Bartender, I’ll have a large omnishambles, if you please!

Sorry, sir, we’ve only got the megashambles left. There’s been quite a run on them lately. You might also try the doomsdayshambles. That’s the really strong stuff. The posh boys go mad for them. And they’re definitely not the common type, if you know what I mean.

The Commons type, perhaps?

Yeah, even that Little Richardjohn couldn’t make it up.

On the live topic of the seemingly wilful destruction of the age-old marriage laws purely to burnish the image of one David Cameron, there’s a potent card in the pack that he hasn’t played yet. I’m surprised that, as far as I can tell, no-one has thought of it.

Gender-bending chemicals.

These have been around since World War II and began making their mark in the Fifties through Rachel Carson’s epic game-changing book Silent Spring in America.

The world’s bread basket, the immense wheat-growing plains of the Mid-west fell silent as no birds sang and whole species of animals disappeared after the annual chemical spraying season began.

Decades later, the natural environment is soaked in supposedly safe pesticides which have ripped through nature in surge after surge of destruction.

Fish inhabiting inland waterways have been particularly affected by chemicals that interfere with gender, some even growing two sets of sexual organs, one male, one female.

Hermaphrodite fish might not seem to be a problem, but these substances now have a firm foothold in the human food chain. “Endocrine disruptors” pose a silent threat to life on this planet, even to human fertility and civilisation.

This appeared in New Scientist on 27 May, 2005: “Gender-bending chemicals mimicking the female hormone oestrogen can disrupt the development of baby boys, suggests the first evidence linking certain chemicals in everyday plastics to effects in humans.”

The Daily Mail goes with: “The diverse systems affected by endocrine-disrupting chemicals likely include all hormonal systems and range from those controlling development and function of reproductive organs to the tissues and organs regulating metabolism and satiety. Effects on these systems can lead to obesity, infertility or reduced fertility, learning and memory difficulties, adult-onset diabetes or cardiovascular disease, as well as a variety of other diseases.”

The New Scientist headline was: “Gender-bending chemicals found to feminise boys”.

Could this be the cause of the fairly recent upsurge in “gay” issues, politics and demand for same-sex marriage? It certainly seems likely, and totally changes the terms of the current debate.

One wonders what scientific advice the Prime Minister is receiving from the Food Standards Agency and Cobra. In politics nothing happens without context.

It’s beginning to look like a case of “bend it like Cameron”.

John Evans

Recent Related Articles

Nigel Farage in typical upbeat style

Nigel Farage undoubtedly won Thursday’s Council elections in the South of England — classic Conservative country — even though his nascent outfit, the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), gathered in just a quarter of the votes … which was a startling result for them.

As a Devon-based man, I was considering voting for UKIP until abstaining at the last moment. I have only ever voted for one party, so it was not easy to change the habits of half a lifetime. Rest assured, that reticence will not stand in a General Election on which the fate of Britain will hang in the balance.

In this neck of the woods, there are thousands like me, toying with the apostasy of voting for a newish, single-issue party of uncertain provenance.

The dilemma for David Cameron is that the single issue in question, independence from the despised European Union, lies at the heart of almost every slice of political debate: law, immigration, public services, defence, education, financial services, foreign affairs and more.

You name it, the choice between independence and obeying remote edicts from people who speak another language, is ultimately between the pride of self-governance and a return to the conditions of the Roman Empire.

There is, then, no choice at all. And the voters know it, even if the metro politicos in the capital don’t. They will know soon enough. There really is a tide in the affairs of men when the only option is revolution, albeit through the ballot box.

Can the Tories escape from the pit of muddled mediocrity into which they have tipped themselves? There is one way.

David Cameron is an urbane product of one of the world’s great schools, Eton College near Windsor. Throughout the Victorian and Edwardian eras it effortlessly produced the leaders and administrators of the mighty British Empire, as well as a very large number of the nation’s prime ministers and ministers of State. It’s a proud record.

In the 21st century, it has struggled to stay relevant, often turning out a recognisable cohort of effete, self-satisfied, work shy individuals who, although as bright as buttons, lack a tough Army training as a necessary finishing school. By contrast, Princes William and Harry are worthy graduates of that school of hard knocks.

David Cameron’s Downing Street has almost no public definition. It lacks shape and the urgency needed to tackle the broken social fabric of our time. Most of the Coalition’s successes come from the hard-toiling products of abolished Grammar schools in lesser ministries.

Cutting to the chase, David Cameron is the kind of PM most English people like: friendly and articulate, he represents Britain well on the world stage. He is a safe pair of hands as the public face of government. Most folk can agree on that.

In policy terms, he just about cuts it for the southern half of the country, but is a lost cause north of Watford and increasingly west of the Home Counties. That’s where Nigel Farage comes in.

UKIP is a truly trans-Britain, trans-class party. With the possible exception of Scotland, whose mind is elsewhere at the moment, UKIP’s reach is an almost precise copy of the Conservative’s best past efforts. Together, they would be much more than the sum of their parts.

