Thursday, March 27, 2008

The Science of Religion(Economist)


"Science and religion have often been at loggerheads. Now the former has decided to resolve the problem by trying to explain the existence of the latter


BY THE standards of European scientific collaboration, €2m ($3.1m) is not a huge sum. But it might be the start of something that will challenge human perceptions of reality at least as much as the billions being spent by the European particle-physics laboratory (CERN) at Geneva. The first task of CERN's new machine, the Large Hadron Collider, which is due to open later this year, will be to search for the Higgs boson—an object that has been dubbed, with a certain amount of hyperbole, the God particle. The €2m, by contrast, will be spent on the search for God Himself—or, rather, for the biological reasons why so many people believe in God, gods and religion in general.

“Explaining Religion”, as the project is known, is the largest-ever scientific study of the subject. It began last September, will run for three years, and involves scholars from 14 universities and a range of disciplines from psychology to economics. And it is merely the latest manifestation of a growing tendency for science to poke its nose into the God business.

Religion cries out for a biological explanation. It is a ubiquitous phenomenon—arguably one of the species markers of Homo sapiens—but a puzzling one. It has none of the obvious benefits of that other marker of humanity, language. Nevertheless, it consumes huge amounts of resources. Moreover, unlike language, it is the subject of violent disagreements. Science has, however, made significant progress in understanding the biology of language, from where it is processed in the brain to exactly how it communicates meaning. Time, therefore, to put religion under the microscope as well.

..."

http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10875666


I found this to be one of the most fascinating articles I've read in a long time, you should all take a look!

- Spero

Sunday, March 23, 2008

US Gov Bans Easter Eggs


Deemed potential danger to national security.

Millions of Americans never expected to hear this type of news on Easter Sunday. Yet, at a press conference early this morning, Secretary of State Condoliza Rice revealed a new "Potentially catastrophic" threat to the American People.

It seems that the cute little multi-colored eggs of our youth have been infiltrated by Al-Qaeda, with help from the Easter Bunny him(or her) self. "Our wiretapping programs have paid off", says President George W. Bush about uncovering the threat, "The Easter Bunny was either with us or against us - and he chose against us".

The controversial (Patriot Act) wiretapping program uncovered terrorist plans to put explosive devices inside these small multi-colored packages in an attempt to "Strike fear into the hearts of Americans" says a senior NSA official.

Early diagnostic efforts have placed the bombs construction' in Iran, with possible help from the Revolutionary Guard. A plant near Tehran, tentatively labeled site 5022, was identified as the most probable manufacturing area. The Iranian government has yet to issue a long official response, but, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was overheard retorting "Damn the American Infidels and curse their goats" - and as usual denying the holocaust.

As for the Easter Bunny, the NSA does not believe he placed the eggs in millions of houses in America by himself. It is believed that his proxies have infiltrated many families, neighborhoods and communities around the country. "Times like these no one is above investigation" says the President Bush. Bush, after seeing bright green eggs on the White House lawn, immediately quarantined many members of his immediate family. "The threat" he says, "is everywhere".

This reporter's efforts to obtain access to the reports that lead to the current Administrations conclusion about the threat were met with stern rebuttal. "Why do you hate America?" fired back a senior State Department official. When this reporter protested, he was met with a brick wall of logic: "Then, why do you love terrorists?"

Faced with this level of argumentation, our news agency has abandoned efforts to read the documents for now.

Monday, March 10, 2008

Dear Europe

This is an old open letter that I thought might spark some provocation, and show everyone that we are still alive!



"Hi. Are you nuts?

--Outdated--
"Forgive me for being so blunt, but your reaction to our reelection of President Bush has been so outrageous that I'm wondering if you have quite literally lost your minds. One of Britain's largest newspapers ran a headline asking "How Can 59 Million Americans Be So Dumb?", and commentators in France all seemed to use the same word - bizarre -- to explain the election's outcome to their readers. In Germany the editors of Die Tageszeitung responded to our vote by writing that "Bush belongs at a war tribunal - not in the White House." And on a London radio talk show last week one Jeremy Hardy described our President and those of us who voted for him as "stupid, crazy, ignorant, bellicose Christian fundamentalists."
---------


"Of course, you are entitled to whatever views about us that you care to hold. (And lucky for you we Americans aren't like so many of the Muslims on your own continent; as the late Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh just discovered, make one nasty crack about them and you're likely to get six bullets pumped into your head and a knife plunged into your chest). But before you write us off as just a bunch of sweaty, hairy-chested, Bible-thumping morons who are more likely to break their fast by dipping a Krispy Kreme into a diet cola than a biscotti into an espresso - and who inexplicably have won more Nobel prizes than all other countries combined, host 25 or 30 of the world's finest universities and five or six of the world's best symphonies, produce wines that win prizes at your own tasting competitions, have built the world's most vibrant economy, are the world's only military superpower and, so to speak in our spare time, have landed on the moon and sent our robots to Mars -- may I suggest you stop frothing at the mouth long enough to consider just what are these ideas we hold that you find so silly and repugnant?

"We believe that church and state should be separate, but that religion should remain at the center of life. We are a Judeo-Christian culture, which means we consider those ten things on a tablet to be commandments, not suggestions. We believe that individuals are more important than groups, that families are more important than governments, that children should be raised by their parents rather than by the State, and that marriage should take place only between a man and a woman. We believe that rights must be balanced by responsibilities, that personal freedom is a privilege we must be careful not to abuse, and that the rule of law cannot be set aside when it becomes inconvenient. We believe in economic liberty, and in the right of purposeful and industrious entrepreneurs to run their businesses – and thus create jobs - with a minimum of government interference. We recognize that other people see things differently, and we are tolerant of their views. But we believe that our country is worth defending, and if anyone decides that killing us is an okay thing to do we will go after them with everything we've got.

"If these beliefs seem strange to you, they shouldn't. For these are precisely the beliefs that powered Western Europe—you—from the Middle Ages into the Renaissance, on to the Enlightenment, and forward into the modern world. They are the beliefs that made Europe itself the glory of Western civilization and - not coincidentally - ignited the greatest outpouring of art, literature, music and scientific discovery the world has ever known including Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Shakespeare, Bach, Isaac Newton and Descartes.

"It is your abandonment of these beliefs that has created the gap between Europe and the United States. You have ceased to be a Judeo-Christian culture, and have become instead a secular culture. And a secular culture quickly goes from being "un-religious" to anti-religious. Indeed, your hostility to the basic concepts of Judaism and Christianity has literally been written into your new European Union constitution, despite the Pope's heroic efforts to the contrary.

"Your rate of marriage is at an all-time low, and the number of abortions in Europe is at an all-time high. Indeed, your birth rates are so far below replacement levels that in 30 years or so there will be 70 million fewer Europeans alive than are alive today. Europe is literally dying. And of the children you do manage to produce, all too few will be raised in stable, two-parent households.

"Your economy is stagnant because your government regulators make it just about impossible for your entrepreneurs to succeed - except by fleeing to the United States, where we welcome them and celebrate their success.

"And your armed forces are a joke. With the notable exception of Great Britain, you no longer have the military strength to defend yourselves. Alas, you no longer have the will to defend yourselves.

"What worries me even more than all this is your willful blindness. You refuse to see that it is you, not we Americans, who have abandoned Western Civilization. It's worrisome because, to tell you the truth, we need each other. Western Civilization today is under siege, from radical Islam on the outside and from our own selfish hedonism within. It's going to take all of our effort, our talent, our creativity and, above all, our will to pull through. So take a good, hard look at yourselves and see what your own future will be if you don't change course. And please, stop sneering at America long enough to understand it. After all, Western Civilization was your gift to us, and you ought to be proud of what we Americans have made of it."

"An Open Letter to Europe", was written by Herbert E. Meyer. Meyer

- Spero

Monday, March 3, 2008

As Promised

Before reading, keep in mind that, as with all such posts, this is purely based on opinion, and does not necessarily reflect the views of In Cogito as a whole.

What is Christianity, and why oppose it?

· Christianity is a religion that is based on blind faith in the Bible’s stories and teachings.

· Christianity is an imperialistic religion that intrudes and imposes upon people in their daily lives.

· Christianity spreads ignorance and delusion and is frequently imposed upon children who are young and impressionable enough to believe everything that their parents tell them; thus involuntarily internalizing the Christian faith without actually having made a rational choice to do so.

· Christianity was created during a time when it was necessary and common for man fabricate tales in order to conceptualize and to explain phenomena that was beyond science at that point, assign meaning to their lives, and motivate and unify societies.

· Christian ideologies are obsolete, and no longer apply to modern society.

· Christianity demands the utter devotion of its members, pressuring them to attend church regularly, and sapping them of their precious time.

· Christian mythology defies all established modern scientific principles.

· The Christian Church has opposed and sabotaged nearly every scientific innovation and discovery since its beginning to this day.

· Christianity flaunts itself as the moral authority to the world.

· Christianity has hijacked, influenced and twisted social values and standards such as morality to force even non-believers to conform to its irrational ideologies.

· Christianity is a hypocritical and intolerant religion that labels all non-believers as “fools”, and condemns them to eternal suffering in hell.

· Countless people have been slaughtered in the name of Christianity.

· Countless crimes have been committed in name of Christianity.


I am not going to go into any detail to try and disprove Christian mythology because that would be simply too easy. We all already know that the Bible is composed of myths that contradict all proven scientific principles and rationality, and that it is full of inconsistencies, intolerance, and lies. Belief in the Bible is belief in talking animals, giants and unicorns, the magical parting of seas, the impregnation of a virgin, magical healing powers, the possibility of a man walking on water, flying chariots of fire, that the earth was created approximately 6000 years ago, that dinosaur fossils are only “a test of our faith,” etc...

Many theists at least have the intelligence to see through these myths, but use the metaphorical interpretation of the Bible as an excuse to cling on to their faith because they are too scared not to, much like a child that is attached to a security blanket. The most common argument supporting the Christian metaphorical interpretation of the Bible is that the Bible is a good source of moral influence. Of course, this is complete nonsense; The Bible condones war, slavery; intolerance, and other ideas that are generally considered immoral, such as polygamy; and in any case, the notion of morality is in no way an inherent human trait, as it has been shown to change in regard to developing social ideals; so why allow the Bible, an ancient book, to define morality in our modern society?

If God isn't the answer, then what is? I certainly do not claim to have the answers. The truth is, we do not know, and people have to learn to deal with that. Science is not flawless, there is very much that science can not explain. However, perhaps it is for the best that we simply accept that the human brain has limits and that there are certain things that are beyond our comprehension. It would be arrogant to think that we live in a universe that we fully understand. At least this is a better approach than to put all of our faith in ancient fairy tales.

I bring up many points against Christianity, but I do not expect anybody to believe it because I am telling them to. I want for people to make their own rationalizations, and to see the truth for themselves through each person's own perception of reality. To define the universe on one's own terms is a fascinating journey, and to simply believe in the words of others based on blind faith is being robbed of that experience.


Finally, here are some biblical quotes that I’m sure you can appreciate:

Exodus 21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.

Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

Exodus 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Matthew 5:29-30 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22573021/

GE 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

CO 11:8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.

CO 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

EP 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

EP 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

EP 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

CN 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

1PE 3:1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;

1 Timothy 2:11-12 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.


I know there are many points that I have not addressed, but I do not want to crowd too much into one post. If you have any counterarguments to offer, feel free to do so by posting a comment, and I will most likely respond promptly.

To anybody I have offended:

Please do not regard this post as hateful. As I have said before, I have nothing personal against Christians at all. Christians and all theists for that matter, have the right to any faiths they choose to believe in. At the same time I have the right to criticize these faiths if I choose.

Christians believe that all nonbelievers are fools and they condemn them to burn in eternal hellfire for it. So, who is intolerant?

- Voice of Reason

Sunday, March 2, 2008

Democratic Economics and Parallels to the 20's


I was going to write a more targeted article even before this weeks issue of The Economist
arrived at my doorstep, but after reading the magazine(and their view on Democratic Economic Policy) I've decided to expand my frame of reference. Because well, they're right.

Miserabilism as Democratic Policy

I'm sure everyone has heard about Hillary and Barack threatening to withdraw from NAFTA in an attempt to woo Ohio voters.
They both, but especially Barack Obama, portray the United States as a place where a mother must compete with her child for minimum wage employment - at a time when unemployment is low by historical standards.

They've been quick to blame NAFTA for job loss that is probably better attributed to the Chinese or Indians. NAFTA definitely isn't the demon they've created in the minds of the American voter; free trade allows consumers to get better items at cheaper prices. This increased purchasing power is exactly what we need at a time when the dollar is ruined and we're heading into a recession.

Mr. Obama has sponsored two bills in his short history that seem to indicate he's thrown away his common sense. The failed Fair Pay Act would have ensured that women and men get the same pay, not for the same work, but for what the government deems equal. His second bill is called the Patriot Employers Act which would reward American companies for NOT expanding overseas.

Naturally, the rich (who already bear nearly all America's tax burden) will not be voting for a Democrat in 2008. But if Mr. Obama is to be believed he intends to raise their tax burden to around 62.3%. Hope - but not for all americans.

Luckily for us, the Democrats always veer populist during the primaries. It is merely a question of how much they do in the Presidency.

Parallels to the Great Depression

Recently I've compared Barack Obama to FDR. Their "Change" and "New Deal" programs sound similar - both are very vague during the race for the White House. And both men are silver tongued and charismatic. The problem with that comparison is that FDR had the experience(as governor of NY) to cobble together a policy on the fly, and I doubt Obama will be able to do the same.

The whole era in general has stark similarities to the depression: the United States is burdened by war debt(WW1 in the 20's), people have mortgages that they can't pay(buying stock on margin in the 1920's), a depreciated dollar might have the same effect on purchasing power as overproduction and subsequent unemployment of farmers in the 1920's; the straw that may break the Camel's back is electing a protectionist president(the tariffs in the 20's were the highest in peacetime history).

For many, this is unsettling - and unfortunately it gets worse.

If Barack Obama truly has become the demagogue that his new speeches indicate then he seems to resemble not FDR but one of the fascists that arose in the Europe during the same period.


- Spero

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10766009