Friday, May 19, 2023

And He Became a Living Soul

I do not write in this blog very much about abortion, since I do not fully understand the issues. But I heard an interesting news report from South Carolina. Anti-abortion protestors stand at the top of the escalator in front of state senators’ offices and accost democratic senators who did not support the total ban on abortion that has just passed. Women senators have had objects slapped onto their backs, and protestors have sent children to run up to them and beg them to stop killing kids. If progressive protestors did this to Republican senators, for example regarding the death of the environment on which our lives depend, they would be jailed.

In one case, a Democratic senator knew more about the Bible than did the protestor. The protestor screamed that the Bible says abortion is murder. The senator, a woman, quoted the Bible back to him. Genesis 2:7 says that Adam became a living soul after God had breathed into him the breath of life. This implies that before a newborn breathes, it is not yet a living soul. Of course, nobody believes abortion is ethical right up to the moment of birth.

File:Michelangelo - Creation of Adam (cropped).jpg - Wikimedia Commons

Genesis implies, but does not prove, that a fetus is NOT alive. The point is that this interpretation is just as valid as the other interpretations that the anti-abortion activists put upon it. The so-called Christian activists insist that their interpretation, and theirs alone, is correct. They will not permit anyone else to interpret scripture. Apparently God speaks through the Republican party, not through the Bible.

Only Republicans think they have the right to interpret the Bible. The Bible is their weapon, and nobody else can lay a finger on it. God is their God, not the God of the rest of us. Puh-raise Trump!

Thursday, May 11, 2023

Uncommon Happiness

How many people are really happy? Assuming we can even define happiness. The one thing we can be sure of is this: far fewer people are happy than appear happy.

Among the countless examples I could cite, here are two that I found when looking through the works of Robert Ripley (see previous essay) (Believe It Or Not). These two examples are of men whom the world thought must surely be rapturously happy. But they were not.

The first is the story of Grimaldi the clown. A man came to a psychologist back in the early Freudian days and said he was depressed. The psychologist said the best cure would be for him to go watch a performance by the funniest man in the world, a clown named Grimaldi. The man said, “I am Grimaldi.”

The second is the story of Caliph Abdurahman III, who ruled for 49 years and had 6,321 wives. This sounds like the ultimate fantasy of many men. But in his will he said that he had, during those years, only fourteen days of complete happiness.

I immediately thought that I should never be jealous of the prosperity and conquests of other men. I wrote this on the day of the coronation of King Charles III. I do not believe that he is nearly as happy as I am. Can you say the same? Statistically, at least among my readers, there is a good chance that you can.

King Charles III News, Pictures, and Videos - E! Online

I recently retired from being a professor. Press a button and out comes a lecture or an essay. I will spare you both. I just urge you to think about happiness, about your happiness, about the happiness of others, and about the happiness that you can create in others.

=================================

Friday, May 5, 2023

What I Learned from Robert Ripley

 Do you remember the cartoonist Robert Ripley, who ran a series called Believe It Or Not! in newspapers across the country (and probably the world)? He proclaimed random amazing facts (amazing to him, at least) accompanied by his very realistic drawings. Do you remember? If you are younger than me, as you probably are, you don’t. Anyway. I ended up with six paperback books with his cartoons. It is impossible for me to summarize these random pieces of information, but I can see some overall themes. In particular, Ripley’s cartoons give us a glimpse into how our brains work: how we gather information about the world and draw conclusions from it, a topic about which I wrote an entire book, Scientifically Thinking.

Many of the items in Ripley’s cartoons were completely subjective to the imagination of the observer. This is a trick our brains play on us. For example, a dog had the shape of a three-leaved clover on its back. Of all the dogs in the world, with splotches of color on their coats, it is nearly inevitable that you will find one splotch that looks, to you, like a cloverleaf. Another example was the Canadian map which, when held upside down, looks like a profile of the explorer Jacques Cartier. How close does the resemblance need to be? It depends on how credulous you are. Lots of rock formations looked like lots of different things, the most famous of which was the Great Stone Face in New England. (It recently collapsed.) The list is long, but I could add one more. Along a state highway to the west of Rapid City, South Dakota, there is a cliff that looks like a caricatured face.

It would be a waste of time to read a book that consisted of nothing except such random coincidences of appearance. Fortunately, Ripley’s work consisted of a lot more than this.

Many of the facts Ripley cited were statistical anomalies, things that are almost but not quite impossible. Any one of them is almost impossible, but collectively, there are lots of statistical anomalies happening all around us. He noted that on one day in 1950 there were 78 babies born in Washington, D.C., and they were all female. The odds against this happening are one in two to the 78th power. Enough to make you say gee-whiz but not enough to change your view of the world. What about all the other days and all the other places?

