10. Spife (combination Spoon/Knife)
9. Beard-in-a-Can
8. Touring Lecture: “476 Ways to Profit off Pretzels”
7. Solar-powered TV
6. Veggie-Panda (Meat-Free Panda Substitute)
5. UnderPressure (medical device, takes blood pressure rectally)
4. Arbor-alls (overalls for trees)
3. 1-800-SHHHHHH (hotline you can call to talk to a librarian)
2. Milk and Cockies (erotic baked goods store)
1. Drive-Thru Fondue
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Santorum? I Hardly Know ’Em
I don’t usually comment on the Republican flavors of the month, because Romney has this one locked up. The fact that people really think Santorum has a chance at either the nomination or the presidency is almost as amusing as the things he says. However, as someone who loves making fun of Republicans, who am I to walk past such low hanging fruit?
I got to thinking… Republican candidates always move right of where they were the day before, so we can only expect Santorum to get more and more medieval as time goes on. So, here is what I predict Santorum will be saying as the race goes on:
I almost feel bad for Republicans… I mean, I would feel bad, if it weren’t for the fact that you could just stop being a Republican whenever you want. However, in the interest of reaching out to the right-wing, I have some advice. There’s already a medical cure for Santorum’s ignorance, and it comes in handy pill form.
Just have Rick hold an Aspirin between his lips, and the problem should clear right up.
I got to thinking… Republican candidates always move right of where they were the day before, so we can only expect Santorum to get more and more medieval as time goes on. So, here is what I predict Santorum will be saying as the race goes on:
I almost feel bad for Republicans… I mean, I would feel bad, if it weren’t for the fact that you could just stop being a Republican whenever you want. However, in the interest of reaching out to the right-wing, I have some advice. There’s already a medical cure for Santorum’s ignorance, and it comes in handy pill form.
Just have Rick hold an Aspirin between his lips, and the problem should clear right up.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Snippet: Science is a Religion?
I was trying to determine why some theists think science is a religion, when it dawned on me… as they understand it, science is a religion: a vague, inaccurate account of reality. To a devoutly religious person who doesn’t know anything about science, it is indistinguishable from a religion, in the same way that to some Americans, Africa is a country.
Discussion: Women and Atheism
Most women are not atheists, which doesn’t surprise me, but most atheists are not women. Considering how religion treats women, how is this possible?
Saturday, February 18, 2012
The Saturn Complex and the Myth of the Downward Spiral
Saturn is probably one of my favorite gods to study. In Saturn, one can see what a firm grasp of human psychology the ancients had. The story of his life is the very story of human power.
Saturn was a child of the Sky and Earth. Occasionally, the Earth gave birth to a hideous child, like a monstrous creature with a hundred hands and fifty heads, or a Cyclops, and the Sky would bury it, imprisoned back within the Earth, where he would not have to look upon them. Those who were allowed to remain free to roam were called Titans, and they were the very embodiment of natural phenomena like earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, volcanoes, the sun, the moon, etc.
The Earth was not happy with this arrangement, for not only was she being physically burdened by this arrangement (which was against her will), these were her children and she loved them despite how they looked. The Earth asked all of the Titans for help, but only one had the ambition to answer the call.
Saturn, armed with a flint knife, lay in ambush and castrated his father. Saturn then ruled over what would be called the Golden Age, a time of peace, prosperity, and equality among all. Every day was a celebration, and every living thing lived free of fear and despair.
But such things cannot last, for in his dying breath, the Sky cursed Saturn by saying that one day, he too would bear a child who would defeat him in a battle where victory would be snatched from him by his own treacherous Titan brethren.
While the rest of the world enjoyed a time of unparalleled joy, Saturn’s wife, Ops, lived a life of silent misery. Every time Ops bore him a child, Saturn would devour it.
Saturn Devouring His Son – Fransisco de Goya
Before long, Ops had given birth to five children, and Saturn had eaten them all. When Ops gave birth to her sixth, a boy named Jupiter, she hid him on the island of Crete and ordered the residents to bang their drums, rattle their spears and sing loudly in order to mask the infant’s cries. She wrapped a stone in swaddling clothes and handed it over to Saturn, who swallowed it whole.
