A Labyrinth and A Way Out

http://bestinfo.freeweb7.com >car insurance tesco uk An offer he can't refuse

http://kreoline.247ihost.com >car insurance tesco Meat and two veg.

http://allinfo.iifree.net >st paul traveler insurance Battle royal

Dear Ms Quinn

I can only speak as a believer, and from my own experience. God's ways are mysterious, way above the imagination of human beings. God seeks to communicate with human beings in as many ways as He can - through dreams, through the words of other human beings, through symbols... You were asking God for a sign and you remained open without any preconceived notions about the answer, and He communicated through a symbol that you understood. It is not magic. It is real. I consider it a religious experience, in spite of the fact a rational mind may try to explain it away rationally.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Posted on January 8, 2007 19:33
Cayln:

"It was the most important thing that ever happened to me…In the end maybe it will make me a better writer because I’ve become more empathetic and more sympathetic than I ever was before.”

Dear Ms. Quinn,

I read the above in your bio, and thought just like the maze story, all of us can tell good myths about ourselves and spin them into anything we want to believe.

As for your empathy and sympathy, I have some experience of that. As a mother I shared a waiting room with you at Children's Hospital. My child had relapsed with cancer and we were waiting to have an emergency MRI. We were told that we had to wait for a boy with a migraine to have his. All of this was fine; we were used to waiting.

For an hour my five-year-old daughter and I found hidden words in puzzles, read books, played tic-tac-toe. You sat directly across from us. There were only three of us. I tried to catch your eye, Mom-to-Mom, but you didn't acknowledge our presence or smile at a very sick, very sweet, very loud little girl. You had a pile of magazines -- freebees sent to you from Vanity Fair, etc. When the nurse came to get you, you didn't offer me any of your bounty; waiting room Moms usually share; waiting room Moms are usually incredibly empathetic.

What I've learned since my daughter died is that it's easy to claim you've had a life-changing experience, but if you don't walk the walk, you can't talk the talk.

Now, let's see if this get published on your blog or if the WP is still censoring.

BGONE,
My favourite hoaxbuster! Love your postings in the On Faith threads, both serious and irreverent.

You seem to be in all the threads. You never let up, never let go, never say die to make us see the fallacies of our faith and beliefs.

From a unrepentent believer to an indefatigable secular humanist in excelsis, hats off to you my friend:)

David, there's a psychological effect to saying anything does what you're saying labyrinths do. In the early 1970's people were wearing pyramid hats sying they helped them do all sorts of things from avoid micro asteroids to better health. The human mine is very vulnerable to that sort of thing.

Are people helped by labyrinths, pyramid hats, lucky charms, that sort of thing? Maybe but it has never been quantified and in not likely to ever be. I'd guess the vast majority of the population believe in some sort of thing like that with most keeping it to themselves. Superstition runs rampant and has ever since there's been any recording it.

Without a doubt witch doctoring is the oldes profession predating the accepted oldest, prostitution by thousands of years. It's a part of our pshche and we're not likely to give it up in spiet of how vulnerable it makes us to conficence scams.

Margeret,

Thanks for the reference to Plato and your insight. You hit the nail on the head and expressed my thoughts from an earlier post perfectly.

In addition, perhaps we should all be looking to ourselves to find our own personal truths as opposed to passively waiting for a God to fix the world.

Thanks, again, Merri -- I would just add that for me, spiritual growth is not associated with belief in God and I don't think it ever has been. I feel more joyful and unconstrained now than when religious beliefs were more influential in my life.

From Merri To E Favorite and William:

Sorry the last post headed anonymous should have my name on it!

To William:

I don't see where Zeus comes in, but since I believe faith is personal, I acknowledge your right to interpret how you wish.

To E Favorite and William:

To clarify my beliefs, I am Christian and believe in God, however I continue to seek the truth as to the nature of God. I don't believe in a strict interpretation of the Bible and am probably a polar opposite of Canyon Shearer in this respect. Keeping an open mind about mysteries of the universe that we can't possibly know for certain is how I always try to approach faith. I continue to sort and refine my views by reading, studying, praying, meditating, communal worship, and discussion. I believe that God is bigger and more creative and compassionate and changing than we can ever imagine. Anyone who claims categorically to have an unquestioning grasp on these mysteries, I think is missing opportunities for spiritual growth and the joys that can come from it. Likewise, a narrow focus on so-called "endtimes" precludes a life of seeking and growth in the here and now.

Peace

Sally, what if your experience is neither magical or spiritual. What if like Plato thought this earth is a "form" or an imperfect representation of a perfect place. What if our souls are the same, we bear the imprint of a creator. And because of that our souls long for truth. The Labyrinth simply is a tool to see that truth. Thank you for your column.

E Favorite, have you seen the essay on how to find God at http://www.hoax-buster.org page 10? He's claiming that God is owned, a piece of property and that scientists can invent God and take God over. He's talking about "Creator God" I'm sure and not the lesser gods.

Does man have the power to create matter from nothing? Will man ever have that power? What will man do with that power should it come to pass? What will the first man to do that claim he is?

"Squander No More U.S. Lives in Iraq"
How could anyone object? But why keep that favor for just those in Iraq? Squander no more lives anywhere for any reason. That should fix the problem. But if we are to live, then we are to die. Even sitting in my chair, I might die. One can only ask Christ to return and take this burden from us. It is too much. We can not hope for better.

Then I thought that to evaluate something, it is useful to know its purpose. If I see a man plunge a blade into another, it helps to know if he is a killer or a doctor. The thought came that of the three important vultures - faith and hope and charity, that love is the most important. I know. It was not one of the three. But I prize it above all others.

To live a life with love, I need to have faith and hope and charity. To support our President I have to have faith that what he is doing is for a purpose and that to win in Iraq will lead to peace. We have three choices here. We can leave without ending the fighting in Iraq, which will be fine for our troops but leave the pain to others. We can continue doing what has not worked well. Or we could find a way to win quickly and bring peace. To chose the last path, we have to have hope that we can win and know how to win. We need charity to spend our wealth for others. And we need faith.

To say our choices are to leave, surge or have the status quo is to ignore the outcomes. It is to say all possible futures are evil and doomed. I reject that analysis. To live without thought of the future or to think that it is hopeless is not the way I want to live. I want faith and hope and charity and most of all to remember that of these - the most important is still love.

Thanks, Merri –

To me, your second message is notably different in tone from your first one. The first one seems much more like an assertion – people who don’t look to God will ultimately go nowhere (paraphrasing). However, the second post includes the important qualifier “in my experience” suggesting that this is what you’ve found works for you, not that you are sure that others “must” see it this way in order to find answers to life’s questions.

In the second post, you’ve also defined God in a much more general way than I took it in your first post. My problem, I know, but I think in our society, “God” is usually meant as the biblical God. People often use a non-religious term like “higher power” (or “benign force,” as you did the second time) when not limiting meaning to the biblical God.

Also, I’m used to hearing religious people make pronouncements, based on biblical teachings (or their interpretation of them) – with no other evidence or no personal understanding of the people they are addressing. To me, that’s what your first post sounded like.

JAMES- ANNE O was gently chastising me for being arrogant and judgemental in that i was stating sally's intentions in a negative way- and if it was or was not an apt analysis on my part- it was still unneccessary for me to express it that way-

shes just too classy to say that and so instead has taken heat on herself for it-

r maybe im being arrogant and thinking the world revolves around me and she WASNT talking to me-

in either case i felt guilt at my ungracious remarks-

i dont have to express every piece of osmething my brain spits out even tho i do but i shouldnt be insulting

peace

"if you had a knife pressed up against your throat, would it matter one bit if you didn't believe in knives?"

One day a man was out walking and came across a circus being set up. Standing out amid all the bustle was a huge and magnificent elephant tethered to a stout post. Yet the elephant was tied not with thick ropes or heavy chains, but a frayed and dirty piece of string. The man was so amazed at this that he went up and asked how such a thing could be. The person told him that the circus had had the elephant since it was a baby, so small that the string they tied it with was too much for it to break, no matter how hard it tried. The elephant grew and grew, but in its mind the string remained so strong, too strong to break - and so it was.

Bring them home now and end this travesty .

Anonymous, all morality comes from God, through the Bible and your conscience. If you don't get your morality from the Bible, you're getting it from your conscience, if you're ignoring your conscience, you're not moral.

BGone, if you had a knife pressed up against your throat, would it matter one bit if you didn't believe in knives?

Why would any reasonable person offer only "religious experience" or "magic" as explanations?

Hey, I have a story too. A friend of mine prayed for days that her drug-dealing husband would beat the rap when he got caught red-handed. He did, on a technicality. Now, was that religion, or magic? She cited it to me as a proof that you really can petition the Lord with prayer. She does so without any sense of irony, and does not use it for monetary gain. She also divorced the guy some months later when he started knocking the crap out of her every time he was high. Musta been bad karma, y'know?

"No one ever claimed that Christians are more moral than unbelievers, especially 'atheists'." Carol Shearer apparently doesn't listen to radio/TV preachers or pay attention to the wingnut insistance that all morality comes from the Bible.

Hey Canyon. Good shot. Christians are all sinners by their own admission to say nothing of Dubya saying, "we are all sinners" on the official presidential record.

Can you do this simple logic. Atheists don't believe there is a God. Therefore there are no laws of God to be broken. Sins are the breaking of God's laws. By definition, atheists cannot sin. By definition, Christians are all sinners. Confessing not recommended though.

Satan, God's accurser who does the test of soul on Christians, Jews and Muslims uses a lie detector. Now it's a really good one that can only be fooled by accompolished liars. Telling the truth is not recommended and especially admitting sinning. Satan feeds sinners to a monster that eats them completely out of existence. I can't help but notice that the three great faiths practice lying so you may well get past Satan. Ahteists don't have that problem and therefore atheists have no need to practice lying. Practice hard Canyon for one never knows how good that lie detector might be.

No one ever claimed that Christians are more moral than unbelievers, especially 'atheists'. ON THE CONTRARY. Christians should never judge 'atheists' or think that somehow 'atheists' are worse than them, we can't know their thoughts; only that God said, "All have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God." It does not say, "All have sinned, especially those lousy, despicable, horrible atheists who nobody likes."

Rather, Christians should err towards Paul when he said, "I am chief among sinners."

To diverge from the path really quickly, many tests show that 'atheists' are on par with the morals of Christians, this shouldn't happen; Christians SHOULD be the most moral people in the world, the fact that evidences could be found otherwise leads me to plead with Christians to listen to this sermon:
sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=2230517301

But more importantly, the morals are not what we base a religion on, at least not a good religion. Religion is not the way to live your life, but rather what happens when you die.

All have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God. This means that God expects perfection, holiness, absolute absence of sin in order for you to enter Heaven.

He has a good reason for this, God let man onto the earth; which was similar to Heaven, and the sin of man has destroyed the sanctity and beauty that this world once was.

Transgression of God's Law breeds death; the sins of lying, the sins of stealing, of covetousness, of lust and hatred, of failing to give God due reverence, and especially of failing to do good in the face of evil, will all keep a person from seeing Heaven and put God in the position of the judge, and He will judge all according to their sins.

Each sin you have ever committed is written on your conscience, and when God opens the book of your conscience, every lie from every day, in EVERY context, not just the white lies told to save someone’s life, but the blatant, shamefaced lies which were woven in deceit in order to deceive. Peter tells us that one sin is damnable, for by one sin was death entered into the world, and therefore, no sin will be allowed into Heaven.

Fortunately for the Christian, and the soon to be Christian, when their book of the conscience is opened, the pages will be blank, because the Blood of Christ cleanses these things; God will be able to allow the Christian into Heaven because their sins have been forgiven, their heart has been born anew, and the merits of Christ have been attributed to their sake.

It is not an issue of morality, but rather an issue of redemption. The lives we live on earth are but wisps of vapor that exist for a moment, and then they are gone, after death it is appointed the judgment.

If the saving graces of Christ have not found you, I plead with you to reach out to Christ, to receive His Blessing; Repent of your sins, and trust that Christ will deliver you to Heaven; not for a better life now, but so that you may know God and God you, and that the doors will be open to you when you knock on Heavens gate.

Drew,

Thanks for paying attention. A word I haven't used yet to describe the faiths of Buddhism and Hinduism is 'coloring book' religions. You make these two religions out to FIT yourself, not to seek enlightenment or to improve yourself in any way.

It's like if I have a huge affliction for chocolate cake, I would say, "Buddha endorses the chocolate cake." Even if I had no reference for that what-so-ever.

Hinduism fits the description because there are more Hindu gods than there are people in the United States.

Because of the millions of individual belief systems that all constitute Buddhism, Hinduism, and even Taoism, we could argue various ideologies all day, and in the end, we would both be right, because these religions have strayed from their origins.

That said, Taoism was formalized by Lao te Tzu, but his pure faith in what was unknown is the beginnings of Hinduism. Taoism knows that we are born, that we die, and that in the middle we live in creation. It makes no presuppositions to a cycle of rebirths. Despite the fact that the most prolific writers on Taoism lived long after the formalization of Hinduism, the merits of Taoism are readily evident, and at the beginning of the mush of Hinduism.

The three quotes I selected on Buddha are only the most damning to his character; I assure you there are many more that show the man had no concept of enlightenment nor of the religion that has sprouted up from his life. For example, I could get up and preach about not being arrogant and being tolerant of all of the worlds religions to the point of silence...but the true test of my message is the extent which I act out my message, in which case, I say, "Avoid haughtiness, and be tolerant of other religions only in as much as we are all being human in need of redemption."

Your post was well written and represented, thank you for asking me to clarify. To segway, your sentence that all are vulnerable to temptation and sin is what I'd like to respond to everyone else with.

Thanks, Sally, for a nice story. It's easy for me (and others) to call it a coincidence, but I'm sure if it happened to me I wouldn't. I suppose you have to be there.

I'd like to respond to Canyon here, on the Buddhist-related conversation that's going on. First off, in reading your chronology, I'm not so sure about your drawing a line between Taoism and Hinduism. It seems to be that Taoism originated in 3-4th century China, and Hinduism came out much, much earlier out of polytheistic traditions in India. The Buddha himself was born (a Hindu) about 200 years before the rise of official taoism, and in a far distant place. Later, much later, Taoism and Buddhism merge together, but their origins are pretty separate.

