A Simple Species, A Lazy Species, A Cowardly Species, a Tribal Species. But With Some Redeeming Features.

Looking at the news recently –  the Israel/Hamas war, trump, election denial, climate change, etc – and the comments and generated by this I was struck once again by a truth about us as a species.  We are a simple, lazy species, a tribal species.  With some redeeming features though. 

We Are a Simple Species

We are a simple species. We dislike complexity and seek simplicity in our thinking. We see a Muslim group attack and kill civilian women and children and simplify that by saying that all Muslims kill and murder innocent women and children. 

A Palestinian group sees a member of a nation that has reduced them to an afterthought, if even that. A nation which daily creates difficulties in a life already difficult. And so thus sees all citizens of that nation as enemies, even those that are working to create a peaceful way forward.

The world sees Muslims/Jews killing innocent women and children and so all Jews or all Muslims are killers and evil. 

We are a lazy species. We have a way of seeing and understanding the world and all that the world shows us, each piece of it in its place, and all supporting the whole picture.  Because of this all new information must then be understood within that way of seeing the world. We do not like to question this way of seeing. It is much easier, and more comfortable, to make the world’s information fit our seeing rather than question how we see the world. Rearranging the many pieces of our view of the world is hard and stressful work, so instead of making the effort to actually see we weed out what the world shows us and toss what does not fit, and then twist the square shape so that it fits the star shaped hole.

And so, the election was stolen, we live in on a young earth where each creature miraculously came into being, the climate is not changing, vaccines are evil, and the list goes on and on.

We are a simple lazy species.  We live in a complex, complicated world. One in which boundaries are more often blurred instead of sharp. One in which multiple motives, both noble and base, are often at work at the same time.  One in which there are multiple interacting causes.  One in which names that we create to describe the world often do not do so fully. 

Which is why we so often blunder.  We not take the time to question and research, to follow the different causes, to understand them. 

We are an inclusive and divisive species; a tribal species. We are born into a family, and a society.  And need both.  And will protect them, the us, against those who are not us, the them. And because we are simple we do not consider that perhaps our boundaries are too small.  And because we are lazy we do not search for the commonalities that are there.  And because we are cowardly we are afraid to do so, especially when our own may condemn us. 

Which is why if you condemn Hamas actions as evil and immoral you are against the Palestinians.  And why if you condemn the atrocities being committed by the Israeli military now against the Palestinians you are condemned as being antisemitic.

We are a cowardly species.  We are afraid to be wrong, and so do not question our beliefs.  Especially those that are most important to us. Fear motivates and affects our thinking.  Fear of those coming across the borders who are the other, fear of losing our comfortable lives if climate change is real, fear of new vaccines, and so forth.  And when combined with us being lazy, being simple, being tribal this can and does lead to tragic results. 

Some redeeming features.  While we are simple, we have learned how to handle complexity and rise above it.  At times. 

While we are lazy, we have been motivated to act and to question. And to change. Usually not easily or quickly. But still….

While we are cowardly, we have forced ourselves to be brave and to question and to learn. At times.

While we are tribal, our tribal nature is what has allowed the human species to survive and spread across the world. And through our history our definition of us has become broader and broader. 

And despite our simple, lazy, cowardly, tribal nature we have made a great deal of progress over the millennia. Human rights are a new construct, one not present thousands of years ago. And even if not universally followed at least it has the power to demand lip service.  Democracy is another recent invention. As is the growth of sciences.  Our lifespans have increased and child mortality decreased. And we are forming larger and larger groups of us. And creating organizations to reduce conflicts or at least their deadliness, between these groups. Not perfectly, not even close to perfectly.  But they are there, and that too is new. 

So, despite our nature I think there is still hope, even as we are going through one of those valleys that are so much a part of our history. In the past we have always climbed again.  I think we will here too, eventually, as we wrestle with our own natures.   

Read Full Post »

Moxie, Another Blow to Human Uniqueness

A few days ago I came across an ad for Moxie, an AI based robot that helps kids learn social skills. This review summed up what a Moxie robot is:

“At one(ish) foot tall and 11 pounds, Moxie is quite heavy. It can move its arms, spin in a circle, make animated facial expressions, and nod its head up and down, among other capabilities (including a serious ability to get its groove on). Moxie is recommended for kids ages five to 10. It teaches, listens, and learns about its child through age-appropriate games including Simon Says, coloring, and scavenger hunts, as well as more mindful activities such as affirmations.”

Later on the reviewer mentions that his children like Moxie being able to “play hide-and-seek, tell jokes, draw pictures, ask questions, and even have dance parties.”

Moxie interacts with the child in positive, friendly ways to promote social skills.  Especially as it learns what the child wants and needs through its interactions.  And has a kid friendly emotive face.   

Reviews have been favorable.  And I can see the benefits Moxie might provide for many children. 

And yet it really hit me and bothered me, seeing its face and interactions.  Hit me in ways that other recent news about the use of AI, such as ChatGPT, has not (to be truthful it is not something I have kept up with or followed much).  I believe that this hit me more than the rest because of the fact that raising our children to be social creatures, to read and understand emotional and social cues, seems such a basic human thing.  Much more so than calculating numbers, seeing relationships among facts, writing articles and stories.  And yet, despite this basic aspect of human family  there is now a machine that can do the same.  Not fully, not totally. But it is just starting. 

I think that this, and the rest of AI brings up very real questions on what does it mean to be human.  Is there something that defines humanity, or not?   Part of our ideals about our place in the universe is our uniqueness. At one time these defining traits were tool making or intelligence.  Or communication.  However, over the years these have been eroded away from both top and bottom. 

From the bottom by the discoveries that many animals are much more intelligent than we had thought.  That many also have complex social systems.  That many also have cultures even.  That many also have the ability to make and use tools, to plan, and to communicate somewhat. 

Our uniqueness from other animals has been eroded from beneath and the gap between us not nearly as large as we had once believed. 

And now from the top by creatures of our own creation.

It started out simply enough.  Tools that could lift more, that could till land better, that could move us faster, that could allow us to fly, that could allow us to communicate across time and distance, that could kill better.  None of these encroached on our ideas about what it means to be human though.  They did not matter to our ideas about our intelligence, our social natures, our ability to communicate, to make tools. In fact, they reinforced them.   But now, due to our intelligence and ability to make tools, we are encroaching on such a thing. 

Starting with machines that could do mathematical calculations faster than us, we now have machines that can not only calculate but also store massive amounts of information, compare it and come up with new relationships and discoveries.  All done millions of times faster than us. They have learned to play strategy games such as Chess and Go better than us.  This alone threatened some views of what it means to be human.  But now though we are venturing into the truly threatening areas in regard to what it means to be human.  We are starting to create machines that can write papers, interact with patients to determine their issues both psychological and physical, that can create paintings and drawings.  And also, now, teach our children emotionally and socially. 

This is only the beginning.  We will be creating machines that can do each of these better, rather like how the machine calculators of the early 20^th century quickly became obsolete and done in by newer and better technology and programs.  What happens when a computer can write a more creative novel, a more insightful paper, a painting that moves humans who gaze at it? When it can impart to our children not only information but also emotional and social learning better than humans? When it can best, or at least equal, humans at tasks considered uniquely human? 

Many people are raising alarms about the dangers posed by such AIs.  And, to an extent, I think they are right.  I also, though, believe that we will continue to find ways to deal with such advances and use them, mostly even if not totally, to benefit us. 

However, our views of our uniqueness…well we may soon no longer be the only creature that can paint moving and meaningful paintings, take insightful photos, create poems highlighting emotions and thoughts through the ambiguity of words.  And can teach healthy social and emotional interactions.  Part of that adjustment is going to involve rethinking what it means to be human.  Starting with does it really mater if we are no longer unique? 

Does it really matter that all the things that makes us human is something shared with other animals, or with our own creations.   Or is it just our vanity and ego that are harmed, both of which are usually overinflated.   

For myself, I think our society and ourselves will adjust in one way or other.  I think that humans will continue to communicate, to teach, to heal, to create art.  To act in ways both good and sublime as well as ugly and evil.  The exact how may change, but that is all.  This desire to find something unique about being human is just useless pride. Nothing more.  And something I think we would be well rid of. 

Read Full Post »

Government, Huh, Yeah, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing?

People disagree on so many issues today.  Strongly and in some cases violently. Often even when the different groups agree on the facts, they strongly disagree on the conclusions to be drawn from those facts: what they mean and what the appropriate course of action should be. One of the major reasons for this is a fundamental disagreement on the proper role of government. 

I thought a different approach to this issue is take a look to the past to find out why governments were formed in the first place. I am not talking the recent past, but, instead, of the very distant past. At how our ancestors lived before the rise of countries and states, before cities and towns, before villages even.  Back to the very first foraging groups that was the norm for homo sapiens for most of our existence.  To look at these and at what our evolutionary heritage to see if they can shed any light on the proper role of government.

A caveat here. I am providing a very simplified story here that, although accurate as far as it goes, does not cover all the complexities involved. But it is enough to provide the gist of things in regards to the proper role of government. 

Evolutionary speaking we are a very highly social and highly intelligent species.  Those two traits were our survival mechanisms taking the place of the speed, claws, teeth, strength and so forth of others animals.  Of the two, the social part came first (most likely when our very distant ancestors transitioned from being nocturnal to living in the daylight) with intelligence coming about later. And while both are very important in regards to how well we are succeeding today, of the two forming social groups was the more important. Indeed, our increased intelligence may be partly the result of our larger social groups. 

One of the big drivers of our need for surviving in groups is the fact that we do not produce large litters of children. Usually just one at a time, occasionally two.  Further, our children required longer to grow and become able to survive independently. In fact, with modern humans, it takes about twice as long for our children to be able to fend for themselves than that of our closest living relative.  And then there is the fact that with this extended development time a mother would have several children at different stages of development and all still needing extensive care.  This required help, which encouraged monogamy (most of the time).  But, it required more than monogamy.  It truly did require a village. 

Keep in mind that as individuals humans are relatively weak compared to many other animals.  No impressive array of teeth and claws, not able to run as fast, nor be as strong as most of the other predators. In fact, 52 million years ago when our ancestors switched from hunting and living during the night to the day forming groups by itself was protection.  You can’t skulk and hide in the light of day as you can at night. 

But, or own species went much further than protection only.  We had people who lived past reproductive age that could provide help in caring and protecting the children, and who could also provide knowledge and pass on skills to them and to others in the group.  We also started helping those who were not our direct kin and cooperating with them in order to better hunt and forage, to find other resources such as the best stones to make into needed tools.  Cooperative production and food sharing increased our chances of survival. 

In other words, the key to our species survival was forming groups that did much more than provide protection against predators. For most of our species’ existence, for tens of thousands of years, this was the norm – cooperative, egalitarian societies. This is the human baseline in regards to society. Family groups engaged in cooperative productive activities and provisioning not only within the family group but with others. They shared resources making sure all got food, supported the weak, the hurt, and the elderly.  They provided a means to educate the young.

The other part of our survival strategy, our intelligence, allowed us to create larger and larger groups, often consisting of a greater diversity of people.  We learned how to improve the amount of resources available to feed and sustain us.  In other words, we learned to farm.  Because though of the greater size of our resulting societies, and also because now one person or group could now dominate the means of production, our heretofore largely egalitarian societies started to stratify more and more, and become dominated by a few.  Something that became more and more true as we grew from villages to towns to cities to states and then to countries.

Often this gets framed as being solely self serving for the group or individual in charge.  However,  while it often, or usually, served as a means of control of a population, it also met a demand by people to regulate social life, a necessity for survival.  The management of property rights, defining what is and is not a crime and how it should be punished, coming up with the means for gathering needed resources for the common good, etc. are all necessary functions for any society, for any government to survive.  For humanity to survive. 

To my mind, ever since we became able to create and sustain larger groups of people, since the advent of agriculture, we have been experimenting and finding ways to manage such large groupings and making sure that they can survive not only outside challenges and threats, but also survive the inevitable conflicts and turmoil created by large groups of differing people.   In other words, looking for a form closer to our baseline.

Three or four thousand years seems a long time to find our way but considering that even that much time is a blink of an eye compared to how long humans have been around, and at how long they lived in smaller groupings. 

I believe that the best type of government is one that provides us the same benefits that our smaller groupings did in the beginning – shelter, food, health, help and protection.  Along with this is doing so in a way which is egalitarian, that treats each member as equal. In other words that return to the baseline which we grew up and lived in for most of our species history. 

This seems to me to be the proper and basic purpose of the government – to take care of its citizens’ needs so that they can live better lives.  It is why I think that the ones who see government as solely evil, or a necessary evil, the libertarians and extreme conservatives, will ultimately lose out.

Government is the development of our enlarged societies writ large.  It is us working together to meet our needs.  It is why no governments or weak ones inevitably fail their people very badly.  Some people point to the dangers of strong government, and they are right, it can be dangerous.  However, anything effective can be dangerous.  Cars and guns for example. What matters are the controls put into place to prevent the government from being a danger to its citizens.  That’s the trick and why it took over 4,000 years to get here. 

For humans, any good government must also take into account that not only are we social creatures though. It also must understand we are individuals.  Too many have made too much of individuality, made it into a fetish almost to deny needed help and support to others.  But, it is a facet of our nature, and part of our evolutionary heritage.  And it is of value in that it helps spark innovation and change, as well as protect against the inroads of a badly formed government. 

I think that a form of democracy is the best match to our baseline.  But, it is gong to have to be one that supports the individuals within it society to survive and thrive.  Just as did those of our earliest ancestors.   Universal healthcare for example.  No one should die or suffer because they could not afford the care they need.  And contrary to the opinions of some, providing such creates better healthcare options for lower costs. And increases individual freedom as a person is not tied to a particular job due to concerns about health insurance. 

Why did we form groups to begin with?  In order to provide for the safety, health and survival of the members of that group.  This seems to me to be the proper and basic purpose of the government – to take care of the peoples needs so that they can live better lives.  Instead of trying to starve the government and weaken or eliminate it, we should be making sure it has enough resources and ability to carry out the functions for which we created social groups in the first place – to ensure our health, our safety, our ability to live and to do so equitably and fairly.  We need to monitor and ensure that the controls over our government are in place but we also need to make our government act as if it were truly a government by the people and for the people, one meant to ensure the life, liberty and ability to pursue happiness of all of its peoples. 

Read Full Post »

Let the Circle Grow Unbroken

It starts with your family.  Your parents, your spouse, your children, your uncles, aunts, grandparents, cousins.  These are the people that we care most about, that we love, work for and protect.  This circle has been with us since we first evolved into being.

But, who we care about and who we help does not stop at relatives.  Neighbors as well as  those we meet at school and work are in that circle too.  While we may not care for them as strongly as we do those who are part of our immediate family, we care enough to help them in times of need and troubles too. And consider them as one of us too.  This too has been part of our circle since we first evolved into being.

From there, the circle has continued to grow.  It is part of our nature.  We evolved as a highly social animal and creating societies is the way our species has survived.   We live in groups who work together, care for each other and help each other.  And protect each member from those  outside our circle, the other.  Even others of our own species since they can be competitors for food and other resources, and so a threat to our group’s survival.

^“4 At that time we took all his cities. There was not one of the sixty cities that we did not take from them—the whole region of Argob, Og’s kingdom in Bashan. ⁵ All these cities were fortified with high walls and with gates and bars, and there were also a great many unwalled villages. ⁶ We completely destroyed^[a] them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying^[b] every city—men, women and children.”  Deuteronomy 3: 4-6

““The Christians gave over their whole hearts to the slaughter, so that not a sucking little male child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape alive the hand of the murderer.”  Contemporary account of the taking of Jerusalem in 1099.

 

Right now let me say that although I am using  European/American/Judeo-Christian examples because those, due to where and how I was raised, are the ones I am most familiar with, the same can be found all over the world; on every continent and in every country and religion.  This is not unique to a region or a religion or a culture.  No one is innocent of being human.

One thing happened through the years .  Due to us being not only a highly social animal but also highly intelligent, the size of our groups grew.  From the original family groups to tribes based upon familial relations to cities of many different family groups to city- states to nations, our circle of who was us and who was not; of who we protect and care for grew. Family and immediate neighbors and friends remained first and foremost. But now others who were none of these also mattered and needed to be protected.  Sometimes from the others without, sometimes from the others within.

One of the most prominent more modern day examples of this was the Holocaust, in which over 6 million Jewish men, women, and children died.  Along with them were others outside the circle  others not fully or even partly us – Gypsies, homosexuals, and many others.

Today we see this happening in so many areas still.  Over 140,000 Muslims were sent fleeing from Myanmar and hundreds killed due to persecution for being other.  In China, a million Muslims are held in internment camps.  In Egypt, there are continuing attacks upon the Coptic Christians, the most recent being upon a bus.  Those outside our circle are dangerous  and fair game to whom no sympathy can or should be given. Their pain and their deaths do not matter.

Which brings me now to the United States and our response to the Caravan slowly approaching our borders.

I realize that we cannot take every person fleeing persecution, violence, and extreme poverty.  I also agree that we do have enemies who would like to come into the US to commit crimes, and so those coming in must be checked and vetted.

However, today, too many of us are treating those who are fleeing death and destruction, who are looking for someplace safe to raise a family as if they were active threats.  No sympathy can be given.  No feeling for these, our fellow, humans can be felt.  They are not us. They are outside our circle, and so are a threat to us.  Their pain and their deaths doe not matter. Separating families and jailing children is OK, because they are outside our circle.  Sending the military to repel these hordes is OK, cause they are outside our circle.  They are totally other deserving only our fears, scorn, and threats.

Let me end this by saying that, as I said earlier, I know we cannot allow everyone into our country.  But, we do need to allow those who are in need in as we can.  We need to treat all coming to our country who are searching for safety and opportunity, whether legally or not, as human beings first and foremost and not as totally other.   Let the circle of our humanity be large enough to include them too.

Read Full Post »

We Are All Born Theists

 

There is a belief that many atheists have that, as this meme states, “we are all born atheists until someone starts telling us lies”.  This statement is wrong on several levels.

First, it assumes that atheism does not have to be taught. As someone who has raised two atheist children, I can state that it is learned. Children ask questions and we provide answers from an atheist perspective.  We provide books and shows that are in line with atheist beliefs.  Children do not somehow magically come up with atheist beliefs.  They are learned.

Second, I would argue that if left to their own devices, the vast majority of children (possibly all), would wind up with some sort of theistic beliefs.  Why? Because we are naturally made to look for personal agents in explaining mysteries.  From spooks romping in the house when hearing strange noises at night, to seeing the hand of God when something goes unexpectedly and importantly right.  Or wrong.

And why are we naturally inclined to do this?  There are several reasons.

First, we are made to be curious. We want to know.  We do not like mysteries, so much so that we prefer bad explanations to just not knowing.  And this curiosity extends beyond just wanting to know the how, but also the why and why now.

For example (caveat here, I read this many years ago and may have some details wrong, but the basic story and idea is accurate), I read of an African village where a hut collapsed killing the children inside it. The villagers put it down the father having angered the ancestral spirits.  When an anthropologist pointed out that termites had infested the wood, the villagers said we know, but that doesn’t explain why it collapsed then when the children were inside and not before or after.

Second, we are pattern seekers.  We look for relationships and patterns everywhere, and find them. Even when they don’t exist.  And often, whether they actually exist or not is not the most important thing in how satisfying people find such patterns.

Which brings me to third, there is a great deal of life that we cannot control.  Weather is a good example, having just lived through a hurricane.  Or fires such as the ones burning California. And then there are car accidents, illnesses, and other anxiety producing events. We do not like not being in control and the potential victim of forces we cannot influence.  And so, in patterns, we find ways to influence events out of our control.  Or to explain them.

Fourth, consider what we learn as infants; someone is taking care of us and doing things. Often the answer to why things happen is because our parents or other adults and individuals are doing it.  We learn that there are people and sentient beings doing things that we don’t understand

Fifth, some speculate that we are evolutionarily disposed to see something in the dark.  For example, way back when, if a person heard a rustling in the bush it was better in terms of survival to think a panther caused it than the wind.   If it is the wind and you walk away, little to no harm done.  If, however, you think it the wind and there is a panther, well,  bad things happen.

As evidence of the truth that a baby is much more inclined to grow up to believe in supernatural beings than be an atheist, consider how long it took for science and scientific thinking to arise.  And then look at how long religion and superstitious beliefs have been around.  Superstitious beliefs have been around as far back as we can see in our history.  Scientific thought, only within the last few hundred years (the precursors a couple of thousand years).

Why? Because belief in supernatural personalities being behind what we cannot understand and control is much, much more natural for us.

If we put 100 new born children on a deserted island and provided only the care needed to ensure their survival, they would all grow up and devise supernatural explanations for much of what they see around them. They would not grow up to become atheists.

I can understand the attraction of believing that religion is a delusion foisted off on us when we were children by lies, lies told by adults for various, often nefarious, reasons. However, the truth is that believing in supernatural entities is much more natural to us than not believing in such beings.

Read Full Post »

Questions About the Hereafter and What the Answers Say About God, Angels, and Human Nature

Before getting to the questions, let me first off make this clear.  These questions are directed at the vision of the afterlife held by those Christians who believe in a “literal” interpretation and understanding of the Bible, in a very real heaven and a very real hell, and in angels, Lucifer, and fallen angels.

Second off, while written mainly in response to the above mentioned  Christians’ views about the afterlife, they also have, surprisingly, a great deal of relevance for almost any idea and conception of a life after death.

Now, having gotten the offs out of the way, on to the setting up questions.

God created Adam and Eve.  God created Angels. He created both to be his eternal companions.  Yet both failed him in that.  Some angels rebelled against God. Adam and Eve disobeyed God.

Given that so far God has a 100% failure rate in creating beings to share eternity with him, then why should the afterlife be any different?  What is the difference this time from the last two times?

Is free will the issue?  Then is God going to take away humanity’s free will?  If so, then why not do so at the beginning and avoid all the pain and suffering of humanity while on earth/. And the pain and suffering that most of humanity will be in for eternity after they die? If free will was important enough to justify that much pain, then wouldn’t taking it away mean that we become something other than human, something less?

If free will is not the answer then perhaps  it is because we are going to be purified by our life here on earth  and our dross will burn away with our deaths?   In which case, what are our impurities?  What is our dross? Often our strengths in some areas also creates weaknesses in other areas, our weaknesses in one area are a strength in another – different sides of the same coin so to speak.  What then?  Burn the coin?

In addition, we are the sum of our weaknesses and strengths.  Change them and you change who we are.  To an extent you could mess with that, but at some point in doing so that person who is experiencing heaven is not the same person who experienced life in the here and now.

Also, humans form groups.  More accurately, we are individuals who form groups.  Being individuals we form stronger groups with those who are most like us in some way.   And being individuals we are going to have disagreements with other individuals  Which means the groups are going to have disagreements.  What is to keep them from becoming violent and creating conflict and pain as they so often do now?

Perhaps  we are purified so that these differences will never get out of hand?  I am not sure how that would work.  Put a banana in a bowl of water and nothing much happens. However, take the potassium out of the banana and purify it and then drop it in the water and you get this:

Perhaps we should  be adding more dross?  Perhaps it is the dross that defines us?

Or perhaps no borders and limitless land and is the secret?  Along with limitless food and drink, and a body that does not get hurt or know pain?  All of which would reduce or eliminate the most common sources of conflict. But not all.  After all, both Adam and Eve had that, as did the Angels. And it did not work then. So, why now?

It seems that God made both angels and humanity with the same design flaw.  In fact, I think that this “flaw” would also make heaven, a paradise in a forever life after death, impossible for humanity, whether it is a God driven one or a secular one.   Humans are too diverse a group for that.

 

Somehow, I think the only way an eternity of bliss would work is if the species inhabiting it were not human.  Between our needs as individuals and our needs as part of a group, I am very much afraid that humans are not meant for an eternity of bliss and happiness.

Read Full Post »

Life is Not Fair – But We Should Be

Recently my newspaper had an editorial about a local issue. The subject doesn’t really matter, what does is the fact that they criticized the Fort Worth School Board for missing the opportunity to teach the students a valuable lesson- that life is not fair.

I am not going to get into the specific issue itself. Instead, let me discuss a more general truth and what it means, namely that life is not fair. The editorial is correct in this much – life is not fair. That is something every person experiences over and over again throughout their lives, from birth to death.

Further, let me add the related fact that the universe is a cold and uncaring place. Whether you do well and prosper, whether you suffer unspeakable pain and losses, or whether, like most, you fall somewhere in between – the universe neither cares nor notices.

Of course, that is not the universe’s job. It provided us life and a place to live that life. Nothing less and never anything more. To expect more from the universe and life than what it has already given you is an exercise in futility and frustration. However, there is more to be considered here, because within this universe we, humanity, exist.

It is our job, yours and mine, to create fairness; to create justice and mercy. We are a social animal, an animal with empathy, with a sense of justice, with a sense of fairness. Such has been demonstrated among our closest living relatives, the chimpanzees, as well as seen in our own very young, our babies. We have a need for justice, for fairness, for mercy. It is one of the reasons that religion came about. It is the reason why we have made such gains throughout the ages – established justice systems, developed democracy, established and expanded human rights, developed more inclusive and expansive moral codes.

And this is where my local paper, the Star Telegram, got it so very, very wrong. Their mistake is, unfortunately, a too common one.

Yes, life is unfair and the universe does not care. But, that is not their job. It is our job, our responsibility to supply, as much as we can, what life and the universe lacks: fairness, justice, mercy. The Fort Worth school board got it exactly right in their decision to pay these young people.

Read Full Post »

The Necessary Contradictions of Ourselves

Contradictory

by Emi

I find it funny how
when you say the word Future
the first syllable already belongs to the past
or when uttering the word silence
you’re ultimately destroying it
and when pronouncing the word nothing
you’re making something no non-being can hold

 

Most people, and most especially those of us who strongly value rationality and reason, tend to strongly value consistency in the living of our lives.  We want to have all of our behaviors, our thoughts, our aspirations and dreams, our likes and dislikes, our loves and hatreds all marching in alignment with each other and in agreement with its fellows.  When they don’t, when they conflict and contradict each other and argue and fuss, it creates distress and worry for us.  Humans want an ordered life. Failures at achieving this though are so common that those of an intellectual bent of mind have even come up with a name for this misalignment of the soul – cognitive dissonance.

Among the scholarly there have been research done, articles and books written, and papers delivered on cognitive dissonance.  Many regular people have read popularized articles and blogs about cognitive dissonance research and how bad it is for people and society and how to overcome its damaging effects.  Any time you look up cognitive dissonance you will read about the stress and anxieties it causes individuals, the societal problems caused by people who, instead of being consistent in their beliefs, compartmentalize them in order to avoid seeing how they lovingly hold two beliefs that are in deadly conflict with each other.

For those who work so diligently to align each belief with the other and who then work diligently to make your words and actions follow along, I have bad news.  It is often not possible.  Cognitive dissonance is part of the human condition, and always will be.

And I am glad.

This is the point where I need to point out that I am all for reducing conflicting beliefs as much as is possible; it is a good goal …overall. However, reducing conflicting beliefs, reducing cognitive dissonance, creating a neat and ordered life is only a good thing in moderation. In addition to order, we need the chaos and tensions of our contradictions.

On the one hand we have our ideals and standards, both moral and societal, and then we have what we enjoy.  The song and the movie, the joke and the book, that despite our best intentions, despite it being sexist, religious, violent, racist, bigoted, vulgar, violent, anti-religious, anti-Semitic, Islamaphobic, misogynist, demeaning, or any of a thousand and one other terrible things we still groove on, read, bop to, laugh at, dance to,  listen or watch in outraged enjoyment and then guiltily wait to see or hear it again.

We try to accept out bodies as ourselves with the recognition that it is beautiful as it is.  Yet, at the same time, we want to change it – become more fit and buff, change our hair style and color, get contacts, get lazik, change our beautiful bodies.  Change and accept, a contradiction.

On a personal level, my vision of myself is as a 22 year old fit and fine fellow. Yet, when I play with my grandson with that image in mind instead of the reality of being an out of shape, overweight, 58 year old, I wind up with damaged knees and aching back, short of breath and long on regret.  And then I do it again, thus confirming another contradiction; that of a smart man being an idiot.

Today I am happy with my life. It is far from perfect and, like all lives, has its challenges and problems. However, it is far better than what my 16year old self imagined, and is one I would not change.

I am married to a wonderful woman who supports me whether I know I need it or not, and who makes my life interesting, loving, and joyful.  I have two wonderful adult daughters who have made for themselves a wonderful life, and of whom I am very proud.  I have two grandchildren, a wonderful matched set consisting of a three year old grandson and a three week old granddaughter.  I am retired and am now grasping things that I had always regretted letting go – getting my Masters degree at the end of July, and starting up my writing again.

I would not change this bounty for anything, and am fully aware that had anything been done different in my life this bounty could well have not become.  I am aware that it is the sum total of all of my decisions and my experiences that have led me here:  the good and bad, the high and petty, the selfish and giving, moments of idiocy and the fewer  moments of brilliance; all of these, no matter the problems they caused then and may be causing now, all of these together led me to this world I would not change.

And yet, despite knowing this, I still regret.  I can still feel embarrassed or ashamed of some action or words of mine from years ago.  I still regret decisions not made, or those that were made. And yet, why?  They led me to the amazing here. I have a life in which I would change nothing for fear of changing all thatt I have, and yet I find my mind sometimes occupied by oft intense regrets.

We humans are a strange mix. We have the beginnings of a logical and rational mind, and from that beginning, until recent times, we take short journeys into the unknown.  At the same time we make decisions on emotion and intuition, the seemingly default position of the human species. Evolution has created us to be a conflicted creature. And for a reason.

Evolution is not concerned with whether we are rational or not; it does not care if our thoughts, emotions, ideas, and behaviors are all lined up with each supporting the other in a highly organized structure. Evolution is not concerned with consistency and avoiding conflict. Instead, evolution is concerned solely with survival.

Each way of making decisions, the rational and the emotional, have their own advantages and disadvantages. It is the mix of these advantages and disadvantages between two different ways of experiencing and knowing the world that has enabled us to better survive as a species. Either one alone would not do the job, leaving us an extinct species. It is the interlocking fingers of each that created  our society and culture, that supports the vehicle of our survival. And if the cost of this survival is a case of cognitive dissonance, evolution says better dissonanced than dead.

The life of our species has been one long attempt to improve both of our ways of experiencing the world – the rational and the emotional – and to resolve our contradictions, not only in our ways of thinking and deciding but also between being a highly social animal with an individual nature; another contradiction.

It is these attempts to resolve the contradictions of our nature that have given rise to some of the greatest achievements of humanity. To take an example dear to my heart, the U.S. Constitution was partly an attempt to create a whole and functioning society from the actions of individuals selfishly serving their own interests.

It is the attempt to show these contradictions that have given rise to some of our greatest works of art in all its many splendored forms. Poetry is one such example, using words ambiguously to communicate experience and emotions.  Great art, music, dance, literature, almost all have this in common.

It is the attempt to live these contradictions that give us our emotions and our so often frustrating enjoyment of living. To be unsatisfied whilst satisfied.

 

There is one other and larger  reason for these always present contradictions, a related twofold one. The world is a much too complicated place to be explained and experienced without contradiction.  And, we are at least as complicated as the world around us.  Put both of these together, and contradictions are eternal.

So, align your many thoughts and feelings as much as possible, as much as is needed to ease your life.  But, do not worry overly much over not having resolved all; instead enjoy your contradictions and misfits, even if with a large helping of guilt.  It is why, in addition to a mess of contradictions, we come equipped with a sense of humor too.

 

Read Full Post »

The Heart

There are many passages within the Bible that express and promote the highest standards of morality; the Golden Rule, the Sermon on the Mount, the Parable of the Good Samaritan, and many, many more.  Yet among all of these oft quoted passages there is one that is almost always overlooked and rarely gets the attention that it deserves.  It is a passage that explains why the  atheist, the Hindu, the Buddhist, the Wiccan, the Jew, the Christian… in fact most of humanity follow moral and ethical codes that have more similarities than differences.   It also highlights the fundamental difference between the theist and atheist in regards to morality.

^“14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. ¹⁵ They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)”  Romans 2:14-15 NIV

The law, morality and ethics, are written on the heart.   I agree with this verse, our sense of morality, our sense of ethics is indeed written on our heart.  That is why, no matter the belifes, or lack thereof, the vast majority of humans share similar moralities.

However, this passage is important for both atheists and theists for another reason, it makes so many of the theist’s beliefs about and against atheist morals nothing more than empty words devoid of truth.  Morality being written on the heart means that morality is not a matter of cold logic and harsh reason. Making rational and logical moral inferences from a disbelief in an afterlife, a heaven and hell, a being upholding and enforcing the good is an exercise in futility and ultimately meaningless.

Using logic based on what atheists do not believe, showing that atheists should be the worst sort of hedonists, caring only for their own welfare and uncaring about all others, obeying no guide except for “what’s in it for me”  is as useful as the old scholastic debate about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.  This is so because morality is not a thing of the head, but of the heart.  It is not a matter of pure reason and pristine logic.  Instead it is a matter of blood and bone, muscle and sinew; it is a matter of our nature.

Whether rational or not we form intense attachments to others, care for our young, our family, our friends – often beyond the boundaries of reason.  We put ourselves at risk for not only our children (logically since we can have more children it makes no sense to risk our lives), but also friends and acquaintance and even strangers.   My wife, along with others, rescued a complete stranger from his car after he overturned it – just before it went up in flames.   Her story and those with her are not unusual.  In fact they are the norm.  Reason and logic do not enter into this – the heart does.

We form attachments and loyalties to groups, feeling kinship with people we may not know well at all – the chess club, science fiction fans, our football teams.   These extend all the way to our local community, state, and nation.   We feel proud when one of these groups does good, bad when they do not – even though most within these communities are complete strangers.   We are usually willing to go through discomfort and pain and occasionally willing to endanger our lives for these groups.

We do so not because it is rational or irrational, not because it is logical or illogical, but because it is in our nature and to do otherwise would be the same as trying to not eat when hungry, or to stop breathing.  Reason and logic have a role to play, but they are not the primary sources of our morality.  Our heart is.  On this I agree with the Bible and the theist.   Where we disagree is on who created and wrote on the heart.   The theist believes God did.  I though know it was evolution and society that did the writing.     Either way, the writing on the heart is still there and to pretend that we are creatures of logic and reason is to delude ourselves.   Reason and logic are useful tools, but they are not us.

Read Full Post »

Questions

Sometimes we get so busy looking for answers that we do not take the time to properly think and consider the questions, or even try to winnow down which questions are most important.  We get so focused on answering these questions that we do so without properly considering them, savoring them, searching them for all the related questions and issues and mysteries hidden within the bigger question.

In so doing we short change the question and ourselves and wind up with incomplete and/or misleading answers.  Or worse, we wind up creating an answer when one really does not exist, or at least no clear one yet.

I won’t claim that these are the most important, but I do think they are important and worth spending a moment contemplating before rushing off to answer them.

 

Perhaps the real conflict is not between the atheist and the theist but rather between those who care for the whole of humanity and who work to improve the lot of all humans and those who do not?

 

If this is so then how do identify which is which?  Even the most repressive and evil dictators say they do what they do in the name of humanity.

 

And how to identify what actions are good for humanity and what actions are not?

 

Then, given the fractious, divisive, and argumentative nature of humanity, how to attain those goals needed for the betterment of mankind?

 

And finally, can these questions be answered and resolved without violence?

 

And as I was putting the finishing touches on this blog I thought of one more question.

Both the theist, and the atheist, the creationist and the scientist, often level the same charges against each other in regards to arguments – ignoring evidence, not thinking logically, being biased by their own beliefs and so forth.   Given that each side perceives the other as being biased and, to a greater or lesser degree, blind to evidence and reason how, can I be sure that I am not?

As I said, some questions for consideration.  Even if you think you have the answers already it is a good exercise to contemplate them again, afresh; putting aside your answers for the moment.   A proper appreciation of the questions not only makes your tentative final answers that much more solid but, just as important, it also allows one to better understand and, hopefully, empathize with those who disagree.

Read Full Post »