2020/10/24

Religious Society of Friends posts from a fundamentalist and conservative point of reference.


Religious Society of Friends


Kenn Orphan




https://www.facebook.com/groups/2204496464/permalink/10158588428211465/

 

I joined this group a long time ago as a place to explore my own Quaker thought, practice and experience and connect with other likeminded people. I actually left organized Friends meetings years ago, but it remains a part of my spirituality.
But over time, and more recently, I have seen more and more posts in this group that are from a fundamentalist and conservative point of reference. A point of reference that excludes certain people whether they be feminist or queer. Everyone is entitled to follow their path and express themselves, but there should also be safe places for people who have been historically marginalized.
I thought about leaving the group. But before I do that I will begin to block people here that I feel are imparting a divisive or disruptive experience. I will see if this works, but if there are more and more posts I will have to leave.
This is not about freedom of expression or speech. It isn't about creating an echo chamber. I have plenty of sources for these perspectives. It is about acknowledging a troubling trend in this group and taking action to protect myself from individuals who devalue my or others humanity or who have simply come here just to proselytize to others.
Sorry for the long post, I just had to get it off my chest.
You, Peri Coleman and 81 others
71 comments
Like
Comment

Comments

  • David O'Donaghue
    yes, my sentiments exactly. This is a place for specific Quaker experiences and thought NOT for fundamentalism or other church's theology. I left all that. good riddance.
    14
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Ludwig Bon Quirog
    Omg saaaame. I just breathe deeply whenever I see such posts. Then I block them. Haha! It has worked so far.
    8
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Morgan Murray
    I'm not sure what has set you off, but I have been fortunate to benefit from listening to many perspectives, most of which I do not agree with, yet have helped me reflect on my own spiritual journey.
    They are sometimes uncomfortable to listen to, but much growth comes from a place of discomfort.
    One of the parts of being a Quaker I appreciate the most is that I am forced out of my complacency. It's not an easy ride, but a constant challenge.
    8
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    • Kenn Orphan
      Morgan Murray
       I get enough of that from other places. And I do not need to be challenged on the value of my humanity. I saw this group as a safe place. If it ceases to be one, I will leave.
      10
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Laurel Beyer
      Morgan Murray
       i think there is a difference between listening to many perspectives and being subjected to words which are intolerant and degrading
      20
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Morgan Murray
      Kenn Orphan
       I did not say that you 'needed to be challenged on the value of your humanity.' It appears that you are looking for a fight.
      I appreciate diversity and the challenge to complacency.
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Kenn Orphan
      Morgan, it appears you are projecting. I am not looking for a fight. I stated in the original post: "I have seen more and more posts in this group that are from a fundamentalist and conservative point of reference. A point of reference that excludes certain people whether they be feminist or queer. Everyone is entitled to follow their path and express themselves, but there should also be safe places for people who have been historically marginalized."
      5
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
      • Edited
    • Kevin Evitts
      What I see here so often is “ devaluation “ of conservatives. Conservatives don’t post here.
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Kenn Orphan
      Kevin Evitts
       I have seen several conservative and fundamentalist posts. One of them posts almost daily, so I am not sure where you are looking.
      3
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Muriel Strand
      i suspect the only really safe place is inside one's own head... and even there one may find one's own unwelcome worries.
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
  • William Henry
    This Friend speaks my mind.
    15
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • David H. Albert
    If folks have experience of Jesus, or Buddha, or Moses, or Mohammad, or the Spaghetti Monster, I don't need or appreciate references to their books; I want to know how.
    Perhaps if there was a moratorium on scripture-citing, then I might at least know what people are experiencing.
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    • Edited
  • Emilia Posada Samper
    I understand. I am a member of an unprogrammed Meeting and currently live in Colombia..a Catholic and conservative country.⁶My thoughts an feelings about judgement and differences is that Equality should cover us all. Male female, black white brown, hetrosexual and homosexual.Equality is an important testimony and I believe it implies full acceptance of one another. Living in this environment makes me appreciate Quaker values even more. Tolerance
    can be stressful but so far just
    being myself is what seems to work.
    7
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Mark L Grantham
    For me it is important to remember that there are varied beliefs within Quakerism. I am an Unprogrammed Quaker, my family have been so, probably since they were created. I personally don't have room for Fundamentalism and other conservative mentalities. I do need to remember that the fastest growing group of Quakers are in Kenya, and that branch, FUM, has a very different outlook than what Unprogrammed Quakers possess.
    This will sound very judgmental, but, in my eyes, the Quakers in Kenya and in FUM are about as much a Quaker as Methodists or Pentacostals.
    10
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    Hide 18 replies
    • Bill Smith
      Mark L Grantham
       except American Methodists and non-American Methodists are struggling with this very issue. Inclusiveness.
      4
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Mark L Grantham
      Bill Smith
       i hadn't thought of that. I have a fundamental Quaker friend that was asking me about this and that, in relation to liturgy and dogma. I tried to explain it as succinctly as I could, that Unprogrammed Quaker Meetings don't have either of those things
      3
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Bill Smith
      Mark L Grantham
       it’s continuing to be a subject for organized religion everywhere.
      Pope endorses civil union laws for same-sex couples — CNN
      APPLE.NEWS
      Pope endorses civil union laws for same-sex couples — CNN
      Pope endorses civil union laws for same-sex couples — CNN
      4
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Mark L Grantham
      Bill Smith
       it's about time
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Bill Smith
      Wonder if anything really changes in the Catholic Church?
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Beth Adcock
      Mark L Grantham That was part of the point of Quakerism at its origin: that we don't do liturgy or dogma.
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
      • Edited
    • Muriel Edgerton
