When We do “IT,” It’s ok …

01 Sunday Nov 2015

Posted by in Anonymous, Critical Thinking, Ethics, Objective Morality

≈ 9 Comments

Tags

, , ,

So, I just read how the hacker “group” Anonymous has been publicly outing members of the KKK. This has been variously accompanied by triumphalist celebrations by some people on the political Left. “Yay … justice … woo-hoo …”

I find such behavior singularly disgusting, both the outing and the celebration of it. When homosexuals are outed against their will – sometimes with devastating consequences – this is an intolerable violation of those persons’ privacy and lives. But when “we” do something similar, it is “justice”! When workers and protectors at a Planned Parenthood clinic have their faces, their families, their home addresses plastered all over the internet, this is a violent attack on their persons and safety. But when “we” do it, it is “justice”. Because, “obviously,” “we” are “good” guys, and “they” are “bad” people.Mlk-in-birmingham-jail

How is it that the question of right or wrong is exhausted by answering whether or not we are the one’s doing it? The question is obviously rhetorical, and the answer is, “obviously, it is not.”

There are numerous examples of nominally wrong actions being done for right reasons such that those reasons suffice to (arguably, at least) justify those actions. To kill another person is wrong, but if that killing occurred in the course of self-defense or the protection of innocent people, it will generally be viewed as a justifiable homicide. Violating the law is typically viewed as wrong, but when the law itself is unjust and immoral, then violating that law can itself become a moral duty. This is the leverage I wish to apply to the actions of Anonymous toward the KKK. My instrument of choice here is one of the most tightly reasoned moral arguments of the last century: Dr. King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Continue reading →

Nuts and Dolts

31 Saturday Oct 2015

Posted by in Global warming, Logic, Philosophy of Science, Politics

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , ,

So the other day, I made the error of reading the comments section on a post relating to climate change denial manifested by a certain prominent national politician. One individual complained about the (accurate and entirely valid) use of the word “denier” in reference to this politician. The commenter went on to state something to the effect that, “Scientists generally cheerfully embrace differing opinions.” (I have altered the exact wording so as to eliminate any identifiable markers that might lead back to the person and the comment.)Dunce-cap

Now, myself, I find that I tend to look much less stupid than I otherwise might if I resist tossing about terms and concepts in public of which I lack even the barest scintilla of understanding. This is a rule I heartily wish more people would adopt, the above mentioned commenter being a prime example. Anyone with even the littlest, little notion about what science is and how it works – either logically as methodology, or sociologically as practice, to say nothing of both – will instantly recognize such a statement as the childishly fatuous twaddle it obviously happens to be. Yet the doe-eyed naïf who spewed this foolishness was almost certainly being sincere. This got me thinking again about the lunacy that is currently swallowing the federal House of Representatives, and the recent elevation of Paul Ryan to the position of Speaker. You see, the two issues are connected. Continue reading →

Carry a Big Stick

29 Thursday Oct 2015

Posted by in Bullying, Critical Thinking, SLAPP

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, ,

A favorite resort of cowards and bullies is the argumentum ad baculum, the argument “from the stick.” It is the use of force or violence – whether physical, psychological, sociological, financial (which is really a part of the sociological), or emotional – to silence others who would otherwise disagree with their positions. Such persons, unable to present a genuinely reasoned case, decide that the vacuum due to the lack of cogency in their claims is to be compensated for with the blunt force trauma they are prepared to inflict. Sometimes “blunt force trauma” is not a metaphor. Just a few days ago, some high-minded “Christians” literally beat their own 19-year-old son to death, so as to properly impress upon him the love of the sweet baby Jesus. Such behavior is not normal, of course, even amongst the viciously right-wing authoritarians in American Christianity today who, regardless of their numbers, garner so much press. But it is also worth remembering that the reason these people are not as bad as, say, ISIL, has nothing to do with the “love” in their hearts, and everything to do with the fact that hard-won secular law stands between them and the kinds of atrocities they’ve committed in the past, and would still be committing if they could get away with it. (Recall Nietzsche’s aphorism: “If the Christians still loved us, they’d still burn us.”)Caveman

