Ninja Turtles, Censorship and Nunchaku

the latest incarnation of the 'mutant turtle ninja teenagers'

So the latest version of the Teenage Mutant Ninja/Hero Turtles is now in box offices and they have a new CG gritty look (Warning: I have not seen the new film, nor plan on going to the theatre, and this in not a review) and like all new superhero/comic movie adaptations there are tons of grey landscapes done on blue screens. Anyway I am no movie production critic (maybe a movie narrative critic) and so my main concern today is to discuss a matter related to these dudes-censorship. We need to back up a bit though-like to Plato's Republic.

The Republic is the 'ideal city' in the philosophy of Plato and perhaps his most well know work and contains the famous 'cave analogy' among others. Part of the perfect city involves a (some would argue) totalitarian regime and deliberate censorship of certain arts. The most famous was the banning of flutes, and Aristotle in his work of Politics notes a sign of cultural decline when 'legislators' allowed the flute back into the public education. Flutes caused people to get excited and so better ban them! :) Flutes were only good for war and the Olympics!

Fast forward to the 1980's in the North America and the UK where the is a new conservative political stranglehold over the arts again. BUT this time it effected me. You see when I was very young I was into superheros and ninja's.  The 'ninja film' (well the US incarnation of ninja films) was in full effect.  There had already been ninja art "booms" in Japan in the 1930, and 50's and was a major source of children's books and entertainment- and spread to North American originally through James Bond novels and the film You Only Live Twice) . 

(side note: The documentary from 2006 THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED covers lots in interesting ideas around how and why films get certain rating and how any explicit lesbians love scenes would be considered x-rated while some PG-13 movies had murders and violence in spades, but that is a separate article. BUT IT IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE CULTURAL ENGINEERING PUZZLE. Anyway back to ninja movies.)

In 1988 my family moved from Canada to the UK where my "mum" was from. The original Laird and whatever his name was  "teenage mutant ninja turtles" were at the time still part of 'geek comic culture' and had not yet been completely pillaged and were pretty gritty and a very cool idea at the time. 

this original sketch sold at auction for like a bunch of money recently 

This was lightyears before MARVEL sold off all the right to its world and Mutants were all over the box office and Prof X became a household name.

Captain Jean Luc Xavier 

The original 'medium' for the Turtles was graphic novels and they were awesome to say the least.

Anywack lets get back to "me" ;) and the point of my story. While Nancy Reagan was teaching everyone that all drugs were equal and they were all hand made by the devil- the UK took the craziness a step further and decided that in order to make England safe (in a land where you can easily get crushed and killed at a 'football' match and where the food needs to be burned to carcinogenic levels to be considered cooked) they decided to ban a word- guess what word "NINJA". not kidding and I wish I was because I had to live in this crazy irrational culture for a few years. The ban was part of the "video nasty's" campaign that decided to ban movies like the EXORCIST as 'too bad for society'. So not only did they already have all guns banned in the UK, all martial arts weapons  needed to be banned as well and then one person really earning their censorship pay check decided "you know what lets extend the ban into the fantasy world- that should really teach those pesky kids NOT to imagine anything and follow the rules blindly right". SO here are some of the things that came out of that brilliant idea.
1. TEENAGE MUTANT HERO TURTLES; yes they actually changed the name from ninja to hero (not synonyms for the record). and here is proof from a video game cover from Konami as released in the UK.

2. It gets better now, because the Japanese Nunchaku or "NUM-CHUKS" as they are normally called are so difficult to make just like this video demonstrates, like a kid could not just make them in 5 minutes (holy shit is my sarcasm dripping out of the screen yet)

HOW TO MAKE "NUMCHUKS" they decided that it would be best to 'remove' them from reality completely!!!!! Well at least as far as they could not even be featured in a fantasy movie, like they were more dangerous then a time machine or ray gun. So the 'num-chuks' were removed and Michelangelo was given a grapple hook???? This scene "proves" he used numchuks in the original :) 

Anyway it gets even better because in TMNT 2 the secret of the Ooze a scene was deleted when Mike is swinging pepperoni in a 'numchucky way' -I know people were getting paid to make these decisions and probably even patted themselves on the back for 'improving society" FFS!

COMBAT COLDCUTS- do you think the carcinogenic preservatives or the 'numchukness' was worse??

AND the icing on the cake.

Do you know why nunchaku became so popular??? One name: BRUCE LEE!