      Mark L Grantham
       statistically, FUM and EFA (Evangelical FRIENDS) out number us Unprogrammed Friends. I’m not sure that claiming who are and who are not REAL Quakers is helpful. I find that following the Light that is given to ME and the community with whom I worship is about all I can manage.
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Mark L Grantham
      Muriel Edgerton
       I was simply following my heart. I feel that the name Quaker has been hijacked, people see that name, and think about situation X in a very different way
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • David H. Albert
      Muriel Edgerton
       I would note that, to me, the most exciting and awe-inspiring Friends Meeting in the world today is Bulungi Tree Shade Friends Meeting in eastern Uganda. It is welcoming and affirming, unprogrammed, and about a third of their membership of more than 75 (and 40 children) is LGBTQ, including their co-clerk being transgender. They've been going through tough times: two members murdered - including the head of a new worship group, 8 members arrested and tortured for four days by the police, many (both LGBTQ and straight) beaten, and 38 members fled. They meet in secret. They have 19 children who have been trafficked under their care. They use North Pacific Yearly Meeting's Faith and Practice.
      Friends World Committee will not even acknowledge their existence, so don't be so quick to assume racism and homophobia don't exist about liberal Friends in western countries.
      As far as I am aware, all of the Kenya FUM churches have LGBTQ members in the closet (and a very few open.) They are anathema to the leadership, but don't assume they don't exist.
      4
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
      • Edited
    • Geoff Knowlton
      Muriel Edgerton
       it only means that the majority is not always right.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Muriel Edgerton
      I’m not making ANY assumptions about ANY Quaker group. I DO assume that Divine Spirit Works through any and all of us individuals and communities who open ourselves up to it and are willing/ABLE to discern right action. It’s not an easy practice, and requires humility and diligence, patience and forbearance with our imperfections and flaws.
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Adria Gulizia
      Many Friends think that a Quakerism not centered on Jesus is as Quaker is New Age or animism. A lot depends on where you sit. As George Fox said of Christians in his day, you can keep the form of godliness and lose its power.
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
      • Edited
    • Brent Bill
      Mark
       I know I’m being picky, but it’s Pentecostal. With an e. And we share our meetinghouse with a Pentecostal congregation so I can say there are a variety of Pentecostals. Plus I’m in no place to say who is or isn’t Quaker
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4 h
    • Mark L Grantham
      Brent Bill
       different flavors for different folks
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4 h
    • Mark L Grantham
      Brent Bill
       when I think about one of the things that Quakers stand for, Equality, I see these groups omitting that concept
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4 h
    • Brent Bill
      I guess you don’t know the Pentecostals that I do. Our meeting has LBGTQ members and our Pentecostal friends have embraced them... literally during coffee fellowship
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 3 h
    • Brent Bill
      And our meeting, which is part of FUM, has a minute of support for marriage equality. So beware generalizations
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 3 h
    • Muriel Edgerton
      David H. Albert. The As I said, not making assumptions about unknowns is one of my spiritual disciplines. Minding the Light I’m given is a full time activity.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 h
      • Edited
  • Kit Mason
    The Friend speaks my mind. The outer world presses hatred and forced inequality upon us; there is no need for it here.
    11
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    • Morgan Murray
      Kit Mason
       Perhaps if one could point out a post that is pressing hatred and forced inequality I would understand better what you all are talking about. I only look at posts that catch my eye while I am procrastinating at work.
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Kenn Orphan
      There is a post today that links to a video which equates LGBTQ people with drug dealers.
      8
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Morgan Murray
      Kenn Orphan
       That's an example of the posts that don't catch my eye. That is totally unacceptable. Even worse if it is pharmaceutical companies that are the drug dealers.
      I understand where you are coming from now. I knew there was a miscommunication between us.
      I appreciate the diversity of thought between us unprogrammed and the more 'fundamentalist', like my mother. But the equality, acceptance and love for all the children of God is not up to debate.
      6
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
  • Saralynn Smith Ingrassia
    I retired from New York to a rural part of Florida. I feel alienated because the political and social views are so unlike my own. My response is to try and see the “inner light” in these folks which requires turning on an “inner switch” to alter my perception and see our shared humanity. I still feel extremely lonely here , but am trying to turn that loneliness into...for lack of a better word ...holiness. Uh...I might add that this isn’t easy because I often feel inclined to smash certain people over the head with a crucifix! .
    4
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Lynn Pharr
    God loves and creates infinite diversity. Look at nature and our universe. Why would He limit diversity in humans? Computers are binary only because that is the limit of our design. Why do humans insist that some are right and some are wrong? When I consider how often I am wrong how can I ever say with confidence what GOD considers as right or wrong.
    5
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    • Edited
  • Gil George
    There is a stream of fundamentalist christianity, steeped in religious privilege, that thinks it is perfectly ok to pretend to be part of a group in order to "save" it and win converts. They infiltrated various evangelical quaker groups and have done a great job of destroying those organizations from within and replacing them with generic fundamentalist evangelical theology. They think that by having a "Quaker" name it gives them the right to invade our spaces with their Calvinist doctrines that reassert the dominance of their paper pope and of course the dominance of straight white men. Amazing coincidence how those two things are always tied together. 🙄
    16
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    • Mark L Grantham
      Gil George
       you speak my mind
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Gil George
      I lived through it in NorthWest Yearly Meeting. They were absolutely ruthless and without the slightest shred of conscience in their manipulation and scheming.
      4
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Muriel Strand
      i don't see fundamentalist evangelicals as having calvinist roots...?
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Gil George