As I noted in a previous post regarding approaches to religion, “In communities that valorize liberal approaches, the experiential element will be directed toward personal growth and spirituality. In conservative communities, experience will be canalized into orthodoxy and conformity.” The latter, canalizing method must – almost, if not simply, by necessity – appeal to other methods than reason in order to establish such conformity. Reason unleashed invariably follows the multitudinous fibers of possibilities not yet described or even imagined, decrying along the way the permissions of others. This might lead to community, but it will not be the foundation of conformity. Continue reading →

God o’ The Gaps (part 2)

20 Tuesday Oct 2015

Posted by in Critical Thinking, God, Metaphysics, naturalism

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

, , ,

In the early part of the previous (which is to say, 20th) century, philosophers tried to dodge the difficult question of characterizing the logical structure(s) of explanation by arguing that science was really only about description. This program was a failure of almost laughable proportions. Anyone casting even a casual eye at what science is and how it functions cannot possibly avoid the fact that science aims at explanations. But are scientific explanations the only things that qualify as explanations?God Blame

Let me restate this question using the points and issues raised in part 1: concepts of “God” serve no valid purpose in scientific explanation, but is scientific explanation the only kind that is valid? I have written at length in other posts about the pathetic misdirection that is to be found in certain elements of contemporary science, primarily gravitational cosmology. But this is a failure of science within science; this still begs the question, is science all that there is? Continue reading →

God o’ The Gaps (part 1)

18 Sunday Oct 2015

Posted by in God, Ignorance, naturalism, Philosophy of Science

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

The “God o’ The Gaps” fallacy is an especially pernicious, yet easily dismissible, form of the argumentum ad ignorantiam. It is pernicious because religious dogmatists, with no interest in or capacity for rational thought, swing this fallacy about with the most abysmally childish enthusiasm, like blind persons with a sledge hammer in an empty field, who fancy themselves to be building a tent city. It is easily dismissible because anyone possessed of nothing more exotic than the mere abstract possibility of intelligence can readily see through it, for no more time or effort than it takes to have such infantilism articulated. All that being said, an analysis of the fallacy does invite some reflections upon the character of explanation, a character which the title of this blog ought suggest is a thing of interest at this site.Gap-In-Mountain

This will be a longish argument, so I’ll be breaking it into two parts. In this part, I will discuss the argumentum ad ignorantiam particularly in light of the God o’ The Gaps (which I’ll simply abbreviate “GotG”) variant, and generically mention some of the places it crops up. The argument will show how the concept/idea of God can play no useful role in natural science, even when the GotG fallacy is avoided. In part 2 I’ll turn to what, in many respects, is my primary question: What might the role of “God” in explanation &/or interpretation be? I’ll review (in a crude way) the distinctions between the religious, the theological, and the philosophical uses of the “G” word (although, I’ve already said a bit about this elsewhere.) With that said, let us turn to the argument itself. Continue reading →

Running The Asylum

10 Saturday Oct 2015

Posted by in Authoritarians, Media, Politics

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, ,

As a general rule, there is a reason why the loonies are not allowed, much less encouraged, to run the asylum. It is because they are – oh dear! What’s the word I’m looking for? Oh, yes! – it is because they are INSANE. Evidently the (un)leadership associated with the GOP failed to get that particular memo. And now they, as well as everyone else, are set to reap the whirlwind that their negligence and systematic refusal to engage in even a pretense of governance has now brought down upon us.Cray

Things started coming unhinged in earnest back in the Clinton (that’s Bill’s) administration. The absolutely off-the-leash lunacy that came about because Clinton proposed mild improvements to the structure of health care in this country was unparalleled. That Monica smoked his bone under the Resolute desk – which is presumably made of “hard wood” – was never more than a red herring. Yet there were more than a few infantile ideologues in high elected &/or appointed (think “special prosecutor”) office for whom this matter of no possible interest or consequence loomed as the preservation or loss of the Republic. Kennedy’s exploits with “Mr. Happy” remain matters of Washington legend, yet nobody cared. Clinton has a single “extended conversation” with a willing intern of legal age, and it is the End of the World. This is because the GOP decided that the only way they could win elections was by engaging in overt acts of debasement and prostration to the most egregiously unhinged elements of their own party. Continue reading →