Some of these statistical improbabilities involved human birth defects. Like the man who had two irises in each eyeball, and another who had three tongues, another who had two hearts, and a woman whose breasts were on her back. One man had mirror-image organs inside his body. Ripley’s major example was a child who had a single eye, in the middle of her forehead. This is known as a cyclops mutation. These bits of information are rather creepy, since they show us how the genetic health we take for granted can be so easily disrupted by a little mutation, or a mistake during fetal development.

Some of the examples Ripley cited were things that were only surprising to him but not to anyone else. He reported tree seedlings growing out of gutters on houses. This always happens unless you don’t have trees, or don’t have gutters. He was also amazed that violets would bloom in October.

Other examples were of almost unbelievable human cruelty or stupidity or just strangeness. For example, there was a man who locked his wife inside their house every day for 52 years. There was a Japanese priest who said “Butsu” (their word for Buddha) sixty thousand times every day for thirty years. Voltaire, who could never be accused of being ordinary, drank up to 72 cups of coffee a day. Hawthorne’s story “The Minister’s Black Veil” was apparently based on a real event. Juliette Drouet wrote Victor Hugo twenty thousand love letters.

Some of the supposed facts must have been based on misinformation. A 160-year-old man who fathered a child? When he died, his oldest son was 106, his youngest 3. There are no verified accounts of people living, certainly of being virile, this long. He also said goatsucker birds actually sucked goats.

I will always remember, from the first time I read them until now, some really amazing stories. For example, a Zulu king ordered thousands of his soldiers to march into the sea and drown, just to prove how much power he had over them. Then there is the story of Grimaldi the clown, which I write about briefly in the next essay, which I will post soon.

Life throws at us lots of disconnected bits of information. Our minds seek, or should seek, some generalities in them, for example, that happiness is found in creating a good life, not in power or possessions; and that there is almost no limit to human cruelty.

Saturday, April 29, 2023

The Mind and Eternal Torture in Hell

One of the most important abilities of the human mind is the ability to “tune out” sensory information that is constant and ongoing. This allows the mind to respond to new information. Examples include scent and sound. If you smell something new, you notice it, but after a while your mind tunes it out, whether it is pleasant or unpleasant. After a while, people cannot smell their own body odor. If you hear something new, your mind pays attention to it, but after a while it is relegated to “background noise.” People often literally do not hear the barking of their own dogs. We call this sensory adaptation. It is one of the standard concepts I taught in general biology classes.

Sensory adaptation may be a property of minds in general, not just human minds. It is certainly true of other mammals, such as dogs that do not react to their masters’ presence, or birds that get used to you when they build their nests near your patio. You can even find examples of it on the level of single-celled organisms that respond to their environments but do not have what we would call minds. And it might also prove to be an important part of AI (artificial intelligence). A mind, even an artificial one, would “go crazy” and stop working if it reacted to every bit of information as if it were new and important.

And pain.

After a while, a person can often begin to ignore chronic pain. Pain exists for a reason. It is a body’s way of telling us, don’t do that. My painful knee tells me that I should give it a rest and let the tendon heal up. But my brain mercifully allows me to ignore this pain except when I am actually moving and need to be reminded. Pain is important, but it should be modulated by sensory adaptation. Let us call it mental adaptation, since it does not depend on actual sensory input.

But, according to Christian fundamentalists, there is one exception. Hell. They believe that Hell is unending, infinite pain, especially the Fires of Hell, but maybe all other kinds of pain as well. This picture is not consistently found in the Bible; for example, Job 10:21-22 talks of the afterlife (for both good and evil people?) as endless darkness. If mental adaptation is a characteristic of minds in general, including the alert minds of souls suffering in Hell, then after the souls have been in Hell for a while (a week? A century? But who’s counting?) their minds will at least partially tune out the suffering. That is, if they have minds at all, the damned souls should begin to adjust to the fires and tortures of Hell.

What Does the Bible Really Say About Hellfire - Eternal Torment? -  Christian Publishing House Blog

But fundamentalists insist that the pain and suffering of Hell are not only infinite and endless, through all eternity, but that you remain infinitely conscious of the exquisite pain during that entire time (so to speak; time does not exist in Hell, I suppose). But for this to occur, God would have to specifically create a miracle to suspend mental adaptation. The Bible makes mention of no such miracle. The fundamentalists just made it up.

Why would fundamentalists insist that the pain of Hell not only continues forever, but remains as fresh as the day it started? How could a God of infinite love specially create minds that are unable to ever tune out pain? Would such a God want souls to suffer as exquisitely in Hell after a million years as they experienced the first day? What kind of God would this be? Yet this is the image of God that fundamentalists offer to us.

