so i relish posting the latest jesus&mo.
click over to the source to read
|
|
|---|
Showing posts with label religion or not.... Show all posts
Showing posts with label religion or not.... Show all posts
jesus&mo: often
have you been told to respect others' religion, or more to the point, shut the fuck up? well, i have, and recently too, although i must say that it's extremely rare... not exactly often. to that, i say, quite simply, no.
so i relish posting the latest jesus&mo.
click over to the source to read
so i relish posting the latest jesus&mo.
click over to the source to read
half theist, half atheist
'neurologist vs ramachandran explains the case of split-brain patients with one hemisphere without a belief in a god, and the other with a belief in a god.'
at 2006 beyond belief conference -- the full talk here.
at 2006 beyond belief conference -- the full talk here.
the god of the old testament, defined
ignorant amos' comment on a post on RDFRS... long, but fun:
snip
"the god of the ΟΤ is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
unpleasant un·pleas·ant/ˌənˈplezənt/ adjective 1. causing discomfort, unhappiness, or revulsion; disagreeable.
2 chronicles 15:13 whosoever would not seek the lord god of israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
/snip
read on and on...
snip
"the god of the ΟΤ is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
unpleasant un·pleas·ant/ˌənˈplezənt/ adjective 1. causing discomfort, unhappiness, or revulsion; disagreeable.
2 chronicles 15:13 whosoever would not seek the lord god of israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
/snip
read on and on...
dan savage interviews tim minchin
skewer mouth
'when i'm being mean about religion, i'm being mean about where religion goes wrong. i'm not just being mean to people for having faith. i think about this shit a lot. but to bring it back to what you were saying, i do want to be a humanist, and i do want to point out to people that beauty is in the real world and not in the fake one, and how the language of spirituality is empty. i mean, i'm not on a mission. i'm on a mission to just play fun gigs and make people have a fucking riot of a time. but the bigger my audience gets, the more i have to take responsibility for what i'm saying.'
the entire interview here.
'when i'm being mean about religion, i'm being mean about where religion goes wrong. i'm not just being mean to people for having faith. i think about this shit a lot. but to bring it back to what you were saying, i do want to be a humanist, and i do want to point out to people that beauty is in the real world and not in the fake one, and how the language of spirituality is empty. i mean, i'm not on a mission. i'm on a mission to just play fun gigs and make people have a fucking riot of a time. but the bigger my audience gets, the more i have to take responsibility for what i'm saying.'
the entire interview here.
a field guide to bullshit
an interview with stephen law in new scientist:
believing bullshit: how not to get sucked into an intellectual black hole
snip
you identify some strategies people use to defend black hole beliefs. tell me about one of them - "playing the mystery card"?
this involves appealing to mystery to get out of intellectual hot water when someone is, say, propounding paranormal beliefs. they might say something like: "ah, but this is beyond the ability of science and reason to decide. you, mr clever dick scientist, are guilty of scientism, of assuming science can answer every question." this is often followed by that quote from shakespeare's hamlet: "there are more things in heaven and earth, horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy". when you hear that, alarm bells should go off.
/snip
also...
snip
in your book you also talk about the "going nuclear" tactic. what is this?
when someone is cornered in an argument, they may decide to get sceptical about reason. they might say: "ah, but reason is just another faith position." i call this "going nuclear" because it lays waste to every position. it brings every belief - that milk can make you fly or that george bush was elvis presley in disguise - down to the same level so they all appear equally "reasonable" or "unreasonable". of course, you can be sure that the moment this person has left the room, they will continue to use reason to support their case if they can, and will even trust their life to reason: trusting that the brakes on their car will work or that a particular drug is going to cure them.
/snip
read the full interview...
via RDFRS
believing bullshit: how not to get sucked into an intellectual black hole
snip
you identify some strategies people use to defend black hole beliefs. tell me about one of them - "playing the mystery card"?
this involves appealing to mystery to get out of intellectual hot water when someone is, say, propounding paranormal beliefs. they might say something like: "ah, but this is beyond the ability of science and reason to decide. you, mr clever dick scientist, are guilty of scientism, of assuming science can answer every question." this is often followed by that quote from shakespeare's hamlet: "there are more things in heaven and earth, horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy". when you hear that, alarm bells should go off.
/snip
also...
snip
in your book you also talk about the "going nuclear" tactic. what is this?
when someone is cornered in an argument, they may decide to get sceptical about reason. they might say: "ah, but reason is just another faith position." i call this "going nuclear" because it lays waste to every position. it brings every belief - that milk can make you fly or that george bush was elvis presley in disguise - down to the same level so they all appear equally "reasonable" or "unreasonable". of course, you can be sure that the moment this person has left the room, they will continue to use reason to support their case if they can, and will even trust their life to reason: trusting that the brakes on their car will work or that a particular drug is going to cure them.
/snip
read the full interview...
via RDFRS
dog condemned to stoning story and confirmation bias
so the story about the dog that was stoned in jerusalem was made up after all. this thing went viral... and i linked to it on facebook as well, as i avoid posting news that i can't adequately fact-check on my blog.
this link offers an image of the apology in hebrew. i cannot read it directly, and i have to trust the source that it says what it's reported as saying.
click image to source
as humans, we are all guilty at some time or another of confirmation bias. it's important to own up to it when we realize our mistake. for me, it wasn't the first time, and this time i was influenced by BBC news, which made the item seem... credible (here's the link to BBC on june 18th). cross-checking becomes especially difficult when the original is in another language.
i can say to myself that i'm not a news service, i'm a person interested in the world... but still, i feel badly about rashly reposting. if you reported this as well, i humbly suggest reposting the updated information... if we're ever going to exist in a reasonable world, we have support the best information we have.
hat tip to richard dawkins.
this link offers an image of the apology in hebrew. i cannot read it directly, and i have to trust the source that it says what it's reported as saying.
click image to source
as humans, we are all guilty at some time or another of confirmation bias. it's important to own up to it when we realize our mistake. for me, it wasn't the first time, and this time i was influenced by BBC news, which made the item seem... credible (here's the link to BBC on june 18th). cross-checking becomes especially difficult when the original is in another language.
i can say to myself that i'm not a news service, i'm a person interested in the world... but still, i feel badly about rashly reposting. if you reported this as well, i humbly suggest reposting the updated information... if we're ever going to exist in a reasonable world, we have support the best information we have.
hat tip to richard dawkins.
ch6 - hallucinations
today marks five years of blogging for me.
this is my notebook and my outlet. it's the place where i collect things to think about. i post stuff i want to see, read and discuss, stuff i want to laugh, wonder and rant over.
if others want to have a peek, they're welcome. feedback has been overwhelmingly positive -- i can count the negative on one hand... that is, if i can even remember it.
still, this isn't an important blog, or a widely read one. it's just my personal speck on the internet. last year i thought i was about to quit... but it's become a habit, it seems. i just might go for yet another year.
here's another installment of my tradition to quote a bit of each chapter from carl sagan's the demon-haunted world: science as a candle in the dark... this is from chapter 6:
'we would surely be missing something important about our own nature if we refused to face up to the fact that hallucinations are part of being human. however, none of this makes hallucinations part of an external rather than an internal reality.'
- carl sagan
♫♫♪♫happy blogversary to me.♫♪♫♪♪♫♫♪♫♫♪♪♫♫♪♪♪♪♫
this is my notebook and my outlet. it's the place where i collect things to think about. i post stuff i want to see, read and discuss, stuff i want to laugh, wonder and rant over.
if others want to have a peek, they're welcome. feedback has been overwhelmingly positive -- i can count the negative on one hand... that is, if i can even remember it.
still, this isn't an important blog, or a widely read one. it's just my personal speck on the internet. last year i thought i was about to quit... but it's become a habit, it seems. i just might go for yet another year.
here's another installment of my tradition to quote a bit of each chapter from carl sagan's the demon-haunted world: science as a candle in the dark... this is from chapter 6:
'we would surely be missing something important about our own nature if we refused to face up to the fact that hallucinations are part of being human. however, none of this makes hallucinations part of an external rather than an internal reality.'
- carl sagan
♫♫♪♫happy blogversary to me.♫♪♫♪♪♫♫♪♫♫♪♪♫♫♪♪♪♪♫
we must know
we must not believe those, who today, with philosophical bearing and deliberative tone, prophesy the fall of culture and accept the ignorabimus. for us there is no ignorabimus, and in my opinion none whatever in natural science. in opposition to the foolish ignorabimus our slogan shall be: wir müssen wissen — wir werden wissen! ('we must know — we will know!')
- david hilbert
- david hilbert
the science rap
with ali G, by melodysheep
999999 multiplied by 9999999999... you don't knnow what i'm going to say 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
respect.
999999 multiplied by 9999999999... you don't knnow what i'm going to say 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
respect.
pz myers: atheism ≠ fascism
i liked the phrase, radical, militant tolerance...
snip
...
i disagree with harris and hitchens, especially hitchens on this one issue, but i also defend them, and not just in the sense of defending the principle of free speech, but because i also agree with them in part. somehow, the meaning of "progressive" has weakened so much that it can be equated to radical, militant tolerance of every blithering looniness someone might spout, with tactics that constitute little more than limp-wristed surrender to the excuses of bigots.
too often, the conversation between so-called 'progressives' and their opponents is one of gelatin-spined appeasers trying desperately to stave off the tyrants of the right by frantically retreating from the conflict.
"i want to chop off my daughter's clitoris," says the islamist. "oooh, that's not nice," says the 'progressive', "and your deep, rich cultural traditions make me hesitate to object."
meanwhile, the new atheist says "no. there is no ambiguity here: your children are individuals, you have no right to butcher them. and being an ignorant barbarian is no excuse."
/snip
etc...
snip
...
i disagree with harris and hitchens, especially hitchens on this one issue, but i also defend them, and not just in the sense of defending the principle of free speech, but because i also agree with them in part. somehow, the meaning of "progressive" has weakened so much that it can be equated to radical, militant tolerance of every blithering looniness someone might spout, with tactics that constitute little more than limp-wristed surrender to the excuses of bigots.
too often, the conversation between so-called 'progressives' and their opponents is one of gelatin-spined appeasers trying desperately to stave off the tyrants of the right by frantically retreating from the conflict.
"i want to chop off my daughter's clitoris," says the islamist. "oooh, that's not nice," says the 'progressive', "and your deep, rich cultural traditions make me hesitate to object."
meanwhile, the new atheist says "no. there is no ambiguity here: your children are individuals, you have no right to butcher them. and being an ignorant barbarian is no excuse."
/snip
etc...
communicating atheism
panel discussion: communicating atheism at the world atheist convention, o'callaghan alexander hotel, dublin ireland 2011. uploaded by aronra. the speakers are rebecca watson, aronra, tom melchiorre and richard dawkins. playlist of four seven videos:
kevin myers: myth of dawkins as an intolerant, atheist crusader is just that -- myth
just after being called evangelical by a friend, i find it comforting to not be alone... if only i had the a fraction of the knowledge and ability to persuade as the dawk:
at the independent.ie:
'dawkins is simply not the austere and proselytising dogmatist of myth. such people expect and almost seek confrontation, whereas he merely wishes to make his case.'
the entire piece here, although i rather prefer this image than to the austere one they have chosen:
click image to source
at the independent.ie:
'dawkins is simply not the austere and proselytising dogmatist of myth. such people expect and almost seek confrontation, whereas he merely wishes to make his case.'
the entire piece here, although i rather prefer this image than to the austere one they have chosen:
click image to source
paula kirby: atheism is the true embrace of reality
paula kirby's rejection of religion may be recent, but she must have had a lifetime of eloquence. at the hibernia times:
snip
atheists recognise that we need evidence in order to come to reliable conclusions about reality and that, so far, those who claim there is a god have signally failed to provide it. and atheists care about reality: not what it might be comforting to believe, or what has traditionally been believed, or what we have been instructed to believe. and this focus on reality, far from diminishing our experience of life, as so many religious people imagine, actually makes our lives all the richer: once you have faced up to the reality that there is no evidence to suggest there is another life after this one, it becomes all the more important to live this finite life to the full, learning and growing, and caring for others, because this is their only life, too, and there is no reason to believe there will be heavenly compensation for their earthly sufferings.
/snip
read the entire piece here.
on this day, god wants you to know...
i saw this post on facebook, on the wall that belongs to a friend i'm highly fond of -- but sometimes, i wonder if we inhabit the same universe:
'on this day, god wants you to know ... that god is crazy about you. god sends you fresh flowers every spring, a breathtaking sunrise every morning. if god had a wallet, your picture would be in it. if god has a refrigerator, your childhood scribbles would be on it.'
and my mind immediately flashed to this:
click image to source
(kevin carter was a pulitzer prize winning south african jouranlist who had seen so much, he eventually committed suicide.)
these conflicting thoughts tear me apart -- how do you deal with nonsense coming from people you really like?
'on this day, god wants you to know ... that god is crazy about you. god sends you fresh flowers every spring, a breathtaking sunrise every morning. if god had a wallet, your picture would be in it. if god has a refrigerator, your childhood scribbles would be on it.'
and my mind immediately flashed to this:
click image to source
(kevin carter was a pulitzer prize winning south african jouranlist who had seen so much, he eventually committed suicide.)
these conflicting thoughts tear me apart -- how do you deal with nonsense coming from people you really like?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