When he was old enough, Jupiter poisoned Saturn’s drink, causing him to vomit Jupiter’s five brothers and sisters. Together, they waged war on Saturn. As the war raged on, Jupiter convinced Saturn’s brother, Prometheus, to join his side. Prometheus had a weapon forged when Jupiter promised to rule justly (a promise he couldn’t keep). Armed with lightning, Jupiter conquered Saturn and his titan siblings.
If you take out the magic and the gods, what you have left is the perpetual battle between the successive generations of humanity. Each new crop of children are destined to replace their parents, and by extension, their gods/ideas. Yet, even though everything changes… it remains eerily the same. Change is inevitable, and yet the more things change, the more they stay exactly the same.
There is another thread running through these sorts of mythologies, and it’s nearly universal across the religions of the world: the idea that humanity descends deeper and deeper into depravity as time goes on. The world’s religions operate on a societal fallacy based on a personal experience.
We are born innocent, with all we need provided for us, but we move into a period where things get progressively more difficult, until we must toil to earn our living, and soon enough we succumb to disease and hardship. Such it is with the Ages of Men: from the idyllic Golden Age we descend down into the arduous Iron Age.
Here we have a fallacy, for things do not get worse for society as time goes on, they only get worse for each individual. We did not become polluted or receive punishment for past offenses. If anything, the human condition has improved. Progress is remarkably resilient. Even when a culture undergoes a Dark Age, its neighboring people tend to keep their advancements alive. The world may lose a culture’s history and art, but their science and technology is shockingly persistent.
And yet, as we age, we are all cursed to one day realize the younger generation is doomed. Never mind that our parents and grandparents said the same of us… they were crazy old coots who knew nothing. No, we are clearly the zenith, the epitome of human development, and it’s obviously all downhill from here. We imagine ourselves bringing about the best that could ever be, and in our nostalgic old age, we look down on the young for shirking our ways.
These kids and their Lady Gaga/Britney Spears/Madonna/Cher… this planet is screwed. It’s almost like we’re reading from some primordial Mad Lib where we just update the pertinent details.
What’s the point of reading from such a formulaic script… or do we even have a choice? Perhaps the end result of a long life is always a cynicism regarding the young and their future.
I don’t understand why anyone would ultimately feel this way, however, because every younger generation is merely the product of the previous. If kids today are messed up, who’s to blame? The kids, who are born as blank slates, or the parents who raised them?
Personally, I draw my comfort from one simple fact: no generation has ever been truly as soft, uncreative, disrespectful or ignorant as the people who raised them fear they are.
Epilogue: Eventually, Prometheus steals fire for humanity and is punished by Zeus. Mankind is in turn punished with Pandora, her curiosity, and the box containing all of the evils of the world. This is followed by the Heroic Age, when men of great fame are aggrandized and exaggerated at length. This is followed by the Bronze and Iron Ages, when nothing can live up to what is heard in legend. Our impossible “past” becomes an idealized goal for our future.
Saturn was a child of the Sky and Earth. Occasionally, the Earth gave birth to a hideous child, like a monstrous creature with a hundred hands and fifty heads, or a Cyclops, and the Sky would bury it, imprisoned back within the Earth, where he would not have to look upon them. Those who were allowed to remain free to roam were called Titans, and they were the very embodiment of natural phenomena like earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, volcanoes, the sun, the moon, etc.
The Earth was not happy with this arrangement, for not only was she being physically burdened by this arrangement (which was against her will), these were her children and she loved them despite how they looked. The Earth asked all of the Titans for help, but only one had the ambition to answer the call.
Saturn, armed with a flint knife, lay in ambush and castrated his father. Saturn then ruled over what would be called the Golden Age, a time of peace, prosperity, and equality among all. Every day was a celebration, and every living thing lived free of fear and despair.
But such things cannot last, for in his dying breath, the Sky cursed Saturn by saying that one day, he too would bear a child who would defeat him in a battle where victory would be snatched from him by his own treacherous Titan brethren.