The reason fundamentalists insist on this is that they want to make themselves infinitely deserving of our obedience to and reverence of them. To them, specifically, by giving money. If people began to suspect that Hell might not be so bad after a few centuries, they might not let the big fundamentalist churches tell them how to live or give the churches their money. It is not faithfulness to God, but to the evangelists Themselves, that is threatened by the concept of mental adaptation.

By the way, the same thing would apply to the pleasures of Heaven. You would think that, after a few million years, the blissful souls would start to get bored. Flying around on cloud banks and playing harps might be oodles of fun for, say, a couple of thousand years. This idea was elaborated by Mark Twain in Captain Stormfield’s Visit to Heaven.

One of the characteristics of religion is that it creates little artificial worlds of thought that are impervious to any outside evidence. Only within such an artificial world would rich evangelists be able to get people to give them money regardless of what they say or do.

Saturday, April 22, 2023

Yet Another Earth Day

Every April 22 since 1970, we have had a worldwide Earth Day celebration. Back in the early days, there seemed to be a lot of enthusiasm for it, but today it goes almost unnoticed in most places.

To a certain extent my view is influenced by the fact that back in 1970 I was just having my environmental awakening. I began to learn about nature, its details and its big picture, and about environmental problems such as pollution and the population explosion. In 1971, I gave the junior high graduation speech, “The Overcrowded Spaceship Earth.” It was actually not a cliché back then. Today, after a career as a scientific and environmental educator, author, and scientist, I have lost much of my enthusiasm, largely because I am now old and tired.

I was also enthusiastic about ecological issues when I was younger because I was a passionate Christian. God made the world, and He expected me to help take care of it. One way to show Him respect was to respect and love His creation.

But there seems to be less enthusiasm even in the younger people around me for environmental issues. This has occurred for bad reasons, but also for a good one.

  • Bad reason: People have become overwhelmed by how many challenges there are just to get by from one day to the next. If you expect people to “get involved” with something other than mere survival, they may not have much time and energy left, especially if they have to work two jobs just to pay rent. On most days, here in Tulsa, there is a fatal shooting. At the end of the day, I breathe a sigh of relief: I didn’t get shot today.
  • Bad reason: People today are overwhelmed with currents of selfishness. Marketers have convinced them that every moment of every day they should experience intense pleasure and that no task should be difficult. To a greater extent now than in the past people don’t care—sometimes because they are overwhelmed, and sometimes because they don’t want to.
  • Good reason: Some of our problems are ecological being solved. The average fuel efficiency of vehicles is improving, because people aren’t stupid: most of them don’t want to waste gasoline. People actually want electric and other zero-emission vehicles. People are using less water per activity because they want to save water. People don’t want to live in toxic environments, and they will buy goods and services that are less toxic. Even the population explosion is cooling off a bit because people, especially women, don’t want to have a huge number of kids who are all sick and starving. A lot of people want to recycle.

Another change that has occurred is that the most common conservative Christian view now is not to take care of God’s good green Earth but to help destroy it. The more Christian you are, the more likely you are to have a big pickup truck, for example. True Christians, from the conservative view, means people who have guns, not people who recycle. Hiking in the woods is for wimps, they think. And why not? God is going to destroy it all anyway, and take His True Followers to a Heaven filled with endless barbecue roasts and truck racing. What about Christians who do care about God’s Earth? You cannot see or hear them in the blasting din of Televangelist Churches. The answer to the question below, should Christians go green, is usually no.

Green Christianity? - Sharefaith Magazine

The general attitude of people—a little bit more openness to environmental responsibility—probably would not have occurred without the environmental activism of earlier decades. I am glad to see these changes. Even in my extremely right-wing neighborhood, I see that most houses have a blue recycling bin in addition to the gray trash bin. But will these changes, which are sometimes minimal, be enough to save Earth from catastrophe?

Each year, most of us produce less carbon than we did in the past for similar activities. But each year we fall short of the carbon reduction targets that we know are absolutely necessary to avoid ecological crisis. If the Earth survives long enough for a history of Earth Day to be written, it might be entitled, One Step Forward and Two Steps Back.

Friday, April 14, 2023

Fiction Can Make Us More Humane

I have been reading recently about how white Americans have slaughtered Natives in gruesome ways, hundreds or thousands of times. This is our white national guilt. We need to face up to this part of our history, even if it makes white people uncomfortable. Here in Oklahoma, it is illegal to teach anything (such as but not limited to history) in such a way as to make anybody (that is, anybody white) feel guilty

One famous example of a white massacre of Natives is the Sand Creek Massacre in southeastern Colorado. Colonel John Chivington attacked a peaceful party of Cheyenne Natives. A former minister, Chivington justified his massacre by saying “Nits make lice.” He hunted down women and children who fled the camp and mutilated them. His soldiers sliced open a pregnant woman. One soldier sliced the pubic hair from a Cheyenne woman, and it was on display in Denver. The next decade, in the Black Hills, whites bought Sioux scalps for up to $300 apiece. (It was as common for whites to scalp Natives as the other way around.) I will not go into more details, partly because they sicken me. You can read about it in Edward Lazarus’ monumental 1991 book, Black Hills White Justice.

History - Sand Creek Massacre Foundation

This is what happens when powerful men are free to do whatever they please to poor and helpless people. There is no sentiment that can stop them.

At the same time, writers of stories and novels depicted Native Americans as being brave, honorable, noble, and respectful at least to people who were not killing them. An example that comes to mind, of which everyone has heard, is Last of the Mohicans. Painters such as George Catlin lived among them and painted them as real people, with real lives and relationships. While the nineteenth-century fiction about Native Americans seems racist to us today, at the time it stood out as practically the only defense of the humanity of Natives. At the time of the slaughters of Cheyenne and Sioux, “East-river” humanitarians (east of the Missouri River in Dakota Territory) called for peace with, rather than slaughter of, Natives.

Whenever the Natives struck back against the Army that gleefully massacred them, the newspapers (writing what they considered non-fiction) would loudly proclaim the Natives to be savages that deserved extermination. In particular, one editorial proposed a Final Solution for the Natives. He wrote, “It’s high time the sickly sentimentalism about humane treatment and conciliatory measures should be consigned to novel writers. There can be no permanent, lasting peace on the frontier till these devils are exterminated” (emphasis mine). You will find this on page 39 of Lazarus’ book.

This shows how important it is for us writers, especially of fiction, to reveal the humanity of all groups of humans. I mean full humanity, the bad as well as the good. People who read these novels opposed the slaughter of Natives. Without these novels, the humanitarians might have disapproved of the slaughters but would not have felt very much outrage at them. It was not just a matter of legal fairness, good government, or the proper use of human resources. These are human beings we are talking about.

This is an exact Native equivalent of the important role that Uncle Tom’s Cabin played in stirring up the national conscience against slavery.

As a writer, I consider it my responsibility to champion the full humanity and beauty of oppressed peoples.

Saturday, February 11, 2023

Insights from Old Notes

I have been going through old notes and papers from thirty years ago, when I was still religious though not a creationist, and recycling most of them. I figured I should either develop them into a larger framework of understanding or get rid of them. Some are individually useful. I should make them available to other people. Here they are:

  • One major difference between science and religion is that science insists on explanations, not just categories and labels. For example, water molecules cohere together, and this is responsible for many aspects of our natural world. But why are water molecules cohesive? A religious person might just say, God made it so. A pseudoscientist might say water molecules have the property of aquosity. But science can explain cohesion of water molecules: hydrogen bonds.
  • Did Jesus take a scientific approach toward the natural world? Partly. The first step in scientific inquiry is to be quietly observant of nature. Jesus did this, as you can read in the Sermon on the Mount. But then he went in an unscientific direction. Instead of using his observations as the basis for hypotheses, to explain them, he built metaphors from them. Still, his close observations made him more scientific than many philosophers who just thought about what the natural world should be like.
  • The Bible is like DNA. (When I read this old note to myself, I had a negative reaction, but read on.) The 66 books of the Bible are like chromosomes. There are some useful genes scattered in the DNA which, while of historical importance, is not useful. A lot of the Bible is not very useful. But some of the verses have significant insights, and these are the ones that get transcribed and translated and put to use. Now you have had your daily intake of metaphor.
  • The Bible describes a lot of miraculous acts. But what is a miracle? In Genesis 1, God says, let there be light. It dies not say, God created light out of nothing, nor does it say that there would have been light anyway. The idea I got from reading this was that the existence of light was a possibility within the laws of nature, and that God unlocked this possibility. This makes God sound like a cosmic Einstein.
  • Finally, there are lots of parts of the Bible that, fundamentalist assertions aside, cannot be taken literally. One example is from the very end of Genesis 1, where God “rested and was refreshed.” This is an image of God left over from very ancient times, and is inconsistent with the image of an infinitely powerful—and tireless—God found in later scriptures. Also, First Kings 18:20 says that “all Israel was there,” which could not have been true. Every single person in Israel was at that one location?

Rather than to just throw away these insights, I wanted to make them publicly available, for whatever use they might prove to you.