Surviving In This Very Moment…

My Personal Battle with Prostate Cancer … And Life!

Archive for the tag “meaningful decisions”

ProPep Surgical – da Vinci Prostatectomy | da Vinci Robotic Surgery | Nerve Monitoring Prostate Surgery

I found this interesting. I wish I had known about this technique so I could have discussed it with my surgeon prior to my prostatectomy. Being informed allows one to  advocate for oneself.

ProPep Surgical – da Vinci Prostatectomy | da Vinci Robotic Surgery | Nerve Monitoring Prostate Surgery.

Caring for the Land…An Ethical Responsibility

Caring for the Land...An Ethical Responsibility

Caring for the Land…An Ethical Responsibility

Yesterday with my wife, son and grandson, I drove the Apache Trail from Globe to Apache Junction, Arizona. Beginning in Globe, where strip mining mountains to extract copper, strips the land of its natural beauty as well as destroying the eco-system which evolved to sustain plant and animal life over millions, perhaps billions of years. Driving into the canyon through which the Apache Trail runs, it quickly became obvious that the land here, with the exception of damming the river to create reservoir lakes and creating a road, remains wild and free.

Along the Apache Trail

Along the Apache Trail

Driving through this nearly pristine desert landscape, especially when compared to the rape of the land that results from strip mining, got me to thinking about an ethical responsibility for our stewardship of the only land we have to call home. The issue, it seems to me, is one in which we somehow have forgotten where food comes from (clearly not a Monsanto laboratory), how to assure the health of the land (surely not applying chemical fertilizer courtesy of a ConAgra laboratory) and the biodiversity that comes from growing multiple varieties of natural grains, fruits and vegetables (rather than planting genetically modified seeds developed in the laboratories of Central Soya). I thought about Georgia Pacific’s clear-cutting of forests in the Pacific Northwest thereby destroying the eco-system of the mountains as well as their ability to maintain fertile soil on the mountains after the nearly daily rains of the region. I could go on here, but you get the point. It seems we have placed profit over sustainability; immediate corporate greed trumping the very survival of future generations.

Until the mid-nineteenth century, people around the world lived in close affinity to the land they occupied. They took only that which was needed to provide food and protection from the elements. As urbanization began to replace the pastoral life of the farm and ranch or even the nomadic hunter-gathering life of indigenous people, the ability to live without exploiting the land began to disappear. By the mid-1950’s it was all but forgotten. I once asked my students where food comes from and to a soul they replied from the grocery store, giving the source barely a second thought. What was lost must be somehow regained if we are to survive as a civilization.

It is not enough to preserve a few primitive sites, set aside as national parks, monuments or forests. It is not enough to declare a few acres as a state park. No, the commitment must be to force a return to sustainable farming, to sustainable foresting and to refusing to support food that is not appropriately labeled as to GMO or antibiotic inclusion in the manufacture, growing or preparation of foods. Our very survival depends on this because everything depends on everything and everyone depends on everyone.

Question Everything…Learning to Think Clearly for Yourself

Don’t just teach your children to read…Teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything.
George Carlin

The late George Carlin took nothing at face value. His deep and often cynical analysis of behavior and ideas was always refreshing in a world filled with apathetic acceptance of propaganda swaddled in the guise of politics, religion, culture, class, race, and gender. Forgive me if I left anything off the list. His point, however, is clear. Accept nothing someone tells you or what someone writes and you read. Do not believe the surface for if you do you’ll surely be disappointed. But what does it mean to question everything? What does it actually mean to read critically?

I have one anecdotal piece of evidence, a story that is funny while carrying the seeds of corporate greed at its core. It was widely reported in the late 1980’s that when toilet training one’s children, it is best to wait until the child asks to be trained. In an era of child centered parenting, a period in which I raised my own children, this bit of news reporting seemed to make a great deal of sense until I learned that the studies that were widely reported were funded by manufacturers of disposable diapers. The question arises as to whether the studies results were motivated by a reasonable interpretation of the data or by the profits to be made from selling one or two more years worth of disposable diapers? Fortunately for my kids, they were unable to use disposable diapers so we opted for cloth. The point of this anecdote is to simply point out that when a study is widely reported it is always appropriate to ask where the funding source for the study came from. Does the funder have an economic or idealogical stake in the results of the study.

It is always important to think clearly about claims made that appear on the surface to be quite logical. Another example: An argument made by fundamentalists for whom the literal (surface) meaning in the Bible is without flaw claims that evolution must be wrong by partially making their case that the human eye is too complex an organ to be made other than by divine design. This is an argument from incredulity which, in its simplest form, goes something like this: I can conceive of no other possible solution so X must be the case. The argument from incredulity is one of the weaker forms of argumentation because, for the most part, those who make the argument fail to consider sources outside of those which make them most comfortable. Consulting other sources, scientific sources, that argue for the evolution of the human eye using evidence from many species allows one to argue from extant evidence and not from belief systems or ideology.

Teach your children to read critically, open their eyes to the very idea that there is always more than one way to get to the roof but if you can’t think clearly you might not recognize them.

The Impossibility of Response-Ability?

I have frequently written about the very idea of ethical response-ability; that the foundation of ethical behavior rests on the notion that I make myself available for the welfare of the other (person). In this sense, to be response-able requires the interiority of the self to turn outward to the exteriority of the other, to expose interiority to the existential world in a selfless manner without reservation or expectation of reciprocation. In the ideal world, the world in which ego plays no part, this form of ethical behavior would seem to come naturally. It is, however, a fact that we do not live in a Utopian society. Quite the contrary, the world in which we live is anything but ideal; it is a world in which everything depends on everything, where things are messy and outside of measurable probabilies, quite unpredictable.

Let’s say that you agree with the idea of ethical response-ability, that your intent is to live according to the principles of ethical response-ability and you make yourself available to the other by announcing “Here I AM!” thereby achieving a state of proximity. Now you wait for the call of the other, the cry of response to your “Here I AM!” which, in turn, obligates you to action. It is precisely here where the rubber meets the road. Just what happens when you receive the call, the cry of response? Imagine you are walking in a park near a lagoon when you see someone splashing about in the lagoon crying out for help. You just heard the cry of response to your ethical announcement obligating you to jump into action. Because we do not live in a Utopian world a certain calculus begins to churn in your head. Is there someone closer than I am that can help? I am dressed in my best clothes and on my way to an important meeting? Can I swim well enough to help the person in distress? Am I trained to help the person in distress? What if the person in distress is a criminal attempting to evade capture? Is there an alternative to swimming out to provide aid to the person in distress, a life saving ring, boat, or pole I can use to offer assistance?

Each of the questions above turns the very idea of ethical response-ability on its head. Each question begins with exteriority and turns inward toward the interiority of self rather than beginning with the interiority of self and turning outward to exteriority. The questions are all geared toward notions of ego and self-preservation rather than a selfless act of providing for the benefit of the other (in need) raising the question of whether or not ethical response-ability is, in fact, even possible in a world in which ego and self-preservation are valued over self-sacrifice.

Other questions are also raised in a world in which uncertainty is the norm. Let’s say you were walking by a lagoon and you saw a baby flailing in the water. Without your assistance that baby would surely die. You save the baby however twenty years later that baby takes an AK 47 with several 100 round magazines to a school and murders 50 second and third grade students along with ten of their teachers. Did you do act ethically in saving the baby or would the ethical thing be to allow that baby to drown thereby saving sixty lives? While this is a different question than earlier posed, the problem remains. Is ethical behavior on the part of the self dependent on future bad acts of the other? If this were the case, would any act of ethical response-ability be appropriate?

The point of this post is that in an uncertain world, the very idea of Utopian ethical response-ability may be impossible. On the other hand, there is absolutely no reason that one cannot aspire to the ideals contained within the very standards of response-ability.

The Very Idea of Giving a Gift is Impossible?

If there is a gift, the given of the gift (that which one gives, that which is given, the gift as given thing or as act of donation) must not come back to the giving (let us not already say to the subject, to the donor). It must not circulate, it must not be exchanged, it must not in any case be exhausted, as a gift, by the process of exchange, by the movement of circulation of the circle in the form of return to the point of departure.
Jacques Derrida, Given Time: I. Counterfeit Money (emphasis in original)

The Very Idea of Giving a Gift is Impossible?

The Very Idea of Giving a Gift is Impossible?

