To my small following....

To all of you out there who have been following my little blog, I have moved it to a private website, where I have more control over the blog and site. I plan to become a little more active with it in the future and I wanted to keep it available to the public, because I like the feeling that somebody somewhere may get something useful in their life from my thoughts.

So, it is on my personal website. The blog site is still under development, so be patient while I get it squared away.

You can find it at:   tonyhenrie.me/wordpress/weatheronthehorizon

I hope you continue to follow it.

Thanks,

Tony Henrie
Weather On the Horizon

P.S. I still have my regular blog at westerntrailrider.com as well.

My New Fox Trotter

Me in the Universe

When I look at a photograph like this one of the Sombrero Galaxy, and recognize that it really is a photograph, not a computer-generated image, or a painting, or something merely imagined in an artist's mind, it amazes me and makes me feel very small.

The Sombrero Galaxy is aproximately 29.3 million light years from earth and about 50,000 light years in diameter. It's center is estimated to be 1 billion times as dense as our sun. Our earth, in comparison, would not be as large as the finest possible needle prick on this image. The light we see here in this image left the Sombrero Galaxy more than 29 million ago. We are looking more than 29 million years into the past.

As I look upon images of the vastness of space, and consider the glorious heavenly bodies therein and the measures of distance and time that are beyond my comprehension, it seems to me incomprehensible that life itself should not be eternal.

Where was I when the light in this image first departed the Sombrero Galaxy? What was I doing? Where will I be when today's light from our earth reaches 29.3 mega-light years into space? What will I be doing? What will life be like then? How those thoughts bring into focus the infinitely short, yet eternal importance, of my time here on earth.

When I look at such images, the statement of Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Second Counselor in the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, takes on greater meaning for me:

"...while we may look at the vast expanse of the universe and say, “What is man in comparison to the glory of creation?” God Himself said we are the reason He created the universe! His work and glory—the purpose for this magnificent universe—is to save and exalt mankind. In other words, the vast expanse of eternity, the glories and mysteries of infinite space and time are all built for the benefit of ordinary mortals like you and me. Our Heavenly Father created the universe that we might reach our potential as His sons and daughters.

This is a paradox of man: compared to God, man is nothing; yet we are everything to God. While against the backdrop of infinite creation we may appear to be nothing, we have a spark of eternal fire burning within our breast. We have the incomprehensible promise of exaltation—worlds without end—within our grasp. And it is God’s great desire to help us reach it."

It is "God's great desire" to help us return to Him, to inherit all He has created for us. As the psalmist said, we are "children of the most High." (Psalm 82:6). How comforting that is in my smallness in the universe.

**

To Believe or Not to Believe...

I recently read a blog post by my son. In his post, he referenced an article by Sam Harris, entitled The Fireplace Delusion.  I read the Harris article with some interest and thought I'd post my response to it.

Here's how it begins:

"It seems to me that many nonbelievers have forgotten—or never knew—what it is like to suffer an unhappy collision with scientific rationality. We are open to good evidence and sound argument as a matter of principle, and are generally willing to follow wherever they may lead. Certain of us have made careers out of bemoaning the failure of religious people to adopt this same attitude."

Harris analogized religious argument to the common perception that a warm fire in the hearth is a comforting and "wholesome" thing, and that people will irrationally argue its merits and benefits, despite the fact that science has proven that fire, in itself, is a harmful, pernicious, and unhealthful thing. He goes so far as to say that, in view of advances in technology, those who burn wood, do so "recreationally", rather than from any possible benefit or need, and that doing so should be outlawed. He rejects any opposing view as irrational, based on scientific evidence.

I found Harris' article and analogy interesting, but not compelling. His argument, as I read it, is basically that religious people irrationally defend that which they believe, despite the fact that science proves religion false, and that for this reason non-believers face only irrational argument from believers and must therefore feel disadvantaged (implied in his closing statement). He applies his logic to believers in religion vs. non-believers, apparently equating non-believers to those educated in science, and believers to the close-minded and self-deceived, who defend falsehood in spite of absolute evidence to the contrary.

It is apparent Harris' intended audience is the body of non-believers who consider religion to be false and irrational. His argument is founded in three assumptions that preexist his argument. The first two are obvious and are set out in the introduction to his article. First, he presupposes that those who are non-believers espouse good evidence and sound reasoning "as a matter of principle" and generally follow wherever it leads. Second, he asserts that those who profess religion do not. He seems to be attempting to console non-believers, who lament the fact that they cannot convince a religious person of the error of their thinking, by explaining that rational arguments are ineffective against them; they do not desire, nor will they accept sound reasoning or good evidence contrary to their beliefs.

