
The mindfulness conspiracy - acsillag
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jun/14/the-mindfulness-conspiracy-capitalist-spirituality
======
1penny42cents
One goal of mindfulness and meditation is to reduce the amount of noise in our
heads so that we can see things clearer. This allows us to take more
_effective_ actions.

The author seems to have a clear bias that radical == good, and this puts me
off. Radical action can be good, and it can be bad. Mindfulness can help us
see which case is which.

~~~
ptah
Fully agree, mindfulness can help one come up with even more radical actions.
It can be a tool for activists to cope with the pressures of activism.

It doesn't sound like the author has done any mindfulness practice

~~~
AstralStorm
Does it though? Do we have any kind of data about it?

If it helps one activist and million corporate drones and people looking for
status quo, the practice is not on the whole a friend of activism. So what are
the numbers?

~~~
ptah
You are adding the goal of turning status quo warriors into activists.
Mindfulness is not designed for that and has never claimed to do that

~~~
AstralStorm
No, more like not turning activists into content status quo followers. But
it's problematic to discern the two.

Perhaps a study on how many activists quit when using or not using mindfulness
techniques. Though the confounder is huge, people trying this have some sort
of a psychological problem most of the time...

~~~
ptah
it doesn't work like that. you should try it for yourself

------
collyw
The bias clearly show through in the writing.

"Societal problems", "unjust society", " systemic change that might remove
it".

Mindfulness is somewhat oversold these days, but his understanding of it seems
very simplistic "Mindfulness is nothing more than basic concentration
training."

Surprise surprise, he has a book to sell about it.
[https://guardianbookshop.com/mcmindfulness-9781912248315.htm...](https://guardianbookshop.com/mcmindfulness-9781912248315.html)

~~~
hkeide
Thank you for pointing out the bias and the advertising aspect of this
article. I just cancelled my Guardian subscription.

~~~
Rexxar
Why is it a problem here ? It's clearly indicated at the end and I see books
as a natural complement to newspapers. I generally dislike advertisement but
this seems to be one of the rare legitimate case.

~~~
hkeide
I honestly don't know exactly why it rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe because
he's railing against capitalism (I can't even count the number of assertions
in the article, and very little explanation or evidence is offered) and then
procedes to try to sell his book based on what I personally think is a shallow
understanding of the subject matter.

In general, complaining that the pop culture version of something is shallow
and ineffective compared to a full understanding (which ironically, the author
lacks), could be generalized without lack of accuracy. If you did that, it
would be hard to find some ideolical construct to point a finger at, which
seems to be his main objective.

Pushing your opinion is obviously okay in a newspaper. That's his right. I
just won't be paying for it.

I've lately noticed a gradual decrease in the "detached analysis" coming out
of The Guardian in favor of more idealist in-group circle-self-satisfaction.
This probably feels good for some people but I don't think it's the way
forward.

~~~
thesz
As I see it, he does object to narrowing the thinking which is imposed by
capitalism as the one _and sole viable_ human society operation mode.

That narrowing is induced by neoliberal ideology, as he thinks. I do too, by
the way.

He even introduced me to "disimagination" neologism which I greatly admire,
and I am not even done with the article.

------
wnkrshm
Depression can be created by a hostile environment in individuals with no
prior issues.

With a background of ever-increasing pressures on the individual to perform,
the author rightfully calls out self-help for being "damage control
procedures" only: practices that can help individuals cope with an untenable
situation for longer.

The manner of the calling-out is hyperbole and full of opinions but in my
opinion there is some truth at the core.

~~~
marcus_holmes
I would agree, or at least acknowledge that there was some truth here, if the
worker's revolutions that have happened actually made anyone happier or less
stressed.

The only thing I've seen in all my travels that made anyone any happier is
strong family ties.

~~~
icebraining
> the worker's revolutions that have happened

Which ones are you thinking of?

~~~
marcus_holmes
Russia, Cambodia and Vietnam are the ones I've personally visited (and I live
in Berlin, so plenty of stories of life under communism here). But I've also
spoken to people from Cuba and Venezuela.

------
Viruptc
I was in a relationship with a girl that had Borderline Personality Disorder.

This totally rewired my brain and I had to go to therapy. There I was
recommended mindfulness meditation.