Giving of gifts is one of those taken-for-granteds that most of us never think about the implications or consequences of gifting. What if, however, giving of gifts were an expression of ethical behavior? What if gifting were a selfless act of response-ability? Ethical response-ability requires one to become available, to announce one’s presence, one’s availability to be of service to the other. Furthermore, it requires one to become available without any expectation of reciprocation on the part of the other. Ethical response-ability is a one-way street, it is the giving of the self for the welfare of the other after announcing availability and waiting for the cry of the other. Ethical response-ability is initiated by the self but only so far as to announce availability. There it stops, waiting in proximate space for the cry of the other to interrupt the proximate space, tearing the fabric of complacency by requiring a response. Then and only then must the proximate self act for the welfare of the other. Ethical response-ability is not in the business of offering assistance when or where it is not wanted. It only responds it does not initiate.

When I give a gift, when I am the giver, what are my expectations? Do I give the gift freely without expectations of reciprocation or does my gift signal the fact that I expect something in return? If I am giving in order to get, if, in other words, I have clear expectations of reciprocation, then it is difficult to classify my gift as a gift; it is more akin to a bribe, inducement or incentive. When a gift is given in order to secure cooperation on the other end, clearly the gift initiates a circle of giving and receiving that can only be classified as self-serving. While one may call this gifting, because it requires action by the other in order to complete the circle, it may better be classified as a quasi-contract spilling out into the realm of economics rather than ethics. Think about how many times you have looked at a holiday list of giving and decided not to send a gift to someone because they didn’t send you a gift last year or the year before. This kind of gifting, I’ll send you a gift if you’ll send me one of equal or greater value, fails the test of ethical behavior. Think about how many times you have given a gift to someone with the thought, “If I give this gift I’ll surely get back far more in return?”

If, on the other hand, my expectations are such that I have none, that I have given a gift without any expectation of reciprocation, then my gift may fall into the category of ethical response-ability. It is rare that one can give a gift without any expectations. If I give a donation to my local symphony orchestra they will give me a set of gifts in return. This gift, while altruistic, comes with reciprocation built into the contract. Even if I give this gift anonymously, so that my name is not listed in the program giving the impression that I want nothing in return, not even recognition, the gift came with baggage that can only be classed as reciprocation and is, therefore, not a gift but a contract; I’ll give you this and you’ll give me that in return.

Random acts of kindness, acts that require no reciprocation, such as holding the door open for a stranger, come close to the true sense of a gift but often fail when there is an inner (or outer) set of doors and the stranger then holds the door open for you. No, the only true gift is the one that announces “Here I AM!” and then waits for the cry of the other so that one can act response-ably for the benefit of the other. The very idea of giving a gift is impossible except when one selflessly makes oneself available to be of service to another in need.

Henri Bergson and the Phenomenological Nature of Time

The more we study the nature of time, the more we shall comprehend that duration means invention, the creation of forms, the continual elaboration of the absolutely new.
Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution p. 7

Henri Bergson and the Phenomenological Nature of Time

Henri Bergson and the Phenomenological Nature of Time

Is Bergson on to something here? What exactly does “duration means invention” mean? What does the creation of forms have to do with the perception of time? Finally, what can Bergson imply when he speaks of the “continual elaboration of the absolutely new?” If one also understands Bergson’s earlier comment that “duration [of time] coincides with my impatience” and that the consideration of time is “no longer something thought, it is something lived, then we may be able to make some sense of this phenomenological approach to time in a rational sense.

The idea that the measure of time, the duration of any given event in linear time is directly related to the impatience of the observer is a profound insight. How many times have you been in a situation in which you kept looking at your watch, time seemingly creeping along at a snail’s pace while other times things seem to fly by so fast that time itself is no longer an issue and you find no need to take a peek at your watch. Engaged behavior occurs in the absolute now while disengaged behavior, while still taking place in the now, occurs in the relative now because the end is elusive. It is here where the invention of duration is activated. When fully engaged, when concentration is at its peak, actions are deeply embedded in the now; time seems to stop and duration is not an issue. There is a Talmudic story about several sages at B’nai B’rak who spent all night discussing the Exodus from Egypt until one of their students interrupted reminding them that it was time for Morning Prayers. Here the passage of time made no difference and a reminder of an obligation had to be issued to close the productive discussion. Those times when time stands still, however, when things move so slowly that the clock never seems to advance, that is a wholly different story. Here one’s impatience dictates the speed of advancement of the clock, the duration of the activity, the scope of the project. In the former, time is a lived-experience while in the latter it is something thought and not lived.

