2023/03/17

Johan Galtung - Wikipedia

Johan Galtung - Wikipedia

Johan Galtung

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Johan Galtung
Johan Galtung - Trento.JPG
Galtung in 2012
Born24 October 1930 (age 92)
Oslo, Norway
Alma materUniversity of Oslo
Known forPrincipal founder of peace and conflict studies
AwardsRight Livelihood Award (1987)
Scientific career
FieldsSociology, peace and conflict studies
InstitutionsColumbia University, University of Oslo, Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO)
Founder and Director of Peace Research Institute Oslo
In office
1959–1969
Succeeded byAsbjørn Eide

Johan Vincent Galtung (born 24 October 1930) is a Norwegian sociologist who is the principal founder of the discipline of peace and conflict studies.[1] He was the main founder of the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) in 1959 and served as its first director until 1970. He also established the Journal of Peace Research in 1964.

In 1969, he was appointed to the world's first chair in peace and conflict studies, at the University of Oslo. He resigned his Oslo professorship in 1977 and has since held professorships at several other universities; from 1993 to 2000 he taught as Distinguished Professor of Peace Studies at the University of Hawaii. He was the Tun Mahathir Professor of Global Peace at the International Islamic University Malaysia until 2015.[2]

Background[edit]

Galtung speaking at the Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education, Mexico City in September 2012.

Galtung was born in Oslo. He earned the cand. real.[3] degree in mathematics at the University of Oslo in 1956, and a year later completed the mag. art. (PhD)[3] degree in sociology at the same university.[4] Galtung received the first of thirteen honorary doctorates in 1975.[5]

Galtung's father and paternal grandfather were both physicians. The Galtung name has its origins in Hordaland, where his paternal grandfather was born. Nevertheless, his mother, Helga Holmboe, was born in central Norway, in Trøndelag, while his father was born in Østfold, in the south. Galtung has been married twice, and has two children by his first wife Ingrid Eide, Harald Galtung and Andreas Galtung, and two by his second wife Fumiko Nishimura, Irene Galtung and Fredrik Galtung.[6]

Galtung experienced World War II in German-occupied Norway, and as a 12-year-old saw his father arrested by the Nazis. By 1951, he was already a committed peace mediator, and elected to do 18 months of social service in place of his obligatory military service. After 12 months, Galtung insisted that the remainder of his social service be spent in activities relevant to peace.[7]

Career[edit]

Upon receiving his mag. art. degree, Galtung moved to Columbia University, in New York City, where he taught for five semesters as an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology.[7] In 1959, Galtung returned to Oslo, where he founded the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO). He was the institute's director until 1969.[8]

In 1964, Galtung led PRIO to establish the first academic journal devoted to Peace Studies: the Journal of Peace Research.[8] In the same year, he assisted in the founding of the International Peace Research Association.[9] In 1969, he left PRIO for a position as professor of peace and conflict research at the University of Oslo, a position he held until 1978.[8]

He was the director general of the International University Centre in Dubrovnik and helped to found and lead the World Future Studies Federation.[10][11] He has held visiting positions at other universities, including Santiago, Chile, the United Nations University in Geneva, and at Columbia, Princeton and the University of Hawaii.[12] In 2014, he was appointed as the first Tun Mahathir Professor of Global Peace at the International Islamic University Malaysia.[13]

Economist and fellow peace researcher Kenneth Boulding has said of Galtung that his "output is so large and so varied that it is hard to believe that it comes from a human".[14] He is a member of the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters.[15]

In 1993, he co-founded TRANSCEND: A Peace Development Environment Network.[16][17] In 1987, he was given the Right Livelihood Award.

Peacebuilding[edit]

Galtung first conceptualized peacebuilding by calling for systems that would create sustainable peace. The peacebuilding structures needed to address the root causes of conflict and support local capacity for peace management and conflict resolution.[18] Galtung has held several significant positions in international research councils and has been an advisor to several international organisations. Since 2004, he has been a member of the Advisory Council of the Committee for a Democratic UN.