Even Farage’s personality supplements Cameron’s perfectly. A Con/UKIP fighting force would inherit the mantle of the unbeaten Thatcher-led party and attract the C1/C2s of recent memory.

If Britain is to have the government it truly wants, Con/UKIP is the only game in town. If it were up to me, talks would begin now. Farage would have his moment of glory in the Euro elections next year, before a serious joint platform is launched.

The UKIP leader could be found a safe seat for a byelection he would fight on a joint Con/UKIP ticket.

The Lib Dems would, of course, retreat from coalition, leaving Nigel Farage to become Deputy Prime Minister.

The rest is future history.

John Evans

… who is the author of The Eternal Quest for Immortality: Is it staring you in the face? Available from Amazon and all good booksellers.

Coming eventually: Mystology: A different way of looking at the world. Also a website, mystology.com.

Recent Related Articles

Professor Steve Jones has published an exhaustive account* of why mysticism, and spiritual experiences in particular, are just so much joshing around by a playful, but totally out of its depth, human brain.

That last bit is my own interpretation, not his. He is a clever, but deeply conventional, aficionado of the genomic view of life, whereby the world is reduced to four letters and an ocean of numbers. What else would one expect from a geneticist who has spent “a lifetime studying snails”?

In his favour he issues a small caveat which suggests a grain of self knowledge: “I have a blind spot. Brain science sheds little light on why I am denied an experience so central to the lives of others; [mystical experience] and its failure reminds us how little success technology has had in understanding the workings of the inner angel that lives within every nervous system.”

There’s only one reply to that: why bother then if it isn’t science?

If I were his professor I’d also point out that technology has no understanding of anything at all, it merely follows instructions from the human world. However, the flaw in his sentence — one that many of his undergraduates might make — throws bright light on the Problem of Science: definitions.

To be able to speak or write authoritatively on a complex subject, such as spiritual experience, requires precise definitions of crucial terms. It also helps to have some practical knowledge of the processes involved.

Here’s another example: “Devotees insist that when they put their trust in a higher power they ascend into a universe of thought denied to sceptics.”

Such elementary errors might suggest sloppy editing, but I suspect it goes to the heart of the science delusion. “Thought” is part of the contents of consciousness, along with emotions and impressions, not consciousness itself, as he intimates — (see first link below). Spiritual experiences take us way beyond thought. In fact, you can even observe your own thoughts and thinking processes from above — (see second link below).

Another fundamental misunderstanding is revealed in this passage: “Science, in its banal fashion, makes it possible to study the mind in ways impossible in the days of [William] James. The visions of saints, sinners, dreamers, drug users or anyone else can now be explored with technology. To do so may not give much insight into piety [?] itself, but hints that at least some of its symptoms are side effects of the machinery of the nervous system.”

Technology can only point to areas of the brain that become active in certain instances. The brain is like a set-top box on your television. If you didn’t know that invisible radio waves surround us every moment of the day, you might assume that the box was actually producing the TV programmes all by itself.

By extension, and personal experience, the brain is an essential interface into the body for events and conditions, most of which take place outside the human person. As the philosopher Plotinus put it: “We are at all times swimming in a sea of consciousness.” The soul is completely separate from the machinery of the body, including the brain.

Apart from the lack of precision in word definitions, understandable in someone who has not experienced the states he is describing, it’s as if he is painting a picture of the Himalayas from a map in an Atlas of the World. The awe generated by the might of Mount Everest will be completely absent, as well as an accurate depiction of its three-dimensional shape. That would not be “scientific”.

Jones continues his snail’s-eye view of the spiritual landscape: “Priests of many religions spend solitary hours in darkness or silence. Such experiences may activate the pineal gland at the base of the brain. Descartes believed that to be the seat of the soul. Be that as it may, the structure is the source of melatonin, a chemical concerned with sleep and wakefulness. Those who meditate may have more of it than others, with a shift in mental condition.”

Again, “may” and “might” have no place in a scientific treatise. It’s the world according to chemistry. But chemistry is just a servant not a master.

As for the rest of the book, I have only read the Daily Telegraph extract and listened to three of his radio broadcasts, but I would recommend he has it re-edited for precision, for if there are this many inaccuracies in such a short article, what must the final total be?

Back to the real-world drawing board, Professor Jones.

1. Midweek Mysticism: 1. Neuroscience confronts reality of the spiritual
2. Proof of consciousness after death
3. The Serpent’s Promise — Telegraph article

* The Serpent’s Promise, published by Little Brown on May 2 (rrp £25).

John Evans

… who is the author of The Eternal Quest for Immortality: Is it staring you in the face? Available from Amazon and all good booksellers.

Coming eventually: Mystology: A different way of looking at the world. Also a website, mystology.com.

Recent Related Articles

Richard Holloway, former Bishop of Edinburgh

The BBC has asked me to inform readers that its brilliant radio series from June 2012, Honest Doubt: The History of an Epic Struggle by Richard Holloway, is now available as an MP3 download and written transcripts (Amazon) from Monday 29 April.

At the time it was only granted seven days on the iPlayer, but the Producer, Olivia Landsberg, writes: “we were inundated with requests for the download”. Hence the new releases.

I wrote a review of the series here: A personal introduction to God.

Other Reviews:
“A rich gift and definitely one worth sharing” — Gillian Reynolds, Daily Telegraph
“Made me stop in my tracks” — Thinking Liberal Review
“Thought provoking, enlightening, educational, moving, humbling. Too good to miss ” — Daily Strength

Here’s a reminder of the content:

Synopsis
In Honest Doubt: The History of an Epic Struggle, the author and former Bishop of Edinburgh Richard Holloway considers some of the universal questions about our existence and the meaning of life, and how some of humanity’s best thinkers and most creative writers have approached these “literally life and death questions”. In exploring the relationship between faith and doubt over the last 3000 years, he looks at its impact from the birth of religious thinking, through the Old and New Testaments, the Middle Ages, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the Victorian period, the horrors of World War II, right up to today. Joining him on his journey are: Karen Armstrong, Richard Dawkins, Sir Anthony Kenny, Sir Andrew Motion, AN Wilson and many others.

A starry cast indeed, and well worth a listen, especially as many appreciators of the series will have missed some or most of it, as did I, only catching the last ten of its 20 essays.

MP3 Download: AudioGo — £6.99.

Written Transcripts: Amazon — Kindle, £10.74.

Enjoy.

John Evans

… who is the author of The Eternal Quest for Immortality: Is it staring you in the face? Available from Amazon and all good booksellers.

Coming eventually: Mystology: A different way of looking at the world. Also a website, mystology.com.

Recent Related Articles

I’ve long retained a healthy scepticism about the ancient art and practice of divination. I like to think I’m an empiricist in the English philosophical tradition. If I can’t make something work, I lose interest in it.

That doesn’t mean it can’t blossom for someone else, of course. The problem is that many of its practitioners seem to hang out on fairgrounds and slightly downmarket television shows. However, I was in for a surprise.

When I was reading psychology at university my hero was the great C.G. (Carl) Jung, a Swiss genius of towering breadth of learning and imagination. His mystical apotheosis was a revelation in every sense:

When the summit of life is reached, when the bud unfolds and from the lesser the greater emerges … and the greater figure, which one always was but which remained invisible, appears to the lesser personality with the force of a revelation, he … will know that the long expected friend of his soul, the immortal one, has now really come.

It doesn’t get much better than that. Jung was also a lifelong student of the Chinese Book of Changes, the I Ching — a rather intellectual tool for divination.

Its method is similar to most other systems of reaching out to foreknowledge, which use the physical to attain the mystical. In ancient China, Taoists used 49 yarrow stalks, throwing them six times to the ground to make up a hexagram. Jung was convinced it worked and practised diligently.

My own experience of it was one of tedium. I adopted the modern method of throwing three coins instead of yarrow sticks. I managed to get hold of three old British pennies, the surprisingly large and heavy copper coins that were in use until 1971.

At first the process seemed interminable, asking a question, then throwing the coins six times and building up a hexagram of six whole and broken lines. I used the Richard Wilhelm translation which had a stimulating commentary by Jung himself.

It seemed to work on many occasions, but could be densely obscure, lacking the vivid nature of real life. Perhaps I was expecting too much.

Some years later — not long ago — I was given a pack of Tarot cards as a present. These, of course, are much more associated with the fairground that ever was the I Ching. But as I shuffled through them, I recognised Jung’s Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious. I was immediately attracted to them and began to try them out.

As often with divinatory methods, it takes a while to break yourself into the deeper aspects of the system. I had sporadic matches with various outcomes, but as with the I Ching, they seemed tenuous and distant, lacking immediacy.

But I didn’t give up on them, because of their archetypal dynamism and the brilliance of the commentary in the book that came with my version. Gradually, the mist clarified and the “immortal one” seemed to answer. I am still staggered by the relevance of the answers I now get.

The Tarot can be a bit scary. The first time you get the Death card is not for the faint-hearted: in some versions, it’s a black skeleton with a scythe riding on a black horse — truly the stuff of nightmares.

All is not lost. The card represents merely a decisive loss, perhaps a job (the sack?) or the need for a complete, beneficial, change of direction. Until, that is, your turn for departure from this world really does come.

If you can accept my assertion that it definitely does work, you stand a chance of making it relevant for yourself after a period of induction. So how does it work?

I suspect it has more to do with biologist Rupert Sheldrake’s “extended mind” — the universal, or Nirvanic consciousness, than any other theoretical medium.

This is genuinely mystical; that is, something beyond normal consciousness and means of seeing. It links our earthly life with what lies beyond. It is both accessible to those who want it enough and will guide them through mysteries without end.

Jung’s “culmination of life” was such an experience. Divination is just the opening shots in the greatest journey of all.

John Evans

Recent Related Articles