Help requested per my book in process --

currently called, My Mobius God Strips...


To Help Enhance Many At Risk Familial Ecologies, We

Are Looking For "FamCol" Ideas In Accord With K-12

Center For Ecoliteracy Principles Of Dr. Fritjof Capra

-- And Leader In Sustainability, Schumacher College:

We need to change our relationship to nature and the basis of how we study

science, economics, business and psychology, in order to develop a systemic

understanding of how to address current ecological and social challenges.


E.g., We'd Love Your Feedback About Re-Establishing

 More "Sacred" And Personal Agents Of Social Ecology

 -- Roles Too Many Of Us Now Care Less & Less About.

So What "Familycology" Activities Would You Suggest

 For Any Family Concerned About Its Own "Ecology"?



All creative ideas are welcome, especially if they compare

well with Duane Elgin's View of "Ecoliteracy" -- and even

ideas as extreme as that of the author of Care Of The Soul,

Plus to bring the idea of "environment" closer to home,

a little more about the only ecology that we can rely on:

On 12/19/13, we were listening to Back Story Radio,

NPR's very cool program about history. The latest one

was about how -- beginning around the early 1800's --

first religious and then commercial interests, took turns

evolving the celebration and the meaning of Christmas.

At the end of this radio broadcast, the show's history profs

spoke with Tyrone Jones, a black Santa from Philadelphia

When asked what his mall's children hope for Christmas, he

said lots of them want mommy and daddy back together again.

And thus our DIY famcol idea for preventing that kind of misery...




More Happy Families Via Familycology?

(To those who think our simplistic "cerebral ecology" nutso,
note these words of much-missed Dr. Paul Pearsall, M.D.

Your thoughts please about two versions of
Better Times Through Family Spirituality!
First, for the more conservative ...

 An orthodox way of wondering about familycology:

 What would happen if more families were seeing

themselves as "sacred" units -- as so few now do?

E.g., by following this "Fathering With Intentionality:

The Importance of Creating a Family Culture" advice?

(And in whatever way the word "God" means to you).



"Family Motivation: The glue that holds families together" by Matthew Hick

The goal of the Vanier Institute of the Family (beyond the borders of Canada): Making families as important to the life of society as they are to the lives of individuals.

Heritage Planning: "Heritage planning is a process that creates a foundation upon which families can plan for and accomplish what matters most to them today, and for generations to come. As with traditional financial and estate planning, heritage planning comes in many shapes and sizes. Just as no two families are exactly alike, no two heritage plans will look the same, either."

All a good start. But why not do more? E.g., to even more directly counter the huge and growing economic, social and political pressures tearing families apart, how about considering establishing your own "family congregation"? According to your own rules! 

And for those who are a bit more daring...
An unorthodox way of wondering about familycology:


Can familycology (families seeing ourselves as sacred) contribute
to ways of living and loving which encourage family members to
circumscribe what we do: so we too can be there for loved ones
(in the way family dynasties are perpetuated by family offices)?
Likely depends on what we do and don't do, familycology-wise.





Please note "family sacredness" does not have to be "religious". E.g.,

this Good Men Project example of awesome dedication to one's family,

inspiring words by Kirsten Tynan (famous jury nullification advocate).



Familycology: Much Stronger And Happier Families.

One Self-Nurturing Family Congregation At A Time.

No famcol membership fees or dogma. Just ideas worth

 thinking about & practices of yours (done on your own).


Do you agree that the time for "famcol spirituality" has come?

Email us your own ideas for it.




The above is being brought to you by Yale & Jackie Landsberg,

founders of the Better Tymes Project who hope for better times.


From Jackie...


Also from Better Tymes Project for better biological clock times:

  The Sophisticated Simplicity of True Time.

Also see Looking at the Whole:

A Social Ecology of Health, an

examination of the changing

health patterns in this century

justifies both celebration and

dismay. By Dr. Richard Levins




From Yale...



12/31/13, 11:59 P.M. -- 01/01/14



For What It Is Worth:

The Unholy Vs. Holy War Over Intelligent Design Heats Up In 2013,


How A 'Monordinate System' May Help Put Out The Fire In 2014?


From time to time, a visitor to this site notices its common thread: the combined "wholeness" and "oneness" found in all families who are happy, all feelings of well-being engendered by awareness of whole and one natural time, all illnesses that are cured, and in everything else that ends up with a heart-warming big "Yes!"

Alas, that momentary (usually not momentous) discovery is as far as thinking about wholeness and oneness ever goes. Because these days few have much time to think about such fundamentals, even though wholeness and oneness threads its way through all ancient philosophies & religions, and through all modern sciences & mathematics (as portrayed in the above diagram).

On the other hand:

  1. As lots of us enjoy reading best-selling teasers, which promise to come across with some Great Secret, but never actually do, as written by writers like Katherine Neville (who wrote The Eight), Dan Brown (who wrote The Da Vinci Code), Jeff Small (who wrote The Breath of God), plus many others also far more gifted and thus deserving of praise than yours truly,
  2. and as I am in the process of writing a tallish tale about how wholeness and oneness can be seen in the 0's and 1's of God and/or Nature's Operating System -- a "GNOShtic" book where I admittedly at times pull my reader's leg, but never his or her chain,
  3. I am hoping that some of you will take a moment to see where I am coming from and where I am going. And then give me some suggestions about what you would like to see in my proposed way of cooling down all sides of a holy and unholy war between many different groups of people, all of whom have the best of intentions.


