11. Letter to a Friend's daughter.
Comments [0]
11. Natural religion.
Gods jumping around redesigning the world every hour
Any rough observation of nature - even that classical one
that we are born, we live, and we die - and thus when
we fully realize that we die, we have to realize that
our living is part of a process, not primarily a part of
a judgement of some abstract principals -
so any observation of nature has to involve some crude
notion of evolution and selection. This is not a commitment
to any very specific theory about genes and evolution, or
the relation of chance and adaptation in evolution, but simply
an awareness that the patterns of speicies that we see
are far too complex to be the product of a personal god.
The popular, if not the theological, Christian notion of God
and its relatives in other religions involves some sense of
an individual making specific individual decisions about
the world. As we see the way species radiate and flourish
or die out, we would have to have a weird image of such
a God rushing and jumping about redesigning the world of species
repainting the picture every day and hour, with no time left
for anything else. Only some simple local but relatively
automatic mechanism could spare this God of such a
comic image. And in some sense such a process of selection
if not self-evident is somehow intuitive.
This has widespread implications.
When I see a tree twisted out of shape by the winds on an
exposed rocky hillside, and compare it to a tree in a sheltered
grove rising straight up, I am not moved to see that comparison
in ethical terms. One tree does not seem to me better that the
other, more good or in a moral sense more successful, than the
other.
Similarly when I look at other species, lizards and ants and wild
mamals. or any of the other oddities of which nature abounds with
their design changing every minute - what a challenge this represents
to a deity. Is the more complex 'better' than that which is simple.
Is there one way to measure complexity?
Is a monkey better than a lizard?
Is a canary better than a snake?
Comments [0]
Keith and Lincoln Steffens
The problem Sarah Palin has, someone just said,
is that she doesn't KNOW what she doesn't know.
Keith Olbermann has delivered two rants ("Comments")
in the last couple of weeks that are truly works of art.
One was on "real" Americans.
The other - on Monday - was on LOVE, the
Califonia ban on gay marriage, and Christianity.
Christian love and the McNamara brothers:
When the McNamara brothers, union leaders,
were put on trial for dynamiting a newspaper
building in Los Angeles in 1911, with Clarence
Darrow as their lawyer, there was at least as much
outrage as at 9/11/2003. Seeing that his case
was in trouble Darrow was interested in a settlement
and Lincoln Steffens offered to rry to get community
and business leaders to support such a settlement.
HE did this successfully - including the notoriously
anti-Union Chandlers of the Los Angeles Times.
Everything was going forward until the Sunday before
the settlement was to be announced. At which point
Christian churches all across the country called for the
death of the McNamara brothers.
Steffens argument to the leaders for accepting the
settlement was the effectiveness of the Christian
'golden rule'. He regarded his effort as an
"experiment"
to see whether the righteous - not just "sinners" could
accept the message of Jesus. "Mercy" (and forgiveness), he
said, "is scientific."
"I read the New Testament to discover the vision
and
plan of Christ. It was astonishing, radical, complete,
but when I went to the churches I did not hear it preached,
and of course the Christians did not practice it. I preached
Christianity and the effect was a shock to the congregations.
I preached in Christ's spirit, too, quietly, literally, with none
of the force with which I had heard Christian ministers
proclaim righteousness and denounce sinners.
My sermons were as loving as the Sermon on the Mount,
for, verily, I believed then that the righteous can be and
must be saved . . . not only the sinners. No use. The regular
members of the Christian churches, thinking they have
Christianity, can no more get it than the righteous, thinking
they are good, can be made good -- for anything. Christianity
will not work with Christians.
But as Jesus learned by hard experience and taught so
clearly,
Christianity does work with sinners. I proved that for myself.
I preached Christianity. Whenever I wanted to get something done
I appealed to sinners for help, and the help came."
(Lincoln Steffens, <em>An Autobiography</em>, page
670.)
I cannot tell the whole story of what happened.
But I can urge
you to read Steffens wonderful chapters, pages 658-689 of his
Autobiography
(your public library? - soon the copyright, hopefully will run out,
and we will be able to read it on the internet, as we should have
long ago. No one is making money on this book.
It should be in the public domain.!!!!!)
Keith makes clear that the stand of the churches on the
Gay Marriage ban was also a failure to understand Jesus'
and other people's message of Love.
Christianity as HATE has got to stop.
Keith's "comment" on this should somehow be sent to
EVERY church and Christian organization, and to such
Christians as are known in the U.S..
Comments [0]
At my age I have come to realize - perhaps the
last 2 months have made everybody realize -
that the best guide to our world is Shakespeare's
world. And that everything that we see that makes
it look like it's not Shakespeare's world is an
illusion.
Also I've been reading the fairly long last stories
of Checkhov that Edmund Wilson organized together
several years ago in an Anchor Book called
_Peasants and other Stories_ . They were written in
1903-1904 just before his death, and are a portrait
of Russion society just before the revolution of 1905,
which Checkhov did not live to see.
The serfs have been emancipated and become, some of
them, businessmen, shopkeepers, engineers - but are still
not accepted socially, and are unsure of their lives.
The factory workers live in "dorms" like animals.
The peasants are still starvingly poor.
And so on.
Comments [0]
I hate "balance" -
When it comes to matters of fact - no matter how
complicated the facts - then there is right and wrong.
There is no "balanced" way to present this, as if there
were 2 equal sides.
Equal time is turning all our reporting into a farce.
Reporters ought to report. What Where When Who How
and not give opinions based on nothing but their spin on
events. Spin, when they are not even qualified to present
Spin, let along expert opinions.
And "experts" should not be paraded in pairs, as if that
made the coverage fair.
Do 2 + 2 make five or four?
Is Obama a Muslim. For a campaign to say this
is a LIE, not a point of vew.
If he says that I am NOT going to raise taxes on
anyone earning less than $250,000 a year, either
he says it or not. Will he do it? What is his intention?
These are different questions but they are lessing confusing
than the lies being put out there.
Comments [0]
In the name of the former and of the latter and of their holo-
caust. Allmen.
Life is a collective fantasy with real landmines and wildflowers, trees
real obligations
real pills
real loneliness and sorrows
real pain
real redwoods (maybe)
real dreams
I am trying to write a blog in which I am able to put the ideas,
the personal observations, reactions to media and events,
beautiful language, music, performances, and other things
that occur to me or that I feel strongly about -
as well information I think is special or useful
and anything else I want to say because my friends have
their own concerns and get tired.
This way I can say these things freely.
Also there will be some special Pages:
some articles of mine on Finnegans Wake
some things relevant to Leo Reisman
Welcome
comments from those interested in what they read
are always welcome. Please don't flame.
fadograph
Comments [0]
Comments [0]