Great listening experience, previous posts point to other offerings, but this one got two listens rather than actually looking for the book that the content is based on. ReadMore and Listen to MP3 are the active links just as they are in the blog post found at http://www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolab/.
After Life
By Radiolab
July 28, 2009
In this hour of Radiolab, we take several different looks at that moment when we slip from life … to the other side. Is it even a moment? If it is a moment, when is that moment? And what happens afterward? It’s a show of questions that don’t have easy answers. So, in a slight departure from our regular format, we bring you eleven meditations on how, when, and even if we die.
Read more.
Download MP3
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Get This, "The Evolution of God"
Review of a New York Times Sunday Book Review
I had to go back through history of my browser to find this review. It stuck with me over several days. The full article is available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/books/review/Bloom-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
First catch was the thumbnail scetch of the history of religion, a course I probably dropped at some point in my curriculum:
No Smiting
By PAUL BLOOM
Published: June 24, 2009
In his brilliant new book, “The Evolution of God,” Robert Wright tells the story of how God grew up. He starts with the deities of hunter-gatherer tribes, moves to those of chiefdoms and nations, then on to the polytheism of the early Israelites and the monotheism that followed, and then to the New Testament and the Koran, before finishing off with the modern multinational Gods of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Wright’s tone is reasoned and careful, even hesitant, throughout, and it is nice to read about issues like the morality of Christ and the meaning of jihad without getting the feeling that you are being shouted at. His views, though, are provocative and controversial. There is something here to annoy almost everyone.
Oh, yeah: "This sounds pro-religion, but don’t expect Pope Benedict XVI to be quoting from Wright’s book anytime soon. Wright makes it clear that he is tracking people’s conception of the divine, not the divine itself. He describes this as “a good news/bad news joke for traditionalist Christians, Muslims and Jews.” The bad news is that your God was born imperfect. The good news is that he doesn’t really exist."
Still, there is some hope:
"It is a great ride, though. Wright gives the example of the God of Leviticus, who said, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” and he points out that this isn’t as enlightened as it may sound, since, at the time, “neighbors” meant actual neighbors, fellow Israelites, not the idol-worshipers in the next town. But still, he argues, this demand encompassed all the tribes of Israel, and was a “moral watershed” that “expanded the circle of brotherhood.” And the disapproval that we now feel when we learn the limited scope of this rule is itself another reason to cheer, since it shows how our moral sensibilities have expanded."
And some doubt: "He is betting that historical forces will trump our basic psychological makeup. I’m not so sure."
And then more good news followed by bad news:
"So I share Wright’s wonder at how nicely everything has turned out. But I don’t see how this constitutes an argument for a divine being. After all, even if we could somehow establish definitively that moral progress exists because the universe was jump-started by a God of Love, this just pushes the problem up one level. We are now stuck with the puzzle of why there exists such a caring God in the first place.
Also, it would be a terribly minimalist God. Wright himself describes it as “somewhere between illusion and imperfect conception.” It won’t answer your prayers, give you advice or smite your enemies. So even if it did exist, we would be left with another good news/bad news situation. The good news is that there would be a divine being. The bad news is that it’s not the one that anyone is looking for."
The review is a very worthwhile read. Not so sure the book is worth the skim on the point taken but I'll look for it in the library if it makes the grade for public consumption.
I had to go back through history of my browser to find this review. It stuck with me over several days. The full article is available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/books/review/Bloom-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
First catch was the thumbnail scetch of the history of religion, a course I probably dropped at some point in my curriculum:
No Smiting
By PAUL BLOOM
Published: June 24, 2009
In his brilliant new book, “The Evolution of God,” Robert Wright tells the story of how God grew up. He starts with the deities of hunter-gatherer tribes, moves to those of chiefdoms and nations, then on to the polytheism of the early Israelites and the monotheism that followed, and then to the New Testament and the Koran, before finishing off with the modern multinational Gods of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Wright’s tone is reasoned and careful, even hesitant, throughout, and it is nice to read about issues like the morality of Christ and the meaning of jihad without getting the feeling that you are being shouted at. His views, though, are provocative and controversial. There is something here to annoy almost everyone.
Oh, yeah: "This sounds pro-religion, but don’t expect Pope Benedict XVI to be quoting from Wright’s book anytime soon. Wright makes it clear that he is tracking people’s conception of the divine, not the divine itself. He describes this as “a good news/bad news joke for traditionalist Christians, Muslims and Jews.” The bad news is that your God was born imperfect. The good news is that he doesn’t really exist."
Still, there is some hope:
"It is a great ride, though. Wright gives the example of the God of Leviticus, who said, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” and he points out that this isn’t as enlightened as it may sound, since, at the time, “neighbors” meant actual neighbors, fellow Israelites, not the idol-worshipers in the next town. But still, he argues, this demand encompassed all the tribes of Israel, and was a “moral watershed” that “expanded the circle of brotherhood.” And the disapproval that we now feel when we learn the limited scope of this rule is itself another reason to cheer, since it shows how our moral sensibilities have expanded."
And some doubt: "He is betting that historical forces will trump our basic psychological makeup. I’m not so sure."
And then more good news followed by bad news:
"So I share Wright’s wonder at how nicely everything has turned out. But I don’t see how this constitutes an argument for a divine being. After all, even if we could somehow establish definitively that moral progress exists because the universe was jump-started by a God of Love, this just pushes the problem up one level. We are now stuck with the puzzle of why there exists such a caring God in the first place.
Also, it would be a terribly minimalist God. Wright himself describes it as “somewhere between illusion and imperfect conception.” It won’t answer your prayers, give you advice or smite your enemies. So even if it did exist, we would be left with another good news/bad news situation. The good news is that there would be a divine being. The bad news is that it’s not the one that anyone is looking for."
The review is a very worthwhile read. Not so sure the book is worth the skim on the point taken but I'll look for it in the library if it makes the grade for public consumption.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Religiousity as a Genetic Predispostion
Yeh, I watched the whole lecture and will probably find the complete set and dive in. The outline for the lecture was included on the bliptv.com page and the inclusion of epileptic seizures as a genetic component of religion caught my attention. It was a joke in progress I never shared with the family.
http://blip.tv/file/2204956/
Some text from the page for context for the video:
Prof. Robert Sapolsky Bio 150/250, Spring 2002 Human Behavioral Biology
The Biology of Religion
I. Some opening caveats, disclaimers and fine print
II. Religion and belief
1. A return to the final question of the schizophrenia lecture
2. Genes and the advantages of intermediate penetrance:Â sickle cell anemia, Tay-Sachs disease, cystic fibrosis....and schizophrenia?
http://blip.tv/file/2204956/
Some text from the page for context for the video:
Prof. Robert Sapolsky Bio 150/250, Spring 2002 Human Behavioral Biology
The Biology of Religion
I. Some opening caveats, disclaimers and fine print
II. Religion and belief
1. A return to the final question of the schizophrenia lecture
2. Genes and the advantages of intermediate penetrance:Â sickle cell anemia, Tay-Sachs disease, cystic fibrosis....and schizophrenia?
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Getting Happy
Studies show...
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200906/happiness
This particular article from The Atlantic Online exposes several aspects of the Harvard Study of Adult Development and the study’s longtime director, George Vaillant. It took two days to read and probably will require a week to digest. Next up are the references gleaned.
One personal quest is finding the NPR program snippet, probably in a memorial report following the death of Vaillant that gave the pronounciation and proper accent for this:
"Vaillant brings a healthy dose of subtlety to a field that sometimes seems to glide past it. The bookstore shelves are lined with titles that have an almost messianic tone, as in Happier: Learn the Secrets to Daily Joy and Lasting Fulfillment. But what does it mean, really, to be happier? For 30 years, Denmark has topped international happiness surveys. But Danes are hardly a sanguine bunch. Ask an American how it’s going, and you will usually hear “Really good.” Ask a Dane, and you will hear “Det kunne være værre (It could be worse).” “Danes have consistently low (and indubitably realistic) expectations for the year to come,” a team of Danish scholars concluded. “Year after year they are pleasantly surprised to find that not everything is getting more rotten in the state of Denmark.”"
Another list item was "The Natural History of Alcoholism". A quick search and a visit to Wikipedia put that one to rest for awhile. Worthwhile reads all over the place.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200906/happiness
This particular article from The Atlantic Online exposes several aspects of the Harvard Study of Adult Development and the study’s longtime director, George Vaillant. It took two days to read and probably will require a week to digest. Next up are the references gleaned.
One personal quest is finding the NPR program snippet, probably in a memorial report following the death of Vaillant that gave the pronounciation and proper accent for this:
"Vaillant brings a healthy dose of subtlety to a field that sometimes seems to glide past it. The bookstore shelves are lined with titles that have an almost messianic tone, as in Happier: Learn the Secrets to Daily Joy and Lasting Fulfillment. But what does it mean, really, to be happier? For 30 years, Denmark has topped international happiness surveys. But Danes are hardly a sanguine bunch. Ask an American how it’s going, and you will usually hear “Really good.” Ask a Dane, and you will hear “Det kunne være værre (It could be worse).” “Danes have consistently low (and indubitably realistic) expectations for the year to come,” a team of Danish scholars concluded. “Year after year they are pleasantly surprised to find that not everything is getting more rotten in the state of Denmark.”"
Another list item was "The Natural History of Alcoholism". A quick search and a visit to Wikipedia put that one to rest for awhile. Worthwhile reads all over the place.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Religion as an Agent of Evolution?
Cautions must precede discussions of Social Darwinism, so consider yourself warned. While the article was thought provoking, there is a lack of anthropological support for fitness characteristics that would lay the groundwork for Judo-Christian dogma development. Natural selection timelines are much longer and failing traits are impossible to eliminate with focused genocides.
Still, the first two paragraphs grabbed my attention and my first read led to an outline:
"Darwinian analyses of religion have tended to come in two forms. The first is characterized by efforts to debunk, dismiss and sometimes openly ridicule religious (and usually Christian) beliefs. Huxley himself engaged in this type of critique, and Richard Dawkins and Dan Dennett have done so more recently (as have lay Darwinists like Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens). Darwinian critics, at their most negative, tend to portray religious beliefs as not just irrational and credulous but also as weak and infantile. Evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller describes his view of how religious believers deal with the fear of death: “They construct pathetic ideologies of self-comfort to plug their ears against such mortal terror. They nuzzle through reality's coarse pelt for a lost teat of supernatural succor. I call them the Gutless, because they aren't bright enough or brave enough to understand their true place in the universe.”
"In contrast, the second type of Darwinian analysis involves a more earnest effort to understand religious thinking from a scientific perspective. This approach has produced two competing general theories about the origins of religiosity. One Darwinist camp, which includes Dawkins and Dennett, anthropologists Pascal Boyer and Scott Atran, zoologist Robert Hinde, and writer Michael Shermer, has arrived at a “by-product” theory. They suggest that religious thoughts are by-products, the result of the mind’s deployment of psychological mechanisms that evolved to fulfil other, non-religious functions. Dawkins, for instance, claims that religion persists because children have adaptations for believing anything their parents tell them.4 The second Darwinist camp, which includes anthropologists William Irons, Lee Cronk and Richard Sosis, biologists Richard Alexander and David S. Wilson, and political scientist Dominic Johnson, offers an alternative “religious cooperation” hypothesis. This camp argues that religious beliefs evolved to fulfil a particular function: specifically, to enhance the ability of people to cooperate in groups and to successfully compete against rival groups."
My outline started with items following these two paragraphs. While the breakdown of camps was interesting, there are too many competing concepts funneled into the lengthy examination of Christian methods of sorting out membership qualification and they are unrelated to natural selection and unconnected to any hypothesis that makes sense in an anthropological context. The following two paragraphs summarize the viewpoint:
"If people are convinced that others sincerely believe, then they will be confident that they can also believe, without the fear that they’ll be exploited by non-believing free riders. The second-order public good is thus produced, divinely and psychologically. Still, assessing someone else’s level of religious belief is a tricky matter—gauging it isn’t always straightforward, and faking religious adherence is possible—so Christians don’t rely entirely on God to enforce the rules. As a backup plan, they also deliver their own incentives. The fact that congregations are generally long-lived organizations helps believers to deliver these incentives. When congregants meet regularly and repeatedly, and members know each other reasonably well, it’s easier for virtuous members to be recognized for their contributions and to achieve high status and popularity within their congregation. It’s also easier to recognize and punish free riders.
"The system works by forbidding behaviors that might harm the group, and by establishing a system of heavenly and terrestrial incentives that make it individually advantageous to follow the rules. By reducing “social ills” like murder, adultery and theft, the system empowers the group and its members: it reduces conflict, frees people up for economically productive work, and increases group solidarity and competitive ability."
Whether this was a worthwhile read for you might hinge on how you take to the final conclusions:
"I’ve used Christianity as a case study in this essay, but I don’t mean to suggest that Christianity lends itself, more than any other religion, to Darwinian interpretation. If the human mind is the product of Darwinian selection, and religious thoughts are generated by human minds, than all religions should be equally amenable to an analysis like this one. This doesn’t mean that all religions are equally well-designed for the specific purpose of producing public goods. However, the basic features that help Christianity regulate group behavior—specific codes for moral conduct and supernatural and natural incentive systems—are shared by other major religions. For example, Judaism has the Talmud and a covenant-enforcing God; Islam has Sharia law and paradise and hell; Hinduism has the Laws of Manu and the principle of Karma.
"Religious systems like Christianity do not, of course, provide the only means by which people may overcome their short-term selfish interests and generate public goods. These systems do, however, seem to be exceptionally well-designed for doing so. Could secular institutions be as effective as religious systems at motivating people to produce public goods? It’s possible, but religious systems have a crucial advantage: their adherents don’t just believe that God knows about all their good and evil deeds, they believe that He is a perfectly just and incorruptible administrator of punishment and reward. Secular institutions for the production of the second-order public good, on the other hand, depend on judgments that are made by police officers, lawyers, judges and juries. A scenario in which fallible, corruptible human beings such as these were allowed to monitor the actions of each citizen, every second of every day, would be regarded by almost everyone as a dystopian nightmare. In the minds of believers, only God can be trusted not to abuse this kind of power.
"It is plain to see that, for many people, religion provides a moral framework for their lives that is both meaningful and compelling. We still have much to learn about why so many people cherish their religious beliefs so deeply, and about how these beliefs may help generate the types of social environments in which many people would prefer to live. By identifying the ways in which religious systems harness human cooperative instincts, and thus generate real-world benefits for their adherents, we can gain a Darwinian perspective on religion that does not just dismiss it as a cognitive by-product. This perspective does not imply that religious concepts exist only in the minds of believers. It simply suggests that, whatever mysteries may be inherent in religious belief, there are compelling Darwinian reasons to believe that religion’s benefits have historically been real."
The ideas are interesting enough, but the perspective doesn't even give lip service to conflicts between belief systems. How political systems use religion and how religion uses power are modern stories that can't automatically be converted to work. As they say in the financial markets, "past performance can not be used to reliably predict future gains".
Anyway, this is a long article and a work in progress. While there is a link to the focus piece, the site got and deserves more attention. Here is a little about the site:
" About the Global Spiral
The Global Spiral is the winner of a 2007 American Graphic Design Award from Graphic Design USA.
Purpose
The Global Spiral is a monthly online magazine dedicated to the mission and vision of Metanexus Institute. Metanexus is a not-for-profit organization that promotes transdisciplinary research into profound questions of human meaning and purpose with the aim of transforming our educational, religious, and civic institutions.
Problem
The present moment, with its ever-accelerating technological development, instantaneous global communication, and unprecedented interaction among cultures, presents remarkable possibilities for enhancing the common good. However, despite the increase in the quantity and diversity of our knowledge, our understanding of ourselves and our world is becoming ever more fragmented. This fragmentation lies at the root of many of the current threats to our well-being and the well-being of our planet.
Proposal
The Global Spiral addresses this problem by offering transformative, transdisciplinary content that is not just about the life of the mind, but about paying mind to the whole of life. We do this through…"
and it goes on. See it all for yourself at:
http://www.metanexus.net/
and
http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/
Still, the first two paragraphs grabbed my attention and my first read led to an outline:
"Darwinian analyses of religion have tended to come in two forms. The first is characterized by efforts to debunk, dismiss and sometimes openly ridicule religious (and usually Christian) beliefs. Huxley himself engaged in this type of critique, and Richard Dawkins and Dan Dennett have done so more recently (as have lay Darwinists like Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens). Darwinian critics, at their most negative, tend to portray religious beliefs as not just irrational and credulous but also as weak and infantile. Evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller describes his view of how religious believers deal with the fear of death: “They construct pathetic ideologies of self-comfort to plug their ears against such mortal terror. They nuzzle through reality's coarse pelt for a lost teat of supernatural succor. I call them the Gutless, because they aren't bright enough or brave enough to understand their true place in the universe.”
"In contrast, the second type of Darwinian analysis involves a more earnest effort to understand religious thinking from a scientific perspective. This approach has produced two competing general theories about the origins of religiosity. One Darwinist camp, which includes Dawkins and Dennett, anthropologists Pascal Boyer and Scott Atran, zoologist Robert Hinde, and writer Michael Shermer, has arrived at a “by-product” theory. They suggest that religious thoughts are by-products, the result of the mind’s deployment of psychological mechanisms that evolved to fulfil other, non-religious functions. Dawkins, for instance, claims that religion persists because children have adaptations for believing anything their parents tell them.4 The second Darwinist camp, which includes anthropologists William Irons, Lee Cronk and Richard Sosis, biologists Richard Alexander and David S. Wilson, and political scientist Dominic Johnson, offers an alternative “religious cooperation” hypothesis. This camp argues that religious beliefs evolved to fulfil a particular function: specifically, to enhance the ability of people to cooperate in groups and to successfully compete against rival groups."
My outline started with items following these two paragraphs. While the breakdown of camps was interesting, there are too many competing concepts funneled into the lengthy examination of Christian methods of sorting out membership qualification and they are unrelated to natural selection and unconnected to any hypothesis that makes sense in an anthropological context. The following two paragraphs summarize the viewpoint:
"If people are convinced that others sincerely believe, then they will be confident that they can also believe, without the fear that they’ll be exploited by non-believing free riders. The second-order public good is thus produced, divinely and psychologically. Still, assessing someone else’s level of religious belief is a tricky matter—gauging it isn’t always straightforward, and faking religious adherence is possible—so Christians don’t rely entirely on God to enforce the rules. As a backup plan, they also deliver their own incentives. The fact that congregations are generally long-lived organizations helps believers to deliver these incentives. When congregants meet regularly and repeatedly, and members know each other reasonably well, it’s easier for virtuous members to be recognized for their contributions and to achieve high status and popularity within their congregation. It’s also easier to recognize and punish free riders.
"The system works by forbidding behaviors that might harm the group, and by establishing a system of heavenly and terrestrial incentives that make it individually advantageous to follow the rules. By reducing “social ills” like murder, adultery and theft, the system empowers the group and its members: it reduces conflict, frees people up for economically productive work, and increases group solidarity and competitive ability."
Whether this was a worthwhile read for you might hinge on how you take to the final conclusions:
"I’ve used Christianity as a case study in this essay, but I don’t mean to suggest that Christianity lends itself, more than any other religion, to Darwinian interpretation. If the human mind is the product of Darwinian selection, and religious thoughts are generated by human minds, than all religions should be equally amenable to an analysis like this one. This doesn’t mean that all religions are equally well-designed for the specific purpose of producing public goods. However, the basic features that help Christianity regulate group behavior—specific codes for moral conduct and supernatural and natural incentive systems—are shared by other major religions. For example, Judaism has the Talmud and a covenant-enforcing God; Islam has Sharia law and paradise and hell; Hinduism has the Laws of Manu and the principle of Karma.
"Religious systems like Christianity do not, of course, provide the only means by which people may overcome their short-term selfish interests and generate public goods. These systems do, however, seem to be exceptionally well-designed for doing so. Could secular institutions be as effective as religious systems at motivating people to produce public goods? It’s possible, but religious systems have a crucial advantage: their adherents don’t just believe that God knows about all their good and evil deeds, they believe that He is a perfectly just and incorruptible administrator of punishment and reward. Secular institutions for the production of the second-order public good, on the other hand, depend on judgments that are made by police officers, lawyers, judges and juries. A scenario in which fallible, corruptible human beings such as these were allowed to monitor the actions of each citizen, every second of every day, would be regarded by almost everyone as a dystopian nightmare. In the minds of believers, only God can be trusted not to abuse this kind of power.
"It is plain to see that, for many people, religion provides a moral framework for their lives that is both meaningful and compelling. We still have much to learn about why so many people cherish their religious beliefs so deeply, and about how these beliefs may help generate the types of social environments in which many people would prefer to live. By identifying the ways in which religious systems harness human cooperative instincts, and thus generate real-world benefits for their adherents, we can gain a Darwinian perspective on religion that does not just dismiss it as a cognitive by-product. This perspective does not imply that religious concepts exist only in the minds of believers. It simply suggests that, whatever mysteries may be inherent in religious belief, there are compelling Darwinian reasons to believe that religion’s benefits have historically been real."
The ideas are interesting enough, but the perspective doesn't even give lip service to conflicts between belief systems. How political systems use religion and how religion uses power are modern stories that can't automatically be converted to work. As they say in the financial markets, "past performance can not be used to reliably predict future gains".
Anyway, this is a long article and a work in progress. While there is a link to the focus piece, the site got and deserves more attention. Here is a little about the site:
" About the Global Spiral
The Global Spiral is the winner of a 2007 American Graphic Design Award from Graphic Design USA.
Purpose
The Global Spiral is a monthly online magazine dedicated to the mission and vision of Metanexus Institute. Metanexus is a not-for-profit organization that promotes transdisciplinary research into profound questions of human meaning and purpose with the aim of transforming our educational, religious, and civic institutions.
Problem
The present moment, with its ever-accelerating technological development, instantaneous global communication, and unprecedented interaction among cultures, presents remarkable possibilities for enhancing the common good. However, despite the increase in the quantity and diversity of our knowledge, our understanding of ourselves and our world is becoming ever more fragmented. This fragmentation lies at the root of many of the current threats to our well-being and the well-being of our planet.
