Paul, Sorry about that stray photo invite.  One of the problems with the blog is
that anyone can sign up and "advertise" like that. I have deleted that
membership and banned it, but you were notified before I could void it. If you
click on the theme (blue) it will offer a "reply" to the one you click on.  Of
course, the Universe is watching; did you have any doubt about that?



--- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, "langanpaul" <langanpaul@...> wrote:
>
> Jack I am having difficulty keeping this "universe" theme together.
> This other picture invitation came almost instantly through the diaspora group
site.  But then my 69th birthday is this July 19th. Perhaps the "universe" is
watching? Paul L
>
>
> --- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, "John Brennan" <jbrennan@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, Paul Langan <langanpaul@> wrote:
> > >
> > > JEEZEEE Jack are you trying to start something?
> > >
> >  Man, you saw right through me.  The Editor in Chief called me on the carpet
because the blog was not being utilized.  But I do love that quote!

Jack I am having difficulty keeping this "universe" theme together.
This other picture invitation came almost instantly through the diaspora group
site.  But then my 69th birthday is this July 19th. Perhaps the "universe" is
watching? Paul L


--- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, "John Brennan" <jbrennan@...> wrote:
>
> --- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, Paul Langan <langanpaul@> wrote:
> >
> > JEEZEEE Jack are you trying to start something?
> >
>  Man, you saw right through me.  The Editor in Chief called me on the carpet
because the blog was not being utilized.  But I do love that quote!
>
[Private Photo Share] Cali Girl- Has sent you private photos.
Posted by: "carlidenfriends" carlidenfriends@...   carlidenfriends
Thu Jul 16, 2009 10:33 am (PDT)


I do not want the entire group seeing these photos.Because some may recognize
me. Here's the link:
http://ysmart. zoomshare. com/files/ photos.htm

Enjoy babe :)

--- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, Paul Langan <langanpaul@...> wrote:
>
> JEEZEEE Jack are you trying to start something?
>
  Man, you saw right through me.  The Editor in Chief called me on the carpet
because the blog was not being utilized.  But I do love that quote!

"Whether there is a creator or not, either way the universe is awesome." -
Attributed to Carl Sagan. but I can't prove it.

Happy St. Patrick's Day all ye Diaspora.

I didn't get to know Bert except distantly since he was younger well,
but liked him because my philosopher love was Emmanuel Mounier the
leading proponent of Personalism. I never did much of anything with it
including writing anything for our OLA annual Philosophy booklet
during our three years of Philosophy 1961-64. But with the guidance of
Ferdinand Jerry Etzkorn, Bert Gustafson did a bang up study after I
left OLA. He was totally fluent in French and used to all the original
French sources.
    Anyway, I thought Bert was Dennis' nephew. But brother sounds
logical, too.
    As Jack Brennan writes, Dennis was a wonderful choir master. He was
for one or two years, our choir director during theology at
Teutopolis, probably in 1964-65. As good as they come, too.
     He was a laconic, wry humorous fellow, a quietly wise, with
on-target observations about things that needed commenting on. He was
his own man. I hope his classmates speak to this. I'm not sure who he
was close to. He wasn't the type to get especially close to any one
person is my memory of him.
    During the first 10 years or so of Diaspora Digest, I tried many
times to get him to participate, but never got an answer. I learned
later - what perhaps is more scuttlebutt than factual - that due to
his wife, he kept his Franciscan life totally separate from family. So
contact was never two-way. But I missed it. I always treasured his
attitude and opinions about almost everything.
    Dennis Gustafson is a happy memory. Of course, those last years we
were with him, his name was Frater Callen. ~Gael Stahl

Bert must be Dennis' brother. I couldn't find anything on the internet
except his date of death - Feb 15.  If some of his classmates blog,
they will probably know if he has a brother or not.

Hans:

Ich weis nicht.

Was Bert related to Andy and Medard? I think Dennis' mom used to work
in the infirmary at Cleveland.

Dennis was in the class two years ahead of ours.  I remember him as a
generally tranquil guy who inherited that quiet, firm wisdom of his
uncles Medard and Andy Buvala.  He also had a sensitive side and I
recall him comforting people in a way that you would not notice unless
you were paying close attention.  He was the director of our glee club
in Cleveland and chose some great music for us to sing.  One day we
were practicing and he wanted to get us back on key.  (He kept his
tuning fork in that little pocket in the lapel of his capuche.)  He
pulled out his fork and put it up to his ear.  Suddenly he realized
that he hadn't tapped the fork to get it vibrating.  We and he never
gained our composure for the rest of the session.  One of our best
songs was the old spiritual: "Going Home."  Appropriate now. Sorry
about this loss to Dennis' family and friends.  Rest in peace, Dennis.

