or how about When the witches go riding and black cats are seen, the moon laughs and whispers, tis near Halloween.

Then no one could miss the massive poster decorating the front window of a candy store cleverly announcing: Trick or Treat, Bag of Sweets, Ghosts are walking down the Street. And in that same shop I laughed when I sighted this posting: Free Flying Lessons BYOB (that would be bring you own broom).

In a hotel laundry, I chuckled when I saw this bit of reasoning: Wouldnt it be great if we could place ourselves in the dryer for 10 minutes and come out wrinkle-free and three sizes smaller?

One of the things I love most about traveling, especially to New England, is the abundance of colonial history to be found almost everywhere. Posted above the front door of a delightful 18th century tavern I noticed this quote: If not in haste, do stop and taste. You bet I did.

And speaking of history, after visiting the birthplace of American painter Gilbert Stuart (1755-1828) whose famous portrait of George Washington has appeared on the dollar bill for decades, I was impressed with the iron marker on the side of the old house: He yearned to portray our greatest citizen. His portraits embody the wisdom and dignity of Washington

So, during my trip I managed to fill my notebook with so many more nuggets of inspiration as well as thoughts about how to live and to behave such as: Be the reason someone smiles today. Or In a world where you can be anything, be kind. And although I dont recall where, I liked this posting: Dream without fear, love without limits.

I suppose it goes without saying, reason and enlightenment are everywhere. All you have to do is look.

Continued here:
Look for the signs of reason, enlightenment | Lifestyle - Herald Zeitung

Complex orchestras werethe rage during the 18th century. It would be nearly two centuries before Camila Cabello's metal beam-melting pop would become the de facto soundtrack to life for anyone with a pulse. Last night (October 12), Cabello gave theEnlightenment Age a taste of spice with her performances of "Cry For Me" and "Easy" onSaturday Night Live.Wearing two beautiful dresses, she contrasted the fashion of thenand yesterday. And it's so much better today.

Can you imagine walking into a bar on an 80-degree day and having to watch dozens of people sweat under thick layers of clothes? Even onstage, Cabello looks like she's wearing a dress that could house three people. In the midst of a crowded bar, she sings "Cry For Me" with conviction. Everyone comes together to perform an elaborate ballroom-like routine that looks hot literally. It's fun for three minutes, but just thinking about seeing this happen back in the day before house fans were a thing can give you a serious bout of anxiety.

Cabello's performance of "Easy" was much simpler. She shed the layers for a stunning white dress and stunned the crows with a vibrant performance backed by a powerful guitar. It was everything you can imagine, and more. Most importantly, it wasn't stuffy.

Check out Cabello's performances up above.

See more here:
Camila Cabello Time-Traveled To The 18th Century In An Enlightenment-Era SNL Performance - MTV.com

In a recent article for Current Affairs, Nathan Robinson describes Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker as the most annoying man in the world because Pinker is the type of person who constantly insists hes Just Being Reasonable while he is actually being extremely goddamn unreasonable. Although Robinsons article was a bit harsh in tone, it gestures at something very real: were in the midst of an epidemic of intellectuals, almost entirely white men, who claim to embody Reason and Rationality while flagrantly and habitually succumbing to the same tribalistic tendencies that they identify as the Ultimate Enemy.

My own experience with Pinker and his ilk exemplifies the problem. Last January, I published an article here at Salon that summarized some extremely detailed criticisms that I wrote of Pinker's book "Enlightenment Now!" More specifically, I examined a few pages in the books Existential Threats chapter, one line or passage at a time, since my own research focuses on existential threats (that is, threats to civilization and humanity) and thus I have some knowledge of the topic.

Although Pinker is widely known, or at least was at one point, as a clear-headed, objective intellectual of the highest caliber, his chapter on existential threats was overflowing with quotes taken out of context, misrepresented ideas, false dichotomies, blatantly inaccurate claims, poor reasoning, dubious citations, condescending straw-man attacks and cockamamie ad hominems. If the chapter had been a first-year undergraduate term paper, and if the professor were an exceptionally easy grader who habitually dished out As for poorly researched papers, Pinkers chapter might have received a C.

(The popularity of poor scholarship seems to be on the rise, incidentally. Just consider the egregious mistakes made by Jared Diamond in his most recent book, "Upheaval.")

What was most telling, though, was the response to my article. For example, the founding editor of Skeptic magazine, Michael Shermer, tweeted this in response to my critique:

Where @RichardDawkins had his fleas (The Dawkins Delusion etc.), @sapinker has his cockroaches (the oleaginous Phil Torres desperate for attention), artfully squashed here:

Shermer then linked to a blog post by Jerry Coyne, which contained a response from Pinker. Before getting to that, though, Shermers tweet is notable for a couple of reasons. First, not only does it contain a personal attack, but the personal attack is overtly uncivil. Thats a bit humorous given that Shermer, as well as Pinker, are famous for accusing progressives, especially those who care about women and people of color, of incivility. For example, in May of this year, Pinker tweeted:

Are you concerned about the growing illiberalism, incivility, intellectual conformity, and repression of debate in today's universities? Join us at the meeting of the society set up to encourage viewpoint diversity and constructive debate on campuses. Ill be giving the keynote.

