Seen on Facebook

Here’s a ridiculous status I recently saw on Facebook:

Incredible outbreak of healings tonight at the [Connecticut] outpouring!! Life debilitating diseases and ailments instantly healed! Yay God!

I left a couple of comments asking who would be receiving the Nobel Prize for this discovery, but they were quickly deleted. It’s almost as if there is absolutely no proof that prayer works in the least. Let me break it down in this flowchart:

One more time: Correcting the ignorant on utilitarianism

I wrote some time ago about Michael Hartwell’s poor grasp of philosophy. Specifically, I went into detail about why he has no idea what utilitarianism even is. However, one thing has been bothering me for quite some time and I want to address it now. Here is what I want to address from Hartwell:

Utilitarianism, in its most basic sense, is committing an evil act to counter a greater evil.

I’ve touched on my issue with this asinine statement, but I want to make sure it is out there in the open as much as possible. It just gets under my skin when someone is this monumentally wrong about something.

Utilitarianism defines what is good as that which maximizes pleasure and reduces pain. Generally, more weight is given to reducing pain, but that is getting into the details and isn’t important here. What is important is that we’re talking about an ethical theory which is in and of itself defining what is good. This cannot be anymore clear. And all the other ethical theories do the same thing. In fact, holy texts do it, too. That’s why it is often futile to argue with certain fundamentalists. Sure, by normal standards we would say it was evil of God to say rape victims had to marry their rapists, but the fundamentalist is going by the assumption that good and evil are defined by the Bible and, more specifically, God. Since God, by definition, can do no wrong, then his rape command cannot be evil. Or so the story goes. The difference, however, with Enlightenment period ethical theories is that they are based and built upon reason.

So I have two problems with saying utilitarianism is committing an evil act to counter a greater evil. First, that could just as easily be phrased, ‘Utilitarianism is committing an act of greater good in order to counter an act of lesser good.’ Talking about evil is nothing more than dishonest spin. Second and more to the point, it makes zero sense to analyze an ethical theory from within if one already has an assumption of what is good and evil. It’s possible to do that analysis looking in from the outside – we do that all the time – but one cannot simultaneously assume the perspective of a given ethical theory and an outside perspective. It would be like criticizing a hockey official because he didn’t call a touchdown when someone scored a goal.

What’s the harm in naturopathy?

It’s no secret that naturopathy is pure quackery. Indeed, part of its premise is vitalism, a concept which has no physical basis. It is the practice and love of those who are no better than 9/11 conspiracy nuts or birthers; it’s nothing more than a hipster-like reaction to something that has been established as true. And it comes with great harm:

Anne M. Adkins
Wichita, Kansas – Kidney failure
January 6 – 26, 2004
She traveled to Utah to be treated by a holistic naturopath. She received large doses of vitamin C, chelation therapy and colonics among other things. Within weeks she was suffering from kidney failure.

Lorie Atikian
Age: 17 months
Ontario, Canada
Died (malnutrition, pneumonia)
September 25, 1987
Lorie’s parents, concerned about modern food additives, were advised to give her an organic vegetarian diet. She was also treated with herbal & homeopathic remedies and an energy machine. Her parents were convicted of neglect.

Cameron Ayres
Age: 6 months
Fulham, west London, England
Died
May 1999
Cameron was born with a rare but treatable disorder, but his parents distrusted conventional medicine. A nurse/homeopath begged them to take him to a doctor, but they refused. He died.

Raj Bathija
Age: 69
Westminster, London, England
Both legs amputated
September 2005
He saw a “natural health practitioner” famous for treating celebrities. He was given nutritional advice and massages. Later, he was taken to a hospital where his legs had to be amputated. He is suing the practitioner.

Debbie Benson
Age: 55
Fort Bragg, California
Died (cancer)
July 15, 1997
She had a deep distrust of traditional medicine, so she sought out naturopaths and other alternative practitioners for her breast cancer. It raged out of control and she died.

Catherine “Cat” Elizabeth Bresina
Age: 17
Wheatridge, Colorado (from Wisconsin)
Cardiac arrest
March 25, 2004
Cat’s family took her to Colorado for what they thought was an inventive therapy for her disease. An injection she was given during the treatment caused her heart to stop. Charges were later filed against the naturopath.

I’ve only given 5 of the 200 instances of naturopathy-induced harm from that one website. Just imagine how many more there are every year throughout the world. And not instances of simple malpractice or clerical errors or bad luck. These are instances of ignorant, untrained individuals trying to play doctor. I have no respect for these people.

Happy Father’s Day

If God did exist, he would be the most evil father in history. Let’s be thankful, then, that the pro-infantacide, pro-genocide, pro-rape, pro-thought crime, anti-liberty, anti-women bigot is entirely a piece of fiction.

Happy Father’s Day.

Quorum sensing

I’m sure someone somewhere made an argument for group selection based upon bacteria working together like this. That model has always clearly been wrong, but now we have yet another reason why.

Bits of Haiti

This is my favorite picture from my trip to Haiti:

How to get public holiday displays banned

Many towns and cities will allow displays on public property around the December holidays. They do this mostly for Christians, but other groups have been taking advantage of things lately. In Olympia this led to a banning of all displays after atheists began adding their signs. Now the same is happening in Palisades Park in Santa Monica:

Nativity scenes and other private winter displays will no longer be allowed in Santa Monica’s Palisades Park after the City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to bar them.

For nearly six decades, private, life-size scenes celebrating Jesus Christ’s birth have been a fixture each December in the park that runs along the coastal bluffs. In recent years, displays have also celebrated the winter solstice and Hanukkah and have promoted atheism.

Last year, after requests for display space exceeded the space allotted, the city held a lottery to allocate slots fairly and legally. Atheists won 18 of the 21 plots. A Jewish group that sets up a menorah won another. The Nativity story that once took 14 displays to tell had to be crammed into two plots.

The reason this happened is because the Christian groups that usually win most of the lottery spots (by virtue of being the most numerical to throw their hat in the ring) had petitioned the city to forever deed them 14 of the spots. The City Council members recognized this was a lawsuit waiting to happen because, as it turns out, Christians aren’t to be given some special privileges under the law. (I hate that word, but I had no choice but to use it here.)

So all it takes to get rid of a set of displays on public property is to allow atheists to play. Do that and everyone is going to pick up their ball and go home. How tolerant.

Younger generations doubting God not ‘just a phase’

I have often found myself in debates where I raise the point that belief in God is significantly lower in younger generations than older generations. (We’re also more liberal, too). This often gets waved off as nothing more than a phase. “Why,” evidence deniers will say, “everyone flirts with these ideas in their youth, but everyone always becomes more religious as they age.” Of course, that’s an inappropriate response. Maybe it could be argued that people become more settled in their religious and political views into their 40’s and beyond, but that still doesn’t really cut it. And now it has to end all together because the wiggle room is gone:

The percentage of Americans 30 and younger who harbor some doubts about God’s existence appears to be growing quickly, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey. While most young Americans, 68%, told Pew they never doubt God’s existence, that’s a 15-point drop in just five years.

In 2007, 83% of American millennials said they never doubted God’s existence.

More young people are expressing doubts about God now than at any time since Pew started asking the question a decade ago. Thirty-one percent disagreed with the statement “I never doubt the existence of God,” double the number who disagreed with it in 2007…

“Notably, people younger than 30 are substantially less likely than older people to say prayer is an important part of their lives,” the report said.

“Research on generational patterns shows that this is not merely a lifecycle effect,” it continued. “The Millennial generation is far less religious than were other preceding generations when they were the same age years ago.”

There are a number of factors at work here, I think. In no particular order,

  • the Internet
  • higher education
  • Gnu Atheism
  • the Catholic Church

Surely there are far more aspects to this increase in doubt, but I think I’ve listed some of the major factors here.

Not too long ago the Internet was still considered a place for nerds. You blog? Ha! and You’re wasting your time! The latter may still hold some truth, but few people can utter it sans a load of hypocrisy. Facebook isn’t too far off a billion users right now. We’re all on the Internet and that exposes us all to a lot of different ideas. That has to breed doubt.

Next there’s education. This generation is the most highly educated age group in history. We’ve been given some worthwhile tools and access to a lot of different information. Moreover, just like the Internet, college is bringing together more and more diverse ideas. The days of black and white, Christian thinking is coming to an end; there’s nowhere left for religious arguments to hide now that everyone is talking. (It’s worth noting that cities tend to be more liberal than rural areas.)

Then we have Gnu Atheism. It would have been seen as absurd 10 years ago to be as openly critical of religion as so many people are today. Now we have books and bus ads and we’re even getting shout-outs from the President. That, of course, isn’t to say it wasn’t seen as absurd in 2006 when The God Delusion was released. It was. But in just the short time since then things have been changed. Gnu Atheism has worked in reverse to religion: Religious ‘moderates’ have always made space for fundamentalists (regardless of their intention), but now the aggressiveness of Gnu Atheism has made space for those who simply disbelieve but don’t necessarily see religion as a negative force.

Finally (at least insofar as my list goes) the Catholic Church messed things up. They associated religion with child molesters and rapists (all the while using the euphemism of “abusers”). Instead of facing up to their sins, they covered up as much as they could, as fast as they could. They became a meme, inviting mockery to no end. Priest jokes evolved from entering bars with rabbis to entering backrooms and more with choir boys. The idea of mocking a religious institution became more mainstream than ever. That helped, along with the Gnu Atheists, to open all religious institutions to mockery.

So this isn’t merely a phase. People really are doubting religion more and more. And that’s a great thing. I don’t say that simply as an anti-theist, but rather as someone who values science and a scientific way of thinking. Doubt is a good thing. We need to use it more, no matter what the subject. If we allow ourselves to close off an entire area to critical thinking, then we’ve put ourselves in some kind of danger. Why not shutter any other area? Why not put a stop to one line of research or another because it looks too difficult to ever come to fruition or because it conflicts with some group’s idea of ethics? We can’t do that. Without doubt we’ll stagnate. I know this generation is better than that.

At least I think I know we are.

I’m tired of the Andreas Moritz defenders

I get a new comment on my post about what a moron Andreas Moritz is every so often. If they don’t show up on that post, they show up somewhere else or on another blog of mine. I rarely read them because when I do, I come across garbage like this:

Your science is limited to that which can be measured, usually by a machine. It is insufficiently advanced to cope with the whole human phenomenon.

It is immediately evident that this person, just like Moritz, has no formal science background. It would be a greater use of my time to argue with young Earth creationists.

So here is what I am going to do now. Every time I get a new comment, I am going to go to Moritz’s fan page, find someone who is asking him for help, and privately message that person to let him or her know that Moritz is a quack who cannot help. I realize I could simply close comments on the posts I have about him, but that isn’t good enough. Every time someone comes over here to defend the quack, I want to steer dupes/customers away from him. I did it once before – it felt great.

So remember, anyone who cares to defend Moritz is actually taking business away from him. It’s like a Chinese finger trap but useful and potentially life-saving.