Excuse me

50kbBob111606.jpg

I really didn’t want to write this song. It just nagged me all week until I surrendered.

Excuse me.mp3
He stepped on the bus holding a suitcase
A look of pensiveness on his face
I moved toward the window, making a space
He sat next to me and said:
“Excuse me for bleeding all over your shoes”

He needed a bath, all dressed in tatters
Can’t put together what’s been shattered
He asked for the time, as if it mattered
He rose from his seat and said:
“Excuse me for bleeding all over your shoes”

He left his suitcase there on the seat
I knew it was wrong but I took a peek
A little dog wrapped in a bed sheet
Dead as the night is black

Twisting, turning

9kbchriskukieric.jpg

Three years ago my guts were twisted about whether to move to Kentucky with my girlfriend or stay in North Carolina with my bandmates in My Dear Ella. I left the band, joined my girlfriend (now my wife), and my life abruptly changed course, as it had numerous times before. I’ve stayed in touch with Eric (MDE mastermind and my closest friend) since my departure, and several times I’ve flirted with the idea of moving back to NC, at least for the nine to twelve months my wife will be doing her doctoral research in Mexico. Per the original game plan, my wife figured she’d be heading off to do her research in the fall of ’06, as in right now, but the vagaries of grad school have been such that things have been considerably delayed, so now we’re looking at next fall at the earliest.

So many twists and turns, and it turns out that Eric recently dissolved My Dear Ella and formed a new outfit, Death of the Sun [pictured above]. It also turns out that D.O.T.S. needs a bass player to complete their line-up so they can take the world by storm. Do I smell the intoxicating effluvium of destiny? Or is it just the same old clump of bull-poop I’ve been dragging around on my boot-heel for years?

I don’t know. Part of me would love to cast off the shackles of normalcy and step out on that thin limb again. Maybe this time things will be different. Maybe I’m ready for greatness. But then again, having been down this road before, I’m all too aware of the costs, the doubts, and the insidious pattern that compels me, every four years or so it seems, to jump whatever ship I’m on in favor of the S.S. Something Else.

Puppets and palindromes

“Bob” is a palindrome. So is “rise to vote sir,” but strangely this just wasn’t enough to get me to the polls today. Truth is, I don’t care who wins any of the races here in Fayette County, Kentucky. There, I said it. I don’t care. Bill Hicks nailed it when he said: “I’ll show you politics in America. Here it is, right here. ‘I think the puppet on the right shares my beliefs.’ ‘I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking.’ ‘Hey, wait a minute, there’s one guy holding out both puppets!'”

I wanted to care. I really did. I even went online this morning to read up on the various candidates’ positions. Not only did I have a hard time making sense of the issues and discerning differences between positions, but every one of these people struck me as fake, plastic, and utterly unworthy of my endorsement. So, I watched some clips of Family Guy on YouTube while I drank the rest of my coffee.

I know what you’re thinking. I can see those fingers wagging at me: “You have no right to complain since you didn’t make your voice heard!” The trouble is, my voice was saying, “I don’t care! These people make me sick!” How better to express such a sentiment than by not voting.

Everytime I saw a slimy, negative campaign ad on TV, I said to myself “I will not vote for anyone who endorses such garbage.” By the time election day rolled around, there was no one left who didn’t stink like a dumpster. I just have no stomach for the abject inauthenticity I’ve seen on display for the past several weeks. While I was typing the last sentence, they announced the results for Mayor of Lexington on the local news and showed some footage of the new mayor’s victory speech. The guy’s been mayor for ten minutes and he’s already reading his speeches. Can’t these fucking androids just speak from their hearts? I’m sorry, but I feel better for having taken no part in this.

In 2004, I voted for John Kerry even though I found him repugnant. It was a vote against the other guy, nothing more. Had there been a Nazi or a rapist on the ballot, maybe I would’ve stood in line today to hold back the greater of two evils. In fact, despite all this vitriol, an hour before the polls closed I was still considering voting against some people. I was doing my grocery shopping, a chore I do every Tuesday afternoon on the way home from work. I went to the beer aisle to pick up a six-pack (my wife and I have a little pizza-and-beer-night thing on Tuesdays) and I was met by a big sign saying “No alcohol will be sold until after the polls close at 6pm.” You gotta be kidding! That was all I needed to justify an official election day boycott, since it turns out no candidate had promised to overturn this ridiculous ordinance during their campaign.

I work in a psychiatric hospital, and when a patient gets out of control, we often present him or her with a choice: “You can either walk to the ‘quiet area’ or else we’ll have to escort you there.” Now, a fifteen year old kid who’s been institutionalized her whole life is apt to respond with a “Fuck you!” and a gob of spit. She knows when a choice is not really a choice. She can see the guy in the white coat holding up both puppets.

The gift that keeps on giving

David Jon Peckinpaugh has been ruminating on Parenthood over on his blog. In his latest installment, he says:

“I have been wondering again about being a Parent and how I received the Gift of Life because my Parents chose to have children… and allowed it to happen. I am specifically wondering if the choice not to have children is a breaking of Life’s Trust? After all, might we not owe an obligation to give to Life the opportunity for a new form–which is what each of us has received? Of course, this is totally in keeping with the notion that Life Is A Gift. If we view Life as a Gift then we will want to share that Gift.”

Interesting… I’ve never thought about my choice to be childless in these terms. I guess I don’t think of life as a gift. I don’t think my parents looked at their decision to have kids in that way either. I think they wanted to raise children and enjoy family life mainly because that was how they wanted to live their lives. I don’t know for sure though. I’ll have to ask them about it. This goes back to the whole “self-centeredness” thing. I always bristle when someone suggests (as they often do) that it’s self-centered to not have kids. After the fact, once the child is born, it’s true that it would be hard to be self-centered and be a good parent. The question is, What’s the motivation to have a child in the first place? You’re the first, David Jon, I’ve heard talk about “giving the gift of life.” Most people seem to want something for themselves, i.e. the wonderful, deeply meaningful experience of being a parent. Life may be a gift, but who’s the gift for? It’s my feeling that the vast majority of humans are at a self-centered stage of personal development when they decide to procreate, and thus they look at the newborn child as a gift—for themselves. This is evident in the language most people use to describe the decision (i.e. “I want to have a baby” or “I want to be a father”). And like a child who gets bored with his Christmas toys by February, too many parents remain self-centered and leave kids feeling neglected, unwanted and unloved.

Of course, someone who decides to have children from a place of relative selflessness will look at and experience parenthood from a relatively selfless perspective. But then again, childlessness can also be viewed and experienced from a relatively selfless perspective. After all, there are millions of children (and adults) already in the world who could use some attention, so one need not create a new being in order to bestow gifts. And the ultimate gift, as I see it, is not life, but love. I could get my balls blown off in a minefield (ouch!) and still give love. And I can give it to anyone at anytime.

I don’t know, David Jon, what goes into the decision to create life, because I haven’t made that decision. But I have made the conscious decision (every time I put on a condom) to not create life, and I certainly don’t feel like I’m withholding a gift from anyone. The truth is, I’m not sure why I don’t want a child (for now at least). That’s why I’m having this discussion with you. Thanks for that.

Atheism, meaning and morality

Let me get this straight. People are actually reading these little screeds of mine? Shit, I’m not gonna have to start checking my facts and proofreading and all that, am I? Okay, so I’m a little self-conscious now, but a thoughtful comment deserves a thoughtful response. Tom over at Blogmandu said:

I think the obstacle to converting God believers en masse to atheism is “meaning.” If their God and religion are taken from them — or if they, themselves, discard it all — what meaning are they left for living their lives? Also, many believe that without religion there is no basis for moral actions. Would it open the door to much greater crime, corruption and murder if religion did not play a part in society?

