With over 64percentof Britons looking at different and quick ways to trim down and become slimmer its always hard to decide what diet plan to trust.But lookingto those who have already gone through the transformation could be a great way to find a diet that is successful and it can also give you the boost of encouragement to get you started. Reddit user ExNihi10, has recordedanincredible 15st 6lb weight loss transformation online for everyone to keep track of.

Starting with a simple change in lifestyle, ExNihi10 followed a low 20g daily carb Ketofood planand incorporated light exercise into his daily routine to achieve a fantastic, life-changing transformation in one year.

With a starting weight of 25st 7lb, ExNihi10 managed to transform into a whole new, healthier person with an end weight of 9st 3lb.

In the post, The Reddit user explained that it was a low carb diet plan and change in lifestyle that helped him change his life for the better.

He said: On the 27 September [2018] I decided to change my life for thebetter.

I was shown the Keto way and it was difficult at first but the best lifestyle change Ive ever made!

I went from size 44 jeans that were [too] tight to currently wearing a loose size34.

"By changing my [work] shift pattern, getting on the Keto diet plan and incorporating walking into my dailyroutine, Ihave changed my life for thebetter.

Several other Reddit users commented on ExNihi10s progress with one claiming [He] looks like a different person, awesome progress!

What is the Keto diet?

The Keto, or also known as the Ketogenic Diet, is a low-carb, high-fat diet that shares many similarities with the Atkins and other low-carb diets.

The Keto diet is an eating plan that drives your body into ketosis, a state where the body uses fat as a primary fuel source (instead of carbohydrates), says Stacy Mattinson, a motivational nutrition guru and healthy lifestyle blogger.

Many on the plan will eat less than 25 grams net carbs a day in order for their body to enter the fat burning ketosis state.

It is thought that once the body has reached ketosis,it burnsmore fat andhelpspeople get in shape much quicker.

On the plan the main foods you should be eatinginclude meat,fatty fish, eggs, butter and cream, cheese, nuts and seeds, healthy oils (such as extra virgin olive oil, coconut and avocado oil), avocados and low-carb veggies.

User ExNihi10stated that: "Determination and resilience is what will bring you success, [so] keepgoing.

"It's difficult at times, but worth it in the end."

More:
Keto weight loss: Man drops 15 stone in a year with a change in diet - what did he do? - Express

Heart attack happens when a blockage in your coronary artery causes part of a persons heart muscle to be starved of blood and oxygen. It requires immediate medical attention to limit the amount of permanent damage to a persons heart muscle. Fortunately, precautionary measures can be taken to reduce the likelihood of a heart attack happening in the first place. New results presented at a meeting of the North American Menopause Society (NAMS) in Chicago, make a strong case for taking fish oil pills.

Scientists today have revealed that taking fish oil pills halves the risk of dying from a heart attacks.

Significantly, it slashes the risk of suffering one by almost a third, said Dr JoAnn Manson.

The findings are based on a study of 25,871 over 50s in the US who were tracked for an average of more than five years.

Those taking the supplements were 50 per cent less likely to die from a heart attack over the follow up period.

They were also 28 per cent less likely to have one.

The Vitamin D and Omega-3 Trial (VITAL) found the fish oil pills were particularly effective for people who do not regularly eat fish.

It also found those who took vitamin D supplements slashed their risk of dying from cancer by up to a quarter.

Lead author Dr Manson, of Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, said: "Whether vitamin D or omega-3 supplementation is beneficial for the prevention of cancer or cardiovascular disease (CVD) in general populations is a subject of ongoing debate.

"VITAL was designed to fill these knowledge gaps."

Fish oil pills were "associated with significant reductions" in total and fatal heart attacks of 50 and 28 per cent respectively, she said.

Dr Manson added: "Vitamin D was associated with a suggestive 17 per cent reduction in

cancer mortality, which strengthened to a statistically significant 25 per cent reduction in analyses excluding early follow-up."

However, this only applied to participants of normal weight with a BMI (body mass index) below 25 - and not in those who were overweight or obese.

Dr Manson said: "The pattern of findings suggests a complex balance of benefits and risks for each intervention.

"Additional research is needed to determine which individuals may be most likely to derive a net benefit from these supplements.

The participants were randomly assigned to take one gram of fish oil or 2,000 IUs (International Units) of vitamin D daily, or a placebo.

According to the NHS, the three main ways to prevent a heart attack are:

To lower blood pressure, the NHS recommends staying active: Regular exercise can also help you lose weight, which will help lower your blood pressure.

Find out the key symptoms of a heart attack here.

Go here to see the original:
Heart attack: Taking this supplement could stave off the life-threatening condition - Express

Become an alchemist. Transmute base metal into gold, suffering into consciousness, disaster into enlightenment.Eckhart Tolle

Bo may know football, but Heather Younger knows adversity. Family adversity. Professional adversity. Life adversity.

In her TEDxColoradoSprings talk, Transforming Adversity into Opportunity, she takes us on an intimate and personal journey filled with failure, doubt, self-reflection, and ultimately triumph through transformation.

It didnt have to be this way, though. Things could have turned out much, much worse. Heres the thing. Even with the circumstances and facts remaining exactly the same, Heather could have slid into resentment and failure. How so?

The adversity she encountered contained specific challenges like familial racism and being laid off, but it doesnt matter if your challenges look and feel different. The approach she reveals that helped her overcome is based on a universal principle that will work for anyone living through challenges, whatever their nature. Heather says it best.

What I learned from that experience is that rather than being a barrier to my success, my adversities and challenges can actually help me achieve great things.Heather Younger, J.D.

Here is my summary of her approach. To get the full nuances, Id recommend watching her TEDx talk or even better, reach out to Heather yourself. Shes very approachable!

Adversity Alchemy, by Heather Younger, J.D.

I know this works.

