Lost Symbols – the cause of many problems.

We all need and use symbols. Symbols refer to something that represents an unknowable. God, or Love, Goodness or Evil, or Infinity, or Wisdom, or Death, or Beauty, all commonly used words but we cannot “know” what they are. These are words that we use every day but are impossible to define, yet we all have some idea about the meaning (to us) of the concepts expressed by the words even though we can never have a full understanding of their meaning. When we are presented with something “Godlike” or experience something that cannot be known such as “Love”, or touched, such as “beauty”, we may have some ideas about what we are experiencing without being able to explain or define it. Hence there is a need for a symbol; something which expresses what we mean, or our understanding of the meaning.

Today there seems to be confusion over the meanings of the words Symbol and Idol.  A Symbol is something that represents a concept, an idea, something which is unknown, even unknowable; something which is imprecise. The purpose of a symbol is to communicate meaning. A good example of a symbol is the mathematical image: ∞, representing the concept of infinity – this useful symbol has crept into common usage. We need this symbol because we cannot “see” infinity; we cannot “touch” infinity; we know that (presumably) infinity exists but we cannot explain the concept of infinity – it just is.

On the other hand an idol is an image or other physical object accepted as representing a deity and to which religious worship is directed. This thing (even occasionally a person) is often regarded with blind admiration, adoration, or devotion. A religious idol is often called an icon.

In this modern day and age, however, we have been so conditioned by the allure of the exactitude provided by “science”, and our apparent never satisfied desire to categorise, to analyse everything, that we no longer believe in things we cannot see. We cannot “see” God therefore God doesn’t exist. There is nothing, therefore, above and beyond human existence and human beings  are just an agglomeration of matter –  just ‘mechanisms’– that the human body is just a watertight skin bag filled with blood, flesh and bones. When we “die” that is the end, there can be nothing else because “science” says so.

This leads us to the troubling idea that if something cannot be ‘proved’, cannot be measured, cannot dissected, cannot be ‘examined’ in a scientific manner (in a laboratory or under a microscope) it cannot exist or it cannot be true. All this may be very interesting but if we destroy or diminish the importance of symbols what are we left with? We, as human beings have been reduced to believing in pure materialism. A stark “black” or “white” – it either exists or it doesn’t. This extreme materialism has devalued symbols and with this there has been a corresponding loss of values.  The wondrous nature of “Life” in all its millions of forms is diminished and reduced to the random activities of atoms and molecules.  

We cannot see “Life” yet life exists. Anyone who has been present at the moment of death when an animal or a person dies will recognise that something that was there is no longer there; something has withdrawn and death is the result. Similarly with “Love”; this most transformative of emotions is reduced, by many people to be just a pleasurable, sensory activity; we derive pleasure without a conscience. We cannot see “goodness” so it is often transmogrified into something we can see – money. If we are feeling down we may decide to apply some “retail therapy” and spend money – thus (supposedly) making us feel “good”. If someone has a great deal of money they, personally, believe they must be good and many others certainly admire and respect them. We no longer have an understanding of what it is to be human.

The wonderful – but unseen – experiences or emotions and their symbols are now so diminished in our consciousness that we demean and cheapen Life (in whatever form) to the point that we exploit all forms of Life for monetary benefit (benefiting and in effect glorifying our “goodness”). Thus there human trafficking; there is slavery (often child slavery in “sweat shops”); there is sexual exploitation – all this when money and profits are considered more important than human beings. Money and no appreciation of “Life” lead to the exploitation of animals – cruelty in farm situations (“industrial” farms with animals confined in shed or cages) and in abattoirs. This is commerce without morality; this is a desire (which, unfortunately, we all seem share) for wealth without having to work for it.

There are many symbols that we used in the past that gave comfort and a link with what is difficult to understand and possibly unknowable. For instance we understand an image of the “grim reaper” (a dark hooded figure holding a scythe) as a symbol of death. We, possibly, might use the image of a tree as a symbol of “Life”, rooted in the earth with branches reaching heavenward – spanning, birth, life and the here-after; or possibly use the image of a seed with its ability to germinate and with its unknown potential. 

The number of symbols is almost endless.

We have now lost our belief in symbols – symbols of something greater than ourselves. We are the poorer for this loss. A new “God” has arisen symbolised by the images $ or €. 

All this is not to say that slavery and exploitation did not exist in olden times – of course they did. But then people had a choice and they were aware of the consequences of their activities (either heaven or hell). Today there is apparently no choice (it is either science or nothing) and people engaged in these questionable activities seem to be unaware of the consequences – almost as if the only crime is to be caught.