While the rest of the world enjoyed a time of unparalleled joy, Saturn’s wife, Ops, lived a life of silent misery. Every time Ops bore him a child, Saturn would devour it.
Before long, Ops had given birth to five children, and Saturn had eaten them all. When Ops gave birth to her sixth, a boy named Jupiter, she hid him on the island of Crete and ordered the residents to bang their drums, rattle their spears and sing loudly in order to mask the infant’s cries. She wrapped a stone in swaddling clothes and handed it over to Saturn, who swallowed it whole.
When he was old enough, Jupiter poisoned Saturn’s drink, causing him to vomit Jupiter’s five brothers and sisters. Together, they waged war on Saturn. As the war raged on, Jupiter convinced Saturn’s brother, Prometheus, to join his side. Prometheus had a weapon forged when Jupiter promised to rule justly (a promise he couldn’t keep). Armed with lightning, Jupiter conquered Saturn and his titan siblings.
If you take out the magic and the gods, what you have left is the perpetual battle between the successive generations of humanity. Each new crop of children are destined to replace their parents, and by extension, their gods/ideas. Yet, even though everything changes… it remains eerily the same. Change is inevitable, and yet the more things change, the more they stay exactly the same.
There is another thread running through these sorts of mythologies, and it’s nearly universal across the religions of the world: the idea that humanity descends deeper and deeper into depravity as time goes on. The world’s religions operate on a societal fallacy based on a personal experience.
We are born innocent, with all we need provided for us, but we move into a period where things get progressively more difficult, until we must toil to earn our living, and soon enough we succumb to disease and hardship. Such it is with the Ages of Men: from the idyllic Golden Age we descend down into the arduous Iron Age.
Here we have a fallacy, for things do not get worse for society as time goes on, they only get worse for each individual. We did not become polluted or receive punishment for past offenses. If anything, the human condition has improved. Progress is remarkably resilient. Even when a culture undergoes a Dark Age, its neighboring people tend to keep their advancements alive. The world may lose a culture’s history and art, but their science and technology is shockingly persistent.
And yet, as we age, we are all cursed to one day realize the younger generation is doomed. Never mind that our parents and grandparents said the same of us… they were crazy old coots who knew nothing. No, we are clearly the zenith, the epitome of human development, and it’s obviously all downhill from here. We imagine ourselves bringing about the best that could ever be, and in our nostalgic old age, we look down on the young for shirking our ways.
These kids and their Lady Gaga/Britney Spears/Madonna/Cher… this planet is screwed. It’s almost like we’re reading from some primordial Mad Lib where we just update the pertinent details.
What’s the point of reading from such a formulaic script… or do we even have a choice? Perhaps the end result of a long life is always a cynicism regarding the young and their future.
I don’t understand why anyone would ultimately feel this way, however, because every younger generation is merely the product of the previous. If kids today are messed up, who’s to blame? The kids, who are born as blank slates, or the parents who raised them?
Personally, I draw my comfort from one simple fact: no generation has ever been truly as soft, uncreative, disrespectful or ignorant as the people who raised them fear they are.
Epilogue: Eventually, Prometheus steals fire for humanity and is punished by Zeus. Mankind is in turn punished with Pandora, her curiosity, and the box containing all of the evils of the world. This is followed by the Heroic Age, when men of great fame are aggrandized and exaggerated at length. This is followed by the Bronze and Iron Ages, when nothing can live up to what is heard in legend. Our impossible “past” becomes an idealized goal for our future.
Saturday Reflection #69
The old enjoy making the young look stupid, perhaps because it’s easy, and it’s one of the few things they can do without the aid of a pill.
Dealing With Religion Lite
I think every atheist has been in this situation: they’re discussing some problem with religion, when a religious person appears and says, “That’s not what I do.”
Sometimes, it’s a fair remark. I hate when atheists try to claim things like… that religion causes all wars, or that religion makes people rape children. I’ve seen it happen. It’s not the atheist norm, but when it’s said, it’s wrong and should be argued. I’m not talking about religious people objecting to this ridiculousness, that I understand.
No, I’m talking about those times when you are criticizing religion for something it actually preaches. Christianity teaches that atheists are going to hell, for example. It’s also pretty clearly against abortion, homosexuality, premarital sex, not worshping God… there’s basically a whole laundry list of things Christianity is against. And even beyond that, there are things Christianity encourages which someone might take objection with, like how Christianity demands that followers recruit, or “share the good news.”
These are true of Christianity, but there are Christians who disagree. I’m not sure if these Christians don’t read the Bible, if they don’t care what it says, or what, but the fact remains that there are Christians who are barely even Christian. I’m sure even religious people notice this phenomenon, that there is a spectrum of religiosity, and there are those who barely fit the bill as being a believer.
I have mixed feelings about these people. On the one hand, they’re usually some of the more sensible, tolerant, forward-thinking, educated, and intelligent believers. On the other, they’re often either very slippery or very irritating to talk to. Still, they’re my favorite believers, just not my favorite to talk religion with.
I think every atheist is out to tackle the problems of religion (or at least those who are actively atheist are). People who subscribe to Religion Lite pride themselves on not supporting most (or any) of the intrusions of Original Recipe Religion. In many ways, our “job” as atheists is already done with these folks, but in some significant ways, people who are only slightly religious can be the hardest to deal with.
They are often confused as to why I don’t believe like they do. I mean… we often share nearly all the same values. They sense that we aren’t all that different. They seem almost shocked that I’m turned off by religion. I liken it to this one time, I hung out with the older brother of a bully in my school. He seemed shocked that his younger brother was a jerk to kids in my grade, because at home he was perfectly normal. While I never experienced it, I imagine it’s also similar to how when the parents of a killer are interviewed and they can’t believe what happened.
It’s not uncommon for you to give the benefit of the doubt to someone or something you’re close to, and it’s a big step to break ties with a group you have come to love, even when it does awful things.
While I would like more people to subscribe to Religion Lite from a social standpoint, I hate talking to these people about the merits of religion itself. It’s hard to explain to someone that even though they may be a great person, it has nothing to do with their religion, and that even though they’re a great person individually, they’re a part of something awful. It seems simple, but it’s not.
Everyone wants to be seen as an individual, not a nameless part of a group. The problem is, we are stuck being both, regardless of how hard we try. I’m part of the atheist community, whether I like it or not. I’m a Southerner, whether I like it or not. I’m an American, whether it’s been embarrassing to be so for the last 12 years or not.
Those are all communities I am a part of, not because of decisions that aren’t based on who I would like to be associated with, but because of other, unrelated issues. Just as I am tacitly guilty for the crimes of America by virtue of all the taxes I have paid and my decision to stay, all religious people are accountable for the organizations they support. But even here, you have a problem when dealing with Religion Lite.
If a person claims to be religious, they attend religious services, and they live their lives… they aren’t really doing anything wrong. When you start donating money to religious organizations or you let religious dogma dictate your political leanings, you become a small part of the larger problem, but plenty of religious people are passively practicing their faith in word alone.
This is what makes talking to these people about religion so frustrating. They make silly claims about me, like that I am erecting a “strawman argument,” or that I’m misinterpreting their religion.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think I give religion a pretty fair shake. However, since I have to look at religion as a whole and I am focused on the problems, I will never see religion the same way a believer does, especially if that believer is on the religious liberal fringe.
Frankly, I try not to address Religion Lite, because I think those people get enough shit from the religious. Why should I attack them for being nearly agnostics when their fellow believers are probably doing the same thing, only from the other side? I see believers of this kind as not only being less of a threat to me and my freedom, but also on the verge of being driven out of their faith by fellow believers. Why bother the natural process?
Well, there’s one reason. Their ideas may seem appealing to some reasonable people who are on the fence. I sometimes wonder how many otherwise good people led impressionable individuals into the trap of religion. It sort of reminds me of an idea I read about in a Chuck Palahniuk book.
Cattle are basically dumb, but it’s not easy to get them to move sometimes. One thing they will do, supposedly, is follow. So, ranchers train one cow to walk up the incline from the holding pen outside so that other cows will file in behind it. Then, they take the trained cow out of line and the other cows continue onto a conveyor belt to be slaughtered.
This trained cow is supposedly called “the Judas cow.” I never thought this was fair, though. Judas’ betrayal only killed one person. The Biblical figure who leads the flock into peril isn’t Judas, it’s Jesus.
While I don’t see this as very flattering (though they might), these practitioners of Religion Lite are undoubtedly the Christians who are most like Jesus and who are the best advertising campaign for their faith. They make for great religious PR people. Unfortunately, like all advertising and PR… they’re ultimately full of shit.
I don’t think being religious takes away from the good things a person does, but just because someone does good things doesn’t mean they know the first thing about… well… anything.
Sometimes, it’s a fair remark. I hate when atheists try to claim things like… that religion causes all wars, or that religion makes people rape children. I’ve seen it happen. It’s not the atheist norm, but when it’s said, it’s wrong and should be argued. I’m not talking about religious people objecting to this ridiculousness, that I understand.
No, I’m talking about those times when you are criticizing religion for something it actually preaches. Christianity teaches that atheists are going to hell, for example. It’s also pretty clearly against abortion, homosexuality, premarital sex, not worshping God… there’s basically a whole laundry list of things Christianity is against. And even beyond that, there are things Christianity encourages which someone might take objection with, like how Christianity demands that followers recruit, or “share the good news.”
These are true of Christianity, but there are Christians who disagree. I’m not sure if these Christians don’t read the Bible, if they don’t care what it says, or what, but the fact remains that there are Christians who are barely even Christian. I’m sure even religious people notice this phenomenon, that there is a spectrum of religiosity, and there are those who barely fit the bill as being a believer.
I have mixed feelings about these people. On the one hand, they’re usually some of the more sensible, tolerant, forward-thinking, educated, and intelligent believers. On the other, they’re often either very slippery or very irritating to talk to. Still, they’re my favorite believers, just not my favorite to talk religion with.
I think every atheist is out to tackle the problems of religion (or at least those who are actively atheist are). People who subscribe to Religion Lite pride themselves on not supporting most (or any) of the intrusions of Original Recipe Religion. In many ways, our “job” as atheists is already done with these folks, but in some significant ways, people who are only slightly religious can be the hardest to deal with.
They are often confused as to why I don’t believe like they do. I mean… we often share nearly all the same values. They sense that we aren’t all that different. They seem almost shocked that I’m turned off by religion. I liken it to this one time, I hung out with the older brother of a bully in my school. He seemed shocked that his younger brother was a jerk to kids in my grade, because at home he was perfectly normal. While I never experienced it, I imagine it’s also similar to how when the parents of a killer are interviewed and they can’t believe what happened.
It’s not uncommon for you to give the benefit of the doubt to someone or something you’re close to, and it’s a big step to break ties with a group you have come to love, even when it does awful things.
While I would like more people to subscribe to Religion Lite from a social standpoint, I hate talking to these people about the merits of religion itself. It’s hard to explain to someone that even though they may be a great person, it has nothing to do with their religion, and that even though they’re a great person individually, they’re a part of something awful. It seems simple, but it’s not.
Everyone wants to be seen as an individual, not a nameless part of a group. The problem is, we are stuck being both, regardless of how hard we try. I’m part of the atheist community, whether I like it or not. I’m a Southerner, whether I like it or not. I’m an American, whether it’s been embarrassing to be so for the last 12 years or not.
Those are all communities I am a part of, not because of decisions that aren’t based on who I would like to be associated with, but because of other, unrelated issues. Just as I am tacitly guilty for the crimes of America by virtue of all the taxes I have paid and my decision to stay, all religious people are accountable for the organizations they support. But even here, you have a problem when dealing with Religion Lite.
If a person claims to be religious, they attend religious services, and they live their lives… they aren’t really doing anything wrong. When you start donating money to religious organizations or you let religious dogma dictate your political leanings, you become a small part of the larger problem, but plenty of religious people are passively practicing their faith in word alone.