Not just because Ive met and know Heather, but also because Ive lived this principle in my Aikido training. One day I was doing a technique and attempting to pin a senior instructor when he resisted just a teeny-tiny bit to test me. I stopped in my tracks and he reversed the technique. Thats an F in Aikido.

He asked me,

Why did you stop, Joe? You had me. You just had to keep going.

We did the technique several more times and for more times than Id care to admit, I still gave up as soon as he resisted until I finally got it. The funny thing is I was in a superior position each and every time and would have been able to complete the technique regardless of his resistance.

Why did I fail? Because I gave up. I folded, like a deck of cards at the first sign of resistance or in Heathers lingo, adversity.

All I had to do was reframe the adversity. So instead of thinking, oh no this wont work, (irrational thought) stopping my momentum and losing my advantage, I could have thought, isnt that cute, he thinks he can resist (rational thought) and completed the technique.

We do this in life whether we realize it or not. We often give up and allow adversity to stop us. Heres the thing. There will always be adversity. The technique Heather shares reveals an important principle its not the absence of adversity, its how we approach it that matters.

You may be wondering: Why do we stop? Why do we give up?

Its fear. Not fear of physical danger or death, though your body may not be able to tell the difference. Its the fear of not being enough or not being worthy. Ironically, that is the same fear that ruined my Aikido technique. I had zero fear that my instructor would hurt me. It was a fear that I could not be any good at Aikido.

Im grateful to my good friend Heather for reminding me of this principle of dealing with adversity and sharing her useful, practical technique to succeed because of adversity, instead of in spite of adversity.

P.S. If youd like to read the #LinkedIn article Heather wrote after she was laid off that jump-started her career in employee engagement, you can find it here: How to Leave Employees with Their Dignity After a Layoff

Heather R. Younger, J.D. is the founder and CEO of Customer Fanatix, an organization that helps organizational leaders and their employees find their truth through executive coaching, leadership roundtables, culture team facilitation and scouring employee engagement survey comments.

As a best-selling author, international speaker, focus group facilitator, podcast host, and Forbes Coaches Council coach, she has earned her reputation as The Employee Whisperer. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community.

See the original post here:
Adversity Alchemy - Thrive Global

According to Isaac the Syrian, a famous 7th-century bishop and theologian, a person whos genuinely humble gives off a certain scent that other people will sense and that even animals will pick up, so that wild animals, including snakes, will fall under its spell and never harm that person.

Heres his logic: A humble person, he believes, has recovered the smell of paradise and in the presence of such a person one does not feel judged and has nothing to fear, and this holds true even for animals. They feel safe around a humble person and are drawn to him or her. No wonder people like St. Francis of Assisi could talk to birds and befriend wolves.

But, beautiful as this all sounds, is this a pious fairytale or is it a rich, archetypal metaphor? I like to think its the latter, that this is a rich metaphor, and perhaps even something more. Humility, indeed, does have a smell, the smell of the earth, of the soil, and of paradise.

But how? How can a spiritual quality give off a physical scent?

Well, were psychosomatic, creatures of both body and soul. Thus, in us, the physical and the spiritual are so much part of one and the same substance that its impossible to separate them out from each other.

To say that were body and soul is like saying sugar is white and sweet and that whiteness and sweetness can never be put into separate piles. Theyre both inside the sugar. Were one substance, inseparable, body and soul, and so were always both physical and spiritual.

So, in fact, we dofeelphysical things spiritually, just as wesmellspiritual things through our physical senses. If this is true, and it is, then, yes, humility does give off a scent that can be sensed physically, and Isaac the Syrians concept is more than just a metaphor.

But its also a metaphor: The wordhumilitytakes its root in the Latin word,humus,meaning soil, ground, and earth. If one goes with this definition then the most humble person you know is the most earthy and most grounded person you know.

To be humble is to have ones feet firmly planted on the ground, to be in touch with the earth, and to carry the smell of the earth. Further still, to be humble is to take ones rightful place as a piece of the earth and not as someone or something separate from it.

The renowned mystic and scientist, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, expressed this sometimes in his prayers. During the years when, as a paleontologist he worked for long stretches in the isolated deserts of China, he would sometimes compose prayers to God in a form he called,A Mass for the World.

Speaking to God as a priest, he would identify his voice with that of the earth itself, as that place within physical creation where the earth itself, the soil of the earth, could open itself and speak to God. As a priest, he didnt speakforthe earth; he spokeasthe earth, giving it voice, in words to this effect:

Lord, God, I stand before you as a microcosm of the earth itself, to give it voice: See in my openness, the worlds openness, in my infidelity, the worlds infidelity; in my sincerity, the worlds sincerity, in my hypocrisy, the worlds hypocrisy; in my generosity, the worlds generosity; in my attentiveness, the worlds attentiveness; in my distraction, the worlds distraction; in my desire to praise you, the worlds desire to praise you; and in my self-preoccupation, the worlds forgetfulness of you. For I am of the earth, a piece of earth, and the earth opens or closes to you through my body, my soul, and my voice.

This is humility, an expression of genuine humility. Humility should never be confused, as it often is, with a wounded self-image, with an excessive reticence, with timidity and fear, or with an overly sensitive self-awareness.

Too common is the notion that a humble person is one who is self-effacing to a fault, who deflects praise (even when its deserved), who is too shy to trust opening himself or herself in intimacy, or who is so fearful or self-conscious and worried about being shamed so as to never step forward and offer his or her gifts to the community.

These can make for a gentle and self-effacing person, but because we are denigrating ourselves when to deny our own giftedness, our humility is false, and deep down we know it, and so this often makes for someone who nurses some not-so-hidden angers and is prone to being passive-aggressive.

The most humble person you know is the person whos the most grounded, that is, the person who knows shes not the center of the earth but also knows that she isnt a second-rate piece of dirt either. And that person will give off a scent that carries both the fragrance of paradise (of divine gift) as well as the smell of the earth.