Also, I don't particularly care for the way in which you've misrepresented the Buddha's quotes there - one can take a single quote and really interpret the heck out of it. The Buddha certianly didn't claim to be a god, even if he did claim to know a lot, and if you ask any monk if Siddhartha Gotama is alive today, the answer is unquestionably no. The inspiring thing about Buddhism is that the Buddha was an ordinary person, like you or me - he was not selected by forces above like Muhammed, nor was he born special, like Jesus - instead, his is a state to which we all can aspire.

All this being said, I'm quite solidly an agnostic, although I'm living in a majority-Buddhist country and working with many monks. In practice, they're similar to priests and preachers - vulnerable to the same sorts of temptations and sins, sometimes capable of profundity.

So, Canyon, I'd invite you to clarify your information a bit.

"Was what I had a magical or a religious experience?"

Of course it was - but so are most of our experiences. We just need to pay attention to see it.

"It was the most important thing that ever happened to me…In the end maybe it will make me a better writer because I’ve become more empathetic and more sympathetic than I ever was before.”

Dear Ms. Quinn,

I read the above in your bio, and thought just like the maze story, all of us can tell good myths about ourselves and spin them into anything we want to believe.

As for your empathy and sympathy, I have some experience of that. As a mother I shared a waiting room with you at Children's Hospital. My child had relapsed with cancer and we were waiting to have an emergency MRI. We were told that we had to wait for a boy with a migraine to have his. All of this was fine; we were used to waiting.

For an hour my five-year-old daughter and I found hidden words in puzzles, read books, played tic-tac-toe. You sat directly across from us. There were only three of us. I tried to catch your eye, Mom-to-Mom, but you didn't acknowledge our presence or smile at a very sick, very sweet, very loud little girl. You had a pile of magazines -- freebees sent to you from Vanity Fair, etc. When the nurse came to get you, you didn't offer me any of your bounty; waiting room Moms usually share; waiting room Moms are usually incredibly empathetic.

What I've learned since my daughter died is that it's easy to claim you've had a life-changing experience, but if you don't walk the walk, you can't talk the talk.

Now, let's see if this get published on your blog or if the WP is still censoring.

I quoted 3 Quarks: ANN replies:

Oops! You're right. It seems it was Einstein is the one who said that, or words to that effect. Here's from the 3 Quarks a Day blog:

"When Albert Einstein was asked what he would do if the measurements of bending starlight at the 1919 eclipse contradicted his general theory of relativity, he famously repliedVonnegut, "Then I would feel sorry for the good Lord. The theory is correct." What he meant was that the theory is far too beautiful to be wrong"

But that name "Vonnegut" doesn't appear in the statement on the blog. I have no idea where it came from. So please don't assume that Einstein was saying that to Vonnegut.

Ann O.

JAMES tells us:

have you read any books lately.

Just as there are about 80 books out right now showing how people are just as moral when they are atheists as believers

there are about 50 books about the human, evolutionarily developed, ability to read other people's facial expressions, and once we started to talk, verbal expressions.

TOTALLY NATURAL> nothing SUPERnatural about it.
loads of scientific evidence

if you were curious, you could research it yourself.

ANN replies:

I've already pointed out to you that I was *not* assuming that atheists are immoral people. You seem to have misread my mind and thought that I was thinking that.

As for reading books about our supposed "mind-reading" ability, I suggest you read a lot more about the complexities of communication, about the many different ways in which we can and do often misinterpret what other people's words mean.

One of the first things you might learn is that there are two very different sorts of "meanings" -- cognitive ones, which are meanings about what we are thinking to be so or not so, and affective ones which are meanings about our feelings about what we are thinking and meanings about intentions and motives.

What you have done with Ms Quinn's words is assign motives for her speech acts which she doesn't speak about explicitly, nor as far as I can see, has even suggested by her words. You certainly projected a thought into my head which I wasn't thinking -- the bit about atheists being immoral. You imply that you *knew* that I was thinking that atheists are immoral. See -- you were wrong, James. And you seem to have done the same thing when you tried to interpret Ms Quinn's motives on the basis of the cognitive statements she made. (I might add that you seem to be assuming that Ms Quinn would have only one motive or one set of related motives. It could be that she had many, many motives of various sorts. More oversimplification on your part, James.)

You seem to have a lot to learn about how language works, James. You might find the linguistic analysts interesting. I suggest you start with John Austin's little treasure _How to Do Things with Words_. If you really want to get into the myriads of things that can happen when we use words, you can try Wittgenstein's _Philosophical Investigations_. Between them they'd be a good start for you. Language can bewitch us, sa
'
Or, as you say, if you were curious, you could research it yourself.

Ann O.

CHRIS tells us:
Need to make an important correction to the quote attributed to Richard Feynman by the first commenter. (Had he believed in the afterlife, he'd be rolling in his grave now...) What he really said was:

"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Posted January 8, 2007 12:37 PM

ANN replies:

Oops! You're right. It seems it was Einstein is the one who said that, or words to that effect. Here's from the 3 Quarks a Day blog:

"When Albert Einstein was asked what he would do if the measurements of bending starlight at the 1919 eclipse contradicted his general theory of relativity, he famously repliedVonnegut, "Then I would feel sorry for the good Lord. The theory is correct." What he meant was that the theory is far too beautiful to be wrong"

At: http://3quarksdaily.blogs.com/3quarksdaily/2005/07/monday_musing_f.html

I haven't been able to track down the source of that quotation, but I assume the writer didn't make it up. (Perhaps I'm too trusting.) But sidebar on the page I'm quoting f rom claims that Dawkins said of that blog: ""I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University."

Ann O.

Some people liked the article, some didn't. Some are critical, some are not. All get to express their opinions. That's what a forum like this is all about.

"was is a magical or religious experience?"

My guess is that for most of us, magic and/or religion are whatever we want them to be.

But in that certain parts of the story have been given an almost mystical aura, and that the story contains certain mythical/heroic/religious archetypes (searchng for something, an unusual journey, finding a special or sacred place, a revelation or enlightenement), then I'd say it qualifies as much as anything else I've read.

Whenever I read anything by Sally Quinn, who is a very good writer, or watch her on Hardball, I get the sense that she is always reminding her readers;/viewers that she is somehow better than most people.

I think the experience in the labyrinth was what Carl Jung called a "synchronicity" - a meaningful coincidence in time.

Different columns, same responses.

Hey atheists, we get it. You have found the one truth of the universe and the rest of us deserve your contempt.

And why are you guys different than any other rigid, intolerant and dogmatic faith?

Sally Quinn has had a mystical experience, and not while drunk and/or on drugs I presume.

To the unbelievers, if you see a UFO, a mermaid, or an apparition,would you share your "out of the world" experience with us? Even while smoking but not inhaling, even while drinking but not drunk?

Sally,
At the end of your beautiful story you asked us to tell you if your experience was magical or religious. My answer to you is that it does not matter. You had an experience that had a positive impact on you. That's what counts.
Let the cynics and smart alecks who disparaged your sentimental essay with their unkind comments struggle mightily to answer your question. (In silence, hopefully)
I've been blessed with a similar experience and have never bothered to analyze it. It happened and it made my life better. And that's enough.
Thank you.

William:

You write, "It appears you've had some ups and downs so have we all. Seeking comfort from Zeus is not the way to handle them though."