But Pinker did nothing to call out Shermer for his patently crude, puerile behavior, which has also included calling people he disagrees with (seriously) namby-pamby bedwetters and (seriously) losers. This is perhaps unsurprising when one realizes the Pinker has unwaveringly supported Shermer despite multiple women accusing Shermer of sexual harassment, assault and even rape. To my knowledge, Pinker has made no effort to contact any of Shermers purported victims. And why would he? What does truth have to do with standing by your comrades? Instead, Pinker has repeatedly de-emphasized the issue of rape in society and college campuses by tendentiously pointing to opinions that support his preferred views rather than by honestly examining the totality of evidence, which gives a quite different perspective. All of this is very worrisome, tribalistic behavior. But it gets worse.

Back to the blog that Shermer references. The particular post was published by Jerry Coyne, a biologist at the University of Chicago who has become something of Pinkers bulldog, defending him against any and all criticisms no matter what, with (almost) no questions asked. One of the most recent examples is Coyne coming to Pinkers defense after a picture emerged of Pinker with Jeffrey Epstein, the child sex-trafficker who recently killed himself in a New York jail cell.

Coyne quickly dismissed criticisms of Pinker hanging out with Epstein as mere slander and character assassination, writing that suggestions that Pinker should have known better disturbed me so much since Pinker is a friend whose character I respect. The problem is that Pinker appears in the photo with Epstein and he tweeted out an affidavit defending Epstein after Epstein was convicted of sex crimes, which happened in 2008. That is inexcusable and gross but not to Coyne, whose allegiance is rooted not in evidence but loyalty.

So it should be no surprise that Coyne tore into my critique of the existential threats chapter, inaccurately calling it a hit piece. Indeed, by any reasonable account, the article was a substantive critique of shoddy scholarship. In fact, I was in touch with four scholars or writers whose work Pinker misrepresents within just a few pages of the chapter. All of them were unhappy with the quality of Pinkers work, so its not like this was just me being a grump.

For example, the political economist Eric Zency, whom Pinker incorrectly describes as an engineer, was livid that Pinker had used a line from one of his papers to mean the exact opposite of what Zency had intended. In an email to me about Pinkers misuse of his quote, Zency remarked, How this guy managed to become a public intellectual in fields so far removed from his expertise is something to wonder at. I agree.

Pinker also wrote a response to my critique, but it only further justifies the view that Pinker is or has become, sadly an ideologue who cant acknowledge when hes wrong. Just consider that the second sentence of his response makes an ad hominem claim that Im trying to make a career out of warning people about the existential threat that AI [i.e., artificial intelligence] poses to humanity. Since ['Enlightenment Now'] evaluates and dismisses that threat, it poses an existential threat to Phil Torress career.

This is obvious nonsense. First of all, the same thing could be said about Pinker: Since his career these days is based on claiming that things have been going quite well for humanity, convincing people that AI poses an existential threat itself could be seen as an existential threat to Pinkers reputation. How Pinker and Coyne both missed this obvious flaw suggests that they werent wearing their critical-thinking hats. The aim of Pinkers comment was to discredit a critique without having to engage with its substance.

Once again, I contacted four scholars or writers who affirmed errors in a small handful of pages in Pinkers chapter. I have no doubt that if someone were to find the same problems in a chapter written by, say, Reza Aslan or Linda Sarsour, both of whom are loathed by the Pinker-Coyne crew, theyd be hailing the critique as proof that Aslan and Sarsour are intellectual frauds.

Pinker then defended one of his most flagrant mistakes: classifying a computer scientist at UC Berkeley, Stuart Russell, as someone who isnt worried about AI. The exact opposite is true! Pinker then doubled down, insisting that his description of Russell was accurate, even though Russell himself told me in an email, which I quote in my article, that hed seen this [mention in Pinker's book] and I agree its an incorrect characterization. So, you have Pinker on one side refusing to acknowledge that he incorrectly characterized a person who says he has been incorrectly characterized. This led Julia Galef, a notable effective altruist who hosts the Rationally Speaking podcast and has knowledge of the relevant issues, to tweet:

Im frustrated Steven Pinker wont admit an error in Enlightenment Now.Summary:- Pinker names Stuart Russell as an expert whos skeptical of AI risk- Someone points out that's exactly backwards; Russell is one of the main experts warning about AI risk- Pinker doubles down

She concludes that the point is its bad that Pinker got this fact wrong and wont admit it. This encapsulates the central problem: Pinker and his ilk dont acknowledge errors when they make them; they are ideologues rather than truth-seekers, willing to bend the facts, launch personal attacks and censor critics to win debates. At exactly the moment in history when we need true intellectual leadership, people who exemplify intellectual honesty and integrity, the most, we get stubborn tribespeople.