End of Daze

09 Friday Oct 2015

Posted by in Critical Thinking, Politics, Religion

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

So, apparently that eminent theologian and Master political strategist Michelle Bachman is declaring that the United States might be facing utter destruction from the Wrath of God for allowing gay marriages. There’s nothing especially news worthy about ignorant people spewing infantile nonsense. I don't want But Bachman was elected to Congress, and even had serious aspirations for the office of President. In order for this to have occurred, Bachman had to receive significant support from a wide range of the public – people who voted for her, people who volunteered for her, people who donated money to her various campaigns, and so on. How is it that so much support was so eagerly forthcoming so as to create Bachman’s political successes and nourish such high ambitions, especially given how disturbingly limited her cognitive faculties apparently are? Are Americans just stupid for buying in to such staggering infantilism? In particular, what is it about “end of days” cultism that it finds so much appeal to so many Americans? Continue reading →

Gun Ownership as Identity Politics

04 Sunday Oct 2015

Posted by in Authoritarians, Gun Control, Identity Politics, John Dewey

≈ 13 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

(This is a “hot button” topic. If you’ve not commented here in the past, then I encourage you to read my policy on comments and spam before commenting now.)KnottedGun

So, another day, another mass-shooting; ho-hum. The NRA and other gun lobbies will noisily declare – in absolute defiance of all logic and evidence – that if only there were MORE guns, such tragedies would not occur. The staggering costs of gun violence will be dismissed out of hand, even and especially on those vanishingly rare occasions when they are mentioned at all. Meanwhile, gun advocates will brazenly insist – again, in absolute defiance of all logic and evidence – that gun control is incapable of effecting gun violence.

This last piece of nonsense deserves special attention, given that the absence of basic reasoning is so manifestly stark. The claim essentially amounts to insisting that since gun control laws cannot be 100% effective (which is to say, completely eliminate all forms of gun violence), then they can only be completely ineffective and useless. In other words, even if gun control laws only reduced gun violence by 1%, those 330 lives saved each year (since we slaughter over 33,000 annually), simply don’t matter. And let us apply the above “reasoning” to other laws: making murder illegal has not ended crimes of murder; so by the same argument, we should make murder legal. The same approach applies equally to every other law and regulation out there. Continue reading →

28 Days

03 Saturday Oct 2015

Posted by in Facebook, Personal History

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

,

So, 4 weeks ago – 4X7 = 28, the mythological “28 days” – I deactivated my Facebook account. I did so very much on purpose: a great part of what was happening on Facebook was nourishing just and only the worst parts of myself. Not everything about my FB experience was bad, but a few things were irreparably destructive. I’ll have a few things to say about both, although much more about the bad than the good. I’ll finish with a few words, not in the way of explanation or justification, but simply in the way of my own thoroughly dumbfounded phenomenological observation, about why I can’t take my eyes off this train wreck.Trainwreck

But before proceeding, just a quick note about the title. There is a well established fairy tale amongst the “detoxification” professionals – that is, the people whom other people pay so that the first people can be declared “clean” of some addiction or other – that 28 (to 30) days is the magic number for breaking an addiction. It is, of course, complete twaddle. Continue reading →

The Prayer Of A Freeman

24 Thursday Sep 2015

Posted by in Altruism, Ayn Rand, Ethics, John Dewey

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , ,

The Guardian had an article recently about an emerging movement that some are calling “extreme altruism.” Believers in extreme altruism hew to the conclusion that one is morally obligated to give away a very large part of one’s own resources (“earnings” is a term used in the article, but that is a concept particular to a very specific type of economic structure) in an effort to seriously improve the welfare of others. The author gives the example of “Julia”: “Julia believed that because each person was equally valuable, she was not entitled to care more for herself than for anyone else; she believed that she was therefore obliged to spend much of her life working for the benefit of others.” Julia did not just throw her money at random charities; rather she researched groups that appeared to do the most good, spent their funds most efficiently, and used local people rather than their own, foreign aid workers. (It was because of this last that Julia chose not to become such a worker herself for an NGO – locals would know their own needs of their own peoples, as well as understand the cultural settings of those needs, much better than foreign aid workers.)fishing-03

A personal aside is necessary here. An aside that requires a brief visit to that toilet of non-intellectual sociopathic spew that is known as “Ayn Rand.” Continue reading →