Bruce Lee was no traditionalist and that is why he is using a Japanese weapon "the nunchaku" and they looked awesome on camera. It was also 'not' a Japanese ninja weapon, there are very few distinct 'ninja weapons' in fact and is a modified farming tool much like the traditional Okinawa Sai and Kama. Legendary Dan Inosanto was said to introduce them to Bruce. 

BUT LOOK AT THIS from the IMDB (movie database) on alternative versions of 'THE GAME OF DEATH".

"All footage of nunchaku was removed from the UK cinema version (which also meant substantially re-editing the closing credits), and video versions received a further 2 secs of cuts to remove a closeup shot of a back-break. The cuts were fully restored for the 2001 Hong Kong Legends release though the 2005 Universal DVD featured the heavily cut video version."

I remember vaguely Bruce using a stupid looking baton-like stick and I think that was what they 'altered' the nunchaku with as seen here. 

Anyway,  I am done writing for now, there are tons of directions this can go and I will leave it at that! 

Cytomel, Ray Peat and Fitness

hey reader read this: I am not a medical doctor so don;t pay attention to anything I say about this stuff, go and ask your doctor if you have real health concerns, this is just for fun :) 

"got any fat friends?" was the question a "gym guy" once asked me years ago as he produced a bottle of these out of a gym bag. He was asking because he was looking to sell some "thyroid" pills - since it could supposedly help drop weight fast. At the time all I "knew" was that if you ever took Thyroid, it may get you shredded but you would be hooked on it for life (not true but  that was the thinking at the time). This was back in the day when most underground physique drugs were either domestic or international "real" pharmaceuticals unlike the majority of drugs today which come from China in powders and any fraternity can buy a capsule making machine or mix some vegetable oil with it or alcohol and set up an 'underground lab' and sell stuff on the internet with  a home label making machine. Safe sounding isn't it? 

So now when you buy internet T3 or T4 it comes in a dropper bottle, made who knows where by who knows who, and says "not for human consumption." 

I mean unless you have a prescription for it but even if you did here in Canada the best that you will get is T4 (thyroxine) the boring stuff, since the HOT T3 stuff (triiodothyronine) is not actually even available in Canada by prescription?? Does that make ANY sense???? The US has tons of it for everyone though :) 

But the internet changed all kinds of stuff, including how people buy and sell drugs. :) Silk Road anyone? :) 

BUT I DIGRESS: back to how thyroid relates to fitness.

For the average person, they have heard that Billy is overweight because of a "gland problem" and that gland they mean is the thyroid gland my friends. 

For the average gym rat, thyroid is something not considered that much, and people still like to do cardio for fat loss and weights for muscles. The one thing they know is that thyroid is linked to that magical thing 'the metabolism' which is given to each person by a Greek god before birth to determine how happy they will be with their waistline. So that is why Sally is always so skinny- she was born with a "good" metabolism. 

In competitive bodybuilding thyroid (mainly T3) is used for fat loss during contest prep but it is very possible for it to work too well and eat away a bunch of muscle and LBM at the same time and so many guys only stack it will other drugs. However some forums will say that all ones needs is T3 to get shredded. 

But it is used because one thing bodybuilders know/knew a long time before the mainstream public was that our body runs on a few powerful hormones and by increasing and decreasing them with pills, injections and creams, one can radically alter body composition. Think testosterone, think insulin, think IGF1, and thyroid falls right in line here. 

if wondering what "shredded means" see picture above

The Thyroid gland (some people call it the throat chakra which relates to personal expression from Hinda philosophy ) is a "butterfly" shaped gland in the throat. Some of the disorders people have are hyper (too fast) and hypo(too slow) thyroid. When a thyroid is slow, the metabolism is slow and weight loss is much harder and gain much easier due to a slowing of caloric metabolism. 

So when people want to speed up the metabolism, some turn to thyroid supplements and drugs. Many OTC supplements in fact contain real thyroid, like many supplements contain pharmaceuticals off label (one famous pre workout drink had prescription blood thinners in it according to a Health Canada report) but some people simply get a thyroid test and get a script. 

Anyway IF thyroid health can have positive effects on body composition for people who struggle to stay lean- what can one do to keep it healthy? 

Well my new favourite 'food dude' is Ray Peat since he is cynical and smart enough to make me think about stuff again! 

my new favourite 'food dude'-like to meet him someday RAY PEAT! 

He is big on promoting thyroid health and I have even read people criticize him because he recommends T3 ALOT. But I am keeping an open mind to his brilliant ideas. 

And so without just repeating everything he said I am linking a great article for other people looking to learn more. 

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/thyroid.shtml

ps: Peat diet spoiler: lots of OJ and Homo Milk, raw carrot, lamb or beef once a day, some cheese, salt and vitamin E + some T3 for good measure! :) oh yeah and relax and buy a red light bulb! 

Live like a wrestler: the care of the self

"Live like a wrestler" -Socrates

This guy actually had a website full of social philosophy! Who knew? RIP

"Live like a wrestler, what did Andrew just say?? I thought he advocated a health based lifestyle maximizing both the body and the mind???  So now he wants me to live hard and die young like the Ultimate Warrior??? Has Andrew finally lost it like Nietzsche?

On a serious note, being able to define "govern-mentality" is what divides the real Fitness Philosopher from all the copy cats! Seriously I went to school for an extra 15 years to know this stuff! 

The 1960, 70’s and 80's saw a massive wave of personal development psychologies and movements. My father was an educational psychologist and so I grew up with all these psychology books.

"Cocaine fuelled my books! Good luck matching my writing with coffee, suckers!" -Freud (total ectomorph) 

In the late 1970’s at Berkeley, Michel Foucault gave a series of lectures focused on the modern ‘culture of the self’. The ‘care of the self’ idea is one of actualizing the human potential. Foucault’s main thesis of these discussions was the recognition that the ‘care of the self’ was not a modern invention as conventionally understood. Most people (but not philosophers of course) attributed the modern quest for self-development and self actualization to be based in rather new "sciences" like the psychological: found in Maslow or Freud. And the pop culture versions like Dale Carnegie.

Michel Foucault argued that the “care of the self” could be traced back to Greek philosophy, to Socrates and specifically to the Platonic dialogue, Alcibiades. 

The care of the self: what is it? 

The idea that a human being needs to continually work on creating the best possible self relates to how a young man in Athens needed proper formation for a life in politics. In the dialogue, Alcibiades thinks that he is ready for a life of politics but Socrates warns him that he is not yet ready. Alcibiades needs a wise master, such as Socrates, in order to learn how to properly think and act. The proper instruction on the care of the self is an essential pre-requisite to political life, since good leaders are born of παιδεία and habit and not by nature alone. 

Socrates advises Alcibiades to care for himself, in the same way that a wrestler must maintain conditioning even after combat has subsided. 

The Neo-Platonists considered Alcibiades to be the first dialogue one would read to prepare one for philosophy. This dialogue was said to open the reader to the idea of the care of the self though Socrates insistence that Alcibiades is still in need of cultivation. 

The German term, ‘Bildung’ derives from the Greek paideia and posits a ‘pure self’ buried beneath the bad habits and irrational beliefs of the average human being. This pure self is for the Neo-Platonists the ‘image of god’ within each human being and derives from the Pythagoreans.

---

A fitness lifestyle, like how I teach people, is ultimately about the care of the self. One can see it in deep metaphysical ways, or not so much, just focussing on getting those 'abs' or 'getting stronger. 

Live like a wrestler! 

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

 I am now starting to take online clients as I get close to finishing my PhD! Please email freedomfitness7@gmail.com if you want to work with the original Fitness Philosopher, Andrew J Cutler. 

My approach is a lifestyle that balances workouts with proper rest, and tasty diet and geared willing to put in some effort! I have been training people for over 15 years and so my 'practical experience' can make this fun as well! If you are interested in learning or being tutored in Philosophy: ethics, history, politics, philosophical anthropology or metaphysics, well we can do that too! :) 

Thomas Jefferson loved to smoke hemp but thought Plato was a joke

 I first got into the 'philosophy of fitness' was when I was working on my MA Thesis in phenomenology and 'the philosophy of the body'. This lead me to thinkers like Heidegger who led me back to Aristotle and classical Greece and that is the area of philosophy I focus on these days. However, my appreciation for classical philosophy also includes the work of Epicurus and how the US Founding Fathers, such as Jefferson were really Epicureans and not Christians or neo-Platonists. 

Check out this amazing letter from Jefferson to John Adams! He was also eons ahead with his advocacy of hemp for both practical and theoretical uses!

Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, July 5, 1814:

I am just returned from one of my long absences, having been at my other home for five weeks past. Having more leisure there than here for reading, I amused myself with reading seriously Plato’s Republic. I am wrong, however, in calling it amusement, for it was the heaviest task-work I ever went through. I had occasionally before taken up some of his other works, but scarcely ever had patience to go through a whole dialogue. While wading through the whimsies, the puerilities, and unintelligible jargon of this work, I laid it down often to ask myself how it could have been, that the world should have so long consented to give reputation to such nonsense as this? How the soi-disant Christian world, indeed, should have done it, is a piece of historical curiosity. But how could the Roman good sense do it? And particularly, how could Cicero bestow such eulogies on Plato! Although Cicero did not wield the dense logic of Demosthenes, yet he was able, learned, laborious, practised in the business of the world, and honest. He could not be the dupe of mere style, of which he was himself the first master in the world. With the moderns, I think, it is rather a matter of fashion and authority. Education is chiefly in the hands of persons who, from their profession, have an interest in the reputation and the dreams of Plato. They give the tone while at school, and few in their after years have occasion to revise their college opinions. But fashion and authority apart, and bringing Plato to the test of reason, take from him his sophisms, futilities and incomprehensibilities, and what remains? In truth, he is one of the race of genuine sophists, who has escaped the oblivion of his brethren, first, by the elegance of his diction, but chiefly, by the adoption and incorporation of his whimsies into the body of artificial Christianity. His foggy mind is forever presenting the semblances of objects which, half seen through a mist, can be defined neither in form nor dimensions. Yet this, which should have consigned him to early oblivion, really procured him immortality of fame and reverence.

The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ levelled to every understanding, and too plain to need explanation, saw in the mysticism of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system, which might, from its indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power and pre-eminence. The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus himself are within the comprehension of a child; but thousands of volumes have not yet explained the Platonisms engrafted on them; and for this obvious reason, that nonsense can never be explained. Their purposes, however, are answered. Plato is canonized; and it is now deemed as impious to question his merits as those of an Apostle of Jesus. He is peculiarly appealed to as an advocate of the immortality of the soul; and yet I will venture to say, that were there no better arguments than his in proof of it, not a man in the world would believe it. It is fortunate for us, that Platonic republicanism has not obtained the same favor as Platonic Christianity; or we should now have been all living, men, women and children, pell mell together, like beasts of the field or forest. Yet “Plato is a great philosopher,” said La Fontaine. But, says Fontenelle, “Do you find his ideas very clear?” “Oh no! he is of an obscurity impenetrable.” “Do you not find him full of contradictions?” “Certainly,” replied La Fontaine, “he is but a sophist.” Yet immediately after he exclaims again, “Oh, Plato was a great philosopher.” Socrates had reason, indeed, to complain of the misrepresentations of Plato; for in truth, his dialogues are libels on Socrates.

FREE WILL?

In Philosophy there are a considerable number of problems (and I do not mean the problems of being  dominated by sexist men or analytic philosophy) but instead there is a HISTORY of problems that take on new forms in various epochs. FREE WILL is one of the big ones!

But the Harris - Dennett debate is a little different. They are both determinists and so it is not as simple as discussing 'freedom' in the broad sense. For example, what they are not arguing over is whether we make existential choices in the world, or if we are predestined like Calvinism claims. 

Because they are both 'determinists' are they are not really arguing over if man is free from the deterministic nature. They are arguing over 'moral responsibility' and how and when and if someone should be accountable. 

They both say something like "since the big bang, stuff has been happening in a chain reaction, and you are part of that chain reaction, so do not think when you pick your nose that you actually choose to do that, it was just another billiard ball banging into another" This is what science can tell us. 

But many philosophers have gone further and denied our radical freedom to do 'whatever we want'  like the existentialists tell us we are thrown into the world with being asked (Heidegger) or how we are part of a huge socio-economic order in which we are slaves (Marx) or how only with the rise of modern liberalism do we even have the idea of an 'individual who thinks for himself" (Foucault) which comes out of empirical philosophy, (like John Locke and David Hume)  and was needed to push the economic philosophies of capitalism and free market competition at the time. To make everyone see themselves a lone ship- and Adam Smiths "a high tide raises all ships' meant that everyone would do well in a "competitive" marketplace that created the conditions for profits.That is why today we have a huge class of "working poor people" BUT, BUT, BUT corporations now have RIGHTS! In case you did not know, corporations have the same rights as you! Are they free to choose? I guess that depends on how you define "are" "they" "free" "to" "choose"? Since Dennett seems to agree with Harris - were not for the semantics they both choose. 

Finally, (and I suspect Harris finds some inspiration here) is the Buddhist idea of 'no self" (very similar to David Hume's ideas on the self)  and the idea that we are all 'robots' going through motions set up by lots of different factors. So Buddhists as questions like "what was your face before you were born" or "show me the REAL you -inside you" which can be interpreted to mean they are pointing at a type of "eliminative materialism" like Dennett and Harris suggests. This form of ontology sees the human being as a type of 'empirical shell' and it is kinda cool concept. 

BUT the best explanation of 'eliminative materialism' is by Thomas M here and I find the idea a philosophically fascinating one. 

 Basically it says that a 'self' is just a collection of senses that exists only when you are conscious. So you 'self" turns on when you wake up, if you take away the body that generates the senses then you take away the self. SIMPLE. However they will go as far as to 'eliminate' any sense of '"you" which some people find silly. Many people like to counter this idea with the idea of 'qualia" or the qualitative aspects of you self- like what it feels like to be you, how beer tastes, how love feels and all the stuff that makes life "human". They think of eliminative materialists as lazy thinkers who cannot separate the mind of Bach from the behaviour of 'The Walking Dead' (pop culture reference -check) 

Definition of Determinism: the theory that everything in the cosmos is subject to 'causal laws' - and therefore it is a 'physicalist' theory. 

premise one: no action is free if it must occur 

premise two: for any event X there are antecedent causes that ensure the occurrence of X in accordance with mechanical causal laws. 

 conclusion: Therefore, no action is free. 

It is related to the mind-body problem because it denies the "mind" and only recognizes the body or the physical, measurable organism, as having causal influence. 

(but that is another debate for another day)

SO :

Dennett is a 'soft determinist' or a 'compatibilist' while Harris is a plain old 'determinist'.

This means:

Dennett thinks that we can have FREE WILL and DETERMINISM since they are psychological and political ideas and make no claim to 'metaphysics'. In classical Greece and Rome- this was the STOIC approach to the world. 

Harris thinks that there is only DETERMINISM and we do not choose. Using this logic, one should be able to predict all human behaviour like we can predict the weather- just watch and record and boom we know what you were about to think? (does this sound reasonable to you?) 

SO THIS IS the DEBATE- there is no clear answer, only arguments for each side. 

Personally I am not a determinist like Dennett and Harris and no one should think that the only rational option for an intelligent person today is to pick a side of their present debate. Perhaps one of the two will 'give in' to the other side or they may have a 'near death' experience and change their story altogether, it happens! 

However a SUPER SMART PHILOSOPHER - KANT objected DETERMINISM altogether a few hundred years ago. By basically saying:

• Persons are things, like rocks, and are subject to physical determinism. SO a rock or a person is pushed off a cliff and both fall down and not up. 
• But persons are also not like things because they are conscious of the operation of these laws and the rock has no awareness of these things happening. The rock does not understand gravity or wind resistance or east versus west, or who Einstein was. 
• When someone wonders, should I jump off that cliff- they are not working in cause and effect anymore, but rather REASONS. Like I put weights on my back and do squats because I have a REASON  and that is "a better QUAD sweep" and not because a star bumped into a bigger star and blew up 300,000,000,000 years ago. 

For me, I agree with Christopher Hitchens and others who think "we have no choice but to have free will" and in a sense I think this absorbs the deterministic aspects of humans, while recognizing that this same determinism gave us "intelligence and reflective consciousness" and that the 'game changes' when humans can rationally reflect on their behaviour and choose. HOWEVER the idea of knowledge equalling virtue does back to Socrates and I personally do not agree that it is so simple. I agree with Aristotle and a point I argue academically is that people are good or virtuous only after the proper EDUCATION. Or in simple terms:

Humans evolved under deterministic conditions, but consciousness is a new X factor in human choice. But this consciousness needs to be cultivated so that people choose the 'best' ways to react to situations. How we improve the human being and make them more compassionate and loving to other human beings outside their little circle of family and friends is a true challenge for humanity! I think debates like Harris and Dennett get people talking about this stuff and that is what is important, that people keep questions and working for positive change, even if it means challenging common wisdom and convention. 

 

Fitness is simple (maybe not easy)

My message going forward in 2014 is this! Fitness is simple (maybe not easy) but simple! 

FITNESS INFO NEEDS TO BE SIMPLE!

