06.29.11
Hameroff interview
Good link from Richard:
Richard said,
June 27, 2011 at 12:44 pm ·
Hameroff interview:
http://www.skeptiko.com/stuart-hameroff-on-quantum-consciousness-and-singularity/
Booknotes: The Rajneesh Bible
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=rajneesh+bible
The Amazon situation with Rajneesh’s The Rajneesh Bible is confusing, with some copies going for over $700!
They should be reissued, for crying out loud, in the original inexpensive format. I have noted many times the way the ‘new atheists’ are mimicking Rajneesh’s attack on Christianity.
I recall the successive volumes as cheap paperbacks in the mid eighties, and I read all of them. The moment here was classic, and very dramatic. Rajneesh emerged from several years of silence and produced these books as discourses given at the soon to collapse Oregon ashram.
They must be just about the most caustic and savage attack on Christianity ever uttered, and from an enlightened buddha they are an eyeopener indeed.
Note that the various establishments in America, politico-CIA and Bible Belt closed in the kill almost immediately, and Rajneesh was deported and probably poisoned (with thalium) for his monumental hutzpah in exposing Xtianity.
So, you forgive me if I wince (and puke behind the scenes) when the Dalai Lama ascends the podicum of political whoredom in his phony baloney on Christianity.
Having said all this, I think that Christianity could easily be transformed into a more sensible form. Kant, after all, did just that. We don’t have to live in a world of the Nietzsche fan club, and the Bertie Russell atheists.
I think a real Christianity would teach people how to be real atheists, and liberate them form the thumbsucking infantile syndrome of stupid prayer and evangelical black magic that currrently makes churches a toxic zone. To force people into such a remnant of religion is totally a failed policy at this point. Small wonders aggressive atheism is emerging. But the latter is actually worse than religious belief. We need something that takes both and makes sense of them, with something like Buddhism in the background as a reminder that religions have to produce. They can’t be ‘just have faith’ kindergartens throwing everyone into a sausage machine of conformity to non-religion.
Dalai Lama’s bad leadership
http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/thesearch/archive/2011/06/25/famed-buddhist-tells-west-look-to-jesus.aspx
Buddhists are getting a lot of bad leadership. I will give Thich Nhat Hanh the benefit of the doubt here, but I suspect he is following the style of the Dalai Lama whose concession to a kind of PR blather (based no doubt on real fear for the future of buddhism) and the worst kind of accomodationism is going to backfire and undermine the integrity of buddhism.
I have no doubt missed some of the stages of the Dalai Lama’s muddle, but I think that to simply say that Westerners should remain Christians is a betrayal of the contribution Buddhism can make here: its offerings of spiritual practice, and its contribution to the greater legacy of ‘Santana dharma’. That is not the same as Christian faith, and the infantile range of Christian belief structures.
The Dalai Lama fails by comparison with Rajneesh who ripped into Christianity with a vengeance, pointing to its corrupt legacy. To compare the two men is almost grotesque, but we can at least see why the Dalai Lama is afraid to make waves.
But I guess we always knew the Dalai Lama is basically a politician who will blather at the mouth in public.
Let me say that I can see five ways before breakfast of being a neo-Christian in the progression from the Protestant Reformation (such a structure need not even be theistic in the conventional sense), so my dissent against the Dalai Lama’s hypocrisy here is not total rejection of what he is saying. Or a total rejection of Christianity, which was always a corrupted degeneration of a true religion of redemption (like Buddhism). Christianity, is a religion that never happened, and I fear that Tibetan Buddhism is a religion that ceased to happen. The original buddhists were outsiders, with beggar’s bowls. The Tibetan Buddhists are a crypto-fascist political estabishment. Confusing the two under the term ‘buddhism’ is misleading. But it is important to have the nerve to stand up to the Dalai Lama.
But the point is clear. It is hard to be a buddhist in the west. So I could see easily a way to be a Christian Buddhist Secularist Modernist. Maybe even an ‘Atheist + all of the above’.