It really helped me a lot to get rid of racing thoughts and finally get some
sleep and general peace of mind.

~~~
partyboat1586
Hey, I'm glad mindfulness helped you. I think my girlfriend might have BPD and
i'm not sure what to do, would you mind sharing your story? Can PM if you
would prefer.

~~~
Viruptc
Yes, of course. But how can I contact you?

------
Mo3
There we go. The authors biased and naive opinion of mindfulness is just that.
His opinion. Without any awareness of itself.

What happens when we have nothing to think about but thoughts? We lose
ourselves in the content of thought without seeing them for what they really
are.

Human says "my thoughts", yet believes himself to be the content of the
thoughts, the seemingly very important thoughts that start with "I" and
everything that comes after it.

Where are the thoughts appearing in? That's you.

And staying in this perspective on purpose is mindfulness.

And being mindful sets a lot of things straight.

Radical change starts within and everything outside follows after it. And you
don't need to do anything for it. In fact, sometimes you need not to.

~~~
bArray
> There we go. The authors biased and naive opinion of

> mindfulness is just that. His opinion.

Except, it's not labeled as opinion. At this point I just consider the
entirely of The Guardian an an opinion piece.

~~~
AstralStorm
There are a scarce few facts in there, about origins of the commercial
training practice and size of the market, as well as a few companies that
benefit from it. That's about it.

Opinion pieces, no matter how biased and disagreeable, are still necessary.
Facts do not make one think on their own. I would like more facts in them.

~~~
bArray
> Opinion pieces, no matter how biased and disagreeable, are

> still necessary.

I don't disagree, I just believe they should be very clearly labelled as such.

------
rocgf
This is not only ridiculous, it may actually be dangerous journalism because
it hints at the fact that this may be a conspiracy by the people 'ruling the
world'. And it does that with no real evidence.

Anything has pros and cons, even if they are not obvious at a first glance.
Doesn't mean there is an obscure element to it.

~~~
AstralStorm
It doesn't. That's your interpretation reading between the clear lines of
text. It is being promoted by high stakes journalism and corporations though.
No conspiracy needed, as it brings desired results. The motive is clear and
not ulterior. Companies want to keep you happy so that you can be exploited
more, and if that falls they want you to internalise blame for your own mental
state. If you internalise mindfulness, you might be amenable to internalising
other values beneficial to the company.

Article does say that the practice can make odious status quo palatable,
removing a source of discontent and thus activism.

There are comparisons between the style McD was sold and mindfulness, but
nowhere do I see implication that it is some kind of conspiracy.

Article has an ethical dig at neoliberal values at the end, equating them to
magical thinking.

~~~
rocgf
> nowhere do I see implication that it is some kind of conspiracy

Except in the title, for starters. And then in your comment, which is built on
the assumption that mindfulness benefits corporations. Your whole argument is
a stretch at best, but even if I were to concede that companies benefit from
this, it is hardly proof that they would actively invest time, money and
effort into playing this incredibly long game through which their gains are,
at best, indirect. I think you're looking for a conspiracy theory where there
is none.

------
blunte
This makes the assumption that our priority is to change/fix things. I'm
usually of this mindset too, but there's something to the argument of
accepting what is and being calm and present to the moment.

We can't really know which approach is best, because we can't A/B test human
life. Who knows... perhaps if everyone were calm and peaceful, much would
change without activism.

~~~
vidarh
If you want to change/fix things then being calm and present is a useful skill
to be able to assess what the problem actually is and how to address it
without being being drawn to actions that are not thought through.

Mindfulness does not imply you should not get angry at injustice, for example,
but that you might want to observe that emotion arising and understand what
you're actually angry about and why before you act. Sometimes you'll catch
yourself being manipulated, or you'll realize you're angry about the wrong
thing, or lashing out at the wrong person or entity.

As such I think the author would have done much better to focus on why
mindfulness is not about inaction, and should not be used as an excuse for
inaction. If someone wants to focus only inwards, that's got nothing to do
with mindfulness, and in fact if they use mindfulness as an excuse for that,
they are failing at being mindful if they're not mindful that it is just an
excuse.

Mindfulness certainly can make some people more ready to accept life as it is,
but the point then is that suffering for the sake of suffering is pretty
irrational - if you can find a way to accept your current situation, then that
is good. But accepting it does not mean you can not want to change it. But you
should be aware of why, not just blindly fight for something that might not
make you or others any happier.