Is that a statement of scientific fact or an article of faith. Could we not establish an empirical study that would demonstrate faith in Zeus did in fact smooth out the ups and downs of life? Out of then thousand subjects wouldn't you expect a certain number to have this happen? Yes, I know that doesn't demonstrate a causality all by itself, but you'd still have to account for it wouldn't you?

I don't mean to be funny. People are not that predictable that we can say "no one can find comfort from Zeus." There was probably a time when there were more Zeus believers, many of which found great comfort in that belief. Perhaps even healing.

I didn't read all the comments posted here, so perhaps someone has already come to the same conclusion as I, which is: the boy would have aced the maze test regardless of whether his mother was in the labyrinth or Walmart. Now, if the boy had gotten lost inside his maze test at the same time his mother found a piece of cheese in the middle of the labyrinth, I'd say the two were somehow connected.

The experience is a given, what she said. The validity, whether or not she had the experience is not the question but rather a mini survey. Time to vote:

a) magic
b) religious

None of the above is not a possible answer. Your experience is not the question. Her experience is not the question. Experiences are not in order. You're lucky for I too have had that kind of experience and you won't have to hear it.

And what kind of presumption does it take, Victoria, for you to be analyzing (derogatorily) Sally because of the story she told about Quinn. It's a bit cynical to believe that everything is self focused and an effort at one upmanship.

Perhaps you know her very well which then may give you more insights into her than the rest of us.

As for me I would try to resist the natural desire to explain. I would try to experience instead. Not all things in this world are explainable--some remain a mystery. And if we are willing to accept that then life is richer and fuller and a hell of a lot more fun.

And in that effort to not explain it, I would also try not to put a religious label on it, although I am a Christian. I get a bit tired of people attributing to God the coincidences of normal life and living.

But I would be thankful for my son Quinn and his success and (I expect) his share of happiness in life, which I am sure you are.

Wait, wait, wait....

After reading some of the comments I have to come to the article's defense because while reading it I was coming to entirely different conclusions.

I saw it as much as a metaphor of how humans come to faith (whether its thru the Bible, Koran, Buddhist teachings, or a maze {which is a method I believe has been around since the middle ages}).

While I'm entirely agnostic, and don't believe that anything supernatural happened with Sally's son, the faith-experience she had served to make her feel better and is a good unto itself because it "healed" her battered psych.

Isn't this faith? How is her story any different than some of the stuff I've read on these posts by Canyon Shearer?

Merri: "I am not necessarily talking about an anthropomorphic, supernatural being, but a benign force in the universe that you may call anything you like. I call it God." I don't mean to be offensive but let's not live in fantasies, even if it feels better to do so. What's a "benign force"? Is it something like lightning? wind? Is there also an "evil force"? It appears that you have had some ups and downs, so have we all. Seeking comfort from Zeus is not the way to handle them, though. Good luck!

When I was in the military stationed in the desert my wife gave birth to our first son. After his first year he began to not look at us, respond tous, etc...He was diagnost with Autism. He stopped walking and was only in his world.

On a bad day I went out in the middle of no where and prayed for him. Hard. Let me say that I believe-and always have-in God and Jesus. I do not believe in a lot of the hoopla surrounding organized religions.

When I went home that he was responding-he was aware of what was around him. He was activily apart of the world.

My son is 20 years old now. He is still and always will be Autistic but he is an incredibly happy young man. He brings joy to other people. We are told this by people he comes in contact with.

He will be with us the rest of his days but it is easy to see the small miracle given to my family.

Hello, Ann O –

More on mind reading. Victoria, who made the comment about Sally bragging about her son, is not atheist. She’s a convert to Islam, mentioned elsewhere. But as James just pointed out, anyone could do this type of “mind-reading.”

I found a Christian on the Miroslav Volf thread who was doing mind-reading at a whole different level. Frozen1 was able to know what Volf’s deceased brother was up to.

“I hasten to explicitly add your 5 year older brother still looks out for you. Together you shall make it if you stay true. He already has his pass, he is just proudly waiting on you, the last in a two brother race?...”

I asked him how he knew that, but he hasn’t gotten back to me yet.

I read your story and am still confused about one thing.

Is your son's name Quinn Quinn?

Sally engaged in "magical thinking"or "non-scientific causal reasoning" - which is a well-documented and understood consequence of the nature of our hard-wired ability with (and desire for) patterns.

http://www.mprize.org/index.php?ctype=news&pagename=blogdetaildisplay&BID=2006122-24033611&detaildisplay=Y

Ann

Sorry to confuse you with the Morality issue.

My main point was your dubiousness about the ability of some atheists to "mind-read."

I admit it is difficult to find Sally's mind sometimes. (sorry, That WAS mean-spirited).

But my major point was:

of course we are ALL mind-readers, and we have been selected by evolution for eons because we were good at reading others' motives: anger, happiness, fear, etc.

i HOPE that when Sally, or anyone else, posts a column on this site, we can "read their minds."

The second job of an educated person is to evaluate the point of view, stance, and biases of a speaker/presenter of a proposition.

It is what rational discourse depends on. Of course it is not infallible. but it is pretty developed.

As someone else here noted, knowing a fair amount about Sally, as we do from the public record and her writings on ON FAITH, helps us to ascribe motives as well.

JAMES asks:
Ann O

have you read any books lately.

Just as there are about 80 books out right now showing how people are just as moral when they are atheists as believers.

Good morning, James.

I fear you misread me. I was talking only about what some people on this list seem to believe that they have, viz. the ability to mind-read and know what other folks real motives are. I said nothing, nothing, nothing about their morality.

In fact, I do not assume that atheists are less moral than others. I have strong reason for NOT assuming that. I have myself known extremely moral non-believers whom I hold in the highest esteem. And add to that my parents even named me after an atheist -- my mother's beloved physics teacher, because my mother held her in such high esteem. So I don't come with the sort of prejudice that many believers seems to have of non-believers. I don't claim any particular virtue about this -- I just wasn't raised that way and I've known some fine atheists.

This does not mean, however, that I automatically assume that *all* atheists are *rational*. Some are, some aren't. And some I've known are even quite narrow-minded, etc. -- all the things that the rest of us are. A number of atheists on the blog have said themselves that there is only one thing that they have in common, the fact that they think there is no God. So I do expect variety from you guys too, including some who seem to think they can read other people's minds.

Ann O.

Need to make an important correction to the quote attributed to Richard Feynman by the first commenter. (Had he believed in the afterlife, he'd be rolling in his grave now...) What he really said was:

"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."

He elaborates this position in his famous "Cargo cult science" speech given as the 1974 commencement address at Cal Tech. Some of you might find it enlightening:

http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm

Chris C.

To JLR:

Hi, JL,

Sorry, I'm afraid I didn't explain my position very well. I'll try again.

My point was not that if science cannot explain something that it cannot be explained. No, my point was that there are different sorts of explanations, and scientific explanation is only *one kind* of causal explanation. Why? Because there are different sorts of questions. And there are different sorts of questions because there are different sorts of causes.