This is what makes talking to these people about religion so frustrating. They make silly claims about me, like that I am erecting a “strawman argument,” or that I’m misinterpreting their religion.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think I give religion a pretty fair shake. However, since I have to look at religion as a whole and I am focused on the problems, I will never see religion the same way a believer does, especially if that believer is on the religious liberal fringe.
Frankly, I try not to address Religion Lite, because I think those people get enough shit from the religious. Why should I attack them for being nearly agnostics when their fellow believers are probably doing the same thing, only from the other side? I see believers of this kind as not only being less of a threat to me and my freedom, but also on the verge of being driven out of their faith by fellow believers. Why bother the natural process?
Well, there’s one reason. Their ideas may seem appealing to some reasonable people who are on the fence. I sometimes wonder how many otherwise good people led impressionable individuals into the trap of religion. It sort of reminds me of an idea I read about in a Chuck Palahniuk book.
Cattle are basically dumb, but it’s not easy to get them to move sometimes. One thing they will do, supposedly, is follow. So, ranchers train one cow to walk up the incline from the holding pen outside so that other cows will file in behind it. Then, they take the trained cow out of line and the other cows continue onto a conveyor belt to be slaughtered.
This trained cow is supposedly called “the Judas cow.” I never thought this was fair, though. Judas’ betrayal only killed one person. The Biblical figure who leads the flock into peril isn’t Judas, it’s Jesus.
While I don’t see this as very flattering (though they might), these practitioners of Religion Lite are undoubtedly the Christians who are most like Jesus and who are the best advertising campaign for their faith. They make for great religious PR people. Unfortunately, like all advertising and PR… they’re ultimately full of shit.
I don’t think being religious takes away from the good things a person does, but just because someone does good things doesn’t mean they know the first thing about… well… anything.
Friday, February 17, 2012
I Don’t Need to Defend Science
I have a background in science, though I wouldn’t call myself an expert. I started out in pharmacy and did that for 4 years (of a 6 year degree). When I gave it up, I switched over to studying religion, and I also did a fair amount of study on cosmology. Before that I had taken quite a bit of biology, biochemistry, genetics, and basically anything that focused on living things.
Still, I don’t like talking to believers about the Big Bang or evolution. It’s annoying, since I know they are not paying attention. They’re just waiting for their chance to try to insert their ignorance into it and pretend that their inability to understand simple concepts means that it cannot be true. It’s futile to try to explain to someone how something works if they refuse to believe it even exists. It feels like I’m talking to a crazy person, and I don’t like talking to crazy people, so I try to steer the conversation back around to religion, where I can feel like they’re just stupid, not crazy. I can cope with stupid people, because you can fix stupid; you can’t fix crazy.
I just don’t feel compelled to defend science, because science doesn’t need defending. Even religious people almost universally trust science more than religion in actual practice. No one walks around with a bracelet that has a list of their religious information and the number of their priest, who should be contacted in case of a medical emergency. When someone is hurt, no one calls out, “Is there a clergyman? We need a pastor, immediately!” You aren’t reading this through prayers that are beamed up to heaven and sent back down to you by Our Heavenly Father through magical, supernatural means.
With the exception of the extreme nutballs out, people do not substitute religion for science. Religion is a theatre putting on a play called “Knowledge,” while science is an actual library. Religion can’t even come close to science when it comes to real applications. Most religious believers know through casual observation that they’re better off with medicine than prayer. Why should I have to defend something that is so universally accepted as actually being true and useful?
Through their very actions, most believers acknowledge that medical science is true. They wouldn’t get MRSA and say, “Oh, I’m not really sick. Evolution isn’t real, so I don’t have a disease that has evolved to be immune to common antibiotics. I’m fine.” But, if you suggest they were descended from monkeys (as opposed to being formed by mud), then they get offended. This is because they are stupid, and it doesn’t matter to them (or the medicine they take) that their drugs were tested on animals (since we evolved from them and have similar anatomy).
When it comes to questioning the validity of science, the religious are saying one thing and doing another. The same is true of the physical sciences. The world seems unusually devoid of miracles (except all those miracles that magically happen in hospitals…).
Unless you’re Amish, you reap the benefits of the physical sciences all the time. You’re reading this on a screen that was scientifically developed, which is transmitted via scientifically developed telecommunications, using scientifically developed power. It makes me laugh when I have a conversation with someone on such a scientifically dependent medium as the internet, and the other person just isn’t impressed with science.
But that’s the magic of science. You don’t have to believe in it or understand it to get the benefits. You can’t say that of religion. Religion doesn’t let you gain its benefits without first believing. You can’t get into heaven as a non-believer. You can’t even get the relief of thinking you’re going to heaven while you’re alive unless you believe. Religion only benefits those who adhere to it.
It’s not that religion is selfish, but rather, religion only exists if you believe it does. If you cease to believe in religion, or just never heard of it, then it ceases to exist for you. It plays no role in your life, it affects nothing (though religious followers are another matter altogether). This is in sharp contrast to science, where turning on a light switch will still always work, even if you don’t believe in electricity.
And at this point, all I can think of is a quote by Philip K. Dick:
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.”
Still, I don’t like talking to believers about the Big Bang or evolution. It’s annoying, since I know they are not paying attention. They’re just waiting for their chance to try to insert their ignorance into it and pretend that their inability to understand simple concepts means that it cannot be true. It’s futile to try to explain to someone how something works if they refuse to believe it even exists. It feels like I’m talking to a crazy person, and I don’t like talking to crazy people, so I try to steer the conversation back around to religion, where I can feel like they’re just stupid, not crazy. I can cope with stupid people, because you can fix stupid; you can’t fix crazy.
I just don’t feel compelled to defend science, because science doesn’t need defending. Even religious people almost universally trust science more than religion in actual practice. No one walks around with a bracelet that has a list of their religious information and the number of their priest, who should be contacted in case of a medical emergency. When someone is hurt, no one calls out, “Is there a clergyman? We need a pastor, immediately!” You aren’t reading this through prayers that are beamed up to heaven and sent back down to you by Our Heavenly Father through magical, supernatural means.
With the exception of the extreme nutballs out, people do not substitute religion for science. Religion is a theatre putting on a play called “Knowledge,” while science is an actual library. Religion can’t even come close to science when it comes to real applications. Most religious believers know through casual observation that they’re better off with medicine than prayer. Why should I have to defend something that is so universally accepted as actually being true and useful?
Through their very actions, most believers acknowledge that medical science is true. They wouldn’t get MRSA and say, “Oh, I’m not really sick. Evolution isn’t real, so I don’t have a disease that has evolved to be immune to common antibiotics. I’m fine.” But, if you suggest they were descended from monkeys (as opposed to being formed by mud), then they get offended. This is because they are stupid, and it doesn’t matter to them (or the medicine they take) that their drugs were tested on animals (since we evolved from them and have similar anatomy).
When it comes to questioning the validity of science, the religious are saying one thing and doing another. The same is true of the physical sciences. The world seems unusually devoid of miracles (except all those miracles that magically happen in hospitals…).
Unless you’re Amish, you reap the benefits of the physical sciences all the time. You’re reading this on a screen that was scientifically developed, which is transmitted via scientifically developed telecommunications, using scientifically developed power. It makes me laugh when I have a conversation with someone on such a scientifically dependent medium as the internet, and the other person just isn’t impressed with science.
But that’s the magic of science. You don’t have to believe in it or understand it to get the benefits. You can’t say that of religion. Religion doesn’t let you gain its benefits without first believing. You can’t get into heaven as a non-believer. You can’t even get the relief of thinking you’re going to heaven while you’re alive unless you believe. Religion only benefits those who adhere to it.
It’s not that religion is selfish, but rather, religion only exists if you believe it does. If you cease to believe in religion, or just never heard of it, then it ceases to exist for you. It plays no role in your life, it affects nothing (though religious followers are another matter altogether). This is in sharp contrast to science, where turning on a light switch will still always work, even if you don’t believe in electricity.
And at this point, all I can think of is a quote by Philip K. Dick:
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)