Hmm… Well, here’s the deal. I don’t consider myself an atheist, nor do I profess a belief in God, because both notions lend themselves to confusion and misunderstanding. Of course, it all depends on what we mean by “God,” so belief and disbelief are really beside the point unless you’re engaged in fairly substantial dialogue with someone. Sam Harris, I know, is a firm believer in the reality and value of spiritual experience, as he has spent years exploring and practicing various meditative practices. He’s only an atheist with respect to the various characterizations of God depicted in religious texts. If “God” is taken to mean “a transpersonal reality,” then you can count both Sam and myself as believers. Speaking for myself, this belief is not an act of faith. I believe in a transcendent order because such a notion makes sense in light of the experiences, evidence and perspectives I have explored thus far in my life. I’m only an atheist when God is a matter of dogma or faith divorced from reason.

As for Tom’s concerns about meaning and morality, I can say that, for me, life became far more meaningful when I dropped preconceived ideas of God and Heaven in favor of open-ended inquiry, dialogue and direct exploration of experience. Meaning tastes best when made, discovered, revealed—not when it’s prefabricated and spoon-fed. And as for religion being the basis for positive moral values, I just don’t think this holds up under scrutiny. Harris points out that predominantly atheistic countries like Norway and The Netherlands rate far better than the God-fearing United States in terms of crime and caring for the poor. Then there are the seemingly endless examples, today and throughout history, of atrocities committed in the name of one religion or another. It could also be argued that moral advances have occurred in spite of religion and not because of it. A strict reading of the Bible, for instance, prescribes acts–such as killing people for working on the Sabbath or for having premarital sex or for mouthing off to their parents–that are considered reprehensible by today’s moral standards. The fact that atheists can be (and usually are) caring and loving people should be enough evidence to shoot down the notion that morality is a faith-based deal.

Anyway, these are good questions and I’m happy to be in dialogue with you fine folks. Hopefully, there is more meaning to be discovered. Good night.

Rational dialogue and human development

Continuing the conversation with Sean regarding Atheists and Development:

Sam Harris is an advocate for the power of conversation, for rational dialogue, and this, more than anything, is what irks him about religious faith: Faith is a real conversation killer. Harris also does a nice job of exposing (then breaking) the taboo of criticizing religious faith. Why give religion a pass, Harris asks, when we demand a basic standard of reasonableness is every other area of our lives? I couldn’t agree more. I also agree with the notion, put forth eloquently by Ken Wilber, that many disagreements and impasses in communication between humans come down to issues of development. Anyone who deals with children or adolescents on a regular basis understands how crucial an understanding of development is for facilitating change. The situation gets trickier, however, when we talk about worldviews and mores and adult human development.

Hec, the majority of Developmental Psychology departments in American universities don’t even discuss adult development, and the few programs in “Life Span Development” posit no quantum changes in human cognition beyond rationality. And although Wilber may be right that development continues in a fundamental way throughout the lifespan, the question remains “How do we best facilitate change?” – whether we’re talking about changing someone’s mind (a change within the bounds of a rational developmental stage) or moving from one developmental stage to another.

Harris argues that certain beliefs eventually become marginalized in a culture when those beliefs are shown to be inconsistent or incompatible with the prevailing evidence. While there is still an active “Flat Earth Society” out there, espousing ludicrous conspiratorial arguments against the “hypothesis” of a round earth, most reasonable people not only refuse to take flat-earthers seriously, we also wouldn’t hesitate to point out the ridiculous, irrational nature of their lame arguments, thus keeping such beliefs on the fringes of society. So, why couldn’t this happen in regard to religious faith? Harris thinks it can, and I agree. And while we can think of the issue in terms of development, such a theoretical pirouette doesn’t weaken the argument that rational, evidence-based, open-ended dialogue is the best catalyst for change we have available to us.

I need only recall my own personal development to understand this. How did I change my mind about religious faith? Or if you prefer, How did I develop to a more inclusive worldview? The answer to both questions is the same in my case: I was exposed, over time, to series of thoughtful, rational, evidence-based perspectives that eventually made utterly transparent the silliness, ignorance, and self-limiting nature of religious dogma. And until integral or developmental theorists can demonstrate a more effective approach to this problem, or any other for that matter, I will have to go with what’s worked for me.

Parenthood

My friend David Jon lit a fire this morning with his latest blogging on the transformative power of parenthood. He makes several interesting points, and I have no doubt that parenthood can be a profoundly deep, spiritual, humanizing, enlightening experience for everyone involved. Just saying this much, however, and I realize I’m in over my head here. I’m thirty-six years old, and neither my wife nor I have any intention (right now, at least) of having children. “Why not?” one might ask. Good question.

I love kids. Always have. At family gatherings I’m the one running around in the back yard with all the kids while the big people stand around like stiffs making idle conversation with each other. My own parents had always assumed I would be family man, and now they — along with my siblings — scratch their heads wondering why I persist in being so self-centered. This is when I get pissed off a little. Because unlike David Jon, I have spent my life surrounded by people who hold parenthood up as the ultimate spiritual experience, at least in the sense that Paul Tillich used the term “spiritual,” i.e. whatever matters most to a person. However you slice it, where I come from, raising children is assumed to be the highest purpose in life. And yet growing up, I never met a single adult who seemed radiantly happy and fulfilled, at least not in the way I yearned to be. And I never heard anyone talk about having and raising children in the way that David Jon talks about it. On the contrary, I was always left with the impression that most people had kids or wanted kids for the most self-centered reasons imaginable, i.e. to keep up with the Jones’s, to pass on their genes, to keep their family name going, to mold little beings in their own image, or to justify continued misery at a soul-sapping job. Where I come from, everyone gets married, has kids, and works at least forty-hours a week. In fact, to this day I know very few people who choose to be childless. If having kids, in and of itself, is such a transformative, life affirming experience, one would expect widespread peace and love instead of widespread misery and ignorance.

When I was a younger man getting ready to take on the “real world,” it seemed that adulthood promised to be, for the most part, a period of gradual physical, psychological and spiritual decline. It just made sense for me to rebel against the status quo. Hec, I never thought I would get married, but here I am. And I may yet decide to have children. If ever I am a father, I have no doubt that it will be a wonderful, spiritual experience like none I’ve ever known. But why should parenthood be any different than loving relationships in general, in that the depth of the experience depends on how open, awake and unfettered I am in my capacity to relate to others and to be alive?

I’ve worked with kids whose parents pimped them out for crack money, or used them as punching bags to vent their endless frustrations. I also have a friend who says he’s discovered what it means to be human through caring for his sons. Any experience can help to free us from our spiritual prison of self-centeredness. Maybe parenthood is uniquely suited for this. I wouldn’t know, I guess.

Keeping it real

So, I spent my precious days off this week at a counselor training workshop type thingy. And yeah, the lack of me-time has left me a bit cranky, but I did manage to learn a few things. For instance, the way I instinctively relate to my clients is consistent with what the state of Kentucky considers to be the “best counseling practices.” Truth be told, the two workshops I’ve attended this month constitute the only official training I’ve received in counseling techniques, despite the fact I’ve been counseling patients in various settings for a dozen years. My bachelor’s degree in Psychology trained me to be a scientist, and my master’s degree was entirely self-help oriented. I learned to be a counselor by counseling. It was a “trial by fire” deal. So, here I am at this seminar and the facilitator is telling me what all the latest research shows and what everyone already knows – that the patient’s perception of his or her relationship with the therapist is far and away the most significant predictor of positive change. Counseling techniques and schools of thought make almost no difference in outcome studies. It’s all about the sense of connection the patient feels with the therapist. It’s all about keeping it real.

For years I’ve considered authentic relationship to be the driving force of positive personal transformation in my life. I even wrote an entire master’s thesis unpacking this concept and using it to articulate some basic principles of personal transformation, principles which I believe are operative across many disciplines. Even yesterday, as I pondered the pros and cons of posting my caustic diatribe, I kept coming back to my commitment to keeping it real, even when doing so might lead to conflict and discomfort. It’s a slippery slope sometimes. In the end, I tempered my reaction to Stu’s blog quite a bit, editing out some pretty harsh comments. I’m still not sure this was the right thing to do. Nor am I sure it was a good idea to post at all, edits or otherwise. Who did it benefit? Was it just a way to make me feel better? Was it unnecessarily hurtful?

These are the types of judgment calls we all have to make everyday, and certainly I have to make them several times a day in my role as therapist. So far, I’ve always gone with my gut, and all in all that’s worked out fairly well. What else can we do?