I do think you're right that if everyone were calm and peaceful much would
change without activism, but I also don't think mindfulness means no activism.
Different activism, perhaps.

------
pygy_
Counterpoint: mindfulness makes one less prone to the torrent of distracting
junk we're being fed and lets us focus on the problem we could act on...

------
kaolti
Mindfulness is being aware of what goes on in your mind. How can anyone argue
that it's a BAD?

How is staying blind to what you're actually thinking good in any way? All it
does is make us a reactionary creature, which is exactly what you need to be
to burn a whole society to the ground.

Thanks Guardian, this is exactly what we need. More violence, more escalation,
more rash decisions. Journalism 2019 - and they ask for your donations.

~~~
icebraining
The article is not arguing against being aware of what goes on in your mind.

------
colechristensen
I don't know whether to be frightened of the cult-of-activism or just confused
about this disorganized rant.

I see fascism hidden in words like this. The whole motivation seems to be that
you must feel rage about anyone and anything which disagrees with your social
ideals and any other reaction is unacceptable.

------
kranner
> Other sources of cultural malaise are not discussed. The only mention of the
> word “capitalist” in Kabat-Zinn’s book Coming to Our Senses: Healing
> Ourselves and the World Through Mindfulness occurs in an anecdote about a
> stressed investor who says: “We all suffer a kind of ADD.”

So the author is upset that Kabat-Zinn omitted to name "capitalism"
specifically and railing against its evils in a self-help book?

One might as well write an article jumping all over CBT: that by helping
patients recognise Automatic Negative Thoughts and breaking the loop,
psychologists are conspiring to keep society in the evil grip of capitalism.

This whole thing comes across as a strawman argument.

~~~
AstralStorm
CBT and MCBT (which uses mindfulness), has control and "being able to
progress" as the goal, not just changing emotional state consciously, which
the pure mindfulness as taught can devolve into. (A crutch instead of a fix.)

Acceptance of the present should not mean letting it stay the same forever.
It's more "what's done is done". MCBT still has you focus on repeated
occasions when you do this, and changing them h this might be by changing
yourself but not necessarily the only way you can approach it.

A sane therapist will tell you if the situation you're in is not conducive to
therapy.

Acceptance is a tool. If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a
nail, which is why CBT and MCBT have more tools than mindfulness which is
taught in a tiny version of ACT.

~~~
kranner
> Acceptance of the present should not mean letting it stay the same forever.
> It's more "what's done is done".

I'm not sure how mindfulness could possibly be construed to intend letting
things stay the same forever. Impermanence is one of the pillars of Buddhist
thought and mindfulness directly addresses it.

------
tareqak
I enjoyed the article. I see mindfulness being a truly helpful tool, but I can
also see it as being a bludgeon to numb people to the status quo. The closest
thing that I can think of that is similar is physical exercise. Physical
exercise is legitimately helpful for maintaining a healthy life for nearly all
(if not all) human beings, but there is definitely an industry around getting
people to buy things to get them into shape with various probabilities of
success. Similar to the author’s assertion about physical exercise, there are
credible factors that affect physical health outside of just physical exercise
such as diet/nutrition and physical/mental stress. Dealing with these other
issues that affect physical health is more difficult and particularly when
food-producing industries have a vested interest in getting people to eat
more, and employers have a vested interest in getting the most out of their
employees.

For what it is worth, The Guardian’s “the long read” section has the following
in the subtitle, “The long read In-depth reporting, essays and profiles“ [0].
I think they could stand to add a bit more guidance / messaging to indicate
that this piece is separate from their reporting without harming their brand
or appearing to insinuate some position over another.

[0] [https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/the-long-
read](https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/the-long-read)

~~~
colechristensen
Mindfulness walks you away from living on autopilot and having your thoughts
driven by emotion. If it "numbs" you, I'm not sure what you're doing but it
isn't anywhere near awareness.

People seem to really be addicted to this emotionally driven autopilot
existence and seem over and over to insist that if you aren't being driven by
emotion you're incapable of doing good. It seems to be the next wave of the
attempt to reject the – what I would call – first order rationalism which
builds its understanding of the world out of what easily fits into
straightforward models and rejects or handwaves the existence of everything
else.