      Oh they do. They preach the doctrine of total depravity, unconditional election, biblical inerrancy, and male headship. All of those are rooted in Calvinist thought.
      4
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Cesare DiRienzi
      Gil George
       Oh wow, I just looked up those words/concepts as I'd never heard of them before. Those are rather depressing doctrines.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 20 h
  • Rich Accetta-Evans
    Thinking I might be missing something, I just scrolled through the posts to this group in the last 11 days. I don't see any that exclude or marginalize LGBTQ folks.
    If there are such posts it makes sense for you to block them, but I hope you don't cut yourself off from all reflections grounded in some version of Quaker Christian theology.
    2
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    • Kenn Orphan
      Rich Accetta-Evans
       There is a post just today that linked to a video which equated LGBT people with drug dealers and I have seen others over the past few months.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Rich Accetta-Evans
      Kenn Orphan
       That's horrible. I don't see it, though. Has it been removed? If you PM me the name of who posted it, that might clear it up for me.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1 d
    • Matthew Smith
      that's odd, why would i not have seen that? does not show up on my feed
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 6 h
  • Linsey Mullin
    That's how I feel. When I see the fundamentalist post, I think I'm on the wrong page. The quaker meeting I grew up in didn't teach the children anything about hell, original sin, or hell and damnation. The emphasis was on pacifism and activism, acceptance and brotherly love, as corny as that may sound. Those are hard standards to live up to. I never heard a Quaker talk about being "saved". It feels like some groups have commandeered Quakerism for their own private use.
    9
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
    • Chris Wynn
      Linsey Mullin
       A number of Friends are steeped in the theology of Robert Barclay, the first "theologian" of Friends. It is also important to realize that there are all kinds of Quakers today. Just like all the other denominations Quakers have wrestled with the LBGTQ issues and some are not as open-minded as many of us would like them to be. I believe the best way to approach persons who have anti-gay views is to first of all hold them in the Light, and secondly engage them in kindly and loving discourse. The old biblical admonition comes to mind, "come let us reason together."
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 19 h
    • Chris Wynn
      Also, it is important to understand the effects that's a 19th century Holiness movement in America had on the society of Friends. From that evolved the pastoral system in the rise of evangelicalism among Quakers. I think it's very important to rememb… 
      See more
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 19 h
    • Chris Wynn
      Note: some of the words didn't come out exactly right because I'm using the voice option and I have a rather Midwestern twangy voice that it doesn't always pick up on well.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 19 h
  • Edie Esl
    There are some very conservative Quakers, particularly among the Evangelical branch. Many African Quakers are quite strongly anti-LGBQT, and when a Lesbian Quaker couple of my acquaintance were looking into a retirement community run by conservative Friends, they were advised to tell everyone they were sisters. They said they also saw postings in the elevators and on the community bulletin board there that made them uncomfortable. Needless to say, they chose a different retirement community.
    Should we block conservative Friends with these kind of views or hope that with time their viewpoints might change?
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Adria Gulizia
    You should consider making the kinds of posts you would like to see more of! We all have a role in making this the kind of group that will nurture ourselves and others, and just as a few “objectionable” posts can change the tone, a few uplifting/inspirational posts can too!
    3
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Raquel Centeno
    Kenn Orphan
     don’t leave. You are not alone.
    4
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Joanne Birney
    Please stay. I’m a nonthesist Quaker and welcoming to all. I think we need voices from all Friends.
    7
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Daniel Lean-Moctezuma
    Kenn Orphan
     Don't leave Friend, stay and hold the space
    3
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Kathryn F. Adams
    I have learned to scroll past posts that I find disturbing. Sending love and Light to all LGBTQ Friends.
    3
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Faith Kenrick
    Welcome all to learn from each other, why not have an open door? The kindness of strangers can be a gateway to paradise.
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • https://www.facebook.com/terrence.landoll.79
  • Terrence Landoll
    https://www.facebook.com/terrence.landoll.79 Your post echoes my own experience for joining this site (i'm an isolated Friend living in Korea,), but your response to evangelicals is something different. i know there are many people who have been terribly hurt by various strands of evangelicalism. Maybe that needs to be talked about. but i'm over it; i look back (i was raised Catholic,) and wonder about how i can still engage these people. And so for me, encountering evangelical Friends is an opportunity to engage people, to "answer that of God" in their souls. i do so gently (i hope!) i can imagine, as i am theo-centric and i do try to understand Christian and Jewish writings/thought/history, that some of my posts may be distressing. One of my "rules of thumb" is that God usually appears at that point in a community where there is hurt/need for healing. i think your post is such a point. Thank you!
    4
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Liz Humes Estep
    Please do not leave the group. Quakers needs your voice
    3
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Dennis W. Mills
    Thanks, David! We need to spread the word.
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 d
  • Sheilagh Smith
    I have never found avoiding what makes me uncomfortable about others as being helpful, even among Quakers. In fact, I generally find that if someone affects me negatively, it is generally something inside me I need to see and work on. Otherwise, I believe it takes all kinds of people to make up a world. I need to let others be who they are and focus on myself and my responsibilities. I generally find it is our egos talking if we start judging and excluding. Quakers are a diverse bunch and we should not expect homogeneity. Our understanding of our SPICES should guide our way, not our opinions on how others see those same SPICES...there is a distinct and salient difference between the two approaches. ✌️
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 16 h
  • Hank Fay
    Quakerism is either about seeking the Light in all people, or it has no purpose other than a safe space for the privileged middle class.
    3
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 4 h
  • Teri Lynn Bookless
    Your post isn't too lengthy. Best to block people rather than deprive us of your fellowship. Thanks. I feel the same.
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 3 h