See the original post here:
The scent of humility - Angelus News

SEPTEMBER 23, 2019

WE LIVE IN a divided world. Our politicians talk of either building walls so that others will not invade us or of creating spaces where diversity may bear fruit to new forms of life. Much of what reaches the general public is in the form of opinions espoused by either television pundits or social media celebrities. If in the past artists and thinkers philosophers in particular had a voice in the public sphere, that is certainly no longer the case. At some point, philosophy seems to have gone inward: it disappeared from the public stage and, among other things, it ceased to be concerned with the humans relation to the nonhuman world. True, to a large extent, the specialized, often incomprehensible, jargon-driven discourse of the philosophers themselves has contributed to this withdrawal. In the English-speaking world in particular, the disputed territories are between Anglo-American analytic philosophy and Continental (or European) philosophy. That, of course, leaves out a whole lot of philosophy that is not part of either tradition: African, Latin-American, or Asian philosophy, for example. For many mainstream philosophers of today, non-Western thought (putatively imagistic, mystical, mythological, and non-discursive) fails to constitute true philosophy. To give an example rather close to home, Latin-American philosophy is usually referred to just as thought. But thought, as James Maffie points out in Aztec Philosophy: Understanding a World in Motion, is usually understood as something naturally possessed by everyone, whereas philosophy is thought to be a deliberate doing. Ironically, as Maffie points out, for all their implicit colonization of philosophy, Western philosophers have not been able to arrive at a consensus as to what philosophy proper is. Indeed, until relatively recently, they have not even considered meaningful parallels between Western and non-Western philosophy. And this brings us to the special import of Jason Wirths new book, Nietzsche and Other Buddhas: Philosophy after Comparative Philosophy.

In his latest book, Wirth does something different from what he did in his previous books, something specific and general at the same time, to which the entirety of the title alludes. First, it is the comparison between Nietzsche and this thing which goes by the name of Buddhism in the West. Wirth begins the book with a kan: Nietzsche and other Buddhas? a pairing that for the nonspecialist who has some general knowledge of both Nietzsche and East-Asian philosophy, at least on the face of it, may seem rather paradoxical. Yet, as Wirth explains:

Plenty of books have been written on the relationship between Nietzsche and Buddha Dharma as if comparison were an issue of weighing what one term of the comparison is, weighing the second term of the comparison, and then bringing them together in a third act of weighing and measuring.

Such an enterprise is further complicated by the fact that, as Wirth reminds us, Buddha Dharma generally holds that there are no isms there is not even Buddhism! How, then, can you compare one with the other?

In concrete philosophical terms, one of the things that makes the comparison problematic but positively worthy revolves around Nietzsches affirmation of the self and the will (to power), and Zens negation of the same. While Bret W. Davis, for example, conceives of this difference as a confrontation between different conceptions of the will, Graham Parkes argues that such a confrontation does not exist, because for Nietzsche the ego is simply a fiction, and the will to power a manner of interpreting the world, not a force to exercise over others. As Wirth points out, Parkes is not alone in seeing Nietzsches conception of the ego in this light. For the Japanese philosopher Tanabe Hajime (18851962), Nietzsches egoism is actually nothing more than a disguise. However, the debate does not end there. In the Journal of Nietzsche Studies, Davis responded to Parkess Open Letter with a conciliatory article aptly entitled Nietzsche as Zebra: With both Egoistic Antibuddha and Nonegoistic Bodhisattva Stripes. Curiously, all of this debate takes places against the background of Nietzsches own negative pronouncements about the Buddhism he knew, most of which was aimed at Schopenhauers interpretation of the Vedas and the Buddha in The World as Will and Representation.

In any case, the point of Nietzsche and Other Buddhas is not to argue in Western philosophical terms for one position or the other. As Wirth writes: I appreciate the force of both readings and note in agreement that neither Davis nor Parkes presents the conflicting strands as an either/or but rather as a both/and. What is positive about the comparisons and contrasts between Nietzsche and Zen is what they bring to light: I settle [] for engaging a problem that gains new vigor when pursued in and between some aspects of the Japanese Zen tradition and Nietzsches inadvertent contribution to new ways of thinking in a contemporary Zen idiom, writes Wirth. This co-illuminating confrontation, as he calls is, is the main concern of his book, which brings us to the more general aspect of the project that is invoked in its subtitle: the place of philosophy after comparative philosophy.

This broader aspect lends Nietzsche and Other Buddhas even greater significance as it points to a philosophy without walls. Wirth says the following of both Nietzsche and Zen:

Nietzsche challenged the conventions that govern how issues come to have philosophical value as well as the values by which we patrol the borders of philosophy. Given that Nietzsches experience of philosophy is a non sequitur from the prevailing practices of philosophy, one could not say that he derived his sense of philosophy [] from the status quo. [] Zen practice also does not originate from or primarily conduct itself in discursive activity.

And at the end of the introduction, Wirth again reminds us that his ruminations are meant to go beyond the traditional, East-West philosophical borders in order to illuminate the paths to new ways of doing philosophy.

Therefore, if rather than arguments what Nietzsche and Other Buddhas presents are different perspectives that one may or may not connect with, depending on ones lived experiences, then we have moved away from a traditional conception of philosophy as an exclusively discursive practice. When Jason Wirth declares that he sees the debate between Parkes and Davis as one that calls for an and/both rather than an either/or response, I am reminded of Deleuze and Guattaris disjunctive synthesis of the and and and, and of the formers rejection of debate and philosophical argumentation. But that is not surprising given that Wirth himself often refers to Deleuze and Guattaris notion of philosophy as emerging from non-philosophy, just as art emerges from non-art, and science from non-science. For instance, writes Wirth, the true Dharma eye is not in itself philosophical, but it is related to the possibility of philosophy as such. Such an understanding of philosophy undoubtedly takes philosophy out of philosophy departments, and makes it much more inclusive, while no less rigorous as an experiential practice encompassing both body and mind.

What, then, should philosophy be about after comparative philosophy? Certainly not about comparing apples and oranges, or about having to choose between different manners of living and thinking the world, but rather about a way of having differences illuminate each other. It is not correct that Nietzsche is a Buddhist, although it still may be true, says Wirth, in a way that returns to the kan with which he began the book.

What is at stake for the future of philosophy after comparative philosophy, notes Wirth, is not comparing and contrasting various philosophies but rather renewing a more philosophical commitment to exploring and unleashing the powers of philosophy, and in doing so, I dare say, the power of love, for in the composite word philo-sophy, let us recall, the first part comes from the Greek word for love (philia). Deleuze was once asked why he only wrote books about philosophers he liked, to which he responded: if you dont love something, you have no reason to write about it.

Jason Wirth has written a book that is the product of his love for both East-Asian and Western philosophy, and as such a book that bridges differences. In that respect, then, Nietzsche and Other Buddhas is an important book for an age marked by intolerance and disregard for the other (the environment, the immigrant, the non-gender-conforming individual), and where the love of thought, spirit, and body that is indeed philosophy has an important role to play.

Rolando Prez is professor of Spanish and Latin American literature and philosophy in the Romance Languages Department of Hunter College. He has written on Nietzsche, Deleuze and Guattari, Badiou, and Latina(o)/Latin American philosophy (Las Casas, Mart, Dussel, Anzalda), and on the relation between philosophy and Spanish & Latin American literature. His creative writing has been featured in The Norton Anthology of Latino Literature, and his latest non-academic publication is Tea Ceremonies for Winter (2018).

The rest is here:
Building Bridges, Climbing Walls: On Nietzsche and Other Buddhas - lareviewofbooks

SEPTEMBER 23, 2019

NOBODY ENTIRELY LACKS the will to be honest; but most people settle for a rather small share of it. These are the words of Walter Kaufmann, who refused to accept the very sorry portion of honesty that is generally deemed agreeable. What he accumulated was the wealth of a philosophical life, unencumbered by the petty habits and practices of thoughtlessness, hypocrisy, and deceit.

Born in Freiburg, Germany, in 1921, Kaufmann was raised by Protestants of Jewish descent. He returned to his native faith when he was 11, unable to accept the trinity or divinity of Jesus. When his parents encouraged him to reconsider, because they said he was too young and because of Hitlers rise to power, he insisted that one could not change ones mind for a reason like that.

Kaufmanns immediate family departed for the United States just in time to escape the horrific violence of Nazi rule. Many of his relations, classified by ethnic heritage, did not. Upon arrival in 1939, Kaufmann lived, on paper, nothing short of a charmed American life: a European immigrant, fleeing a monstrous tyrant, swiftly climbing the latter of success (at Williams and Harvard), while answering the call of duty to defend his new homeland (in the Army Air Force and Military Intelligence Service). His time in World War II put his graduate studies on hold, but it wasnt long after his return before he completed his dissertation at Harvard in 1947. Soon he accepted a teaching appointment at Princeton.

As the postwar boom ushered in an economy of excess, and institutions of higher learning became increasingly specialized, Kaufmanns ascent was trained on different heights. In Stanley Corngolds Walter Kaufmann: Philosopher, Humanist, Heretic, we see how his steadfast pursuit of truth was as rooted in a deep knowledge of Ancient Greek thought as it was in Old Testament prophecy, modern German poetry, and Christian theology. Long before the term interdisciplinary became a nostalgic marketing device to promote a form of education that no longer really exists and very few actually care about, Kaufmann was among the exemplars of what interdisciplinary scholarship could look like and what it could do.

His first major accomplishment, building on his dissertation at Harvard, was the publication of, Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist (1950). With its appearance, Kaufmann became principally responsible for bringing Nietzsche to America. At the time, the German philosopher was mostly a novelty item in the United States powerful but obscure, and too closely associated with the rise of fascism in 20th-century Europe to be canonized by academic gatekeepers. In this sense, Kaufmanns work was an introduction for some, and a recovery project for others. For his Princeton colleague, Alexander Nehamas, Kaufmanns interpretation and achievement rested on the controversial claim that Nietzsche is a rationalist heir and not, as he had been thought to be, a romantic critic of the Enlightenment. He also worked to undermine a myth that still wont go away: Nietzsche as proto-Nazi.

As Kaufmann argued, Nietzsches books are easier to read but harder to understand than those of almost any other thinker. [] As soon as one attempts to penetrate beyond the clever epigrams and well turned insults to grasp their consequences and to coordinate them, one is troubled. Perhaps the least troubled, and most troubling coordinator of Nietzsches thought was his sister, Elisabeth, who began shaping her brothers legacy in accordance with her own ideological preferences while he was still alive and descending into madness. Married to an outspoken antisemite, Elisabeth, who curated her brothers work, was decisive in setting the trajectory of an oeuvre that Kaufmann worked tirelessly to demythologize. Her influence was solidified as she gathered the publishing rights and, according to Kaufmann, refused to publish some of the most important manuscripts, carelessly and strategically published unfinished works, poorly edited texts, and promoted the significance of particular passages and volumes that, taken out of context, obscured the larger concerns of the author himself.

For Kaufmann, the way to demythologize was to humanize, and the way to humanize Nietzsche was to philosophize the life and work of a thinker whose style was not commensurate with the systemic coherence of Aristotle, Thomas, Kant, or Hegel. But an absence of systemic coherence does not mean an absence of coherent thought. Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist is a staggeringly comprehensive and cogent study that remains as vital today as it was in the middle of the 20th century. It also did not give way to the claims of relativism or anarchy so readily imposed on the man who Kaufmann characterized as a fanatical seeker after truth [who] recognized no virtue above intellectual integrity.

