Determinism: Delusions and The Hive

Some painter named Raoul Martinez doesn’t want to be held responsible for his choices and actions.  He lays out the standard case for determinism in one of those slick little youtube infomercials:

What’s interesting to note about this form of scientism is how it supports my contention that determinism will eventually become part of social justice atheism. 

Continue reading

Advertisements
Posted in free will, Gnutopia, Scientism | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Postmodernists Give Us a New Sexual Identity

So it looks like this story was not a hoax, as there are people who think they have romantic and sexual relationships with inanimate objects.  It’s supposed to be called Objectum Sexuality.

Let’s have a closer look from some of the descriptions on Quora:

According to Wikipedia, “is a pronounced emotional and often romantic desire towards developing significant relationships with particular inanimate objects. Those individuals with this expressed preference may feel strong feelings of attraction, love, and commitment to certain items or structures of their fixation. For some, sexual or even close emotional relationships with humans are incomprehensible. Some object-sexual individuals also often believe in animism, and sense reciprocation based on the belief that objects have souls, intelligence, feelings, and are able to communicate. Contrary to sexual fetishism, the object to an OS person is viewed as their partner and not as a means to an end to enhance a human sexual relationship.”

Wow.  So this would be like taking a guy with a shoe fetish and pushing it to the extreme where he has relationships with the shoes themselves, thinking the shoes are expressing emotions and desires for him.

To maintain this illusion, they embrace an atheistic version of religion – animism.

Here’s how one Objectum Sexual describes herself:

One respondent said, “We are not freaks, nor are we fetishists. Our lovers are living beings that communicate, and love us back.”

The divorce from objective reality is so complete that this person actually believes something like a toaster communicates to her and loves her back.  It’s existing in a world of pure subjectivity, where feelings and imagination become the sole source of truth.

Continue reading

Posted in post-modernism | Tagged | 2 Comments

Goldilocks and Evidence for Christian Theism

Let me provide what I consider to be a significant piece of evidence for the truth of Christian theism.

It all begins with the Goldilocks Principle.  Wikipedia describes it as follows:

The Goldilocks principle is named by analogy to the children’s story, The Three Bears, in which a little girl named Goldilocks tastes three different bowls of porridge, and she finds that she prefers porridge which is neither too hot nor too cold, but has just the right temperature.[1] Since the children’s story is well known across cultures, the concept of “just the right amount” is easily understood and is easily applied to a wide range of disciplines, including developmental psychology, biology,[2] economics and engineering.

What fascinates me is how well the Goldilocks principle describes life.  Many are probably familiar with the use of the principle to detect other planets that could possibly support life:

In astrobiology, the Goldilocks zone refers to the habitable zone around a star. The Rare Earth Hypothesis uses the Goldilocks principle in the argument that a planet must neither be too far away from, nor too close to a star and galactic center to support life, while either extreme would result in a planet incapable of supporting life.   Such a planet is colloquially called a “Goldilocks Planet”.

Yet what is often overlooked is that Life itself is built around the principle.  In physiology, the central concept is something known as homeostasis.  The dictionary defines it as follows:

the tendency of a system, especially the physiological system of higher animals, to maintain internal stability, owing to the coordinated response of its parts to any situation or stimulus that would tend to disturb its normal condition or function.

The ability or tendency of an organism or a cell to maintain internal equilibrium by adjusting its physiological processes.

Wikipedia defines it as:

Homeostasis is the property of a system within an organism in which a variable, such as the concentration of a substance in solution, is actively regulated to remain very nearly constant.[1] Examples of homeostasis include the regulation of body temperature, the pH of extracellular fluid, or the concentrations of sodium, potassium and calcium ions, as well as that of glucose in the blood plasma, despite changes in the environment, diet, or level of activity. Each of these variables is controlled by a separate regulator or homeostatic mechanism, which, together, maintain life.

Now note this – homeostasis, which is near the very essence of life, is basically the Goldilocks Principle.  Think of it this way – you don’t want your blood pressure to be too high.  But you also don’t want it to be too low.  The body is built to correct for each extreme.  The same would true for just about every aspect of your body.  Blood sugar?  Not too high and not too low.  Heart rate?  Not too high and not too low.  White blood cell count?  Not too high and not too low.  On and on it goes.  And it even extends into the very workings of your cells.  For example, there are rather clever mechanisms within your cells to ensure that the intracellular iron levels are not too high (which would generate toxic free radicals) but not too low (which would disable important metabolic enzymes).

In fact, a violation of the Goldilocks principle is typically linked to disease.  Eat too much and experience obesity.  Eat too little and experience malnutrition.  Put too much stress on a joint and watch it tear.  Put too little stress on a joint and watch it atrophy.  And when something goes wrong in the body?  It’s typically because the Goldilocks  principle has been disabled somewhere.  Too much thyroid hormone?  It could be Graves Disease.  Too little thyroid hormone?  Could be a goiter.

What I am pointing out here is not controversial; it is well known that homeostasis is a defining feature of life.  All I am adding is that homeostasis is essentially the same as the Goldilocks principle.

What does Christian theism have to do with any of this?

Continue reading

Posted in Christianity, evidence, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 37 Comments

Woman wants to marry light fixture

 

That gender spectrum continues to expand:

A British woman plans to marry a chandelier she bought online — and admits she’s hooked on “kisses and cuddles” with the dusty antique.

Amanda Liberty, 33, isn’t fazed by the whopping 57 year age gap between her and the tarnished light fitting, who she has dubbed “Lumiere.”

Speaking of her wife-to-be, who she spent over $500 shipping over from Europe in 2016, she said: “As soon as I saw Lumiere on eBay, I knew immediately that she was the one for me and it was love at first sight.”

…..

“I couldn’t stop thinking about her and how beautiful she was — she has such a beautiful shape and I could feel really amazing energy coming from her.”

….

As an Objectum Sexual, someone who is sexually attracted to inanimate objects, all sorts of bits and bobs have caught her eye.

My first instinct is that this is some type of attention-seeking hoax.  But if not, and this person truly has romantic feelings for a chandelier, then I would have to conclude she is mentally ill.  This doesn’t mean she should be forced to seek out treatment.  But it does mean I am under no rational obligation to treat her illness as something that is normal.

Is someone like Amanda Liberty supposed to be evidence of the “gender spectrum?”  If so, that’s the type of evidence that would call the reality of the whole “gender spectrum” into question.

Posted in post-modernism | Tagged | 15 Comments

What is Secular Privilege? Here are 10 Everyday Examples

When trying to better understand what white privilege is supposed to be, I discovered a series of articles that help by providing concrete examples, such as What Is White Privilege? Here Are 9 Everyday Examples by Suzannah Weiss.   As I was reading through these, it occurred to me that the social justice movement has been suspiciously silent about a another form of privilege that may be just as extensive  – secular privilege.

Let me use the first seven examples of white privilege  from the Weiss article to show they could just as well represent examples of secular privilege (it would help to read that article before this one).   I’ll start by again quoting Weiss, with a few word changes, and quote her examples with the appropriate word changes.   I will then add three more examples of my own.

Let’s begin.

Continue reading

Posted in Secularism, Social Justice, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 16 Comments

Defining a Determinist

A determinist is someone who thinks people should not hold him morally responsible for his actions.

I see…..

Wonder why that is? 😉

Posted in free will, Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments

Atheist Activists Mourn Murderer’s Death

Another atheist activist has committed murder.  This time it’s Scott Smith, an activist who seemed to play a significant role in the atheist activist community:  he co-hosted the “Recovering from Religion” podcast and was active with the Military Association of Atheists & Freethinkers.

I wasn’t going to comment on this because anti-religious bigotry didn’t play a role in the murder.  Smith murdered his own wife.  Also, I did not want to stoop as low as The Friendly Atheist blog.  If Smith had been a Christian pastor who murdered his wife for wanting to divorce him, we can be sure The Friendly Atheist blog would be using it as a lesson about religion.  And I surely don’t want to give the impression that I somehow think Smith’s atheism was behind the murder.

What changed my mind was the early reaction of the internet atheist community.  For the most part, they behaved as if some type of unfortunate accident killed Smith along his wife and were actually mourning his death.

Before looking at their reaction, let’s be clear (as we can) about what happened.  Smith’s wife, Jennifer, wanted to divorce him.  So he murdered her.  He did this cowardly act when his children were not home.  So not only did he murder his wife, he took his son and daughters’ mother away and has thus undoubtedly poisoned their lives with deep depression and anxiety from now on.

Yet many in the internet atheist community seem oblivious to the horrific nature of this senseless murder.

Continue reading

Posted in atheist activism, Uncategorized | Tagged | 3 Comments

Wilfrid Laurier University Admits Wrongdoing

Yesterday I pointed out that faculty and administrators at Wilfrid Laurier University were engaged in an unethical abuse of power.   Since this behavior became widely known, thanks to the student wisely taping her interrogation, the University has been forced to “apologize” in a desperate face-saving manuever.  I’m cynical about the “apology” because it does not have the ring of sincerity nor a willingness to fully acknowledge the unethical dimension of the meeting.

According to this report:

“Through the media, we have now had the opportunity to hear the full recording of the meeting that took place at Wilfrid Laurier University,” says the letter from President and Vice-Chancellor Deborah MacLatchy.

“After listening to this recording, an apology is in order. The conversation I heard does not reflect the values and practices to which Laurier aspires. I am sorry it occurred in the way that it did and I regret the impact it had on Lindsay Shepherd.”

I find this statement to be dishonest.  If the conversation does not reflect the values and practices of  Wilfrid Laurier University, explain how it happened.  Keep in mind that this was a meeting that not only involved Nathan Rambukkana, but also involved Herbert Pimlott, a tenured professor and Adria Joel, manager of Gendered Violence Prevention and Support at the school.  How can three such educated professionals just stumble into something that violated the values and practices of  Wilfrid Laurier University?  And how is it that throughout the entire meeting, not one of them seems to be slightly aware that they are engaged in activity that violates the values and practices of Wilfrid Laurier University?  It looks to me like the very reason Rambukkana, Pimlott, and Joel felt so at ease playing the roles of interrogators is that this is indeed something that fits well into the values and practices of Wilfrid Laurier University.

If this is not the case, then there is another problem.  That two professors and an administrator felt so comfortable violating the principles and values of their own university indicates the University has a serious problem with its faculty and administration. Will they be punished?  The apology certainly does not indicate anything other than the President trying to treat this incident as some type of unfortunate, freak anomaly.

Rambukkana also comes across as a very dishonest person in his face-saving “apology.”
Continue reading

Posted in academia, activism, post-modernism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 6 Comments

More Postmodern Authoritarianism

We have yet more evidence for the authoritarian nature of today’s social justice activists

A Canadian teaching assistant was reprimanded by her professor for showing students a video featuring University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan Peterson.

According to The National Post, Wilfrid Laurier University educator Lindsay Shepherd was branded as “transphobic” and scolded by her supervising professor, Nathan Rambukkana, for showing the video, which he compared to “neutrally playing a speech by Hitler.”

Shepherd, who is currently a graduate student at the Waterloo, Ontario school, reportedly played a video of a debate between Peterson and University of Toronto Sexual Diversity Studies program lecturer Nicholas Matte.

Following the event, Shepherd was told that simply showing the clip to the “Canadian Communication in Context” class implied that she was “legitimizing” Peterson’s position on genderless pronouns, and that at least one student had complained that the video created a “toxic climate” in the classroom.

[…]

Last week, Shepherd was reportedly made to attend a meeting with her supervisor; the head of the Gendered Violence Prevention and Support program, Adria Joel; and program coordinator Herbert Pimlott to discuss concerns that were raised by one or more students who claimed that the lecturer created “a toxic climate.”

If you’d like to listen to Rambukkana, Joel, and Pimlott tag- team and bully this young graduate to the point of tears, then I encourage you to go here and listen to an excerpt from a secret recording of this “meeting.”

Continue reading

Posted in activism, secular values, Social Justice, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 5 Comments

Two plus two does not equal five

Here’s a story of a guy who calls himself Ja Du.  He believes he is both a woman and a 636461680217152823-transracialFilipino.  He is transgender and transracial.  If he wants to believe that, fine.  The problem arises when he and others demand that I too believe that.  Or, at the very least, “go along” with it.  Those who make those demands try to intimidate others by labeling those who don’t play along as “transphobes,” “bigots,” and “haters.”

Yet the reason some of us don’t want to play along is very simple.  It has nothing to do with transphobia, bigotry, and hate.  It is all about a respect for the truth.  We don’t want to agree that Ja Du is a Filipino woman for the exact same reason we don’t want to agree that 2 + 2 =5.  At some point, you have to draw a line in the sand.  For truth’s sake.

As Orwell wrote:

In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable – what then?

Posted in post-modernism, secular values, Social Justice, truth, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments