h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

As the Scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz used to sing:

"If I only had a Brane."


Ah yes, string theory, the latest incarnation
of Euclid's Harmonix of the Universe.


http://books.google.ca/books/about/The_Mathematics_of_Harmony.html?id=K6fac9RxXREC&redir_esc=y


~jwf~

". . . suggests to me that you have agnostic tendencies . . ."



Never mind tendencies, I said it outright!

There's no contradiction in being agnostic and atheist -- the terms describe two different, independent aspects of thought. "I don't know" need have no bearing on "I have no belief". Actually, on second thought, "I don't know" would very likely lead to a position of "I have no belief", perhaps with "yet" appended.

I don't know if there's a person named Jurmunder Blue Flowerpot living at this moment in Brest, France. I also have no belief concerning the dwelling place of someone with such a name *until* someone shows me a telephone directory for Brest, France.

One can be theist/agnostic, one can be atheist/agnostic. Why do the categories continue to be confused?



I'm beginning to realize again why I've chosen to be away from here lately.

Ah yes, Indeed Jurmunder Blue Flowerpot; that which we call Jurmunder Blue Flowerpot by any other name would smell the same.

Are native americans delusional and idiots for believing in the spirits of their ancestors?

Maybe. Logic and reason would suggest as much.
Rationalists and pragmatists and technogeeks
and atom splitters and Atheists would say so.

Not me though. I am not a native but I do believe
in some sort of ancestral connection - whether it be
in the genes or the dna or the racial memories or some
other as yet unidentified and not understood connection.

I'm happy to call it spirituality and to accept it as a
fact of my life with a track record of positive outcomes
resulting from my awareness of 'them'. To do so one must
first be content with themselves, knowing 'who I am' and
accepting that their present 'me' is an evolved being with
a long, complex history and ancestry back thru evolution.

Maybe the 'ancestors', the ghosts I acknowledge and respect,
are not my immediately traceable generational relations but
much deeper, much older coded memories, sensations and altered
perceptions and decision making processes. That I exist at all
does suggest that I have good survival traits so maybe I am just
the product of a series of really lucky B*****rds.

And that's fair enough.
It gives me confidence to carry on with some sense of success
and survival and happiness because of who I am, the end product
of a long line of successful survivors.

Is it simply genetic or a spiritual actuation? I dunno. But the
more I believe it, the better it works. That may be delusional
or idiotic but ask battlefield survivors how often god seems to
protect idiots and children when the bullets are flying. Innocence,
ignorance and delusional faith are powerful magics against the
harshest realities of the cosmos. Ignorance is bliss.


~jwf~

interesting train of thoughtyou have there jwf

There were tears and rejoicing in the temple of the ivory tower as it was announced that what appears to be a god particle (aka the "Higgs Boson") has been found. The Chief Lord Cern Master Rolf Heuer stated: "It has global implications for the future and it comes at the right time and I think we can be very optimistic". I think we can all have an extra spring in our step with this humongous achievement for mankind; they will be dancing and cheering in the reservations.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-18702455

When they invented glue, Sellotape, Blue-tac and Sticky pads they didn’t throw a big party.

All these items help keep stuff stuck together but as yet none of them have been so highly celebrated.

Even humble String has its uses, but then aren’t we supposed to some how commute between ’s with it not tie parcels up with it

Interesting how this conversation seems (to me) to have swung from pro-atheist to a more neutral viewpoint. Interesting also how this seems to coincide so exactly with the absence of any fundies to remind us what Dawkins et al(*) are arguing against.

My latest missive is at http://giford.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/resurrection-of-dead.html. I've spent a bit of time on this one, hope you like it!

Gif

(*) Who is this Al bloke? He sure gets around.

In your blog you mention "near death experience"

I have come across the following
http://www.southampton.ac.uk/mediacentre/news/2008/sep/08_165.shtml
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2055499/An-body-experience-brain-playing-tricks-you.html

From Wiki:
University of Southampton study
"In the fall of 2008, 25 UK and US hospitals began participation in a 3 year study, coordinated by Dr. Sam Parnia and Southampton University. Following on from the work of Pim van Lommel in the Netherlands, the study aims to examine near-death experiences in 1,500 cardiac arrest survivors and so determine whether people without a heartbeat or brain activity can have documentable out-of-body experiences."