When Bergson references the idea of the “continual elaboration of the absolutely new” he is, I think, arguing that the absolute duration of time is not only infinitely brief but that it is something never to be repeated in the experience of the individual. Furthermore, every unique individual experiences the same relative duration of time in his or her own unique manner. In short, each moment is unique for each being to be experienced in one’s own way as something new. This view of time is not unlike the post-modern view that the only experience that qualifies as existence is this very moment, the moment which is always already gone, never to be recovered except as an incomplete trace. And so we come to the idea of the “creation of forms.”

It is possible to understand Bergson’s notion of the “creation of forms” as being similar to the idea of laying down of traces serving as memory engrams, recalled nostalgically to create a past and even to project a future (although the idea of projecting goals is similar to the trace of memory it is likely to be mechanically different). As we invent duration, live our experiences, our absolutely new and unique experiences, we are creating traces or forms that allow us to understand time as linear and history as ‘real’ because we can recall a part of what occurred. Our recall, however, isn’t as focused as the experience itself, rather it is idealized to conform to the underlying story predicted by the prior laying down of traces, reminders of our lived-experience.

While Bergson seems to apply a teleological foundation to his ideas about time, the ideas are more attuned to a randomly constructed universe with no particular purpose in mind. These ideas work just as well, in fact even better, when teleology is removed from the equation. What is important to note, however, is that Bergson’s ideas are flexible enough to provide a base for understanding a non-teleological ethics based on responsibility for the other and embracing the absolute uniqueness of the other.

Infusions, Doctors and Life Generally

Infusions, Doctors and Life Generally

Infusions, Doctors and Life Generally

As I was sitting in the very comfortable reclining chair getting hooked up for my sixth infusion of antibiotics to deal with the  resistant echoli strain that has seen fit to invade my body, I was struck by the idea that since my cancer diagnosis, surgery, and recovery period, I have slowed down. Now slowing down is a good thing. It began when I took off my watch forcing me to be less concerned with time in general. While the act of refusal to recognize time as a constraint was difficult at first, it has become a blessing. To not feel the urgency of time makes the time I have more precious; something akin to a gift from myself to myself. At the same time, I have not lost my appetite for punctuality. This may seem a contradiction but I think it is not. When everything is run by the clock then punctuality is an obsession but when I take the time to just take in what is there, punctuality becomes an ethical act; an act of respect for the other whether the other is driven by the clock or not.

So sitting in that chair, talking to Cynthia, the nurse administering the antibiotic, I noticed all of the surroundings, the pictures on the wall, the clock with the broken second hand, the smell and taste of the antibiotic as it drips into my veins. In the moment of that half hour of dripping solutions I was at one with the universe.

Since taking off the watch six or so months ago the world seems to spin at a slower pace. Of course it isn’t the case but the fact that I take the time to notice things I didn’t have the time to notice before is a bonus that was totally unexpected. I hear the voices of doctors as they try to figure out what is going on with me and find the urgency of one doc countered by the patience of another as they look at the results of the data. One doc looks at a number and nearly panics while the other looking at the same numbers takes the approach of waiting to see how the whole picture develops before striking out with a treatment plan. I think that one should never treat a number, rather one should look at the whole picture and treat the cause of the abnormal data that emerges over time. Jumping in without all the facts is as dangerous as denial of the emerging data. While one cannot be absolutely certain when incomplete data is present, one cannot allow oneself to be driven by the presence of a single abnormal number either. That too is an insight I learned after taking off my watch and allowed myself the luxury of observation.

As an aside, I found it interesting that even with the PICC line inserted I had to be stuck to draw blood in my internist’s office. What a waste of a good PICC line. When in the infusion center blood was also drawn and the same blood numbers will be analyzed. Why twice? Could it be profits are involved?