But the problem is hardly confined to those mentioned above: Shermer, Coyne and Pinker. Consider another Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) luminary, Sam Harris, one of the most famous atheists in the world because of his book "The End of Faith." Previously, I never had any reason to believe that Harris was racist but I do now. He has spent a massive amount of time and energy defending Charles Murray, author of "The Bell Curve," which argues that black people are inherently inferior to white people.

Over and over again, ad nauseam, Harris has used his large platform to suggest that Murray isnt a junk scientist peddling cowardly racist memes, but someone whos been victimized by those anti-truth progressives. Even more, Harris apparently believes Murrays claim that blacks are genetically dumber than whites. In a podcast with Josh Zepps, Harris opines the following with a wholly unjustified degree of epistemic confidence:

As bad luck would have it, but as youd absolutely predict on the basis of just sheer biology, different populations of people, different racial groups, different ethnicities, different groups of people who have been historically isolated from one another geographically, test differently in terms of their average on this measure of cognitive function. So if youre gonna give the Japanese and the Ashkenazi Jews, and African Americans, and Hawaiians youre gonna take populations who differ genetically and we know they differed genetically, thats not debatable and you give them IQ tests, it would be a miracle if every single population had the same mean IQ. And African Americans come out about a standard deviation lower than white Americans. A standard deviation for IQ is about 15 points. So, if its normed to the general population, predominantly white population for an average of 100, the average in the African American community has been around 85.

In other words: black people are dumber than white people. Why? Because of genetic evolution, meaning that IQ is in the genes and the genes of white people are, well, just plain better. What a bold stance, especially amid the ongoing rise of white nationalism in the U.S. and Europe!

In all seriousness, the irresponsibility of being a public intellectual with a large following and spouting unsupported claims with the sort of certainty you might expect from someone reciting the second law of thermodynamics is shocking. If Pinker is annoying, as Robinson claims, then Harris is intolerably obnoxious, constantly demeaning people for not being Rational and Reasonable while simultaneously making anintellectual fool of himself with claims like those above.

Other examples could be adduced, but I dont have an extra 20,000 words to spare. The point is that the entire IDW movement is annoying. Its really, really annoying its champions misrepresent positions without their (mostly white male) audience knowing, and then proceed to embarrass the opposition. They embrace unsupported claims when it suits their narrative. They facilely dismiss good critiques as hit jobs and level ad hominem attacks to undercut criticism. And they refuse they will always refuse, its what overconfident white men do to admit making mistakes when theyre obviously wrong. I am annoyed, like Robinson, mostly because I expected so much better from the most popular intellectuals of our time.

Read more:
Steven Pinker, Sam Harris and the epidemic of annoying white male intellectuals - Salon

Many Americans take for granted, even idealize, the ideal of personal autonomy: they call it independence, self-sufficiency, self-reliance, not being a burden, not taking hand-outs, taking care of their own, standing on their own two feet, and freedom. The American myth is that autonomy is achievable and that its the most honorable lifestyle there is. Many Americans unconsciously accept that people are by nature autonomous individuals. But autonomy is a myth, not a reality.

Autonomists think that people can live entirely by the fruits of their own efforts, not relying on outside people or society. They imagine that they can interact with people solely as they choose, entering into relationships and leaving them whenever they want to, not being a burden to them or having them be a burden in return. They believe that they are entirely in control of their thoughts and choices, that they direct their wills, and that their true moral guidance comes from their own hearts.

This mythology is not a new thing for most (though not all) Americans. To some extent our geography has shaped it. Historically weve had the sense that theres always new land out there, waiting to be subdued, where men are men and women are tired. Theres room never to have to be part of a neighborhood. When those mythic Americans, the pioneers, saw the chimney smoke of a new neighbor on the horizon, they could move farther out and wrest an independent living from the land, with no revenuers or government agents breathing down their necks. Of course this is no longer true, if it ever was, but the mythology of autonomy remains with Americans today.

Morrison Residence, Nebraska. Library of Congress.

Philosophy has also shaped our mythology. Many of the earliest and most influential European settlers arrived during the intellectual ferment of the Enlightenment. Enlightenment philosophers held, and the common people absorbed, the ideas that there was not a personal god, that mankind was perfectible by its own efforts, and that through reason and science we could break the bonds of oppressive religious, governmental, and personal relationships. In fact, some of the philosophers believed that the interdependence of people was what created evil in the world, that perfectly detached people would be perfectly good. Enlightenment philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau even abandoned his own (illegitimate) child to be raised in a convent, feeling that the smothering interdependence of father and son would distort the childs psyche and prevent his growing up free. (Whose freedom was Rousseau concerned with?)

Rousseau. Library of Congress.

We tend to forget that there was always tension in America between individualistic and collective ways of thinking, between mountain men and barn raising, between lighting out for the frontier and being part of an established community. In the memory of autonomists, the American Revolution seemed to reinforce the convictions that independence and self-determination were the supreme good and were achievable by our own efforts. According to the mythology, the Civil War, too, was fought over the issue of independence of states rights or personal independence from slavery. Although the Civil War might more properly be seen as a contest of the cooperative life of the Northern towns versus the so-called autonomous life of the Southern landowner, in which the Northern way of cooperation won, nonetheless autonomists see the war as a struggle for personal freedom. And so the myth of self-reliance continues until today.

But no matter how they boast, no one is living the autonomous life that they idealize. Even the few who look like theyre self-sufficient really arent. The survivalist hunts his own meat and tans the hide, but did he smelt the ore to make his guns and traps? Homesteaders raise both food and buildings, but they didnt plant the trees that they cut down for lumber, nor did they mine the iron for the nails. In fact, they didnt give the trees the power to grow or place the raw materials in the earth. They we all rely on provisions from outside ourselves for life.

Cabin in Montana. Library of Congress.

Autonomists typically claim that theyve worked for all they have, that theyve never taken a hand-out from anyone, but they arent telling the strict truth. They may have started their own business, but they didnt make the economy or customers or infrastructure that made the business possible. They didnt create and raise and educate the human capital that keeps their business running. And ironically, not only do they rely on others for their success, but others rely on them to provide something they need and pay the autonomists money that they need to maintain their business. Even autonomists are part of a web of giving and receiving, not an isolated entity.

One barrier that autonomists erect to preserve their illusion of autonomy is money. If I pay you, I dont have an interdependent relationship with you. You arent another person, youre an employee, or a nursing home attendant, or a shopkeeper. I can pay you to look after me when I want you to and go away when I dont, and then well never be a burden to each other. But paying for food, education, care, services, and goods doesnt make people autonomous. It just moves the relationship they have with the providers of goods and services a little farther away.

Even our thoughts are not autonomous. All people are products of their culture, time, and place. Consider Ralph Waldo Emerson, an undeservedly popular American essayist and contemporary of Henry David Thoreau, the ultimate guru of autonomy. In his essay Self-Reliance, Emerson writes, Whoso would be a man must be a nonconformist. He who would gather immortal palms must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of our own mind. Absolve you to yourself, and you shall have the suffrage of the world. In other words, dont let anyone or anything affect your thinking, but rely only on yourself. The big joke is that now, 150 years later, graduate students are writing dissertations on where Emerson got his ideas, because they understand, if he didnt, that no one develops in a vacuum.

Ralph Waldo Emerson. Library of Congress.

We are fooling ourselves if we think that individual independence is the mark of personal and evolutionary success. We evolved not by the Randian competition of individuals but by the development of interdependent social networks. Our most extraordinary evolved trait makes that clear: language. If we were meant to be autonomists, we would look like sabertooth tigers or sharks; instead, we are small and weak on our own, but with the means for complex cooperation and community, we have become the intelligent, flexible species we are today. Its time to debunk this mythology of autonomy and consider the nature of our true relationships with the world and each other.

Teaser photo credit: Our manifest destiny. Library of Congress.

Read the original here:
The Myth of Autonomy - Resilience

The International Culinary Center (ICC) is honored to announce the return of Korean Temple Food Guru and Cookbook Author, Wookwan, following her first successful cooking class in 2018 at the New York City culinary school. Wookwan will travel from Korea to introduce the techniques of temple cuisine to a global audience of ICC's current Professional Culinary and Pastry Arts students, bringing with her the first-of-its kind English-language cookbook on temple food, Wookwan's Korean Temple Food: The Road to the Taste of Enlightenment.

During this visit, Wookwan will share the techniques, beauty and benefits of temple cuisine with aspiring chefs and future leaders of the culinary industry through a 30-minute lecture and 1.5 hour hands-on cooking class. Through this class, ICC students will discover the excellence of Korea's fermentation techniques, rooted in over 1700 years of history, and understand how to apply the practice to their culinary education. After the hands-on cooking session, students will have the opportunity to enjoy the delicious cuisine through a tasting and review of the traditional dishes prepared.

Dishes prepared in the cooking class will include:

- Fermented Barley Chili Paste

- Chili Paste Pancake with Corn

- Spinach Porridge with Ginkgo Nut and Pine Nut

In addition, Wookwan will prepare four more dishes to taste:

- Sticky Rice Wrapped in Lotus Leaf

- Pickled Cucumber

- Kelp Crisps with Sticky Rice

- Lotus Snack

Through this partnership, the International Culinary Center and Wookwan are proud to recognize the importance of ingredients and respecting where they come from, as well as promoting global cooking techniques-key principles in the teachings of both ICC and Wookwan.

About the International Culinary Center:Founded by the late Dorothy Cann Hamilton as The French Culinary InstituteTM in 1984, the International Culinary Center (ICC) is a global leader in professional culinary, pastry and wine education in New York City with graduates from more than 90 countries. The renowned six-month Total ImmersionSM program has produced such talents as Bobby Flay, David Chang, Dan Barber, Joshua Skenes, Christina Tosi and 15,000 more under the guidance of deans including Jacques Ppin and Jacques Torres. ICC's mission is to train the next generation of culinary leaders and innovators, providing students with the credentials, confidence and connections to chart a successful career anywhere in the world.

About Wookwan, Korean Temple Food Guru and Cookbook Author:Born in Korea, Wookwan entered the Yaksusa temple in the Gwanak Mountains under the teaching of the Venerable Jeonghwa in 1988 to become a Buddhist nun. As a certified master of Korean temple food and the Director of the Mahayeon Temple Food Cultural Center in Korea, she not only shared the techniques of temple food in her home country, but has also been invited to share the beauty of temple cuisine at workshops and festivals all over the world including New York, London, Madrid, and Hong Kong. With her mindful approach to food as a spiritual practice, Wookwan believes that all of the varied flavors of nature come together to become the taste of enlightenment. To share this with the world, Wookwan continually studies and creates recipes that emphasize the nourishment of mind, body, and soul.

HAMILTON Will Hold A Fan Performance on October 31 With All Tickets Available For $10 Via Lottery For the second year in a row, Hamilton will host a special fan performance on Thursday, October 31 at the Richard Rodgers Theatre on Broadway, with al... (read more)

Breaking: Ethan Slater, Gavin Lee & More Will Reunite to Film SPONGEBOB for Nickelodeon Following a critically lauded run on Broadway, members of the original award-winning Broadway company of The SpongeBob Musical: Live On Stage! will re... (read more)

Quiz: Which Broadway Show About Gods Are You? Bring on the monsters because The Lightning Thief: The Percy Jackson Musicalis officially open on Broadway! We're celebrating Camp Halfblood coming t... (read more)

MOULIN ROUGE To Head To The West End in 2021 The blockbuster Broadway hit, Moulin Rouge, will be heading to the West End in 2021!... (read more)

BWW Photo Exclusive: Adam Pascal Stars In THE MUSIC MAN At 5-Star Theatricals Tony nominee Adam Pascal stars as Professor Harold Hill in the first show of the 5-Star Theattricals2019-2020 season, THE MUSIC MAN.... (read more)

Continued here:
Korean Temple Cuisine Is Coming To NYC - Broadway World

Column: Breaker of Chains

Stay in line. Ask questions. Raise your hand. Listen to your superiors. Follow directions. Be quiet. Keep your head down.

When I think of bad advice, this is what I think of.

Make a safe decision. Be easygoing. Get on the grind. This advice is even worse.

When you are a kid, what do you do? You play, have friends and enjoy life, but there is always one thing that every kid truly hates.

This is, of course, school. Many children, especially in the U.S., grow up knowingly hating school. Why?

Why do so many of us hate the idea of obtaining new knowledge? I believe this dread stems from a multi-rooted cause. To start, school is run very similarly to prison when you think about it.

You wake up and go to school early. The day is segmented off into periods of time in which you are told specifically what to do during each. One has to ask permission to relieve bodily functions. You are only allowed to speak when spoken to.

This regimented, strict and almost authoritarian way of educating begs the question: What kind of people does it produce? There will always be gifted and talented people who come out of school, obviously, but what about other people?

People who perhaps had gifts and talents that, if properly nurtured in a non-dictatorship like environment, might have thrived.

It is not only the schools fault. Society, as previously mentioned, both directly and indirectly, gives awful advice. We are told from a young age to always work hard so that you may get a good job in the future. A question so often asked is: What do you want to be when you grow up?

This ensures that children are looking forward to getting an acceptable and successful" job. If a child were to answer they do not know, or even worse, do not want to be anything, this would not be considered an acceptable answer.

Why are children being asked to think about what they want to be when they grow up instead of what games they like to play? How is a 6-year-old being held to that standard of success? How successful can a 6-year-old be?

Fast forward a bit, when you are in high school and college, you are encouraged to build your resume. People do not work on projects and become part of clubs for personal enlightenment, but rather, they do it to raise their score in a game called get a job.

If we keep telling and reinforcing the idea of constant kissing up, then what will America, let alone the world, be filled with?

I always used to think that in America, you can be anything. Now, I think in America you can be anything that someone else approves you to be.