Proposal
The Global Spiral addresses this problem by offering transformative, transdisciplinary content that is not just about the life of the mind, but about paying mind to the whole of life. We do this through…"
and it goes on. See it all for yourself at:
http://www.metanexus.net/
and
http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
What Beliefs Are Worthy of Faith?
There are three points of view referenced here, but just one question. While consideration of dogma and built-in human desire for religious acceptance gave two sides to the coin, the missing element was the eternal discovery of truth through science. A critical review of a remark by Richard Dawkins defined one side of the triangle:
"...one cannot claim that science requires atheism because atheism is a philosophical position, not a scientific one. She leverages the standard distinction between philosophical and methodological naturalism: if you are a scientist you have to be a methodological naturalist (i.e., assume for operative purposes that nature and natural laws are all that there is); but this doesn’t commit you to the stronger position of philosophical naturalism (i.e., to the claim that there really isn’t anything outside of nature and its laws)."
While the discrepancies between dogma, faith, and belief in this cartoon caught my attention, a lecture series on the historical Jesus borrowed from the public library is providing insights into the tentacles formed in my own thinking from 12 years of parochial schooling. Trained in botany, physiology, and chemistry, a second side of the triangle, the base is familar territory to me. Perhaps you would substitute other labels for the third corner. Call it what you will.
The question is: If humans are hard-wired for faith, it is easy to see why finding something to believe in is a common quest. See an earlier post that defines the "conveyor belt" concept, a meaningful concept more pointed than simply stated "live and learn".
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Consideration Overload
Avoidance behaviors fine tuned with final tax preparation and a new biofeedback blog, weather instabilities or ecocommunity backlash triggered by Easter Sunday sugars , but everything seems to have more layers to peel back today.
This was supposed to be a light read:
This was supposed to be a light read:
Divine irony
...the further in I got, the deeper the concentration needed. Got to the comments and thought - Salvation! Wrong, deeper still:
Quoting from Newsblaze: "Using a synthesis of scriptural materials from the Old and New Testaments, the Apocrypha ,the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library, it describes and teaches a single moral command, a single moral principle offering the 'promise' of its own proof; one in which the reality and power of God responds to an act of perfect faith with a direct, individual intervention into the natural world; correcting human nature by a change in natural law, altering biology, consciousness and human ethical perception beyond all natural evolutionary boundaries. Intended to be understood metaphorically, where 'death' is ignorance and 'Life' is knowledge, this experience, personal encounter and liberation by transcendent power and moral purpose is the 'Resurrection', the justification of faith and foundation of righteousness." For the first time in known history, a religious teaching and moral tenet exists bearing the name of Christ, offering access by faith, to absolute proof for its belief and that changes the very basis of all theistic religious assumption. In fact the whole intellectual paradigm under which we exist as a humanity. History may be about to judge both our human conception of what God and religion are and those who have chosen to believe in nothing but themselves. It should be most interesting to watch both sides respond as this new development plays out? http://www.energon.org.uk
...and that is just the second comment, attraction to mockery by Christians being the subject of the first comment. I haven't yet followed the link above, that is part of the reason this stuff finds its way here - I hope to get to it later.
Well, my creating you own universe post is still has Multiverse readings to follow and along comes Smart Mobs with this lead - Encarta will soon be euthanized by Microsoft. As six memories parade, starting with the salesman showing my mother the chicken hatching from the egg picture in World Book and ending with the fantasy of my biofeedback book bloated with Wikipedia entries and converted to PDF for distribution, pervasive media invades an equally pervasive reality.
Wonder what's on the radio....
Monday, April 13, 2009
Creationist Beliefs Examination
Considering the season, http://www.scientificblogging.com/terminus_post_quem/its_time_put_shroud_turin_back_its_box seemed like a good subject. A discussion of carbon dating doesn't draw many and history cuts a little deep into too well remembered wounds around relics.
When evolution gets whittled down, most of the alternative universe seemed mysteriously unprofessed until browsing this opinion and position rich site. After a look at several pages and articles this is my pick for the ideal source for those times when a creative discussion on evolutionary theory is unavoidable. The volume and depth available have nearly convinced me that it isn't some Onion-like satire piece.
Faith challenged? Here's reason:
http://objectiveministries.org/creation/sciencefair.html
From the High School Creation Science Fair section:
When evolution gets whittled down, most of the alternative universe seemed mysteriously unprofessed until browsing this opinion and position rich site. After a look at several pages and articles this is my pick for the ideal source for those times when a creative discussion on evolutionary theory is unavoidable. The volume and depth available have nearly convinced me that it isn't some Onion-like satire piece.
Faith challenged? Here's reason:
http://objectiveministries.org/creation/sciencefair.html
From the High School Creation Science Fair section:
"2nd Place: "Maximal Packing Of Rodentia Kinds: A Feasibility Study"
"Jason Spinter's (grade 12) project was to show the feasibility of Noah's Ark using a Rodentia research model (made of a mixture of hamsters and gerbils) as a representative of diluvian life forms. The Rodentia were placed in a cage with dimensions proportional to a section of the Ark. The number of Rodentia used (58) was calculated using available Creation Science research and was based on the median animal size and their volumetric distribution in the Ark. The cage was also fitted with wooden dowels inserted at regular intervals through the cage walls, forming platforms which provided support for the Rodentia. Although there was little room left in the cage, all Rodentia were able to move just enough to ward off muscle atrophy. Food pellets and water were delivered to sub-surface Rodentia via plastic drinking straws inserted into the Rodentia-mass, which also served to allow internal air flow. Once a day, the cage was sprayed with water to cleanse any built-up waste. Additionally, the cage was suspended on bungee cords to simulate the rocking motion of a ship. The study lasted 30 days and 30 nights, with all Rodentia surviving at least long enough afterwards to allow for reproduction. These findings strongly suggest that Noah's Ark could hold and support representatives of all antediluvian animal kinds for the duration of the Flood and subsequent repopulation of the Earth."
Friday, April 3, 2009
Back in Old Time Religion Days...
Newspapers will be missed. Trend spotting is hard to Google. The following article is in my pile because there are links I haven't read, but each one, along with the article, delivered revelations.
From rumors of next Popes to Palin's power base with an audio program from This American Life, there are too many links, of very high quality, to let slip from my desktop.
The article:
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religiousright/1275/the_new_christianity%3A_what_the_mainstream_media_has_missed_/
From rumors of next Popes to Palin's power base with an audio program from This American Life, there are too many links, of very high quality, to let slip from my desktop.
The article:
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religiousright/1275/the_new_christianity%3A_what_the_mainstream_media_has_missed_/
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Create Your Own Universe
I drifted into a Black Hole while listening to this broadcast of WNYC's Radio Lab. Give it a listen while you clean your kitchen. Let me know how creation works out for you.
"Can you make your own universe? We usually think of the universe as “everything that exists,” so how could you make another one? Well, physicists have been speculating about the existence of multiple universes for some time now. And for Robert, the obvious next question was: “Can we make one?” So he invited physicist Brian Greene to his kitchen to speculate about just that. And it turns out, it’s not such a far-fetched idea. There are scientists right now trying to figure out whether it’s possible and what it would take. According to Brian, it would require a tiny black hole, a dash of reverse-gravity, and a lot of luck. But the laws of physics don’t rule it out."
Download MP3
"Can you make your own universe? We usually think of the universe as “everything that exists,” so how could you make another one? Well, physicists have been speculating about the existence of multiple universes for some time now. And for Robert, the obvious next question was: “Can we make one?” So he invited physicist Brian Greene to his kitchen to speculate about just that. And it turns out, it’s not such a far-fetched idea. There are scientists right now trying to figure out whether it’s possible and what it would take. According to Brian, it would require a tiny black hole, a dash of reverse-gravity, and a lot of luck. But the laws of physics don’t rule it out."
Download MP3
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Guide to Education Futures
The conclusion of my career in technology within K-12 education featured classroom video and digitized frames. Legal analysis of the case included explanations of MP4 protocols. Changes continue and the projected future is clear with the path for severely overburdened public school teachers, especially in urban areas, very obscure.
As an aside, a recent discussion of the demise of newsprint and how the functionality of obituaries might survive focused on the pocket device, like the evolving device suggested in the Horizon Report, that we learning to live with and use.
See the Horizon Report announcement where I first saw it:
http://www.smartmobs.com/2009/03/18/research-horizon-report-2009-k12-edition/
(You might want to watch the video clip)
http://wp.nmc.org/horizon-k12-2009/
(The mothership with lots of ways to view the report in addition to the pdf link below)
or just read the PDF report directly:
http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2009-Horizon-Report-K12.pdf
As an aside, a recent discussion of the demise of newsprint and how the functionality of obituaries might survive focused on the pocket device, like the evolving device suggested in the Horizon Report, that we learning to live with and use.
See the Horizon Report announcement where I first saw it:
http://www.smartmobs.com/2009/03/18/research-horizon-report-2009-k12-edition/
(You might want to watch the video clip)
http://wp.nmc.org/horizon-k12-2009/
(The mothership with lots of ways to view the report in addition to the pdf link below)
or just read the PDF report directly:
http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2009-Horizon-Report-K12.pdf
Sunday, March 1, 2009
An Examination of Conscience: Mind, Soul, Emotions, and Faith
My entertainment this evening while walking the dog: consider faith's view of the soul and hear experienced tellers relate it to their depression. Pehaps responding to the spiritual transmissions from my being, P.D. shook off his collar and led through the winter's brush he found attractive.
February 26, 2009 Speaking of Faith Podcast, Depression and the Soul
» Download (mp3, 53:09)
» Listen Now (RealAudio, 53:09)
» Podcast
One in ten Americans, and even more dramatically, about one in four women, will experience clinical depression at some point in their lives. We take an intimate look at the spiritual dimensions of this illness and its aftermath.
February 26, 2009 Speaking of Faith Podcast, Depression and the Soul
» Download (mp3, 53:09)
» Listen Now (RealAudio, 53:09)
» Podcast
One in ten Americans, and even more dramatically, about one in four women, will experience clinical depression at some point in their lives. We take an intimate look at the spiritual dimensions of this illness and its aftermath.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Leadership and Technology
While the media focus may be on Obama, the PopePage gave cautions on "obsessive" Facebook use, a sin, and offered a glimpse of the Vatican's technology history.
Pope Benedict XVI says that social networking sites can “foster friendships and understanding, but warns they also can isolate people and marginalize others.” Sort of like all religions under the sun.
Pope Benedict XVI says that social networking sites can “foster friendships and understanding, but warns they also can isolate people and marginalize others.” Sort of like all religions under the sun.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Church and State, Bush Style
Never pass by a Harper's Index might be a motto. It led to A retrospective of the Bush Era and these little nuggets:
Rank of Nevaeh, “heaven” spelled backward, among the fastest growing names given to American newborns since 2000: 1
Months, beginning in 2001, that the federal government’s online condom fact sheet disappeared from its website : 17
Minimum amount that religious groups received in congressional earmarks from 2003 to 2006: $209,000,000
Amount such groups received during the previous fourteen years: $107,000,000
Percentage change from 2003 to 2007 in the amount of money invested in U.S. faith-based mutual funds: +88
Average annualized percentage return during that time in the Christian and Muslim funds, respectively: +11, +15
Rank of Nevaeh, “heaven” spelled backward, among the fastest growing names given to American newborns since 2000: 1
Months, beginning in 2001, that the federal government’s online condom fact sheet disappeared from its website : 17
Minimum amount that religious groups received in congressional earmarks from 2003 to 2006: $209,000,000
Amount such groups received during the previous fourteen years: $107,000,000
Percentage change from 2003 to 2007 in the amount of money invested in U.S. faith-based mutual funds: +88
Average annualized percentage return during that time in the Christian and Muslim funds, respectively: +11, +15
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Religion Helps Human Evolution
See the article for the bigger picture and more details like this:"Some of the more intriguing conclusions that McCullough drew were:
- Religious rituals such as prayer and meditation affect the parts of the human brain that are most important for self-regulation and self-control.
- When people view their goals as "sacred," they put more energy and effort into pursuing those goals, and therefore, are probably more effective at attaining them.
- Religious lifestyles may contribute to self-control by providing people with clear standards for their behavior, by causing people to monitor their own behavior more closely, and by giving people the sense that God is watching their behavior.
- The fact that religious people tend to be higher in self-control helps explain why religious people are less likely to misuse drugs and alcohol and experience problems with crime and delinquency.
"By thinking of religion as a social force that provides people with resources for controlling their impulses [including the impulse for self-preservation, in the case of suicide bombers] in the service of higher goals, religion can motivate people to do just about anything," he concluded."
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Finding the Edge
Edges are always richer places - the interactions at borders are powered by meeting of diversity. A simple link to a "year-end" review led me to the Edge.org and all the reading material needed if banished to a desert island for a year.
The Edge Annual Question - 2009, "What Would Change Everything?" - was more than I could finish in one sitting with attention stealing sidebar links.
http://www.edge.org/
There is a Dean Ornish interview video with the text version.
The Edge Annual Question - 2009, "What Would Change Everything?" - was more than I could finish in one sitting with attention stealing sidebar links.
http://www.edge.org/
There is a Dean Ornish interview video with the text version.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
