Other ways of knowing

Posted on October 26, 2011 by Michael

It’s a popular meme amongst the sans-science crowd to claim there are ‘ways of knowing’ besides science. They don’t simply mean ways of ‘knowing’ things like whether or not someone loves us, but rather they mean ways of knowing significant, world view-altering things beyond our personal lives. That is, they want to bring their non-methods up to the level of knowing that science gives us (or, perhaps, they want to bring science down to their level). It’s sort of cute, but it never stands up to scrutiny. There is a reason, after all, why no respectable institution teaches that Adam and Eve actually existed – even if genetic facts didn’t tell us they are 100% fictitious, religion offers zero in the way of knowing otherwise.

So that brings me to Deepak Chopra. The anti-science quack is always embarrassing himself one way or another, and he does so in this video in exactly the same way the mainstream religious embarrass themselves when they talk about ‘other ways of knowing’:

The guy is entirely unable to answer the question. He waffles and waddles about, at some point launching into a weak attack of science, implying the entire field needs to evolve to include some weird, unscientific ideas he has. Just like the Expelled creationists, he wants to redefine science to fit the ideas he wishes were true.

The fact is, science is the best way of knowing that we have. It offers concrete methods for coming to conclusions as objectively as humanely possible. Chopra and other religious nutbags (i.e., the mainstream) want to substitute that objectivity for subjectivity – if we cannot confirm or falsify a claim, then all claims become equal, and wouldn’t you know it? that makes everything equal, giving religion and ‘spirituality’ (whatever that is) quite a bit more space to operate.

Filed under: Religions, Science | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »

Thought of the day

Posted on October 25, 2011 by Michael

Random travel things that interest me more than my readers: It looks like my Haiti trip will be in March, not January (though everything is confirmed now). It is becoming more and more certain that I will be in Italy this summer, though the precise nature of the trip – whether it is guided or winged – has not been determined. And I very well may rejoin members of my Kilimanjaro trip for my planned hike up Aconcagua in Argentina – but about 6-18 months earlier than I originally thought (that is, the end of next year instead of 2013 or 2014).

Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one’s lifetime.

~Mark Twain

Filed under: Misc | Tagged: , | 3 Comments »

Good. Everyone hated Raphael anyway.

Posted on October 25, 2011 by Michael

Now if it was Michelangelo, I would be upset.

Filed under: Humor | Tagged: , , | Leave a comment »

Jesus the liar

Posted on October 25, 2011 by Michael

I’ve had conversations where I’ve asked people to tell me who they think is among the greatest humans to have ever lived. Unsurprisingly, Jesus is a common answer. And for a long time I didn’t disagree. After all, the things Jesus said really aren’t represented by the religious, so it isn’t so much to say he was a good person. Of course, I’m granting that he really did exist, but that’s another discussion.

But I’ve been thinking. Sure, Jesus said some good things. Of course, other philosophers have said the same good things – and done so with actual, ya know, reasons – but good is good. Except that pesky detail about using reason is where things get sticky. Okay, Jesus wasn’t great at arguing his case logically (that part is well represented by the religious), and that obviously doesn’t make him a bad person by any means, but consider the way he did argue his case: he lied. He claimed he was a divine being from some magic place. He said he had a mandate from the one true god to save the world. Whether it was an actual man named Jesus who said those things or if scribes simply made them up along with the miracles they invented, none of it is true. Not a bit. It’s all a lie.

I don’t know about anybody else, but I have trouble ranking a fundamental liar among the greatest people the world has ever seen.

Filed under: Religions | Tagged: , | 9 Comments »

Occupy Augusta

Posted on October 24, 2011 by Michael

I decided to check out the Occupy Augusta crowd over the weekend. I didn’t get down there Saturday, which is when I imagine there was at least a moderately sizable crowd, but there were still a couple of dozen camped protesters Sunday. It’s about what I expect for a small city – the larger protests are going on in Portland where a bomb was recently set off by someone rather unsympathetic to the movement.

Anyway, here are a few pictures:

Filed under: Misc | Tagged: , , , | Leave a comment »

Thought of the day

Posted on October 22, 2011 by Michael

Dead or dying because of President Obama: bin Laden, al-Awlaki, Gadhafi, the war in Iraq.

Dead or dying because of Republicans: the economy, hope, change.

Filed under: Misc | Tagged: , | 12 Comments »

Bow! Bow before my particular god!

Posted on October 22, 2011 by Michael

That’s what the military told one of its soldiers. He said no:

The 20-year old private first class, a proclaimed atheist, is graduating from Advanced Individual Training at Fort Jackson in South Carolina on Thursday.

The soldier, who requested that CNN not give a name and gender for fear of repercussions, called the Military Religious Freedom Foundation on Wednesday after taking part in a rehearsal for the graduation.

The soldier told the watchdog group that during the rehearsal, officials ordered the soldiers to bow their heads and clasp their hands during the chaplain’s benediction. As an atheist, the soldier refused to do so.

The military then threatened to prevent the soldier from graduating. They backed down when they found out he had contacted an outside group for protection of his rights, but who knows how far things would have gone otherwise.

This isn’t a big story because it appears to have been resolved relatively quickly (plus the solider is remaining anonymous), but I wonder how Christians in general would react to this. I imagine a good number would support the solider in principle, but I think a significant portion would be against his actions.

Filed under: Atheism/Humanism | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

This is why TBS shouldn’t cancel shows

Posted on October 21, 2011 by Michael

Filed under: Humor | Tagged: | 2 Comments »

Thought of the day

Posted on October 21, 2011 by Michael

I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.

That would only be a crazy thing for someone seeking the Republican presidential nomination to say. Someone like the only remotely reasonable candidate in the field, Jon Huntsman.

Filed under: Misc | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

Craig is unworthy

Posted on October 20, 2011 by Michael

William Lane Craig has his rhetoric down pretty well. He is a professional debater, after all. Ask him most any metaphysical or theological question and he will probably have a prepared answered well memorized. But that’s about as far as the guy can go. Actually engage his points and it isn’t difficult to defeat him.* But why should anyone bother debating the guy? He has made zero special contributions to his field other than to revive a long-dead, easily dismissed argument (one which, unlike a good deal of philosophy, can be directly addressed and defeated via empirical evidence). His primary claim to fame is that he likes to debate. I admit I occasionally enjoy watching debates myself, but I generally only watch the ones done by people with esoteric knowledge in a field. Craig, for that reason, is not worth watching.

And according to Richard Dawkins, he also is not worth debating.

Don’t feel embarrassed if you’ve never heard of William Lane Craig. He parades himself as a philosopher, but none of the professors of philosophy whom I consulted had heard his name either. Perhaps he is a “theologian”. For some years now, Craig has been increasingly importunate in his efforts to cajole, harass or defame me into a debate with him. I have consistently refused, in the spirit, if not the letter, of a famous retort by the then president of the Royal Society: “That would look great on your CV, not so good on mine”.

It’s true. A debate between Dawkins and Craig, while it would rack up the YouTube hits, would only serve to benefit Craig. It would be beneath Dawkins to engage the guy.

But these facts aren’t stopping Craig from continuing “in his efforts to cajole, harass or defame” Dawkins into a debate. At one of his entertainment shows in England, Craig is going to place an empty chair on the stage to represent Dawkins’ absence. I’ll let the good doctor take it from here:

But what are we to make of this attempt to turn my non-appearance into a self-promotion stunt? In the interests of transparency, I should point out that it isn’t only Oxford that won’t see me on the night Craig proposes to debate me in absentia: you can also see me not appear in Cambridge, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh, Glasgow and, if time allows, Bristol.

Okay, I’m happy Dawkins isn’t going to debate the guy, but it wouldn’t be so bad to hear a few more knockdowns like that.

*When I went over to Mike’s to find some Craig links, it turned out he already had a post on this topic, as well as another Craig post. Further searches will reveal a good number more posts.

Filed under: Philosophy | Tagged: , | Leave a comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »