Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Circles of Meaning Labyrinths of Fear The Twenty-Two Relationships of a Spiritual Life and Culture Brendan Myers. The importance of loneliness brendan myers at tedxguelphu. Brendan Cathbad Myers is a philosopher and author known for his contributions in environmental philosophy, Druidry and Neo-Druidism, mythology, and applied virtue ethics. Contents. Brendan myers author circles of meaning labyrinths of fear interview with nadiya shah. Philosophy and writings. Normative in their conception, Myers’ works fundamentally examine ideas regarding the interconnectedness of creation and emphasize the importance of strong moral character as vital to the health and well-being of the world and society. Myers criticizes utilitarian views, especially "negative" utilitarianism, which holds that ethics require nothing more than the minimization of harm, and of deontological views, which emphasize social duties and adhering to social norms, i.e. rules. As an alternative to utilitarianism and deontology, Myers explores the ethics of character and identity, self-knowledge and shared life. "My question was whether the environment is ethically significant, and what that must ultimately mean for the choices we make individually, politically and collectively. I wanted to know whether there is a 'right' way of living in and with the natural world. "I invented a way to think about our ethical responsibilities to future generations – in which an act that harms no one or infringes no one's rights is still considered to be morally wrong." "The morally correct way to treat the environment is to shape it into the kind of world in which we may flourish best as human beings." "Rather, I think we should involve ourselves in the world, shaping it and making use of its natural processes as a gardener might do, in order to make the whole landscape of the Earth into a garden fit to be the dwelling place of a peaceful and fully flourishing human community." "It cannot be for lack of scientific or technical know-how that pollution and resource depletion continues to ruin our landscapes and make life hard for millions of people. If we want to change the world for the better, all we need do is muster the political will." P 14 March/April 2006 issue 29 SEPAView The Magazine of the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency. Biographical information. Born in 1974, in Guelph, Ontario, Canada, Brendan was raised in Elora Ontario, a small village north of Guelph in Wellington County, Ontario. He was born the eldest son of an Irish-Canadian family and completed a bachelor's degree in drama and philosophy in 1996 and then a master's degree in philosophy in 1999, both from the University of Guelph. While at university, he became more involved in ethics and environmentalism and he converted from Catholicism to paganism, becoming an activist member of the neo-pagan community. Myers continued his academic career in Ireland, and eventually completed a doctoral dissertation entitled "Time and the Land" at the National University of Ireland, Galway. Professional life. His first published work was a play entitled Visions of a Better Way , which won a competition for high school students run by University of Guelph's department of English. Myers attended the University of Guelph for undergraduate studies in drama, starting in January 1992. He further attended Memorial University of Newfoundland, reading folklore there in 1994. Myers then began his master's studies at Guelph in 1998, majoring in philosophy. In 2000, he published a dissertation titled "Animism, Spirit, and Environmental Activism", and was matriculated. For the two years following, he served as president of a labour union (CUPE local.) Myers began doctoral studies in philosophy at the National University of Ireland, Galway in 2001, touring the European continent, especially England and Germany. He completed doctoral studies in 2005 with a dissertation entitled "Time and the Land: Four Approaches to Environmental Ethics, Climate Change, and Future Generations". Pagan activism. Myers returned to Canada in late 2005, and taught philosophy at several universities and colleges in Ontario and Quebec. In 2007, he worked as a contract researcher for the Government of Canada studying Aboriginal values and ethics, morals and logic in relation to police work and peacekeeping and consensus government. In 2008 he was awarded the Mount Haemus Award for research in Druidry, from the OBOD in association with Salisbury Cathedral. Myers currently lives in Gatineau, Quebec, where he is professor of philosophy and humanities at CEGEP Heritage College. He claims to be the only openly-pagan philosophy professor in the world. Academic influence. Myers' works have been quoted in the published works of numerous neopagan writers, including Emma Restall-Orr (in "Living with Honour"), Philip Carr-Gomm (in "What do Druids Believe?"), Graeme Talboys (in "The Way of the Druid"), Janet Farrar and Gavin Bone (in "Progressive Witchcraft"), and Isaac Bonewits (in "Bonewits Essential Guide to Druidism"). His work also appears on pages 185 to 191 of "Out of the Broom Closet" edited by Arin Murphy-Hiscock. Non-fiction. Fiction. Accolades from other artists and activists. "Brendan Myers is smarter than me." - Isaac Bonewits, at the "Fire in the Hearth" conference, Ottawa, July 2009. "While Myers' ideas may not resonate with everyone, he should be commended for being at the forefront of an effort to write better Pagan books. He, along with some other authors of note, are writing those "advanced" books we all keep saying we want." - Jason Pitzl-Waters, author of The Wild Hunt Blog (on 30 November 2008), the most read pagan blog on the Internet. "Myers’ analysis confronts our very raison d’être against our uncertain times. He asks the questions that most prefer not to ask." - Michael York, Professor of Theology, Bath Spa University. "Our guest [Brendan Myers] is a man of letters, a man for the people, a man who respects Mother Earth, and all her children. In my mind he is the perfect role model and a true purveyor of ancient teaching with passion and integrity." - Yvonne Boyer, hostess of God Box Cafe podcast, in Episode 80 (6 November 2009). Circles of Meaning, Labyrinths of Fear EBOOK. Ebooks lezen is heel makkelijk. Na aankoop zijn ze direct beschikbaar op je Kobo e-reader en op je smartphone of tablet met de gratis bol.com Kobo app. Samenvatting. You've heard of sacred places, writings, relics, and rituals, holy days and magical times of year. But these are actually representations of relationships that people have with each other and the elements of the world. Some of these relationships environmental: they involve landscapes, animals, and the streets of your home town. Some are personal, such as families, friends, and elders. Some are public, involving musicians, storytellers, medical doctors, and even soldiers. This book studies twenty-two relationships, from a variety of traditions, and shows their place in "the good life'. Yet these relations are always fragile, and threatened by fears, from the fear of loneliness, to the fear of the loss of personal or political freedom, to the fear of death. To escape from these fears, people often trap themselves into ways of life that are bad for everyone, including themselves. This book studies how that happens, and how to prevent it. More than beliefs, laws, and teachings, our relationships are the true basis of spirituality, and freedom. The call of the Immensity: An interview with Brendan Myers, philosopher – part 2. Winterviews continues! From the Solstice (Dec. 21st) till the next Cross-quarter (Feb. 4th), we’re bringing you non-stop interviews and other goodies from big-name authors. Mark your calendar! Dr. Glenys Livingstone, author of PaGaian Cosmology – Dec. 21 Dr. Chet Raymo, author of When God Is Gone, Everything Is Holy – Dec. 25 Chris Stedman, author of Nonprophet Status – Jan. 8 Dr. Brendan Myers, author of Loneliness and Revelation – Jan. 15 Rev. Michael J. Dangler, Druid and Senior Priest of Three Cranes Grove – Jan. 22 Dr. Ursula Goodenough, author of The Sacred Depths of Nature – Jan. 29. Our interview with Dr. Brendan Myers concludes today with an in-depth discussion of the revelation of “presence” in nature, and a peak at his upcoming book Circles of Meaning, Labyrinths of Fear. B. T. Newberg: Last time we talked about the universal experiences you call Immensities , and whether gods might have some relation to them. I don’t want to push the gods question too far, but there’s another of your key concepts that seems too relevant to pass up: your notion of presence . One of the issues we’ve been discussing on this blog is how to talk about gods in a naturalistic way without reducing them to archetypes, metaphors, etc. We need to find a way to let the sense of the numinous come through. Your book Loneliness and Revelation speaks in an almost numinous way about the revelation of presence by nature, works of architecture, and other entities. What is this “presence”? What does it mean for something to “reveal” its presence? Brendan Myers: Presence is, quite simply, the here-ness and the now-ness of something-that-is-not-nothing. It has to do with something’s being in front of you, available to your senses and to your contemplations. Presence is also that aspect of a being’s identity, reality, or selfhood which that being reveals to you. It is what you experience when someone or something shows itself to you, or deliberately allows you to see and to hear what it is. And here I do mean a “being”, not an object or a mere “thing”: presence has to be revealed as a statement, a deliberate act. But perhaps controversially, my thoughts are rather flexible concerning what could count as a presence-revealing statement. Much of the time, a being asserts its presence just by showing up. You are here, and you are now, and your very existence here and now makes a statement to others who might be in a position to see and hear it. At minimum, the statement is “I am here!”. Remember, not all statements are expressed in words. Some are expressed in gestures, symbols, artworks, bodily postures, and other movements. And I’m also open to the possibility that animals and plants reveal presence in a similar way. But it seems to me that the very possibility of speaking intelligibly about ethics, and the very foundation of eudaimonia , the good and worthwhile human life, begins in the revelation of presence, where two beings show themselves to each other and they do not fear. Incidentally, my understanding of the importance of presence is one of the places where my thinking diverges away from existentialism. Existentialists always claim that existence precedes essence; or in other words, the fact of your bodily existence on earth comes before any discussion of your nature, your character, your soul, your fate or destiny, or anything else that could count as an “essence.” By contrast, my argument is that existence and essence always come together: that the revelation of your presence is an essence, of a sort, which is always bundled with your existence. The two are inseparable, and there is probably no point in asking which one came first. You ask about the gods. For the most part, I am inclined to leave questions about the gods to more theologically inclined pagan writers, such as John Michael Greer (his book A World Full of Gods seemed to me very well-reasoned). I am a big fan of the idea of apotheosis, which is the immortality of a person’s life-story which continues to be told long after her death. I’m mostly convinced that the gods are, or rather were, living human beings from many centuries ago who lived outstandingly heroic or exemplary lives, and whose stories continued to be told, and exaggerated too, until they became the mythologies we have today. Add a little animism to the mix, in the form of the belief that the souls of these people survived death and may be seen in dreams or in omens, and you have the basis of a Pagan polytheism. The interesting thing about presence and revelation, as I have described these ideas in my work, is that while existence and presence are inseparable, it may not always be strictly necessary for a body to be in front of you for a revelation to present itself. A person’s presence can be revealed in the story of that person, even when that person is elsewhere, or long dead. You tell the story of your grandmother on the anniversary of her funeral, and she is there with you, in the story. The storytelling event is the existing thing, inseparable from the presence. You may also experience this presence when visiting places in the world that figure into that person’s story: this is why we make pilgrimages to the birthplaces or the graves of famous musicians, for example (the graves of Elvis Presley and Jim Morrison come to mind here). Some people may also experience something like presence revealing itself through nonhuman events, like thunderstorms, sunrises, blizzards. Some people experience presence in landforms like great mountains, mist-shrouded lakes, vast deserts, and the sea. The experience of encountering such things often produces in people the feeling of being in the presence of a god. The idea that the world as a whole has a presence is perhaps the basis of monotheism, although I think this is a direction well worth pursuing for anyone, whether monotheist or polytheist. Whether the god of revealed presence is the same as the creator-god of Genesis or the Koran, however, and whether the appropriate relationship to have with such a god is “worship”, is entirely another question. If the gods are presences that reveal themselves through heroic storytelling and environmental events and the like, there doesn’t seem to be much point in worshipping them, or even “believing” in them in the usual way. As the philosopher Beaudrillard wrote, “If God exists, there is no need to believe in Him. If people do believe in Him, this is because the self- evidence of his existence has passed away.” BTN: Experiencing presence in this way, especially through thunderstorms or mist-shrouded lakes, strikes a powerful chord. I certainly have felt it, and no doubt many others have too. There’s one part that thoroughly confuses me, though: “presence has to be revealed as a statement, a deliberate act.” How is the statement “I am here”, delivered just by showing up, deliberate? It seems quite unintentional to me, accomplished without deliberation and whether you like it or not. To push it further, how can animals or especially plants make deliberate statements? BM: The basic statement of presence, “I am here”, is only the very simplest, very first movement of the whole revelation. It is always bound together with whatever else you may be doing at the same time. The deliberateness of the basic statement of presence underlies or hides behind your other purposes and projects, yet also participates in them. In the book I discovered this statement by following a method invented by the philosopher Husserl, called “epoché”, or “reduction”. The method involves looking at the world and “standing back” from all the utilitarian or practical purposes that things appear to have, in order to see what remains. If, for example, I am watching a man plant a tree, I see that he digs a hole, places the seed in the ground, waters it, and so on. But I also see that together with these practical actions, he also exists, shows up for life, reveals his presence, makes himself available to be seen and known by others. The revelation of presence, the “I am here”, is the substance, the hypostasis, of your practical way of being in the world, and inseparable from it, no matter what it is. Yet just showing up is only the first movement of revelation. There are three more that follow it, which account for these practical matters more closely. Concerning animals and plants: I also understand “a deliberate act” in a very flexible way here. This is because adult human beings are clearly not the only creatures in the world who act with intentionality. Newborn babies do too; and so do our pets, as any dog owner could tell you. We normally assume that intentionality flows from consciousness and will. But following the work of philosophers like Merleau-Ponty, I’m suggesting that the truth is the other way around: that consciousness and will flows from intentionality. Any living organism which acts intentionally – hunting for food, or turning its leaves to face the sun – is acting in an intentional way, whether it is “conscious” of its act in a human sense or not. And bound together with its way of being will be its own peculiar way to assert the basic statement of revelation, “I am here.” A scale of complexity is in play, from the simplest and smallest intentional movements, such as a paramecium swimming, to the most sophisticated and self-aware examples, such as a human reading these words. Perhaps we are stretching the word “deliberate” a little bit too far here; and it may also be too difficult to see this kind of intentionality in sunrises or thunderstorms. Perhaps this is my last concession to animism. I recognize this problem right in the book itself – writers should be honest with their readers, and should not pretend to know everything – yet I’m confident that I or some future writer may be able to solve it. In the meanwhile, let us not lose sight of the more ultimate aim of this new way of thinking about things. It attempts to understand the world systematically and logically, but without at the same time stripping away its magic and wonder. In fact, it attempts to actually restore some of the magic and wonder of things, and to restore meaning and desirability to life. BTN: Fair enough. And yet, perhaps this line of questioning can lead us to other insights. Let me try to explain what I mean… First off, how can a person deliberately reveal their presence to generations to come through story, if it is not in their power to control whether and how their story is told? For that matter, if your story is told exaggerated to god-like proportions, how is it still a revelation of your presence, and not something entirely different? The kind of revelation of presence described seems decidedly unintentional , completely without deliberation, a presence that goes beyond any kind of egoistic deliberation, and cuts to the heart of what we share with all things in the universe: existence itself. If there is any deliberation, it seems like it is on the part of the beholder: we may deliberately open ourselves to seeing a presence in the person or thing before us. We might intentionally allow ourselves to see not a “mere thing” as you say, but a “being.” Would that be a misunderstanding of your work? BM: In the case of storytelling, we find that the storyteller supplies the material: the words that are spoken, the act of speaking them, etc. But from that material emerges more than just the teller’s own presence. We also find the presence of the characters in the story. Think of how an excellent actor can sometimes portray her role so well that you forget you are watching a scripted and rehearsed performance. You sense that character’s presence in the actor’s gestures or the storyteller’s words; you know that something more is there. In this way we can understand the old proverb of the Celtic bards, that a seannachie can raise the dead. The revelation of presence is, indeed, that which cuts through the ego and reaches the very heart of existence itself. Yet I want to understand this existence without falling into the black hole of solipsism. Revelation is something that you experience, but it is not an anthropomorphic projection. There’s something out there, revealing itself to you. A closed-minded or fearful person might prevent himself from seeing it. But it’s out there nonetheless. And the more self-aware its intentionality is, the more it will reveal to you. And the more it will want the same things that you want: to not be alone, to know that it is something-and-not-nothing, and to know that its existence matters. And this, it seems to me, is the very foundation on which we can build healthy relations with each other, and lead worthwhile lives. BTN: Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts in this interview. Or should I say, thank you for revealing your presence to us? (grin). Before we conclude, can you give us a brief teaser about your next book? What’s it about, and when can we expect it on store shelves? BM: I have several irons in the fire for the near future. In March of 2012, I will publish Circles of Meaning, Labyrinths of Fear . In this book we’ll see how sacred places, sacred writings, relics, and rituals, holy days and magical times of year, and so on, are actually representations of relationships that people have with each other and the elements of the world. Some of these relationships environmental: they involve landscapes, animals, and the streets of your home town. Some are personal, such as families, friends, and elders. Some are public, involving musicians, storytellers, medical doctors, and even soldiers. This book studies twenty-two of them, from a variety of traditions, and shows their place in “the good life.” Yet these relations are always fragile, and threatened by fears, from the fear of loneliness, to the fear of the loss of personal or political freedom, to the fear of death. To escape from these fears, people often trap themselves into ways of life that are bad for everyone, including themselves. This book studies how that happens, and how to prevent it. Just this week I signed contracts for two short books to be part of the “Pagan Portals” series from Moon Books (O Books’ pagan imprint). One will be about Druidry and Celtic mysticism, the other will be about philosophy. A few months ago I invented a strategy game that I used to teach basic political science to my students. It turned out to be surprisingly popular, so I will be publishing it very soon. And before the end of this year, I will self-publish my first novel: “Fellwater”. This is the story of two lovers who, while having problems in their relationship, accidentally get caught in the conflict between two factions of an ancient secret society. News and information about these projects will be announced on my web site, my blog, and my Facebook page, as publication dates arrive. BTN: Wow, let no one say you are not prolific! Thanks for talking with us, Dr. Myers. BM: Thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to you and your readers! The interviewee. Canadian philosopher and writer Brendan Myers is the author of several well-respected books on mythology, folklore, society and politics, ethics, and spirituality. His work is studied by college professors, social activist groups, interfaith groups, Celtic cultural associations, and even Humanist societies, in many countries around the world. In 2008 he received OBOD’s prestigious Mount Haemus award for professional research in Druidry. Since earning his Ph.D in environmental ethics at the National University of Ireland, Galway, he has lectured at several colleges and universities in Ontario, and toured much of Canada and Europe as a public speaker. In his varied career Brendan has also worked as a musician, a labour union leader, a government researcher, an environmentalist, and as a simple country gardener. Brendan’s books in print to date include: Brendan is also one of the hosts of Standing Stone and Garden Gate podcast. Día De Los Muertos Comes To Life Across The Mexican Diaspora. Decorative sugar skulls line the the front of the colorful, four-tiered altar. C empasúchiles in bloom are scattered between painted skeletons, unlit candles and plates of food resting on pink papel picado, an intricately designed tissue paper. Three banners hang above the display. In the center, La Catrina, the female skeletal figure that has become an icon for the occasion, is painted with a declaration: Día De Muertos . Day of the Dead. Circles of Meaning, Labyrinths of Fear: The twenty-two relationships of a spiritual life and culture - and why they need protection. Brendan Myers, PhD, is the author of eighteen published books in philosophy, environmental ethics, history of ideas, spirituality, urban fantasy fiction, and game design. He’s run three successful fundraising campaigns on Kickstarter, presented a TED talk, and hunted for fairy tales in seven European countries. Originally from Elora, Ontario, Canada, Brendan now serves as a professor of philosophy at Cégep Heritage College, in Gatineau, Quebec. Связанные категории. Предварительный просмотр книги. Circles of Meaning, Labyrinths of Fear - Brendan Myers. 1. Body and Mind. When speaking of sacred relations with others, including the most intimate others, we might first speak of the relations within ourselves. (The fashionable wisdom of our time demands that all discussion of the sacred begin with the self.) The most obvious and visible of these are the relations of the body. In every experience of my life, whether in the interior realm of my heart and mind, or the external world that I perceive with the senses, I am also experiencing my body. I feel heat and coldness in contrast with the temperature of my own flesh. I feel texture in contrast with the friction of my own skin. I see light and color through the lenses of my eyes. I hear music through the instrument of my eardrum, as well as in the harmonic resonance of some of my bones. It is with the body that we move and speak and act. It is with the body that we see and touch other people and the world. It is with the body that we experience all our feelings and emotions. It is with the body, and mainly through the voice, the eye, the face, and the hand, that we reveal to other people the contents of our hearts and minds. It is with the body that I know myself to be an individual, different than others, possessing my own identity. For my body is particularly my own, unlike any other body. It has its own unique shape, appearance, and its own DNA code. And I have exclusive possession of it: only I inhabit my body, no one else, and I inhabit only this body, not any other. And finally, it is the body that is mortal and which some day comes to death. Yet in looking at the relations of the body, problems quickly appear. For the body is the site of so many conflicts among differing religious and cultural traditions. Consider as an example the different ways that religious traditions treat hair. Some require practitioners to keep it cut short. Others want some or all of it covered by scarves and cloths. Some groups require their practitioners to shave it completely off. Other groups encourage their members to grow it long, and might recommend distinct ways of braiding it, such as dreadlocks. Some traditions require men to grow beards. Finally, in countries where a form of fundamentalism is part of the political climate, people can be ostracized, taunted in public, arrested by the authorities, or even physically assaulted by vigilantes, because of the way they show (or do not show) their hair. Some of these issues might be treated as differences of culture about which it isn’t necessary to get too excited. But superficial differences sometimes point to more serious theological commitments, which in turn become sources of conflict. I’m almost sorry to begin the body of this book on such an unpleasant note. But it seems important to me to get certain problematic assumptions out of the way. Just as one cannot plant a garden until first one has cleared the weeds, so one must first identify and discard faulty thinking in order to enjoy good thinking. Made in the Image of God. Many religious and philosophical traditions treat the spirit and the body as two separate and distinct things. The spirit is a kind of ‘ghost in the machine’, immaterial and incorporeal; it belongs to a realm of pure thought and feeling. It also survives death, to reincarnate again on earth, or to move on to an otherworldly realm. This idea can inspire glorious works of art, and admirable acts of service and self-sacrifice. But it also entails a denial of the spiritual significance of the body. It appears most prominently in Christian Scripture, for instance Paul’s letter to the Romans: My inner being delights in the law of God. But I see a different law at work in my body – a law that fights against the law which my mind approves of. It makes me a prisoner to the law of sin which is at work in my body. What an unhappy man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is taking me to death? Christian physical disciplines are some of the most well-known results of this attitude. Flagellation, fasting, celibacy, corporeal punishment, and even requirements for colorless or constrictive clothing, are products of the idea that the body must be disciplined or punished for the sake of the mind and the soul. Permit me to identify this idea with the name of misercorpism . Let this word designate any doctrine, practice, idea or teaching which disparages the body, or which privileges the mind or the spirit or the soul over the body, to whatever extent. But the Abrahamic tradition also holds that a human being is made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26) and that the human body is the temple of God (1st Corinthians 6:19). This idea can sanctify a body, and make it holy. In the early Italian Renaissance, this idea seems to have been expressed in sculptures and paintings of nudes. Historian Kenneth Clark described a painting that the council of Florence commissioned Michelangelo to create. It depicted a group of Florentine soldiers taken by surprise while bathing (for which reason the council rejected it). But a preparatory sketch still exists, and Clark says that sketch was the first authoritative statement that the human body – that body which, in Gothic times, had been the subject of shame and concealment… could be made the means of expressing noble sentiments, life-giving energy and God-like perfection . ¹⁶ Michelangelo’s sculptures, such as his famous David , also suggest the idea that the body is the instrument for expressing spiritual forces. The contemporary Wiccan practice of worshipping ‘skyclad’ (that is, naked) is perhaps intended to convey a similar idea about the dignity and divinity of the human body. Yet the principle of ‘made in the image of God’ exists in Christian thought in an unresolved tension with other, more disparaging ideas about the body. Consider the passage from Genesis that is often read out at funerals: For thou art dust and unto dust thou shall return. (Genesis 3:19) When the prophet Abraham addressed himself to God, he also identified himself with dust and ashes (cf Genesis 18:27). Paul’s aforementioned complaint about the different law at work in his body is only one example from the New Testament. There are others, such as Paul’s claim that precisely because the body is the temple of God, it therefore does not belong to you. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own. You were bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and your spirit, which are God’s. (1st Corinthians 6:19-20). He similarly tells the people of Galatia that if they indulge in various bodily pleasures, such as eating, drinking, and sex, then they will be denied access to the Kingdom of Heaven (Galatians 5:19-21). To Paul, this principle generates a duty to control physical desires, and particularly to abstain from extramarital sex. Christianity seems to have inherited the Stoic idea that only the mind, not the body, is made in God’s image. This idea can also be found in the work of Boethius, Cicero, and Marcus Aurelius, no less than in Early Fathers of the Church. Saint Augustine, for instance, claimed that resurrected saints have no need to eat! (cf City of God , Book 13, Ch 22, pp 18-19). Even Michelangelo’s magnificent nude sculptures, glorifying the beauty of healthy and strong human beings, still privilege the mind and spirit over the body. An unfinished sculpture of his, called The Prisoner (even though there are no chains nor shackles), resembles a man struggling to free himself from the stone in which he is still half-encased. Clark says this work expresses Michelangelo’s deepest preoccupation: the struggle of the soul to free itself from matter. ¹⁷ Christianity did not invent misercorpism. We find it in pre-Christian Greek and Roman philosophy too. It appears in the works of Plato, who in The Republic argued that one must master the demands of the body to become a philosopher (cf 430d-432b). Here’s a short text called The Dream of Scipio , in which Scipio Africanus, a student of Cicero’s, dreams of a conversation with his grandfather. At one point the grandfather says: Rest assured that it is only your body that is mortal; your true self is nothing of the kind. For the man you outwardly appear to be is not yourself at all. Your real self is not that corporeal, palpable shape, but the spirit inside. ¹⁸ Disparagements of the flesh like this appear frequently enough in the religious literature of the East as well. The proposition that life is inherently miserable is the first of Buddhism’s four Noble Truths. The Samyutta nikaya , an important Buddhist text, says: The body, monks, is soulless. If the body, monks, were the soul, this body would not be subject to sickness… Thus perceiving, monks, the learned noble disciple feels loathing for the body… Another Buddhist text makes a miraculous claim about the bodies of enlightened Buddhists which reads a lot like what Augustine said of the body of a resurrected saint: Reverend Ánanda, the Tathágatas have the body of the Dharma – not a body that is sustained by material food. The Tathágatas have a transcendental body that has transcended all mundane qualities. ( Vimalakirti Sutra , Ch 3) Passages like these suggest that Buddhism rules out in advance anything desirable, beautiful or good about corporeal embodiment. Certainly, it cannot reasonably be denied that much of the world is unhappy. Murder, disease, warfare, enmity, tribalism, grief, anger, and the like, do darken many people’s lives. But misercorpism sees these unhappy conditions in a non-accidental association with embodiment. Whatever the Buddhist perceives, he finds it involved in various embodied attachments, and therefore inherently in a state of suffering. Nor is this program