About

This is a group for anyone on Facebook who considers themselves a Quaker, whatever branch you belong to or wherever you're from.
Let's keep everything relevant to Quakerism and the Religious Society of Friends. (That doesn't mean no politics. It does mean no discussion of politics without relating it to spiritual life) Let's keep it civil. And let's try to be clear, knowing (among other things) that not everyone here is North American.
Commercial posting will not be tolerated. Please relate whatever you post to the Religious Society of Friends. Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Since the text above has not seemed to be clear enough: Political postings not explicitly related to Friends' testimonies or our life as Friends may be deleted without notice. Personal attacks and name-calling may be deleted without notice. Those who cannot or will not refrain from posting those may be removed from the group without notice. 
See less
Private
Only members can see who's in the group and what they post
Visible
Anyone can find this group.
Posted by at

The World Needs Nuclear Power, And We Shouldn’t Be Afraid Of It

The World Needs Nuclear Power, And We Shouldn’t Be Afraid Of It:

17,669 views|02:00am EDT

The World Needs Nuclear Power, And We Shouldn’t Be Afraid Of It

Starts With A Bang
Ethan SiegelSenior Contributor
Starts With A Bang
Contributor Group
Science
The Universe is out there, waiting for you to discover it.

For thousands upon thousands of years, humans have been harnessing the power of nature to provide energy to push our civilization forward. By leveraging fire, we gained the ability to cook food, provide warmth and shelter, and to protect us from predators. Later on, we tamed a variety of animals, using their labor to perform tasks that would be too strenuous or inefficient for humans. Eventually, natural power sources, like the wind, was harnessed through windmills to turn millstones, grinding grain without any human input at all.

An enormous transformation occurred when we began using natural sources — windmills, steam-generating combustion processes, even flowing water — to turn turbines, generating power and providing electricity. Today, the world’s energy needs are still dominantly met through these same processes, with non-renewable fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas providing the dominant fraction of Earth’s energy uses. We’re powering a space age civilization with the same fossil fuels that emerged during the iron age. Now, more than ever, the world needs nuclear power, and yet fear, rather than facts, governs our policies. Here’s the science of why we should embrace it.

Recommended For You

The way a conventional, chemical-based power plant works is simple and straightforward. A fuel source of some variety is burned, releasing energy, which heats up and boils water, generating steam. That steam turns a turbine, which generates electricity, used to provide power for whatever purposes are in demand downstream.

The big problem we have, whether we admit it to ourselves or not, is that this way of generating large amounts of energy has created enormous environmental problems. While the impact of extracting these raw materials in such enormous quantities is no doubt significant, the end products of combusting these fuel sources has fundamentally and significantly changed the chemical composition of Earth’s atmosphere and oceans, leading to global warming, ocean acidification, and other climate-related effects.

The evidence that this has occurred is overwhelming, and it’s a problem that we continue to exacerbate with each passing day on Earth. As more hydrocarbon-based fossil fuels undergo combustion, they increase the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in Earth’s atmosphere, which has risen from pre-industrial levels of about 270 parts-per-million to modern levels of around 410 parts-per-million: a little more than a 50% increase in less than 300 years.

This carbon dioxide increase also extends to the ocean, where carbon dioxide combines with water to create carbonic acid, changing the pH (a measure of acidity) of our oceans on a global scale.

But the most pressing problem is the global warming that has ensued from this additional amount of carbon dioxide. Our global average temperature has risen by 0.98 °C (1.76 °F) since we began accurately measuring it back in 1880, and that rise has accelerated, having increased by 0.18 °C (0.32 °F) per decade over the past 39 years.

Although many different approaches have been proposed to address this problem, it’s clear that any sustainable, long-term solution will include one important component: a transition to energy sources that don’t result in additional carbon dioxide emissions. While most of the ideas put forth — such as the hypothetical Green New Deal — focus on renewable energy sources like solar and wind power, there’s another option that we should seriously reconsider: nuclear fission power.

Yes, it’s true that fission power plants that cut corners could lead to radioactivity-related disasters, such as what infamously happened at Chernobyl in 1986. Meltdown is a risk, occurring at Three Mile Island in 1979. And a poorly contained reactor on a fault line could result in radioactive waste products contaminating the nearby environment due to a natural disaster, such as what occurred at Fukushima in 2011. But even despite these occurrences, nuclear power remains safer, on the whole, than any other large-scale power source in use over all of human history.

The first nuclear reactors to be used for large-scale power generation came online in the mid-1950s, and in that time, there have been a total of over 17,000 reactor-years (where one nuclear reactor operating for a year equals one reactor-year) spanning 33 countries. The three aforementioned incidents are the only adverse ones to be documented in all that time. And yet, when people think of nuclear power, they commonly think of these disasters — as well as the danger of nuclear war, the hazards of radioactive waste, and the destructive power of the atomic bomb — rather than the safe, efficient, and green energy source that nuclear power actually is.

Thankfully, the science behind nuclear power is actually simple, and helps us understand why we shouldn’t fear it the same way we fear nuclear bombs or nuclear war. Instead, there’s a well-understood process that goes on inside the atom, and can generate enormous quantities of power, enough to power our global energy needs for centuries, without the polluting side-effects of fossil fuels.

The physics behind nuclear power. In conventional (chemical-based) fuels, reactions occur between the electron configurations of various atoms, releasing up to ~0.0001% of the fuel’s mass as energy. In nuclear-based reactions, it’s the atomic nuclei themselves that are split, releasing approximately ~1000 times as much energy for the same amount of fuel. In particular, fissionable material (like uranium-235) only needs one simple ingredient — a neutron for the nucleus to absorb — to trigger a fission reaction.

Although other fuels can be used, the good news about nuclear power is that it’s self-sustaining: each U-235 nucleus that absorbs a neutron in turn emits three new neutrons when it splits apart, releasing energy and sustaining the reaction. So long as enough neutrons continue to interact with fissile material, the reaction will occur. This releases heat, which is used to boil water, generating steam, and turning a turbine, the same as a chemical-based reactor. Only, with nuclear, there’s no carbon dioxide waste produced.

Nuclear’s energy output is entirely controllable. One of the big concerns raised with renewable sources of energy like wind and solar are that they’re not controllable. If it’s not windy, you don’t generate wind power; if it’s not sunny (or if it’s night), your solar panels’ output drops tremendously. But the rate of nuclear output can be controlled in a straightforward manner, simply by controlling three factors: control rods, temperature, and a medium (usually water).

Remember what causes a nuclear reaction: the availability of neutrons for the fissile material to absorb. If you put more (or fewer) control rods in, you absorb more (or fewer) of the available neutrons, changing how much interacts with the fissile material. If you increase the temperature, you increase the rate of the reaction; if you decrease it, the reaction rate drops. And the presence of a medium, such as water, can also act as a neutron absorber, but that comes at a cost: you wind up with tritiated water, which itself is radioactive for a period of a few decades.

Still, this is an enormous win: we can generate more or less power as needed, up to the plant’s maximum safe capacity.

There’s no risk of a nuclear bomb, and the waste is eminently manageable. A lot of people, quite understandably, fear the risk of a nuclear explosion. Fortunately, the risk of a nuclear explosion is absolutely zero when it comes to a nuclear power plant. Put simply, the fuel used inside every nuclear reactor — as demanded by the International Atomic Energy Agency — isn’t sufficiently enriched to make a runaway chain reaction even a possibility. The material isn’t capable of creating a nuclear explosion.

That said, there will be nuclear waste produced. Some of it will be useful for repurposing, like the plutonium used in thermoelectric heating and energy generation for deep space missions, while other material (like tritiated water) will need to be stored and managed. According to the World Nuclear Association:

  • Radioactive waste comes out as high-level waste,
  • which usually needs ~5 years of underwater storage followed by ~45 years of dry storage,
  • allowing radioactivity and heat levels to drop,
  • and by then it's become low-level waste,
  • which can be packaged and stored underground for long-term disposal.

Although we still have to overcome the “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) mentality when it comes to nuclear, this is essentially a scientifically solved problem.

We can fully transition to nuclear in under 20 years. Building a new, country-wide (or global) set of reactors to power the world will require a sustained investment. New power plants, reactors, cooling towers, etc., will all need to be constructed. Sufficient quantities of nuclear fuel will need to be mined, extracted, and appropriately refined. Supply chains will need to be constructed, and waste management will be an ongoing need to address. Above and beyond the existing infrastructure that we have today, it will require an enormous and sustained investment of resources.

But the payoff will come. While humanity has, to put it lightly, done a dismal job of addressing the climate crisis up until this point, that can all change. If we can simultaneously replace:

  • coal, gas, and oil-based power plants with nuclear ones,
  • our gasoline-based automotive infrastructure to electric power,
  • industrial, commercial, and residential heat and power needs into electric rather than fossil fuel-based solutions,

We can eliminate more than 80% of our fossil fuel uses, including practically all of the non-sustainable ones. We can transform the world for a long-term payoff with a short but significant up-front investment.

The uncomfortable truth is this: we are a space-age civilization that has chosen to eschew technological advances in energy generation because of fear and inertia. We are powering the 21st century with 18th century technology, which has had disastrous effects on our environment that we have ignored for far too long. While there are many possible ways forward to address this problem, nuclear power has the proven track record of success necessary and the flexibility to be an integral, and potentially the primary, resource in humanity’s arsenal in the fight against climate change.

For many years, we have let fear, rather than facts, control the narrative over nuclear power. While the conventional story around nuclear power focuses on the few disasters that have occurred, nuclear’s track record tells a different story: one of unparalleled safety, successful waste management, and abundant, affordable, green energy. The world needs nuclear power now more than ever. If we can overcome our entrenched biases against it, we just might solve one of the biggest problems facing our world for generations to come.

Follow me on Twitter. Check out my website or some of my other work here. 
Ethan Siegel
Ethan Siegel

I am a Ph.D. astrophysicist, author, and science communicator, who professes physics and astronomy at various colleges. I have won numerous awards for science writing since 2008 for my blog, Starts With A Bang, including the award for best science blog by the Institute of Physics. My two books, Treknology: The Science of Star Trek from Tricorders to Warp Drive, Beyond the Galaxy: How humanity looked beyond our Milky Way and discovered the entire Universe, are available for purchase at Amazon. Follow me on Twitter @startswithabang.

Posted by at

2020/10/23

Cézanne: A life: Danchev, Alex: 9781846681707: Amazon.com: Books

Cézanne: A life: Danchev, Alex: 9781846681707: Amazon.com: Books




Cézanne: A life Paperback – October 3, 2013
by Alex Danchev  (Author)
4.3 out of 5 stars    100 ratings
 See all formats and editions
Kindle
$6.99
Read with Our Free App

 Today we view Cézanne as a monumental figure, but during his lifetime (1839-1906), many did not understand him or his work. With brilliant insight, drawing on a vast range of primary sources, Alex Danchev tells the story of an artist who was never accepted into the official Salon: he was considered a revolutionary at best and a barbarian at worst, whose paintings were unfinished, distorted and strange. His work sold to no one outside his immediate circle until his late thirties, and he maintained that 'to paint from nature is not to copy an object; it is to represent its sensations' - a belief way ahead of his time, with stunning implications that became the obsession of many other artists and writers, from Matisse and Braque to Rilke and Gertrude Stein.

Beginning with the restless teenager from Aix who was best friends with Emile Zola at school, Danchev carries us through the trials of a painter tormented by self-doubt, who always remained an outsider, both of society and the bustle of the art world. Cézanne: A life delivers not only the fascinating days and years of the visionary who would 'astonish Paris with an apple', with interludes analysing his self-portraits, but also a complete assessment of Cézanne's ongoing influence through artistic imaginations in our own time. He is, as this life shows, a cultural icon comparable to Monet or Toulouse.


Customer reviews
4.3 out of 5 stars

Top reviews from the United States
Homage to Bird
2.0 out of 5 stars Not for Art Lovers
Reviewed in the United States on August 21, 2019
Verified Purchase
The late Alex Danchev was a professor of International Relations at the University of St. Andrews. Late in his unfortunately short life (he died just short of his 61st birthday), he took to writing biographies of artists, Braque and this book on Cézanne.

That Danchev was not trained as an art historian is most evident in this book about one of Western art's greatest and most important painters. Danchev read seemingly everything about Cézanne in English and much in French. Consequently, he gives us minute details about the lives of Cézanne and his contemporaries. Yet there is nothing here that follows the stylistic development of Cézanne's paintings, much less explains how Cézanne went from crude paintings of thick impastos applied with a knife to the light, airy works where the subject is as much the relation of strikes of color to one another as anything else. To make up for this lack of insight into the artist and his work, Danchev gives us an overabundance of lengthy quotations: from ancient writers that Danchev imagines Cézanne was thinking of in a particular situation to contemporaries to figures from many decades after Cézanne's death such as Samuel Beckett (not commenting on Cézanne but presenting views on life that Danchev imagines Cézanne had).

Hilary Spurling showed with her outstanding two-volume biography of Matisse that a non-art historian can write incisively about art and an artist, but Danchev proves himself not up to her level.
Read less
5 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
Cher Carter
1.0 out of 5 stars This is not a biography
Reviewed in the United States on July 15, 2020
Verified Purchase
I purchased this book to learn about Cezanne's life, both personal and artistic. This is not a biography. It barely provides any information about Cezanne's life and certainly not in a chronological manner. It does provide many quotes from Zola novels and comments by others, but I gave up 1/3 of the way through, feeling I knew--let alone understood--no more about Cezanne and his development as an artist than I did before I opened the book. A huge disappointment.
One person found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
Sharon Knettell
4.0 out of 5 stars Extraordinary scholarship, very good read.
Reviewed in the United States on January 4, 2013
Verified Purchase
As an artist I am often leery of biographies of artists as they tend to glamorize the more salacious aspects of an artists life.-This did not- perhaps because Cezanne was more monk-like in his dedication to his art. I learned a great deal about his extraordinary work methods- his insistence, in trooping out day after day painting and experiencing his landscapes. This is contrary to much current practice of landscape copiers- I can't even call them painters, who snap photos and retire to the studio to finish them up. I was teaching a figurative workshop in Scottsdale, Arizona- a place of breathtaking vistas when I passed a 'landscape class'. The students were all inside, lined up on long tables, while the instructor showed them how to copy the small pictures taped next to their canvasses. Cezanne was one with his landscapes. He felt them and it it extaordinarily evident in the originality of his painting of them- they are not mere renderings.

He painted his apples and portraits with the same intense scrutiny, strangely he painted his nudes from his head or old school drawings.

There are some wonderful descriptions of his methodology and the artist matierials he used. Danchev describes the colors and pigment Cezanne used- useful to any painter. I would have loved a bit more of that.

The only quibble I have with this book is a lay person trying to get inside a head of a painter- Danchev did a fair job, but I wish art writers or critics would like Adam Gopnik take drawing lessons from Jacob Collins just to see what a struggle it is to learn how to draw. Maybe then we would have better art critics and biographers who are more in tune with their subjects.

The picture reference could be better- they are small- but this should impel a visit to a museum so see them- well worth the trip.

All in all it is a wonderful book and a good read. It leads to a greater appreciation and understanding of the enormous impact Cezanne had on art.
Read less
35 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars A masterful biography
Reviewed in the United States on February 24, 2013
Verified Purchase
This is an impressive work: prodigious research, lively presentation, and written from a very compassionate point of view. Working my way through the biography, I felt each chapter giving me a bit more information or another point of view until by the closing chapters I felt I had acquired a satisfying sense of who the man was from his own words, from the events of his life, from contemporary accounts, and from other appreciations (notably for me the wonderfully sensitive and expressive Rilke). But the book is work. It is written beautifully but organized less than helpfully with footnotes all collected at the end and illustration legends at the front. This is a shame, because the illustrations are well discussed and the footnotes are themselves full of fascinating information. But the laborious layout is a minor matter compared to the pleasure of reading this warm and intelligent account.
27 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
Hilary
5.0 out of 5 stars The book is great. I just have to comment that I bought ...
Reviewed in the United States on February 17, 2015
Verified Purchase
The book is great. I just have to comment that I bought both the kindle and hardcopy edition - so I could actually read an art book in bed! I go between them but do most of the reading on the kindle because the illustrations and footnotes are linked. You can click on them see the reference and click back without flipping through the enormous volume. Since images of Cezanne's work are easily found I recommend the kindle version for this brilliant and, from the viewpoint of a painter, satisfying biography.
5 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
careful
1.0 out of 5 stars A great story made dull and boring
Reviewed in the United States on July 27, 2018
Verified Purchase
I love Cezanne and like any famous artist had an interesting life but I found myself losing the will to live while reading this. Like wading through syrup.
3 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
PVreader
5.0 out of 5 stars Best biography for Cezanne
Reviewed in the United States on November 28, 2014
Verified Purchase
The writer looks far beyond the cliches which have accumulated regarding Cezanne's life and career over the years. The illustrations are both pertinent and well produced. Do not mistake this for a 'coffee table' book.
4 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
Sheila La Farge
5.0 out of 5 stars The best book on Cezanne's life
Reviewed in the United States on May 15, 2017
Verified Purchase
I reordered this as I lost my first copy. The best book on Cezanne's life.
Helpful
Comment Report abuse
See all reviews
Top reviews from other countries
CGKent
4.0 out of 5 stars Keep going to the end
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on July 31, 2015
Verified Purchase
Not as easy a read as I thought it was going to be. Cezanne's life was not filled with fascinating incident. He lived almost exclusively an inner life, unlike some of those who followed him such as Picasso or Matisse. A biographer is obliged to flesh out the story with the lives of those who meant most to his subject. So what we have is a lot of Emil Zola, Cezanne's great childhood friend, in existential musings. This is not uninteresting but Danchev does draw it out a little too much. Where the author scores heavily is in his writing about Cezanne's progress as a painter and in discussing the paintings themselves. despite the longueurs, this is a worthwhile read.
4 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Riverman
5.0 out of 5 stars The Cezannian Revolution
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on February 21, 2013
Verified Purchase
At times I seemed to lose my way in this book. That might have been due to my lack of attention, but some sections read like little discrete essays and these sometimes seemed to derail the narrative of Cezanne's life. The section on pages 328 to 330, for example, is like a small essay on Cezanne's relationship with trees. However, this is a small criticism. As W.H. Auden observed, a shilling life will give you the facts and Alex Danchev's marvellous biography will give you far more than that. His motivation for writing the book appears to have been a burning desire to understand Cezanne's genius, and I doubt that there is a better reason for doing so. Towards the end of the book, and following a fascinating account of a meeting between two young artists and Cezanne in 1906, at the end of his life - a meeting that resulted in a remarkable series of photographs of Cezanne painting the Mont Saint-Victoire and which are reproduced in the book - he gets to the heart of the matter:

