BOOK REVIEW: The Last Lecture, by Randy Pausch.

 “Be happy for this moment. This moment is your life.”
– Omar Khayyam (born 1048) 

There’s not much more to be said for the courage of a man facing death, with three children under the age of six and a wife who is standing by his side. Further, to share his wisdom with the world via a book – The Last Lecture – -now the country’s no. 1 bestseller — as well as a lecture which was videoed and posted on You Tube, and has gone viral. I don’t touch the man, his courage, his hard work, his pain or his fortitude.

The book, however, basically stinks. It is presented haphazardly, and to be straightforward, the advice is – what is the best way to put this? – lacking in inspiration or enlightenment.

Randy Pausch loves Disney, and as a computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon, one can understand why. He even got to cross off a line on his Bucket List – that of being an Imagineer at Disney, you know, one of those people who use computers to make some of the magic visitors see at the parks. That’s fine, and while I haven’t counted words, I will say if he gave me a buck very time he told a story about Disney, why, I’d be able to afford a very nice dinner someplace, maybe even Dinseyworld.

My point is the reader doesn’t walk away with any feeling of, oh yeah, I need to live my life that way, whether we’re walking away from Disney stories or tidbits from his classroom. Pausch has set himself up – as all writers of such books do – as a guru of sorts to dispense knowledge gleaned from a life well led and a death courageously faced. This of itself is a fine goal, and in fact one a reader of such books seeks.

Sadly, he fails.

In fact, I was surprised to read some advice which I would have expected contrary to the lessons we all need to remind ourselves of. Pausch touts himself as a master of the multitasker, the time cruncher, the man who can get lots of things done all at once and in record time (he even got his tenure earlier than anyone else has at Carnegie Mellon).

Frankly, so what?

Many writers of such books will advise you that the key lesson of dying is to live in the moment, savoring the time one has. Juggling three tasks at once doesn’t really help with that, does it?

The advice which seems agreeable enough is generally unexciting. “No job is beneath you.” “Tell the truth.” These are fine aphorisms, but really, one doesn’t need to face death to realize them. Readers want the unique perspective which such clarity of existence lends while we aren’t facing the same pain or time limits.  Pausch can’t help us.

I haven’t seen the video. Perhaps he comes across more effectively in person. Still, books need to stand on their own, and this one doesn’t.

But I’ll close again, I wish him and his family well, and I dearly hope he becomes one of the “one in a million” who survive his cancer.

– Maui Curmudegeon

YES!  Next Question

The Templeton Organization (http://www.templeton.org/belief/) has begun a series of full page advertisements in newspapers such as the New York Times which publish a debate centering around this question:

“Does science make belief in God obsolete?”

Here are the quick answers given by the recent writers (the full answers can be found on the website):

• “Yes.” – Steve Pinker, Harvard University Psychology Department, author of The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.).
• “No, and yes.” – Christoph Cardinal Shonborn, Dominican Friar.
• “Absolutely not.” – William Phillips, Nobel Laureate, Physics.
• “Of course not.” Mary Midgley, authoer of Evolution as a Religion(Routledge Classics).
• “No, but it should.” Christopher Hitchens, author of God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.
• “No.” – Keith Ward, Church of Englad Priest, author of The Big Questions in Science and Religion.
• “Yes.” – Victor Stenger, Professor, University of Hawaii, author of God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist.
• “Not at all.” – Jerome Groopman, Professor of medicine, Harvard, author of How Doctors Think.
• “It depends.” – Michael Shermer, author of How We Believe, 2nd Edition: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God.
• “Of course not.” – Kenneth Miller, professor of biology, Brown University, author of Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution (P.S.).
• “No, but only if we continue to develop new notions of God” – Stuart Kauffman, author of Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion.

Excepting Pinker’s The Language Instinct, I’ve read the books mentioned. As always, we can learn something by what is NOT mentioned. For example, none of the writers, whether or not they believe in a god, mentioned strict texts such as the Bible or Koran or Torah. It is as if the debate has moved beyond these minor issues. The participants recognize that the fairy tales can’t be supported anymore. The idea of a god has to be redefined (as Kauffman posits).

Yet, those like Kauffman miss the point. Either there is a god with certain characteristics, or there isn’t. Whether or not humans adjust their concept of this god is immaterial to and ineffectual on, this idea of omniscience. It is, however, understandable that many fall into the trap laid by the question.

To illustrate the trap, let’s take a simpler example. Let’s say there’s a word, we’ll call it Gynyx. We know that there is no such word in the English language, nor any other language which can then be translated into English. Thus, the object, creature, motion or hypothetical which every word must represent, does not, in this case, exist. There is no such a thing as a Gynyx.

Now, let’s ask the question: “Do you believe in Gynyx?”

The first understanding the answerer has to come to is what is a Gynyx? And when the word cannot be defined, then the question becomes moot. It is so with the notion of a god.

NOT ONE of the responders to the question examine how to define a concept of god as put forth by the questioner, and so cannot really answer the question. As an English construct the question is illogical, makes no sense, and so the answers can’t illuminate the issue very clearly.

Not many people know that Christians invented the word “atheist”. The classic definition – one who does not believe in god – neatly makes its point. The person the word refers to chooses not to believe in god – it says nothing to the issue of god not existing. So it is with the question put forth by Templeton.

But still, to take a crack, using the broad definition of science – rational thought applied to an experience to explain it – the answer is immediate and easy. No one of rational thought and moderate intelligence thinks any god exists as defined by any religion yet fabricated from man’s mind.

And yes, the antithesis of the last sentence is also true.

– Mauiu Curmudgeon

Who’s kidding whom about this vog?

Perhaps it’s the same people who tell us that cane smoke is not harmful. Is life worth living? Ask the liver. Is air worth breathing? Ask the lungs.Not all people will be affected equally, but sneezing, coughing. stuffy nose, headache and throat and eye irritations are and will be common. We may have to change the names of these isles to the Mucus Isles.

An ethical and moral government and tourist bureau would urge tourists to stay away for health reasons. But don’t hold your breath. Wait a minute, we are already holding our breath.

Sulfur dioxide, cadmium, mercury, silica and whatever else comprises that toxic shroud cannot but be threatening to people, tourism and real estate values.

We may have to individually warn Mainlanders. I’m afraid our governor lacks the moral courage to do it.

– Raphael O’Suna, Haiku

Musical Instrument Day Day 143 of 2008 223 days left in this year

Epat: Airport
HAWAIIAN PROVERB OF THE DAY — “Sneeze and may you have long life.”
HAOLE SAYING OF THE DAY — “Forget injuries, never forget kindesses.” (Confucius)

WEB SURF SPOT OF THE WEEK — The Smithsonian Museums

WEB VIDEO OF THE WEEK — Mathews Exposes Right-Wing Ignoramus
NETCAST OF THE WEEK — NEWSEUM – World’s Most Interactive Museum
GOOD DEED SITE OF THE WEEK — Feed the Hungry at FreeRice.com

---

HISTORICAL EVENTS ON THIS DAY — May 22nd
1872: The Amnesty Act goes into effect, restoring civil rights to citizens of the South
1906: Orville and Wilbur Wright are granted the first U.S. airplane patent
1909: The first San Francisco fireboat, David Scannell, is launched
1939: Hitler & Mussolini sign the “Pact of Steel”, committing Germany and Italy to a military alliance
1947: The “Truman Doctrine” goes into effect, aiding Turkey & Greece
1947: The first U.S. ballistic missile is fired
1954: Robert Zimmerman (aka Bob Dylan) is Bar Mitzvah’ed
1961: The first revolving restaurant, Top of the Needle, is dedicated in Seattle Wshington
1972: President Nixon becomes the first U.S. President to visit Moscow
1974: Ruffian begins her racing career as a filly & dies 14 months later
1998: A heavy turnout of voters in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland overwhelmingly approve a Northern Ireland peace accord
2000: A committee of the Arkansas Supreme Court recommends that President Clinton be disbarred for giving false testimony about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case

BORN ON THIS DAY — May 22nd
1813: Richard Wagner, composer
1844: Mary Cassatt, Impressionist painter
1859: Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, author
1891: Robert Gordon Sproul, educator/college pres
1895: Jiddu Krishnamurti, spiritual philosopher
1907: Laurence Olivier, actor
1920: Thomas Gold, astronome
1922: Judith Crist, movie reviewer
1928: T Boone Pickens, cspitalist
1934: Peter Nero, pianist
1938: Richard Benjamin, actor/director
1938: Susan Strasberg, actress
1940: Bernard Shaw, CNN anchorman
1941: Paul Winfield, actor
1950: Bernie Taupin, musician/songwriter
1959: (Steven Patrick) Morrissey, singer/songwriter
1961: Ann Cusack, actress