There are different sorts of causes, and science deals *only* with one of them, what philosophers these days call "agents" or "agency". Agents are causes which make something to come into existence that wasn't there before, and scientists are concerned *only* with this sort of causality.
When you turn up the knob of the stove and the water in the pot boils, then you can reason on the basis of that (plus other evidence, see Boyle's Laws) that turning the knob is at least one of the causes that the water is now evaporating, which it wasn't before you turned up the heat. The turning of the knob was one of the agents that caused the boiling state of the water to come into existence.

But we know that there are other sorts of causes besides agency. We know from our own internal, subjective experience that we do things for a purpose -- and the philosophers call this sort of reason "final causality", or the reason why we do what we do. It's a cause of a cause, a cause of agency. For instance, we can ask the question: "why did you turn up the heat in the first place?" and your answer might be "I wanted to make a cup of tea to cheer me up on a dull and dismal day". That was the final cause of that act, that agency of turning the knob (and all the other things you did to get boiling water).

I think Sally's experience was concerned with final causes -- something strange happened, a conjuction of individual facts, a co-incidence which science could not project. (I agree with you that science cannot project such a fact.) You might argue that science could project it if it had enough information, but it is also a fact that there is nothing in the nature of palm trees, mazes and certain learning disabilities that necessarily, universally, in all cases causes that all palm trees and mazes and mothers to happen *together* in the particular conjunction of those events which Sally experienced.

The laws of nature are all universal laws. They explain *only* what things have in common, how they are alike. They do not explain how *and why* there are *different things* which come together in nonuniversal, unpredictable ways. In other words, science does not explain individual lives, the *why* of individual lives, which this and this and this *happen together*. Only philosophy and religion can even begin to attempt to do that. Such questions are beyond the domain of science.

The problem with people like Dawkins is that they ask only one sort of question: how do all things of the same kind act? But there is much, much more to explain about the world we live. We need to explain way and for what final causes *individual things* are found in conjunctions that are neither universal nor predictable.

So, yes, Sally is quite REASONable when she asks: why was there the conjunction of that palm tree in a grove of oaks near a maze with me in the middle worrying about my beloved son who later proved to be astonishingly good at figuring out mazes which gave me hope when I particularly needed it for his future which has come to pass?

Boyle's law and the rest of physics can't even begin answer that one.

Ann O.

Well, that's one way to rationalize taking a vacation when your kid's sick.

From Buddha:

The Beginning - “I am the core of all that exists. I am the seed of all that exists. I am the cause of all that exists. I am the trunk of all that exists. I am the foundation of all that exists. I am the root of existence. I am ‘the core’ because I contain all phenomena. I am ‘the seed’ because I give birth to everything. I am ‘the cause’ because all comes from me. I am ‘the trunk’ because the ramifications of every event sprout from me. I am ‘the foundation’ because all abides in me. I am called ‘the root’ because I am everything.”

Omnipotent - "All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think we become.”

Omniscient - "To understand everything is to forgive everything”

From the oral tradition of Buddha, aka Pali Canon:

Monk's question, "...but I ask you where the four elements cease and leave no trace.” Then the Great Brahma took him by the arm and led him aside and said, “These gods think I know and understand everything. Therefore I gave no answer in their presence. But I do not know the answer to your question and you had better go and ask the Buddha.”

Buddha is referred to as, "Master of the Dharma, the Sage who is completely perfect, who is all-pervasive, who encompasses all world systems, who is All-Knowing, the Lord Vairocana."

On Buddha, "He is universal Goodness, beneficial, destroyer [of suffering], the great Lord of Happiness, sky womb, Great Luminosity … the great All-perceiving Lord … He is without beginning or end … [He is] Vishnu [God] … Protector of the world, the sky, the earth … The elements, the good benefactor of beings, All things … the Blessed Rest, Eternal … The Self of all the Buddhas … Pre-eminent over all, and master of the world.”

What Hinduism thinks of Buddha:

From the Amarakosha, "He who is the All-knowing One, the One who has Well-gone, awakened, the King of Righteousness, the One who has Thus Gone, Universal Goodness, the Blessed One, the Conqueror of the Demon Mara, the Conqueror of the [Three] Worlds, the Victorious One, the Possessor of the Six Supernatural Knowledges, the Possessor of the Ten Strengths, the Speaker of Non-dualism, the Guide, the Lord of Sages, the Auspicious One, the Teacher, the Sage and the Sage of the Śākya Clan -- that one is the Lion of the Śākya clan, He who has accomplished all goals, the Son of Śuddhodana, Gautama, the Kinsman of Scholars and the Son of Mayadevi."

The Christian God said, "Humble yourself before the Lord, and He shall lift you up."

Buddha said, "You yourself, as much as anybody in the entire universe, deserve your love and affection.”

The Christian God said, "Love Thy Neighbor."

Buddha said, "He who loves 50 people has 50 woes; he who loves no one has no woes.”

The Christian God said, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."

Buddha said, "The whole secret of existence is to have no fear. Never fear what will become of you, depend on no one. Only the moment you reject all help are you freed.”

I have met several 'enlightened' Buddhists, and they have the HIGHEST opinion of themselves out of anyone I have ever met, even 'atheists', their robes are lavish and showy. Just as the Pharisee's in Christ's day lost Heaven because they sought after it with legalism and flare, the Buddhist loses enlightenment at the moment he thinks he finds it.

In the end, Buddha and his followers seek to alleviate suffering by avoiding it.

Christ confronted suffering, bore it upon Himself, and alleviated suffering.

Christ said, "Come unto me, all ye that are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

True Buddhist's who are after enlightenment should be following Christ, not Buddha.

One question for Pam - comment 3 (I think)- How can you be an atheist and spritual at the same time? Just wondering. The two go together that oil and water.

A friend pointed me to Sally's Quinn's article relating her experience while walking a labyrinth. I had a similar unforgettable 'experience' in June 1995. Since then I have walked and constructed many labyrinths in many places. They are growing in popularity worldwide as increasing numbers of people have found them to be helpful when attempting to navigate various forms of personal crisis in their lives. Why or how they facilitate the 'effects' people report is unknown, although there's no lack of opinion on the matter.

Sally's report is but one among thousands; each affirming some sort of solace, reconciliation, magical healing, or mystical insight. The core variable in each anecdote seems to be a circumstance or condition of deep personal crisis.

It's uniquely human to seek explanation for the inexplicable. The appetite naturally evokes hypothesis. Hypothesis tends to become belief and, thereby, the basis for opinion.

Sally asks: "Was what I had a magical or a religious experience?" Since the inquiry is self-referenced, only Sally can answer the question. Are you able to honor her opinion, without prejudice, if it conflicts with your own? Do you know, or do you believe?

As an empiricist, I know I experienced what I experienced while walking that labyrinth in 1995. Knowing what was experienced is less certain. The quest to know continues.

There's just one thing left to decide. Shall we teach a course in "Laybrinthing" in the public schools along with "Intelligent Designing?" We have something to compare "Intellignet Designing" to called "The Theory of Evolution." What can we compare "Labyrinthing" to, teach by associating the unknown with the known?

So Miss Sally needs to give us something to compare with her labyrinth experience. I like to "surround" things, envelope them with "better than" or "not as good as" questions. We can begin with, was it better than or not as good as a big bowl of ice cream? Presuming that it was at least that good then that can be our left or lower enveloper. If it wasn't at least that good then we shouldn't be discussing it. Now about the real question. How good was it? That may lead to topics not discussable as "the best things in life are free." So rather than guess or ask immoral quetions I'll wait for Miss Sally to tell us.