\--

Anything remotely beneficial (any many things that aren't) will have a whole
herd of self-help industrialists trying to sell it to you, they're better off
ignored. Their presence really has no signal as to the legitimacy to what
they're selling.

~~~
tareqak
Thank you for replying 'colechristensen.

The example that I would give is how someone might view homelessness in San
Francisco, the first time, the next few times, and then subsequent n times.

The first time a person can truly be utter shock. The next few times might
remain uncomfortable, but less of a shock. In the subsequent n times, this
person might stop seeing homelessness altogether except for the more
gratuitous moments.

I am refining my thoughts here, and the part I see at issue is not mindfulness
as a whole, but its partial or selective application. The author’s point is
that the parts of mindfulness industry and parts of the economy as a whole
benefit from the spread and application of the self-regulation/desensitization
of mindfulness and it is in their interest to stop any sort of follow through
action that would disrupt the status quo.

By stopping mindfulness at self-regulation and not following through with
action, an outside observer would be hard pressed to find the difference
between someone practicing this much mindfulness and someone who is just
apathetic. I think this is where the calls to emotion that the author makes,
and my use of the word “numb” comes in: it is question posed by someone else
asking, “Do you not care?” In this way, I think the author is trying to argue
that some of parts of this mindfulness industry is effectively selling mass-
produced apathy and mass-produced self-regulation/compliance. To take this
even farther, I think it would be possible to argue that this combination of
desensitization and no-follow-through is basically learned helplessness [0].

To be completely honest with you, after writing all this out, I think the
author could have made this point more clear.

[0]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness)

~~~
colechristensen
What you are describing just is not mindfulness as I have seen it described or
taught anywhere.

Mindfulness and learned helplessness are diametric opposites.

------
shrimpx
I directly know "mindfulness" people and some TM people. They all seem to
doing roughly the same thing: avoiding thoughts, or pushing thoughts out of
their focus/ignoring thoughts that arise.

My bystander observation is they're all developing memory problems. Obviously
mentally replaying and analyzing memories strenghtens retention and these
people avoid doing it. It's idiotic.

~~~
mercer
I feel there's a subtle difference between 'pushing thoughts out' or
'ignoring' them, and 'observing them (impassively)', which is what I've been
taught when it comes to mindfulness/meditation/zen.

When I meditate, my impression is not that I avoid or push away thoughts.
Rather, it's as if I observe them from a distance, and inspect them, smell
them, turn them over, etc.

In many cases, true, these thoughts sort of dissolve of 'disappear'. But in
other cases they merely change a bit in quality, or they remain with some
context added.

Generally speaking it's not so much about avoiding, replaying, or analyzing
memories (and strengthening retention), as it is about developing and
practicing discernment as to _what_ thoughts are worth replaying, analyzing or
avoiding.

------
tmoravec
The article literally starts with this: "It is sold as a force that can help
us cope with the ravages of capitalism..."

For a more meaningful discussion of mindfulness, I recommend the "Mind The
Mindfulness Hype" episode of The Psychology Podcast [1] . They dig into what
the scientific method has to say to mindfulness, what studies have been made
and what is missing, and what benefits can be realistically expected. And
what's over the top hype.

[1] [https://www.scottbarrykaufman.com/podcast/mind-the-
mindfulne...](https://www.scottbarrykaufman.com/podcast/mind-the-mindfulness-
hype-with-david-vago/)

~~~
mikeyjk
Sam Harris regularly claims that it reduces the half life of emotions such as
rage.

I personally find that a 'deterministic' view of life achieves that for me.

For whatever reason when I meditate I can only leverage it as a relaxation
tool, as opposed to witnessing my thoughts occur, which I think is somewhat
'mindfulness'.

~~~
herghost
I've struggled to get very much out of mindfulness (primarily via Sam Harris)
but this 'half-life of an emotion' thing is one of the bits that has worked.

The best example I've experienced was being in an argument with my wife about
something or other that had gotten heated to the point I was getting angry.
But then I got a phone call from someone at one of my clients - I immediately
had to be a different person for that call. Once it had finished I came back
to my wife and felt like I entirely had the _choice_ as to whether I would be
angry again. I was, in fact, almost certainly treading an automatic path down
which I _would have_ made myself angry to continue from where we were.
Instead, the obviousness of this was so apparent that I didn't - because it
suddenly felt artificial.

~~~
kranner
What Sam Harris teaches in his meditation app is not 'mindfulness' as commonly
understood, i.e. in the vein of Vipassana or even MBSR. It's more like his own
lite version of Dzogchen practices.

------
lackoftactics
his arguments doesn't make sense. Using this way of thinking psychoteraphy is
bad, because you are not fighting the system that damaged you. Of course he is
using Zizek as authority and he treats his word of gospel, I think he lacks
critical thinking that he advocates

------
bArray
Just the first statement says alot about the writer:

> It is sold as a force that can help us cope with the

> ravages of capitalism, but with its inward focus, mindful

> meditation may be the enemy of activism.

Every interaction I've had with mindfulness so far hasn't been that it was
"sold", it was just simply offered. It's not an organized religion or
ideology, from what I've seen there doesn't appear to be a hidden agenda. I've
personally found it quite interesting to reflect on the subject of mindfulness
and my (current) conclusions I have regarding how to live my life - there's a
lot of overlap.

It's not something that exists to "help us cope with the ravages of
capitalism". Political ideology aside, it's simply there to help you think and
act more freely by understanding your thinking and acting. My friend who
studies mindfulness says (para-quoting): "it's about understanding your
actions and why you take them, it's about separating yourself from your
immediate reality". I think most people could potentially benefit from such an
idea. In general I believe people should take more time to "do nothing" and
reflect.

As for being "the enemy of activism", if clear thinking is the enemy of
activism, I think this says more about the current state of activism than it
does about mindfulness. In general, I believe we shouldn't be striving to
produce a society who dedicate their lives to activism. It's perfectly okay to
be an activist, but there has to be more - life is short after all.

~~~
bildung
_> Every interaction I've had with mindfulness so far hasn't been that it was
"sold"_

In defense of the author, it isn't really hard to come to the conlusion that
mindfulness is mostly an attempt to sell stuff: Open the search engine of your
choice, type in "mindfulness" and look at the results. Look at any pop-
psychology, lifestyle or fashion magazine, and be greeted with advertorials
for "calm" or similar apps.

------
tmpfs
It should be pointed out that mindfulness is one of many practices in various
esoteric belief systems (typically with a view to complete self-realization)
and when taken out of context and practiced alone it can have benefits
(depending upon the individual) but is much more powerful when combined with
all the practices of a belief system (Buddhism, Taoism, Bon etc).

------
bayesian_horse
I think the author doesn't understand mindfulness. Achieving mindfulness can
only help you to know what exactly you want to change and what you can change.

It seems to me that the author favors radical change, either in general or he
assumes everybody knows what exactly must be changed and how. Which I doubt.

"Capitalism" has spared the Western world increasingly more suffering, so
there is no point in "going back" anywhere.

While I do favor corrections in terms of wealth distribution, I'd be hesitant
to implement any unproven radical changes.

I fail to see why mindfulness meditation is any obstacle to this.

~~~
jahaja
> "Capitalism" has spared the Western world increasingly more suffering

"Spared" implies that there's a clearly worse and inevitable alternative.
Unless we shake off this ingrained cold-war mentality no other alternatives
than status-quo will seem plausible.

~~~
kaolti
Who is disputing that there are clearly worse alternatives? Pick almost any
part of history.

You're talking about alternatives to the status-quo. Sure, there's lots to be
improved, that's not what the disagreement is. The disagreement is whether to
have a calm conversations and plan for a better future, or - like the Guardian
suggests - burning it all to the ground because capitalism = bad.

~~~
jahaja
> Who is disputing that there are clearly worse alternatives?

No one, and neither do I. That's why I added inevitable. Because the problem
is the false dichotomy of Capitalism or Stalinism. It's obvious that the
people calling for radical change are not even close to supporting Stalinism.
But for some reason this is always assumed when just criticism towards
Capitalism is presented.

> The disagreement is whether to have a calm conversations and plan for a
> better future

Moderates never ever find a "good" time for true change. It should always be
delayed and slowed down until it eventually evaporates.

------
herghost
Be mindful of the source of this - the quality of content coming out of The
Guardian has slipped since its recent change of editorial - it is much more
content with click-bait and sensationalism than with anything more
substantial.

From the opening line this seems to be coming across as little more than a
virtue signalling piece for anti-Capitalists, and progresses into tired old
tropes about Western consumerism.

------
mirkonasato
As soon as I read "meditation may be the enemy of activism" the image of the
Vietnamese monk Thích Quảng Đức burning himself to death in 1963 popped up in
my mind.

From Wikipedia
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch_Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_%C4%9...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch_Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_%C4%90%E1%BB%A9c))

"Đức calmly sat down in the traditional Buddhist meditative lotus position on
the cushion. A colleague emptied the contents of the petrol container over
Đức's head. Đức rotated a string of wooden prayer beads and recited the words
Nam mô A Di Đà Phật ("Homage to Amitābha Buddha") before striking a match and
dropping it on himself."

"Photographs of his self-immolation were circulated widely across the world
and brought attention to the policies of the Diệm government. John F. Kennedy
said in reference to a photograph of Đức on fire, "No news picture in history
has generated so much emotion around the world as that one.""

~~~
AstralStorm
Buddhism is not just meditation. It is a big ethical system.

By stripping ethics from it you would stop all its activism.

~~~
CPLX
Indeed. But a premise of Buddhism is that the ethics came about as the result
of meditation.

~~~
gbuk2013
This is not the premise of Buddhism.

Here is a good starting point for understanding what is:
[http://ftp.budaedu.org/ebooks/pdf/EN074.pdf](http://ftp.budaedu.org/ebooks/pdf/EN074.pdf)

~~~
CPLX
I didn't say it is "the" premise of Buddhism. I said it is a premise of
Buddhism.

It is.

The story of Shakyamuni Buddha achieving enlightenment after 49 days of
meditation under the Bodhi tree is pretty well known. There, of course, are a
lot more antecedents to contemporary Buddhist thought and ethics than that one
incident, but it's fair to say it's a pretty core part of the historical
tradition, and precedes essentially everything that came after.

For context in this discussion, I am a practicing Zen Buddhist.

~~~
gbuk2013
Ethics affect the seeds you plant. If your seeds are bad you will not even
have the opportunity to learn meditation.

Meditation is for going beyond all that.

> I am a practicing Zen Buddhist

Who?

------
HNLurker2
Zizek may say this is late capitalism of the west.

------
kaolti
The article has obviously nothing to do with mindfulness and is a cheap attack
on capitalism from the growing socialist revolution propaganda machine.

Anyone who actually knows what mindfulness is can immediately see that they're
building the biggest strawman ever with the sole purpose of forcing anti
capitalist agenda down our throats.

Remember this: It used to be that news were facts and you formulated an
opinion on them. Now the news is opinion and you're trying to figure out what
the facts were.

------
bencollier49
This is an interesting reversion to form for the Guardian. Religion as the
opiate of the masses is straight from Marx.

~~~
golergka
As if it hasn't long time ago.

~~~
bencollier49
Oh, of course. But this one is particular is a classic Marxist trope, it's
interesting to see it popping its head up in a new context.

------
dev_north_east
From an outsider's perspective, it just seems like a way to replicate daily
prayers.

I'll stick with the Rosary thanks.

~~~
philsnow
The rosary is great for contemplative prayer [0], but does your mind ever
wander from what you 'should' be thinking about to various mundane things
(last weekend's sporting events, your car needs an oil change, what to make
for dinner)?

One part of mindfulness meditation is deliberate practice at directed focus,
and that practice improves your ability to think about what you want to think
about rather than what your mind wanders to. There's another common practice
where you actually intentionally practice allowing your mind to wander, and
consciously choose to dismiss those thoughts.

I see mindfulness meditation as orthogonal to actual prayer, a little axe-
sharpening that improves not only my prayer life but my general thought
processes as well. If I only have time for one and not the other, obviously
prayer is more important.

[0] For people who don't know, the Rosary is a series of meditations on
different aspects of the lives of Jesus and Mary and the ministry of Jesus, in
the form of an easily-memorized sequence of rote prayers. The rote nature of
the prayers allows the person saying the rosary to use the brain's fuzzy focus
to think about each aspect in turn. In total it consists of the Apostle's
Creed, 6 "Our Father"s, 53 "Hail Mary"s, 6 "Glory Be"s, and one "Hail Holy
Queen", taking between 10 minutes (if you're in a rush) and 20 minutes (if
you're sleepy).

~~~
dev_north_east
Many thanks, very interesting reading

