HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
May 4, 2006 I'm one of the authors of the 11 Chapters. Well, a very minor author, but I've submitted a few quotes. We don't agree on everything " t411sh doesn't get quite as political as I do, for example, but I do agree with most of the basic idea. Anyway, here a quote that came from me: "Being dead is like the time before you were born. Most of your time has been spent in a state of non-existence. When you die your energy and atoms will reform into new things, just as you were made from bits which used to be dirt, other animals and stars." Lets let Carl Sagan take it from here, shall we? He's someone that inspired me and he's worth writing about anyway. All of the italics below are quotes of his. Note that the 11 Chapters doesn't pick an American political viewpoint/party per se " I, however, do. I'm a rather liberal atheist, but it needs to be stated that atheism doesn't equal liberalism. We've tended in our cosmologies to make things familiar. Despite all our best efforts, we've not been very inventive. In the West, Heaven is placid and fluffy, and Hell is like the inside of a volcano. In many stories, both realms are governed by dominance hierarchies headed by gods or devils. Monotheists talked about the king of kings. In every culture we imagined something like our own political system running the Universe. Few found the similarity suspicious. Monotheistic religion, taken dogmatically and literally, conflicts with science. Some adapt, which is good, like the Catholics [on some issues, anyway], while others attempt to insist that fact must conform to dogma " that's bad, John Waters! It's the reason that I'm a "militant" atheist. Yes, I care what you, the reader, believe because you may vote and affect me directly. Actions are indeed better ways to judge someone, but voting and influencing people and raising children is what I call "action by proxy", therefore, belief alone matters. Ann Druyan suggests an experiment: Look back again at the pale blue dot of the preceding chapter [the view of the Earth from a deep-space probe]. Take a good long look at it. Stare at the dot for any length of time and then try to convince yourself that God created the whole Universe for one of the 10 million or so species of life that inhabit that speck of dust. Now take it a step further: Imagine that everything was made just for a single shade of that species, or gender, or ethnic or religious subdivision. If this doesn't strike you as unlikely, pick another dot. Imagine it to be inhabited by a different form of intelligent life. They, too, cherish the notion of a God who has created everything for their benefit. How seriously do you take their claim? Ann was Carl's wife. An elegant analogy. Consider Christianity and Islam " can they both be correct? Not as they are currently most often expressed, not by most of their current adherents. Humanism makes no silly distinctions based on where someone happened to be born and indoctrinated. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. Human history is mostly about the rich using religion to control the poor, ignorant, masses. Telling people that suffering (or whatever sub-optimal state they find themselves in) is OK because the reward comes in the NEXT life is a true evil. The world would be a better place if we went about our business believing that this is all there is. Anything extra, then, wouldn't interfere with this life and would be a bonus. Human history can be viewed as a slowly dawning awareness that we are members of a larger group. Initially our loyalties were to ourselves and our immediate family, next, to bands of wandering hunter-gatherers, then to tribes, small settlements, city-states, nations. We have broadened the circle of those we love. We have now organized what are modestly described as super-powers, which include groups of people from divergent ethnic and cultural backgrounds working in some sense together " surely a humanizing and character building experience. If we are to survive, our loyalties must be broadened further, to include the whole human community, the entire planet Earth. Many of those who run the nations will find this idea unpleasant. They will fear the loss of power. We will hear much about treason and disloyalty. Rich nation-states will have to share their wealth with poor ones. But the choice, as H. G. Wells once said in a different context, is clearly the universe or nothing. It's not as if we are born disliking other cultures and ways of life. Religion is too often the ultimate source of racism. Someone can be in the same social/wealth class, have the same hobbies and have the same skin color, yet still be discriminated against for adhering to a different religion. People are flawed without religion, but with religion, all too often, leaders have a handy and potent catalyst. Hearing American Christian fundamentalists such as our own Michael John McCrae whine about the "evils" of multiculturalism is Exhibit A. Those afraid of the universe as it really is, those who pretend to nonexistent knowledge and envision a Cosmos centered on human beings will prefer the fleeting comforts of superstition. They avoid rather than confront the world. But those with the courage to explore the weave and structure of the Cosmos, even where it differs profoundly from their wishes and prejudices, will penetrate its deepest mysteries. Giving "God did it, and that's good enough for me" in response to important questions should be as taboo as calling an African American by a racial slur loudly in public in a blue state. If I wasn't such a free-speech nut, I'd say that that kind of brain-crimping attitude should be considered criminal. Widespread intellectual and moral docility may be convenient for leaders in the short term, but it is suicidal for nations in the long term. One of the criteria for national leadership should therefore be a talent for understanding, encouraging, and making constructive use of vigorous criticism. Instead, Americans seemed content to put a cowboy hat on a shallow imbecile and watched as his ilk painted the world in either black or white. Maybe we are waking up? In our tenure on this planet we have accumulated dangerous evolutionary baggage, hereditary propensities for aggression and ritual, submission to leaders and hostility to outsiders, which place our survival in some question. But we have also acquired compassion for others, love for our children and our children's children, a desire to learn from history, and a great soaring passionate intelligence " the clear tools for our continued survival and prosperity. Which aspects of our nature will prevail is uncertain, particularly when our vision and understanding and prospects are bound exclusively to the Earth " or, worse, to one small part of it. But up there in the immensity of the Cosmos, an inescapable perspective awaits us. Folks, we can choose humanism, or we can choose death. If something better than humanism comes along, I'll be all for it but right now, I'm not aware of any such set of principles. Humanism takes the best from the various religions " it expresses a moral foundation, for example. But it does away with the worst of religion - the brain-freezing dogma and the inherent racism that comes from thinking that your own view is "eternally" correct and Truthful with a capital T. Why is the alternative death? Many reasons. It's clear that humans are still trying too hard to kill each other and our tools for doing so are getting better " it's time for something different. Political religionists in modern times, especially here in the USA, seem bent on attacking our foundation in science and science is required to save us. Whatever dangers may get us first, be it a biological weapon out of control, nuclear war or global warming, sooner or later an impact from space will wipe us clean like a chalk stain on a sidewalk during a thunderstorm. Science is, literally, in every sense, the only human invention which can save us. This is our window " right now is the time after the acquisition of science and some technology and before the next large extinction level event. The ball is in our court. Replacing science with provincial dogma at this time in history is as smart as collectively sawing our own hands off. Good work with the 11 Chapters, t411sh. I'd be glad to help with the project further. ------------ About the author Frederick Smith: I enjoy writing about the positive virtues of humanism - humanists are the good guys. I now have a blog that I will start to increasingly maintain and update. Here is the link: fredsuberview.blogspot.com/ About my personal background and life: I was born, I got some education, worked, ate, and had some kids. It seems I like to write � something that was unknown to me until relatively recently...How's that for detail? ;) Hate mail is welcome unless you are from the Army Of God. Please! It's not that I mind seeing pictures of aborted fetuses in my inbox, but once you've seen one you've pretty much seen them all... Email: dahlek65@gmail.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