We have lost our symbols and now have science without humanity.

Bank bashing – What goes around comes around

What is it with banks? I have written about this before – I have even written to individual banks and to the Secretary of the Australian Bankers Association about the matter. I have never received a satisfactory answer.

Why do many people take a delight in “bashing” banks? And why do the banks, seemingly, do nothing about it?

People “bash” banks because they have a sense that they are being exploited – for no good reason. Banks (in general) forget that they are in the service industry – they ‘serve’ people; they are not in business just to satisfy their shareholders.

I fully understand that banks need to make a profit – to pay wages and dividends and all the other things that businesses are in business to do. But I really believe that banks are in a different category from “normal” businesses – because in every sense of the word they “serve” people – and they are supposed to look after the money of the people they serve.

What irritates many people is the fact that banks keep raising fees to maintain their profits – in spite of the fact that, in Australia at least, the official Reserve Bank Cash Rate is falling. Banks say they need to keep being highly profitable to attract investors.

But banks need to look at money from a different point of view. Money is a token; something used in exchange for goods and “stuff”. And who are the investors? The investors are individuals just like you and I and also “institutional” investors, who are more often than not superannuation (pension) funds and other similar type organisations. Now these institutions receive increasing dividends from the banks who charge these higher fees. But who pays these higher fees? The individuals like you and I who, trustingly, place our savings with the institutions who invest in the banks to get higher dividends to pay their depositors increasing yields for their pensions!

Like a dog chasing its own tail. It is all just a “round robin” – what goes around comes around. If banks provided a service by looking after the interests of their individual depositors, not just servicing the institutional investors they might be less reviled and be respected as they used to be many years ago.

Take a big gripe of mine – trying to transfer money from my bank to someone else’s bank. This normally takes two working days. Some months ago I wanted to transfer $500 to someone in Melbourne (a distance of 3456km – about 2100 miles – from Perth). I “transferred” it at about 6.30pm on a Friday evening. The Melbourne bank received the funds on the following Tuesday – four days later! I complained but got all sorts of excuses from my bank – none were satisfactory. They had no answer to the fact that, feasibly, I could withdraw cash from an ATM at 6.30pm on Friday, climb in my car and drive the 3400 odd km to Melbourne and arrive before the (transferred) money on Tuesday! I would be driving at about 100km per hour whereas an electronic transfer would presumably travel along optic fibre cables at close to the speed of light with bank main frame computers down loading at speeds measured in the gigabytes per second category.

This is why I and many others get irritated with banks. They serve themselves with no reasonable explanation to the public they are supposed to serve. Most people (including myself) have limited contact with banks – the enquiries counter, a teller or a loans officer at the end of a phone. Most of us are unaware of the finer points of “banking” and the financial machinations that go on behind the façade. But then the banks never offer any explanation on their actions – just a bald statement that raising finance now costs the banks more therefore mortgages and loans will cost more.

They have yet to learn that if they treat the public with apparent contempt, surprise, surprise, they will be treated the same way. What goes around comes around.

Ethics and Injustice – the Catholic Church and others.

It is outrageous that an august institution like the Roman Catholic Church should deny the prevalence of physical and sexual abuse and paedophilia within its ranks. For this to be allowed to happen is shameful and indicates that, firstly, the Catholic Church leaders have forgotten (or chosen to ignore) the difference between religion and spirituality. Secondly, the Catholic Church leaders would appear to be (to use an appropriate term) hell bent on preserving the Church’s image, regardless of the consequences.  

Just because someone who attends a church and is well versed in the contents of the Bible (or the Koran or anything else), and can quote it, as the saying goes – chapter and verse – does not mean that they are a “good” person; they may be “religious” but are they spiritual? Spirituality is difficult to define. Generally I think that referring to someone as “spiritual” means that the person has empathy, an awareness, an understanding that there is something above and beyond a person’s apparent existence, something more; that a “Great Artificer” (God, the Divine, Allah) exists and that Humans have souls and a higher purpose than mere existence. The quest for and the fulfilment of this purpose is (or should be) a Human Being’s principle aim.

It is my understanding that the Catholic Church, in fact any organisation or groupings of people performing a similar function, through its leaders and teachers, should be guiding, instructing and helping their followers to do just that – to try and understand that higher purpose. I am not sure that any Religion, of whatever Faith, does this today.