a merely incidental part of its general system: in fact this loathing for the body, prescribed by Buddhism, is part of its method for achieving enlightenment. As the aforementioned passage from the Samyutta nikaya continues: feeling disgust [for the body] he becomes free from passion, through freedom from passion he is emancipated… ¹⁹ Nor is Buddhism the only Eastern source of misercorpism. The Yoga Sutra, an important text in Hinduism, asserts that the seeker should practice five observances, the first of which is cleanliness: By cleanliness is meant disgust with one’s body, and cessation of contact with others. ( Yoga Sutra , 2.40) The Chandogya Upanishad, one of the holy books of Hinduism, says: O Maghavan, verily, this body is mortal. It has been appropriated by death. [But] it is the standing-ground of that deathless, bodiless Self. Verily, he who is incorporate has been appropriated by pleasure and pain. Verily, there is no freedom from pleasure and pain for one while he is incorporate. Verily, while one is bodiless, pleasure and pain do not touch him. ( Chandogya Upanishad viii.xii.1) It’s clearly true that embodied life involves both pleasure and pain, and that it involves death. But from these propositions, it simply does not follow that the body is therefore without value . Let us assume that one who is ‘bodiless’ is freed from bodily pleasures and pains. Yet from this proposition it does not follow that the appropriate strategy for handling the problems of life is a retreat into some escapist fantasy concerning the immortal soul. There is no polite and diplomatic way to say it: these arguments are non sequiturs. But since they are supported by thousands of years of tradition and ritual and history, we no longer see them that way. As a final example of misercorpism from religion, consider this selection from the Maitri Upanishad : … in this ill-smelling, unsubstantial body, which is a conglomerate of bone, skin, muscle, marrow, flesh, semen, blood, mucus, tears, rheum, feces, urine, wind, bile, and phlegm, what is the good of enjoyment of desires? In this body, which is afflicted with desire, anger, covetousness, delusion, fear, despondency, envy, separation from the desirable, union with the undesirable, hunger, thirst, senility, death, disease, sorrow, and the like, what is the good of enjoyment of desires? ²⁰ Certainly, it is undeniable that the body is subject to injury, disease, and death, and that these conditions can be obstacles to full human flourishing. If the body is a home of joy, as I have affirmed earlier, nevertheless it is a home that is fragile and vulnerable, subject to invasion. For this reason, many Eastern traditions claim that sustainable spiritual fulfillment cannot be found in bodily enjoyments like food, or sex, or even exercise. The purpose of such claims is to turn one’s attention toward the soul, and to discourage people from getting ‘stuck’ in the thought that the body is the whole of their being. There may be some merit to this purpose. Yet I cannot help but find myself suspicious of any teaching, however old and venerable, which disparages the body so systematically. Religious texts are not the only places where we find profoundly disordered attitudes toward the body. Consider smoking, binge drinking, drug abuse, sedentary lifestyles, bad eating habits, and bad hygiene. Those who work in high-pressure jobs, such as in sales or in corporate management, often deprive themselves of sufficient sleep, in order to be more productive and competitive. People also treat themselves poorly when they get sick: they simply drop a few pills and go back to work instead of taking a few days of rest. Some industries, such as the fashion and design industry, and the weight loss industry, veritably encourage disordered bodily relationships. They teach people to feel disgust with the natural shape and size of their own bodies, and they reward punitive diet regimes. Invasive forms of body modification, like cosmetic surgery, can be included here, when borne of a refusal to accept the beauty of a healthy body just as it is. The results of disordered bodily relationships are often serious physical diseases like as anorexia, bulimia, obesity, type-2 diabetes, alcohol-related liver disease, and lung cancer. I won’t claim that these disordered bodily relationships have philosophical roots in religion, because I don’t know that for sure. But some of them seem to be borne of a similar attitude, which views the body as a kind of adversary, or obstacle, which gets in the way of the higher and deeper things, be they material, or immaterial. The main difference between religious and non-religious misercorpism is the type of weapon. Instead of coarse-fiber shirts and flagellation whips, the weapons are crash diets, punitive exercise regimes, binge-and-purge eating cycles, invasive surgical procedures, and pharmaceutical interference in the body’s.