Then and only then can the children be taught the "labyrinth experience" without actually doing it, like sex education for example. Otherwise the federal government must create a program for labyrinth development and deployment. Everyone is entitled to have the labyrinth experience, provided it's better than a big bowl of ice cream. The cheap way is to teach it. But first we must know. How good was it? Really?

The movie "What the Bleep Do We Know?" is about quantum physics, and how there are an infinite number of possible realities, and strong thoughts can drive one particular instance of those realities into existence. If you really really want something specific to come into existence, your thoughts can drive it to become real.

I have noticed something like this happening in my life: whenever I say 'dammit I'm tired of screwing around, I want THIS and that's all there is too it!' then that thing actually happens. Are my thoughts, the forces coming out of my brain, determining a particular quantum state? Or is it coincidence? Anti-superstitios people will always argue for the latter. I'm generally pragmatic and non-superstitious but sometimes I'll wish for the most unlikely things, and then they'll happen. For example, I wished for both the House and Sentate to go to Democrats in the last election. I said it out loud every day, with my hands clasped together, almost like praying (even though I don't believe in the biblical god). I didn't think the Senate had any chance at all, but then it came true.

T, I don't know the Greeks originated the expression, "there is more in heaven...."

I saw the movie, "Big Fat Greek Wedding" and ever since I've been giving Greeks credit for everything because I want to be politically correct.

It was a Greek that said, "Friends Romans countrymen lend me your ears..." Dam! Got another one wrong.

Those who know the truth can get things wrong on purpose. Not true in my case.

This is a nice story, but as evidence of supernatural intervention in daily life, it lacks what most such stories lack: a little science.

Ms Quinn says that her child was 'chronically ill and severely learning disabled.' In the reader, this passage creates an image of a handicapped child, one with perhaps congenital problems. Without further discussion of the child's problems, MS Quinn sweeps us to the miracle of the maze, and then tells us that her son is now a happy college graduate.
That's great, but what was the illness, and what were the disabilities? Did poor health play a role in the learning disabilities, and did regaining his health play a role in overcoming them? What role did science-based therapies play in his recovery?

Clearly, people will believe what they want. but for those who feel we all 'need' to believe in something, recall that just because you need something doesn't mean it exists.

This is a pathetic story. Only someone who lives in Cleveland Park/Georgetown and who no sense of what hardship really entails could even think that this story (the prose is pathetic as well) offers any insights into spirituality. Also, it is wonderful to hear that one can go to a health spa (and then go back agan!!) to recover from an emotionally draining event. I think that Sally should write about the spiritual takeaways she garnered from her date with the Billy Kilmer, who was a quarterback for the Washington Redskins in the 1970's. Those of us who live in the real world may relate to that kind of spirituality more easily.

Well Put Ann O and Petuunia.

This is a nice story and Sally appears a rational thinker. But this story doesnt prove anything in particular. Its nice to know that we can experience spectucular things that cant be explained by science (at present time). Women are more likely than men to experience them, I have learned. My girlfriend says that I just have to be "open" to experiencing them.

E Favorite:

In my experience when faced with crisis and turmoil, a person needs to find answers from outside himself/herself; if he/she had all the answers,there would be no crisis. I am also a believer in psychology/psychiatry, which has greatly helped me at times. However, having experienced many years and many difficult times, I believe that a higher power than ourselves, whatever you choose to call it, can provide answers, comfort, whatever is needed. I am not necessarily talking about an anthropomorphic, supernatural being, but a benign force in the universe that you may call anything you like. I call it God. I am also interested in your response to this. (I am always reading and seeking spiritual truth for my journey in through life.)

Great story! Great coincidence! Let's not get carried away with imagining connections that can't possibly exist! We should be smarter than that!

Sally,

For those above who say "is this what we've come to" or some negative and demeaning similar statement, forgive them, they know not what they do/say. Your story is evidence of a faith that most "pious" people could never connect with, the faith that God is truly every where in every thing. Humanity's problem is that we don't "tune in" to the signs or bring our minds fully to God as you did in that moment. Too often we spend our time as you did before you walked, depressed, run down, thinking somehow you and your family were failing because you were trying to control everything. You got the sign that everything was already healed and you let go. The negativity that comes from the pious is born of fear -- fear that their version of God is more than the rigidity and control they seek over others. Your story and your son's journey should inspire us all. Blessings, from a seeker.

Sally,
I can understand that in a moment of intense positive concentration on a sick child your mind has extraordinary focus. If there are radiowaves, telephones and radar, I have no trouble believing that humans emit energies as well...why would synthetic things have more power than all living ones? I think the power of the mind is almost completely unexplored except by the arts. Most religious thinking, I think (!) is flawed by the effort to make experience fit theology, rather than the other way around.

I am agnostic but believe that in some ways, at some times, prayer affects things. I am glad things turned out well for your son.

Best

Anne O.

How do we [non-believers] do it [know other people's motives]?

We read what people write and listen to what they say. Usually they tell us, and they often have a history. Sometimes when they don't, the motive is obvious (as in why the Catholic church would suppress reports and investigations of child abuse by clergy).

Here is some history on Ms. Quinn. She is married to the Washington Post's former editor, Benjamin C. Bradlee. While working for the CBS Morning News in the 1970s she said during a report on the children of California migrant farm workers that child labor "was how I felt when my mother and father made me clean up my room."

Merri,

I’m glad things have worked out for you and your son, but I don’t understand how you come to the conclusion that, “For those who feel they don't need God or that they have all the answers already I caution that the time will come when those answers lead nowhere.”

Are you asserting that people who find answers in life without guidance and support from a supernatural being whom they have never seen will at some point be without useful answers to the important questions in life? If so, how can you possibly know that?

I hope you see this message. I’m sincerely interested in your response.

Canyon: "Buddha was quite conceited and felt himself to be a god, if that helps."

Well, let's think about you for a moment, Canyon. According to your faith, God (aka, "The Creator of All", aka, "The Omnipotent One", etc.) had originally consigned you to hell for eternity. But YOU have managed to make Him change his mind. You have, by nothing more than the exercise of your own free will, persuaded the most Powerful Being In The Universe, to accept you into Heaven. That sounds just a mite conceited to me.

Sally,
I am very moved by your story. I, too, have come full circle with a son with serious problems who is now a responsible, caring individual and a wonderful father to a young son. I have had experiences much like yours. I came to believe that God continually gives us insights, wisdom, and encouragement if we only have the humility to be open to them. It has been a very difficult challenge to develop and maintain this openness and humility but God's guidance is always there for anyone who wishes to "tap into" and accept it. For those who feel they don't need God or that they have all the answers already I caution that the time will come when those answers lead nowhere.

Ann O

have you read any books lately.

Just as there are about 80 books out right now showing how people are just as moral when they are atheists as believers

there are about 50 books about the human, evolutionarily developed, ability to read other people's facial expressions, and once we started to talk, verbal expressions.

TOTALLY NATURAL> nothing SUPERnatural about it.
loads of scientific evidence

if you were curious, you could research it yourself.

James - no problem on the "Christian" remark, especially if our little conversation on the topic opens the eyes of some Christians who use this kind of exclusionary language

The labyrinth is a technique similar to ones used by psychiatric occupational therapists who utilize various hand crafts to focus the minds of their patients on an activity which requires concentration but ultimately leads to accomplishment of a task. This form of therapy has been found to reorder a disorganized mind which helps to relieve stress and allow patients to become more effective in dealing with emotional problems they are confronting in their lives. Learning focusing techniques in hand crafts (or negotiating a labyrinth) can transfer to assisting one to deal more effectively and precisely with one's emotional problems or worries. And if one can confront personal problems more clearly and effectively, a successful resolution is more likely

Dear Ms. Quinn,
I'm sure you know "no good deed goes unpunished" as many of your emails attest.
That was a beautiful story whatever its consequences. It's good you told it.
I love seeing you on hardball even when "hyper" doesn't give you a chance to finish your sentences.
If you're ever in Jersey and want to swap stories let me know. Don't wait to long though I'm 75 but still relative [to me at least]and you can bring Ben! We'll do lunch and martini's.
Keep on track.

I would feel better if I knew if Sally Quinn was sincerely questioning or asking us to question this kind of magical thinking. I don't know.

Perhaps she doesn't believe this was a miracle or spiritual happening...it's unclear.

I hope not.

youre right anne i honestly try to have suspicions for the best intentions- sally quinn is my test for that

Hi, gang,

It constantly amazes me how many people who decry superstition are constantly ready to show that *the* can actually read other people's minds and know what their mostives are. For instance, someone says,

" I tell you the whole story was a way to give your friend credit for making the labyrinth famous- which she didnt- and mostly a way to brag about your son- and by implication yourself."

Gee whiz, it must be interesting to have the ability to read other people's minds and motives. How do you guys get to do such marvels? Richard Dawkins seems to do it at will. Ain't science grand?

Ann O.

THANK-YOU SALLY FOR A WONDERFULL STORY AND SUCH A HAPPY ENDING AND NO MENTION OF ALL THAT JESUS/GOD HOKUS POKUS!

Canyon

Do you *know* you are being flagrantly inaccurate in\ saying that Buddha thought he was a God?

In other words, is it duplicity or ignorance?

He most explicitly said he was NOT, nor was anyone else.

If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him?

ever heard that one? a canonical buddhist mantra.

to Victoria

No need to apologize as far as I am concerned.
Sally does seem much more concerned with "showboating" than with contributing anything substantive to the conversation.

To Phil

Sorry, I was making a little joke with "How Christian", the implication having supposed to have been, "well, Phil you are being nice, and Christians who think they are the only religion worth considering say "How Christian of You"
by noting i was an atheist i was trying to signal my irony, but sorry it didn't come across.

My underlying point is that I think you were being in fact nicer to her than she deserved.

How "unchristian" of me.

Canyon Shearer:

“Well...Buddha was quite conceited and felt himself to be a god, if that helps.”

Can you provide a specific reference for this particular claim? Thanks.

I’m continuously surprised by the sarcasm and mean spirited responses to the postings on this forum. Why is it that so many folks feel the need to belittle either the panelists or other forum participants? Honestly, it has been my experience that people who are comfortable with their own beliefs feel little need to reflexively defend or promote their personal views. Perhaps the stridency of ones position is proportional to ones unacknowledged fear, anxiety and self-doubt? Whatever its origins, such stridency inhibits open and honest discussion, which is after all the very purpose of On Faith.

Is this woman's kid named Quinn Quinn?

bgone @ 5:36: isn't that line from "Hamlet" as he talks to Horatio? "there are more things in heaven and earth, horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." did it originate earlier, and Shakespeare was quoting it?

BGone, considering your decision to avoid Buddhism because they don't believe in a god. Well...Buddha was quite conceited and felt himself to be a god, if that helps.

But in truth, I want to actually try to have a conversation where nobody starts yelling.

Buddhism is derived from Hinduism which is derived from Taoism. Hinduism is a terribly confused version of Taoism, but it's roots are their none-the-less. Buddhism is a purified form of Hinduism, not based on Taoism, but the similarities between Taoism and Buddhism are striking...with the exception of the 'transcendant' Buddha.

Taoism recognizes a spiritual force guiding the world; it does not call it Creator or Him, or even a person, but rather a force. The way I understand it best is actually from a movie quote, "Life will find a way."

The only thing I don't like about Taoism(besides lack of atonement) is its tendency towards hedonism. Not hedonism in the confused cultural sense, but hedonism in the sence of depriving yourself of something for so long that when you finally get it, it feels like heaven. The next time you have an itch, wait until you think you're gonna die before you scratch it, that's pure hedonism. It doesn't draw a line for right and wrong, rather that rights feel better than wrongs.

Taoism is nearly a perfect religion, in my opinion, if you didn't have revelation from the Creator. In essence, have you ever seen a "Chilton's" maintenance manual for a car? They buy a car from the manufacturer, then completely disassemble it, try to figure out how it works, figure out how to fix the minor problems, and give their answers as best as possible.

The Tao te Ching and the iChing are the basis for Taoism and resemble a maintenance manual for the soul.

The author of the Tao te Ching, the author of the iChing, and Buddha are all lying in state in their tombs right now...

I would much rather have the owners' manual, written by the manufacturer, which is why I went and got a new Heart right from the Creator Himself and now read the owners' manual, aka, the Bible; complete with atonement and warrantee and everything; and the Author is still living.

Obviously, if you hadn't walked the stupid labyrinth your son would have scored genius level in everything else too, but as it is, he only scored that way in the maze test. If not for you, your son would now be head of his own Fortune 500 company.

You have a lot to answer for.

no it is just another in a series of self-indulgent posts by sally where somehow she always end up congragulating herself for her own clever life-
i appreciate the paths of many here- even the fact that she waited to post so her post could be at the top is a telling feature- its self aggrandizement disguised as godlovesmemorethanyou syndrome becausehegivesmesigns that is detracting from the really seeking and finding that others are sharing---

obviously im not entirely alone in this summation
since shes a panelist i feel i can respond others i would let be and do

i just have a low tolerance for showboating

To James,

I think of it as a open-minded, compassionate, secular perspective - could be Christian, but Christians don't corner the market on giving the benefit of the doubt.

To Dan S,

It wouldn't matter much where the labyrinth was located. By the way, I enjoyed Quinn's account - but I thought Victoria's response caught the essence of it.

Sally,

“magic or religion?” Actually, there are other possibilities. It might be communication about which we are unconscious. I had a good friend from Alaska when we were both in the army. He always had money. He played in poker games on the weekend and he never ever lost. He didn’t win a lot, just enough for beer and cigarettes and a good meal now and then.

As time went on, and he just kept winning, I asked him how he did it, convinced as I was by then that he was marking the cards or stacking the deck in some manner I just couldn’t seem to catch. He said no, when other players looked at their hole cards he could just “see” the cards in their brain. He claimed he had always been able to “see” what people were thinking about, to read their minds so to speak. Of course I thought this was likely nonsense and not to be believed.