Christians fail to see how they have wrecked the use of the term ‘god’. You can’t use it any more. Which isn’t quite atheism.
The original monotheism we should note was trans-theistic, cautioning against the use of the term ‘god’, as it pointed to IHVH as the unnameable glyph for a mystery.
The onset of vulgar theism was the betrayal and destruction of that original source religion, and monotheism is its garbage dump.
There are thus many ways one could go about moving in multiple worlds, Christian, Buddhist, Secular.
But to simply pronounce in PR style on Westerners staying Christian is a reminder that one has should move on from the junk buddhism of the Dalai Lama.
Famed Buddhist tells West: ‘Look to Jesus’
By Douglas Todd 25 Jun 2011
The world’s second most famous Buddhist is heading to Vancouver this summer with a message that may resonate among West Coast residents, who are on the front line of blending Western and Asian spiritualities.Vietnamese Zen monk Thich Nhat Hanh, a peace and environmental activist second only to the Dalai Lama in global renown, doesn’t want all North Americans to become Buddhists.
Thich Nhat Hanh, author of scores of books, is happy if Christians remain Christians, Sikhs stay with Sikhism and atheists hold onto secular humanism.
However, the 84-year-old monk urges all people to engage in inter-spiritual dialogue. He believes it will strengthen their commitment to their own founders’ authentic teachings.
While Buddhists make up one of the fastest-growing religions in B.C., self-described Christians remain the largest cohort – comprising about 54 per cent of the provincial population, according to the last census.
But many West Coasters who identify as Christians are casual about it. They may believe Jesus had a special relationship with God, but many don’t bother to show up often to church to explore such teachings.
Nhat Hanh – who will lead a five-day retreat at the University of B.C. Aug. 8 and give a public lecture at the Orpheum Aug. 14 – reached out to Christian searchers and the wider spiritual community in his bestselling 1997 book, Living Buddha/Living Christ.
In Nhat Hanh’s accessible writing style, Living Buddha/Living Christ describes similarities between the life and teachings of Gautama Buddha and those of Jesus of Nazareth.
Both Buddha and Jesus, Nhat Hanh says, were contemplatives.
Both were wisdom teachers who had transformative experiences in their early 30s.
Both began renewal movements in their own traditions, Hinduism and Judaism.
Both taught ways to respond creatively to life’s temptations and sufferings.
Both are considered exalted, if not divine.
The question
We all know what we think it means but is the idea really so simple, and what is the good that secularism aims for?
The question guardian.co.uk, Monday 27 June 2011 11.00 BST Article historyOne of the terms that is taken for granted in the debates here is “secularism”. We all know the four or so things we think it can mean, from the total extirpation of religion from public life to the curious convolutions of the American constitution, or even the claim that Britain today is a secular democracy. But is the idea really so simple?Does secularism make any sense outside a particular kind of religion: specifically, Christianity or Islam? What is the good that secularism aims for? It’s clear from the history of the last century that abolishing theology – even abolishing theologians – doesn’t get rid of superstition and irrationality. At the moment, the intellectual fashion is to claim that we are all less reasonable than we like to suppose. So what are the kinds of attitudes we need to make societies more reasonable? Are they properly called “secularism”?
The ‘evolution’ of science contradicts the assumptions of reductionist science!
The Case of the Missing Centuries
The ‘evolution’ of science contradicts the assumptions of reductionist science!
Liberalism, and ‘freedom’s causality’
Freedom’s Causality, Teleology and Politics
The issue of ‘freedom’ in the legacy of liberalism has all the fascinating paradoxes studied by Kant.
The liberal idea of ‘freedom’ as supernatural as anything in religion
The issue of liberalism is ironically one that resembles the dissent or religious thought from science: the rise of the modern idea of freedom, and it political realizations in the early modern, accompanied the rise of (causal) science, and stands in dialectical contradiction there, a point discussed at length by Kant, et al.
Liberalism, as the core modern ideology, is thus a brand of anti-science, a perspective that needs to be taken with intelligent discretion. But the point is that ‘freedom’ is a ‘supernatural’ as anything in religion.
And it is no accident that science fanatics like Sam Harris wish to eliminate the idea of freedom.
Let me say that I don’t divide the pie this way: the idea of freedom is, to me, transcausal, but not for that reason ‘super’-natural. It natural but not in the realm of physics objects…
A good study of Kant would help here.
Atheist liberals? What of William Jennings Bryan?
Well, Don’t We Liberals Hate the Public God?
You would think that people might remember William Jennings Bryan, a liberal theist (and critic of Darwism/Social Darwinism) here.
Confusion over ‘secularism’
Another quote from same link source: I note once again the confusion over the term ‘secularism’. Secularism simply means ‘modernity’, and the latter has no fixed definition as ‘anti-religious’. Attempts to force the equation with such things as Darwinism and the new atheism, are obviously very destructive. But whatever I think of it the fact remains that evangelical protestantism is a product of secular modernity. It is hard to avoid that conclusion if the ‘secular’ was born in the Protestant Reformation.
The Problem of Atheism
Evangelical Christianity, as a whole, tends to more prevalent in countries with higher levels of religiosity. Regions such as the USA, South America and sub-Saharan Africa have large numbers of Evangelical Christians in contrast to Northern Europe. Most evangelicals attending this congress, then, will have come from countries with a low percentage of atheists in their population.
This makes it all the more surprising that the number one issue seen as a threat to Evangelicism was “The influence of secularism” (secularism and atheism/non belief in God is frequently used within the survey as meaning the same thing). 71% of evangelicals saw this as a major threat while 20% viewed it as a minor threat. In comparison, the influence of Islam is seen as a major threat by 47% of evangelicals and government restrictions on religion by 22%.
Pew poll: wrongly framed questions
Same link as previous post.
I think that the way in which the questions are framed is revealing: The first option would certainly be my choice, except that it tries to do the usual, make evolution mean natural selection. So I would have to reject this option. Moving down, the second and third are even worse. So I would have to aggressively withdraw from such a poll, with some hard words for the pollster.
To make the point clear: belief in naturalistic evolution is not equivalent to belief in natural selection. The dishonest framing of the issues is most probably a deliberate strategy, and shows the cynical dishonesty of those who wring their hands over the failure of religious groups to toe the line on evolution.
Evangelicals and Evolution
First, and probably of no surprise to anyone, is the result of the question regarding acceptance of the scientific theory of evolution. The survey posed the question:
“Which statement comes closest to your own views?” – the options being:
Humans and other living things have evolved over time due to natural processes such as natural selection.
A supreme being guided the evolution of living things for the purpose of creating humans and other life in the form it exists today.
Humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.In other words the choices are evolution, intelligent design of the Michael Behe variety, and standard creationism. It is important to note that the Pew foundation used a wording for the evolution option that, unlike some previous surveys, doesn’t specifically exclude a role for God: for instance, someone who believes that God set up the laws of nature and that biological evolution is just one of the consequences of these laws should answer option A.
What proportion of evangelicals accept the scientific theory of evolution?
The answer is 3%
Almost half (47%) of respondents opted for traditional creationism, while 41% chose intelligent design. Not exactly testament (ahem) to the success of BioLogos in convincing evangelicals to accept biological evolution. Bearing in mind that surveys of this type usually have a margin of error of several percentage points (surveys of atheists occasionally show a similar percentage answering that they believe in God!), one can read this result as a unanimous rejection by this community of the scientific consensus on biological evolution.
To put the 3% figure in perspective, it is the same as the percentage of evangelicals who answered that it is not “essential to follow the teachings of Christ in one’s personal and family life”: pretty much the defining feature of evangelical Christianity. Furthermore, the 3% figure for support of evolution by evangelicals was consistent across all geographic regions.
BioLogos, in trying to convince evangelical Christians to accept evolution while keeping their religion, may be tacking an almost insurmountable problem. Rejection of evolution is not simply a theological side issue in evangelical Christianity, but appears to be a defining feature.
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/evangelicals-evolution-and-atheism-the-2011-pew-foundation-survey/
The Pew 2011 survey
Compared to most developed nations, the proportion of evangelical Christians in the USA is far higher. In 2004 they comprised 26.3% of the population. At the same time, the level of acceptance of the theory of evolution is significantly lower. The question of whether there is a direct connection between evangelicals and the rejection of evolution has been difficult to quantify, however, since most surveys to date have not separated specific religious subgroups.
This issue has now been addressed in a new survey released by the Pew Research Forum on Religion and Public Life, who polled the opinions of evangelical leaders attending last year’s Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization.
Stress, epigenetics, inheritance
Effects of Stress Can Be Inherited, and Here’s HowScienceDaily (June 24, 2011) — None of us are strangers to stress of various kinds. It turns out the effects of all those stresses can change the fate of future generation, influencing our very DNA without any change to the underlying sequence of As, Gs, Ts and Cs. Now, researchers reporting in the June 24 issue of Cell, a Cell Press publication, have new evidence that helps to explain just how these epigenetic changes really happen.
Atheist Richard Dawkins Admits Universe’s Fine-Tuning Difficult to Explain
.Francis Collins: Atheist Richard Dawkins Admits Universe’s Fine-Tuning Difficult to Explain
By MICHELLE A. VU – CHRISTIANPOST.COM
Added: Tuesday, 28 June 2011 at 8:39 PM
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/641942-francis-collins-atheist-richard-dawkins-admits-universe-s-fine-tuning-difficult-to-explain
Outspoken evangelical geneticist Francis Collins revealed that combative atheist Richard Dawkins admitted to him during a conversation that the most troubling argument for nonbelievers to counter is the fine-tuning of the universe.
“If they (constants in the universe) were set at a value that was just a tiny bit different, one part in a billion, the whole thing wouldn’t work anymore,” said Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health, during the 31st Annual Christian Scholars’ Conference at Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif.
These constants regarding the behavior of matter and energy – such as strong and weak nuclear forces, gravity, and the speed of light – have to be precisely right during the Big Bang for life as we know it to exist.
“To get our universe, with all of its potential for complexities or any kind of potential for any kind of life form, everything has to be precisely defined on this knife edge of improbability,” said the world renowned scientist.
“That forces a conclusion. If you are an atheist, either it is just a lucky break and the odds are so remote, or you have to go to this multiverse hypothesis, which says that there must be almost an infinite number of parallel universes that have different values of those constants,” explained Collins to Christian scholars of various disciplines in the audience. “And of course we are here and so we must have won the lottery, we must be in the one where everything worked.”
There are some serious scientists in the world, however, such as English theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking, who believe in the multiverse hypothesis.
King of the Head Butt
Domed Dinosaur Was King of the Head ButtScienceDaily (June 28, 2011) — Llamas can’t really manage it. Giraffes aren’t very good at it and while big horn sheep and muskox excel at it, it turns out a small plant eating dinosaur — the pachycephalosaur Stegoceras validum — was probably even better at it: head butting.
Engineered Bacterium
Bacterium Engineered With DNA in Which Thymine Is Replaced by Synthetic Building Block
ScienceDaily (June 28, 2011) — The genetic information of all living cells is stored in the DNA composed of the four canonical bases adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G) and thymine (T). An international team of researchers has now succeeded in generating a bacterium possessing a DNA in which thymine is replaced by the synthetic building block 5-chlorouracil (c), a substance toxic for other organisms.
Mystery Ingredient in Coffee
Mystery Ingredient in Coffee Boosts Protection Against Alzheimer’s Disease, Study Finds
ScienceDaily (June 28, 2011) — A yet unidentified component of coffee interacts with the beverage’s caffeine, which could be a surprising reason why daily coffee intake protects against Alzheimer’s disease. A new Alzheimer’s mouse study by researchers at the University of South Florida found that this interaction boosts blood levels of a critical growth factor that seems to fight off the Alzheimer’s disease process.
War Colleges
The Politics of Militarization and Corporatization in Higher Education
War Colleges
By HENRY GIROUX
http://www.counterpunch.org/giroux06292011.html
While there is an ongoing discussion about the increasing corporatization of higher education—extending from the attempted buying of faculty positions by right-wing billionaires such as the Koch brothers to the increasing casualization of faculty labor and the commodification of knowledge, what is often left out of this analysis is the intrusion of the military into higher education. (1)
Service’s bio of Trotsky
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/jun2011/pers-j28.shtml?utm_source=Book+Link&utm_campaign=0983c08af0-IDLT_Review6_28_2011&utm_medium=email
“A book that fails to meet the basic standards of historical scholarship” The
American Historical Review discredits Robert Service’s biography of Leon
Trotsky
28 June 2011
The *American Historical Review*, among the oldest and most prestigious
academic journals in the United States, has published in its June 2011 issue
a critical examination of two books: the denunciatory biography *Trotsky* by
British historian Robert Service and *In Defense of Leon
Trotsky*
*, *by David North, the chairman of both the Socialist Equality Party in the
United States and the international editorial board of the *World Socialist
Web Site*. The author of the combined review is the historian Bertrand
Patenaude, a lecturer in history and international relations at Stanford
University, and a fellow at the Hoover Institute. He is also the
author of *Trotsky: Downfall of a Revolutionary*, published by Harper Collins in 2009.
How Greed Destroys America
Robert Parry: How Greed Destroys America
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/06/28-12
Is the Global Civilization Failing?
Thom Hartmann with Lester Brown: Is the Global Civilization Failing?
http://www.commondreams.org/video/2011/06/28
US Nuclear Facilities Threatened
Three US Nuclear Facilities Threatened by Flood, Fire
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/28-6
Cuts To Medicaid
Proposed GOP Budget Cuts To Medicaid Could Kill Jobs And Short-Change Seniors
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/28-10
Climate Skeptic Received $1 Million
Documents: Prominent Climate Skeptic Received $1 Million from Big Oil
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/28-12
‘Climate Change is Here, Now’
Extreme Weather says: ‘Climate Change is Here, Now’
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/28-13
Worst Drought in 60 Years
Worst Drought in 60 Years Threatens Famine in Africa
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/28-9
Populist Backlash
In Greece: ‘Populist Backlash in Age of Austerity’
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/28-11
Making the World Safe for Hypocrisy
RG mail
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28423.htm
Information Clearing House
June 28, 2011
Making the World Safe for Hypocrisy*
By Michael Parenti
Why has the United States government supported counterinsurgency in
Colombia, Guatemala, El Salvador, and many other places around the world, at
such a loss of human life to the populations of those nations? Why did it
invade tiny Grenada and then Panama? Why did it support mercenary wars
against progressive governments in Nicaragua, Mozambique, Angola, Ethiopia,
Afghanistan, Indonesia, East Timor, Western Sahara, South Yemen, and
elsewhere?
Is it because our leaders want to save democracy? Are they concerned about
the well-being of these defenseless peoples? Is our national security
threatened? I shall try to show that the arguments given to justify U.S.
policies are false ones.
by Michael Parenti – from the book Dirty Truths
Extreme Weather
RG mail
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=extreme-weather-caused-by-climate-change
[image: Scientific American]
June 28, 2011
Storm Warnings: Extreme Weather Is a Product of Climate Change
*More violent and frequent storms, once merely a prediction of climate
models, are now a matter of observation. *
Part 1 of a three-part series
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »