Freethinker's corner

How Not to Win Support For Your Cause …. December 9, 2013

2013/12/08

What were they thinking? How can you win support for your cause from some group, doesn’t matter which, by insulting or trying to shame them? Sure, for a small few without any kind of backbone simple shaming will cause submission, but insults? Insults bring backlashes. A thumb in the eye does not earn support.

Take Barbara G. Walker’s assertion that anyone who claims to be a feminist must by definition support women being in total control of government and society. She lambasts all men for the failure of some and then seems to desire men to support her chauvinistic cause. Nope. I don’t think so. I support equality. I do not support a patriarchy, why would I support a matriarchy?

Let’s look at the remarks some female atheist writers bewail. In a recent article on Alternet: “Another thing one notices with the atheist movement is the fact it is predominantly upwardly middle-class, white and male. If mainstream free-thought and humanism continue to reflect the narrow cultural interests of white elites who have disposable income to go to conferences then the secular movement is destined to remain marginal and insular.” Why is this an issue? I have never seen any evidence that the atheist movement represented only one segment. I have always seen women and other segments of society being encouraged to speak out. In my opinion it is not the fault of the “white-male elite” (a very derogatory as well as inflammatory phrase) that the other segments of the atheist movement are hesitant to step up to the microphone.

The article on Alternet goes on to exclaim that there is fear-mongering going on where Islamic terrorism is concerned. They have labeled this Islamaphobia. If one examines the history and content of Islam there can be no such thing as Islamaphobia as all the “fear-mongering” issues have a very real and solid basis in fact. I have nothing good to say about Islam not because I am Islamaphobic but because there is nothing good to say about Islam. This “fine” article goes on to insult all of the “New Atheists”, like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. I am sure this will go far in garnering the support of people who admire both these men, not!

Another section makes it clear that the writer is also quite biased against the prosperity of the United States and wishes to redistribute wealth worldwide. While I have similar perspectives mine are only nation-wide.

The only real and correct thing proclaimed in the article is the fact that atheists cannot belong to the Republican party. The Republican party is owned not only by the business sector but by the religious right as well. These two segments of society work together. The corporations exploit the worker class and the religious right makes the worker class submissive enough for exploitation. Not only does it not make sense for an atheist to belong to the Republican party, it doesn’t make sense for anyone who works for a living to belong to the Republican party.
No Fun Intended …. December 4, 2013

2013/12/04

Dour faced the old woman looked upon her daughter’s son and said, “Those video games are too violent! They’ll make you do bad things. Get up and go outside and play.” The child protested, saying it was too cold outside, but the moment was won by the grandmother. As she looks out the door and observes the boy she notes he seems to be digging in the ground. She opens the door and shouts, “Quit digging in the ground, you’ll get all dirty.” The child speaks again to say he merely was constructing a road for his car to drive in, but again, he is over-ruled. The grandmother watches again as the little boy climbs on the swing. She shouts, “Don’t go swinging now, I can’t come out now to keep you from hurting yourself.” “What am I supposed to do?!” shouts the boy. Don’t do this, don’t do that, what’s a little boy to do?

There are always those who try to boss. They tell you this or that is bad to do. They watch and criticize every move. They claim to know the best of ways. After all is said and done it seems though, what they know best is how not to have fun. They can’t seem to exist knowing others are having fun, while they sit idly, afraid to do anything that might seem…unseemly. Whether it be from lessons instilled by parents or the local parsonage, inhibitions magnified by envy of those with more freedom tends to make a dour old fussbudget out of the most well-meaning individual.

Sometimes one wonders if envy of those who were having fun might have caused the development of some very restrictive systems of belief. In an effort to develop some kind of value to the crowd, even maybe to gain some influence therein, if those who are having such amusement could be convinced that this fun would lead to painful consequences… the lonely party would have some worth, maybe an elevated position within the group, if some way can be presented to escape such a fate.

Religion needs to control, it cannot afford to become inert, obsolete. All religions are busy trying to guide the masses. Freedom, especially of thought, is anathema to all religions. Although presently somewhat quiescent here in the States, christianity, despite the opposing claim, despises freedom in any way. If not violently, it enforces the dictates of faith sternly where-ever it holds sway. Islam hates the freedoms held in high regard here in this, the United States. Islam acts decisively to squash all freedom, even of thought, where it rules the day.