 

Yes, A Week for Medical Concerns: Dealing with the Aftermath of Cancer and More

Yes, A Week for Medical Concerns: Dealing with the Aftermath of Cancer and More

Yes, A Week for Medical Concerns: Dealing with the Aftermath of Cancer and More

In the next ten days, starting today when I visit my internist and oncologist back to back, I begin a ten-day period of rather intense medical review. While I expect to find things right on schedule, one never knows. My internist drew blood last week in preparation for this morning’s visit. Leaving his office, right around the corner from Starbucks, I went to read and enjoy a cup of coffee. While sitting in Starbucks, I began to notice some significant back pain along with gripping groin pain. It took a few moments, but it soon became clear that I was passing a kidney stone. As if I didn’t have enough urological problems, I then noticed that I was running a fever of around 101 degrees. Yikes, now I am getting sick as well. Just what I needed. Since the symptoms weren’t getting any better, last Friday I went to my internist complaining of cloudy urine and this on again off again fever. He prescribed an antibiotic, one I had never taken before and said I should keep the Monday appointment as a follow-up as well as one in which we would address any number of issues. By Saturday, I couldn’t stay away from the bathroom and I had developed a bright red, blotchy rash all over my body. I stopped taking the antibiotic on Sunday. It is now Monday morning and I still have bowel trouble but at least it is not constant and urgent.

Soon after I post this I will be on my way to Starbucks once again in preparation for my trip to the internist’s office. As soon as I finish with him I must go to the oncologist for an infusion of iron as my system simply refuses to ingest iron from any source whatsoever. This means a bag of the dirtiest looking rust water (I know it is not but that is exactly what it looks like) will be introduced into my veins and allowed to course through my system adding iron to my blood stream.

Finally, I get to see the urologist who replaces the urologist who treated me for the past fifteen years. He took a new position and so I am left to see if I like his understudy or not. I am actually feeling a bit uncomfortable about this change but my old urologist swears that this new doc is even more affable than he is and that he would send his own brother to him which, I suppose, is a strong recommendation. Time will tell whether I like this new guy and whether he will become my urologist of choice or will I have to shop for someone else? Tick tock tick tock!

Other than that, not much is new on my medical front. The kidney stone pain has subsided which may only mean that the stone is not moving about or it could be that the stone has passed. My fever is gone but there again, on only two days of antibiotic it may return. I think I’ll suggest to my internest that he stick with antibiotics that we know I have absolutely no allergic response to and take it from there. I nervously await the PSA results of my blood test, he also tested for testosterone levels but I don’t know why. I think I’ll ask. May post later with some news about the test results. If not, I’ll surely post tomorrow.

Of All the Rotten Luck…

Of All the Rotten Luck...

Of All the Rotten Luck…

Yes, that’s right, of all the rotten luck. Just a few days after my wife recovered from her very strange virus, the one having an effect on her knees, back and causing a significant and constant headache, I come down with some strange virus that has mimicked a kidney stone, caused incredible lower back pain, upper back pain, neck and shoulder pain along with some violent gastro-intestinal pain that, for the sake of decency, I won’t mention here. While those painful episodes are all giving up the ghost, the ones that still remain are related to the lower back and the GI system. Yuck, doesn’t this stuff ever go away.

Of course, there is a good side to all of this agony. I have had a great deal of time to devote to reading new texts, something I simply love to do because with everything I read I am better informed, have more at my fingertips to make responsible decisions about the very things that make a difference to me in my life. Sometimes, a book presents an argument that is, on its face, difficult to accept as being factual or well researched, sometimes arguments are forced and difficult to follow (always a danger sign of a dogmatic mind) and other times an argument seems so well situated in data that if the data being relied upon is true (often not the case) the argument is actually persuasive.

I am currently reading a monograph by Jacob Neusner, the famous scholar of Jewish Antiquity and ancient texts, as he approaches the historicity of the Jewish and Christian schism in the third and fourth centuries CE (the 100 t0 150 years post Constantine). Neusner never fails to surprise as he demonstrates through “what he knows” or, in other words, what can be supported by extant evidence and not by theological intervention on an otherwise fluid context of historical conditions, the shifting winds that brought Christianity to the gates of triumphalism while relegating Judaism to the posture of a utopian dreamscape waiting for the coming of the Messiah, while Christians ardently awaited the return of the Messiah in order that he complete his mission. Neusner claims that both Christians and Jews understood the Messiah and his coming in the same terms, based on the same biblical and post biblical texts varying only in the application of the lessons learned from those texts. An interesting proposition from the man who elsewhere argues that the Jewish Hillel and the Christian Jesus were one in the same human being expropriated theologically to serve specific needs outside of the historicity of the man extant.

As time passes, I hope to expand on these ideas on a regular basis. I just hope I can keep it together long enough to make a coherent thought.

