Getting to know meditation (Part Two)

Meditation isn’t easily defined. To begin with, there are hundreds of techniques, but most practitioners fall into a few categories. On top stands mindfulness meditation (currently the fastest-growing), followed by mantra meditation (better known as Transcendental Meditation), Zen meditation, Vipassanā (insight) meditation, loving-kindness (Metta) meditation, yoga-based meditation and Christian contemplative prayer (see chart).

At what age do people begin? This varies by culture. In traditional cultures with strong Buddhist or Hindu traditions, many children are introduced before the age of 10, with formal training beginning in adolescence. In modern Western countries, people begin much later, between an individual’s 20s to 50s, which is the most common starting period. 

Often entering the practice is triggered by stress, illness, burnout, or a life transition. In the US, meditation users are disproportionately middle-aged adults. You can wonder if meditation usually become a lifetime practice and the answer is yes, at least traditionally. In Buddhist, Hindu, Taoist, and contemplative Christian traditions, meditation is generally viewed as a lifelong discipline, similar to physical exercise or prayer. 

However, modern secular meditation is different as many practitioners meditate for stress reduction and many quite once the immediate problem improves while others yet cycle in and out of practice. Research on meditation apps consistently finds that long-term adherence is difficult. There’s no single global figure, but dropout rates are high. Depending on the program, short mindfulness courses often lose from 20 to 50% of their participants before completion.

Meditation apps frequently lose the majority of users within a few months and only a minority maintain a daily practice for years. In the US, one large study showed that about 79% of people who had ever meditated had also practiced within the previous year, suggesting many continue at least intermittently, so meditation is not usually abandoned completely, but consistent daily practice is much rarer than occasional one.

In the next blog, we’ll explores the most well-know and also potential drawbacks of the practice...

Getting to know meditation (Part One)

For almost six and a half years I’ve been meditating without missing one single day. I had begun in 1969, dropping off and restarting for short periods every now and then. With that in mind, don’t jump to the conclusion that meditation is addictive, because it’s generally not considered pathological, though some people become attached to the pleasant mental states it can produce. 

It’s simply hard to stick to it for a wide variety of reasons. Yes, there are hundreds of millions of people who meditate worldwide and the practice is gaining rapidly more followers, especially in the mindfulness category. Unlike myself, most people can’t maintain a strict daily practice for long periods of time as dropout rates are substantial, especially during the first few months after they get started. 

Meditating begins anywhere from childhood (in traditional cultures) to middle age (in secular settings like our Western world). Reliable country-by-country statistics exist only for some nations; the highest participation appears in countries where meditation is integrated into religious and cultural life (see table). 

The biggest uncertainty lies in Asia, where meditation is often embedded within religious life and may not be measured separately from prayer, temple attendance, yoga, or other spiritual practices. For countries such as India, Thailand, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, China, and Japan, the cultural importance of meditation is clear, but rigorous nationally representative prevalence figures are surprisingly scarce. 

One interesting conclusion from the available data is that modern secular countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States now report meditation participation rates comparable to—or sometimes higher than—those measured in many traditionally Buddhist countries, depending on how "meditation" is defined, which is a dimension we’ll explore in the next blog.

Barbecue spring cleaning

A few days ago, I received a postcard from Bar-B-Clean, a local franchise inviting me to have someone come to my house to clean our patio barbecue, so I wouldn’t have to get my hands dirty. I did it myself last year and must admit that it’s not one of my favorite chores!

In addition to that, Americans love to have someone to inspect, repair if necessary and lube their bicycles before riding season or “detail” their car right at their home, so why not their sacrosanct summer grill? I checked the prices and for an average size barbecue like ours, it would cost us from $250 to $350. 

What might influence an exact final quote include the size of the device. For instance a larger or built-in grills might exceed $800. If something additional might be required, just plan on a base rate of $125 per hour and parts. 

The company utilizes deep steam cleaning and degreasing so the inside of the grill is free of residue and completely clean to the touch. 

With about $25 in supplies, my wife and I (almost) did as good a job in less than 2 hours that afternoon. 

Our grill doesn’t quite look brand new, but still is very clean and saved ourselves a pretty $275!

Park City’s last patch of snow

Same thing every year. June 16 holds a special significance to me. On that day in 1985 as I was house-hunting and had rented a large camcorder to shoot a movie of the house we bought in Park City, for my wife to see and hopefully, get her stamp of approval. 

There was a bull-eye window in the house, and through it, I accidentally captured Jupiter Peak with a tiny snow patch left just below the summit, just like you can see on the picture below! 

What’s amazing is that this winter was our worst snow year ever, and yet after an excellent 1984-1985 snow season, we have as much snow left this year not to mention even more around the main bowl and Portuguese Gap, thanks to some cool weather in April, May and June. 

Amazing isn’t it?

 

Disappointing skier visits!

At long last, I just heard about Utah’s skier visit numbers for the 2025-2026 winter season. At just 4.8 million (an amount rounded up it seems, to suggest a bit less in reality) this represents a drop of 26.2 % for our 15 ski resorts compared to the previous season, a significant decline, even more than Colorado’s down by 24%. 

It was also a large drop-off from the record-setting 7.1 million visits recorded when Utah received a record-high snowfall during the 2022-2023 season. A Ski Utah spokesperson said that “...The big takeaway from this year is that it really is just an anomaly, and the ski industry here in Utah is really at the mercy of Mother Nature.” 

I wish I could agree that it’s just an “anomaly” when in fact, I believe, it’s more the beginning of a trend, showing that global warming is here to stay, should be taken much more seriously and won’t go away any time soon. 

Historically, Utah experienced its lowest snow-pack on record, which reflects the amount of water in new snowfall, but many resorts also struggled to maintain operations because of record-warm temperatures throughout most of the winter. Long, warm periods between storms and warmer precipitation that produced more rain in higher-elevation areas than is the case typically, while also making it difficult for them to produce artificial snow. 

What this dismal season tells me is something about politics. Short-sighted politicians are woefully unable to address long-term needs, like global warming and have no problem sacrificing long-term solutions for short-term gains. Not only in the US where Trump and his republican allies are turning their back to the environment, but also in Europe where the sacrifices required from a sound climate protection strategy seem unaffordable in their short-term lens.

Finding good information today (Part Five)

We all want to “develop a sound opinion” and today we’ll talk about a framework that will move us out of tribal narratives. We’ll start with the problem, not the positions by asking: 

• “What is the underlying issue?” 
• “What are the incentives of the actors involved?” 
• “What constraints shape their behavior?” 

We then identify the trade-offs, not the “right answer” Every real issue has costs, benefits, winners and losers. So, sound opinions come from mapping trade-offs, not picking sides. Nothing, for the most part, is ever black and white, plus constant mistakes are the background and fabric of our lives. 

Then we’re ready to separate the facts from the interpretations, as facts are verifiable, interpretations are narratives and predictions just guesses, while most media love to blend all three. In the end, let’s remember that we’re not looking for “news”, we’re looking for meaning, and meaning doesn’t come from volume. 

Instead it comes from context, synthesis, reflection, conversation and frameworks. If this discussion subject interests us, it also shows that we’ve already had the instinct for this, and what we need to build and be comfortable with, is a structure that protects our attention and channels our curiosity. 

The resources are overwhelming, so pick a selection you feel comfortable handling and stick to it. Good luck!

Finding good information today (Part Four)

In this section, we’ll see how to keep a critical view. If we want a method for keeping a critical view (without becoming cynical), we should say that critical thinking isn’t skepticism but a form of structured curiosity. 

Here’s a simple method we can apply to any issue; let’s call it the “The 5-Question Filter”. When we encounter a piece of news, let’s ask ourselves 

• “Is this important or just urgent?” 
• “Is this new information or recycled garbage?” 
• “What long-term trend does this connect to?” 
• “What would change in my life if I ignored this?” 
• “What is the strongest argument against the position presented?” 

If a story fails questions 1–3, we can safely let it go and ignore it. Then, use the “two sources, two perspectives” rule, for any issue we want to understand: We begin by reading one mainstream source, then we read one outsider or contrarian source. 

We read one left-leaning analysis, followed by one right-leaning analysis. We don’t do it to “balance” but to triangulate. Finally, we learn the “slow opinion” principle in which when an issue is emotionally charged we wait 48 hours before forming an opinion, as most early takes are either wrong, incomplete, or manipulated. 

If that sounds like luxury, it is as I don’t have quite that time at my disposal! In the next blog we’ll discover a method for forming sound opinions, so we’re not done yet.