Religion squashes imagination. It stifles innovation. Religion frowns upon any new thing that distracts from the primary goal to spread the message of the faith. Anything that belief finds which is counter to its precepts is not only resisted mightily, but sometimes with violence. Any good the faithful hoped to do is cancelled by the result of the doctrine upon the people. War, bigotry, misogyny, and hatred become the legacy of the believer. It is soon realized that the promised good was, all along, a front, to spread the message of hate.

… And all this, because someone was too inhibited, to have a little fun.
Humanity’s Inherent Flaw ….. December 2, 2013

2013/12/01

In the ancient times when the lightning flashed and the thunder roared they figured some god was angry. If the crops failed due to lack of rain or other reason it was once again a god’s anger. A volcano suddenly sputtering to life was a call for appeasement and sacrifice to please some angry deity. Human beings have always sought some conscious entity or power as the cause of natural events.

The search for a cause of conscious origin led quite readily to seeking a reason why things occur. An angry god became the reason for many events. Eventually a reason for humanity’s existence was desired. Why is there life? Why is humanity? Why the earth and the universe. Why? Why? Why?

“Why” is not a question for science. The goal of science must be the “how”, not the why. How is there existence instead of non-existence? There is no why. Why implies a consciousness behind the cause.

Why this need for a purpose to life? Life has no purpose besides, perhaps, perpetuation of itself. Even that is not a conscious pursuit. We should be content in discovering how life emerged, rather than why. Humans have been struggling for millennia trying to find the why. In frustration the imagination came into play and fabricated a why. Though science is most often urged into action by the amazing powers of the human imagination; sheer imagination without science answers nothing. Sheer imagination produces answers which, if held true, stifles science.

Religion was humankind’s infantile first effort to provide answers to troubling questions. It emerged from ignorance and developed through sheer imagination. There can be no truth generated through ignorance coupled with imagination. Though religion provided much of the cohesiveness necessary to hold a peoples together, it worked to separate one people from another. Much conflict followed such an arrangement.

Science came along and it was soon evident that it was anathema to religion. Ignorance and the imagination was no match for science and the imagination.

Just as there is no conscious purpose driving evolution, there is no purpose behind life. There is, however, purpose behind humanity. It’s the purpose we create for ourselves. We were not created to please a god, we arose and must please ourselves. Our intellects should be used to improve the quality of life for all rather than the creation of yet some new super bomb. If we used all the resources that are expended in war for the betterment of humanity instead, there would be no starving masses. With more resources our best scientists could find ways to cure all maladies. Without the destructive nature of conflict our earth could be better managed for all. With additional resources even ways could be found to defuse the impending population bomb.

I would be content with the knowledge of “how” things are, rather than trying to find the non-existent “why”.
There Was Never a God … November 27, 2013

2013/11/27

I disagree with some “scientists” in that I think it possible for people to know rather than simply to accept or believe. One thing I know is that there is no God, god, or gods.

The concept of a God, god, or gods is of human invention. Not only is god a derivation of our infantile awe that we held for our parents it is also a product of our effort to explain phenomena we found frightening and mysterious.

There have been many religions invented in humanity’s history and it is true that, as expressed by many, each religion is unlike any that came before or after. If there had been one true deity or many true deities this would not be the case.

Outside humanity there is no evidence of the god concept. Ritual developed by animals and humans are the result of the manner in which our brains learn. If something works most of the time, some action, some ritual, even if it fails at other times, becomes habitual.

There is much secondary evidence that leads to the almost ironclad proposition that such a deity as described by modern religion does not exist. For that deity to exist much of what we find in nature should not exist. This or that flaw in humanity’s physical body that points directly to continuous modification over millennia rather than instantaneous creation cannot be dismissed. Fossils existing in predicted depths and arrangement showing creatures that adapted over time by evolutionary means to changing conditions and locales is overwhelmingly damning to the concept of a supreme creator god. The fact that genetic evidence has now come along puts the lid on the coffin of the creator god’s casket.

Evidence that invalidates religion, including all the Abrahamic religions, showing how each were manufactured by human beings in an effort to manipulate others is the dirt that is shoveled over god’s coffin.

Then why do so many “atheists” proclaim merely that “We don’t know.” It is so very clear that we do know, but are afraid to say. These “We don’t know” atheists are truly simply agnostics. As far as I am concerned agnostics are simply cowards!
Yes You Do, No I don’t, Yes You Do, No…Really I Don’t ….. November 25, 2013

2013/11/24

A delusional person cannot see reality, at least where their delusion is concerned. You can tell them white is white and offer more than adequate proof that this is so, but, stubbornly, they insist it is black.

Recently, on a frequent basis, I see stories in the news and from other sources written by the religious that proclaims that even atheists believe and fear the word of god. I admit that for those newly minted atheists that this may be true, that is, that they fear using scripture negatively.