The background: 1) Several years ago, although an out-spoken atheist, Dr. Stuart A. Kauffman proposed in his Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason and Religion book that scientists add a teleological ("intentionally" coming towards) factor to their materialist and reductionist models of life processes. To the chagrin of many scientists, his proposal has been interpreted by those who are deeply religious as support for belief in an Intelligent Designer; and 2) for decades, philosopher of science, Professor Thomas Nagel, was a hero to cognitive and biology scientists around the world as a result of his historical essay, "What Is It Like To Be A Bat?" However, not any more. In early 2013, his book Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False was published, and almost immediately Nagel became a pariah to many otherwise cool, calm and collected scientists who now think him a fool for his dual-aspect monism preachings. 

So, whether orthodox scientists like it or not, after some three hundred and fifty years of Newtonian absolutism and a hundred years of Einsteinian relativity, it looks to those who believe in a God, or some other kind of "Principal Principle", as if things are swinging back towards the religion side of the equation. On the other hand, atheist scientists keep insisting that it is only a matter of time until completely scientific logic prevails. 


A case can be made that there is no way to resolve that impasse. But in these ever more crazy times when up-side opportunities of all kinds can cause huge down-side crises, and some very prominent atheists are proposing what believers in God have always known (a madness that skeptics thought humanity was finally close to being completely free of), maybe it is time for an equally crazy or perhaps just "Janusian" (holding two different ideas in your head at the same time to be more creative) proposal of my own, a pre-modern and post-modern union of complementary opposites, older than Heraclitus and as timeless as Nicolas of Cusa's and Northrop Frye's visions of it?



My candidate method (as seen above and below) for lightening up the conflict between science and religion is for those of you who are inclined towards a reverence for Nature, regardless of your religious views, to examine -- in some especially simple -- mathematical ways the common thread of this site, that being the fundamental nature and "magical" properties of "wholeness" and "oneness". And, as a result, see a perhaps legendary whole and one kind of self-referencing frame of reference that to some comes into surprisingly clear telescopic and microscopic view when imaginatively seen through the cognitive lens of an always there (but until now rarely noticed) "monordinate system".

So if and when you are ready to spend a few moments considering a "rebelationZ" view of the nature of what is whole and one (as revolutionary and revealing in its own way as Mos Def's rap song Mathematics), behold (like some Venus coming out of the sea) an equally naked "wholeness" and "oneness" emerging and merging in the form of two puzzles, here. Plus by doing so, as was pointed out by a punny sports fan friend of mine, notice also how a very small paradigm shift in perspective per the usually hard-to-tackle nature of reciprocal concepts such as zero and infinity -- as well as wholeness vs. oneness -- becomes a game-changer just by moving in a ballsy way the Cartesian (y axis) goal-post from its x=0 line to the monordinate system x=1 yard line! And then, perhaps later on, move along to reading and commenting on an, in no way in the league of Katherine Neville, et al, book I am in the process of writing, which (for psycho-analytical "naked", "expose", "reveal"... free association reasons and some others) I am inclined to entitle, My Mobius God Strips. (Alas, plays on words can be very contagious. -( )

BTW, while my counter to orthodox math diagrams can at first seem disorienting (and thus often pisses off math pros), they also often do end up being especially understandable as well as funny to those either blessed with math-anxiety or wired to think about math in non-traditionally ways. Not surprising as my diagrams are merely pictures of elementary algebra notions like "approaching infinity" and "approaching zero" that are being presented in ways never usually shown in most schools. BTW2, if anything about my diagrams needs explaining, send me whatever questions of yours that come to mind via Yale[@]



Three things for all of you out-of-the-box thinkers to think about now that you have used a monordinate system way of seeing the underlying nature of wholeness and oneness that puts algebraic concepts like "approaching infinity" and calculus concepts like "approaching zero" in whole new lights. And after some reflection also reveals to both the math-challenged and the math elite why 1 is so very different than .99999999999999... -- as well as the same.



That being said, an archaic "well come" to those of you who by now have come to see why, e.g., the wholeness of 2/3 + 1/3 and the oneness of 3 - 2 are both the same, and yet also different! You have just seen some things almost no professor of math or philosophy, or anything else for that matter, has ever seen -- nor is likely to ever run with. Because no one who is smart in anything scores any points or wins any prizes by knowing something extra simplistic -- and my math notions are very simplistic.

That also being said, you have just "self-anointed" yourself so to speak. In a non-religious, but perhaps very deep ecology way, you have by now set yourself apart from almost all math experts as well as the rest of humanity when it comes to knowing usually unsuspected aspects of "wholeness", "oneness", as well as "approaching zero", "approaching one" and "approaching infinity". If that ever matters to you, a request: how about letting an old dreamer and seeker like me know what you think about my recently "resurrected" monordinate system, as well as any possible contributions you think it may offer up for unifying Cartesian duality and Nagelian dual-aspect monism? E.g., perhaps enabling more of us to see one in the other, the way the parts of a yin-yang holistically mix and match.