Monday, 4 July 2016

Thoughts of Freedom on Independence Day Weekend.

A common family tradition at Thanksgiving is for everyone at the table to tell everyone else what they are thankful for; this is not so common of families on the 4th of July.  We are more caught up in BBQ, parades, and nationalism.  We rarely hear sediments connected to the Preamble: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The Preamble is about welfare for all people, protected by justice, tranquility, and common defense.
 
Looking at the news, the week leading up to the 4th of July weekend, there were many stories that show how special interests are constantly a threat to justice, tranquility, and welfare for all - here are three:

1       . Ralph’s Thriftway v. State of Washington Department of Health
2       . Opposition to SB 1146
3       . iPhones versus seer stones
 
The first story, Ralph’s Thriftway v. State of Washington Department of Health, starts on a common theme today, but then takes a bizarre twist.  The short description of this case is; Washington State passed a law on the distribution of pharmaceuticals.  The state was then taken to court as Ralph’s Thriftway requested a second law be created for Christian pharmacists.

One may agree or disagree with the either of the purposed laws; it doesn’t matter which law one supports.  The important focus is, that to protect justice and tranquility; all American’s must be subject to one law.  Further, the first sentence of the Bill of Rights reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”  Thus, it is against American’s founding to create a special law for Christians.  And therefore, Ralph’s Thriftway case lost.  But oddly the case made it all the way to the consideration of the Supreme Court last week, however, then as expected the SCOTUS
did not grant certiorari.  So what is the bizarre twist?  The curious writing is Justice Alito’s dissent, posted @  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-862_2c8f.pdf.   In the short 15-page dissent Justice Alito asked multiple times -  if pharmaceutical laws can be secular based, why not have religious based laws too?  This is an extraordinary question as the law the land, that we cannot have religious laws, was put into place by the Founders to protect justice and tranquility for all.  The Justice knows this, and therefore it is peculiar as why he would promote allowing us to open the slippery slope back to the tyranny of religious law.  Luckily the other Justices were not confused, but it still reminds us that even those at the top of the American judicial system can lose focus, and our freedoms are not guaranteed.

Last week the opposition to California SB 1146 also began to grow.   http://www.opposesb1146.com/    The bill states that post-secondary schools which receive public funding cannot practice discrimination.  The bill does not mention religion, but the right wing is fighting SB 1146 to allow religious discrimination to remain in place and for it to be publicly funded.   There are two simple takeaways from this; one don’t discriminate, but if you do don’t be a whiny little bitch when taxpayers do not support you.  This is an example of freedom the Constitution goes not grant, and one that should never be expected.
 
The third story this week which reminded me of the delicate freedoms we have, may not immediately seem on the subject.  I will connect the relevance back in - in the next few paragraphs.  The story is a post by Dieter F Uchtdorf, who is a senior representative of the LDS church.  Before I move forward with this third example I must disclose that some of the greatest people I know (like my father and my brother) are LDS, I grew up LDS, and my family is still LDS; 99% of LDS members I know are good, kind, caring people.  But this does not grant immunity to the LDS leaders that they can write or say anything they like without being held accountable for their actions.

Last Tuesday Mr. Uchtdorf posted on his Facebook page that stones can translate ancient languages to English, comparing stones to iPhones “My mobile phone is like a “seer stone.” I can get the collected knowledge of the world through a few little inputs. I can take a photo or a video with my phone and share it with family on the other side of our planet. I can even translate anything into or from many different languages! ” Our freedoms allow us to post and say anything we wish, and adults are free to believe what they want, and have their opinions.  However, those in an influential position must be held accountable for what they say.  This is especially true when children are involved.

Why is this danger to our freedom?  First, let us establish that religion does not and cannot claim invariance, That is to say, if one scientist in Utah finds a new method, this method is then tested and eventually a proof is found that is also true in New Jersey, South America, Europe, Mars, and Jupiter and outside our solar system.  If we ever did meet alien life, the same laws of physics would apply to both them and us.  And this is how we as humans normalize our ideas and judge how things are true or not true, by the scientific method.

If we teach children to believe ideas which do not have invariance, we are teaching them it is okay to believe anything authority tells you without applying the “bull shit detector” of the scientific method.  


Rocks do not translate language any more than talking snakes slither around hoodwinking unsuspecting victims.  The danger to our freedoms is that if one teaches children to forgo skeptical thinking, then these children could grow up believing anything.  Which is a danger to us all.

This last week also brought deaths of hundreds of people due to religious ideology.  A terrorist in a Bangladesh café was quoted as saying “God wants you to die.”   If you can convince a kid that rocks translate language, it isn’t much of a stretch to move to “God wants you to die." taking all of the freedoms from people that the 4th of July represents.