I think it is more pivotal to find oneself than kiss up. Instead of asking What do you want to be when you grow up?, we should ask, What is your passion?.

I think schools should start emphasizing the idea of finding your passion rather than the idea of hall passes and building your resume.

Society should start to believe in the idea of personal enlightenment rather than rigid, robotic following. If we do not, no problems will be solved and no innovations will be created.

The stagnation of thought is something not only deep-rooted in school, but also it is ingrained in America.

Teachers need to start emphasizing unique thinking over test studying. Colleges should encourage innovation over new classes to take so that you can get hired. Parents should push their kids to read a book for fun, rather than for a class.

Perhaps we should start thinking about what we are told rather than doing what we are told.

Zachary Smolder is a School of Engineering freshman, pursuing a degree in mechanical engineering. His column, "Breaker of Chains," runs on alternate Fridays.

___________________________________________________________________________

*Columns,cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.

YOUR VOICE|The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Due to space limitations in our print newspaper, letters to the editor must not exceed 500 words. Guest columns and commentaries must be between 700 and 850 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com by 4 p.m. to be considered for the following days publication. Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Targum.

Here is the original post:
SMOLDER: Independent thinking critical aspect of finding your passions - RU Daily Targum

Posted on October 19, 2019 by Sonoma Valley Sun

Alchemy, the current exhibition at Arts Guild of Sonoma, displays art from the finalists who submitted works to the third annual National Juried Competition; the Call For Artists was open to anyone in the country. Through the subject of alchemy, artists were invited to express their dreams, desires, mysteries, symbols, creativity, and enlightenment.

The public is invited to view a wide array of the finalists art styles in the gallery at 140 E. Napa St. The show is up through November 3.

The shows juror was Jenny Gheith of the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, who had the daunting task of blind-selecting 68 works from 143 submissions. The Arts Guild applauds some of its own member artists as well as other Sonoma artists who are among the finalists in this competition.

The Best of Show honor was awarded to Petaluma resident Ruby Newman for her painting Entwined Embrace, which explores the deepest meaning of alchemy, that of two souls combining in perfect harmony.

Along with being a fine arts painter, Ruby Newman has worked on several wonderful public art projects. These include murals and overseeing the restoration of the 1914 Golden Gate Park carousel, for which she personally hand-painted the 62 wooden menagerie figures, decorative panels, and masks. She also created all the decorative painting for the exterior and interior of old St. Vincents Church in Petaluma. A long-term member of the Arts Guild, she shows her art in the gallery every month.

Gallery hours are Wednesday through Monday, 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. through November 3.

Jackie Lee | Sun Fine Arts

Read this article:
The magical process of creation and transformation Sonoma Sun | Sonoma, CA - Sonoma Valley Sun

We knew that there were going to be a bunch of new sets for Magic: The Gathering, and in their weekly live stream, we found out from Wizards of the Coast that the two upcoming sets are Theros: Beyond Death and Ikoria: Lair of Behemoths.The sets will be released on January 24, 2020 and April 24, 2020, respectively. Each will also have a pre-release event a week prior to its official release date, which has become the new standard for just about every Magic: The Gathering set. Plus, itll probably be on Arena around that time.

In addition to that news, coming out November 16 there will be new Game Night decks.Game Night is an out-of-the-box multiplayer experience that has five decks playable out of the box, which includes a mix of reprints and five new cards. Its perfect for new players in a group who want to have competitive, evenly powered decks out of the box.

Those new cards coming out withGames Night are:

Calculating Lich (4){B}{B}

CreatureZombie Wizard

Menace

Whenever a creature attacks one of your opponents, that player loses 1 life.

We share a common enemy. Does that not make us friends?

5/5

Illustrated by Antonio Jos Manzanedo

Sphinx of Enlightenment(4){U}{U}

CreatureSphinx

Flying

When Sphinx of Enlightenment enters the battlefield, target opponent draws a card you draw three cards.

I would be a fool if I taught you everything I know.

5/5

Illustrated by: Johan Grenier

Highcliff Felidar (5){W}{W}

CreatureCat Beast

Vigilance

When Highcliff Felidar enters the battlefield for each opponent, choose a creature with the greatest power among creatures that plater controls. Destroy those creatures.

Once the felidar has marked you as prey, theres no point in running.

5/5

Illustrated by Kimonas Theodossiou

Fiendish Duo(4){R}{R}{R}

CreatureDevil

First strike

If a source would deal damage to an opponent, it deals double that damage to that player instead.

Half the size, double the mayhem

5/5

Illustrated by Lucas Graceland

Earthshaker Giant (4){G}{G}

CreatureGiant Druid

Trample

When Earthshaker Giant enters the battlefield, other creatures you control get +3/+3 and gain trample until end of turn.

Come, my wild children. Lets give the interlopers a woodland welcome.

