Do We Have the Right?

                                        By Grandfather

        Do we have the right to play God? If we create life in a test tube are we playing God? First we must assume that God exists. Then there is the question of Gods perfection, or at least the conclusion that if God is perfect can (or would) God create anything less than perfect. Most people would accept the reality that the World is not perfect. Would God create an imperfect world, or is that part of the design?

        Assuming that God would not create a mistake, any imperfection must be by design. The only sense for imperfection by design would be for the purpose of evolution. Thus God is letting the world evolve into an eventual perfection in itself. Until this evolution reaches its end result though, we have imperfection.

        Just as Grandfather stated in the book “Saddam’s Revenge”, if a man were watching an Ant colony and it was attacked by a Scorpion, the man (like God) would not see individual Ants and their individual deeds. He would see the overall experience of the attack and marvel at the overall results. Over the course of time the colony and how it responded to life in general would evolve and its responses would change. This is what the man would be looking for… these changes.

        Now taking it to the level of God watching mankind, would see a parallel. God is watching as man evolves to each level of existence.    Each battle we fight is a part of that evolution, from wars against other peoples to wars against disease.

          It only makes sense that to step back and watch the changes reveals the purpose of the design. Just as we no longer worship the sun and moon gods etc. We have come past that stage of life. Until we get past the stage of limiting ourselves “in the name of God” We can not reach the next level.

        We can look at one group of people that see women as not equal “in the name of God”.
        Yet others will say they are, but they are not equal enough to be religious leaders “in the name of God”
        And then there are those that say women have every right to be religious leaders as well.
        Some say only men can lead and those men are not allowed to marry and have female partners in that life “in the name of God”.

        Yet others “in the name of God” say this is normal and proper.
        Some say they are the one and only true religion.
        But no God would ever exclude all the rest of the world because they were not born to believe in that one religion.

        So until the world evolves past this pettiness, we are and will still be evolving. Until we can get past the worship of false gods and false ideals, we are still evolving. As long as men claim limits to what mankind can do “in the name of God” we are still evolving.

        It only makes sense for that man watching the Ants to marvel as they evolve and look forward to the point when competing colonies combine as one without conflict. He would naturally marvel as they evolve to each level of ability … forming ideas and sharing those ideas.

        Why would God not marvel of the same in mankind? Too, why would God only create perfection? Wouldn’t it make more sense to create and then allow for evolution to continue that creation? It certainly would be more interesting, even for God to observe. This possibility is inherent in the imperfection we already know is in this world. If evolution were not real then perfection would already be the rule, which it quite obviously is not.

        In the course of evolution, any group must eventually take matters in hand and control the path they take. To limit this path is to limit the results. Who is to say what that path ought to be besides God? To limit the path “in the name of God” is to slow evolution. To claim to know God’s intent is to claim to be a god or equal to God.

        In the case of the Ants, the marvel is in the change. When they can go past each step… combining colonies, sharing ideas… making civilization, this is a marvel. But first they must… create, create ideas to start, and then create the makings of that civilization from Art to Science.

        In the case of man, we are well past that beginning. We have been creating for ages, from Art to Science and more. To limit man’s creation “in the name of God” is to limit mankind.

        Do we have the right to create? Of course! Do we have the right to create anything we can? Unless it can be proven harmful then… why not? If there is a possibility that it could be harmful, then protection is only prudent. That creation should be limited to those controls we know we have, to assure it won’t be harmful and until we can prove it will be safe.

        Would God object to our creation… why? If we are made in the image and likeness of God … as many believe, why would we not Act in the likeness of God as well. If we can create life, we are acting in God’s likeness and creating. It does not make us God. It makes us children of God and children do as the parents do. There is nothing more gratifying to a parent than for the child to emulate them and continue the parents work. If in fact God created us, then God would want us to create as well.

        The thought that we could create something better isn’t blasphemy. It’s reality. We would be taking God’s evolutionary creation, studying it, removing the evolution that was no longer needed and remaking God’s creations without the unnecessary parts that may be flawing it now. Those parts that have evolved to be no longer needed could naturally be discarded.

        What parent would not be proud to watch their child continue their work, and possibly make it better? The possibility of it being better would not be a slight to the parent, but a compliment.

        Should we attempt to create life from scratch? Do we have the right? Of course!

Len Lambert Athletic Training Technique

This is my training technique for taking the Athlete beyond the usual level and to higher level standard of performance. It comes from my many years of teaching Martial Arts. But I soon realized it is appropriate for anything, from any athletic endeavor to any action based activity … I even use it in my jewelry making and photography. It works quite well in the art world.

The Technique is broken up into 3 parts. In my mind it should be 3 equal parts (more or less) but of course it can be tailored to the individual. And part 2 is such that it can be done anytime, and so it can take up more than a third of actual training time. Each part requires 100% concentration at that time. Don’t cross over techniques 1 and 3. But part 2 should be used in parts 1 and 3 as well.

 Part 1

Learn the Basics:

Learn to do the basics totally and completely as your coach teaches them. Whatever your coach teaches … learn it and do it perfectly. Spend more time on this in the beginning, until you get it down properly. Strive for perfection. Use Part 2 all the time but don’t attempt Part 3 until Part 1 is perfected. There isn’t much more to say here because this is determined by your coach/teacher.

Part 2

Meditate:

Sit still or lie down or whatever you prefer. Actually this can even be done anywhere, and anytime, at the dinner table or take a moment during a commercial break watching TV. The beauty of this part is that it only takes a moment at a time and can be done anytime… almost. I don’t suggest doing this while driving a car or running heavy equipment. (I only mention that because yes …someone will try it).

While in a comfortable position, imagine doing the action that you are learning. Or go over the basics you already know in order to perfect them more.

Example: If you are doing basketball … Imagine throwing baskets. Imagine every action; go through every motion, including picking up the ball. Feel the ball in your hands and feel the weight of it as well. Imagine the action of throwing the ball including the exact arch the ball should take. In order to better control this imagination, memorize these actions when you are doing them for real.  When you are shooting baskets remember the feelings you have in doing so. Memorize the action. Try to feel the differences between when the ball goes in and when it misses.

Later when you are shooting baskets you reverse this process and remember the image you imagined going in.

This process comes with scientific proof: There was a test done quite a few years ago…

It was a simple test but I found it profoundly interesting…

The test was broken up into 3 groups. To start off, everyone in the test was told to shoot baskets for an amount of time and the percentage of baskets was recorded.

Then

Group 1 continued practicing shooting for the next month.

Group 2 never touched the ball for that month but was to “imagine” shooting baskets.

Group 3 did nothing basketball related at all

After the month was over all were retested at shooting baskets.

Group 1 had a measured increase in baskets made.

Group 2 had 80% of the increase of group 1

Group 3 had no increase at all

This got me thinking. If visualization alone increased the ability to make baskets by 80% without even touching a ball, then utilize this with actual shooting and you’ll increase even more. And so part 2 of my techniques.

Keep in mind that this visualization is also part of the action. Pre-visualize the action as you do it. You have practiced the shot in your mind. See it in your mind as you do it for real, and this will help it as you do it. Just as the Martial Artist sees the wood break before hitting it, sees the fist going thru it.

Part 3

Do everything wrong.

For instance, when shooting a jump shot, theoretically the shooter should stop forward motion and then jump up straight in order to have total control of the shot. Otherwise he is jumping as he moves forward and shooting while in a sideways motion.

In Part 1 he would be (momentarily) stopping and shooting from a vertical jump. But as we all know, in reality that is not the most effective way to avoid the defender and make the shot.

So in Part 3 practice shooting in all the wrong manners, even bouncing the ball off the floor. Punching the ball into the basket would be acceptable in this part. The point is to learn total control of the ball and of your body doing the wrong things. Your opponent should be learning to do it correctly and expecting you to do this too. They know how to defend against what is correct. So don’t do what is correct.

An example is watching Tiger Woods bouncing a golf ball on his club… in and out of his legs, then bouncing it high and hitting it like a baseball. The closer you are to total control of the ball… the closer you are to doing anything you want with it.

However my father... a retired music teacher was a “purist” in his teaching. He believed that doing things wrong would carry over into the results. Proper technique was the only acceptable way to perform. He believed that you could hear the results …proper technique and improper technique came thru in the music. 

I agree with him completely, well up to a point. The beginner must learn things completely and only correctly. This Part 3 should only be added once the basics are understood and perfected. Doing it wrong, will affect one’s ability to do it right. So learning it right comes first. But learning it wrong takes it to the next level and gives that slight edge over ones opponent.

I played in a number of bands in college and the “Jazz” players used to claim Jazz players were technically better than “Classical” players because they could play both “proper-Classical” and “wrong-Jazz”. Where the Classical (only) players could not play Jazz.

But again, it took many years of studying to get to a level to perfect both. The trained ear could tell when young/new musician would leak Jazz into Classical music. Even the older accomplished musicians would (or at least might) at times, when their concentration was down.

So this just follows my fathers “purist” ideas that, learning it wrong affects how to do it right.   Until the techniques are perfected in the proper manner, Part 3 should not be attempted.

Finally:

As I said before, splitting this into thirds is how I see it being used. However, I also see Part 2 being used at any time. An artist is constantly visualizing ideas. I even sit and “see” a piece of jewelry or a photo forming in my mind, and then go and produce it. The more I understand the medium that I’m working with the more accurately I can visualize the final product.

The more you understand the sport and all its parts the better you can do them. Learn to do it right and then to do it wrong as well.