Galtung is strongly associated with the following concepts:

  • Structural violence – widely defined as the systematic ways in which a regime prevents individuals from achieving their full potential. Institutionalized racism and sexism are examples of this.
  • Negative vs. positive peace – popularized the concept that peace may be more than just the absence of overt violent conflict (negative peace), and will likely include a range of relationships up to a state where nations (or any groupings in conflict) might have collaborative and supportive relationships (positive peace). Though he did not cite them, these terms were, in fact, previously defined and discussed in a series of lectures starting in 1899 by Jane Addams (in her 1907 book she switched to calling it 'newer ideals of peace' but continued to contrast them to the term negative peace), and in 1963 in the letter from a Birmingham jail by Martin Luther King Jr.

Criticism of the United States[edit]

In 1973, Galtung criticised the "structural fascism" of the US and other Western countries that make war to secure materials and markets, stating: "Such an economic system is called capitalism, and when it's spread in this way to other countries it's called imperialism", and praised Fidel Castro's Cuba in 1972 for "break[ing] free of imperialism's iron grip". Galtung has stated that the US is a "killer country" guilty of "neo-fascist state terrorism" and compared the US to Nazi Germany for bombing Kosovo during the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia.[19][20]

In an article published in 2004, Galtung predicted that the US empire will "decline and fall" by 2020. He expanded on this hypothesis in his 2009 book titled The Fall of the US Empire - and Then What? Successors, Regionalization or Globalization? US Fascism or US Blossoming?.[21][22]

Views on Communist regimes[edit]

During his career, Galtung statements and views have drawn criticism including his criticism of Western countries during and after the Cold War and what his critics perceived as a positive attitude to the Soviet Union, Cuba and Communist China. A 2007 article by Bruce Bawer published by the City Journal magazine[19] and a subsequent article in February 2009 by Barbara Kay in the National Post[20] criticised Galtung's opinion of China during the rule of Mao Zedong. China, according to Galtung, was "repressive in a certain liberal sense", but he insisted "the whole theory about what an 'open society' is must be rewritten, probably also the theory of 'democracy'—and it will take a long time before the West will be willing to view China as a master teacher in such subjects."[19] Calling Galtung a "lifelong enemy of freedom", Bawer said Galtung discouraged Hungarian resistance against the Soviet invasion in 1956, and criticized his description in 1974 of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov as "persecuted elite personages".[19]

Views on Jews and Israel[edit]

Galtung has recommended that people should read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a fabricated antisemitic text purporting to describe a Jewish plan for global domination.[23] In defending his claims that Jews control American media companies, Galtung cited an article published by National Vanguard, a neo-Nazi organization.[23] Galtung's rhetoric has been criticized by Terje Emberland, a historian at the Center for Studies of the Holocaust and Religious Minorities in Oslo, and Øystein Sørensen, a University of Oslo historian known for his scholarship on conspiracy theories.[23] Asked by NRK about his controversial remarks, Galtung reiterated his recommendation that people should read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.[23] Galtung rejects that he is anti-Semitic.[23]

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz accused Galtung in May 2012 of antisemitism for (1) suggesting the possibility of a link between the 2011 Norway attacks and Israel's intelligence agency Mossad; (2) maintaining that "six Jewish companies" control 96% of world media; (3) identifying what he contends are ironic similarities between the banking firm Goldman Sachs and the conspiratorial antisemitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion; and (4) theorizing, although not justified, antisemitism in post–World War I Germany was a predictable consequence of German Jews holding influential positions.[24] As a result of such statements, TRANSCEND International, an organisation co-founded by Galtung, released a statement in May 2012 attempting to clarify his opinions.[25] On August 8, 2012, the World Peace Academy in Basel, Switzerland announced it was suspending Galtung from its organization, citing what it posited were his "reckless and offensive statements to questions that are specifically sensitive for Jews."[26] Galtung said the claims were "smearing and libel",[27][28]

Selected awards and recognitions[edit]

Selected works[edit]

Galtung has published more than a thousand articles and over a hundred books.[31]

  • Statistisk hypotesepröving (Statistical hypothesis testing, 1953)
  • Gandhis politiske etikk (Gandhi's political ethics, 1955, with philosopher Arne Næss)
  • Theory and Methods of Social Research (1967)
  • Violence, Peace and Peace Research (1969)
  • Members of Two Worlds (1971)
  • Fred, vold og imperialisme (Peace, violence and imperialism, 1974)
  • Peace: Research – Education – Action (1975)
  • Europe in the Making (1989)
  • Global Glasnost: Toward a New World Information and Communication Order? (1992, with Richard C. Vincent)
  • Global Projections of Deep-Rooted U.S Pathologies Archived 2017-08-18 at the Wayback Machine (1996)
  • Peace By Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization (1996)
  • Johan uten land. På fredsveien gjennom verden (Johan without land. On the Peace Path Through the World, 2000, autobiography for which he won the Brage Prize)
  • 50 Years: 100 Peace and Conflict Perspectives (2008)
  • Democracy – Peace – Development (2008, with Paul D. Scott)
  • 50 Years: 25 Intellectual Landscapes Explored (2008)
  • Globalizing God: Religion, Spirituality and Peace (2008, with Graeme MacQueen)[32]

References[edit]

  1. ^ John D. Brewer, Peace processes: a sociological approach, p. 7, Polity Press, 2010
  2. ^ "Public Lecture: "Seeking Peace from Resolving Conflict between Buddhists and Muslims in Myanmar and Sri Lanka" by Prof. Dr. Johan Galtung". Archived from the original on 2015-06-03. Retrieved 2015-06-02.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b "CV_Galtung". Coe.int. Retrieved 2013-11-18.
  4. ^ "Johan Galtung", Norsk Biografisk Leksikon
  5. ^ "Johan Galtung". Retrieved 4 April 2017.
  6. ^ "Genealogical data for Johan Galtung". Archived from the original on 2008-08-03. Retrieved 2007-11-18.
  7. ^ Jump up to:a b Life of Johan Galtung (in Danish)
  8. ^ Jump up to:a b c "PRIO biography for Johan Galtung". Archived from the original on 2008-05-28. Retrieved 2007-11-17.
  9. ^ History of the IPRA Archived 2011-12-03 at the Wayback Machine
  10. ^ (E. Boulding 1982: 323)
  11. ^ Andersson, Jenny (2018). The future of the world: Futurology, futurists, and the struggle for the post-Cold War imagination. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198814337.
  12. ^ "Dagens Nyheter 2003-01-15". Archived from the original on 2011-05-15. Retrieved 2007-09-27.
  13. ^ TUN MAHATHIR PERDANA GLOBAL PEACE FOUNDATION (PGPF) CHAIR FOR GLOBAL PEACE, International Islamic University Malaysia
  14. ^ (K. Boulding 1977: 75)
  15. ^ "Gruppe 7: Samfunnsfag (herunder sosiologi, statsvitenskap og økonomi)" (in Norwegian). Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters. Archived from the original on 27 September 2011. Retrieved 26 October 2009.
  16. ^ Transcend.org
  17. ^ "Interview - Johan Galtung". 27 May 2014. Retrieved 16 November 2014.
  18. ^ PEACEBUILDING & THE UNITED NATIONS Peacebuilding Support Office, United Nations
  19. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Bawer, Bruce (Summer 2007). "The Peace Racket". City Journal. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
  20. ^ Jump up to:a b Barbarians within the gate by Barbara Kay, National Post, February 18, 2009.[dead link]
  21. ^ Prof. J. Galtung: 'US empire will fall by 2020' on YouTube Russia Today.
  22. ^ On the Coming Decline and Fall of the US Empire by Johan Galtung, Transnational Foundation and Peace and Research (TFF), January 28, 2004.
  23. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Zondag, Martin H. W. (2012-04-24). "– En trist sorti for Galtung". NRK (in Norwegian Bokmål).
  24. ^ Aderet, Ofer (30 April 2012). "Pioneer of global peace studies hints at link between Norway massacre and Mossad". Haaretz. Retrieved 7 September 2012.
  25. ^ "TRANSCEND International's Statement Concerning the Label of anti-Semitism Against Johan Galtung". TRANSCEND International. Retrieved 8 September 2012.
  26. ^ Weinthal, Benjamin (August 9, 2012). "Swiss group suspends 'anti-Semitic' Norway scholar". The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on August 12, 2012. Retrieved August 11, 2012.
  27. ^ "STELLUNGNAHME/035: Professor Galtung zu den Vorwürfen des Antisemitismus (Johan Galtung)". Schattenblick. 14 December 2012. Retrieved 2016-01-12.
  28. ^ "Grenzach-Wyhlen: Zwei Vorträge mit Johan Galtung". Südkurier. 6 December 2012. Retrieved 2016-01-12.
  29. ^ "Honorary doctorates - Uppsala University, Sweden".
  30. ^ "Jamnalal Bajaj Awards Archive". Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation.
  31. ^ TRANSCEND biography on Johan Galtung
  32. ^ "Johan Galtung's Publications 1948-2010" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 September 2012. Retrieved 8 September 2012.