6/6

Illustrated by Milivoj eran

Other sets that will release in 2020, such as Core 2021 and Zendikar Rising, do not currently have release dates attached, but we do know that soon emerging from the Magic world will be the upcoming War of the Spark: Forsaken book. Its the follow up to the New York Times bestseller War of Spark: Ravnica, publishing on November 12 and written by Greg Weisman ofGargoyles andYoung Justicefame.

(via Comicbook.com, image: Wizards of the Coast)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.

Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com

Read more:
Next Two 'Magic: The Gathering' Sets Announced For 2020 - The Mary Sue

Little, Brown, 18.99

Review by Teddy Jamieson

THE Gourock Bay Hotel. 1992. Suede, the best new band in Britain according to the Melody Maker (a popular weekly music newspaper of the time, Milord), have just finished playing their libidinous, circling song Pantomime Horse in front of a small, surly crowd in a back room. As the desultory clapping dies away and the band ready themselves to launch into their next song, a gruff Glaswegian voice breaks the silence with a notably withering review. You effete southern wankers!

Its a moment remembered with some amusement by Suedes front man Brett Anderson in his new memoir, Afternoons With The Blinds Drawn. In truth, Suede were always a Marmite band. Most of that was down to Anderson, thanks to his penchant for wearing womens blouses, being playfully androgynous, owning a falsetto voice that irritated as many as it thrilled and his very obvious belief attitude that his band were better than anyone elses (to be fair, an attitude that you would find in any band of the time; it was generally accepted to be part of the job description).

What some saw as effete, others however (and, yes, my hand is raised at this point) believed thrillingly transgressive. Between grunge and techno, Suede were the first glittering, narcotic vision of what would come to be called Britpop. Id always had a desire to pollute the mainstream with something poisonous, Anderson writes at one point.

Others would wipe away the mascara, ditch the sexual ambiguity and become huge as a result. But for a moment in the early nineties Suede offered a vision of what a British band could be; dark, sexual, provocative, effete if you will.

In the years that followed they were both embraced and reviled by the music press, had hits, fell out, took too many drugs, lost members, made more records, toured constantly, carried on long after they really needed to, split up and then years later got back together again.

Its a familiar story. Perhaps too familiar for Anderson. In the introduction to his first book, Coal Black Mornings, Suedes front man defended its concentration on the pre-history of the band. The very last thing I wanted to write was the usual 'coke and gold discs' memoir, he wrote then.

Well, he has now. Thats exactly what Afternoons With The Blinds Drawn is; an account of Suedes salad years and their wilting aftermath. At times it feels like he is faintly appalled that he has done so. The resulting memoir is curious. Its both revealing and reticent. He is both very honest and also, at times, deeply evasive. The fall-out with fellow band member Bernard Butler, Suedes musical driving force, during the making of their dark, murky, swirling masterpiece Dog Man Star, to take one example, feels like it happens offstage (partly perhaps because by the end they couldnt bear to be in the same room at the same time).

In fact, the whole book has a hermetic sealed-in quality to it; all dust motes and drizzle and interior voice. Reading it is a bit like being inside a Suede song itself. Which is maybe a mark of the strength of Andersons vision. (At times, too, his prose can be rather arch and affected, but that in itself is also very Brett.)

That said, the books insularity is as much a strength as a weakness. For a start, it offers a corrective to the bumptious laddishness that characterises many Britpop memoirs. (Shall we call it the Gallagher option?) But then Suede always had more in common with Massive Attack and Tricky in their world view than Oasis and Blur at their most music hall.

And Andersons honest enough about himself, painting a picture of a young man dressed in nothing but a Moroccan robe, reading William Blake and Aleister Crowley, and taking too many chemicals. A damaged, paranoid figure, wired and isolated, edgy and obsessed and lost within a strange fantasy landscape, a simulacrum of life.

In a way the books main problem is that coke and gold discs issue. How do you make the familiar rise-and-fall music narrative fresh? Im not sure Anderson totally manages it, to be honest. As he trawls through the creation of various B sides you do feel this is great for the fans but not for the general reader.

And yet there is much to cherish here. Anderson is an adroit chronicler of rented London flats. The pages reek of stale cigarette ash, rising damp and mouldy grouting. From Notting Hill to North Kensington to Paddington and on to Knightsbridge, Anderson and his best mate Alan smoke and scheme and debauch themselves across the city. At one point, reading his description of yet another nicotine-coloured flat, I found myself fantasising about pitching Channel 4 an anti-aspirational TV pilot called Bedsitterland, hosted by Anderson and, say, Marc Almond, which would celebrate the drying, browning artichokes and the torn Rizla packets rather than Eames furniture and all-mod-cons kitchens.

Andersons choice of interior decoration doesnt notably improve in the wake of Suede becoming a chart band. But in every other sphere success proves an accelerant. By this point in my career, he writes in the wake of the bands best-selling third album, Coming Up, I think that my ego was, to say the least, burgeoning.