For the Catholic Church leaders to prevaricate, obfusticate and generally deny the problem of abuse and paedophilia within its priesthood is criminal and plain wrong. They are not protecting their image – they are tarnishing it. Worse still they are damaging the mental and physical wellbeing of those they are charged with protecting – their parishioners; the reason for their very existence as a church. The Catholic Church is risking everything for what? For an image? What image and what is ethical or honourable in what they are doing? What they are doing is destroying trust and damaging the wellbeing of countless individuals.  

It is odd that an institution founded on honesty and penitence should struggle so. Today’s Catholic leaders might also recall that clerical abuses of power, defended by legalistic quibbling, greatly angered an itinerant preacher in Palestine two millennia ago (The Economist Mar 18th 2010).

While, fortunately, there are many very good and devoted people in all religions, it is, as always, the case that a few “bad apples spoil the barrel”. Therefore it is hardly surprising that it is not just the Catholic Church that is struggling with the problem of sexual and physical abuse and paedophilia. A search, even a cursory search, of the internet reveals the astonishing and distressing fact that these issues are present in all the Christian Churches, in Islam, in Judaism, in Buddhism and in Hinduism. No one seems to be able to control it or be prepared to do anything about it.

Wherever and whenever males are involved with women and children (and being a male I am distressed to admit this is almost entirely a male problem) male perceptions of “dominance” and “power” come into play and sexual temptation will be ever present. Just because “The Book” (Bible, Koran or whatever) does not explicitly condemn the sexual and physical abuse of women and children does not mean that it is acceptable in any shape or form.

Being a male I am only too aware of the influence of testosterone in daily living. But I believe that I have been able to exercise a measure of restraint and self-control over my actions. My thoughts and dreams are of course another matter entirely. This is where the so called “teachings” and the teachers have failed. Imams, Monks, Preachers and Priests, by virtue of their positions and “superior” knowledge should lead by example; should lead with love; not with fear and certainly not with a “do as I say, not as I do” approach. This “holier than thou” attitude helps no one and destroys that most subtle element of life, trust in others.

It is the “Golden Rule” and a basic tenet of ALL religions that one should treat others as you, yourself, would like to be treated.  This is the ethical, moral way – in fact the only way. Self-restraint, self-discipline, empathy and an understanding of the unwritten “Law” of Cause and Effect; that whatever a person does will have unanticipated consequences; that what goes around comes around; that a person reaps what they sow; that they will have to sleep in the bed they have made, appear to be beyond the comprehension of Church leaders and leaders of other religious organisations. There are countless myths, legends and children’s stories, in all languages, detailing the consequences of wrong doing and of harming people. Does anyone read and reflect on these today?

Is it any wonder that there is so much violence in the world when those who are supposed to promote, preach and “spread the Word” about “loving thy neighbour as thyself”, themselves by their actions, do nothing of the sort.

That ALL the “great” religions of the world have declined to such an extent that they have lost their moral compass and are seemingly unable to distinguish right from wrong, is a sad reflection on our day and age. Trying to get back to the roots of any religion by reverting to an outdated, primitive and “fundamental” interpretation of the Bible or the Koran, or any other “Book”, will just compound the problem.

It would appear that Religion today, as practiced by all faiths, has been reduced to a shell hollowed out by hypocrisy, immorality, injustice and unethical conduct.

Shame on you!

(For the record I was baptised as an Anglican – Church of England – but I do not attend any church and do not align myself with any particular faith).

Pharma-psychology - more on Faith based medicine.

Some time ago I wrote about Psychology and that in my view psychological “cures” based on pharmacology (i.e. drugs) is founded on faith and may be considered as a pseudo-science. This aroused a fair bit of interest and one informed comment by an unidentified contributor. This post is really a continuation of my original.

There is a profound ignorance about the connection (if there is one) between mind and brain. It is all very well for neuroscientists to point out that with the various brain scanning techniques now available it can be seen that different parts of the brain “light up” when a patient is talking about an enjoyable experience or when thinking about a mathematical problem. But HOW does the excitation of neurons translate into memories of the experience or the solution to a maths problem? And what comes first – is it the activity of the neurons which creates the thoughts and memories or does the creation of the thoughts and memories activate the neurons? No one knows.

Consider now, from a psychological point of view, our freedom to choose – known as the “problem of mental causation”. Regarding the multitude of properties attaching to the human brain, in terms of its physical activity, there are occurrences that in strictly scientific terms should be impossible:- How can it be that subjective (non-material) thoughts of the “self” can so influence the function of the brain that it compels the brain to direct one course of body action rather that another?

It is a fundamental fact of science - a precept - that nothing can happen that is not governed by natural laws of material causation (i.e. physical things cause physical effects). Thoughts are non-physical (they are subjective), therefore by definition cannot cause anything physical to happen....!!

The one and a half kilogram brain is certainly an incredible organ.

But why, Oh why, if we know so little about how and why the brain works do psychiatrists, when presented with a so called “mental disease” persist in pumping the brain full of drugs? They prescribe drugs even for children – some as young as 2 and 3 years old. This is inexcusable; this is unethical. In this regard an over reliance on pharmacology is fraught; a “chemical imbalance” in the brain means what, exactly? What is the “correct” chemical balance and how is this determined? It should not be forgotten that behaviour can never be considered a “disease”, as an illness. A person may be ill at ease and this may affect their behaviour but they are not “sick” – unless there is a pathological reason, which would then be beyond the scope of psychology.

All this may be a bit technical for the casual reader but as many people a possible should try to understand the basic facts – Firstly, that no one knows what actually causes any individual to suffer from a mental problem (and make no mistake people do suffer); Secondly, that the “Bible” of Psychologists and Psychiatrists, the American Psychological Association’s DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders edition IV) lists over 360 disorders – which I find bizarre; Thirdly, using the diagnostic tools listed in the DSM-IV mental health professionals have reported to the Australian Bureau of Statistics that 19% of Australians, will in their lifetime, suffer from some form of mental disorder! That is 1 in 5 Australians will need some form of treatment (most probably drugs). This I also find bizarre.

All this is determined on a highly problematical and yet to be proven “scientific” basis. For instance after nearly one hundred years of research there is no objective test for psychosis (classic psychotic experiences involving, for example, feelings of persecution, thought interference and auditory hallucinations) – it's a matter of a health professional’s judgement regarding the apparent behavioural and thought disorder patterns presented by an individual (as determined using the DSM-IV diagnostic tools - in other words ticking multiple choice boxes on a list). Furthermore if psychosis is deemed to have a genetic base – as some psychologists now claim - the questions relating to any evolutionary advantage will need to be answered.

Then there is the grave issue of side effects of these drugs – they can be very severe indeed. For instance the West Australian Government’s Chief Psychiatrist warns as follows – quoting from the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA):-

FDA Product Information Warning

Patients with major depressive disorder, both adult and pediatric, may experience worsening of their depression and/or the emergence of suicidal ideation and behavior (suicidality), whether or not they are taking antidepressant medications, and this risk may persist until significant remission occurs. Although there has been a long-standing concern that antidepressants may have a role in inducing worsening of depression and the emergence of suicidality in certain patients, a causal role for antidepressants in inducing such behaviors has not been established. Nevertheless, patients being treated with antidepressants should be observed closely for clinical worsening and suicidality, especially at the beginning of a course of drug therapy, or at the time of dose changes, either increases or decreases.

Consideration should be given to changing the therapeutic regimen, including possibly discontinuing the medication, in patients whose depression is persistently worse or whose emergent suicidality is severe, abrupt in onset, or was not part of the patient’s presenting symptoms.

Still happy about taking these drugs??

Finally I include the following email I received from a correspondent which may be of interest to some readers (I suppress his name for obvious reasons): 

“A year ago you wrote about your take on the perceived horrors of the West Australian Mental Health Act and its so called 'Chief Psychiatrist'.

I am an Australian, and in another State. But I can tell you all of the states in Australia have the same kind of heinous 'mental health acts'.

 You are completely, and utterly correct in your assertions. I am a survivor of forced psychiatric drugging in Australia and I can tell you, far more than it being 'worse than prison' (which is correct), it is enough to make you lose all faith in humanity and all agreement in the false assertion that this Australia is a 'free society'. If your brain can be raped, on the say so of one man, without court hearing, without charge, without opportunity to hire a lawyer, you're living in a piece of shit fascist state.

It took me years to even be this articulate in response, and I am one in 10,000 in terms of the survivors of forced psychiatry in this country. The vast majority are rendered drooling zombies, and I'm not frigging around.

 It is always nice, always ever so slightly encouraging, to see an Australian even remotely  empathising with the people targeted by these laws. It is challenging enough, to not arbitrarily HATE all Australians who would dare vote for governments who continue such heinous laws.  Which includes 99.99 percent of Australians.

.....which makes for a lonely existence nonetheless. 

Kudos to you, for at least acknowledging what disgusting torture governments dish out in this country.”

(I hasten to add that I have nothing personal against the Chief Psychiatrist – I have never met or spoken to him. I am sure he is a man with the mental welfare of the Western Australian population at heart).

NOW are you still happy about being prescribed and taking antidepressant medication??