I bought a fresh, still sealed pack of cards and sat down with Travis on a Saturday morning to test this mind reading thing. I opened the fresh deck, removed the seal, shuffled the deck, and cut it. He just asked me to think of the cut card. I did so and sure enough he correctly told me the card I had cut. I did this four times, reshuffling each time. Travis correctly identified the card all four times. Finally, I decided I would separate the connection between my mind and the card to fool him. I cut the deck to the 6 of spades, but I then thought about the jack of hearts. That did slow him down just a bit, as he identified the card as the jack of spades. To this day I have no explanation for that experiment, but I am certain that there is something deserving explanation. I am not the sort of infidel who pretends to know more than he knows. Unfortunately, his mysterious mind reading ability did not keep him alive through his second tour of Viet Nam.

So I don’t know Sally, but I would think that neither religion or magic is a better explanation of your experience than simply, “I don’t know.”

"Is it just an obviously shallow account?"

I should probably rephrase that as "an obviously selfish account" - I was thinking shallow in the self-centered sense.

Bob, CA AG Jerry Brown talking about the Iraq "just cause" before the kickoff said about the same thing you just posted. We're now in a state of decline that will likely end at the bottom of the heap with the whole world on top of us.

I think you and JB understate to case. We are now in a dark age that will end with something like the plague and even a plague maybe, avian flu. That's preferable to nukes at 20 paces but that's not off the table by any means. It's impossible to predict what or when but as Sally points out that strange feeling that something is up keeps coming on.

When it hurts too much to cry then laugh at it. I only want to be the first to go. If you're correct the living will envy the dead. Hope it don't happen but there's a lot of faith, an awful lot of that going around. Faith has always brought disaster and it's so popular right now, (Jesus Boot Camp, Hitler Youth Camp) it'll have to be rationed before long if it continues to grow. With all the major media pushing it how can it fail to grow? Got faith?

I'm not sure why Victoria and Phil C. are so confidently and uncharitably ascribing shallow, selfish motives to Ms. Quinn here. Would they be responding the same if her story was about going to Grace Cathedral where "one of our On Faith panelists [was] Canon Pastor" and praying? Is it just an obviously shallow account? Or . . .? *shrug*.

Phil opines:
"But you gotta give Sally Quinn some credit for putting herself in the line of fire. After her last essay, this kind of criticism couldn't have been unexpected."

A Christian way to look at it, I must say Phil (full disclosure: I am an atheist).

It is amazing that Sally has no conception of how embarrassed she should be to submit such a vacuous piece after all of her "editing" and exposure to the discussions here.

It is very close to the level of discussion people have about Astrology: "i think we fell in love because he had sccrpio rising...it was just uncanny).

Sorry to be mean, but really...

You hit it, Victoria,

"I tell you the whole story was a way to give your friend credit for making the labyrinth famous- which she didnt- and mostly a way to brag about your son- and by implication yourself."

But you gotta give Sally Quinn some credit for putting herself in the line of fire. After her last essay, this kind of criticism couldn't have been unexpected.

Oh boy . . . this is, like, deadly stuff isn't it? What is it in our culture that permits people to just pour our their inner prescious nonsense to the amusement of the rest of us. . . Do they presume respect? Reverance? Egoists pretending piety. We are in decline, completely, as a people, I'm afraid, and we all know it.

Pam, faith comes complete without proof. The situation described was more for the benefit of Sally than her son who is shown to be what he was with or without the labyrinth, the maze part clearly a coincidence. However, there are many similar experiences where a clean cut connection between event and "mind" is made.

Mothers and I would bet fathers as well have stange things happen when their children are involved in violent events, car crashes, murders, the like. I looked at that a little and decided distance definitely plays a role. Mothers of soldiers killed in WW2 rarely if ever knew before they read the infamous telegram. There seems to be a not identified physical phenomenon. I'd say there are many of them, phenomenon to be unearthed.

Duke folks tried to create the situations where it happened. To test what I said above we need to kill the same poor child over and over again just to search for the communication link that informs the parents. That alone makes the scientific trapping and mapping into the known more than reasonably difficult.

Interesting story anyhow. Don't see it's relevance here but then I miss a lot so that means nothing. I now know what a labyrinth is, an old word with a lot more meaning for me now.

A Nice Story.

What does it show?

Nice things happen to us sometimes. That is nice.

Every 10 or 15 years, amazing coincidences happen in a nice way. That is nice too.

What does it show about God or religion?
Obviously nothing.

What does it show about spirituality? It is a useful spiritual quality to have to be amazed from time to time how nice things happen, and be grateful for them.

As a serious contribution to the "On Faith" project by one of its two editors, I say.....

I don't know what to say.

I tell you the whole story was a way to give your friend credit for making the labyrinth famous- which she didnt- and mostly a way to brag about your son- and by implication yourself.

Hi Sally,

That was a beautiful story.

You were already in a meditative state when you walked through the lovely labyrinth gardens. It was ultimately your mind that made the connection in symbols to the Maze of your walks to the Maze test your son did so well in.

I am an atheist too; but consider myself very spiritual. Your story is a perfect example of how all of use can still feel wonder at the power and magnificence of nature all around us.

There is magic in our daily lives -- in our smiles and the love we have for each other.

It's not a proof of a a "mind" influencing our spirituality -- like a divine being -- just a proof of the mystery and beauty of life.

Take care.

I'm afraid so BA'AL. I was thinking about becoming a Buddhist only to find out they don't believe in God. Buddhism isn't even faith even though I know a few who faith the Almight Dollar. It has God written all over it. Amazing, bewildering, confusing and more.

Good grief! Is this what we've come to?

Some Greek scolded another with, "there is more in heaven and on earth than is dreamed of in your philosophy." No doubt there is more than anyone has yet to dream, 2,000+ years later so the point goes to the scolder. Saying that all is not known will seldom get a negative response.

People have all sorts of ESP type things happen to them. Duke U researchers wrestled with trying to make that scientific. I think they failed, probably calling their work a limited success. I would sugest getting them involved if this wasn't a many year thing you're talking about. That alone makes it a one-of-a-kind and anything said about it pure guesswork.

You must do the same thing several times. You must not do the labyrinth and do the labyrinth and show that without exception that controls the results. I'm afraid we'll have to chop down the palm tree to prove it is or is not the decision maker. Otherwise it might have been the color of your undies that caused what happened to happen. If you're trying to say supernatural beings did it then maybe someone needs to do a labyrinth or two for you.

SALLY QUINN tells us: Quinn is now out of college and working as a filmmaker, a happy, healthy young man. Was what I had a magical or a religious experience? You tell me.

Hi, Sally Quinn,

I think it was Richard Feynmann who once said of a particular theory, "It's so beautiful it must be true". The same thing might be said of your Quinn and mazes story.

No, I don't think the one experience proves anything, but when the parts of life *fit together so beautifully* we have to begin to wonder about the limits of science. And I think religious faith begins to be born in such experiences as yours, when we find values that science itself cannot account for -- I mean the *beauty* of the the way things fit in our own lives in spite of all the disappointments and evils.

When the teachings of a religion make sense of the whole of an individual life with both its joys and pains, then we think, "Ah, this is the best explanation yet of the good and the evil in the world", and we then accept it, subject to revision.

It is quite rational to accept the best explanations we have found for the patterns of our own individual lives. It *makes sense* of things which science can't make sense of. It is indeed a matter of evidence, though the evidence is not compulsory. But then, neither is science entirely sure.

Thank you for your beautiful story.

Ann O.