For the newly minted atheist who has seen enough to decide that things are not exactly, perhaps not at all, as the pastor of his former church has taught in endless sermons on Sunday mornings. Despite this revelation, this epiphany of thought, after years of indoctrination and having been taught to think a certain way, the thought that god is staring, ever so intently over your shoulder, is hard to shake.

Many newcomers to the world of non-belief having nagging fears of committing some blasphemous act against the god they thought they knew. Though they have through exploration reached the conclusion that the bible is a work of fiction, somehow they retain residues of respect for its pages. For some it seems so wrong to dismember and destroy this book, this book that has caused humankind such pain.

As time progresses for the atheist newcomer such reverence will fade. Some, no doubt because of deep indoctrination, will never lose this feeling that they are committing some immoral act by failing to believe. There will always be some nagging doubt. For many, however, such as myself, who never gave much credence to such beliefs, merely using the believers as a remedy to loneliness, the reverence soon fades to nothing. The book assumes a place on the shelf as fiction.

Do I wish the bible banned? No. I do, however, urge those who have one to read it carefully with reason turned on. Somewhere along the way while reading the outrageous claims found therein, I would expect a spark to ignite, eureka to be exhaled, and a new atheist born.

For those insistent religious that proclaim even atheists must believe I remind you that you are living a delusion. Those who live in a delusion cannot see the reality.
The Overbearing Ego of Humanity … November 20, 2013

2013/11/20

For much of documented history humanity gazed upon the stars and asserted that the entirety of existence held earth at its center. Religious dogma at the time insisted upon such a viewpoint.

As human beings came to understand the massiveness and arrangement of the universe the egotistical stance that held earth as the center could no longer stand. Despite the resistance of the clergy it was eventually decided that the earth must be demoted from the center, from its unique position, to mere mundaneness.

Did this demotion find human ego deflated? Of course not. There were, after all, many other ways to express an enormous ego. God, it seemed, did not die with the understanding that earth was not so unique. Life had not yet been found to exist elsewhere and has not yet been found to this day.

People who live their lives with such confidence believing some omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent being holds them in such importance that it will alter the schedule of events for them alone exhibit egos unbounded and vast. They fail to notice that such beliefs are a contradiction. To be omniscient their god would depend on a future predetermined and unchanging while omnipotence would allow unrestrained ability. Such a being is impossible.

Even now, in this millennium, religion still exists and resists the knowledge which science delivers. Education, they demand, should be controlled and directed in such fashion as would permit the continued existence of outdated, ancient, and archaic beliefs. Science, it was determined, was a threat to the maintenance of humankind’s enormous conceit.

Even those in scientific circles now seem determined to promote a position of importance for those who stand around possessing a conscious mind and a seeing eye. The observer not only exists, it is conjectured, but the fabric of existence itself is affected by the observer’s gaze.

At this point I cannot help but to reflect upon some past thoughts of my own. I often considered my own existence and in my immaturity felt that should I cease to have consciousness the whole of existence would fade and embrace oblivion. I see this conjecture that the observer has some influence upon existence as an expression of bloated human ego. I see it as immature and self aggrandizing. This concept that an observer is not only inevitable but necessary to reality’s existence is no different than my youth’s thought that the universe would vanish with my passing. Reality, I posit, would do just fine without someone looking.

I must admit, however, humanity is simply being consistent in its arrogance.
Tiny Bubbles or Where No One Has Thought Before … November 18, 2013

2013/11/17

At first the ancient peoples were content with the world. It seemed very roomy, immensely large. Though some remained convinced that it was flat and that the sun circled the world and went under it at night, many thought it round. The stars remained a tapestry for some hundreds of years; the moon an object provided by god to light the night.

Soon, though, discontent set in and looking again there were those who found it sound to think that there were other orbs besides the earth. Still, arrogant as they were, earth was the center around which all flew. Great thinkers arose who examined further still. The sun, they found, was the center of the orbits, even of the earth’s.

Great vessels plied the seas and soon affirmed, the earth was round, as round as a sphere. When they traversed the circumference of the planet, the planet shrank in size, at least in thought. They knew the land and sea was finite and came to wonder how small it really was. Again, those of greater intellect came forward and from mathematic equations were able to estimate an approximation. Though human kind pale in size when compared to the planet, the planet shrank in size, in thought, once more.

Contentment is a fleeting condition and so the thinkers began to wonder just what lie beyond the sun. Using astronomical calculations they found many other planets circling the sun above. Earth was even less unique, it seemed, and smaller still. As observational equipment grew in quality and power, soon enough it seemed the sun was being swarmed by numerous bodies. Even a band of tiny orbs was found between Mars and Jupiter. Still more discoveries, farther out, reduced the Earth to mere membership in the horde.

Planet membership grew to nine, but soon someone noticed that Pluto was merely a planetoid, being one of many outer orbs, and not even the largest. Membership now down to eight.

These blasted thinkers, why won’t they go away, thought more about what lie out further still. They came to understand the immensity, of at least what they could see, when they grew to understand that there were multitudes of stars, some bigger than our sun, out there. Billions, billions they saw, as plentiful as the sand on the beach. They were astounded at the size of the universe.

Technology, like thinkers, never rests. Soon it was clear that some of those stars were not stars at all. Astounded they discovered we reside in just one of many galaxies. Billions, they discovered, billions of galaxies. What a pinprick then, the Earth became.

Satisfaction with the status quo, not being a normal state, soon the thinkers tread softly into the unknown, the unseen. What, they wondered, was beyond the horizon, that distance to which they were restricted? Was there an edge? Did those galaxies that seemed to be fleeing the vicinity of one another merely pile up on a wall? Was there a wall at all? If there were, they scratched their heads, what lies beyond?

Was our universe merely a bubble? Perhaps it’s one of many. Bubble universes touching or not, separate and different. What are these madmen thinking? Are they trying to reduce existence to the soap-like bubbles in our bath?

Our universe, for whatever reason, favors our existence. Conditions are mild enough it seems that life can form and adapt to what is offered. These great minds speculate that though our universe may be suitable, many others may not be so friendly. Not having seen the edge of ours, I wonder, how can they know it ends? With the disparate galaxies madly fleeing in directions opposed to one another, does the bubble expand or does matter gather like some lather upon a curved wall? I think these people with their large capacity thinking organs are no different than the ancients who guessed at what produced the rain, the wind, the sky. They are way beyond the technology capable of verifying their grandiose thought. Are they very much like those that think, and think, and think to the point where even reality fades into a delusion? Perhaps their thought is stuck in overdrive?

I have always been pro-science. I will always be pro-science. Nevertheless I like at least to understand before I consider adopting new thought. There is so much science that seems more like common sense, then there is quantum physics. I begin to wonder if they are merely treading unknown thought, or if they have simply gone off the pier.
Too Rude and Crude … November 13, 2013

2013/11/13

There are many people who claim that they are outspoken, straightforward, to-the- point, or frank. They are proud of this habit of speaking without any notion of civility. If someone is hurt all the better as sometimes, it is asserted, the truth is painful. These apathetic individuals, lacking tact and manners, in their final hours wonder “Where have all my friends gone”.

“But with me you will always know where you stand”, they claim. I doubt so much that those holding such immature stances would receive such knowledge from others as they dish out, with thanks. There’s something wrong there, inside their cranium, so full of apathy and containing so little empathy. Do these louts go about insulting those with handicaps, those with disfigurements, those overweight or too thin? Surely, some day, those who have so much apathy and speak their minds without restraint will speak the wrong word to the wrong person and achieve an early end.

The world is full of calloused people, mean people, with deep throats that issue profanities, insults, and barbs. Beyond their families I cannot see any acquaintances more secure than casual. In time of need, and in old age, such brutish people will no doubt be abandoned. Despite pronouncements to the contrary most give what they get in exchange. My hand does not reach out to save the calloused, the outspoken, the frank of speech, but instead is clasped upon the hands of those who have kindness in their bearing.

Our species survived because of cooperation, not apathetic behavior. We succeeded due to our empathy for one another not because we didn’t care.
Imagine a World Free of Religion … November 11, 2013

2013/11/10

What if religion never came to be?

Religion, it must be grudgingly admitted, was the inspiration for some great works of art, music, and architecture. Other forms of inspiration, however, guided human endeavor in the development of music, art, and invention as well. Sometimes a moment of clarity in thought, an epiphany, can give birth to new ideas, innovations.

It must be recognized that where music is concerned human procreation urges provided the platform for many compositions. Religion excites many of the same areas of the brain excited by these primitive urges and so perhaps many if not all of the great accomplishments for which religion is accredited might have transpired without the baggage religion inevitably brings.

Scientists, inventors, and other great human entrepreneurs have developed numerous incredible advances while being said to be possessed. Upon realizing the possibility of the fruition of an idea or epiphany these individuals will work, sometimes to exhaustion, finding the means by which to make the idea or epiphany a reality. This relentless pursuit of a goal was sparked not by religion but by that moment of clarity wherein an individual could see a possibility, perhaps an answer to a problem, or a new way of doing something.

The Dark Ages, undeniably precipitated by religion, was a blight upon humanity’s past. There is a gap within which technological development was nearly at a standstill. During this time most answers were not sought through scientific means but by looking to religion. There may have been a period of at least six hundred years during which humanity stagnated. This is not to say that there were not any bright spots within this period. Numerous bright individuals, having gained literacy through whatever means (the church was in charge of literacy in those times, almost exclusively), made many scientific discoveries. However, the church leaders were wary of these people and if these bright innovators crossed certain forbidden lines they were persecuted by the church, sometimes severely. What if the church were not there to stymie these advancements? What if religion were not in the way blocking thought that contradicted scripture? Would we have had 600 extra years of advancement instead of stagnation?

Certainly there would have still been many testosterone prompted conflicts, wars, which would have stymied progress. In many cases these testosterone prompted conflicts utilized religion as a means to gather and control contestants in these battles. What if religion were not there as a means of control? The absence of this means of organizing armies would make conflict more difficult, control more difficult. Still, there would be the treasures obtained by warfare available to prompt the greedy. The promise of riches, however, is not motivating to all. Many care more about making a living and supporting their families than conquest and acquisition of access wealth. There is much to risk in conquest, like life and health.

I think it can safely be said that though there would still be many wars, conflicts, they might have been fewer with the absence of religion. So then, perhaps there might have been less than six hundred years of additional progress but there could have been perhaps two hundred more.

Two hundred years, perhaps, at least, might have brought us to a level where the moon bases envisioned by many science fiction writers could have been realized. A base on Mars might even be within the realm of possibility. Other advancements in science and medicine might have eliminated disease, prolonged life to an average of 150 to 200 years by now. One hundred and fifty years might be the new fifty. Even with two hundred years I could not imagine humanity making a discovery that would make interstellar flight commonplace. That pesky light speed barrier may never be broken.

If religion were non-existent there would not be the baggage of bigotry, misogyny, and that dangerous concept of life after death. The concept that there is a better life after the one we are living lessens the value of this life and paralyzes the desire to improve it. It allows the subjugation of individuals, makes them blithely accept servitude, in hopes of an afterlife of euphoric nature. It was not Christianity that freed the slaves, indeed, it was Christianity that promoted it. By promising a rosy afterlife it allowed the masters to rule by making the population quiescently accept their lot in life. It, religion, even promised that the greater would be lesser, and the lesser greater. The lowest and most humble were promised the greatest reward.

Religion has been like a ball-and-chain. It has slowed humanity and kept it from making achievements and advancements at the rate it might have attained without it. Even today religion threatens to strengthen these chains and freeze humanity in place. Unless religion can be removed from its perch of authority humanity will never realize its potential.
Ravings of a Non-Scientist … November 6, 2013

2013/11/06

Consider a universe which arose from nothing. The catalyst for such an event can only be speculated upon as there were no witnesses. There would be many who would insert a god as a catalyst, others who might guess it spontaneous or caused by something unknown. There is no proof of any nature to substantiate that it was a god or that it was spontaneous. It must remain unknown.

If you started with nothing then the balance of what might be created would have to equal nothing. There would have to be equal quantities of matter and anti-matter so that the balance of the universe would equal nothing. Matter and anti-matter cancel each other out.

Presently we have a universe where there is a preponderance of matter and a much less quantity of anti-matter. With this discrepancy considered then the universe would have had to start with something. Convention is that this something was energy squeezed into an unimaginably dense point which exploded. Perhaps this is the case.

Suppose instead that the universe did start from nothing. Suppose there is antimatter equal to matter. We can see the universe only to a finite horizon with our limited means. Is it possible that the balancing quantity of the antimatter which need exist is coagulated in a sphere at the edge of the universe, surrounding it? Pluses and minuses it is said attract. Being opposites it is easy to speculate that they must attract. If antimatter attracts matter then this might explain the acceleration of the galaxies from one another. Surrounded by an enormous globe of concentrated antimatter the universe we know would surely rush toward the outer edge and soon become nothing once more. This sphere of antimatter may be in the form of an antimatter universe that is accelerating in as fast as our universe is accelerating out. In the beginning there may have been more of each, matter and antimatter, but that antimatter that remained within reach of matter, cancelled some of both out.

Of course this is just imagination at work. As non-provable as any god or big bang.