Sources[edit]

  • Boulding, Elise. 1982. "Review: Social Science—For What?: Festschrift for Johan Galtung." Contemporary Sociology. 11(3):323-324. JSTOR Stable URL
  • Boulding, Kenneth E. 1977. "Twelve Friendly Quarrels with Johan Galtung." Journal of Peace Research. 14(1):75-86. JSTOR Stable URL

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Johan Galtung.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

How your masturbation habits are impacting your sex life - Big Think

How your masturbation habits are impacting your sex life - Big Think
NEUROPSYCH — NOVEMBER 10, 2020
How your masturbation habits are impacting your sex life
Is your masturbation routine benefitting your sex life? Here's how to tell...



Credit: Bede on Adobe Stock

KEY TAKEAWAYSAs many as 40% of women experience difficulty reaching orgasm during heterosexual partnered sex. A 2019 study explores the potential links between female masturbation habits and partnered sex satisfaction.
The frequency in which women masturbated did not correlate to their orgasm experiences with their partner. However, researchers did note that the greater the overlap between masturbation activities and partnered sex, the more women were to overcome orgasm difficulties.
In general, women who were more satisfied with their relationship had lower orgasmic difficulty.

Jaimee Bell


A2019 study published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine explored the link between female masturbation habits and their effect on partnered sex. The researchers on this project suggest the relationship between masturbation and partnered sex is understudied, and went into this experiment hoping to clarify if masturbation improves or decreases the sexual satisfaction of partnered sex.

“Many women, perhaps as high as 30-40%, experience some-to-great difficulty reaching orgasm during heterosexual partnered sex, particularly if the primary form of stimulation occurs through penile-vaginal intercourse,” said study author David L. Rowland, a psychology professor at Valparaiso University. “The issue is relevant because sometimes masturbation by women is ‘prescribed’ as a way of improving orgasmic probability during partnered sex. But masturbation has also been hypothesized to interfere with orgasmic response during partnered sex.”



Over 2,000 women were polled to determine how masturbation impacting their partnered sex life.Credit: Drobot Dean on Adobe Stock


Over 2,000 women living within the United States and Hungary completed an online survey about activities and reasons for orgasmic difficulty during masturbation, as well as activities and reasons for orgasmic difficulties during partnered sex.

The average number of times these women masturbated was once every two weeks, and the average number of times per week they reported having sex with their partner was twice. The majority of women reported using clitoral stimulation during masturbation while significantly fewer women (about half) reported using clitoral stimulation during partnered sex.

Nearly all women who reported using clitoral stimulation during masturbation also included it during partnered sex.

Favorite positions translated from partnered sex to masturbation for the majority of women.

53 percent of women who used a particular body position (and 48 percent who engaged in anal stimulation during masturbation) also regularly used the respective activities during partnered sex. Additionally, 38 percent of women who engaged in sexual fantasy (and 36 percent of women who used sex toys such as vibrators) during masturbation included such activities when having sex with their partner.

Masturbation frequency was not related to orgasm experiences with partners.

The frequency in which women masturbated did not correlate to their orgasm experiences with their partner. However, researchers did note that the greater the overlap between masturbation activities and partnered sex, the more likely women were to overcome orgasm difficulties. Additionally, women with lower alignment between their masturbatory activities and partnered sex activities were more likely to report preferring masturbation to sex with their partner.

“In and of itself, women who masturbate experience no particular advantage or disadvantage insofar as reaching orgasm during partnered sex. However, women who show greater similarity between the behaviors/techniques they use for stimulation during masturbation and the type of stimulation that occurs during partnered sex report lower orgasmic difficulty than women who report disparate stimulation techniques during these types of activities,” Rowland told PsyPost.


Does relationship satisfaction lead to better sex?

Another interesting takeaway from this particular study is that relationship satisfaction is a key variable in understanding just how satisfied women were in both their partnered and solo sex activities. In general, women who are more satisfied with their relationship with their partner had lower orgasmic difficulty.

“This relationship is likely bi-directional,” Rowland explained. “Women who have greater sexual satisfaction during partnered sex enjoy the intimacy with their partner, thus enhancing their relationship. At the same time, women who have a better relationship with their partner are likely better at communicating their sexual needs to them, thus increasing their potential for arousal and orgasm.”



How do you talk to your partner about your sexual needs and desires?Credit: Sasin Tipchai on Pixabay

Talking to your partner about sex is key to having better sex. Kate McCombs, a sex and relationships educator, spoke with HealthLine about this very topic: “When you avoid those vital conversations, you might avoid some awkwardness, but you’re also settling for suboptimal sex.”

These conversations don’t just center around desire and pleasure.

Talking about sex, according to Healthline, should include things such as sexual health, how frequently you’d like to be having sex, the things you would like to explore with your partner, and how to deal with times when you and your partner want and need different things during sex.


Reading erotica (or talking about an erotic story you’ve read) can help.

According to the World Literacy Foundation, reading has been found to decrease blood pressure, lower your heart rate, and reduce stress. In fact, as little as six minutes of reading can slow your heart rate and improve your overall health. Reading erotica can not only help get you in the mood, but research suggests it can also help you discover more about your sexuality and communicate your needs with your partner.

Start with simple questions to get to know your partner more intimately.

Megwyn White, Director of Education for Satisfyer (a leading sexual wellness brand based in Germany), explained in this previous article how to ask your partner non-confrontational and fun questions that can help bring you closer together and provide a good base for communicating about sexual desires.

This can include questions such as:“Are there things I’m not doing [during sex] that you wish I would?”
“What is your favorite sexy memory of us?”
“Is there any moment of our sex life in the past that you’d like to recreate?”
Asking your partner these kinds of questions is a good starting point for communication about sex, consent, and desires.
Tags
communicationhappinesshuman bodylovemenpersonal growthselfSexwomen
Posted by at

Is there an afterlife? Here’s what he saw while he was ‘dead’

Is there an afterlife? Here’s what he saw while he was ‘dead’

PART OF THE SERIES


Great Question
Explore Series











Is there an afterlife? Here’s what he saw while he was ‘dead’
What if death isn’t the end? NDEs may complicate what science teaches us about death and consciousness.
▸
with
Dr. Bruce Greyson
DESCRIPTIONTRANSCRIPT
Copy a link to the article entitled http://Is%20there%20an%20afterlife?%20Here’s%20what%20he%20saw%20while%20he%20was%20‘dead’
SHARE IS THERE AN AFTERLIFE? HERE’S WHAT HE SAW WHILE HE WAS ‘DEAD’ ON FACEBOOK
SHARE IS THERE AN AFTERLIFE? HERE’S WHAT HE SAW WHILE HE WAS ‘DEAD’ ON TWITTER
SHARE IS THERE AN AFTERLIFE? HERE’S WHAT HE SAW WHILE HE WAS ‘DEAD’ ON LINKEDIN
Thousands of people across the world and throughout the centuries have reported near-death experiences (NDEs). Most NDEs share one common trait: an overwhelming sense of spirituality and connection with the Divine.
NDEs strongly hint at the existence of an afterlife, but not everyone agrees.
NDE research has raised more questions than answers. For example: Are we just physical machines, spiritual beings, or both? Does consciousness survive brain death?
===

BRUCE GREYSON: Most near-death experiencers around the world talk about an increased sense of spirituality after a near-death experience; by which they mean, roughly, a sense of connectedness to other people, to nature, to the Universe, to the Divine. One of the questions that people often ask about near-death experience is whether they provide proof that we survive death. They don't provide proof for other people. They certainly provide proof for the experiencer, but not for the rest of us. But there are some experiences that do provide something that's at least evidence, if not proof. And those are cases in which the experiencer encounters a deceased individual who was not known at the time to have died.


One person that I know, Jack, was hospitalized in his mid-twenties, and he had one nurse who worked with him every day. And one day, she told him that she was going to be taking the long weekend off, and there'd be other nurses substituting for her. And while she was gone, he had another respiratory arrest where he had to be resuscitated. And during that arrest, he had a near-death experience in which he found himself in a beautiful pastoral scene, and there to his surprise was this nurse, Anita, walking towards him and she said, "Jack, you can't stay here with me. You need to go back into your body. And I want you to find my parents, and tell them that I love them and I'm sorry I wrecked the red MGB." He then woke up back in his body in his hospital bed- tried to tell this to the first nurse who walked into his room. She got very upset and left the room in a hurry. It turned out that this nurse of his, Anita, had taken the weekend off to celebrate her birthday, and her parents had surprised her with a gift of a red MGB for her 21st birthday. She got very excited, jumped in the car, took off for a drive, lost control, crashed into a telephone pole, and died just a few hours before Jack's near-death experience. Now, there's no way he could have known or expected that she was going to be dead. And certainly, no way he could have known how she died- and yet he did. And that seems to be evidence that something about this nurse, Anita, still persisted after her death, and was able to communicate accurate information to Jack.


Does that mean we live forever? Not necessarily. It certainly means something about our minds can survive death of the body, at least for a time. Virtually every near-death experiencer that I've talked to has said without any doubt in their minds, that we do continue after death. No matter how they describe their NDE, they describe having existed without their physical bodies. When their physical bodies were essentially dead, and yet they were feeling better than ever. There's got to be more to the world than just the physical realm to explain these events. I think the ultimate question raised by near-death experiences is: What are we as human beings? Are we just physical machines? Are we spiritual beings? Are we some amalgam of both? I don't know the answers, but now I'm much more comfortable with not having the answers. I think the important part of near-death experiences is what they tell us about this life we're in now. That we're all interconnected. That we aren't individual people, but we're part of something greater.
Posted by at

How Zen Buddhist koans help us understand life experiences - Big Think

How Zen Buddhist koans help us understand life experiences - Big Think

13.8 — MARCH 16, 2023

Zen Buddhist koans help us understand life experiences like science helps us understand the world
Science cannot help us understand or describe first-person experience. Zen koans are a powerful form for helping us reach that description.

Annelisa Leinbach / Big Think; Adobe Stock

KEY TAKEAWAYS
Koans are a keystone of Zen Buddhism.


The practice of spending days, weeks, or even months contemplating a koan helps discipline and focus the mind.
Physics gives a powerful account of the world from a third-person perspective. To understand pure experience, however, requires something more, and koans are a very useful means toward that end.

“Stop the sound of the distant temple bell.”

This short sentence is a koan. It was one of the first I was given when I began what is called koan practice as part of my work with Zen Buddhism. As with all the other koans I had encountered up to this point, my first response was simply, “Excuse me?” followed by laughter. “Stop the what, where?”


Many people have at least heard of Zen koans. They are supposedly nonsensical questions that Zen monks must address as part of their training on the way to enlightenment. The most famous koan people know, if they know any, is, “What is the sound of one hand clapping?” But while some folks might have heard of koans, my experience is that most people do not understand what they really are, what they are for, or how they work. In fact, that well-known koan above is a misquote. I learned it as, “You know the sound of two hands clapping. What is the sound of one hand?”

As someone who has worked with koans for a while, I thought I would use my 100th post for Big Think to unpack them a bit today. I do this for two reasons. First, I love koans. I find them endlessly delightful and frustrating, and above all very useful. Second, as a scientist, my job is to answer questions about reality, and koans offer a powerful perspective — a different way to carry forward that job.
Navy SEAL training for the mind

Let’s start with the Zen part of Zen koans. Zen is one form of Buddhism among many. Beginning as Chan in China somewhere around the 6th century, its emphasis has always been on experience. Later Chan would take root in Japan, and that is where took on the name we recognize, Zen. The focus on experience, pure and simple, did not change. Zen teachers emphasized a direct and simple contemplative practice — what we now call meditation — whose goal was to develop an intimacy with the verb “to be.” What is it really like to just be.

Zen contemplative practice aims to cut through ideas and concepts about the world and the self. The goal is to stay close to just this. Just this breath in the lungs, just this step over the stream, just this response to the person before you. As anyone who has tried meditation for even a few minutes knows, staying with what is right in front of you is a lot easier said than done. Our minds are like puppies stumbling from one idea, worry, or memory to the next. Such is the human condition, and such is the problem Zen focuses on.

Zen focuses on this problem for the very basic Buddhist reason of eliminating suffering by eliminating our delusions about ourselves and the world. From the Buddhist and Zen perspective, we are so distracted by our endless self-concern that we cannot see the truth of experience that is right in front of us. If instead we experienced that truth, we would be more free in our response to life with all its changes. (A Buddhist corollary is that we would also be more compassionate.) Zen contemplative practice can be pretty rigorous, though. Zen can be to mindfulness meditation what Navy SEAL training is to a light workout at the gym. But the rigor serves the purpose of calming and focusing our minds.
Koans and the golden age of Zen

So where do the koans come into all this? The term koan in Chinese means “case,” in the sense of a legal case. Most koans are not a single sentence. They are a short narrative, usually involving a dialogue between a monk and a teacher. The story is followed by a short commentary, and then an even shorter verse. All the koans come from the golden age of Zen in China, between the 8th and the 10th centuries. Later they were compiled into books, and these came to comprise the koan curriculum a Zen student is expected to work through.


To do koan practice means meeting regularly with the teacher who is moving you through the curriculum. You meet, the teacher gives you a koan, then you go spend some time with it — work that can last days, weeks, or even months. Finally, you come back and present your answer, which is nowhere near as simple as it sounds.

Presenting an answer to a koan is never about offering an explanation. You are not there to give an account of what the koan means. Instead, you are to demonstrate the answer. Long ago when I was starting Zen, a teacher said, “Don’t tell me. Show me!” Using movement, sound, or even words, you reveal your answer through action. The answer is your lived response to the koan, embodied in that moment of demonstration. It is not a theory about why the koan is expressing some idea or view about the world.

To show you what I mean, let’s go back to that koan we started with: “Stop the sound of the distant temple bell.” My initial, New Jersey-style response to this was, “Hey you with the bell. Shut up already!”

As you would expect, that did not work.

So I stayed with it. I did hours of zazen — Zen contemplative practice — keeping the koan hanging in my mind. I brought it out into the world with me, asking how this koan was pointing me back to intimacy with just what was happening in that moment. I would go back into meetings with the teacher to present what I found. The answer for a long time was, gently, “Nope.” It was frustrating, but also kind of funny.

Then, one evening, while I was waiting to meet with my teacher, I was quietly doing zazen. As I dropped down into my breath, I became aware of an air conditioner humming somewhere nearby. The more I quieted down, the more there was just the hum of the machine. Not me hearing the air conditioner — just hearing. Fully and completely hearing. I don’t know how long I was in that state, but suddenly — and I mean like a thunderclap — I knew the answer to my koan, just as fully and completely.


I went in, gave my presentation, and my teacher and I laughed together.

The rules of Zen say that I cannot tell you what that answer was. You’re not supposed to talk about what happens in those meetings. But even if I could tell you the answer, it wouldn’t matter. It wouldn’t make any sense, or it wouldn’t seem like a big deal. That is because it’s not really the answer that matters. What matters is the path to intimacy with experience that the koan gave to you. That is the point. What I have found is that every koan pretty much points you back to that same direction. They each open the same gate that lets you, for a moment, experience the profound freedom and openness that is just this. They each offer a glimpse into experience without constant self-reference.
A contrast between science and experience

So what does any of this have to do with science? On the surface, it would seem, nothing at all. Zen koans don’t need science and science does not need Zen koans. But as a scientist I have taken, and given, many tests in my day. I have sat before many difficult problems in mathematical physics where I stretched myself thin to find an answer. I cannot help but compare and contrast the two approaches, and in that comparison, I find much of interest.

To be clear, there is nothing about koan practice that is going to teach you about the nature of the physical world. There are no insights a koan can grant you about quantum physics or the relativistic structure of spacetime. Physics provides a powerful tool for elaborating the dynamics of the world from a third-person perspective. It asks specific kinds of questions that have specific kinds of answers, and koans have nothing to do with that.

What koan practice does show me, however, is something about the strange loop that is my own experience. My experience is mine, and no one else can have it for me. As the Zen saying goes, “No one can pee for you.” What koan practice shows me is that words can only go so far in probing that experience. The verb “to be” is always enacted personally, and it is very, very slippery. While it is great to come up with theories, ideas and concepts about it, ultimately those words wither and blow away like dried leaves in autumn. You just cannot understand first-person experience the way you understand how mass curves space.

Physics gives a powerful account of the world from a third-person perspective. For that reason, it always deals with abstractions about experience. But because experience itself is always first-person, its investigation requires a different kind of question and a different kind of answer. Discursive reasoning of the kind I practice in my scientific and philosophical work will only work up to a point. After that I need something more — something more direct, something more intimate. And that is what koans are for. For all the ways I am left laughing when introduced to a new one, for all the ways I think “that’s just crazy,” in the end I have seen over and over again how this old, strange form can constantly surprise me.


Tags
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)