Ego and excess. To his credit, Anderson never revels in the drugs stories here. There are no blow-by-blow nor snort-by-snort breakdowns. Suffice to say, its clear that its happening, and it seems anything but glamorous. Afternoons with the blinds drawn sums it up. This dissolution reaches a climax towards the end of the book that, thankfully, just falls short of disaster. But only just. The older Anderson now has little time for the idea that excess is an aid to creativity.

Inevitably, the book offers the singers own nuanced take on pop and success. He is still in love with the former but found the latter disorientating. In pop music everyone becomes a cartoon, Anderson suggests. The problem comes when that cartoon persona develops a separate life to the person its attached to. Especially when the person is complicit in its creation.

Years of poverty and struggle and failure had made me hungry for any scraps of success that were thrown my way, Anderson admits, and in my frenzy to feed I think I was often far too willing to indulge their silly fantasies and wear the costume that was so carefully stitched for me despite the fact that it increasingly seemed ill-fitting.

Inevitably it becomes too heavy to wear anymore. Afternoons With The Blinds Drawn ends backstage at the Graham Norton Show with Anderson finally admitting: I cant do this anymore, to his fellow bandmates and friends.

All bands, Anderson suggests, follow the same career arc. The same points are plotted along the way, he suggests, like the Stations of the Cross; struggle, excess, disintegration and if youre lucky enlightenment.

This is a book written from a position of enlightenment. That enlightenment might also be the reason that Anderson doesnt ever fully pull back the curtain on his younger self. He is protecting the innocent. And the guilty. Its a mark of decency; a mark which his younger, callow, attitudinal self might not have recognised.

But we are given enough of a glimpse to hope that there might be a third volume, one that covers his solo years, his rapprochement with Bernard Butler and the records they made together as The Tears, and finally, in recent years, the rebirth of Suede which has given the band a thrillingly fierce third act. Turns out effete is the last thing they are.

See more here:
Review: Brett Anderson on Suede's "coke and gold discs" years - HeraldScotland

By Andrew Cohen

In India it is often said, Guru is God. But in the complex and ever-evolving world of the 21st century, can we still hold on to such beliefs? As Indian culture slowly makes the journey from the traditional, to the modern and postmodern era, can these ancient beliefs survive intact, untouched by the piercing lens of cultural evolution, the revelations of modern science and the profound insights about human nature that have come from western psychology?

Indeed, even in the land that gave birth to such remarkable spiritual geniuses as the Buddha, Adi Shankara, Sri Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi and Sri Aurobindo, can we still hold on to the notion that these profoundly enlightened masters were therefore, inevitably perfected human beings?

Guru is God implies that a true guru is perfect in all ways. This means that the physical form of body, mind and personality of the realised one is always an expression of manifest perfection. Does the profound gift of spiritual enlightenment inherently mean that the receiver of that gift is always perfect in all ways?

I dont think so. And that is because anything that is born, that has a beginning in time and that will eventually die, is inherently imperfect.But unmanifest absolute spirit or Brahmn is perfect because it has never been born and has never entered the stream of time and therefore is ever untouched by anything that has ever happened in time.

The man who has become a true guru, a true master, has a personality that has become radically transformed, now mysteriously and powerfully animated by the immortal consciousness of Brahmn. That awakened consciousness expresses itself as the guru principle. This principle has the power to awaken earnest seekers directly to the consciousness of Brahmn.

But if the guru-principle itself is to survive the unstoppable, dynamic movement of cultural evolution into the future, then it needs to be remodeled. The authority and power of the guru need to be downscaled in such a way as to emphasise that the human persona of the realiser is always inherently relative and in that, will always be imperfect. This somehow needs to be done while still finding a way to deeply honour that the manifestation of the guru-principle, when fully activated, reveals an absolute metaphysical source and uniquely reflects the brightness and brilliance of that source in all its overwhelming glory.

In my work as guru and spiritual teacher today, my own way to honour this guideline is to always make the effort to clearly distinguish between man and master. There is no way around the fact that the master always expresses himself through a relative personality structure, and his expression of the enlightened state is therefore always on the one hand limited, coloured and shaped by the condition of the body-mind of man, with his gifts and flaws alike; but on the other hand, he simultaneously transmits theuncorrupted purity and perfection of an authentic teacher.

Considering the guru perfect in all ways is confusing transcendental reality with manifest existence. Only at itsdeepest sourcethe initial impulse of spiritual transmission is inherently pure and untainted by the deficiencies of this world.

An authentic master, because he is rooted in that source, is able to transmit a powerful measure of this inherent purity to his students and to this day, this remains the most valuable aspect of the guru principle.

Follow Andrew Cohen at speakingtree.in

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

Read the original:
Evolution of the guru principle - Economic Times