As we see in Corngolds account, the same could be said of Kaufmann, whose devotion and service to Nietzsche alone is worthy of considerable attention. Philosopher, Humanist, Heretic goes further, describing the broader philosophical ethos of Kaufmanns teaching and scholarly production, which extended far beyond the horizon of one thinker. In fact, for the critical work he did in excavating Nietzsches life and thought, many readers will only have a faint acquaintance with Kaufmanns name as the translator attached to their Modern Library Basic Writings of Nietzsche (1967) or Penguin Portable Nietzsche (1977). But there are no doubt others, including myself, for whom Kaufmanns name first calls to mind books like Existentialism From Dostoevsky to Sartre (1956), Critique of Religion and Philosophy (1958), the three volumes of Discovering the Mind (198081), Tragedy and Philosophy (1968), or Religion from Tolstoy to Camus (1961).

These and other titles give voice to Kaufmans stunning philosophical range, historical depth, and literary dexterity, the sum of which is the focus of Philosopher, Humanist, Heretic. More a work of commentary than an intellectual biography, Corngold writes with a tenacity and intensity that matches his subject even when its clear that keeping up with Kaufmann is painstaking work. Of the choices, relationships, and twists of fate that animated his life we learn very little. And in this sense, a more delicate and personal account like Rdiger Safranskis writing on Heidegger, Nietzsche, and Schopenhauer, Ray Monks on Ludwig Wittgenstein, and Elisabeth Young-Bruehls on Hannah Arendt would still be welcome. But as a provisional cartographer of Kaufmans thought, Corngold proves an admirable guide.

As he points out, The Faith of a Heretic serves as the most intimate expression of Kaufmanns interior life and public commitments. Kaufmann would forever want to be more than a professor, Corngold writes. That is, he wanted to model for his students what it looked like for thought to be transformed into action even when action came in the form of philosophical or literary expression. Where philosophy theoretically requires leisure to function, and the modern university created comfortable conditions for philosophical reflection and expression to occur, The Faith of a Heretic marks the more perilous intellectual, if not always sociopolitical, terrain on which philosophy invites us to travel. Kaufmann carefully engages some of the most treacherous interpersonal and intercultural battles that have been fought throughout human history, and the private discomforts we must assume if we are to fight, or make sense of, those battles honestly.

Because, as Kaufmann writes, honest appraisals of faith and morals often lead to hurt feelings and even war, most people speak dishonestly of the most important subjects. And worse, in a state of presumption or resignation, [m]any recent philosophers prefer not to speak of them at all. For Kaufmann, this was a pervasive, lamentable, and distressing silence that needed to be broken. How could reticence about religion and theology lead to anything more than ignorance of religious and theological traditions? How could confused interpretations of the Old and New Testament lead to anything more than dismissive, muddled, or overzealous treatments of formative cultures and institutions? And what good is philosophy, if its timeless pursuits are increasingly obscured by petty domestic infighting between the annoyingly abstruse (Continental) and the presumptuously ascetic (Analytic)?

The Faith of a Heretic is a passionate plea to address these questions with the clarity they deserve, wrestling them away from philosophers whose motivations were too obviously informed by career advancement, and theologians who too readily fabricated doctrines of god in their own image. The crisis he witnessed in philosophy was one in which the discipline had become a profession a job rather than a vocation, such that if Plato or Spinoza actually applied to graduate programs they and their (too modest or too ambitious) projects would likely be rejected. The crisis in theology, especially Christian theology, was one of obscuring reality with a spiritualized otherworldliness, simultaneously ignoring moral responsibility while reinforcing predetermined cultural biases; Jesus is as easily construed as a fire-brand fundamentalist as he is a radical socialist, or bourgeois liberal. But with salvation at stake, theologians can always escape the need to explain themselves, or live in accordance with the claims of their faith. After all, the world we know is only a temporary home.

For Kaufmann, such intellectual failure and moral frivolity was not grounds for categorically dismissing philosophy or people of faith. Rather, it compelled him to offer a more robust and forthright account of the human condition. It was the calling of the philosopher and humanist to reconfigure what had been sundered by philosophys very recent personality disorder and theologys ongoing shell game, championing a spirit of self-making via thought that is deep enough, daring enough, to confront the darkest hours of existence, and ascend to its greatest heights. My own ethic, he wrote, is not a morality of rules but an ethic of virtues. It offers no security but goals.

The goals for Kaufmann rested on four pillars: humility, love, courage, and honesty. As evinced by Socrates and the Hebrew prophets (who Kaufmann revered), to live a life in accordance with these virtues invites ostracism, exile, and the branding of heresy. Where most are trained and content to prize comfort and self-interest, the philosopher and prophet stands in the gap, echoing Socrates who denounced the false justice of the benevolent dictator and Jeremiah who refused covering the wound of my people, lightly, saying, Peace, peace, when there is no peace. It is easy to demand or lay claim to justice: to make sacrifices for it is not.

In this vein, Kaufmann reserved some of his most ruthless criticism for American Protestants of every stripe. Where the fundamentalists would claim the United States as a Christian nation, he unequivocally illustrated how our form of government depends utterly on the widespread abandonment of any deeply felt faith in traditional Christianity. Where mainline liberals have long since given up on belief in hell, the more troublesome reality for Kaufmann was that few have ever given any thought to the idea that they might end up there. All of which points to an ethic of complacency and conformism, tempted to delight in the false peace of dishonesty, but inevitably inviting intellectual and moral chaos. A practicing Protestant myself, I could lament that Kaufmann so accurately characterizes the transgressions of (if I must) my people. But is an uncriticized faith in a religion, political movement, hero, or friend worth believing any more than an unexamined life is worth living?

The examined life Kaufmann envisioned did not require a prized academic life or position. It did require the provision of an education, no matter how elementary, so we can learn to understand views different from ones own and to outgrow the narrow-mindedness and lack of intellectual imagination that cling to us from childhood. To learn in this way sets us in the direction of a humble ascent, fortifying the individual to take pleasure in and weather the vicissitudes of life. It should also inform how we understand and approach our dying. In The Faith of a Heretic, he wrote:

If one lives intensely, the time comes when sleep means bliss. If one loves intensely, the time comes when death seems bliss. [] The life I want is a life I could not endure in eternity. It is a life of love and intensity, suffering and creation, that makes life worthwhile and death welcome. There is no other life I should prefer.