As the Fitness Philosopher I could be accused of being to "ivory tower' at times, but thanks to my recent research into Aristotle for my dissertation, I have come to the conclusion that the average person needs pragmatic and practical advice and does not benefit from too much high minded theory or 'arm chair speculation.' I am inspired by philosopher Peter Singer's work, he was a great Hegelian philosopher (the most speculative of philosophies) who turned to "applied ethics" and now most people know him as the "animal protection philosopher" and I think he is a wonderful human being and helps a lot more by his 'practical work'. Check out this awesome BBC segment from a recently deceased "intellectual Britain" ;)

So I am going "Back to Basics" with my fitness advice. Because at the end of the day, most people just need a moderate amount of exercise, and need not have it take over all aspects of one's life! Fitness should be a foundation for a good life, not the goal of it! 

Humans, as animals, like gorillas, have evolved to be capable of being 'very active' and so when we are 'very passive' we get fatter and slower (excessive calorie storage) and depressed (brain feels like dirty swamp rather then fast paced river). We are not plants, we need to move around, a lot. Simple. Not just human beings though, go to a Zoo and compare those animals with their wild counterparts. Kinda makes you sad.

So, if you sleep 8 hours, sit in a car to and from work, sit in desk at work or just walk around a bit, and then drive home to lay on the couch - then you certainly are not being 'active enough' . If you feel 'too' overweight (because the goal is not to be a underweight or too skinny either but FIT! ) or if you feel "blue" maybe it is resulting from your lifestyle. Remember, it is a lifestyle problem, not your own fault necessarily, but you are part of the problem if you do not work to improve it. WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT THINGS CAN BE BETTER WITH A LITTE EFFORT!

Survival of the Fattest (remember this 'punk' album?) 

SO what am I saying: 

Humans NEED to "move more" just to feel normal. If we do not we will get sick, and that takes various forms. If we want to feel 'extraordinary' we need to really work at it, but most people would benefit from just 'getting back to feeling normal.' :) 

Here are five tricks for beginners or veterans looking to get off the couch and re-claim their lives again!

1. Go for a 20 minute walk. Do not over think this one. Go outdoors and walk for 10 minutes then turn around and walk home! (Steady state cardio + tai chi equivalent now done!)
2. Try "couch squats". Stand in front of a couch and squat onto it, into a seated position and then back up again. This is like 'box squats" and in all my years teaching lifts, using a box or bench to squat just allows people the confidence to 'get those hips back" and sit properly. Start out with 2 sets of 12 reps and go from there. Over time try doing it with one leg! (lower body pushing exercise done!) 
3. Push ups! Do 3 sets of 5 slow push ups- when you think about it! Right now would be good.
4. Planks- try holding front and side planks for 30 seconds to start and move from there. 
5. Shadow boxing. Stand in front of a mirror (not too close ) and 'punch dance' to your hearts content! If you 'punch' the air for a minute or so you will be breathing hard and getting some excellent 'upper body based cardio'! Release your inner Rocky! 

why I do not promote Transcendental Meditation

The general fitness world is getting more excited about meditation, probably because you can sell "how to do it" easily on the internet.  Charles Poliquin, the Strength Sensei is now promoting TM and regretting not getting into it earlier. So while meditation and relaxation can be good, do we need a specific "brand name" form of meditation like TM is? I say certainly not!

Chuck- the Strength Sensei 

So this is where the fitness philosopher stands apart from the pseudo- philosophers on  the rise these days. All I am concerned with is telling you the Truth!

I have personally experimented with AND researched the theory behind many forms of meditation and mystical practices. AND I wrote a section in my masters thesis on meditation and its multiple forms and at the end of the day you get most of the benefits from taking naps and specifically the method has been summarized by the good dude, Dr. Herbert Benson as the "relaxation response".

http://www.relaxationresponse.org

http://www.relaxationresponse.org/steps/


In reality TM is an overrated "pyramid scheme" which sold "secret mantras" for thousands of dollars which were based only on your age (they never told people that). The Beatles brought it out and the founder died a billionaire in Holland with multiple Rolls Royces and "his helicoptor". Ask yourself, do I have a helicopter??? So save you money and take a cat nap or do the "relaxation response" exercise for FREE!

OR RATHER: "Meditation is the means for me to get rich off those damn Westerns whose ancestors invaded and colonized India-like Jon Lennon" 

My cat is named "YOGI" because he naturally does all the stuff people pay loads of money to learn these days! ;) BREATH, STRETCH, NAP,  SPRINT, EAT, REPEAT

Just a natural- Yogi my cat- napping and stretching are as natural as killing mice to him!  

To learn more about the "other side' of TM check out these links,

http://minet.org/Documents/TM-FAQ

http://www.skepdic.com/tm.html