Not sure if this is a good comment, it is just two questions:
Are there good quality articles like this about the quran? (would they give a background to attitudes in places were islam is common)
Also, does this sort of article feed a personal interest in the subject or do they explain something about the psyche of modern people? (i assume not many people are influenced by these ideas in the north america/europe today)
I'm always surprised when I see another Western European religious movement that is so similar to Zen. Why do we look so far for solutions if we have some in our own history?
But one thing I feel is lacking in most western movements: The handling of emptiness. If you really think about consequences of actions and how small one is compared to the whole, one cannot avoid realizing how meaningless and heartless the world is. Facing this void and not running away is one of the hardest challenges a human can cope with. We have a very deep desire to see some meaning in life, even if there isn't.
Zen at least admits this and offers ways to interact with this void and one's own growing understanding of it. I think these monks don't because they simply assume the meaning is to show how good you are so you can receive redemption after death.
So I think that would've been a great point three of the article instead of handling boredom, which in some way is also about handling the meaningless, but on a less deep understanding of it. If you are bored you still believe other people are doing meaningful things.
> Zen at least admits this and offers ways to interact with this void and one's own growing understanding of it. I think these monks don't because they simply assume the meaning is to show how good you are so you can receive redemption after death.
In the Christian tradition, it isn't how good you are that gives you redemption after death, it's a free gift from God that you can never be good enough to deserve.
This is probably also why the Christian mystical tradition doesn't engage that much with the void and lack of meaning (although see Ecclesiastes), since a Christian believes that fundamentally there is a huge amount of meaning to life that comes from relationship with God.
> In the Christian tradition, it isn't how good you are that gives you redemption after death, it's a free gift from God that you can never be good enough to deserve.
Isn't this the protestant view ("sola gratia")?
I'd think one's actions are very much accounted for in catholicism, which is also why there is a big stress on confession/repenting and penitence.
My understanding is that in all major forms of Christian theology, including Catholicism, salavation is an unearned gift of God. This is not to say that actions are irrelevant in any of the major forms - Protestants too believe that the gift of God must naturally result in particular kinds of actions by those who have genuinely received it.
It's also the case that many (though not all) Christians believe that it is possible to lose your salvation by giving up your faith, something that could be argued to be an 'action' and that all forms of Christianity emphasise 'repentance' another potential 'action'.
I think (from the Catholic view at least) that actions should come from your belief in God. Faith isn't just supposed to be a belief that god exists, because Satan knows god exists, it is supposed to be an acceptance of his will into your heart. If you say that you have accepted his will into your heart and yet you don't perform charitable deeds, are abusive to others etc. then it shows that your are either deluding others or yourself about your relationship with God. Or from the Book of James "If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well,” but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it? So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead. Indeed someone may say, “You have faith and I have works.” Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works. You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble."
Christians face the void and the emptiness, but the Christian claim is that the void is the lack of God in our life caused by sin; that is, to fill the void and to address existential crises, we must engage further with God.
Mystic theology in the Protestant tradition is very obscure. My judgement is that it is because the Protestants are essentially a textual tradition. Pentacostals shook that up, but have some maturing left to do there. :-)
“Meaningless! Meaningless!”
says the Teacher.
“Utterly meaningless!
Everything is meaningless.”
3 What do people gain from all their labors
at which they toil under the sun?
4 Generations come and generations go,
but the earth remains forever.
5 The sun rises and the sun sets,
and hurries back to where it rises.
6 The wind blows to the south
and turns to the north;
round and round it goes,
ever returning on its course.
7 All streams flow into the sea,
yet the sea is never full.
To the place the streams come from,
there they return again.
8 All things are wearisome,
more than one can say.
The eye never has enough of seeing,
nor the ear its fill of hearing.
9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there anything of which one can say,
“Look! This is something new”?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time.
11 No one remembers the former generations,
and even those yet to come
will not be remembered
by those who follow them.
This is from Solomon, a man who had everything and it didn't satisfy.
One question would be why aren't we satisfied?
An answer, from a Christian perspective, would be, as cs lewis states:
> If I find in myself desires which nothing in this world can satisfy, the only logical explanation is that I was made for another world
A consistent biblical them is God's Providence in suffering. The book of Job for example, or Joshua's, what you meant for evil God meant for good, but along with these examples the people aren't given any explanation for what has happened to them. Job never gets told why he was made to suffer.
And so Providence imbues the apparently meaningless with meaning, even if it's meaning we can't understand.
The analogy of children is appropriate. Often they find themselves in situations they don't understand, and actually they're developmentally incapable of understanding, but their implicit trust of their parents comforts them. This is how we were designed to live our lives.
> This is what I have observed to be good: that it is appropriate for a person to eat, to drink and to find satisfaction in their toilsome labor under the sun during the few days of life God has given them—for this is their lot. Moreover, when God gives someone wealth and possessions, and the ability to enjoy them, to accept their lot and be happy in their toil—this is a gift of God. They seldom reflect on the days of their life, because God keeps them occupied with gladness of heart.
> This is from Solomon, a man who had everything and it didn't satisfy.
Well, it's attributed to King Solomon in one tradition and attributed to Hezekiah and others in another. I am not sure if either has been definitively established. It could as well have been a disillusioned religious scholar.
"Why do we look so far for solutions if we have some in our own history?"
I believe we had even much more solutions, but most have simply been wiped out. The celtic druids for example seemed to had a very interesting philosophy, but they were destroyed by the romans and the christians finished off, what was left, just like the germanic and slavic religions/philosophy systems. And since they had a tradition of vocal teaching and not writing down, we know allmost nothing for sure about them as most of it comes from christian chronists.
But the bits you still can find, are very interesting, I think.
Thanks for the comment - I wanted a little more information about your work - did you have to search extensively/move a far away for this type of employer?
Also what kind of words would the employer use to describe these working conditions (looks like its beyond normal "flexitime" arrangements) so that others might find them too?
This is my first fulltime job, having just graduated in December and spending most of January traveling. It was actually the only job I got an offer -- it was near the top of my list of choices but I was still pretty disappointed. I probably applied to maybe 300 places over the course of a year, but after getting an offer (following an internship over the summer) I probably only applied to 3-5 places I was serious about.
The employer doesn't use any words to describe it, its just part of the culture I guess. Just get your work done, no one cares when you're in the office. We have a scrum meeting we're expected to attend and a few sprints meetings/allhands, but everything else we are free to schedule whatever suits us best. Initially I was a little disappointed about how little vacation time I was getting, but I've taken a few days off and have never been docked days from my balance.
This work hours issue is quite contentious. I don't want to stifle discussion but right now I wish there was a standard "gwen" response at the top of the thread with well researched papers on the subject.
Jason Holtman: one of the main guys responsible for Steam
Tom Forsyth: already mentioned, VR for TF2
Moby Francke: art lead for TF2
Realm Lovejoy: one of the Narbacular Drop people which turned into Portal
Plus a few others that have been there since the beginning, what you would call the core of the company.
Without knowing details it's impossible to know if they were justified or not, but they are surprising because their resumes suggest these aren't slackers.
Are there good quality articles like this about the quran? (would they give a background to attitudes in places were islam is common)
Also, does this sort of article feed a personal interest in the subject or do they explain something about the psyche of modern people? (i assume not many people are influenced by these ideas in the north america/europe today)