Video and description from TEDTalks April 2011
By leading the Americans in his audience at TED step by step through the thought process, sociologist Sam Richards sets an extraordinary challenge: can they understand -- not approve of, but understand -- the motivations of an Iraqi insurgent? And by extension, can anyone truly understand and empathize with another?
The Mountain from Terje Sorgjerd on Vimeo.
This was filmed between 4th and 11th April 2011. I had the pleasure of visiting El Teide.
Spain´s highest mountain @(3715m) is one of the best places in the world to photograph the stars and is also the location of Teide Observatories, considered to be one of the world´s best observatories.
The goal was to capture the beautiful Milky Way galaxy along with one of the most amazing mountains I know El Teide. I have to say this was one of the most exhausting trips I have done. There was a lot of hiking at high altitudes and probably less than 10 hours of sleep in total for the whole week. Having been here 10-11 times before I had a long list of must-see locations I wanted to capture for this movie, but I am still not 100% used to carrying around so much gear required for time-lapse movies.
A large sandstorm hit the Sahara Desert on the 9th April (http://bit.ly/g3tsDW) and at approx 3am in the night the sandstorm hit me, making it nearly impossible to see the sky with my own eyes.
Interestingly enough my camera was set for a 5 hour sequence of the milky way during this time and I was sure my whole scene was ruined. To my surprise, my camera had managed to capture the sandstorm which was backlit by Grand Canary Island making it look like golden clouds. The Milky Way was shining through the clouds, making the stars sparkle in an interesting way. So if you ever wondered how the Milky Way would look through a Sahara sandstorm, look at 00:32.
Available in Digital Cinema 4k.
Like my Facebook Page for updateshttp://www.facebook.com/TSOPhotography
Follow me on http://twitter.com/TSOPhotography
Press/licensing/projects contact: terjes@gmail.com
Music by my friend: Ludovico Einaudi - "Nuvole bianche" with permission.
Please support the artist here:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/una-mattina/id217799399
Thank you to my sponsors:
http://www.canon.com
http://www.g-technology.com
http://www.dynamicperception.com/ (Best dolly in the world!)
"Developing love and compassion and reducing anger and spite is a universal activity which requires no faith in any religion whatsoever." - Dalai Lama
The point is increasing happiness – what we all look for anyway – through cultivating ‘love’ –Basically learning how to love harder. Now If you’re skeptical, let me explain. As Plato’s Socrates said, the highest purpose of love is to become a lover of wisdom – for him this is equivalent to becoming a philosopher. Wisdom, in its mystic sense, can be found at the core of each religion – hence the term ‘wisdom tradition’. If you strip religion of all its doctrine, hierarchies, and ‘unwavering’ laws, you will be left with its core ‘wisdom’.
By wisdom I don’t mean hidden rules or knowledge; I mean practices – particularly, practices which cultivate love. The benefits of specific practices can be seen in within the field of positive pychology (click to view insights into Buddhist practices). Loving-kindness meditation is actually considered a practice of Buddhism. This is not limited to Buddhism, but can also be found in Christian monasticism and several other religions. When you get down to this level of religion, it begins to lose its strong attachment to faith, authority, and other modern institutional structures.
So how does this relate to the Dalai Lama’s quote? He says love and compassion “requires no faith in any religion whatsoever." He has also said “kindness is my religion”. By equating religion with kindness, this eliminates the institutional structure altogether. If religion becomes ‘kindness’, where is the need for faith? The alternative to focusing on faith – which presupposes knowledge and laws – is the focus is on practices which are a tool for growth. Of course, this is a break from ‘religion’ as we commonly know it.
Rather than being a mere part of the flock, over-determined by the laws of a master, one must make religion into ‘kindness’; only then can freedom and individual growth begin to occur. On that note, I will end this post with another quote:
“All major religious traditions carry basically the same message, that is love, compassion and forgiveness, the important thing is they should be part of our daily lives.” – Dalai Lama
Photo Credit: Ian Kushnir
Hundreds of people from different faiths came together Thursday afternoon to take part in the opposition against Florida Pastor Terry Jones. The InterFaith Leadership Council of Metropolitan Detroit organized the event, held at Dearborn's Islamic Center of America.
The ICA hosting committee greeted visitors at the door and provided head scarves for women upon entrance. Just before entering the main hall, a large white banner that covered a long table had a number of attendee signatures written on it. In the center of the hall laid a red carpet that led to center stage of the religious panelists.
As people filed in to take their seats, smiles were exchanged and hugs were shared, giving the gathering a peaceful atmosphere. The attendees, though diverse in the faiths they practice, were unified in their message.
Exerpt from The Dearborn Patch
This is a sight I like to see: unity in difference. But here is a different perspective on the recent events. ‘Spirited Atheist’ Susan Jacoby Writes:
Respect for religion—any religion—is not required under American law, despite the wrongheaded idea that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. You can burn copies of the Torah, the New Testament, or the Koran…
There is absolutely no moral equivalency between the symbolic act of one demented pastor—who apparently commands a congregation of only 30 warped souls—and revenge killings abetted by the voices of so-called religious leaders in Afghanistan
Exerpt from The Washington Post
This is a reaction to the claims of those who blame Pastor Terry Jones for the revenge killings which resulted from his actions.
Of course there is no moral equivalency between disrespect and killings. Although respect for religion is not required by law, I stand for earned respect – those in Dearborn have earned respect and deserved to have been shown it. But lack of respect is not the main issue here; the issue is Jones’s hateful speech and actions. His actions are a perpetuation of a cycle of hate. Hate and anger only leads to more hate and anger.
But what about the interfaith gathering? This breaks from my logic of harm begetting harm. The gathering is significant because it is an example of a hateful action causing a positive reaction: a diverse community uniting. These are the reactions we need to see more often.
In the end, Paster Terry Jones is an example of a hateful person who will merely create more hate in those he is against – this is the downward spiral we need to watch out. Rather than engaging in negative reactions, we must first consider the harm we may be perpetuating. The interfaith response is an example of a path one must consider before engaging in protest.
Perhaps one day responses like this will not only be ‘interfaith’, but inter-faith/non-faith. What a day it will be when atheists will be welcome with arms-wide-open in a country were they are currently its #1 hated minority. Until then, all I can say is this: always consider your reactions; they can be part of the problem or part of the solution.
This reminds me of the popular Atheist vs. Religious debates: O'Reilly vs Dawkins, The Richard Dawkins Forum (which I had once been a regular contributor), Reddit Atheism, the Hitchens vs. Hitchens debate and several other Youtube videos.
Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy a hardy laugh at religious ignorance; as well, I can appreciate an eloquent argument by Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, or Sam Harris. Although they can be amusing, these discussions are usually futile and breed resentment.
By giving attention to what we don’t like, we actually strengthen its stance. This creates a looping effect where each side gets firmer in their stance and more resentful of the other.
Lastly, both sides tend to make the same fundamental error of judgment; they both appeal to the absolute worst/must harmful individuals of the other group. This is especially evident in the Hitchens vs. Hitchens debate where Christopher generalizes the fundamentalist stance on ‘religion’. The same goes for Christians who think all atheists are arrogant or immoral. We should be careful of the tendency to judge ourselves by our best characteristics and the other by their worst.
I find discussions on religion quite fascinating and think they have the potential to unite differences rather than merely dividing them.
“For of the fast stage of this cultural development, it might well be truly said: ‘Specialists without spirit, sensualists without heart’” – Max Weber
Why keep talking about religion? Well, I think it has something to offer. There is something to be said about a regular collective gatherings which encourage states of intoxication. That’s right, states of group intoxication – and I’m not talking about the bar! This doesn't sound like the religion you know? Well that’s because modern religion has been sterilized, sanitized, and stripped away all the fun stuff – the bliss.
Max Weber’s quote appears in his book Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1908). It was written in response to a dramatic rise of modern ‘work ethic’. Basically, this ‘ethic’ consists of working as hard as you can to please God; but there’s a catch (there’s alllways a catch with God): you can’t enjoy any of the profit you earn from your work; it must be strictly invested and never used for pleasure. This is the modern ‘ascetic ideal’ – the same ideal Nietzsche hated. This ideal boils down to one thing: being completely rational and disciplined all the time wile avoiding any kind of pleasures.
So what’s wrong with being rational? Well, this is not you’re ordinary type of ‘rational’, this is extreme rationality where every action must be reflected upon for its instrumental utility. In pushing ones self so far in this direction one grossly neglects some of the most important things: passion, sensation, and emotion.
Now I’m not trying to get all ‘new agey’ here. I really think we need to start paying more attention to these other parts of the human experience. The protestant ethic did not disappear; it is alive and well in almost all religious and corporate institutions. The difference is that we no longer place God at the top (Nietzsche was right when he said God is dead). Money is our new object of worship.
So now what. How can we bring back passion to institutions that have been hollowed out? How can we bring meaning back to a sterilized zombie religion and a psychopathic corporate world? We don’t need a new God to save us; we need passion. We can learn a thing or two from the pre-modern world. We once thought of them an unhappy ‘primitive’ world which needed happy civilizing. I’m starting to wonder if we had it backwards.
Here are some clips to consider. Enjoy!
Human Planet: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12618167
Gross National Happiness: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Zqdqa4YNvI