I haven't been able to track down the "results" of the study and can only assume that their results are "negative".

They were supposed to test whether people involved in near death experiences could see objects placed on top of cupboards etc in hospital wards / theatres. If someone had seen any of these objects then I am sure Dr Sam Parnia would have "announced" his findings. The fact that he hasn't suggests that the looking down on ones body experience is not "real". It's not clear who funded the study.

Ps I think these near death experiences have to be a property of the brain, as are dreams a property of the brain, as are "revelations", as are "thoughts" etc.

Following on from your blog it would be interesting to know of those claiming to have met Jesus, how many of the Jesus' looked like these guys:

http://www.rejesus.co.uk/site/module/jesus_in_the_movies/

Hi Gif

I get my fundamentalist kicks on facebook these days.

Why just the other day I was told atheists aren't people but we are all liars.

>> test whether people involved in near death experiences
could see objects placed on top of cupboards <<

There is a psychological factor in elevation.
The high ground has a psychological advantage.
The high ground has a physiological advantage.
Some people seem to be above it all.
Snobs have their noses in the air.
Some people are quite aloof.
People on drugs are said to be high.

From experience I can understand the use of that term and
conclude that when under stress, drugs, disorientation or
a life threatening injury or disease, the brain does change
its perceptive interpretations to a broader 'over-view' as it
seeks alternative actions that might result in more positive
outcomes. It may be as simple as a genetic survival memory.
Our ancestors likely often found that they could escape harm
by climbing higher up into the trees. Of course one must first
assume these ancestors and trees are things we may or may
not have descended from.

http://youtu.be/WH6UnvSlahc


~jwf~

Out of interest what are Dawkins qualifications in the realm of the Spiritual? Is he a published poet? Has he trained as a yogi or a llama? Has he been taken abroad by Robert MacFarlane...has he studied the Shamanic practices of the Tuvan people of Siberia..has he spent time with Australian aboriginals, (I noticed they got a mention in his latest offering).

He's an Oxford educated evolutionary biologist, with a First I presume..and has been Oxford chair of the in the Public understanding of Science...has several books published in his name, most to do with his academic area of expertise.

I see him as typical of the tedious contemporary phenomenon in the west of e.g. having on TV discussions like e.g. the political programme This Week, all manner of rag tag artists and comics, giving forth on politics. Why? Simply because they have some excellence in one area, they are suddenly grabbed hold of for their opinions on politics. Why not Joe Blogs. Is anyone interested in their opinions on politics?

We see the full flowering of this phenomenon in shows like 'Strickly Come Dancing'.

Now that's a thought...

Where does oath taking fit into a Dawkinian atheist society. What's the point of oaths in such a society? The hippocratic medical oath. The oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth?

When I talk about "atheist" society I really mean the "militant atheist" society of which Dawkins is supposed to be a member.

I have been reading about MBA courses and their history. It is worrying to see that most do not consider "ethics" or "society". There is a movement to introduce an MBA oath, similar to the Hippocratic oath, but the movement has failed to get proper traction.
http://mbaoath.org/

Following on from Effers comment. Where are the socialist atheists, the historian atheist, the anthopologist atheist, the artist atheist. Why does it only appear to be people with a strong "allegiance" to science that are in the vanguard party of atheist militancy?

I expect the vast majority of scientists have better things to do with their time...like doing science.

Most atheists don't seek to make a career of it.

Yes you're right. It is just a vocal minority behind which lots of others jump on.

Perhaps Dawkins did a correspondence course in spirituality. Either way, what is it that you feel people who have done those things you mentioned can do better than the average joe picked off the street?

>>When I talk about "atheist" society I really mean the "militant atheist" society of which Dawkins is supposed to be a member<<

I think you've got to be really careful about talking about "militant" atheists - atheists generally aren't the ones going around shooting others and blowing themselves and others up.

Why would an atheist have any issues with oaths? The hippocratic oath was never an oath to a deity, it was an oath on the medic's soul. The court oath is backed up by the full force of the law: doesn't matter who/what you swear to, if you abrogate the oath the criminal justice system will get you.