For Kaufmann, philosophy isnt just about learning how to die. It is a discipline that prepares its faithful participants to be left for dead following the great thinkers, prophets, and occasional martyrs of the past whose reward for defending a more honest and courageous way of life was to be ignored, shunned, betrayed, abandoned, and sent away. Though Kaufmann remained at Princeton until his death in 1980, as Corngolds closing scene illustrates, toward the end of his life he began to lose favor with some of the same colleagues, students, and reviewers who once heralded his fresh iconoclasm. But in this, Kaufmann was simply living out a calling that required a sturdy enough disposition to fend off petty grievances and to be enriched by the suffering we all experience. In the face of such suffering, philosophy promises no comforts. But it does promise that we can die in peace having given an honest account of our short and frail existence. To give Kaufmann the last word, It is better to die with courage than to live as a coward.

Robert L. Kehoe III writes from Madison, Wisconsin, where he lives with his wife and their four children. He is an editor atThe Point Magazine, currently at work on a book about philosophy and athletics.

Read more:
Left for Dead: On the Philosophical Life and Vocation of Walter Kaufmann - lareviewofbooks

Paul Theroux, a novelist and one of Americas most prolific travel writers, recently spent over a year making forays into Mexico. In a half-dozen trips, each lasting around a month, he drove his own car the length of the border and traveled through the hinterlands: Sonora, Potosi, Oaxaca, Chiapas. In particular, Theroux was interested in exploring the motivations behind Mexican migration to the U.S. What are they leaving? Who are they leaving behind? he wondered.

The result is his newest work, On the Plain of Snakes: A Mexican Journey,Owhich is out Oct. 8th. The title comes from the name of an ancient town the writer chanced upon while driving, after having picked up some locals requesting a ride. A lot of towns in Mexico have the word snake or snakes in their name, he says. Theres a snake on the Mexican flag. Snakes were sacred beings in Aztec society.

Theroux, 78, who divides the year between Hawaii and Cape Cod, recently spoke with Penta about the new book, as well as the joys of marksmanship, the idea for his next travelogue, and what he thought about Anthony Bourdain.

My favorite neighborhood in the world is where Im living now. I live on a hillId rather not reveal the townin Cape Cod. At the end of the road is a tidal creek. I can look at the ocean from my window. I can work here with a nice view and at the end of the day, like yesterday, I can wheel my kayak or take my rowboat down to the creek. Its a combination of living, working, and recreation all rolled into one. The neighbors are friendly, but none live close to me. Its quiet, serene. I spend the summer here, as I did when I was a small boy.

At a certain age, it helps to have worked out your favorite neighborhood and live there. You shouldnt get much beyond retirement age and think, Oh my god, where do I want to live? By then, you should have figured it out and found the great good place.

The one thing in my kitchen I cant live without is a non-stick omelette pan.

If I were to buy a piece of art, it would be an oil painting by Francis Bacon. Hes the greatest modern painter. I just love his work. Its strange, beautiful, ambiguous; some of its violent. Its beauty and its cruelty seem to epitomize the modern world.

The best book Ive read in the last year is I re-read Moby Dick. But Im gonna say, I Am Dynamite, about Friedrich Nietzsche by Sue Prideaux. I knew very little about Nietzsche. What surprised me was what a struggle he had to get started. The strangeness of his life, inspiration and bafflement and solitude, and then he went mad. But he had these short years of brilliance before going completely off his head.

A passion of mine that few people know about is marksmanship. I go regularly to a rifle range. I started off as a Boy Scout (Michael Bloomberg was in the Boy Scouts with me). I got my marksmanship merit badge when I was about 11. Ive never killed an animal but Ive been shooting at targets since then. I havent shot abroad but Ive been shot at: Guns in Kenya and Malawi, and in New Guinea some boys jabbed me with spears. Ive been on the wrong end of hostility.

The one trip Ive taken that I would love to do again without question, Mexico. I would go back to the opening of a taqueria. I would use any excuse to go back to Mexico and see my friends there, speak Spanish, look at churches, talk to people. Its a rich, various, and wonderful place, and its next door.

The next destination on my travel itinerary is I have an idea for a travel book but I dont want to disclose too much about it, except that it involves returning to Malawi, where I was a Peace Corps volunteer 56 years ago. Thats part of it, just a hint.

The thing that gets me up in the morning is the idea of writing something, of returning to my desk. The notion that theres work to be donemy work. I dont have a boss. I havent had a boss or a salary since 1971. The idea that I have work in progress and I have always had work in progress, even after 50-odd books. Ive had something unfinished for all that time.

The restaurant in my hometown that I love to take a visitor is a Japanese restaurant in Yarmouth Port, Mass., called Inaho. Its a great restaurant. When people visit us, we end up there.

A person who inspired me to do what I do is the greatest inspiration I had or mentor was V.S. Naipaul. I met him first in Uganda in 1966, and I visited him in London just before he died in 2018. We had our differences over the years. But he was the man who helped me to become a better writernot a better person because he was a very flawed individual. But in terms of writing, he was a great example. One of my favorite books Ive written is Sir Vidia's Shadow, a book about me and Naipaul and a book about how I became a writer. It took everything I had to write.

If I could have a drink with anybody, anywhere, it would be Anthony Bourdain, to find out the mystery of this man. His suicide was one of the most shocking things I could imagine. Maybe having a drink with him I would have found out something. Maybe I would have been able to help. People said, He dabbled in drugs; he was depressed. But that doesnt explain it. He had a daughter whom he loved. He loved to travel. He loved food. He loved people.

I did have lunch with him once and he was a wonderful person. Hed been so many places. I had just published my book, Deep South, and I mentioned various juke joints, diners, barbecue spots. He knew every one of them. He was just a wonderful guy. Another thing, he was a great reader. The idea of having a drink with someone who reads is a great pleasure for me. And Ill say this, I have no desire to have a drink with anybody in power. Oprah, Bill Clinton, Putin, you name it. People conscious of their power dont interest me and they always seem out of touch. I have always sought out the companionship of people powerless and overlookedthey have the best stories and are usually longing to tell them.

Read this article:
Worldwise: Esteemed Travel Writer Paul Therouxs Favorite Things - Barron's

The topic of college admissions lends itself well to degenerate farce on The Politician, a terribly giddy examination of human desire, American hierarchies, and the baroque structures erected in support of each. The eight-episode first season of the serieswhich was created by Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk, and Ian Brennanis the first flowering of Murphys three-hundred-million-dollar deal with Netflix, the biggest such contract in TV history. The Politician announces its intention to provoke from the jump, with a trigger warning alerting persons of sensitive mental health that some distress may follow. The plot, a soapy, dystopian fantasia about extracurricular competition among rich high-school students, delivers on the threat: theres suicide, existential alienation, and fear and loathing in both the Friedrich Nietzsche and Hunter S. Thompson-on-the-campaign-trail senses, plus high anxiety about class and power. This is American Horror Story: So-Called Meritocracy, and it arrives at an opportune moment: on the heels of the college-admissions scandal, right around the PSATs.

It is a timely satire not only in its strafing of privilege but also in its funhouse-mirror reflection of the contrived faades and convoluted selves of aspirants to political power. The high-school antihero, Payton Hobart (Ben Platt), is a type-A kid and a DSM-V-type sociopath. Hopeful of securing admission to Harvard College, and thereby moving toward his long-term goal of winning the U.S. Presidency, Payton is running for the presidency of his student body. Payton seems addicted to ambition for its own sake, but he also worries, in his heart of hearts, that he has no heartthats hes faade all the way to his core. Platt is amazingly elastic in depicting Paytons struggle to maintain the series of successful gestures comprising a personality that at times seems focus-grouped. The character is, like most who dream of high office, a narcissist. But is his narcissism malignant?

In flashbacks, we see that Payton, who is perhaps sexually fluid or simply closeted, had a romance with his Mandarin-language tutor, who is now his opponent for the student-body presidency. This is River (David Corenswet), who looks like what you get if you picked up a vintage Abercrombie & Fitch catalog and ordered a J.F.K., Jr., clone. Payton and River were friends and part-time lovers, but it was doomedthe shows outlook on human nature is often deliciously grimfrom the start. (The scene depicting their first meeting offers a symmetrical shot of the pair hovering over a chessboard.) Likewise, the first episode takes extreme care to depict characters troubled by the questions of what is fake and what is real by having them repeat those labels again and again. It also allows a member of Paytons campaign team to exclaim, during a debate, Hes sweating like Nixon! The show had already done a foxy job of evoking the thought, but it cant resist returning to the passage with a highlighter. On the other hand, I guess that it cant hurt to shoutthat it clears a safe path to proper understandingand to be firm about your points when you are trying to make a work of Heathers-level mercilessness in a country that cannot handle a Heathers remake.

Gwyneth Paltrow plays Paytons mom with a benevolent glow; the family also includes a gerbil-like zillionaire father (Bob Balaban) and Paytons two older brothers, a set of toxic jocks with popped collars. Imagine Bill Murrays jackass twins from Rushmore, but played by Armie Hammer. The Politician isnt merely cribbing Wes Anderson, here and elsewhere, with its casting, compositions, camera moves, and stylized prep environment, with fabulous costumes in tangerine and lavender and cotton-candy pink. The show proceeds as a deliberate pastiche, dense with references to movies ranging from thirties screwballs to the work of David Lynch. (Jessica Lange plays a platinum-blonde monster mom whos like a cross between Patricia Arquette in The Act and Diane Ladd in Wild at Heart.) But the show has a special regard for Hollywood of the sixties and seventies, from the pill-popping swing of Valley of the Dolls to the bubblegum pop of Robert Redford in The Candidate and the chicken-salad sandwich from Five Easy Pieces. It knits these moods together to accommodate both paranoid thrills and grand pastel melodrama. The campiness and creepiness are joined by way of biting wit, such that the show reads like some kind of Hal Ashby telenovela. The Politician hits a tonefuriously angry, wistful beneath its bitternessthat is indebted to the disillusionment of the Nixon era, and updated to capture the disorientation of ours. The show doesnt quite do subtlety, or subtext, but nor do these times.

The rest is here:
Ryan Murphys The Politician Is a Funhouse-Mirror Reflection of the So-Called Meritocracy - The New Yorker

by Emily Zhang | 9/26/19 2:00am

West's class focuses on the work of James Baldwin, Lorraine Hansberry and W. E. B. DuBois.

This Monday afternoon, Cornel West Harvard University professor, political activist, public intellectual and social critic stood outside Filene Auditorium and chatted with a student about 20th-century, African-American identity in the United States. Fifteen minutes later, nearly a hundred students flocked into the auditorium to attend Wests class titled ENGL 53.43, Race and Modernity.

This fall, West is teaching as a temporary faculty member at Dartmouth in the English department. His course examines the themes of race and identity among works of three African-American intellectuals: James Baldwin, Lorraine Hansberry and W. E. B. Du Bois. The class meets for three hours every Monday during the 3A and 3AX period.

Before this fall, West had come to Dartmouth several times both to teach and speak. In 2017, associate dean for the faculty of arts and humanities and English professor Barbara Will invited West to give a speech as part of a lecture series titled Why the Humanities Matter in the 21st Century.

I invited him to give a lecture two years ago, and there were about six hundred people in the audience, Will explained. It was out of that I decided it would be terrific to bring him back to teach a class.

In the summer of 2017, West was invited back to campus to teach a course called The Historical Philosophy of W.E.B. Du Bois. Last summer, he also spoke at the Race Matters@25 conference in celebration of the 25th anniversary of his book Race Matters.

