I see delicate rain whispering her love,
Recall the beautiful moment
and read eternity
in the wind.
Let him cry
for his dream
is in summers blood.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Does truth lie in eye of the beholder?
Part 2 of a 3 part series exploring the nature of truth.
So what is truth?
The word truth has a variety of meanings, from honesty, good faith, and sincerity in general, to agreement with fact or reality in particular.
In fact according to WIKI there are no less than 14 different theories on truth.
For the sake of this blog I will use the most common, the Correspondence theory. Correspondence theory states that true beliefs and true statements correspond to the actual state of affairs. So we can say that there is a “fact” of matters or events. The ball is red. The sky is blue. Night is dark. We can all agree on the fact of these things. But what about questions like, will Obama fix the economy? That question is amazingly more complex then it seems on the surface. Republicans say no, democrats say yes. But why the confusion? 200 years from now we could look back and say, yes or no to that question with some authority, just as we can now say who won the civil war. So there is a fact of things, a truth to them, separate of opinion. With our bias, our opinions, and our faulty senses, how do we come to this truth?
Science and critical thinking my dear friends…
So what is this “Critical thinking”? Critical thinking is purposeful and reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do in response to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments. It is a way to process the data that we receive from our senses in order to come to a truth.
What about science? Why the hub bub about that? It is defined as systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. In other words it is a method of determining facts or truth by utilizing tools such as critical thinking and the scientific method. At its most basic form it is:
1. Use your experience: Consider the problem and try to make sense of it. Look for previous explanations. If this is a new problem to you, then move to step 2.
2. Form a conjecture: When nothing else is yet known, try to state an explanation, to someone else, or to your notebook.
3. Deduce a prediction from that explanation: If you assume 2 is true, what consequences follow?
4. Test: Look for the opposite of each consequence in order to disprove 2. It is a logical error to seek 3 directly as proof of 2.
Let’s say we have a ball, we are trying to determine the color of this ball. Let us also suppose that in this case the ball is red.
First of we observe the ball, we believe it is the color blue. We look at other balls, their labels, their characteristics. We form the hypothesis, “I think the ball is blue because my perception tells me it is blue”. We deduce “all persons must see this ball as blue”. And we create a test to determine this. So how to do that? Well, we would want this test to be independent of or senses and opinions, we would want it repeatable, and we would want our peers to look at it for mistakes. So we create a test. We take ten people, and ask them to write down what color they think the ball is. We also take another ball, a white one and ask ten more people to write down what color they think it is. This is the control group. It is there to make sure that the data we get is not skewed by something we may have missed. In addition we will be publishing our results in the magazine “Ball weekly” the premiere ball color magazine in the world for the public to review.
So what were our results? Well, our study showed that 10 out of the ten persons said that our ball was red not blue. What about our control? They all said that their ball was white, so their perception was not skewed in any way. In addition we published and our “ball enthusiast” public all also agreed that our ball is red not blue.
Our hypothesis was wrong. We run the study again, this time with the assumption that the ball is red, and our results verify our hypothesis. At this point we can call out hypothesis a theory. A theory is the highest level any answer can attain in science. Do not mistake it with the common use of the word. A theory states within 99.99999999999999999% accuracy that the data fits the theory, consistently.
In contrast faith and psudo science say that the ball is blue, because god, the bible, some divine being, some ancient wisdom, tell us it is so. This is despite the evidence, despite our study. As much as we would distort the word blue, rationalize the point, the ball would still remain factually red, not blue.
So how accurate is this wacky thing you call science? Well it depends on just how complicated a system is and how much we know about it. For example, we can predict the movement of the planets and eclipses to extraordinary accuracy. We can measure the distance to the moon to within millimeters, which is the width of a pencil lead. We can predict an eclipse to within nano seconds. In fact almost all science theory is accurate to this level. Even the Theory of evolution accurately predicted that we would find the fossils that we have, and found them and at what time in the past they would have lived. Without this accuracy in science your computer, car, phone, lights, air conditioning, stove, microwave, radio, cd player, dvd’s would not exist. If you are older than 33 you would also most likely be dead as the life expectancy has risen from 33 to 79 in just over 200 years! This is due to Science.
So thus is the power of truth.
"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in
thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth,
which never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in
self-delusion and ignorance which does harm."
[Marcus Aurelius]
So what is truth?
The word truth has a variety of meanings, from honesty, good faith, and sincerity in general, to agreement with fact or reality in particular.
In fact according to WIKI there are no less than 14 different theories on truth.
For the sake of this blog I will use the most common, the Correspondence theory. Correspondence theory states that true beliefs and true statements correspond to the actual state of affairs. So we can say that there is a “fact” of matters or events. The ball is red. The sky is blue. Night is dark. We can all agree on the fact of these things. But what about questions like, will Obama fix the economy? That question is amazingly more complex then it seems on the surface. Republicans say no, democrats say yes. But why the confusion? 200 years from now we could look back and say, yes or no to that question with some authority, just as we can now say who won the civil war. So there is a fact of things, a truth to them, separate of opinion. With our bias, our opinions, and our faulty senses, how do we come to this truth?
Science and critical thinking my dear friends…
So what is this “Critical thinking”? Critical thinking is purposeful and reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do in response to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments. It is a way to process the data that we receive from our senses in order to come to a truth.
What about science? Why the hub bub about that? It is defined as systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. In other words it is a method of determining facts or truth by utilizing tools such as critical thinking and the scientific method. At its most basic form it is:
1. Use your experience: Consider the problem and try to make sense of it. Look for previous explanations. If this is a new problem to you, then move to step 2.
2. Form a conjecture: When nothing else is yet known, try to state an explanation, to someone else, or to your notebook.
3. Deduce a prediction from that explanation: If you assume 2 is true, what consequences follow?
4. Test: Look for the opposite of each consequence in order to disprove 2. It is a logical error to seek 3 directly as proof of 2.
Let’s say we have a ball, we are trying to determine the color of this ball. Let us also suppose that in this case the ball is red.
First of we observe the ball, we believe it is the color blue. We look at other balls, their labels, their characteristics. We form the hypothesis, “I think the ball is blue because my perception tells me it is blue”. We deduce “all persons must see this ball as blue”. And we create a test to determine this. So how to do that? Well, we would want this test to be independent of or senses and opinions, we would want it repeatable, and we would want our peers to look at it for mistakes. So we create a test. We take ten people, and ask them to write down what color they think the ball is. We also take another ball, a white one and ask ten more people to write down what color they think it is. This is the control group. It is there to make sure that the data we get is not skewed by something we may have missed. In addition we will be publishing our results in the magazine “Ball weekly” the premiere ball color magazine in the world for the public to review.
So what were our results? Well, our study showed that 10 out of the ten persons said that our ball was red not blue. What about our control? They all said that their ball was white, so their perception was not skewed in any way. In addition we published and our “ball enthusiast” public all also agreed that our ball is red not blue.
Our hypothesis was wrong. We run the study again, this time with the assumption that the ball is red, and our results verify our hypothesis. At this point we can call out hypothesis a theory. A theory is the highest level any answer can attain in science. Do not mistake it with the common use of the word. A theory states within 99.99999999999999999% accuracy that the data fits the theory, consistently.
In contrast faith and psudo science say that the ball is blue, because god, the bible, some divine being, some ancient wisdom, tell us it is so. This is despite the evidence, despite our study. As much as we would distort the word blue, rationalize the point, the ball would still remain factually red, not blue.
So how accurate is this wacky thing you call science? Well it depends on just how complicated a system is and how much we know about it. For example, we can predict the movement of the planets and eclipses to extraordinary accuracy. We can measure the distance to the moon to within millimeters, which is the width of a pencil lead. We can predict an eclipse to within nano seconds. In fact almost all science theory is accurate to this level. Even the Theory of evolution accurately predicted that we would find the fossils that we have, and found them and at what time in the past they would have lived. Without this accuracy in science your computer, car, phone, lights, air conditioning, stove, microwave, radio, cd player, dvd’s would not exist. If you are older than 33 you would also most likely be dead as the life expectancy has risen from 33 to 79 in just over 200 years! This is due to Science.
So thus is the power of truth.
"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in
thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth,
which never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in
self-delusion and ignorance which does harm."
[Marcus Aurelius]
Monday, June 15, 2009
Is there in truth no beauty?
Disclaimer:
Today I want to start a new 3 part blog post on the nature of truth. Mind you, I am not referring to the subjective truth that we all feel from time to time, but rather the objective truth, the fact, the reality. This post shall also reveal things that one might find offensive and or objectionable, but after all, that is the nature of truth.
Is there in truth no beauty?
Ever since I was a small child I have always been asking questions. I have always been interested in the reasons behind things, the truth of the matter if you will. This of course led to some rather uncomfortable confrontations in catholic school. Inevitably this evolved to the usual curiosity that most children have, although I suspect most children didn’t try to disassemble a television. In college I had the good fortune to attend several classes on Western History. Please forgive me, I do not remember the professors name, but if you can imagine a class being taught by an atheist jesus you get the picture. One of the most valuable thing he or anyone for that matter has ever taught me was that there was a truth to history, to people, that was quite different to the popular view. For example the events attributed to Paul Revere and his famous ride, was a fiction, created by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and detailed the account of three different riders. I became fascinated with this.
As a society we tend to glorify individuals, to raise them on a pedestal or deify them. In a very real sense we remove their accomplishments from the realm of the possible. An analogy would be saying that the pyramids were built by Aliens. This implies that humans are incapable of building them on their own. To illustrate this point I will need three volunteers……. Ok, you in the first row The Dahli Lama, and you next to him, Gandhi, and what about you in the back with the blue scarf, Mother Theresa.
When we think of all three of these people we get this mental image of great peace keepers or incredible humanitarians. I’m not here to dispute that claim, but did you know that one of these people was a vocal racist against blacks? That one of these people accepted millions of dollars from the CIA to fund guerrilla warfare in his former country? Or that one of these created a cult of suffering and denied basic health care to those that she professed to help all the while traveling and collecting millions of dollars to open more “hospitals”. Don’t believe me? Look it up, the record is clear.
The Dalai Lama admitted that he received 1.7 million dollars a year from the U.S. Government to fund guerrilla operations against the Chinese. The Dalai Lama himself was on the CIA’s payroll from the late 1950s until 1974, reportedly receiving $180,000 a year. In addition, the Tibet that he wants to go back to was a horribly unequal social situation where the peasant class comprising 95% of the population lived in abject poverty so that the remaining 5%, the priest class could live in opulent wealth. The Dalai Lama is widely considered one of the greatest humanitarians alive today.
Gandhi not only spoke out against blacks while he was in South Africa he wrote about it quite extensively in the local newspaper “ The Indian Opinion “. Gandhi’s desire for Indians to be segregated from blacks was so strong that he went to Johannesburg in late August of 1904 to protest the placing of blacks in the Indian section of the city. Gandhi was elevated to the status of Mahatma, a title reserved for the greatest of thinkers, analogous to the western “saint” and one Gandhi himself denied.
Mother Theresa and the Missionaries of Charity took in millions from whatever source they could including the family of Papa Doc, The “butcher” of Haiti. There are many accounts from prior nuns, who left the order in disgust, after seeing how the money was being squandered instead of going to the poor as promised. In addition she believed that suffering was important for the soul and denied those she sought to help basic health care. Mother Theresa has been venerated and is well on her way to Sainthood in the Catholic Church.
So what is the point of this? Why should we remember these people as they were and not as society perceives them? Well it is precisely because they have done amazing things that I want this. The Dalai Lama is the premiere humanitarian alive today. He has done untold good in the world. Gandhi started the non violent resistance movement that freed India from colonial rule and ultimately lead to the civil rights movement in the United States. And Mother Theresa went on a public awareness campaign that raised awareness for the horrible conditions and desperate poverty worldwide. She opened our eyes.
When we raise people up to the level of Sainthood, when we deify them, and create an idealized version of who they are, we set them out of reach. They become unattainable. But when we accept them as human beings, on the same level as us, with the same flaws, and fears as us, all of a sudden their great accomplishments enter the realm of the possible.
We all have the capacity for compassion that the Dalai Lama has or the strength of Gandhi or the compassion the Mother Theresa had. We all have these abilities in ourselves. We are capable of these things and so much more if we only learn to listen to ourselves, and the truth.
Today I want to start a new 3 part blog post on the nature of truth. Mind you, I am not referring to the subjective truth that we all feel from time to time, but rather the objective truth, the fact, the reality. This post shall also reveal things that one might find offensive and or objectionable, but after all, that is the nature of truth.
Is there in truth no beauty?
Ever since I was a small child I have always been asking questions. I have always been interested in the reasons behind things, the truth of the matter if you will. This of course led to some rather uncomfortable confrontations in catholic school. Inevitably this evolved to the usual curiosity that most children have, although I suspect most children didn’t try to disassemble a television. In college I had the good fortune to attend several classes on Western History. Please forgive me, I do not remember the professors name, but if you can imagine a class being taught by an atheist jesus you get the picture. One of the most valuable thing he or anyone for that matter has ever taught me was that there was a truth to history, to people, that was quite different to the popular view. For example the events attributed to Paul Revere and his famous ride, was a fiction, created by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and detailed the account of three different riders. I became fascinated with this.
As a society we tend to glorify individuals, to raise them on a pedestal or deify them. In a very real sense we remove their accomplishments from the realm of the possible. An analogy would be saying that the pyramids were built by Aliens. This implies that humans are incapable of building them on their own. To illustrate this point I will need three volunteers……. Ok, you in the first row The Dahli Lama, and you next to him, Gandhi, and what about you in the back with the blue scarf, Mother Theresa.
When we think of all three of these people we get this mental image of great peace keepers or incredible humanitarians. I’m not here to dispute that claim, but did you know that one of these people was a vocal racist against blacks? That one of these people accepted millions of dollars from the CIA to fund guerrilla warfare in his former country? Or that one of these created a cult of suffering and denied basic health care to those that she professed to help all the while traveling and collecting millions of dollars to open more “hospitals”. Don’t believe me? Look it up, the record is clear.
The Dalai Lama admitted that he received 1.7 million dollars a year from the U.S. Government to fund guerrilla operations against the Chinese. The Dalai Lama himself was on the CIA’s payroll from the late 1950s until 1974, reportedly receiving $180,000 a year. In addition, the Tibet that he wants to go back to was a horribly unequal social situation where the peasant class comprising 95% of the population lived in abject poverty so that the remaining 5%, the priest class could live in opulent wealth. The Dalai Lama is widely considered one of the greatest humanitarians alive today.
Gandhi not only spoke out against blacks while he was in South Africa he wrote about it quite extensively in the local newspaper “ The Indian Opinion “. Gandhi’s desire for Indians to be segregated from blacks was so strong that he went to Johannesburg in late August of 1904 to protest the placing of blacks in the Indian section of the city. Gandhi was elevated to the status of Mahatma, a title reserved for the greatest of thinkers, analogous to the western “saint” and one Gandhi himself denied.
Mother Theresa and the Missionaries of Charity took in millions from whatever source they could including the family of Papa Doc, The “butcher” of Haiti. There are many accounts from prior nuns, who left the order in disgust, after seeing how the money was being squandered instead of going to the poor as promised. In addition she believed that suffering was important for the soul and denied those she sought to help basic health care. Mother Theresa has been venerated and is well on her way to Sainthood in the Catholic Church.
So what is the point of this? Why should we remember these people as they were and not as society perceives them? Well it is precisely because they have done amazing things that I want this. The Dalai Lama is the premiere humanitarian alive today. He has done untold good in the world. Gandhi started the non violent resistance movement that freed India from colonial rule and ultimately lead to the civil rights movement in the United States. And Mother Theresa went on a public awareness campaign that raised awareness for the horrible conditions and desperate poverty worldwide. She opened our eyes.
When we raise people up to the level of Sainthood, when we deify them, and create an idealized version of who they are, we set them out of reach. They become unattainable. But when we accept them as human beings, on the same level as us, with the same flaws, and fears as us, all of a sudden their great accomplishments enter the realm of the possible.
We all have the capacity for compassion that the Dalai Lama has or the strength of Gandhi or the compassion the Mother Theresa had. We all have these abilities in ourselves. We are capable of these things and so much more if we only learn to listen to ourselves, and the truth.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Humanity
What an amazing time to be alive.
For the first time in this planet 4 billion year history, a species has arisen that has a clear understanding of the universe around them. Of course I am talking about us, Human Beings. We have developed great art; we are capable of great compassion, left the firmament of the earth to set foot on another world. Written monumental philosophies, and developed tools to let everyone, every human being, access almost all information. We are a way for the universe to know itself.
Only 400 years ago Johannes Kepler said “We do not ask for what useful purpose the birds do sing, for song is their pleasure since they were created for singing. Similarly, we ought not to ask why the human mind troubles to fathom the secrets of the heavens. The diversity of the phenomena of nature is so great and the treasures hidden in the heavens so rich precisely in order that the human mind shall never be lacking in fresh enrichment.”
Contrast that to Neil Armstrong’s, “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”
We were born to delight in the world. We are curious creatures. We hunger to know our origins. To decipher the mysteries of the cosmos.
And it is now, today, this instant, that through 14 billion years of cosmic time and 4 billion years of evolution that we find ourselves on a precipice.
Every species does it; they come to a crossroads of sorts. They can outgrow their environment. They can use up all their resources. They can even be snuffed out via cataclysm.
We face a challenge that no other species has ever had to deal with. Fundamentalism and ignorance are on the rise, as is a distrust of the very science that has brought us to this point in history. This combined with the 23,335 nuclear weapons still in existence all over the world makes for a very deadly combination. Surely our world leaders wouldn’t let that happen? Of course, but what if those weapons fell into the hands of groups that believe the end times are here? That believes that their ideology overrides the welfare of humanity? That believes that they have divine cause to wipe the sin from the earth? Sound farfetched? I say this that it not only will happen, that it must happen. It is a statistical probability.
That is unless we can stop it. The problem is that these humans relish in the “end time”. They want to purify the earth for their ideology. They will stop at nothing short of killing themselves to this end.
Pakistan for example is a hairs breath away from losing control of their considerable nuclear stockpile to the Taliban, unarguably on of the most fundamental of religions. In addition the Russian stock pike is slowly falling into disrepair, and their government is unable to keep tabs on all their weapons.
Scary. Yes. Insurmountable? No. We have the power to change all of this.
What an amazing time to be alive.
For the first time in human history we have the capacity to destroy ourselves, but we also have the ability to save ourselves. Through, knowledge, compassion, education, and our humanity I feel that we can overcome this. We can survive, that is if we want to.
For the first time in this planet 4 billion year history, a species has arisen that has a clear understanding of the universe around them. Of course I am talking about us, Human Beings. We have developed great art; we are capable of great compassion, left the firmament of the earth to set foot on another world. Written monumental philosophies, and developed tools to let everyone, every human being, access almost all information. We are a way for the universe to know itself.
Only 400 years ago Johannes Kepler said “We do not ask for what useful purpose the birds do sing, for song is their pleasure since they were created for singing. Similarly, we ought not to ask why the human mind troubles to fathom the secrets of the heavens. The diversity of the phenomena of nature is so great and the treasures hidden in the heavens so rich precisely in order that the human mind shall never be lacking in fresh enrichment.”
Contrast that to Neil Armstrong’s, “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”
We were born to delight in the world. We are curious creatures. We hunger to know our origins. To decipher the mysteries of the cosmos.
And it is now, today, this instant, that through 14 billion years of cosmic time and 4 billion years of evolution that we find ourselves on a precipice.
Every species does it; they come to a crossroads of sorts. They can outgrow their environment. They can use up all their resources. They can even be snuffed out via cataclysm.
We face a challenge that no other species has ever had to deal with. Fundamentalism and ignorance are on the rise, as is a distrust of the very science that has brought us to this point in history. This combined with the 23,335 nuclear weapons still in existence all over the world makes for a very deadly combination. Surely our world leaders wouldn’t let that happen? Of course, but what if those weapons fell into the hands of groups that believe the end times are here? That believes that their ideology overrides the welfare of humanity? That believes that they have divine cause to wipe the sin from the earth? Sound farfetched? I say this that it not only will happen, that it must happen. It is a statistical probability.
That is unless we can stop it. The problem is that these humans relish in the “end time”. They want to purify the earth for their ideology. They will stop at nothing short of killing themselves to this end.
Pakistan for example is a hairs breath away from losing control of their considerable nuclear stockpile to the Taliban, unarguably on of the most fundamental of religions. In addition the Russian stock pike is slowly falling into disrepair, and their government is unable to keep tabs on all their weapons.
Scary. Yes. Insurmountable? No. We have the power to change all of this.
What an amazing time to be alive.
For the first time in human history we have the capacity to destroy ourselves, but we also have the ability to save ourselves. Through, knowledge, compassion, education, and our humanity I feel that we can overcome this. We can survive, that is if we want to.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Roobie Roobie doo!
I was sitting with my son today, watching a new Scooby doo made for tv movie. This movie seemed to follow the traditional Scooby Doo formula, Kids run into ghost/ monster, Scooby and Shaggy create mayhem while the others uncover the truth of the mystery, the gang determines that this ghost/ monster is simply a mere mortal in disguise. All of a sudden I was struck with the realization that this childrens show, one that I grew up with, while horribly done and stupid at times was teaching the virtues of skepticism! Think about it, the gang would almost always find a mundane explanation for supernatural claims using reason. In fact Carl Sagan favorably compared the formula to that of most television dealing with paranormal themes, and considered that an adult analogue to Scooby-Doo would be a great public service! (thank you wiki!)
Well back to this movie, and as I waited for the "reveal" I realized that there would be none. For the first time there in fact was a paranormal explanation for the ghosts/monsters! At one point, a deity, perhaps the devil, came down to summon his minions back to whence they came. In fact the gang were all transformed into demons and Scooby himself was morphed into some kind of dog dragon. Of course they were all transformed back to normal at the end.
I was stuck by how this, the simplest of childrens programing, has contributed to this backslide of critical thinking in our society.
Even comparing the original Star Trek, from 1965 to the modern one. Great care was taken in the original to base all of the technology on real science. This seems to have been abandoned in the reboot in favor of "Red Matter" and random travel through black holes.
Is it any wonder that psudo science and ignorance is on the rise again with critical thought and science at large thrown out of even our simplest forms of entertainment.
Then again, its only a kids show. Pass the Scooby snacks wont you?
Well back to this movie, and as I waited for the "reveal" I realized that there would be none. For the first time there in fact was a paranormal explanation for the ghosts/monsters! At one point, a deity, perhaps the devil, came down to summon his minions back to whence they came. In fact the gang were all transformed into demons and Scooby himself was morphed into some kind of dog dragon. Of course they were all transformed back to normal at the end.
I was stuck by how this, the simplest of childrens programing, has contributed to this backslide of critical thinking in our society.
Even comparing the original Star Trek, from 1965 to the modern one. Great care was taken in the original to base all of the technology on real science. This seems to have been abandoned in the reboot in favor of "Red Matter" and random travel through black holes.
Is it any wonder that psudo science and ignorance is on the rise again with critical thought and science at large thrown out of even our simplest forms of entertainment.
Then again, its only a kids show. Pass the Scooby snacks wont you?
Friday, May 22, 2009
Why I don't believe........
I was recently asked why I decided to declare myself an Atheist. This answer is very complicated but I will try to be concise in my response.
I was raised Catholic. I remember sitting at the pews during mass, looking up at the huge painting of the crucified Christ before me, his mangled body, his suffering, and wondering if my father would allow the same thing to happen to me. I could not reconcile even at that early age how a loving god could let the suffering of his only son take place? To forgive our sins?
I recall that almost every evening I would find myself downstairs at my grandparents; listening to my grandfather, father, and whomever else came by arguing about philosophy, religion, or the news. These conversations would get quite heated and loud, but they thought me a very valuable lesson and that was to think, to use my brain.
Skip to High school, where I had some friends convince me to attend a local Baptist church. I was baptized and went on my merry way, attending Sundays and seminars. At this time we were living in poverty and as a result I did not have the finest clothing to wear to church. I remember the looks from the fellow worshipers, the distain on their faces. I thought to myself that even Christ hung around the poor and downtrodden, how they dare judge me for my clothing!
In the following years I continued my search for god. I became a Wiccan, almost converted to Judaism, Dabbled in Bahi, looked into Taoism and Buddhism, I even attended a service at a local Mosque.
All I found in these was contradiction and people willing to kill for their “faith”. They were not even practicing what the tenants of their religions prefaced.
And then I found the two loves of my life, history and science. History taught me that there were no less than 6 messiahs during the time of Christ that all were born of a virgin birth, raised the dead, professed to be the son of god, were sacrificed for humanity, and rose from the dead. This list also includes the Roman God Hercules (whose virgin birthday falls on December 25th). This didn’t stop there. Much of the book of Psalms was taken almost word for word from the Egyptian Pharaoh Akanatan. The story of Noah and the flood was taken, again almost word for word from the Babylonian texts, The Epics Of Gilgamesh. In fact the 4 gospels of the bible were written at least 4 decades after the death of Christ, and were only included in the bible by a committee of Christians 2 hundred years later (other books were thrown out at this time such as the Gospel of Thomas, The gospel of Judas, and the gospel of Mary Magdalene). History also taught me the almost unbelievable atrocities done in the name of god.
Science taught me that the universe is 14+ billion years old, that we evolve over time, and that there are 100 Billion stars in our Galaxy and over a 100 Billion galaxies out there. It also taught me just how precious we all are, how unique we all are, and yet how linked we all are to everything else. I learned that we are almost identical biologically to all the other primates on the planet. Most important it taught me how to think critically, how to argue logically and how to identify the fallacies in other people’s arguments. To me these concepts seem so much more profound than a myth of god or the threat of eternal damnation.
Both taught me that the functions of religion were Law and to explain the nature of the world around us. In modern times the law is the realm of government and the search for truth has been taken up by science. So what does that leave religion? Control? In the case of Fundamental Christianity and Islam that is most certainly true. One could argue that without religion we would not have the crusades, witch burning, the inquisition, the massacre of the native Americans, the holocaust, or 9-11.
But how can I be a moral person without god. Well, I believe that morality is both a taught behavior and a inherited one. Morality is the glue that holds our society together. I was raised by two very free thinkers, and I have never been in jail, never stolen a car, never had a drug problem, never ran away from home. I don’t obey the law because I am in fear of god. I obey because it is the right thing to do for me to function in society.
I no longer live in fear of offending a jealous god. I just live in fear of what his followers are capable of in his name.
I was raised Catholic. I remember sitting at the pews during mass, looking up at the huge painting of the crucified Christ before me, his mangled body, his suffering, and wondering if my father would allow the same thing to happen to me. I could not reconcile even at that early age how a loving god could let the suffering of his only son take place? To forgive our sins?
I recall that almost every evening I would find myself downstairs at my grandparents; listening to my grandfather, father, and whomever else came by arguing about philosophy, religion, or the news. These conversations would get quite heated and loud, but they thought me a very valuable lesson and that was to think, to use my brain.
Skip to High school, where I had some friends convince me to attend a local Baptist church. I was baptized and went on my merry way, attending Sundays and seminars. At this time we were living in poverty and as a result I did not have the finest clothing to wear to church. I remember the looks from the fellow worshipers, the distain on their faces. I thought to myself that even Christ hung around the poor and downtrodden, how they dare judge me for my clothing!
In the following years I continued my search for god. I became a Wiccan, almost converted to Judaism, Dabbled in Bahi, looked into Taoism and Buddhism, I even attended a service at a local Mosque.
All I found in these was contradiction and people willing to kill for their “faith”. They were not even practicing what the tenants of their religions prefaced.
And then I found the two loves of my life, history and science. History taught me that there were no less than 6 messiahs during the time of Christ that all were born of a virgin birth, raised the dead, professed to be the son of god, were sacrificed for humanity, and rose from the dead. This list also includes the Roman God Hercules (whose virgin birthday falls on December 25th). This didn’t stop there. Much of the book of Psalms was taken almost word for word from the Egyptian Pharaoh Akanatan. The story of Noah and the flood was taken, again almost word for word from the Babylonian texts, The Epics Of Gilgamesh. In fact the 4 gospels of the bible were written at least 4 decades after the death of Christ, and were only included in the bible by a committee of Christians 2 hundred years later (other books were thrown out at this time such as the Gospel of Thomas, The gospel of Judas, and the gospel of Mary Magdalene). History also taught me the almost unbelievable atrocities done in the name of god.
Science taught me that the universe is 14+ billion years old, that we evolve over time, and that there are 100 Billion stars in our Galaxy and over a 100 Billion galaxies out there. It also taught me just how precious we all are, how unique we all are, and yet how linked we all are to everything else. I learned that we are almost identical biologically to all the other primates on the planet. Most important it taught me how to think critically, how to argue logically and how to identify the fallacies in other people’s arguments. To me these concepts seem so much more profound than a myth of god or the threat of eternal damnation.
Both taught me that the functions of religion were Law and to explain the nature of the world around us. In modern times the law is the realm of government and the search for truth has been taken up by science. So what does that leave religion? Control? In the case of Fundamental Christianity and Islam that is most certainly true. One could argue that without religion we would not have the crusades, witch burning, the inquisition, the massacre of the native Americans, the holocaust, or 9-11.
But how can I be a moral person without god. Well, I believe that morality is both a taught behavior and a inherited one. Morality is the glue that holds our society together. I was raised by two very free thinkers, and I have never been in jail, never stolen a car, never had a drug problem, never ran away from home. I don’t obey the law because I am in fear of god. I obey because it is the right thing to do for me to function in society.
I no longer live in fear of offending a jealous god. I just live in fear of what his followers are capable of in his name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
