45. The Invisible Gardener

Synopsis - Stanley and Livingston have been staking out a clearing in the forest, waiting for a gardener who supposedly tends to the area. Nothing moved in that time but Livingston suggests he might be 'invisible' but a frustrated Stanley wants to send the gardener to 'invisible heaven'.

I didn't expect Baggini to relate this story to the existence of God. Quite a dramatic but logical progression I suppose. So can God be said to exist if there is no physical sign of his intervention? Maybe not. Can God be believed in even these signs do not exist? Yes.

I remember at interesting lesson in school when the teacher asked 'Did God invent man or did man invent God?' That was a wow moment in education for me, those times when a uninitiated part of the brain suddenly springs to action with new oxygen. Back to the topic, it seems early man had a great need to explain the world about him and when he couldn't quite explain things, he attributed the event to a higher power. Fair I guess. But what sort of became unfair was the way that those in power or wanted to be in power used these beliefs as a way of control. That still happens today. Many people do things, harmful things, in the name of God. I can't subscribe to this.

Science has come along to explain phenomena and in most cases helped make our lives better. The case for religion has somewhat waned in the shining spectre of logic. Some have totally rejected the idea of a higher being, others have taking their foot out of organized religion while preserving an understanding and respect for God and further others have attributed the wonders of science to God's greatness, a solidification of their case for religion. There many ways to tackle this 'invisible hand'.

Yes, things will happen around us because nature takes care of things. There will be ebbs and flows in the way the Earth changes but generally there's a balance. We may not be able to account for everything, a role for science to qualify, but their is change about for sure. When Man stepped into this picture, a thinking, creative being, the situation changes somewhat. We began to manipulate the world around us. That sort of started screwing up the balance of nature. Human nature came to rule the land. Our greed, sometimes manifested through religious actions, is responsible for quite a few of the world's problems today. So the thinking man of today, living in an overcrowded, polluted, over-exploited planet, is perhaps permitted a little cynicism about the control the 'invisible hand' has had.

44. Till Death Do Us Part

Synopsis - Harry and Sophie start having second thoughts about their marriage. Both think that if one put the other's interests first, he/she would lose out. But marriage requires "two lives to be joined in one unbroken circle", the collective before self. How is this going yo work?

The author got it right when he started off with 'Something doesn't sound right'. You bet. Why are are Harry and Sophie even contemplating marriage when they can't forsee giving up their self-interests for one another? I know marriage isn't supposed to be a sacrifice but there has to be some give before the take to start off with.

Apparently Harry was scarred by other broken marriages (not his own), and this has spearheaded this attitude. Having discussed it together, both had decided to put their ego aside in their relationship but secretly looking out for individual selves. Oh dear. About to go nowhere this tie up.

Baggini brings up the prisoner's dilemma. (Some would have no problem relating marriage to prison.) Some would have seen some measure of it played out on some U.S. cop drama. In these situations, prisoners are kept in separate cells unable to talk. Without a pre-arranged story, of course then each prisoner would look out for himself, selling the partner crook out in a jiffy. It's kinda funny to apply the same circumstances to a marriage but at some levels I guess it's plausible. Maybe couples who don't share their feelings about work and income may end up feeling like it's a competition between themselves. Competition is good but can get unhealthy pretty quickly when one can't split work and personal life.

This thought plays out as the 'sum of parts is greater than the whole' too. I think this has got to emphasized more when two people get together. Let the emotions and thoughts interconnect so that both individuals get more than from just keeping to oneself or putting oneself first. I agree with the author when he wrote that putting oneself first often closes off the possibilities of what we can achieve together. Anyone who's had a positive group brainstorm can testify to that.