This week, West started his lecture by reviewing the four legacies of Du Bois covered in the previous class and presenting a short biography of Du Bois early life. He then gave a detailed analysis of the first few chapters of Du Bois seminal work, The Souls of Black Folk, exploring the themes of victimization, alienation and suppression.

West connected Du Bois work to the works of a wide range of philosophers, such as Socrates, Goethe, Kafka and Nietzsche, as well as elements of todays popular culture, like hip-hop and swagger. His literary interpretations were often intertwined with personal anecdotes and deliberate digressions, causing the audience to fall into alternating periods of laughter and silence.

Will expressed her appreciation for Wests teaching style and method of close reading.

The reason his teaching is so powerful is that he can speak to anybody, wherever they are in their lives, and talk about really essential issues about what it means to be human, what it means to be American, what it means to have an identity, race, gender, Will said. He often takes a paragraph and goes through it very closely, so you can see all of the nuances. It may mean you dont always get to cover everything, but you do get that in-depth kind of connection to the text.

English professor James Dobson is co-teaching the class with West. Dobson explained that the reasons they chose those particular African-American writers are because their works cover a wide variety of literary genres including plays, essays and autobiographical reflections and because they represent three different time periods.

From the late 19th century to the 20th century, [it is] an unfolding process to track the evolution of these twinge problems of race and modernity, Dobson said.

West also expressed high respect for the three authors, adding that it was difficult to find three more towering figures than Baldwin, Du Bois and Hansberry.

Natan Santos 21 said he thoroughly appreciates Wests lecture style.

[Wests lecture had] a constant flow of imagery [and context] all tied into one, Santos said. Its really engaging.

Arabella McGowan 23 said that Wests class was unlike anything shed taken in the past.

Hes just a very powerful speaker, McGowan said.

During the second half of the class, six student responses to The Souls of Black Folk were selected and discussed together, touching upon the influence of Jerusalem, American Romanticism, Athens and European Enlightenment on Du Bois work, as well as the contemporary significance of Du Bois insights about African-American identity in 20th-century U.S.

Elizabeth Whiting 21, a student whose response was selected, analyzed the influence of Jerusalem and American Romanticism on Du Bois work. As an English major, she said she chose this course in part because the topic was related to a class she took during her sophomore summer.

When asked why he decided to come back to Dartmouth to teach a course again, West said, he has had a great time teaching at the College.

Students are hungry for truth, for beauty, for goodness, and I love to be part of that hunger, West said.

See the rest here:
Cornel West returns to Dartmouth to teach class on race and modernity - The Dartmouth

The Latest on the Emmy Awards: How to Win the Crown of Life

Game of Throneswon for Outstanding Drama Seriesat last nights Emmys, making itthe most-awarded narrative series in the history of the Emmys.Fleabagwon for Outstanding Comedy Series. Jodie Comer and Billy Porter received Outstanding Lead Actress and Lead Actor in a Drama Series.

Here is what I noted: Except for a few minutes watching a late-night talk show here or there, I did not see a single show that was nominated. Not one.

Part of the explanation could be that much of popular culture is aimed at people half my age. Another factor is that I have to go to bed early each night to finish this article early the next morning.

But I suspect the largest reason for the disconnect between the 2019 Emmys and my television-watching habits is that Janet and I choose to watch shows that do not dishonor the Lord and his word. Im not suggesting that every nominated show fails this standard, but many do.

Scripture calls us to be holy in all your conduct (1 Peter 1:15). In that light, we should heed the warning of the eighteenth-century scientist G. C. Lichtenberg: Never undertake anything for which you wouldnt have the courage to ask the blessing of heaven.

I wish I could tell you that I always follow his advice. But I do recognize the truth of his assertion.

The popularity of television shows that contradict the biblical worldview reveals that many people do not realize there is a biblical worldview.

Gods word speaks to every dimension of every moment of life, not just our Sunday worship or Monday prayers. Abraham Kuyper was right: There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!

When we make Jesus our Lord, we must stand against all that stands against him. Unfortunately, many see Christianity as little more than a means to our personal happiness. If we attended church services yesterday and read the Bible and pray today, all will be well with us, or so we think.

There islittleprice to pay for following such a faith. To the contrary, it exists for us, not us for it.

Sadly,Friedrich Nietzsches scornful description of popular Christianityis even truer now than when he penned it in 1881: A God who, in his love, ordains everything so that it may be best for us . . . so that everything at length goes on smoothly and there is no reason left why we should take life ill or grumble about it: in short, resignation and modesty raised to the rank of divinitiesthat is the best and most lifelike remnant of Christianity now left to us.

As a result, he claims, Christians live in the belief that, in the entire universe, benevolence and honest sentiments will finally prevail. Nietzsche calls this state of affairs the euthanasia of Christianity.

Biblical Christians know that the opposite is actually true. Scripture calls Satan the god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4). As a thief [who] comes only to steal and kill and destroy (John 10:10), the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour (1 Peter 5:8).

Consequently, Christians do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness (Ephesians 6:12).

In a fallen world like ours, popularity can be perilous. Jesus warned us: Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets (Luke 6:26). If you must choose between temporary fame and eternal reward, choose the latter.

Every time.

Martin Luther King Jr.: Cowardice asks the question, Is it safe? Expediency asks the question, Is it politic? Vanity asks the question, Is it popular? But conscience asks the question, Is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is right.

The man for whom Dr. King was named observed: They gave our Master a crown of thorns. Why do we hope for a crown of roses? (Martin Luther).

By contrast, our Master promised: Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life (Revelation 2:10).

Which crown do you seek today?

TheDaily ArticlePodcast is Here!

Click to Listen

Publication Date: September 23, 2019

Photo Courtesy:Getty Images/Kevin Winter/Staff

More:
The Latest on the Emmy Awards: How to Win the 'Crown of Life' - Christianheadlines.com