HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
June 22, 2005 John Waters, keeping with his "I'll believe anything" mentality, wrote: "Dear Skeptic. I don’t care if you’re insane or savant, divine or defective." ...signifying the difference between rationalists and those willing to believe without sufficient justification. Unlike Mr. Waters, I most definitely do care about the mental state of the person I'm talking to. I recently attempted to have a reasonable discussion with someone who's willing to believe a number of things simply on faith, or the possibility (read: hope and longing) that it could possibly be true. Since Mr. Waters' comments are directed at our discussion, I'll take a few moments to respond. After spending a lot of time using non-synonymous terms interchangeably, the crux of his claim is that we should rewrite our understanding of the mind and the fields of psychiatry and psychology so that 'visions' are classified as potentially real and beneficial instead of mental aberrations which are potentially harmful. He'll even go so far as to claim that schools should encourage the imaginations of our children to the point where they are likely to experience visions which he might consider divine. Why? I'm not completely sure. After all, there's no evidence to support his claims and there's considerable evidence to the contrary. He couches it in language designed to encourage support for his position from those who are unable to critically consider his claims. He avoids the fact that what we're reading is just a collections of assertions which he can't back up. From his perspective, akin to many religionists, faith is a virtue. Believing that something unproven might be true, without evidence and even in the face of evidence to the contrary is not only acceptable, it should be encouraged. This philosophy presents a number of difficulties not the least of which is that you are likely to end up believing many things which simply aren't true. Though, I suppose, someone who idolizes visions that transcend reality wouldn't see the problem with accepting similarly irrational claims. Perhaps the biggest problem with this philosophy of acceptance is that you lose the ability to determine reality from fantasy. You've opened your mind to all possibilities, determined that any explanation is as likely to be true as any other and left yourself with no consistent mechanism for resolving conflicting beliefs. What evidence does he offer to support that these 'visions' are anything more than delusions? None. What evidence does he offer that these 'visions' are beneficial? None. He does try to play to his audience and play to emotions. "each modern student is trapped in a popular academic subculture where certified professional authorities are totally out of dream time." Mmmm 'dream time'. It sounds so new-agey and yummy. So, teachers who are prone to hallucinations are favorable to those grounded in reality? "and doing hours of homework at the TV or the computer night before keeps the modern student hyper-alert and far out of dream time. Speed makes them go even faster!" That may as well read: 'Slow down, dream a little. Set that book aside, your visions are more important than building a knowledge base which might someday call those visions hallucinations.' "During a major part of human evolution, however, our ancestors did actually live in dream time. In fact, the gods were everywhere." And those days are preferable to today? And by "the gods were everywhere" are you claiming that there actually were gods everywhere or people just imagined that the gods were everywhere? If it's the former, where are they now, and doesn't that conflict with other people who envision only one god? If it's the latter, then can you show that believing in false gods was essential to progress? And, by the way, what exactly do you mean when you say our ancestors lived in dream time? And exactly what is it that makes dream time a "good thing", again? "Human survival required maximal brain activity, and dreams and visions were part of this brain activity." Two assertions with no evidence. The second uses a generalization which tries to equate normal brain activity with the "divine" or "supernatural" visions you were originally talking about. Not to mention that 'maximal' brain activity isn't defined, or particularly accurate in it's implied meaning. "Shamans talked with the gods and no warrior was addicted to amphetamines, high on LSD, or hooked on phonics." Huh? Shaman talked with the gods? You have proof of this? Were they real gods or hallucinations? And speaking of LSD, weren't hallucinogens common among Shaman and other people who claimed to commune with deities? And if you're claiming that great wisdom, 'new truths' and works of genius are likely to occur from these hallucinations, wouldn't it be considered beneficial to start our children on a monthly regimen of LSD? "Unlike our hard-working ancestors, who often had significant dreams and prophetic visions to help them survive," You have evidence, of course that these dreams and visions were critical and beneficial to their survival? You can demonstrate a causal relationship between these visions and any insight into reality that the individuals discovered? Isn't it also possible that these visions hindered their survival and limited their discoveries? The answer, as Mr. Waters has been continually unwilling to acknowledge, is yes, it's possible. Based on what we know of reality, it's even probable. Which is why scientists have classified many of these instances as neurological disorders. Could the scientists be wrong? Yes, the certainly could. And that's what Mr. Waters bases his entire argument on. The logical fallacy that since we can't know everything, we probably don't know anything. And instead of acknowledging the evidence and the critical thinking which lead us to these conclusions, Mr. Waters decides to vilify the scientists as "self-righteous social authorities." But he doesn't stop there. He goes on to equate clinical diagnosis of psychosis with the Nazis: "In fact the master-authority Adolf Hitler murdered huge numbers of such "defectives."" He then begins to spin misperceptions in with his countless logical fallacies: "If genius and defectiveness go together, one wants to know in what way Archimedes was defective." Genius and defectiveness don't always go together. Some brilliant individuals have suffered from mental disorders like autism but this doesn't mean that genius goes hand in hand with delusion. And now it's time to exaggerate in order to appeal to emotions: "But when an obviously frail person of unusual and proven talent gets hauled off to the mental hospital, beaten to the floor by two hard-fisted male behemoths, and given a brain-numbing shot of Thorazine in the butt, and kept for years thereafter on antipsychotic medication, that is definitely an aggressive act!" Yes, because clearly that's what happens to all geniuses who have visions, it's the recommended psychiatric treatment and not the exception to the rule. (That was sarcasm, for those unable to recognize it). "but in every modern nation today, the social authority keeps moving in the same old direction...towards glorifying, adoring, and emphasizing memory, reason, calculation...the very intelligence of modern so-called “intelligent” machines. In moments of reflection all of us lesser mortals and non-phi-beta-kappas empathize with the Gypsies, the Jews, and with other distrusted and misunderstood persons." How silly of us to promote proven methods of understanding. How cruel of us to view you "lesser mortals" as Hitler viewed the Jews. (Yet more sarcasm) I'm not sure if you're throwing a pity party for yourself or if your persecution complex is indicative of acute paranoia. And the phi-beta-kappa line, were the frat boys mean to you? And now, the infamous "slippery slope" argument...in the guise of "the sky is falling": "If you ignore this, pretty soon the social authorities will come knocking at YOUR door." Hurry! Get down to Home Depot and pick up a bunch of 2x4's and nails! You'll never take me alive, social authorities!!!! And with great irony, we read the diversionary: "This pseudoscientific word-gaming is an intellectual Russian roulette and it is exceedingly dangerous!" Please remember that if you ever begin to pimp your "yogic force" healing methods. "You ARE a child of God." And you have proof of this as well? Mr. Waters. if you truly buy into your theory that it's better to believe things until they can be proven wrong, then believe me when I tell you that you are crazy. I'm not a psychiatrist, so I have no idea if you're a paranoid schizophrenic, psychotic, disturbed or just garden-variety crazy...but you're crazy just the same. You are unable to make a valid logical argument. You post fallacy after fallacy. You have a persecution complex and compare those who disagree with you to Nazis. You cannot acknowledge a proper cause/effect relationship and the only support you offer for your claims are bold assertions that defy logic and reason. Perhaps this is the result of 27 years of work on a pet theory which has yet to bear fruit. Or, since you claim that your self-healing routine eventually leads to eccentricity and psychosis...perhaps you've been self-medicating too long. In any case, I don't see any reason to continue or discussion. ------------ Email Matt Dillahunty: sans_deity@yahoo.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ 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). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