Understanding Tragedy: Thinking in Jewish XVIII

Understanding Tragedy: Thinking in Jewish XVIII

Understanding Tragedy: Thinking in Jewish XVIII

Bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people. Yes, it is true but it has absolutely nothing to do with teleological purpose, punishment or reward for behavior deemed to be unclean, unspiritual or unworthy or, in the case of rewards, the precise opposite. To believe that creation is purposeful, that some deity has a plan for me and you, that it is in our best interest to keep this deity appeased or it may not rain, crops might not grow, rivers might turn to blood and hail, tornados and hurricanes (not to mention earthquakes, volcano eruptions and tsunamis) is, to my mind, an exercise in wishful thinking. Oh, perhaps it was important in late antiquity to try to answer the mysteries that presented themselves but there is little reason to ponder the very existence of a God that plans for each and every outcome as a part of the grand teleological plan for creation (and extinction). Since Darwin, who showed how natural selection (not the survival of the fittest which is a term that may be applied to Herbert Spencer and Social Darwinism) follows random genetic mutations that help insure the survival of a species or, perhaps, the demise of that species altogether, teleological arguments fall in the ranks of mythology and fairy tales without evidence other than the evidence of the recursive nature of its own writings of the foundational truth contained within the mythology.

The universe is, it seems, a very large random number generator. Things happen randomly. These things become part of a larger and ever changing historical narrative, one that has little staying power as interests and contexts shift quite rapidly. Underlying the idea of randomness is the closely related notions of isolated, almost solipsistic, existential experience of the life of the self and the random social network that begins with the dyad of self and other, two unique beings that interact for a while and then part; each leaving a trace behind that is both self and other. These encounters, even among close friends and lovers are random in their occurrence and yet, in some cases may be quite predictable as well (by force of habit rather than by chance meeting; say I have dinner with my wife at 6:00 PM every night except when we have other plans, the meal didn’t get cooked, the stove went on the fritz, the dogs ate the chicken before it got to the table…and so on).

The very fact that you or I am present in the world is the outcome of a single sperm out of millions of potential sperms penetrated a single ova to produce each unique other and the unique self is the beginning of the ontogenesis of the self or the other; an entirely random outcome, one that is based on the probability of connection produces a unique being at birth. On the other hand, the wanton destruction of human beings during the Shoah (Holocaust for those who chose the Greek) by Germans with the aid of Poles and Lithuanians seems to mitigate against the idea of a God with a plan. If the plan was to kill six million Jews then this God is a sadist and not worthy of adoration. If this God with a plan was horrified by the escalation of the murderous mania of the German bureaucracy and didn’t intervent to stop it then this God with a plan is simply weak and not worthy of adoration. If this God with a plan was horrified by the murdering and was unable to stop it then this God with a plan is impotent and unworthy of adoration. We can say that today because there is so much evidence pointing directly to the very randomness of the exercise of free will; the intentional actions that human beings follow that are brought on by both the convergence of time and space at this very moment and the intention to act within that time and space to insure the survival of the planet until such time as the sun explodes into a red giant engulfing the orbiting earth turning it into a crispy rock where no life survives as we know life.

Post Navigation

Attila Ovari

Loving Life and Inspiring Others

celebratequotes

This WordPress.com site is the cat’s pajamas

cancer killing recipe

Just another WordPress.com site

THE RIVER WALK

Daily Thoughts and Meditations as we journey together with our Lord.

sanslartigue

The silent camera

alesiablogs

A Blog About Ordinary Life Told In Extraordinary Fashion!

biljanazovkic

the beauty of words and colors

who is the God of heaven ? the jesus I never knew.

life is not a rehersal,so live it...if you cant be the poet, be the poem.

Hebrew Hutong

(Almost) Jewish in Beijing and California

NIKOtheOrb

A weirdo unleashed. . .riding the spiral to the end.

Screwy Lew's Views

An egotistical flight of fancy into the random ramblings of a semi-demented mind.

Rabbi Danny Burkeman Online

An English Rabbi in New York

Gooseyanne's Blog

The everday ramblings of Anne and her Goose

Exploring Torah and Genetics

A college student's exploration of the interplay between genetics and Torah.

FEC-THis

Life after a tango with death & its best friend cancer

JUMP FOR JOY! Photo Project

Capturing the beauty of the human spirit -- in mid-air -- around the world

%d bloggers like this: