Month: December 2011
The gospel according to rationalbrain
The usual end-of-year introspection, coupled with a beer or two, gets one to thinking.
And so is born the gospel according to rationalbrain.
In case you were wondering, the word gospel derives from the Old English ‘gōd-spell’, meaning ‘good news’ or ‘glad tidings’.
Happy New Year to you all.
The Scheme of Things 1
1:1 Beginnings
- It is self evident:
- That We are a group of complex biological organisms on quite a nice little planet.
- That the planet is quite nice simply because We evolved to match what it could provide for Us.
- That We have senses and responses which developed for the purpose of surviving and thriving on this quite nice little planet.
- That those senses also provide the functionality required to for Us to see beyond the trees, the ground and the sea, to the expanses beyond our nice little planet and to the microscopic components within it.
1:2 Awakenings
- It is also clear:
- That We have developed sufficient complexity over millions of years to transcend mere observation and reaction, and to add to Our inventory the ability to plan, to dream, to calculate, to communicate and to conceive of that which does not exist in physical form.
- And thus to conceive of Self and understand Its place on this quite nice little planet, and Its place in the We.
- But also to conceive of shadows and ghosts and consider them real, born of the senses and responses developed for the purpose of surviving and thriving on this quite nice little planet.
1:3 Conflicts
- And thus We now see:
- That the We differentiated according to the shadows and ghosts and the location of the We on this quite nice little planet.
- That the shadows and ghosts of each of the We became the reason for the existence of the We.
- That, for the biological organisms, obedience to the shadows and ghosts superseded the purpose of of surviving and thriving on this quite nice little planet.
- And thus some organisms were selected for survival by the followers of the shadows and ghosts, while others were extinguished.
1:3 Ages of Reason
- And furthermore We now see:
- That conception of the non-physical was developed by the complex organisms for the purpose of surviving and thriving, and not as tools for division of the We.
- For exploration and understanding of the abstract and unseen.
- For invention and extrapolation of the unknown.
- And therefore the survival of biological organisms is incompatible with obedience to shadows and ghosts.
1:4 Transcendence
- And finally We now see:
- That reality consists of the We, and of the quite nice little planet.
- And that the complex biological organisms must re-focus their well-earned capabilities to the purpose of surviving and thriving on this quite nice little planet .
- And not in the obedience of the shadows and ghosts.
1:5 That will be all.
Essay: Humanity analysed
Care for an analysis of what makes humanity tick?
Correspondent Neutralturn has further developed his thoughts, originally sketched in this post, into an essay. In case you looked at this link, Pizza is the original pseudonym, and Neutralturn is the pseudo-pseudonym. And that also explains why you never see Pizza and Neutralturn in the same room together.
In this essay, Humanae Vitae – An Unauthorised Version, Neutralturn tackles this modest little topic with his now customary ‘surgical’ analysis, and in the process perhaps challenges our intuition on the subject.
An Atheist’s Sermon
To complement the recent Atheist’s Carol (which you really need to see), here’s another outstanding contribution from the guys at the Reasonable Doubts podcast, and in particular Jeremy Beahan. As background, Jeremy was raised as a fundamentalist christian, and studied religion at university level. At some point he ‘converted’ to atheism, has gone on to be one of the most knowledgeable and articulate speakers on religion going around.
That he was invited to to give this sermon at the ‘All Souls Unitarian Church’ in his home town is remarkable, but perhaps explained by the refreshingly inclusive nature of this church – you can read a bit about it here.
Sit back and listen to An Atheist’s Sermon, which conveys many of my own thoughts on the subject far more eloquently than I could ever do.
Another dangerous anti-vaxxer goes into print
Reasonablehank has written this piece on Stephanie Messenger, who has written an insidious little book entitled ‘Melanie’s Marvellous Measles’. The summary reads:
“This book takes children aged 4 to 10 years on a journey of discovering about the ineffectiveness of vaccinations, while teaching them to embrace childhood disease, heal if they get a disease, and build their immune systems naturally.”
I understand that Messenger is a grieving mother, having lost a child to what she believes was a reaction to vaccination. And she is not alone in this belief.
However, it is one thing to have the belief that vaccination was the culprit, but quite another to state it as medical fact, and incite others to boycott vaccinations. To do the latter is simply irresponsible, particularly when study after study finds no link between vaccination and serious illness. Yes, there are small risks, but in comparison to the misery which can ravage a community should, for example, measles and mumps kick off again, choosing vaccination is a no-brainer.
What happened to Messenger’s child was sad, but coaxing other parents into leaving their children unvaccinated will amplify that sadness many times.
For those wishing to read further on the whole counter-anti-vaccination scene, have a look at the Reasonablehank blog.
Vale Christopher Hitchens
One of my first posts on rationalbrain was a review of ‘God is Not Great’ by Christopher Hitchens.
His writing actually served to inspire me to start this blog, so it was sad to read yesterday that he has died, aged 62. Tobacco claims another scalp.
I was a late-comer to his work, but was immediately impressed by his clear, direct and often witty writing style.
I’m sure he’s in heaven at the keyboard of his word processor.
And I’m certain he would have hated anyone saying that, even as a joke.
TGA reforms? Much ado about nothing.
Rationalbrain has been eagerly awaiting the outcomes of a recent government review of the Therapeutic Goods Administration – an organisation which has copped a bit of stick on this blog for its rubber-stamping of dubious treatments and devices (see here for example). There was some hope for optimism based on this article a little while ago.
Well, the report is in, and you can read it for yourself here. There’s also an interview on Radio National (thanks Tony) with noted activitist Dr. Ken Harvey here for those who can’t stand the excitement of reading the actual text. The title of the piece on Radio National sums up the report quite well, if you ignore the tired old dog, teeth, bite metaphor: “Health watchdog gets a few more teeth, but still lacks bite“. Read the rest of this entry »
The atheist’s christmas carol
This chokes me up. Thanks Tim Minchin, great work.
Watch it, enjoy the festive period with your families and friends, and remember those no longer with you.
Ghosts, holy or otherwise, not invited.
Merry Christmas to all from rationalbrain.
I was only kidding
They say life imitates art.
A while back, while travelling in Europe, I wrote this tongue-in-cheek piece on the perils of modern technology – more specifically, injuries sustained using smart-phones and pads. (As a result I probably lost a few readers who happened to be accolytes of the Apple world-view. Such is life.)
Anyway, this article has suddenly turned my parody into a real piece of journalism.
Or maybe it’s evidence that I can see the future.
Oh boy – Christmas has come early!
Danger: extreme smug-alert for the next several paragraphs.
In what seems to be a sudden, planet-wide attack of common sense, the world of reason has received two early chrissy presents.
Firstly, we read that here in Oz, Doctors take aim at chiropractors. It’s about bloody time that doctors stood up and and pointed the finger at these purveyors of quackery and pseudoscience. I’ve written before about this, and a particular irritation is the fact that our universities are teaching this stuff, and what’s more are being funded federally to do so. Predictably, the spokesman for the quackopractors insisted that “chiropractic treatment was evidence-based, including its use on children for the treatment of conditions such as colic“. They say that, but they NEVER back it up with evidence, such as, oh, reference to quality trials. If such trials and results existed, then the British Chiropractors Association wouldn’t have lost the celebrated case against Simon Singh in which Simon was sued for referring to chiropractic treatment as ‘bogus’. The BCA proferred a range of studies as evidence, but none stood up to scrutiny. So, Australian Chiropractors Association, let’s see the studies ….
And today I also read an article entitled EU quells buzz on royal jelly, in which a body called the European Food Safety Authority has sunk the boot into a whole range of health claims of one sort or another. In fact they’ve gone further than just safety, but have assessed products for efficacy. It appears that the EU approved regulations in May 2006 to ensure that nutrition and health claims appearing on food products were scientifically proven. Well done EFSA. Our Therapeutic Goods Administration should take note. Apparently the EFSA has approved only 200 of 2500 health claims made by different products,with many more waiting in the wings. Amongst those products that get the thumbs down are royal jelly and its claim to boost the immune system, green tea and its claim to maintain healthy blood pressure, black tea and its claim to help focus attention, and glucosamine and its claim to improve joint pain and function (no doubt the EFSA finally read this).
Advice: You are leaving the smug zone.
Beware – technology can be scary
This article from the Age’s IT pages got the blood boiling here at rationalbrain, on two counts.
Fristly, it’s the disappointing and perhaps lazy journalism from this otherwise fine paper. Not content with filling their ‘lifestyle’ pages with pop-psychology and pseudo-science, the the ‘IT-Pro’ section is now just being filled with a kind of prepared statement, sourced from some company wanting to get into the paper for PR purposes.
Secondly, we are pushed some nonsense about how people should be able to use computers without having to learn anything. Read the rest of this entry »
Oh Bolty, you’ve done it again
With apologies to the McCain people. At least their product had some utility in society, unlike the doltish drivel churned out by Andrew Bolt. When Bolt meets climate change, the nonsense just seems to flow. I refer to this recent article, which I just happened to see while at my aunt’s house. Try as I might, I couldn’t avert my eyes – damn you Bolt.
This time, he tries very hard to be amusing by using sarcasm, although fails dismally. Rather than coming off as clever, he once again shows either:
a. His complete and utter lack of understanding of climate change, or,
b. Willful disregard of the facts in order to churn out more pointless column-inches.
The source of his failed attempt at humour is that all the rain and flooding around the country is another nail in the coffin of climate change. To make his point, he dredges up irrelevant quotes from people who talked up the drought a couple of years back. I’m not even going to quote from the article, because I couldn’t find anything worth directly commenting upon.
Andrew. How can I say this in terms you will understand? Let me try.
GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT THE SAME AS CLIMATE CHANGE. THE FORMER IS THE CAUSE, THE LATTER IS THE RESULT.
GLOBAL WARMING IS NOW AN INCONTROVERTIBLE FACT – I DON’T EVEN ASK YOU TO ACCEPT THAT IT IS MAN-MADE, EVEN THOUGH THIS ALSO BEYOND DISPUTE.
CLIMATE CHANGE WILL VARY ON DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE GLOBE – THIS MEANS THE POSSIBILITY OF MORE DROUGHTS AND MORE FLOODS.
ANECDOTAL STORIES BASED ON A HANDFUL OF OBSERVATIONS CANNOT BE USED TO PROVE OR DISPROVE THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE – LONGER TERM OBSERVATIONS ARE REQUIRED.
So, what is it about these primary-school level ideas that so challenge you Andrew?
You have in the past accused climate researchers for having less than pure motives. Well, it seems that you are willing to fill newspapers with this sort of pointless and misleading content for money alone, since you could not possibly be so ill-informed.
Could you?
rationalbrain 