Author: Ophelia Benson

  • John Lewis: McCain is Sowing Seeds of Hatred

    Lewis’s comments follow widely reported outbursts of anger against Obama at McCain campaign events.

  • Riots in Acre

    Peres said ‘there are several religions in Israel, there is only one law and one police.’

  • Andrew Brown on Libraries

    Under the pretence of abolishing elitism, you actually entrench it in the cruellest way.

  • Mill refuses

    On page 301 of C S Lewis and the Search for Rational Religion John Beversluis has a lovely passage from Mill. At the end Mill gives what I have long thought of as the Huck Finn response, but Huck seems to have derived it from Mill, so I will attribute it to Mill in future.

    From Mill’s Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy:

    ‘If in ascribing goodness to God I do not mean what I mean by goodness; if I do not mean the goodness of which I have some knowledge, but an incomprehensible attribute of an incomprehensible substance, which for aught I know may be a totally different quality from that which I love and venerate – and even must, if Mr. Mansel is to be believed, be in some important particulars opposed to this — what do I mean by calling it goodness? and what reason have I for venerating it? If I know nothing about what the attribute is, I cannot tell that it is a proper object of veneration. To say that God’s goodness may be different in kind from man’s goodness, what is it but saying, with a slight change of phraseology, that God may possibly not be good? To assert in words what we do not think in meaning, is as suitable a definition as can be given of a moral falsehood. Besides, suppose that certain unknown attributes are ascribed to the Deity in a religion the external evidences of which are so conclusive to my mind, as effectually to convince me that it comes from God. Unless I believe God to possess the same moral attributes which I find, in however inferior a degree, in a good man, what ground of assurance have I of God’s veracity? All trust in a Revelation presupposes a conviction that God’s attributes are the same, in all but degree, with the best human attributes. If, instead of the “glad tidings” that there exists a Being in whom all the excellences which the highest human mind can conceive, exist in a degree inconceivable to us, I am informed that the world is ruled by a being whose attributes are infinite, but what they are we cannot learn, nor what are the principles of his government, except that “the highest human morality which we are capable of conceiving” does not sanction them.; convince me of it, and I will bear my fate as I may. But when I am told that I must believe this, and at the same time call this being by the names which express and affirm the highest human morality, I say in plain terms that I will not. Whatever power such a being may have over me, there is one thing which he shall not do: he shall not compel me to worship him. I will call no being good, who is not what I mean when I apply that epithet to my fellow-creatures; and if such a being can sentence me to hell for not so calling him, to hell I will go.’

    That is (surely) the only honourable position to take. We should not call any being good, who is not what we mean when we apply that epithet to our fellow humans. If we do we simply risk approving tyranny and cosmic sadism. We should not risk that.

  • David gets jiggy

    I read a funny story in II Samuel 6 today. (I was reading about what a shit god can be. There’s this bit in II Samuel 6 where David and some friends are transporting the ark of the covenant somewhere in a cart, and Uzzah put his hand on the ark to steady it because the cart was shaking – so god killed him. That makes a lot of sense – Uzzah tries to help and god kills him for it. Nice guy. David gets cold feet then and puts the ark in storage, not wanting to get smited, then he runs some experiments and confirms that god helps people who have the ark [apart from Uzzah, but that’s not explained] and hurts those who don’t [reason not explained] so David is happy again and throws a party.) David dances in his underpants in front of the ark and Samuel’s daughter Michal sees him from a window and disdains him in her heart. And she tells him so. ‘Some king you are,’ she says. ‘You danced in your underpants in front of your servants’ girlfriends. What a schmuck.’ David says ‘God likes me better than he likes your father so ha.’ And Michal never had any children, so that (it is implied) was God’s ha.

  • Ockhamism

    I’m writing a review of C S Lewis and the Search for Rational Religion by John Beversluis. It’s a gripping read, at least if you’re interested in argument and belief and arguments for belief in god and the problem of evil and theistic epistemology and the difference between rhetoric and argument. Beversluis shows carefully and in detail what is wrong with Lewis’s various claims. It’s a gripping read if you’re interested in reasons for believing things, and if you’re not interested in that, you ought to be; everyone ought to be.

    The most gripping chapter, in my view, is chapter 10, ‘C S Lewis’s Crisis of Faith.’ Beversluis argues (and shows, I think) that in his despair after his wife’s death Lewis (without admitting it) gave up his Platonist view of morality – that good is prior to god and good because it is good, not because god loves it – and was stuck with the Ockhamist view that the good is whatever god damn well says it is, no matter how horrible we think it is.

    Beversluis points out (p. 291) that the Ockhamist view is philosophically untenable but also more compatible with the biblical God than the Platonist view is. There are a few people in the bible, like Job, who question god’s goodness from a moral point of view, but they’re ‘glaring exceptions to the standing rule that God is to be obeyed no matter what – that is, no matter how flagrantly his commands violate moral rules including the Ten Commandments.’ He cites some nasty examples (God stops Abraham from killing Isaac, but he doesn’t stop Jephthah from killing his daughter). Then he points out (p 292) that the Ockhamist god, ‘who is not good “in our sense,” is the god of ‘the vast majority of orthodox Christians, most of whom have never heard of the Platonist alternative and, when told about it, typically reject it out of hand. Orthodox Christians unhesitatingly believe that obedience to God is absolute and unconditional – that he is to be obeyed simply and solely because he is God.’

    This is an interesting and deeply depressing thought.

  • Are You Right-on Enough to Teach Here?

    Which of your achievements in the area of equity for (____) gives you the most satisfaction?

  • Monbiot on Wilson on Booker on Asbestos

    ‘Since 2002, [Booker] has published 38 articles on this topic, and every one of them is wrong.’

  • Steven Poole on ‘Don’t Get Fooled Again’

    The author hopes to give us the tools to avoid being fooled by ‘pseudo-news’ and pseudo-experts.

  • Tom Clark on ‘Misrepresenting Naturalism’

    Naturalism is perfectly supportive of moral responsibility, human flourishing and an open, democratic society.

  • Times Higher on Academic Blogging

    Many philosophers seem quite happy to post early drafts of their research papers online.

  • Reiki “cannot do harm” – or can it?

    What would it be like to have world-class athletic ability, and to spend years of intensive training honing that ability, only to suddenly lose it all in the instant it takes your physician to utter a few words?

    Hayden Roulston, a professional cyclist from New Zealand, has experienced this. After several seasons competing for the top-flight professional teams Cofidis and United States Postal Service, Roulston was diagnosed with arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia (ARVD), a rare and incurable heart disease known to cause sudden death in athletes. Notably, the prognosis is good for ARVD patients who refrain from exercise early in the course of the disease, which is why medical experts advise ARVD patients that they “should not do vigorous exercise.”[1]

    Exercise simply does not get more vigorous than professional cycling. World-class racers commonly compete in six-hour nonstop events that cover over 150 miles, and completing six or seven of these events in a week is not unusual. Cyclists can maintain heart rates above 150 bpm for hours at a time, and during the most intense periods of a race they will push their heart rates to exceed 190 bpm, close to physiological limits, for a chance to win. Clearly, professional cycling and ARVD are incompatible, and so, following his diagnosis, Roulston reluctantly retired from professional cycling in 2006.[2] He was only 25 years of age and, under normal circumstances, could have expected the best years of his career to be ahead of him.

    Not long after this, Roulston had a chance encounter in a pub[3] with a woman who claimed to practice “reiki”, an alternative medicine approach “based on the idea that there is a universal (or source) energy that supports the body’s innate healing abilities.” In reiki,

    the client lies down or sits comfortably, fully clothed. The practitioner’s hands are placed lightly on or just above the client’s body, palms down, using a series of 12 to 15 different hand positions. Each position is held for about 2 to 5 minutes, or until the practitioner feels that the flow of energy—experienced as sensations such as heat or tingling in the hands—has slowed or stopped… typically, the practitioner delivers at least four sessions of 30 to 90 minutes each.[4]

    The woman convinced Roulston that by doing this, she could cure his ARVD. Two months later, Roulston won New Zealand’s national road racing championship. Then, this summer, he capped his comeback when he took silver and bronze medals in cycling’s demanding pursuit events at the Beijing Olympics. “Reiki is the be-all and end-all for me,” says Roulston. It [ARVD] doesn’t even enter my mind now.”[5]

    This sequence of events raises a question. If Roulston’s condition was so easily cured by some hand positions that channel universal healing energy, why did Roulston have to meet the supposed savior of his career in a pub? Why didn’t his physicians prescribe reiki? One possibility, of course, is that they had never heard of reiki at all, and so could not have had any medical opinion, pro or con, regarding the practice. Or, more likely, they may have known enough about reiki to know that it has no medical effects whatsoever,[5] such that prescribing it to a patient with a potentially fatal disease would be irresponsible, dangerous, and a clear violation of medical ethics. Perhaps they went even further and recognized that reiki has no medical effects because the “universal energy” on which it is based cannot possibly exist, for if it did, it would have to do so in contradiction of the conservation of mass-energy principle, and that is as well supported by scientific evidence as practically any principle that we know.[6]

    So if reiki does not work – indeed, cannot work – how has Roulston managed to return to the top of his sport without a fatal result? Perhaps he was misdiagnosed, and never actually had ARVD. Or, possibly, Roulston did have ARVD previously, but has since experienced a spontaneous remission that is the result of natural bodily processes. Both of these possibilities are extremely unlikely given what we know about ARVD, but note that each of these is much more likely than the possibility that a person he met at the pub is in possession of magical curative knowledge and procedures that have been entirely missed by medical science. Ominously, though, the most likely explanation of all is that Roulston still has ARVD, but that it has not interacted with his strenuous training and competition to kill him. Yet.

    Proponents of reiki are quick to assert that it “cannot do harm.”[7] (Apparently the life force energy on which it is based, which is otherwise so willing to be called on and directed by reiki practitioners, somehow knows when it is being summoned to do evil, and refuses.) But what if undergoing reiki causes you to be deluded? What if it blinds you to medical evidence? What if it causes you to ignore sound medical advice such that you return to the most demanding aerobic sport in the world, despite the fact that doing so is likely to cause heart failure and sudden death?

    What if reiki, because it is nonsense, is only capable of doing harm?

    Roulston is contracted to race alongside the current Tour de France champion as a member of the newly formed Cervelo Test Team in 2009.[8]

    Christopher A. Moyer is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at University of Wisconsin-Stout, and a former competitive cyclist.

    References

    [1] Johns Hopkins Medicine. (2008). Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia: Q & A. (2008). Retrieved October 5, 2008.

    [2] Roulston retires for health reasons. (2006, August 31). Retrieved October 5, 2008.

    [3] Olympics: Hayden Roulston lone rider. Sunday Star Times. (2008, July 27). Retrieved October 5, 2008.

    [4] National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. (2008, July). Reiki: An introduction. Retrieved October 5, 2008.

    [5] Jarvis, W. T. (1999). Reiki. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from National Council Against Health Fraud Web site.

    [6] Mook, D. (2004). Classic experiments in psychology. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

    [7] Allison, J. (2008). My journey with reiki healing. Retrieved October 5, 2008.

    [8] Hayden Roulston signs with Team Cervelo.
    (2008, October 2). Retrieved October 5, 2008.

  • Christians, Buddhist ‘Offended’ by Cartoon

    Cartoon seen as mockery of Pentecostals. (And Palin, and McCain, and God.)

  • Jesus and Mo Solve the Problem of Evil

    Free will; appreciation; character formation; mystery. My shout.

  • Stephen Law’s ‘The God Delusion’ Book Club

    Dawkins marshals empirical work on the evolutionary roots of morality to defend godless morality.

  • Anthony Appiah at Philosophy Bites

    One on experiments in ethics, another on cosmopolitanism.

  • Responses to Sam Fleischacker’s Series

    ‘The alternative to ethnic nationalism is civic nationalism and a regime of equal rights for all citizens.’

  • Maclean’s Wins ‘Hate Speech’ Case

    BC rights tribunal dismissed the case as did Ontario and Canadian HRC.

  • Religion v Science Round 4,857

    Strident secularists, fanatical fundamentalists, Dawkins, Beattie, Reiss, Baggini, etc.

  • Rolling Stone on the Make-believe Maverick

    ‘McCain has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to taking whatever position will advance his own career.’