The third presumption is not obviously stated, but is as evident as the first two. He presumes, before all, that religion is false, irrational, and not founded in scientific reality. All his rationale simply disintegrates in the face of the possibility that any religion may be true. In fact, if any religion is true, then the same presumptions he applies above can be stated otherwise with equal validity as: Those who disbelieve the true religious principles, do so despite good evidence and sound reasoning, do not desire such, and they will not follow where such leads. Harris' fireplace analogy can be applied equally in the case of believers in false religious doctrine as in the case of believers in faulty scientific conclusions. However it fails in the case of true religious doctrine and principles.

Harris' analogy fails to address the fact that there are renowned scientists who have made momentous scientific discoveries, who are also very religious. He also discounts the fact that the same analogy may be applied equally to the non-believing scientific community, who simply disregard any evidence that they have not measured, quantified, labeled, and manipulated. So, he paints non-believers with the broad brush of being open-minded and rational as a matter of principle, while using the same brush to paint believers as being close-minded and irrational, disallowing the possibility that either side might go either direction depending on the topic at hand (for instance, the scientist who is afraid of harmless snakes). Following this logic, one must assume that a scientist, regardless of renown or scientific accomplishments, who is also religious, must not be open-minded and rational "as a matter of principle," nor willing to follow where open-mindedness and rational thinking leads.

A favorite quote of my son comes to mind: "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." 

One cannot simply state, as Harris has implied, that people believe in religion only because it is comforting, or that believing in religious doctrines is equivalent to being unscientific, uneducated, or irrational, without applying the same parameters to non-believers, whether scientists or not, and still comply with the argument he himself has presented by his analogy.

Mr. Harris's analogy, contrary to his intent, I'm sure, is effective in showing how all people, including himself, regardless of whether they believe in religion or not, irrespective of their avocation, education, or belief system, feel the same emotional need to defend their beliefs and values; interestingly, that same characteristic demonstrated by his writing the article. We tend to see in others that which we find in ourselves. I'm sure, if he were to read this response, he would find humor in the fact that, as he read, he was developing in his mind arguments to refute it and support his own assertions, despite the fact that his original conclusions are admittedly based upon his "extensive research" at "dinner parties". 

A true scientist does not reject or deny the possibility of evidence he/she has not yet discovered. Neither does a true scientist expect to arrive at valid scientific conclusions without research and experimentation following proper scientific methodology. At the same time, all scientists accept and apply information they receive from sources other than themselves, sources they have vetted and trust, and they recognize the verity that they cannot possibly discover it all for themselves. They must believe somebody. True religionists follow these same principles.

As I would not expect to make any valid scientific discovery without following the prescribed protocols of science, I would neither expect to discover any religious verities without following the prescribed protocols of religion. Neither would I disregard the occasional fortuitous accident, or miracle, by which either scientific or religious knowledge may be obtained. Nor do I regard scientific knowledge as being separate and distinct from my religious beliefs. Harris, judging by the entirety of his article and not just the analogy, seems to discount completely that there may, in the final analysis, be no difference in true religious doctrine and scientific knowledge, or the possibility that in some future day all rational thought must include a knowledge of the existence and workings of God.

The value of faith is the ability to live according to true principles not yet discovered nor explainable by science. Those who can do so benefit by living according to those true principles, while those who disregard faith must wait until a true principle is discovered by science before they or their followers can benefit. Who, then, is close-minded? The believer who lives true principles only by faith, or the non-believer who discounts the existence of true principles not yet discovered and proven by science.

There really is no difference in the rejection of true principles, regardless of whether they are based in faith or scientific knowledge. Both are irrational. Similarly, it is no more rational to disregard the possibility that current scientific knowledge may be faulty or incomplete, than blindly to believe in false religious principles.

The key to true knowledge and wisdom is to seek it on its own terms, regardless of the source, and to follow where it leads...as a matter of principle.

It appears Harris' mind is closed on the matter. 

As he put it, "And that should give you some sense of what we are up against whenever we confront religion."

I must admit, however, that he convinced me that a wood-burning fireplace is unhealthful.

The Road Not Taken

I was working on my website this morning (westerntrailrider.com) and came across a picture of the fork of a trail in the woods on a facebook page. It reminded me of one of my favorite poems, composed by Robert Frost, to whose poetry I was introduced in the fourth grade my Mrs. Cernik.

Thank you, Mrs. Cernik. Of all I ever gained in school, that ranks among those things I regard most highly.

The Road Not Taken

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim
Because it was grassy and wanted wear,
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I marked the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way
I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Robert Frost

(poem clipped from poemhunter.com)

Words of Wisdom

Words of Wisdom

Words of wisdom, often times,
When twisted in distorted minds,
And spoken then in hallowed halls,
Reverberate within their walls,

And written down in books well read,
Considered not, but often said,
Spread far and wide throughout the land,
Misquoted, to promote and plan,

Altered, changed, repeated then,
Abused to serve the wants of men,
To prove their words, support their cause,
By reasoning and force of laws,

And then through subtlety of time
And unwise use in thoughtless minds,
And viewed in light not seen by all,
Become proof positive of the fall

Of man.

Tony Henrie
01/25/2013

Road maps...

The most lost individuals I have ever known spent most of their lives trying to find themselves. Back in the 1970s, it was in vogue in the United States for one to depart from the beaten path of society and go out into the "world" to find himself. People young and old left family, friends, businesses, education, careers, and often all of the above, to go out and explore life, to find out who they were. This often led to experimentation with drugs and alcohol and many other things commonly considered to be counter-culture to the societal values to which the individual may have been raised-up. Many of these people eventually returned, in their later years, to be contributing members of society. In other words, after all was said and done, they finally found themselves back in the society they wandered away from. Others simply lost themselves in the effort and never contributed to anything but their own demise.

There are so many deceptions in the world today that one who attempts to leave the proven and well-worn paths in life, as he tries to make his own path, puts at risk himself, his future, and the happiness of all those who hold him dear. Those who tend to keep to the well-worn paths, cleared and smoothed by the feet of many successful people before them, are much more likely to end up in later years with happy, successful, and fulfilling lives, making all around them better and happier people as well.

Now, that is not to say that all well-worn paths are worth following, but one can easily look at a map and see where the road he is on leads. That is, unless he is making his own path. If one wishes to arrive at the city of "Successful", he can choose to take the road that leads there, which passes through the townships of "Education," "Discipline," and "Respect", and is located in the County of "Hard Work", or he can take the back roads, which may take longer, may offer more scenic views, pass through different townships, but still eventually arrive at the same destination. In reality, both use established pathways that lead to "Successful" in the end.  Or, one may decide that he has no need to follow any established route at all. By that route, one may find it extremely difficult to judge progress, or even determine exact location at many points in the journey, and arrival at the destination becomes doubtful, or less likely at best.

When one looks at a map, he sees many roads leading to major population centers. One may decide where he wants to go and select the route that is most satisfactory for his purposes. The best and most direct routes are normally shown in prominent colors and broad lines, while the less efficient routes are shown in finer lines and subdued colors. The same concept applies to our endeavors in life. The most well-worn pathways are well-traveled, because that is how the most people get where they want to go. If one's purpose in choosing another way is no more than a decision not to follow the established route, then one can certainly plan on delays in his arrival at...wherever. I once heard someone say, "If you don't know where you're going, it doesn't matter when you get there." If you know where you would like to go, but decide not to take the roads that will take you there, then other priorities clearly rule your decision-making.

I have often heard people, particularly in the entertainment industry, who, early in their lives led counter-cultural, immoral, vice-ridden lives, say they had, "no regrets".  Many claim they are better and wiser for having passed through the addictions and unhappiness that resulted from the excesses of their youth. What a selfish view of the world! I submit they show wisdom only inasmuch as they have recovered from their foolishness and returned to normal life (as much as possible). The fact is, that they have returned to the established pathways of the society they departed from earlier in life. Do they simply disregard the good they might have done for others in the world, had they never departed the beaten pathways? Do they truly have no regrets for the pain, suffering, and shame they caused their parents, grandparents, brothers, sisters, and friends during their, shall we say, excursion into the countryside? Maybe they should ask those closely associated with them whether they should have any regrets and consider their answers.

As a law enforcement officer, earlier in my life, I often became acquainted with volunteer counselors in various assistance programs for those suffering from addictions and other choice-related maladies, such as criminal convictions. Many of these self-designated "counselors" felt they were qualified to counsel others, simply because they, themselves, had been through the same problems. I often found myself shaking my head in wonder at the counsel I heard given from the mouths of morally impoverished persons, who considered themselves wise, who claimed to have wisdom gained from wandering aimlessly through life and experiencing the depravity of addictions and immoral living. How much more valuable would be counsel from one who had actually gained and exercised wisdom by making wise choices throughout his life. Compassion and understanding can be born from common experience, yes. A listening and understanding ear has a wonderfully uplifting effect on the troubled soul, I agree. However, the most valuable counsel, I believe, comes from wise people, who have been wise enough throughout their lives to stay on the "straight and narrow" path.

A saying I once heard goes, "You'll get where you're going, if you don't change your ways." I like that. It cuts both ways equally. If you are wandering, you'll continue to wander, unless you choose a destination and follow the path to get there. If you follow designated pathways, you'll get there sooner.

Notice how I said one must choose a destination rather than a path. To simply choose a path without considering where that path eventually leads, is foolishness. Doing that and returning later to the path you were on before is not wisdom, it is simply the cessation of foolishness. Choosing a destination and following the pathways that lead there, are what get us where we want to be.

The key, then, is first to desire to be in a worthy place, then to choose your destination, get on the right road, and start traveling. Road maps, whether real or metaphorical are good and useful tools in that endeavor.

Remember, "Wherever you go, there you are."