'At the core of the Cezannian revolution is a decisive shift in the emphasis of observation, from a description of the thing apprehended to the process of apprehension itself. Cezanne insisted that he painted things as they are, for what they are, as he saw them. The issue is what he saw - how he saw.'

Drawing extensively on the reactions of Cezanne's contemporaries and those who have ever since tried to understand his significance, Alex Danchev has, to my mind, written a profound and moving biography, and one that is worthy of its subject.
Read less
13 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Posted by at

Thanissaro Bhikkhu ON FORMULAS AND BEING SENSITIVE ALL THE TIME

Steven Goodheart

The Skillful Teachings of Thanissaro Bhikkhu


ON FORMULAS AND BEING SENSITIVE ALL THE TIME

We like to think that if we had it all figured out, we wouldn’t have to pay so much attention—that if there were some formula we could memorize, that in itself would take care of things so we wouldn’t have to put so much effort into the meditation, put so much effort into being present. We’d like just to plug into the formula and let things go on automatic pilot—but that’s missing the point. The point is being attentive, paying careful attention, being sensitive, all the time.
~
This is a quality the Buddha calls citta: intentness, attentiveness, really giving yourself fully to what you’re doing right now. When you’re intent, insight comes not as a formula that allows you to be inattentive, but as a sensitivity to what’s going on right now so you can read what’s happening, continually. In other words, you’re trying to strengthen this quality of being attentive, this quality of being present, because when you’re really present you don’t need all the other formulas. You recognize the signs of what’s going on: when the breath is too long, when the breath is too short, when the breath energy in the body is too sluggish, when it’s too active. Being attentive is what enables you to notice these things, to be sensitive to them, to read what they’re telling you.
~
So the insights you gain are not necessarily wise sayings that you can write down in little books of wisdom. Insight is a greater and greater sensitivity to what’s going on. Don’t think that you’d like to have things explained beforehand, or to sit here trying to come up with little rules or memory aids: “Well, when this happens, you should do this; and then, when that happens, you should do that.” You’re trying to develop the quality of being able to listen, able to read what’s happening in the present moment, all the time, so that you won’t need those memory aids.
~
If you’re looking for the little formulas or the little nuggets of wisdom that you can wrap up and take home, in hopes that they’ll allow you to drop the effort that goes into being so attentive, it’s like the old story of the goose laying the golden egg. You get a golden egg and then you kill the goose. That’s the end of the eggs. The goose here is the ability to stay attentive, to be present, to be fully engaged in what’s happening with the breath. The insights will come on their own—you keep producing, producing, producing the insights—not for the sake of taking home with you, but for the sake of using them right here, right now.
~
You don’t have to be afraid that you’re not going to remember them for the next time. If you’re really attentive, your sensitivity will produce the fresh insights you need next time. It will keep developing, becoming an ability to read things more and more carefully, more and more precisely, so that you won’t
have to memorize insights from the past. It will keep serving them up, hot and fresh.
❀❀❀
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
Sensitivity All the Time
~
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/.../meditations.html...
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)