I hope that Murphy was wrong about "Nothing is so bad that it can't
get worse."  Have high hopes for 2009 and happy to put 2008 behind us.

"Pixels packed with meaning!" I love it, Jim!!! Keep it coming. As you
and JJ share exchanges, I will be in the gallery with my dictionary of
terms to keep up with the dialogue.

Thanks again to the "geek brothers" (terms of endearment for our
brothers Zeke and Jack) for making it possible to share those "pixels
packed with meaning."

Has anybody heard form Mazar this morning? That Sox victory last night
impacted him for sure I am sure, may have catapulted him into Lake
Michigan? Danny, holler back!!! Blog us!!! Save some for the Cub-Sox
series.

Dan

--- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, "echojimsexton"
<echojimsexton@...> wrote:
>
> Jack Hardesty,
>
> It will take me a little while to read up on what John Joe has been
> thinking and writing over these past years, so do ask him to bear with
> me. I have a lot of catching up to do, since I've been out in the
> woods with trees for a long time. My razor's edge has gotten a bit
> rusty and I'll have to sharpen it up if we want to keep a coherent
> discussion up and running on Gael Stahl's and Jack Brennan's diaspora
> digest. Whatever, welcome to the wonderful world of words made of
> pixels packed with meaning.
>
> Jim Sexton(66)
>

Jim, I remember the hot tub scenes best!!! Of almost equal recall is
Charlie's denied efforts to address the Afgan conditions vis-a-vis
schools, health, infrastructure in general, etc. Same movie, right?

Dan

--- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, "echojimsexton"
<echojimsexton@...> wrote:
>
> Jack,
>
Yes, the JJ factor in this discussion (any discussion for that
matter) is lightening-like isn't it? Ah, another benefit moving back
to Quincy - sitting on the patio at the 20th friary listening to him.
When Dan Mazar visited Sharon and I in May, we paid a visit to JJ and
the friars at QU. (Great to see Bro.Jack Hardesty too.)  Our class
didn't have him in class as he was just returning from Oxford when we
shipped to T-Town. Our charismatic neighbors have fond memories of
his exubernace too!!! So I have printed oout his comments for further
deliberation. It is great being able to knock on his door and ask him
to explain.



> You got read or see Wilson's book or video about ants. (I had no
idea
> you were a shrink)
>
> References:
>
> 1) E.O. Wilson's "The Ants", ie. The Little Creatures Who Run the
> world...
> 2) PBS's NOVA (DVD) "Lord of The Ants", by E.O. Wilson (narration by
> Harrison Ford)
>
> Now that John Joe Lakers has surfaced everybody is going to have to
do
> some serious reading and catching up to stay in the
conversation ...
>
> No more political "malarkey" or Cartesian philosophy, that's for
sure.
>
> Jim Sexton (66)
> NB. While you are at it, "Charlie Wilson's War" was a "must" as far
as
> films go.
>

Jack, the Gem City toastmasters are meeting in the Hall of Fame room on
10/1 to celebrate its charter. I am giving one of the speeches. Come on
down!!!! The meeting is from noon to 1 pm. I hoping to make the open
house on 10/7 too!

Dan


--- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, "Jack Hardesty" <hardesty@...>
wrote:
>
> Was great to see Dan Tanna and "Cowboy" Mazar again. Fr. JJ Lakers
and
> I enjoyed the little time with them at QU Friary.
>

Jim, you can respond to my blogg-ings anytime -24/7 - if so
inclined!!! Thanks for scribing the carefully considered
distinctions. I remembered two our of four - Plato and Aristotle and
our guy Ockham ( although not too familiar with the razor after all
these years.) Be assured - not boring!!!

And did I not see a comment from Frank Wildt? Frank, good to have you
blogging too!

Dan



--- In Diaspora_ofm@yahoogroups.com, "echojimsexton"
<echojimsexton@...> wrote:
>
> Dan, Now I don't know if I have the right to respond to your
> blogg-ings, so bear with me and forgive me if I bore you.
>
> Aquinas thoughts were mainly based on 11th century's Avicenna, who's
> major ideas came from Aristotle and Plato (two very contradictory
> sources to say the least). Anyway, the big deal in philosophy at the
> time was essence and existence and which came first, the chicken or
> the egg. Avicenna opted for essence. Averroes, Avicenna's avid
> competitor opted for existence. And so began the long saga of
thought
> and thinking that probably wasted more time and brains than counting
> beans and pennies all the way up to 20th century existentialism.
>
> Today overloaded words like "essence" and "existence" could be
> translated into matter (mass) and energy, and as you might imagine
> lots of problems and/or questions still exist there. But, let's get
> down to business and Senator Joe Biden.
>
> Biden attended a Norbertine college, a preparatory high school in
> Delaware. I don't know much about Norbertines or Delaware, but I
> imagine Senator Biden got a full dose of Thomas Aquinas and
classical
> scholasticism, while not screwing around as kids often do.
>
> Biden's "Meet The Press" reference to Thomas Aquinas and Holy Roman
> Catholic Church's confusion over when life really begins (prior to
> when some Pope decided) may have been based on something in Avicenna
> that Aquinas swallowed, lock stock and barrel. It's called "tabula
> rasa", which means we're born with nothing in our beanies, empty,
> void, brainless, babies, one and all. He was an empiricist,
Avicenna.
> You learn as you go or grow, he thought. No nature, nurture dilemmas
> haunted Avicenna or Aquinas. Genes, chromosomes and DNA were well
> hidden in either the chicken or its egg at the time, yet to be
> discovered by philosophers.
>
> So, we "met...The Press" and some more of Biden's "malarkey".
>
> Now, I don't want to appear too down on Avicenna, Aquinas or VP
Biden,
> but I guess I am. Yet there's room for some democratic discussion.
> Whatever, we who had the rare opportunity of being franciscans might
> appreciate a little better one of our ancestors called Ockam, though
> nobody really paid very much attention to his "razor" until B.
Russell
> and L. Wittgenstein in the 20th century. It is a shame Ockam's,
> Russell's and Wittgenstein's thoughts remain on many obscure
American
> library shelves accumulating dust for the most part, especially
given
> America's sane origin in pragmatism as a way of thought and life.
>
> Jim Sexton (66)
>
> NB. Who knows when life begins, but best we respect it because it's
a
> gift, maybe not to the Papa or Mama Bear, but to the Baby Bear.
>

Jack Hardesty,

It will take me a little while to read up on what John Joe has been
thinking and writing over these past years, so do ask him to bear with
me. I have a lot of catching up to do, since I've been out in the
woods with trees for a long time. My razor's edge has gotten a bit
rusty and I'll have to sharpen it up if we want to keep a coherent
discussion up and running on Gael Stahl's and Jack Brennan's diaspora
digest. Whatever, welcome to the wonderful world of words made of
pixels packed with meaning.

Jim Sexton(66)

Sorry, I forgot to identify the last message as coming from Fr. JJ
Lakers.  In case you want to see more of his writings, go to:

http://www.qufriary.org/Lakers/

Sorry, I forgot to identify the last message as coming from Fr. JJ
Lakers.  In case you want to see more of his writings, go to:

http://www.qufriary.org/Lakers/

I was surprised by the quick response of John Brennan and Jim Sexton
to my entry. John, I am not used to having people want to hear from
me in more detail. John, I confess that I don't remember you. Jim, I
remember you as immensely bright and hopelessly idealistic. If you
remember, I visited you in your home once.

Jim, since you dared to tell me what I must have meant in my sketchy
development, I can't resist a few comments. First, in an early entry,
you targeted the vagueness encoded in references to belief and
unbelief. Your reference to "common sense" is equally suspect. To
resituate my approach: (1) Since I locate moral discourse in a
framework depicting human existence as a perpetual journey into the
unknown, I fear anyone who pretends to offer an authoritative
definition of what it is to be human or to be uniquely oneself. (2)
We find our way on that journey by acquiring an everyday language
which, in turn, becomes formative on our longings, passions, desires,
perceptions, imagination, motives, intentions, judgments and agendas.
Thus, even Israel's great prophets could not entirely escape from the
formative power of the traditional depiction of God as Lord, Lawgiver
and Judge. But the narrative structure of the early stories by the
Yahwist and the Eloist nonetheless enabled those with powerful
sympathetic imaginations to project metaphors whose reach initially
exceeded their grasp. To this day, these metaphors enable prophets to
show that the formative power of distinctions and differentiations
enshrined in everyday language is full of both promise and peril.
I.e., this language can be used to promote person-to-person
involvements or to disguise the violence inflicted on those who have
no voice in the on-going dialogue. In this context, a sympathetic
imagination is far more fruitful than appeals to reason or to common
sense.

To situate the above in my personal history: Though I have always
dwelt happily in the realm of ideas, I have also let people into my
life in intensely personal ways. Willy nilly, I discovered that,
without these   involvements, I would have gone through life without
awareness of the depth of my own longing for intimacy with the
Father, Jesus, the Holy Spirit and loved ones. In each of these
involvmements, events tapped tangled feelings in me that would
otherwise have remained deeply buried. (A favorite metaphor: "We are
tangles".)

In that vein, since I have been involved in the charismatic movement
for years, I am often asked when I accepted Jesus as my personal
Savior. Though motivated by irritation, my reply is also honest: I
don't think I have. As long as I can remember, Jesus and I have been
locked in tangled struggles. I now understand the dynamics of the
struggle. Since He is fully human, he longs for fully human and
uniquely personal responses from me. On my part, though there is much
about being human that I enjoy, there is much that I am still
uncomfortable with. And though I am often obnoxiously myself, I also
lie to protect my backside. So I can only hope that we both remain
faithful to our commitment to one another. Through this commitment, I
am constantly made aware that his passionate longing for intimate
involvement with me assures me that I am never alone in my pain,
fear, anger, shame, care, compassion, joy or playfulness. And this
realization reminds me that he also hurts with those I hurt in this
same way. ("Whatever you do....")

John Joe (via Jack Hardesty),

How in the name of heavens do you just pop up like Karl Popper after
40 years. I doubt you remember me after 30 years of teaching
philosophy at Quincy. I was one of your 1st students when you returned
from Oxford. They called me "little diz", the bigger one, Dismas
Bonner, your classmate was my warden when the franscians moved T-Town
to Chicago. I only lasted a couple of years at Chicago before running
off to become a California dreamer. Then came the draft, Iran,
Afghanistan and 20 years of forestry in France until returning to the
US in 2000 to vote for President Bush. So I'm really messed up as far
as contemporary American thought and opinions go.

I don't know how or why I got involved in this Senetor Biden's "when
life begins dispute", except that in general I don't trust many Irish
Catholics, being one myself and having spent some time in Ireland
digging up my Sexton family's roots and grave stones, which revealed
lots of myths.

Anyway, down to business: (following your points 1 to 5)

1) I never thought of the rich meaning you give to Yahweh telling
Abraham to go forth and form a new "people" or nation, leaving his
past, tribe, rules and social environment.  An adventure to say the
least. That this becomes a "critique of the natural law of ethics" is
curious. I think what you mean is that there is no "natural law of
ethics", but that there is something call "common" or "social" sense.
(ie. Darwin or simple human goodness)

2) The books of Hosea and Isaiah, two beautiful books. I was lucky to
study scripture under Carroll Stuhlmueller, CP who opened up my eyes
and heart. Here again, with the "dispossessed" aren't we really
talking about common sense. What does it profit a society, community,
tribe, clan or whatever to have poor and oppressed among them.
Furthermore, in a much larger sense, what does it profit the world...?

3) Prophets: Carroll Stuhlmueller maintained biblical prophets were
not predictors, but commentators. So, if they really wanted to do
something about the poor and oppressed, best stand amidst the
society's oppressors and work for the oppressed, as you say.
Otherwise, societies suffer revolts and revolutions. I can recall a
few, like the inhuman and bleak side of Iran's 1979's revolution or
Afghanistan's. But Jack's DDigest blog is way too small for me to
start lamenting the past.

4) Tangled moral issues... You're too good John Joe. I call them
cacophony or sophism or how many angels you can put on a pin's head.

5) conclusion:  "...efforts to address abortion in political
discourse, as a single issue are ...etc". Everyone should read your
original words. They are amazingly precise and excellent.

Thank you for popping up again.
Do keep popping up. Lots of the diaspora is in need of a little faith,
humility and common sense when it comes down to the universe.

Sincerely,
Jim(dismas)Sexton (66)

NB. Thank you Jack Hardesty for not wasting any of John Joe's time
with screens and keyboards.

Jack,

You got read or see Wilson's book or video about ants. (I had no idea
you were a shrink)

References:

1) E.O. Wilson's "The Ants", ie. The Little Creatures Who Run the
world...
2) PBS's NOVA (DVD) "Lord of The Ants", by E.O. Wilson (narration by
Harrison Ford)

Now that John Joe Lakers has surfaced everybody is going to have to do
some serious reading and catching up to stay in the conversation ...

No more political "malarkey" or Cartesian philosophy, that's for sure.

Jim Sexton (66)
NB. While you are at it, "Charlie Wilson's War" was a "must" as far as
films go.

In my many years as a psychotherapist and in my readings about human
nature, I am convinced that humans are exceedingly and necessarily
social beings.  Some brain scientists assert that the human brain
makes no sense except in the context of each of us growing up in some
sort of community.

My point is that science is coming to the same conclusion as does Fr.
JJ Lakers who arrives at his conclusion from scripture and philosophy.

I have been amazed about how the issue of abortion plays out on both
sides of the American ideological divide; i.e. Conservative vs
Liberal.    Conservatives seem to have a knee jerk reaction to
conflict: it must be resolved with the rigid application of a law or
by physical force in the extreme.  And yet, as a group they abhor the
act of abortion.   On the other hand, Liberals want to resolve
conflict by negotiating and avoiding physical force.   As a group,
Liberals tolerate abortion.    I have heard no one claim that abortion
is the best solution to an unwanted pregnancy.

Just this morning I heard about a psychologist researcher who, in
trying to figure out this divide, concluded that conservatives are
fearful and liberals are naïve and we act accordingly.

Fr. JJ's notion of putting morality in the context of all human
communal activities makes sense.  I hope he says more…

Jack Brennan

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [Diaspora_ofm]  Re: Joe Biden and Meet the Press
> From: "echojimsexton"  <echojimsexton@echojimse>
> Date: Sat, September 13, 2008 6:46  am
> To: Diaspora_ofm@To: DiasporaTo:

> Jack,
>
> I couldn't find DD38, so I "blogged" from my memory about  Senator
> Biden's Meet The Press's 40 days (he probably mixed up Lent or  the
> Accession) and Thomas Aquinas, as well as got in a couple of  foot
> notes that John Joe Lakers taught me.
>
> I still want to answer  Paul Langan's question about percentages of
> believing, church-going  Americans, but I'm afraid I'm becoming a
bore.
>
> Jim
>
-----------------------------------------
Fr. JJ Lakers responds:

Since Jim Sexton mentioned me in his entry into the discussion, Jack
Hardesty has supplied me with print-outs of a dialogue concerning
abortion, unbelief, and assorted other asides.

Jim, as an empiricist, I emphasized that the way a question is
formulated determines, to a large extent, what counts as an answer
and what counts as evidence for the answer.  In that vein, I offer a
few remarks on the way that I now formulate moral issues.

(1) I begin with the way that the foundational stories in the Hebrew
narrative tradition encode a rupture with nature.  E.G., Yahweh's
words send Abram, son of Terah, on a journey into the unknown as
Abraham of Yahweh.  These words require that he abandon his previous
identity and security within a tribe.  (This provides the biblical
basis for my philosophical critique of the natural law theory of
ethics.)

(2)  At the time of the Exiles, Hosea and Second and Third Isaiah
inscribed this narrative structure in poignant metaphors depicting
God's covenant with Abraham and his descendants as a marriage-union.
When they applied this metaphor to everyday life in a community, they
insisted that the moral will of God can be heard in the cries of the
dispossessed, oppressed, abused, marginalizsed, lost and silenced.

(3) To this day, these cries give vioice to the universal longing for
a fully human and uniquely personal existence.  Note, then, that what
the prophets stand for determines what they stand against.
Intriguingly, what they stand for also calls them to stand with the
oppressor as well as the oppressed.

(4) In effect, the prophets insisted that tangled moral issues lie,
inextricably, at the core of every human action and assertion.  (The
postmodernist movement attempts to recover this insight, but its
adherents can only speak in a hollow voice of prophetic protest.)

(5) When I apply this approach to the way that the abortion issue is
formulated in political discourse, I must conclude that efforts to
address abortion as a single issue are plainly immoral.  E.G., it
allows all of us to ignore the call to create a community in which
young people learn to interact in ways conducive to intimate
involvements, provide a support system for children at risk, aid
unwed mothers who want to keep their offspring, etc., etc. (as I
argue in my philosophical analysis of moral discourse, responses to
moral issues must be dictated by the personal rather than the
political dimensions of human existence.) - An added point: Those who
want a law defining abortion as a criminal offense target the
providers.  In this regard, Fr. Joe Z. notes that he has never found
anyone who wants to put the woman who has an abortion in prison.  But
from a legal perspective, the women are at least accomplices.

Young fellows,

I still think that Allan and Tommy did an excellent job of bringing
embriology, philosophy and theology together.

Jim, this is not my Blog.  Zeke is the one who set it up in 1999.  In
fact, I ignored it for years, not appreciating it and using it only
one time.  I have finally come to appreciate its instantly gratifying
features.

I think Paul is simply trying to make a point about the number of
believers there are (or are not) in the USA. I understand that many
statistics are the product of an educated guess as seen through a
maze of variables. There is no way to eliminate variables or account
for all of them in such a way as to get a perfect statistic.
Besides, 90 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot!

Paul, I sent Tony an invitation to join us, but he has not responded
to my latest 2 notes I sent him.  I think he wants to stay away from
me because I profess to be agnostic.

Jack

Paul,

I think I should respond to your question that has been on Jack's DD
blog ever since I invaded it. You mentioned: "... that approximately
16 or 17% of the North American population are in the "non-believing"
category." The problem here is one of numbers 16% to 17%, which are
clearly defined, and the concept or word: "non-believing", which is
not so clearly defined. Of course, "non-believing" means absence of
"belief". But then again, what does "belief" mean.

Sincerely, I doubt anyone could give you a very clear or universal
meaning to such a word as "belief", least of all a franciscan who has
read Ockham and learned how to shave. Words such faith are deemed as
nominalisms, which means they don't really have a universal, well
defined range, meaning or sense like numbers do. In other words, you
can't pin them down to something concrete, like an object, potato or
plumb.

True, you could stand in infront of a church all day on Sunday and ask
everybody going in or out "do you believe in God...?" and probably get
"yes", "no" or "maybe" for an answer. But what you've really done is
simply put one nominalism ("God") inside another ("belief") and tried
to come up with a well defined number (16% or 17%).

I'm sorry for being such a "pain in the ass", Paul, but I've lived too
long in other places in the world to fall into the trap again of
mixing up numbers and indefinable names or opinions. So I don't think
I answered your question, since I don't think there is an answer to it.

Maybe, best leave the faithful to their beliefs and stay away from
numbers, or simply count the number of people who go to church on
Sunday without asking them any questions.

Jim Sexton (66)

Frank Wildt,

Good heavens, it's great to hear you're out there somewhere. I recall
Frank Wildt. You were close to Medrad. He admired you, as I, though I
doubt we ever spent much time chatting about Thomas Aquinas. I read
your comments about his 40 to 80 day calendars with interest after
having scanned Wolter and Shannon's article that Jack saved on
[diasporadigest.org/articles/moralstatus.html].

Biologically speaking their article was very well informed. Otherwise,
of little help aside from the fact of pulling Henry de Ghent out of a
bag of tricks. Your explanation is much better.

From the looks of Curran's "Loyal Dissent" Paul VI's "Humanae vitae"
may have been the source of Senator Biden's "scholastic malarkey", but
you read more than I do, Frank. What's curious to me is the 40 days. I
always thought the menstrual cycle (though I've never had one) was
based on 28 days, the lunar calendar. So where in the name of Jupiter
did 40 days come from...? The Ascension's 40 days after Easter, Lent,
or whatever. Forty may be a magic number, like 4 being 1/2 of 8 that
stands tall and looks like infinity when it falls down on its side.
Who knows.

Anyhow, when I think back to all the wizards who tried to teach me a
little philosophy, I recall a principle that "The way a question is
posed often determines its answer". That's probably what I meant by
the historic essence and existence (nature of nurture) fiasco that has
haunted many brain for centuries. The real question seems to me to be
not when life begins, but what it is.

Your turn, now.
Jim Sexton