What is truth?

What is truth? Big question, right? It's something philosophers have been pondering for as long as there have been philosophers pondering. I'm not going to pretend to be able to answer it here but I would like to list a few things that truth is not. Belief is not truth. Faith is not truth. Desire is not truth. Hope is not truth. Vague prophecy is not truth. The other day a believer in a religion forum conversation I was a part of told me that he hopes that some day I learn the "truth" and get saved. I am always wary when a word is willfully and consistently misused. There is an Orwellian doublespeak creepiness about the mis-use of the word "truth" by believers that is disturbing to me whenever I hear it. People often speak of a personal truth and I suppose that concept has some validity, but all too often that personal revelation, which ends up being called truth, is applied to humanity as a whole. In other words, "My truth must be your truth". That is a very myopic viewpoint and one thing about belief in God that has always rubbed me the wrong way. That same believer more recently posted that because he knows the truth no one will ever be able to change his mind or shake his faith. He is mistaken if that's what he thinks the non-believers are trying to do by arguing against certainty. Why would I want to take away from him his life's philosophy that he has worked so hard to discover? Conversely, why would he want to deny me mine? As an atheist all I have ever wanted from believers is respect. Respect for my doubts. Respect for my journey. Respect for MY personal "truth". Does belief rule out respect and understanding for other paths of life? I don't think so but if that is the case, that is just one more reason that I would prefer to hold on to my doubts.

Continue ReadingWhat is truth?

Paul Kurtz criticizes fundamentalist atheists

Paul Kurtz is not one of the "new atheists,"but he is a first-rate skeptic, having published 50 books on various topics, many of them relating to religion and skepticism. I wrote a rather detailed post about him last month. Kurtz is founder and chair emeritus of the Center for Inquiry. In this 30-minute CFI interview with DJ Grothe, Kurtz expressed that he is not "an atheist," and that one can be a secular humanist without being in "atheist." Kurtz describes himself as a "non-theist," an "agnostic," and a "skeptic." He stresses that people should define themselves by what they do believe, yet to call oneself an atheist is to attempt to define oneself by what one does not believe. He mentioned that while 3% of Americans are atheists, almost 9% of Americans are agnostic, while yet others are skeptical or "religiously indifferent." Kurtz indicates that as a skeptic, he is always willing to look at the evidence, and this is an important part of who he is. He also believes we should all be grounded by a genuine concern for fellow humans. In fact, he suggested that he's thinking about abandoning the term "secular humanism," and replacing it with "empathic humanism." Good will toward others should be the starting point of any ethical system. We should be focusing our efforts on affirming life, and achieving social justice. Kurtz points out that there are such things as "fundamentalist atheists," who he describes as "embittered atheists," people who were "bruised" by religion. These people "bore me now." He is tired of "nasty, in-your-face atheists." These are people who spend too much energy rejecting mythologies of other people. They often engage in intolerant ridicule that borders on "pornographic." According to Kurtz, we can disagree with each other, but we must always do so respectfully. To the extent that we engage in sharp parody and prejudice, this will not further our goals. In fact, Kurtz expressed that he was appalled that CFI supported "blasphemy day." This amounts to "ridiculing" many sincere people. It is not a civilized mode of discussion. Kurtz went out of his way to acknowledge that he had many friends who were practicing members of various religious faiths. He believes in engaging people of other faiths with respectful and reasoned dialogue. "We don't want to be religious bigots."

Continue ReadingPaul Kurtz criticizes fundamentalist atheists

Shiite law and stem cell advances in Iran

While many Americans continue to try to halt embryonic stem cell research, Iranian scientists are forging ahead with this cell research with the aim of curing people suffering from real life medical conditions, especially military veterans who have suffered disabling spinal cord injuries. That is the issue brought front and center by this episode of Frontline. In the Shiite view, the soul enters the embryo only once it is viable--only after viability is can the organism growing in utero be considered a "human being." In the U.S., many of us continue to treat stem cells as though they are harvested from organisms that are fully human, even though these embryos lack the biological equipment necessary for any semblance of sentience. As best I can understand the dispute, many of those in the U.S. who oppose embryonic stem cell research consider an embryo to be fully human even though it has merely the potential to someday become a thinking human being. They focus on the potential rather than sentience--on what will someday be rather than what is. The Iranians, in focusing on viability, illustrate that two versions of religious practices (conservative Muslims and conservative Christians) that both believe in supernatural "souls" and are both conservative look at the exact same thing (embryos) and come to opposite conclusions.

Continue ReadingShiite law and stem cell advances in Iran

Internet porn and sexual irresponsibility

Remember the old argument that porn encourages rape? I've always been suspicious. It would seem that men who relieve their sexual frustrations in private would be less likely to harass real life women. I've sometimes wondered, then, whether sexual assaults have decreased since Internet porn has become more readily available. Here are some rather startling statistics, and they suggest that many measures of sexual irresponsibility have decreased with the increased availability of Internet porn. This includes a decrease in sexually transmitted infections, teen sex, divorce, and rape (since 1995, rape has decreased by 44 percent). This article at Psychology Today concludes: "If Internet porn affects society, oddly enough, it looks beneficial. Perhaps mental health professionals should encourage men to view it."

Continue ReadingInternet porn and sexual irresponsibility