1. Hook, line and rapture

Comment #109122 by dvespertilio on January 8, 2008 at 11:49 am

The inimitable Pat Condell, as always!

2. Highway to hysteria

Comment #93901 by dvespertilio on December 4, 2007 at 12:31 pm

More insanity from the American heartland! These people are really quite insane. And scary, too.

3. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #86858 by dvespertilio on November 10, 2007 at 10:35 am

Steve99: I agree with you. The bible simply doesn't conform to the observed facts of evolution. Why engage in tortured intellectual arguments that strain credulity when science provides a better "fit" for the facts? People like ADH will always slip away, however. It is impossible for them to acknowledge that they are wrong, because to do so would literally destroy their whole world view and conception of themselves. That is a process that is simply too painful for most "believers" to endure.

4. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #86802 by dvespertilio on November 10, 2007 at 7:14 am

ADH: I have never heard of any of your theological sources except N T Wright, and he is considered to be an orthodox believer who is working from the basic premise that the accounts are historical and eyewitness to begin with. Are you familiar with the works of John Dominic Crossan and others in the Jesus Seminar? What you are doing is akin to mistaking the works of, say, Homer or Shakespeare, for descriptions of actual persons or events, even though there may be some historical basis (like the ruins of Troy)underlying the tales they tell. Tell me, have you had a direct revelation of either Jesus Christ or God, i.e., have they either appeared to you or spoken with you, given you incontrovertible evidence of their existence? Plenty of people claim such, like the Medjugore visionaries claiming visions of Mary or the Polish nun who dictated the words of Jesus given to her over several years. This latter nun is the basis for JPII of the rc church declaring that the Sunday after Easter is Divine Mercy Sunday. So we have the leader of the largest single christian denomination in the world making decisions about faith based on the mystical visions of a semiliterate Polish nun. Most competent observers would classify such things as psychiatric disorders. Be that as it may, people in positions of power and authority who pretend to speak to complex social and environmental issues based on visions and revelations that are, at best, a matter of personal opinion, are dangerously misguided. Subjective feelings, powerful emotional experiences ( no matter how compelling) and personal interpretations of ancient texts or writings (or modern ones, for that matter)are no basis for rational decision making or the generation of good public policy.

5. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #86777 by dvespertilio on November 10, 2007 at 6:18 am

ADH: Re my comment 285 to you from yesterday, 11/9/07. I am still waiting for a response from you. The gospels you purport to be "eyewitness" accounts" are not, in fact, anything at all like that. They are stories, collections of sayings, etc, and as such are works of literary fiction, not historical accounts of actual events. You cannot rationally justify your belief in either God or Jesus based on this literature. Why do you persist in insisting that your feelings and beliefs have any basis in objective, historical facts? I would really like you to answer that, please. Thanks in advance.

6. Church row evolves over fossil boy

Comment #86550 by dvespertilio on November 9, 2007 at 2:26 pm

Just wait until the christian and muslim fundamentalists in Africa really go at one another. Both faiths are pushing aggressively for converts, and there can only be more conflict coming out of that kind of scenario in the future. Such a pity that a continent with so many natural resources, so many different cultures, should be such a backward place divided by mindless ideologies. Not that much of the United States is any different, by the way. The problem, all over the world, is irrational ideologies, be they religious, political or economic, or some combination of the three. Frankly, I think we're doomed. Or, at the very least, it's going to get a whole lot worse before it gets any better. Too bad.

7. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #86534 by dvespertilio on November 9, 2007 at 1:32 pm

Re: Post 191 Comment#86370 by ADH It is also warranted by the eye-witness accounts of Christ's life offered by the four gospels, culminating in the accounts of his resurrection.

Let me jump into the fray. ADH, this is factually incorrect. It is the opinion of most competent scripture scholars that the the canonical gospels are faith statements written by believers in faith communities anywhere from 30 to 70 years after the events of Jesus's life, whatever those might have been. They are NOT eyewitness accounts, nor are they historiography or biography by any modern definitions of those words. They were written by believers as faith statements for, principally, other believers, and are based on a body of oral traditions that included sayings of Jesus and stories about Jesus that were in common circulation. This is why the 3 so called "synoptic" gospels, i.e., Mark, Matthew and Luke, have so many parallel, similar stories and sayings. The gospel of John is widely considered the latest of the four, dating from perhaps around 90 CE or even later. It is very unlike the other three, contains all of the mystical "I am" type statements attributed to Jesus, and portrays Jesus in a much more god-like and omniscient manner, unlike the synoptics. It is the opinion of many competent NT scholars that Jesus probably never made these statements, as they are found no where in the synoptics and are only slightly removed from similar types of statements attributed to him in non canonical gosples such as the gospel of Thomas. The gospel of John is clearly neo-platonic in outlook and of very late origin. It is not the work of a first century palestinian jew, and it is absolutely not the eyewitness account of a follower of Jesus. It is doubtful that any of the gospels contain anything more than rehashings of various oral traditions about Jesus that had been in circulation in various, mostly gentile, communities of believers for several decades before they were committed to writing. As such, they do not constitute either eyewitness accounts nor reliable historical data for making any significant judgements as to the factuality of the matters they purport to describe.

Just thought I'd clear that up. I have spent more than 30 years delving deeply into the question of whether there is any truth in the christian revelation. In the process I began as a believing roman catholic and ended as an atheist. I even pursued life in a cloistered monastic community for several years in my pursuit of the truth in this matter. I might add that all of this was at great personal loss to me, as I preferred this search over the obvious path of pursing the development of my own career. I gave away thousands of dollars to the church, damaged my own career, wasted years of my time and, in the end, discovered that it is all absolutely not true. The churches distort the realities of what is actually in the scriptures, they ignore the findings of competent scholarship. In the process, credulous, trusting believers are taken for a ride, bilked of their money, their resources, and their very lives. In the case of the rc church, I ask you, why is it that we hear so much about relatively narrow moral issues like abortion and stem cell research, and nothing at all about matters concerning unjust and immoral wars, environmental problems, overpopulation, social justice, the rights of women, etc.? I cannot support religious institutions that are so obviously blind to matters as blindingly important as these. No thinking, inquiring mind in the early 21st century could possibly accept the mythologies and twisted ethics of the christian churches as being the best, most rational and truest answers to the questions that we all face both individually and as a species. Orthodox christianity, in all its various forms, simply doesn't stand up to any resonable or rational scrutiny. The same could also be said for most other religious beliefs. It is sad that you are wasting your time, energy and breath defending the indefensible.

8. Same Flea, Different Name?

Comment #85897 by dvespertilio on November 7, 2007 at 12:42 pm

OP stands for Order of Preachers, which is what the dominicans are supposed to do in the rc church, teach and preach the dogmas and doctrines of the church.

9. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #84113 by dvespertilio on November 1, 2007 at 7:30 am

I was raised as a roman catholic, recited the Creed on Sundays, like all good catholics and was deeply conflicted about what it said for years. I, too, ultimately went to university and majored in Religious Studies and Philosophy. I graduated with honors. I fully concur with Standings' conclusions. It's all right there in the scriptures and the creeds. Either it makes sense and is intelligible in terms of a scientific, rational world view, or it does not. At this time, in the early 21st century, any thinking, well-educated individual knows for certain that christian scriptures are clearly an amalgam of mythology, outdated philosophy and metaphysics, and peculiar, religiously based ethics. They cannot possibly be the basis for any rational discourse or decision-making in a world such as ours. Think about it: the species, Homo sapiens, is perhaps 200,000 years old; civilization is perhaps 10,000-12,000 years old, at most. Modern science is, at most, only 400-500 years old. I would submit that science, for better or worse, has done more to transform the world in practical, visible and powerful ways than all the religions of the world have done in more than 20,000 years. And science is just getting started. Whether we like it or not, we are here and owe our existence to the scientific revolution of the past several centuries, and our continued existence in the future depends vitally upon the extension of gains obtained from that same knowledge. As imperfect as the world may be, what sane, rational person would prefer to return to the sort of existence a literal, religious world view would yield? I firmly believe that the vast majority of so-called believers are, when closely questioned, basically practical atheists in the actual living of their daily lives. They only cling to their outmoded belief systems because of early indoctrination, personal desires and fears, and, quite often, for personal gain. There is, after all, quite a lot of money to be made in organized religion, even if you don't really believe in it. I could point out several mega churches in my neighborhood that aptly demonstrate this.

But back to the article.... all in all, very to the point, and very well written. Should be a point for discussion with all so called "christian moderates".

10. Jury Awards Father $11M in Funeral Case

Comment #84098 by dvespertilio on November 1, 2007 at 6:50 am

How about 5,000 peaceful atheists showing up at Phelps' church some bright, Sunday morning? We could just say that we were curious, and wanted to see if they could "enlighten" us on their unusual positions. And I bet we could get some good press coverage out of it, too. Of course, we would have to be absolutely "respectful" and totally nonviolent. Think about it.

11. Call for major science campaign

Comment #77319 by dvespertilio on October 9, 2007 at 3:40 am

Again, why don't we have more students interested in physics,math and chemistry? Because these are hard-core sciences and they require a huge amount of discipline and hard study, even if one does have a special aptitude for them. A culture that panders to the banal and meaningless, and that is more interested in titillating than in thinking, isn't going to produce a whole lot of anything w/ any real significance. And yet we're still producing Nobel laureates. So maybe there's room for a little bit of everything in places like the UK and the USA. And if all the best scientists and teachers are overseas, we can do what we've always done, we can BUY them. My brother-in-law, about to finish his doctorate in structural engineering, is a Korean national. Ten to one, he stays in the US when he's offered a salary by a corporation that not only exceeds anything he'd make in Korea, but also buys him a lifestyle that wouldn't even be possible in South Korea. (Don't know how much longer that kind of lifestyle will be possible, what w/ global warming and general environmental and possible economic decline looming on the horizon, but for now....)

12. Sam Harris seems like a nice fellow, but very confused

Comment #77316 by dvespertilio on October 9, 2007 at 3:27 am

Much ado about nothing. Get a life, all of you!

13. Teachers 'fear evolution lessons'

Comment #76989 by dvespertilio on October 8, 2007 at 3:39 am

Comment #76951 by Veronique on October 8, 2007 at 12:01 am I am interested in how you are taught to teach in the US, maybe you can tell me.

Sorry, Veronique, about my rambling paragraph style. I'll try to do better at that in the future.

Well, as far as how I am being taught, this is how it works. I am becoming a science teacher under a plan set up as part of our No Child Left Behind law (you know, the one that C Hitchens lampooned as "No child's behind left" HA HA)

Anyway, this law created an entity known as ABCTE, the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence. This past Friday I took and passed my subject competency test in Biology, grades 6 through 12.

The next step involves the PKT test (sounds somehow medical, doesn't it?) That's the Professional Knowledge of Teaching test which is part multiple choice and part essay. I am just beginning to study for this, and frankly am a little daunted by the prospects. I have been given rubrics to review for the essay portion which I have not yet taken the time to review, but it will probably take me several more months to prepare for this as I have only limited classroom experience to date and virtually no theoretical background courses in pedagogy.

In Florida where I live the process is supposed to work like this: after obtaining certification on the subject and PKT exams, and having survived a background check and check of academic credentials (my college transcripts for my BA degree), I am to apply to local school principals for positions. If hired, I am supposed to be mentored for two years (not sure exactly what that will involve, appears to be a highly subjective process basically up to the principal and teacher mentor and differing from school district to school district). After the two year probationary mentoring, the state is supposed to grant me a permanent teaching license which must be kept current w/ regular educational updates, etc. That's my understanding of the teachers' education process in which I'm involved.

Hope that sheds a little more light on things.

You see, despite having a federal Department of Education, and fifty state versions of the same, education is still largely a local phenomenon here. The state departments of education are all scrambling on this accountability thing, trying to come up w/ comprehensive testing measures that demonstrate that the students have learned ( or are learning) the essentials as they progress through the system from 1st grade through senior year high school (grade 12). In Florida the tests for this are called FCATs, Florida Comprehensive Assessment Tests. Each state has its own version of these, and its own process for implementing, assessing, revising, etc, these. So it's a very complicated educational situation here in the USA.

At the immediate local level, there is the local (in my case, county)school district. There is a School Board of elected officials and a hired Superintendent of Schools. All of this is highly political. Currently, here in Duval County, Florida, we have concerns about reorganizing the school district into smaller, subdistricts and the Superintendent is feuding w/ the Board over this. Additionally, a huge chunk of the money for the education budget here comes, as it does everywhere in Florida, from property taxes. The state legislature recently passed a proposal to dramatically cut property taxes, a move which would adversely impact many local services, i.e., police, EMT, fire and educational services. They were originally looking for a $19 million shortfall on the educational budget for next academic year. But there was supposed to be a referendum on the matter, and a judge struck that down on the grounds that the ballot version of the property tax reform was too confusing. Hence, we are now about to have the state legislature revisit the entire issue. That means, at this point, the school districts, like the county and municipal authorities, don't know exactly what funding they will have available from property taxes next year, so all the budgets are up in the air. Politics and money, again.

On the classroom level, we have armed police officers in the schools, we have had mutiple instances of weapons and violence in local schools and the environment is not always friendly, even in the supposedly better "A" and "B" grade schools (they grade them based on their overall FCAT performances). As a substitute in the past, a few years back, I have had students attempt to physically challenge me in the classroom ( I am not easily intimidated, for you see I worked for a number of years in adult and adolescent, inpatient psychiatry, and I've pretty much seen everything. Also worked for a while in various situtations as a pharmacy tech and patient relations advocate in a major hospital trauma center, so I've seen my share of gunshot wounds, blunt trauma to the head and body, etc., am not easily cowed by anything.)

Teaching in this district is also relatively low paying, considering the level of competence and responsibilities expected. Entry level positions start around $32K, which is not a whole lot of money when a typically middle class house here cost say, $250K, and a family of four needs a monthly income of $4-5K just to survive, never mind college funds, vacations, etc. The US is NOT a country with a highly developed social welfare system. I am currently self employed, doing odd jobs, etc. May be working in a supermarket at $8.00/hour in the near future, to make ends meet until I can finish this teaching "reeducation" process. This is one of the wonders of our "global", so-called "free market economy" (yeah, I know, it really isn't a "free market economy", I'm not an economics major, so sue me!! HA HA!)

According to the prevailing wisdom of most of my neighbors here, I'm pretty much on my own and it's my responsibility to "pull myself up by the bootstraps". After all, it's my fault that I didn't get a useful degree back when, thirty odd years ago (I'm 53 years old). I was also crippled by a rc background that left me feeling guilty about myself and searching for an illusory and apparently non existent god. I have only recently, in the past few years, freed myself from that twisted and distorted upbringing. I am, in my middle years, taking a hard look at myself and the situation in which I find myself (which is economically hardpressed and quite strapped), and trying to come up w/ a realistic and pragmatic vocational alternative. I figure I'll very probably live another 30 odd years, will have to work until I'm at least 70 years old. Teaching looks like an honourable profession, if I can survive the politics of the school district and daily rigours of the classroom. We shall see.....

14. Teachers 'fear evolution lessons'

Comment #76516 by dvespertilio on October 6, 2007 at 3:33 am

We're getting a lot of stuff in the media on this side of the pond about "the islamification" of Europe. My attitude is, hey, if you want to advocate terrorism and you don't want to assimilate to western values of science, reason, democracy, etc, LEAVE! In fact, people who consistently advocate extreme views on matters like terrorism should be deported to their countries of origin. And if they are native-born, they should be told, in no uncertain terms, to cease and desist. Maybe there needs to be a program to deincentivize such views. "OK, you can advocate crazy views like creationism, ID, etc, but we don't have to hire you or consider you for jobs, etc." Yeah, I know, this would probably be considered a violation of basic human rights and suddenly we are acting like fascists and fundamentalists, the very people we are trying to oppose. But I am beginning to feel a little like Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens on these issues. If we stand around saying, "Oh, we're so tolerant and understanding, why don't we all hug one another and live in peace and love?" we're going to find ourselves in societies where reason, democratic principles and toleration for ALL forms of diversity have gone out the window. And about this democracy thing...with continued immigration and high birth rates, what do you do when a muslim MAJORITY votes in sharia law, etc in places like the UK or France? Religious fundamentalists of that ilk may win solely on the basis of demographic trends.

I am working on certification as a biology teacher here in the US. I don't think UK students are a whole lot different than American students. The overwhelming majority of these students are not interested in science, have no concept of the scientific method or how to apply it in their lives, etc. Why should they? It isn't being taught, schools look and are run like prisons, and the parents are largely even more abysmally ignorant than their offspring. Hey, this is America, we have GOP (Republican) candidates running for president who not only don't believe in evolution, they're PROUD of it! This country has a long history of extolling all that is anti intellectual, anti scientific, etc. So where does this leave us? Look around, America. Many of your doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists, etc are foreign born, and the numbers of these are increasing all the time. If we wish to keep any kind of technological/business advantage over the rest of the world, we have no choice but to allow increased immigration for these people,as our own children, born and raised here, are increasingly not interested in science, and not sufficiently disciplined to pursue it. Science is HARD WORK! Very few individuals have the intellectual skills and drive to become,say, a Dr Craig Venter, or someone like that. I see it right here in my own household and in my own community. My daughter and her friends talk about being scientists, in my daughter's case, a zoologist. But the kids are getting piss poor science education generally, they are not being taught the PROCESS of the scientific method or how to apply it, nor is it being impressed upon them that this requires DISCIPLINE and HARD WORK. The world is not a computer game w/ instant gratification. A good part of the problem is that we live in a society that tolerates every kind of fuzzy thinking and touchy, feely, huggy I'm OK and you're OK,too do goodism. We send the message that anything and everything is OK, that mediocrity, stupidity and banality are OK, and to be accepted or even ENCOURAGED, on par w/ excellence, intelligence and outstanding achievement. Too many kids get too much positive feedback for performing at levels that should be considered basement level achievement, but treated as if they were all Nobel prize laureates. Well, folks, life is hard, and people are all very different. And some few people ARE more intelligent, more driven and more skilled than the rest of us. Wake up, America, and the rest of the developed world, before it's too late and you find yourselves buried by fanatics who will probably use western derived technologies to do it (witness al Quaeda's search for nuclear bombs and bioterrorist weapons, and their extensive use of the internet) If we don't stop acting like imbeciles, get off of our increasingly fat asses and face the cold, hard realities of the world in which we live, we're all DOOMED!

Just a few thoughts on education.....hey, what do I know, anyway? HA HA!

15. I am creating artificial life, declares US gene pioneer

Comment #76504 by dvespertilio on October 6, 2007 at 2:41 am

Goodbye, Nature. Hello, brave new world. Are we not on the threshold of redefining both our humanity and the natural world in which we live?

16. Christianity's Image Problem

Comment #76196 by dvespertilio on October 5, 2007 at 3:00 am

So christianity is on the decline in America? You wouldn't know it in my neighborhood. More worrisome to me is the fact that fundamentalist christianity and islam are growing gangbusters in Africa and Asia. Witness the recent bouts of homophobia coming from Nigerian anglicans and the brouhaha about evolution recently in Kenya. And it was recently brought to my attention that a world values survey shows that religion and belief in god still rank high (5th place)for many people in different countries around the world. I'm not really very impressed w/ this supposed "trend" toward secularism. It doesn't look very convincing from where I'm standing. Churches here in NE Florida are still major centers of socialization, and most are pushing the tithe program, so they've got big bucks to push their social agenda. Even the rc bishop here in Jacksonville, FL is getting into the fray w/ an article in the "Saint Augustine Catholic" entitled "Give and feel the love".... you know, how all those wonderful blessings will descend upon you from god because you've decided to tithe (or do "sacrificial giving", as they like to call it in catholic circles). And they really believe this crap. I have noted over the years, to my chagrin and general frustration, that many fundamentalist, evangelical churches, particularly the new, nondenominational types, do do alot for their members who tithe. I know of one woman who I used to work w/ who had her water heater go out. She was a practicing, tithing member of this church. They bought her a new water heater ( she couldn't afford one)and church members installed it for her, all gratis (well, not exactly, as she tithes). But you see, it becomes a great extended family and a substitute for the old families of origin which have become so dysfunctional and dispersed for many that they cease to function at all. Of course, I often wonder how many "believers" in these types of churches are really there just for the social life and whatever else they can get from the church. Indeed, my wife, who doesn't believe any of this shit, belongs to a choir at a rc church up the street here just because she likes to sing and she likes the choir director (thinks he's cute, which is fine by me!)

Anyway, I don't think either christianity or islam are ready to roll over and play dead. Dream on!

17. A New Debate

Comment #75573 by dvespertilio on October 3, 2007 at 3:27 am

Of course, if the Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan or Iran get a hold of nuclear weapons, we will have an environmental crisis that will be a whole lot worse, very, very quickly. Wouldn't rational people be calling for world wide nuclear disarmament about right now. And, gee whiz, THEY HAVE BEEN FOR SOME TIME. Again, E. O. Wilson is right. We need "to put aside our metaphysical differences" and get down to the task of working on saving what we all have in common, the world in which we live. (See his interview w/ Bill Moyers back in early July of this year, you can find it in archived episodes of Moyers' JOURNAL.)

18. A New Debate

Comment #75572 by dvespertilio on October 3, 2007 at 3:20 am

Excuse me, but E. O Wilson is one of the most respected environmental scientists alive. We are facing, indeed, are already in, an environmental crisis of epoch proportions. If you want a future of an impoverished humanity living on a biologically impoverished planet, just keep going in the same direction we're going now. Any one who thinks this isn't so is just dreaming. The scientific indicators of MAJOR world-wide environmental upheaval are everywhere. Only the unenlightened who don't give a damn would say otherwise.

As to the idea of a scientific debate among presidential candidates: a wonderful idea that hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of flying. The candidates don't care, for the most part. Most of the electorate doesn't care, w/ spades, no matter what public opinion polls say. Oh, yeah, everyone's concerned about the environment, until it hits their bottom line. Things will probably get much, much worse before any significant number of Americans sits up and takes notice. Sad and scary, but, alas, I fear, probably true.

19. Atheists arise: Dawkins spreads the A-word among America's unbelievers

Comment #75185 by dvespertilio on October 2, 2007 at 2:14 am

Richard, you're coming to Birmingham, AL tomorrow. Too bad you can't come to Jacksonville, FL, city of, it seems, thousands of churches, one on almost every street corner. There are at least four churches w/in two miles of my house (one literally right next door), and I live in an affluent suburb! Put me down as another Florida atheist who would dearly love to see Richard Dawkins come here. I suspect that there are many atheists here, but they aren't particularly organized and many may think that they are alone. Wouldn't it be great to bring the Out Campaign to Florida? Any other Florida readers out there to second my motion?

20. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74832 by dvespertilio on September 30, 2007 at 6:38 pm

46. Comment #74777 by wilk1978 on September 30, 2007 at 11:51 am

"Actually, dvespertilio, since you have experience with South Korea, maybe you could shed light on a question I've had. I read recently that Asian Americans are actually the fastest growing segment of evangelicals in the US. I was wondering if you had any experience with Christianity among Koreans. At my university in the US, Koreans make up the largest group of foreign students. I'm always surprised talking to them how religious they seem to be. Has this been your experience?"

Well,wilk1978,it has been my experience that virtually all the Koreans I have known in the US are christians, most of them presbyterians, baptists or such, a few roman catholics. I don't know what this means. My understanding is that approximately 25% of the population of South Korea is christian, and that presbyterians of one sort or another constitute the majority of these christians. Most of the Koreans I have met in the US are either professional people, working class business owners or students. I suspect that there is some strong resonance with many of these Koreans between what might be called traditional Korean values and the values that are espoused by the churches to which they belong, but I am not sure if I am correct in this, nor do I know what the sociological particulars of this might be. I read some years ago that the two countries in the world with the highest numbers of cults and cult members are Switzerland and South Korea. Again, I have no exact idea what this might mean.

21. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74773 by dvespertilio on September 30, 2007 at 11:23 am

Re: 41. Comment #74743 by wilk1978 on September 30, 2007 at 8:03 am

"Actually, South Korea has had a healthy, robust democracy for a couple of decades now. I'm sure that your interpretation of South Korean society and politics would come as a surprise to many people there!"

Actually, I lived and taught English in South Korea in the mid-1990's, and I married a South Korean woman. Local governments were appointed by the central government up until about 1995 when the first local government elections were held. I would not describe democracy in the Republic of Korea in the 1990's as robust and healthy. A good beginning, perhaps, but still a long way from what one might expect to see in, say, the United Kingdom or Canada. In any case, I am not making any sort of determinist argument, but am merely stating that these societies are different than ours. Indeed, much of what passes for democracy in the United States of America isn't.

22. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74706 by dvespertilio on September 30, 2007 at 3:29 am

Where to begin? Well, of course organized religion has done much evil in various societies down through history. So have organized industrial-military complexes and organized educational institutions. Although, to be fair, much of this is apparent only w/ hindsight and often only from a perspective that is culturally and temporally far removed from the times and places of the alleged harm. What I am saying is that it is perhaps a little too facile and simplistic for us to judge what was said and done in other places and times, and pronounce it as absolutely "good" or "evil". Reality simply is, and usually steadfastly refuses to fit into any simple boxes that we might devise to try to contain it. And why all this talk of "rationality" vs "irrationality"? Humans may have rational tendencies in their makeup, as evidenced by the history of science and the best of philosophy, but I should think that even a passing purview of human history adequately demonstrates that we are also, very largely, creatures of irrationality and passion, even often to our own detriment and destruction.

Comparing societies as varied as Burma, the Phillipines and Poland begs the point. Each place has its own history, complexities, cultural values and unique situation. I don't think it is easily possible to isolate "religion" as a factor in any social situation, and scientific studies to do so usually show that there are different kinds of belief systems, some demonstrating high correlations between orthodox measures of religiosity and conservative values, and others showing different ("liberal"?)values that seem to correlate inversely w/ measures of religious orthodoxy. In short, there is no such thing as "religion" as an entity in and of itself. If anything, in complex societies, there are "religions" which represent competing and often conflicting value systems within those societies, usually reflecting differences in educational and socioeconomic backgrounds among various groups in any given society. As Westerners we frequently overlook the fact that Eastern societies, like Burma or South Korea or China, etc. are working from radically different sets of assumptions than we are. Confucianism and Neo-confucian values underlie much of the social hierarchy in east Asian societies, and no matter how modern and "Western" they may look, they are NOT Western societies. The traditional emphasis on order and right relationships, including the relationship between the rulers and the ruled, are inherent in this kind of mindset, and values like democracy, the value and worth of individuals, etc are, at best, secondary in these social contexts. And even if one is liberal, well-educated and pro-democratic in a society like Burma, upon what historical basis and with what "democratic" institutions is one supposed to build a society that reflects these values?

Another point: organized religion, like organized anything, will always out compete, for better or for worse, disparate and disorganized individuals at anytime and and in any place. If atheists are not organized, do not have institutions that they run and that reflect their values, biases, etc, then they probably will not prevail in having any major significant effects on the societies in which they live. Hence, it would seem vitally important that we who define ourselves as such would strive to find as much common ground and agreement among ourselves as possible, and would support those institutions that do reflect our unique set of values. In short, what is the essence of what it means to be an atheist, a humanist, a secularist? And how do we create and support institutions that effectively represent us in society at large? In a sense, we must almost take a quasi-religious ("values")stance of our own and ORGANIZE effectively if we wish to be heard in any society. I think that is why the debate promulgated by Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Dennett, and many others in recent years is so important. But be advised, we are probably in the minority in many places, and humans are NOT RATIONAL ANIMALS in the main, so the struggle we have is an uphill one.......

23. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #70829 by dvespertilio on September 17, 2007 at 3:27 am

Re: Comment #70822 by Veronique

Veronique: What beautiful quotes from Shakespeare! I am ashamed to say that in my fractured liberal arts education here in the USA, I never read "Hamlet", we focussed rather on several lesser plays of Shakespeare, i.e., "Romeo & Juliet", "The Merchant of Venice", etc. Aside from the issue being discussed here, you have renewed my interest in studying Shakespeare. Now, if I could only find the time! I don't think any local playhouse here in NE Florida, USA, is even producing a Shakespeare play. Too bad! How defective was my classical education while I was growing up! Oh, to have the time to go back and remedy the deficiencies!

Anyway, thanks again for the beautiful quotes.

24. Griffin's 'offensive' Emmy speech to be censored

Comment #69649 by dvespertilio on September 12, 2007 at 3:10 am

Go, Kathy, go! And anyway, "Jesus" is Latinized Greek. Was she referring to Yeshua bar Yossef (which is how he would have been known)? He never claimed to be God, he would probably be totally perplexed by all of this, who knows? So the "Jesus" she is taking a swipe at exists only in the minds of the believers and, according to the best scholars, like John Dominic Crossan et al., isn't the "Jesus" of history at all.


Geesh, Louise, give it a rest, Catholic (Fascist) League! Let's hear it for free speech and the rights of minorities to FREELY EXPRESS THEMSELVES IN A FREE SOCIETY.

25. We need a more intelligent religion debate

Comment #68640 by dvespertilio on September 8, 2007 at 1:38 am

So any touchy-feely, we're all one sittin' here around the campfire singing Kumbaya my Lord kind of experience is religious or quasi religious?Yeah, so we have this emotional limbic brain thing goin'. So what? So that every demagogue from Hitler and Mussolini to George Wallace and G W Bush can attempt to manipulate us by pushing our "feeling" buttons? (Although G W Bush is pretty much a piker when it comes to demagoguery, a joke, really!!) Raves sound potentially dangerous (like soccer fans out of control) At best, why not call all of this arousing and sometimes aesthetically pleasing. So that makes good "religion" an art form, not necessarily true in the empirical sense, but art nonetheless. But one man's Mona Lisa is another man's......garbage?!!?? Sounds pretty subjective and solipsistic to me.

26. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #68635 by dvespertilio on September 8, 2007 at 1:09 am

RE: Comment #68630 by eirik

Oh, indeed, it is CLEARLY about making a fast buck! And there are dozens of christian and/or reactionary publishers out there willing to publish for these blokes. But we can only hope that the public at large will get tired of reading such tripe. And as of yet, it doesn't appear to be redounding with any consequences on Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett or Harris. Of course, THEY are making a pretty penny on this, too. But isn't it about time that the rational opposition should do so? I won't begrudge Richard and company their "dime". Having sold myself short on my own ideas and the sweat of my labour for much of my life, I will not begrudge or envy others for capitalizing on theirs.

27. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #68631 by dvespertilio on September 8, 2007 at 12:58 am

RE:Comment #68629 by steve99

Yes, sadly scientific illiteracy is rampant in Western culture today. And it appears that there may be a natural bias against rational thinking built into the human nervous system, so overcoming this anti rational tendency may be very difficult, indeed. I am repeatedly amazed by encounters w/ people who not only don't understand the scientific way of perceiving and understanding reality, but don't even wish to TRY to do so. Sometimes, in my darker moments, I think that this will be our ultimate undoing. (Or maybe that's just religious apocalypticism creeping insidiously into my mind.)

28. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #68628 by dvespertilio on September 8, 2007 at 12:49 am

Ay, Richard, ye've spawned a theist industry, ye have! But seriously, this is really funny. Just goes to show you what ideology, envy and not a wee bit of greed will do for you. Every Tom, Dick and Hairy Harry wants to cash in on the back of poor Professor Dawkins. Keep up the good work, Richard, and give 'em hell!

29. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66930 by dvespertilio on September 1, 2007 at 3:04 am

Comment #66926 by Dunc-uk on September 1, 2007 at 2:40 am
Or Leonardo Boff, the Brazilian friar, also defrocked by the last pope, JPII, for daring to speculate that Divine Wisdom personfied as Sophia and somehow or other linked to the Virgin Mary (BVM)might be best thought of as a balance to the overwhelming masculinity of the Trinity and that perhaps it should be incorporated into the Trinity and yield something like a Quaternity.....obviously he needed a serious f..k too, as this kind of (sub)mental masturbation is pathetic.....but then there's JPII's advocacy of the rantings and ravings of deceased sexually repressed and presumably virginal young nuns, like the Polish one who said Jesus told her he wanted the Sunday after Easter to be Divine Mercy Sunday, so even though she was considered heretical and suspect for forty plus years, the Polish pope thought it meet to push her to sainthood and declare, in the rc church, that the sunday after Easter sunday is, indeed, Divine Mercy Sunday. Where does it all end? ......newsflash.....the BVM has just appeared to a Volkswagen Beetle in downtown Santa Monica....details at 11.........

30. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66929 by dvespertilio on September 1, 2007 at 2:53 am

Re: Comment #66926 by Dunc-uk on September 1, 2007 at 2:40 am
Well, you might try Matthew Fox of the Creation Spirituality Institute in California. But then he's a defrocked Dominican friar and an authority on Meister Eckhart..... but his vein of Creation Spirituality and theology has appeal to the fringes of the christian communities.

31. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66923 by dvespertilio on September 1, 2007 at 2:19 am

RE: Comment #66919 by bean on September 1, 2007 at 2:06 am "And the girl's angel had a magic wand?"

Yeah, all the male angels have "magic wands" Have one myself, I do.......ah,.....the middle of the night.....in the middle of the bible belt.....must go now and play w/the little baptist angels next door. I think I hear Pan's pipes.........ah, that chevrain smell of that ole tyme rerligione.........SLAP ME someone, I need to come to from this slightly past mid summer night's dream......no, honey, I said SLAP, not pinch, well, if you INSIST you CAN do it again please, but a little lower..........

32. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66920 by dvespertilio on September 1, 2007 at 2:09 am

I agree with the comment that "angels are not wispy, winged beings in ethereal nightgowns," All my angels have been a whole lot more material than that, and I prefer them totally in the nude, keep the "ethereal nightgowns", why don't ya? If you can't get to "know" an angel in the biblical sense of the word "know" (like "knowing" your wife and the like, or your neighbor's wife if yours is unavailable for "knowing") then what the fuck is the point......oh, dear, there I've gone again, and given it all away...... clearly Vickers is truly in need of a good...........

33. Mother Teresa's '40-year faith crisis'

Comment #65585 by dvespertilio on August 25, 2007 at 1:44 am

It's exactly what I've been saying here for the past several weeks. God is a vast empty spaciousness, cold and dark in places, but light and open in others. Because God is the cosmos. Apart from matter and energy ( and now we know about dark matter and dark energy) what else is there? So of course, all mystics and saints worth there salt eventually come to the realization that their icons of god are just passing illusions, neither more nor less divine than anything or anyone else. What Mother Theresa failed to do, apparently, is to develop beyond the prescribed institutionalism of the rc church and go where the spirit of the cosmos would have taken her. Had she done that, I trust she would have melted away from religious life and gone on to lead a quiet, productive, compassionate life somewhere in the world, quite unknown and unremarkable. What the world needs is caring compassionate people who help from the spaciousness of their hearts, not dusty, moldy old sexually repressed virgin imagos from another place and time. Sad that she never reached that. All the saints I know are anonymous.

34. Atheists and believers have got religion wrong

Comment #63928 by dvespertilio on August 16, 2007 at 7:01 pm

Well, as a former Trappist monk postulant, I must confess (HA HA!)that, yes, as a matter of fact YOU CAN HEAR A THING WHEN THE TRAPPISTS SING! Just got back this past weekend from Mepkin Abbey where the Father Abbot, Stan, did a singing sermon. And it was beautiful! Lighten up, guys!! All that's dead is outmoded notions of God. The cosmos is very much alive. Be that, dance w/ the energy and the light!

Mad Monk Michael

35. In Games, an Insight Into the Rules of Evolution

Comment #61129 by dvespertilio on August 3, 2007 at 7:38 pm

Next they'll be saying orchids are in relationship w/ humans (or at least orchid aficionados, anyway) And exchange alien modified DNA w/ them too....that's why they're so rapturously seductive....see pleurothallid alliance. OK!

36. Proboscidean Mitogenomics: Chronology and Mode of Elephant Evolution Using Mastodon as Outgroup

Comment #59040 by dvespertilio on July 27, 2007 at 3:18 am

So evolution rules. Rock on! Now if we'll only evolve to the next plane of human (or transhuman existence) and get on with it!. Like the bumper sticker says, "Evolve already, damn it!" Life flows on.

37. Texas Leads U.S. in Teen Birth Rate

Comment #59037 by dvespertilio on July 27, 2007 at 3:11 am

I'm writing a little political fable. The working title is: The Little Shrub that Could: An Oxymoronic Tale from Deep in the Heart of Texas. The missing village idiot staggers onward! However, I do note that his powers of public speaking do appear remarkably more clarified, concentrated and precise (OK, only marginally so, perhaps) since he had his colonoscopy. Maybe those 5 polyps were GW's brain? Or the real, hidden WMDs? Should we check Cheney next. Life is peachy....peachy....peachy.....impeach Bush now...peachy, peachy......Cheney first.....PEACHY!

Have a wonderful day!

Regards,

dvespertilio@bellsouth.net

38. Religion beat became a test of faith

Comment #58019 by dvespertilio on July 23, 2007 at 3:01 am

Re 35. Comment #57967 by Duff
Yes, religious concepts are powerfully enthralling, like meme viruses of the mind. And why is this? Neurologically, the religion complexes engage people from birth with all their sensory modalities, using powerful images, art, music, sexualitiy, anxiety, joy, bliss, in short every kind of human experience of feeling and consciousness, to inculcate themselves. More than thirty years ago there was a school of psychotherapy called Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP) which posited that any behaviour could be broken down into its component parts and be taught or transmitted to others by engaging individuals in their dominant sensory modalities and using techniques like mirroring body stances, expressions, etc and reflexively shaping conversations by keying them directionally with imagery couched in sensory images that were observably appealing to the subject being programmed. At least one of the founders of that process went on to become a kind of educational/psychological consultant and made a huge amount of money. This is also, I believe, similar in its roots to much of L Ron Hubbard's Scientology. He, of course, developed similar methodologies in the 50's and 60's and linked them to his alien domination sci fi fantasy mythology, turning the whole thing into a highly profitable cult which initially was supposedly about freeing people from their psychic dysfunctions. I had passing acquaintance with Scientology inductees in LA and Oregon back in the 70's. So you see, all religious "cultuses", if you understand my coined word borrowed from academia, are "social mind cultures" of vast memeplex mind webs spidering their way through our minds. Only gentle, but firm and consistent confrontation with the empirical realities of existence can change these, and only then over fairly lengthy periods of time, assuming the individuals/groups involved are amenable to being in dialogue w/ others about their beliefs. Segue to various religiously-based terrorist groups or extremely radical and mentally deranged religious cults ( i.e. Jim Jones and Jonestown, David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, etc), however, and you have a recipe for mayhem and disaster. Wahabist Islamic fundamentalist terrorist w/ control of, say, Pakistan's nuclear arsenal would be a nightmare of apocalyptic proportions. Equally bad are the Left Behind Rapturists of the West, particularly the American variety, who would egage the Muslim variety in the their mutual self delusions and blow us all to, to use the old religious expression, "kingdom come".

Regards,

Michael Edward Davis
dvespertilio@bellsouth.net

39. Religion beat became a test of faith

Comment #57897 by dvespertilio on July 22, 2007 at 4:00 am

Mr Lobdell: your story was sad and poignant. Yes, all religions are illusions,
stories that we tell ourselves, Sometimes they work for apparent good,
frequently they don't. You are now hopefully free of the delusions of
institutional, organized religion(s). It is the same with all human
endeavours. It is our condition. Live now in the vast, spacious openness of
radical compassion. Wait. Watch. Listen. Love. There is an inner vastness of
consciousness where we connect with everything and everyone. It mirrors the
same vastness that we see outside when we raise our eyes to the heavens and
beyond. Love this. Stand in awe of it., as we have done for countless
millennia. This is the root of our being, our source and our destination. We
are children of the cosmos. Let us struggle to love and care for one another.
May your journey continue with blessings and may you bless all those you touch
with your writings. Thank you for blessing me with your candid revelations of
that journey. Life goes on. New life arises from the abyss and crucible of
apparent death. Radical compassion for all living beings is the only way.

Regards, Michael Edward Davis

40. Face to faith

Comment #57843 by dvespertilio on July 21, 2007 at 2:29 pm

Once upon a time I was an honors premed student at Indiana University (back in the Dark Ages prePC and worldwide web). Even had it all paid for, courtesy of multiple scholarships. But I had a "nervous breakdown" and dropped out of college to find myself (common back then). I peregrinated about most of North America, came right back to Bloomington and put together an interdisciplinary degree in Religious Studies, w/a strong concentration in biological sciences, history and philosophy of science and religion, Jewish, Christian and Buddhist mysticism, etc. With this degree alone I worked as a caseworker in psychiatric social services for more than a decade. I also worked several years as a pharmacy tech, and taught sciences, social studies and English as a substitute teacher off and on for more than twenty years. I made a very modest living, but went all over the world (Europe, Singapore, Latin America, etc), met a lot of interesting people, made myself useful, and such. My degree has served me well. Although I was accepted into one or two graduate programs, I could never afford to go, as they generally cost more annually than my gross salary at the time. I soldiered on with my liberal arts education because, after all, learning and wisdom are a life long journey, and who knows where the road(s) will go?

Did I mention that the "nervous breakdown" had many varied facets of origin, i.e., I am the adult child of an Anglo-Irish_American alcoholic, that I was sexually molested by a RC priest off and on in 1966 and 1967, and later sexually humiliated by twenty-something novices in a well known novitiate in the Midwest of the US ( I was 15 at the time). I was angry years later, but I paid for my own therapy (my parents paid for the initial electroshock and pharmacological therapies at eighteen or so years; it cost them over US$9,000, a kingly sum for blue collar workers at that time, and still enough to make me stop and reflect upon even today. I'm more of a "garden gate" than Bill Gates! HA HA). Anyway, I survived, and all of this has been grist for the mill,as they say. My personal evolution, like all evolution, has proceeded from the necessity of using what I had been handed by descent, and actualizing the possibilities and "mind niches" that I discovered inherent in the dynamic system called, variously, this world, the Cosmos, etc.
It's been a really cool ride!

In the mid 80's through mid 90's I explored interior life, unitive consciousness, neurophysiology of mystical and peak experiences and all such "stuff" in Trappist and Buddhist Monasteries in the US and Korea. Supported the journey teaching, doing corporate customer service/sales for several of the Biggies in insurance and telecommunications,whatever it took to survive. Married a Korean student 13 years my junior, to the day, in 1995 and have two beautiful daugthers here in Mandarin. FL

The article is right on. I lived with a sociologist for eight plus years in my 20's. Academic study of religion/spirituality is much ignored by other academic disciplines. Our knowledge of the neurophysiology of unitive, peak states of consciousness and how they might be optimized and integrated into enhancing daily living, is woefully inadequate. Kudos to Sam Harris et al for exploring these areas. The Dalai Lama is making similar efforts. As E O Wilson said recently in a 7/5/07 interview w/ Bill Moyers, "let's put aside our metaphysical differences" and dialogue with those who are capable, about what we have in common, that is, the Creation/Cosmos which is our common, mysterious heritage. ( I'm paraphrasing, go see the interview for yourself, it's at the Moyers blog journal site.)

Isn't reality more complex than any of us had ever supposed? Isn't science a way of thinking that generates ever more predictive, subtle and powerful models for explaining what we perceive around us? Maybe religions and spiritualites are vast memeplex networks perpetuating themselves through this terrestrial space/time existence as they infect our collective minds,sometimes for perceived human good, sometimes maybe not. Complexes of religious art, ritual, liturgy, literature,myth,storytelling and such are powerful conditioners of individual and social "cultures". The understanding of the neurophysiology of this conditioning from a scientific perspective is relatively in its infancy. But whatever these phenomena are, they are not going away, and it's vital that we understand them as part of the current, quickening pace of global human experience. Please WAKE UP and pay attention to us "religious studies" majors. And while you're waiting..... Breathe deeply, relax, center and be still. The Cosmos is a Vast Spacious Emptiness filled with a Dynamic Dance of Light........Be that, be radically open, aware and compassionate....Listen....Look... ponder and reflect.....in this stillness of mystery, you will find utter wonder, amazement and joy.

Have a nice day!

Another mutant chimp in the neighborhood.

41. The fundamentalist delusion

Comment #56401 by dvespertilio on July 15, 2007 at 3:42 pm

Re: 35 Comment # 56376 by Steven99:
I also have found it difficult to be sexually oppressed over many years by an institutional religion. However, it has been my long experience that blatant anger and poorly thought out, emotionally charged rhetoric generally repel others and impede rational discourse. You know the saying, "You catch more flies with honey rather than vinegar." (Of course that actually depends on the species of flies HA HA!), but my
point is that if we do not maintain a modicum of decency, civility and decorum with our interlocutors, than we only impede genuine communication and problem-solving. It is very difficult, indeed, to keep highly charged emotions of any kind, positive or negative, out of rational discourse, and I am not saying that that is what we should do. But if we do not extend to each other the courtesies, freedoms and respect that we expect for ourselves, how are we any different from those who pillory us verbally? Again, you will note in my original posting that I am speaking of addressing moderate or rational believers of whatever stripe. Obviously fringe fanatics of any stripe or kind are totally different. People who attack, persecute, maim, kill, etc others are outside the boundaries of any sane society and they should be contained by all rational societies by whatever means prove most effective. If they cannot be reasoned with, then we must defend ourselves, and if attacked we must use whatever force deemed necessary and prudent to disarm or destroy them. But that is called warfare. There are many other options in relatively free societies. If you live in one, you always have the option for rational discourse, no matter the emotional difficulties that entails. I wouldn't say that it's easy.

But I do know what it's like.


Regards

42. The fundamentalist delusion

Comment #56354 by dvespertilio on July 15, 2007 at 8:53 am

As offensive as I find some of Mr Svartz' remarks to be, I do feel that he has a point to make in the several final paragraphs of his opinion piece. He is calling for a calming of passions and useless rhetoric among all the parties involved in this highly complex and multi-faceted global debate. Similar to remarks made recently by E.O. Wilson in his interview w/ Bill Moyers (it's at Moyers site, as well as posted here at the Dawkins site.). As both are trying to say, one in a secular humanist way (Wilson),and the other (Svartz) from a religious/philosophical perspective, (at least as I interpret it), the time has come, is, indeed, almost dangerously past, for ALL of us on this planet to get down to the difficult but vitally necessary task of addressing the pressing problems that we and all species on this planet, face, i.e., global warming, inequity of resource distributions, weapons of mass destruction, inequities in distribution of knowledge and power, etc.

I feel that Wilson says it better than Svartz in that he states, in his interview w/ Moyers, that he could, now, go and reason w/ any countryside Christian pastor, and they would, he asserts, arrive at a common ground for agreement. He says, let's put metaphysics and epistemology aside for the moment and address our common ground, your Creation and our Evolved World. Can we not reasonably agree that the destruction of the created world is not something either of us wishes to countenance? What are we going to do to address these problems that beset the entire planet? In this way Wilson engages (and is actively engaging as the Moyers interview shows)the more moderate/rational/reasonable religious believers and true dialog about pragmatic solutions to our common problems (AS A PLANET)begins to emerge.

Anyway, that's my view on this.