Sunday, 1 May 2016

Finding Gods in the Static

Part 1:

The Pyramid Texts tells us Ra-Atum made humans out of tears.  Mayan art reviles Kukulkan made humans out of corn.  The Hebrew Bible states Yahweh made humans out of dust.  In Greek religion, Prometheus made humans from clay.  Viracocha (God – Incan) made humans from rock; Bumba (God – Central Africa) made hums out of vomit; Nüwa (Chinese goddess) made humans out of mud; Kamuy (Japanese for God) used a bear. Odin as we were taught in fourth grade, made us out of logs; and Coyote, a North American god, made humans out of a beaver.  

Did each of these gods and goddess have a binary beginning or is all mythology linked?  Radcliffe G. Edmonds commented on this question in his book on myths:  “The Greek poetic and mythic tradition provides the models of and models for the society, models which are given authorities status as a description of the way the cosmos is constituted and of the proper modes of behavior with it.  Thus, these constructs, the traditional tales, have a paradigmatic function; their elements are symbols that enunciate a model with general application.  Each myth, each telling of a traditional tale, presents a different version of the model, as the teller shapes the narrative according to his perceptions of the cultural models.” (1)   Again Edmonds: “This symbolic system provides a language by which the myth-teller may communicate with his audience.  As a result, every myth is shaped by its context and the motivations of its narrator.”

In this sense, all of the gods listed above are ‘myth’.  The Incan (1000*), Mayan (2200*), and Coyote (2500*) gods evolved from North American Archaic Shamanism (6500*), which itself can be traced back to Shamanism of Central Asia (14,000*).  The Hebrew myths (2950*) are based on Zoroastrianism (3100*), Atenism (3350*), Canaanite (5000*), Egyptian (5000*) and Mesopotamian (6000*) religions.  Ra-Atum (5000*) grew out of Middle East Shamanism (14,500*).  Odin (1800*), and Prometheus (4000*) are tails based on Proto-Indo-European Polytheism (5500*).  Bumba is a spin on Nilotic Animism (5000*).  Nüwa and Kamuy are tales evolved from South Asian Shamanism (12,000*).  Middle East, Central Asian, South Asian, Paleo-Indian, and Proto-Indo-European Shamanism are all individual evolutions of Animism dating back possibly 100,000 years.

* years before present.

Each story and god developed from an earlier story and an earlier god.  The Encyclopedia of GODS, published in 1993 lists more than 2,500 deities humans have created (2).  All of which have an evolutionary path back to Animism.  Charles Segal adds: “Myth comprises a system of symbols, verbal, visual and religious.  Each myth is built up of already existing symbols and forms and, like all narrative, reforms and reorganizes those symbols in its own structures.” (3)

Myth telling of religion has existed for possibly one hundred thousand years, but about 500 years ago something changed.  Around 1550 CE, new gods stopped being created from older gods.  There are some exceptions; there are some myths that were founded rather recently, such as Wicca, Mormonism, Scientology, Voodoo, Hoodoo, Umbanda, and Santo Daime.  However, for the most part, the major gods constructed in the Iron Age, have been somewhat constant.  Even if humans change the tone of a given god over time to reflect the consensus of morality in the current population.  For example, Pope Francis, the 266th Pope, has changed the Catholic Church to reflect the progression of Catholic rank and file; in positions of sex abuse, divorce, and climate change.

In the last 100 years, the use of myth evolution in creating a new religions has almost vanished.  Why?  This change reflects how we as people see the world, and the greater universe.  The idea of a greater universe itself is new to humans; the modern era of physical cosmology is just now, in 2016, beginning its second century.  There have only been three generations which have been exposed to the fact that the Earth is just one small part of a greater cosmos. 
 
In the last ten years, the change has intensified.  The invention of the iPhone and similar personal devices killed miracles and myths paralleled to when barbed wire killed the wild west – just far faster.  Anyone today can video and event, and they do.  When someone creates a story out of an event, hours later a video will appear on YouTube showing the actual incident, and the new myth is busted before it had a chance to advance.

Something else has changed in the last decade along with the invention of person devices, which allows anyone to access and record information; that is the fastest growing religion in North America, Australia, and Europe is the non-religious (4).  Access to information is putting religion in a tailspin.  What has taken 100,000 years to evolve, may be extinct by the close of the 21st century due to the introduction of devices that allow all to access the same data.

So why is access to intelligence killing mythology?  A modern study from the University of Texas at Austin may have the answer (4).  The study presented groups of people two tests; the first test was a bit of a ruse.  The first test allowed one group to feel in control of their answers.  The second group was exposed to questions they could not answer – or were given negative feedback on any particular answer submitted.  In the second part of the test (the real test), both groups were given a grainy picture and asked to find meaning in the image.  The first group who had a feeling of control from the first test found nothing in the static.  The second group, who were left feeling no sense of control from the first part of the test, found meaning in the static.  The conclusion of the study:  “Individuals who lack control seek to find and impose order in the world through superstition, rituals, and conspiratorial explanations.”  Wow, this study may explain much of what the human experience is.

Part 2:

Allow us to look at an example of how access to information changes a common myth.  When I was a child, my parents took me to a church where I was exposed to writings of the New Testament.  One story I remember from Mark is when Jesus calms the sea, and of course when Jesus walks on the sea.  As a child in the 1970s, I had no control over how to interrupt the writings of Mark other than based on the instruction of the youth teacher of my parent's religious preference.
    
Today we have countless interruptions available to consider.  One of these comes from David Growler, professor of religion Oxford College.  Growler describes how students of literature in the first century were taught to write.  Specify the teachings of Chreia and Progymnasmata: “Progymnasmata were a standard part of first-century CE educational curriculum, and the exercises found in them represent widespread educational practices from the early first century BCE.  The work performed in these texts prepared students to use chreiai rhetorically within extended prose composition (Bonner 1977: 250, 276; Hock and O’Neil 2002: 81-83).  These exercises took youths one step at a time through the skills required to construct more complex rhetorical compositions.  The basic emphasis was to develop students’ abilities to say and write the same thing – or variations of the same thing – in different ways.  This exercise thus also greatly influenced student’s skills of oral argumentation.   The rhetorical handbooks and other chreia elaborations in ancient literature demonstrate that speakers/ authors were free to vary the wording, details, and dynamics of chreiai according to their ideological and rhetorical interests.  Speakers/Authors were taught and encouraged to make minor and/or major changes to bring clarity and persuasiveness to the point they wanted to make with a chreia in specific contexts.” (5)

Now that we have insight into the instruction of first-century authors, let us examine a few verses in Mark on the crucifixion and compare them with writings in Psalms, an older book from the Hebrew Bible:

Mark 15.24: ‘They part his garments among them, casting lots upon them.’
Psalm 22.18: ‘They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon them.'
Mark 15.29-31: ‘And those who passed by blasphemed him, shaking their heads and saying, “. . . Save yourself . . . “ and mocking him, saying “He who saved others cannot save himself!”’
Psalm 22.7-8: ‘All those who see me mock me and give me lip, shaking their head, saying “He expected the lord to protect him, so let the lord save him if he likes”.'
Mark 15.34: ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’
Psalms 22.1: ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’

The above table is a simple and clear example of how Mark was not writing from a historical viewpoint.  Instead, he is reconstructing an earlier myth to fit the current political environment.  Based on this unassuming example and knowing Progymnasmata was in practice at the time, a person can now begin to interpret Mark differently than my Sunday School teacher did.

Mark also used other sources; here is a short description of the ninth book of Homer's Odyssey:

Ulysses and his legion came ashore to an island overrun with wild goats, which had meadows that in some places came down to the sea shore.  Ulysses and his men walked to a cave on the island to meet a cyclops whose name was Polyphemus.   Upon meeting Ulysses, Polyphemus asked Ulysses in a loud voice ". . do you sail as rovers, with your hands against every man, and every man's hand against you?"  Polyphemus asks Ulysses his name, to which Ulysses answers "Noman."  Ulysses cast out Polyphemus's eye and escaped under the belly of the cyclops' sheep.  When Ulysses boarded his ship and left the land he called out to Polyphemus, "Cyclops, if anyone asks you who it was that put your eye out and spoiled your beauty, say it was the valiant warrior Ulysses, son of Laertes, who lives in Ithaca." As Ulysses sailed away, Polyphemus begged Ulysses to stay to which he answered no.

Mark 5: 1 - 20, here is a description from these verses:

Jesus and his disciples came ashore to a land that was overrun with pigs, which had meadows that allowed the pigs to walk down to the sea. Jesus and his disciples walked to a tomb and met a man so strong that no chain could bind him.  The man asked Jesus in a loud voice "What have you to do with me, Jesus . . . do not torment me." Jesus asked him his name, to which he replied "Legion."   Jesus cast out the legions from the man into the pigs of the land.  When Jesus boarded his ship to leave the land he told the man to "Go home to your friends, and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he had mercy on you."  As Jesus sailed away, the man asked to come with Jesus, to which he answered no.

The author of Mark reused the poetry of Homer.  Replacing Ulysses with Jesus, goats with pigs, cave with tomb, the Cyclopes with a possessed man and so on.   Robert M. Price, PhD New Testament, provides a deep dive into this and other New Testament reuses of the writings of the Septuagint, Homer, Euripides' Bacchae, and Josephus, in his 2005 book "New Testament narrative as Old Testament midrash".

The historian Richard Carrier from Columbia University offers a third and more complex example:  “Like Moses, Jesus begins each sequence of five miracles with a sea miracle (a rather conspicuous coincidence), in which he proves his dominance over the waters of chaos.  Like Moses, Jesus treads on them and commands them – and in the same order: Moses parts the sea, then crosses; so in sequence one, Mark has Jesus calms the sea, then in sequence two, Mark has Jesus walk on it.  --  Jesus heals the sick (for which we are given two full narratives each, conspicuously the same number in each sequence, and in one sequence both are women, while in the other, both are men), corresponding to the second miracle of Moses, in which the faithful are assured power over diseases.  Jesus also exorcise demons (for which we are given one full narrative each, also conspicuously the same number in each sequence, and in one sequence a woman, in the other a man, this time reversed), corresponding to the fifth miracle of Moses, which exhibits power of the forces of evil (except demons in this case rather than soldiers), And near the end of each sequence we get a miraculous feeding, echoing Moses’ power to call mana from heaven. (and thus, miraculously provide sustenance for his flock, this third miracle in Exodus). Like Moses,  Jesus’ miraculous feedings take place in the wilderness, involve ‘gathering up’ the food, everyone is fed, and they end up with more than they start with (compare Exod. 16.4-5 with Mk 6.43; 8.8; and 8.19-20).” (6).

Carrier, Robert M. Price, and others have listed in great detail how the book of Mark is an adaptation of early writings – modified to fit the contemporary political environment.  Combine this with the knowledge Growler provided, that first-century literature promoted the reuse of earlier stories; I now come to a different conclusion on Mark’s writings than when I was a youth attending church -- I don’t believe the author of Mark ever expected his writings would someday be looked at in a historical context!
 
Mark wrote a fictional political construct based on earlier stories which were available to him as he was taught to do by the educational system of the time.  Matthew, Luke, and John followed this tradition, basing their writings on Mark.  This practice is the method employed by the evolution of mythology.  As Price pointed out “The Quran was assembled from a variety of prior Hagarene texts (hence the contradictions re Jesus’ death) in order to provide the Moses-like Muhammed with a Torah of his own . . .”   This practice continued over the next millennium, slowing by the mid 16th century, but appeared again in the 19th century.  It reappeared, although rather differently, in the form Chiasmus displayed in the book of Mormon where major themes familiar to the author are inverted to form rhetorical parallelism; As Joseph Smith re-used earlier forms of writing from the Bible and other ancient Middle Eastern texts.

Today we have a plethora of information available to us, a considerable change from merely 20 years ago.  The world in 2016 allows humanity access to material that was never possible before modern technology was introduced to the public; many of these introductions have been made in the current decade.  Technology allows us to understand the world around us; more and more people have control of their physical surroundings.  And thus, the evolution of supernatural myth is virtually extinct.  Myth in someways has been replaced by propaganda, which while still an issue, propaganda is based on, for the most part, natural events;  Opposite to the intrinsic supernatural settings of myth. Today far fewer people find gods in the static, however most of the 'news' we are exposed to is created.  In general news is based on actual events, but then adopted to stimulate controversy, debate and conflict, by professional storytellers.  These storytellers are employed to appeal to audiences on the left, and audiences on the right.  Thus, while humanity is digging itself out of a past based on religious mythology, we find ourselves in a new breed of fictional political constructs.

1.      978-1-107-40730-5 - Myths of the Underworld Journey: Plato, Aristophanes, and the ‘Orphic’ Gold Tablets.  Radcliffe G. Edmonds III, p. 6.

2.      0-8160-2909-1 – Encyclopedia of GODS.  Michael Jordan.

3.      Interpreting Greek Tragedy: Myth, Poetry, Text.  Charles Segal  1986, p 49.

4.      The World’s Newest Major Religion: No Religion.  National Geographic. April 2016 < http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160422-atheism-agnostic-secular-nones-rising-religion/>

5.     The Chreia in The Historical Jesus in Context.  Princeton University Press.  David Growler. Chapter 7.


6.      On the Historicity of Jesus.  Richard Carrier. 2014 p 416-7   

Wednesday, 20 April 2016

Dao De Jing

The past few evenings I read the Dao De Jing as translated by Roger T. Ames and David L. Hall.   Rozann put it in my stocking this past Christmas, it is not the type of book I would normally pick to read.  Philosophy in general is obsolete.  However Rozann is traveling this week, and the books I have been reading I managed to leave behind in the Santa Clara office.  So I needed to do something during my off hours this WW -- one thought from each chapter:



Chapter 1:
 The nameless is the fetal beginnings of everything that is happening,
            While that which is named is their mother.
              
             Google was a backrub in 1996.

Chapter 2:
 As soon as everyone in the world knows that the beautiful are beautiful,
            There is already ugliness.

The smuts we are, we can't help but to put things in boxes, and then label the box before filing. It is too hard not to.

Chapter 3:
               Not prizing property that is hard to come by
               Will save them [others] from becoming thieves.

The Dao De Jing was writing in the Iron Age as was the Hebrew Bible; these were horrible times in human history.  It was a very dark time after successes of humanity in the Bronze Age were lost.  Mothers didn’t expect their kids to make it to adulthood.  If you had something good, you were best to keep it to yourself.

Chapter 4:
               I do not know whose progeny it is;
               It prefigures the ancestral gods.

I like this idea; we think of 600BCE as the ancients.   It is obvious from this phrase the Chinese in 600BCE had their own concept of ancients to them.  And it makes me consider those who will live on Earth in the year 4000CE will look at us as their ancients.

Chapter 5:
The heavens and the Earth are not partial to institutionalized morality.

This phrase stands on its own; it did then, it does now.

Chapter 6:
               The life-force of the valley never dies.

They didn’t understand (or even care as far as I can tell from the reading) what happens when the Sun runs out of hydrogen.  I suppose I don’t care either, as it is so far off, but we do know now that we live in a special time, a time where we have a visible universe.  Billions of years from now the universe grow dark, and the life-force will die.  Iron Age ignorance bliss it seems.

Chapter 7:
The reason the world is able to be lasting and enduring
Is because it does not live for itself
This it is able to be long-lived.

This reads like complete garbage, what a philosopher from Sedona would tell you today if you paid them to read the lines in your hand.
                 
Chapter 8:
               The highest efficacy is like water,
               It is because water benefits everything.

               Good thought for thinking inward – and outward.

Chapter 9:
               It is better to desist
               Then to try to hold it upright and fill it to the brim.

Many things come to mind when digesting this thought, most of them will be smarter than my comment to follow; but hey, let’s face the music and dance tonight while the moon is still out – tell me the rest tomorrow.

Chapter 10:
Are you able to become a newborn babe?

No, Nix, Go fish.

Chapter 11:
This chapter is 100% philosophical rubbish, nothing worth quoting.

Chapter 12:
               The five flavors destroy the palate.

I am sure this is an early version of Matthew’s “no one can serve two masters”.   But if the author were to watch the food network in 2016, different words would have been used.

Chapter 13:
 . .  whenever favor is bestowed, both gaining it and losing it should be cause for alarm.

All primates are sentient social beings who will come into favor and drop out of favor.  To not do so would be as expected as it would be for teenagers to abstain from sex.   But, I would agree, it is good to keep track of when favors come and go; smart.

Chapter 14:
               Groping and yet not getting it
               We thus call it “intangible.”

               The author never met Jake Plumer.

Chapter 15:
               Muddy water, when stilled, slowly becomes clear;
               Something settled, when agitated, slowly comes to life.

Like ten chapters earlier; This phrase stands on its own; it did then, it does now.

Chapter 16:
Using common sense is to be accommodating.

Common sense of any given time period, in general, turns out to be proven wrong in the next period.   Those who employ common sense rarely if ever improve living standards or human knowledge.   So yes, when we engage in common sense we do so to accommodate the surrounding contemporary culture.

Chapter 17:
With the most excellent rulers, their subjects only know that they are there,
               The next best are the rulers they love and praise,
               Next the rulers they hold in awe,
               And the worst are the rulers they disparage.

Written as well as any modern day Libertarian Atheist would write it.    Note: The third and fourth level are the stories of the Jewish Bible and the Qur’an’s God.

Chapter 18:
It is when wisdom and erudition arise
That great duplicity appears.

This seems to have been written under the influence of ancient Chinese honey wines.   It would not be surprising that the authors wrote both day and night, and some nights the hawthorn may have come into play.

Chapter 19:
               Cut off sagacity and get rid of wisdom.

This was, in my current judgment, written about two days after recovering from the honey consumed when writing Chapter 18.

Chapter 20:
               The author was on a rampage in chapter 20:
Cut off learning and there will be nothing to more to worry about.
                             
How much difference is there really between a polite “yes” and an emphatic “no!” ?

                              Those who people fear
                              Cannot but also fear other.

So indefinite! Does this humbuggery ever come to an end!

As with Chapters 5 and 15, Chapter 20 is self-evident in modern time.  And yes it comes to an end.   If anyone read this far and tells me, I’ll add my commentary on the other 61 chapters of the Dao De Jing.  Else I’ll finish a glass of modern day honey and call it a night.   Cheers.

Tuesday, 5 April 2016

A Mid-201x Helical View of our Solar System

The achievements in positional measurements of celestial bodies in Mesopotamia and other regional powers of the Bronze Age were lost in social collapse brought on by climate change (or attack by “sea people” – really there is a fun online Crash Course, by John and Hank Green on the subject).   The layer model in the Iron Age replaced the knowledge of cosmology lost by the ancients.

The layers: The “underworld” held up the Earth; the ‘firmament’ (the air) held up the Moon; the Moon to Mercury; Mercury to Venus; Venus to the Sun; Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn; and a final layer for all the stars (top of heaven).   It was not always in this order, sometimes the firmament was above the sun, the moon and the starts – with water above the firmament and water below, as depicted in the following picture:



While the layers changed depending on who explained the concept there was a basic idea of a static universe;  if represented by the seven-layer dip, hell would be the refried beans, we live in the guacamole, and heaven is a mixture of green onions and chilies.  Iron Age ideas set humans back ~2700 years.  But we must remember the Bronze Age collapse was a dark age for the Mediterranean, a sudden decrease of technology and literacy.  Thus, it isn’t hard to understand why the Bronze Age measurements in positions, motions, and magnitudes of stars degenerated into a seven layer dip by the dawn of the Common Era.

That 2700 year extended dark age of cosmology ended between the mid-fifteen or sixteen-hundreds depending on who you ask and the human mind has been kicking ass building instrumentation to expand our view of the universe since.  Here is a 2015 helical model of our solar system https://youtu.be/mvgaxQGPg7I . . . this would blow the socks off, and most likely cause a few strokes in our Iron Age ancestors.  The first notable stand out is the lack of an “underworld”; there is nothing under Earth; there isn’t even a concept of “under Earth,” it is a sphere.  I hope the next time you hear the term underworld you roll your eyes – at least metaphorically act out an Iron Age meme.

On the other hand -- The seven layers of heaven (the dip) looks exactly like we would expect it to look if created by the minds of iron-age humans who were fighting to make their first attempt at cosmology, psychology, and philosophy; a first attempt at politics and control of the environment, in the wake of a sudden cataclysm in the region. 

Sunday, 27 March 2016














Thinking a few months into the future, I was wondering, who would make a fitting running mate for Donald Trump?   Huckabee?  Christie?  Carson?   Maybe any of the three, but there is a far better match for Trump – Kanye West!    Just line them them up:

Trump

West

Nobody builds walls better than me.
Kanye West has a giant mural on a wall in Melbourne of Kanye West making out with himself.
. . people would say I’m the super genius of all time.  The super genius of all time.
I think I do myself a disservice by comparing myself to Steve Jobs and Walt Disney and human beings that we’ve seen before.
My whole life is about winning.
I feel like I’m too busy writing history to read it.
I feel a lot of people listen to what I have to say.
I liberate minds with my music.
“I’m the No. 1 developer in New York.  I’m the biggest in Atlantic City.
I am Warhol.  I am the No. 1 most impact full artist of our generation.  I am Shakespeare in the flesh.
I have an attention span that’s as long as it has to be.
I would never want a book’s autograph.  I am a proud non-reader of books.
I actually don’t have a bad hairline.  .  . there is no problem (with size of hands or anything else)
I don’t know what’s better gettin’ laid or gettin’ paid.
People love me.
If I was just a fan of music, I would think that I was the number one artist in the world.
I think I was born with the drive for success because I have a certain gene.
I really want a Male Heir
I’ve got the hottest brand in the world.
Man, I’m the No. 1 living and breathing rock star.
I was a great student.  I was good at everything.
I still think I am the greatest.
I win at golf.  I’m a club champion many times at different clubs.
West left Nike for a more lucrative deal at Adidas.
I had tremendous success in show business.
 . . . I have decided in 2020 to run for president.
Nobody Reads the Bible more than me. . . I love evangelicals.
I am God’s vessel

Donald can’t go wrong with Kanye, they are quite the pair.



Friday, 4 March 2016

High Standards of Realism and Precision

Not so hidden in the Cave allegory, & Plato’s theory of Ideals lies the “deepest reality”.   From this deep reality comes the Ideal Cat and an Ideal Human, which in part enabled both Greek and Abrahamic Mythology to flourish.  This top-down, idea first, mind’s eye view is ambitious; it is also quite non-precise; that is to say, it is false!

Why did Plato abandon precision?   We could make a guess as to why, but doing so would inherently abandon the point of this post.  Interestingly we can use Plato in an example of precision:

The world, alas, is not made according to the mathematical principles in the way that Plato guessed.

While this sentence is true, the opposite is also true:

The world is made according to mathematical principles, as Plato guessed.

Demanding Precision; that is back to the subject, Plato declared a mutually excluding relationship between Realism and Precision.  In many ways the pre-Newtonian Western world accepted this fragmented perception, priests and philosophers thrived on the separation.  Until, this theory-heavy, data-lite worldview began to give way to the Scientific Revolution (1550-1700).  The historian Alexandre Koyré described this new demand for precision as such:

To abolish the world of the “more or less” the world of qualities and sense perception, the world of appreciation of our daily life, and to replace it by the (Archimedean) universe of precision, of exact measures, of strict determination.

The Scientific Revolution can be looked at as a change in discrimination, and, more importantly, an acceptance of what realism is.  Newton wrote:

To explain all nature is too difficult a task for any one man or even for any one age . . . ‘Tis much better to do a little with certainty & leave the rest for others that come after you than to explain all things by conjecture without making sure of anything.

Those following Newton in time took to this task, the upheaval spun into electromagnetism, Special and General Relativity, the transistor, and the GPS guiding the Boeing 777 to the runway, which I am currently setting in while writing these words.  We really do stand on the shoulder of giants!

The result of, the product of, this new bottoms-up, theory-lite, data-heavy world is that humans became free to break from the idealism of both Plato and religion.  This break from idealism was evident in a discussion I read last week between a Christian apologist and colleague of mine.  The Christian apologist was ecstatic to declare he has “Amazing answers to probably the single most coming question atheists have [with theism].”  The question he was seeking to answer is “If God is good, then why is there so much evil in the world.”  While the Christian was very excited about sharing his new ideas on the subject with an Atheist audience; he was missing a much larger issue – atheists are no longer looking for an answer to this question, we are no longer bound in the ideal based world Plato provided us (we are free to leave the cave so to speak).  A 21st-century thinker has the benefit of understanding religion from the viewpoint history provides us; we know why gods were created.  We know when and where the Yahweh god stories developed after the late Bronze Age collapse, and we know why this story line was adopted after Jerusalem’s surrender to the Babylonian Empire.  We also know when, why, and how the Jesus myths were created, and why this particular dying and rising god grew into a new religion.  We no longer have questions for gods; rather our questions are focused on history and human nature; why we do what we do.  Unfortunately for the Christian apologist, he didn’t take the time to understand his audience.

The Realism and Precision presented by the great minds of the Scientific Revolution resulted in the end of a period, the period when philosophical perspectives on reality came from a priest.  Today we all have the ability and the benefit of having no set pre-judgments on reality.  We study realism, and the result is whatever the result it.  We do not have an emotional connection tied to the result because Plato’s Idealism has been replaced by Realism and Precision.

There is a priest one isle over on the plane where I have been writing this blog.  I can’t help but have a curiosity about how he may struggle with the question that the Christian Apologist was providing an answer for.  Should I ask him?  Should I open up issues for him, or just leave him be?  Maybe he is happy in his mind’s eye. . . .  How do believers reconcile reality with the myths they have been taught to believe?  The answer is it takes a lot of philosophy; it takes an institution based on Idealism.  I wonder, how many generations does Plato’s top-down data-lite (data-less) Idealism have left?

Philosophers (including religious visionaries) have long employed thought experiments to rationalize their positions. Thought experiments do not have the ability to prove anything.  However, they can create beautiful ideas.  Ideas large populations can follow.  Can Realism and Precision produce the same concepts of beauty that mysticism does?  Frank Wilczek, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics, discusses the problem in A Beautiful Question:

Newton’s method of Analysis and Synthesis also goes by another name: reductionism. . . .Reductionism has a bad name, not least because “reductionism” is a bad name.  The word’s plain implication is that when you have understood something, by the method of Analysis and Synthesis, you have somehow reduced it.  Your rich and complex object is “no more” than the sum of its parts.   For that  matter—and here, close to home, is where it gets disturbing—perhaps you yourself, and those you love, are “no more” than collections of molecules just doing their thing, which is behaving according to mathematical rules.

You can see how focusing on realism can leave the romantic quite empty.  John Keats, an English Romantic poet, wrote among other things “In the dull catalogue of common things . . . will clip an Angel’s wings, Conquer all mysteries by rule and line, Empty the haunted air . . . Unweave a rainbow . . .”  While Keats was never a fan of reductionism, other’s such as Carl Sagan took the same information and turned it into beauty.  Keats’ line “Empty the haunted air” is exactly the task Sagan took on in his book The Demon-Haunted World.  While Keats viewed the “catalogue” of realism as clipping an Angel’s wing, Sagan visualized science’s catalogue as a candlestick in the darkness.

Sagan, Frank Wilczek, Brian Cox, Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, Jared Diamond and others have provided a framework in our contemporary to find beauty in the relativity, symmetry, and reductionism of Realism.  An increasing population is embracing Precision of Realism.  However, one cannot deny the fervor that still exists in billions of humans for Plato’s top-down data-less Idealism.  It will be interesting to see which path we choose, and what leaders we choose, in the next year and the next decade.

Friday, 19 February 2016

How about we start by appointing an Atheist to the bench to replace Justice Scalia’s seat?

Have you ever heard the one where the Christian missionary knocks on the door of an Atheist’s house, “Do you have time to talk about Jesus Christ the Savior”, and the Atheist responds: “Sure, come on in, what would you like to know?”.  In the information age of the 21st century, it is becoming more common for Atheists to know more about Christian history than Christians do. 

In January, I wrote a post suggesting there is a questionable issue in logical deduction among millennials;  in the United States as 87% believe the New Testament stories are factual.   The problem with the deductive reasoning of this 87% is there is a complete loss in inductive reasoning.
    
To review deductive reasoning is:
               Hypothesis -> Theory -> Observation -> Confirmation.

Inductive reasoning is:
               Observation -> Pattern -> Hypothesis -> Theory.

Christians are taught at a young age to know Jesus through deductive reasoning, meaning “Jesus is our Savior,  and you are saved because of him, it says so in The Book.”   Meaning the Hypothesis and Theory are built on the observation of the New Testament writings itself.  The writings in the New Testament are the Observation.  The deduction is confirmation from reading and praying of the text.

Consider the reverse, consider the inductive reasoning of an Atheist – consider you are the Christian missionary knocking on the door of an Adult’s house, not having the advantage of indoctrination of children in a controlled church environment, and you say:

Let me tell you about the popular belief that a celestial Jewish baby, born from a virgin mother, died for three days so that he could ascend to heaven on a cloud and then make you live forever.  But only if you symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood and telepathically tell him you accept him as lord & master.  So he can remove an evil force from your spiritual being that is present in all humanity because a woman made from a man’s rib was hoodwinked by a talking reptile possessed by a malicious angel to secretly eat forbidden fruit from a magical tree.   .   . 

Sounds perfectly plausible, right?

The problem for Christians today is the growing atheist population understands:
1)      There are no books or writings contemporary to the time of the Jesus stories which survived that mention Jesus or Christianity.  The first writing history gives us is a 93CE paragraph from Josephus, which has been proven a forgery.  There are no other first century writings on the subject.
2)      Surviving books from the first century we have are what the Roman Catholic Church allowed to survive.
3)      Literature of any inductive reasoning was destroyed shortly after Rome adopted Christianity and outlawed all other ideology – i.e. much of history was destroyed at this time in the name of religion, highlighted with the burning of the Library of Alexandria (391CE).

Christianity is not plausible; it is a longshot of odds.  If I told you, someone, was hit by a car today in NYC, how much evidence you would require to believe my story?  Not much I suppose, as the story is very plausible.   But, as an adult, if I told you the “Rib -> Magical Tree -> Taking Reptile -> Virgin Birth -> Walk on Water -> Three-day Resurrection -> Eat his flesh and You will Beat Death” story would you not require just a bit of bottom-up reasoning?
  
This is why I suggested an educational problem with 87% of millennials taking the New Testament stories as history.  The other thirteen percent could easily be represented as simply those not brought up in Christian indoctrination.    Meaning the 87% represents almost a 100% success rate of Christian childhood indoctrination program.  If first-century history was taught at all in pre-college history courses in the U.S., at least one-quarter of this percentile would understand via inductive reasoning the Christian story is a human story of an ancient society which could not overcome adversity on their own due to being subjected to considerably superior and culturally dissimilar military force.   Christianity started as a grassroots organization promoting a savior god to allow hope for the subjected people of the time.

Also, a critical modern social studies course would teach the youth; lasting conditions of economic, social, and educational inequality allow for faith in a particular religious system to stay intact:

Consider the political movement and agenda of the evangelical right-wing.   It may or may not be intentional, but right-wing lobbyists fight for the removal of environmental protection laws, keeping the minimum wage low, continue to disallow single payer healthcare, and the fight against welfare programs; all of which play into the favor of promoting inequality, which, keeps religion attractive.   The push against a national minimal science education programs in the school system, and support for vouchers for private schools that can leave out subjects such as evolutionary biology, is a strike against STEM education; allowing religious ideas to be passed on to the next generation.  Laws against legal abortion - Stephen Levitt and Stephen Dubner have published substantial empirical data showing legalized abortion results in lowering crime and poverty rates; continuation of poverty helps to ensure the continuation of religion.  The battle against marriage equality by definition creates inequity.   Arguably, the two utmost important policies to worry about are the religious promotion of larger families and the right-wing’s disregards for environmental protection laws.  The combination of climate change and overpopulation will create resource contentions, which, could prove to be a self-fulfilling Armageddon policy. (http://axialinclination.blogspot.com.es/2015/06/what-does-silverback-gorilla-and-tower.html)

What is the point?  For me the point is to look at where America is today; Atheism is a growing movement that no longer needs to remain in the closet.  Putting reason before faith is the trend, but we have a long way to go.  Where to start?  How about we start by appointing an atheist to the bench to replace Justice Scalia’s seat?  Why not recognize the fastest growing world-view segment of today?  This will not happen unless YOU voice your views and come out of the closet.  Speak up!  And if you consider yourself an Agnostic, ask why – come out with our Atheist self!  Make it clear, Be open and make a difference.