Quote of the Day: Belief in "Belief-in-God"

It is seldom remarked (though often observed in private, I daresay) that many, many people who profess belief in God do not really act the way people who believed in God would act; they act the way people would act who believed in believing in God. That is, they manifestly think that believing in God is—would be—a good thing, a state of mind to be encouraged, by example if possible, so they defend belief-in-God with whatever rhetorical and political tools they can muster. They ask for God's help, but do not risk anything on receiving it, for instance. They thank God for their blessings, but, following the principle that God helps those who help themselves, they proceed with the major decisions of their lives as if they were going it alone.

Those few individuals who clearly do act as if they believed in God, really believed in God, are in striking contrast: the Christian Scientists who opt for divine intervention over medical attention, for instance, or those who give all their goods to one church or another in expectation of the Apocalypse, or those who eagerly seek martyrdom.

Not wanting the contrast to be so stark, the believers in belief-in-God respond with the doctrine that it is a sin (or at least a doctrinal error) to count on God's existence to have any particular effect. This has the nice effect of making the behavior of a believer in belief-in-God and the behavior of a believer in God so similar as to be all but indistinguishable.

Once nothing follows from a belief in God that doesn't equally follow from the presumably weaker creed that it would be good if I believed in God—a doctrine that is readily available to the atheist, after all—religion has been so laundered of content that it is quite possibly consistent with science. Peter de Vries, a genuine believer in God and probably the funniest writer on religion ever, has his hyper-liberal Reverend Mackerel (in his book The Mackerel Plaza) preach the following line: "It is the final proof of God's omnipotence that he need not exist in order to save us."

The Reverend Mackerel's God can co-exist peacefully with science. So can Santa Claus, who need not exist in order to make our yuletide season more jolly.

- Prof. Daniel Dennett, Philosopher of Science,

Interview for Science & Spirit, 2007

Quote of the Day: Birth and Death

"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it."

Mark Twain

By a Single Thread

Hanging on by a single thread at West Head,
comtemplating life and all it's unsavouriness.

Life is short. Far too short. Go do something crazy. Quit your stinking pile of dog poo of a job. Eat something you have never eaten before. Suck the juice out of life. Hang off a cliff. Feel alive.

What ever you do, do not sit at your office blogging inane crap in an inane blog. :-)

Go!!!

Religion: Why it Should Affect Your Vote

Why should you vote for a Christian when you are a Muslim, a Buddhist or a Jew? And why should you vote for a Catholic when you are a Protestant, or a Baptist, or even a Mormon?

I think Scott Adams have pose a good question and provide a great answer to this conundrum. Go and read it in his blog about:

Religion and Politics

I am now an "Atheist"!!

As I said at the outset I'm reluctant to use the word 'atheist' to describe my own unshakable disbelief and that's not because I'm ashamed, afraid or even embarrassed, but simply because it seems so self evidently true to me that there is no God that giving that conviction a special title, somehow dignifies what it denies. After all, we don't have a special word for people who don't believe in ghosts or witches.

- Jonathan Miller, Director & Author,
"A Brief History of Disbelief", 2007

God dammit!! In a feeble attempt to boost my readership levels (from the current zero readers who read this blog, to something even resembling half a reader), I have signed up to Mojoey's Atheist Blogroll and the OUT Campaign Blogroll, both of which is a conglomeration of blogs written by atheists, secularist, brights, agnostics, skeptics, non-theists, humanists, anti-theists and so on.

In the process, I guess I am now "outing" myself as an "atheist", whatever that means.

So what is an atheist anyway? How do we begin to define a group of people who lack the imaginative powers to believe in any form of supernatural agents, playing checkers using our arses as the pieces.

I can't really begin to fathom the idea of atheism, because it is much too broad and varying of a term. Similarly, theistic beliefs are very hard to nail down as well, since no two Christians (or two Muslims, two Jews, two Buddhists, two FSM-ists) of the same denomination would ever believe in exactly the same bucket of religious ideas.

So it is pretty meaningless to say that I am an atheist, not because I am not an atheist, but the labeling of myself as one is pretty pointless to say the least. It doesn't say that anything about me as a person at all.

Still anything and everything to pander for some readership, eh? ;-)

PS. Please have a look at the some of the other blogs on Mojoey's Atheist Blogroll, some of them are quite good.

Quote of the Day: The Right to Free Speech

Why we must protect everyone's right to free speech, especially those whose opinions we disagree with:

'How do I know that I know this, except that I have always been taught this and never heard anything else?'

It is always worth establishing First Principle...

'How can I prove the Earth is round? Am I sure about the Theory of Evolution? I know it is supposed to be true, here's someone who say there's no such thing, it's all Intelligent Design. How sure am I of my own views?'

Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus and the feeling that whatever you think, you're bound to be okay because you're in the safely moral majority.

- Christopher Hitchens, Writer & Journalist,
Debate at Hart House, University of Toronto, 2007

Quote of the Day: Probability and Fame

It's all about luck. The problem with famous people in general is that they actually think they're geniuses. You get famous and you think, 'Yes, of course I should be famous and I've earned it all'. You haven't, you got lucky.

I got lucky, I was in a TV show that got a Thursday night-time slot at 10pm and it was a massive hit, and as a result I get to do movies I want to do.

- George Clooney, Actor, smh.com.au, 2007

How Men Should Commit to Women

Rather than blogging about why men cannot spend the rest of his days with one women, here is something a little less depressing about men-women relationship:

How to Keep your Woman

Quote of the Day: Probability and Religion

All religions were forged as defences against this virus, chance. Once you have dreamt up a god or a goddess, you can abase yourself, offer up burnt offerings, put your knees to the ground or your bottom to the air, all in the hope that by fawnings and repeated praise you may ward off ill fortune, or gain an imaginary better world.

- Brian Aldiss, Science Fiction Novelist,
"Fiction or Prediction?", 2007

Why Men Can't Commit - Part IV

Boo-Yah!! Sam de Brito cuts to the chase again with this little beauty about the cost of courtship of women:

Some a mixed drink, some a Maserati

Make sure you read to the bottom, the analogies there are hilarious, and it points out once again why men, generally, can not (or would not) commit to women.

Fat Beget Fat

OK, for once, this post is NOT about religion... Woohooo!! ***Cue Trumpet, Fanfare, Confetti***

I just want to draw your attention to the latest scientific study by biological geeks in UK, that show that obese people tend to procreate with other obese people which leads to more obese people in the world:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL0766980720070808

To which I can only respond with a nonchalant: "No shit, Sherlock!"

Seriously, when was the last time you see a really fat person hooking up with a slim fit hot young thing, huh? (excluding situations where the fat lard have money flowing out of his/her ears to satisfy the whims of the slim trophy partner).

The result of the study is hardly surprising, but what compels me write this blog entry is this rather shocking thought:

Humankind is transcending the confines
of the Laws of Natural Selection
(AKA Survival of the Fittest)

That's right, just because you are stupid, ugly and fat, it does not preclude you from passing your dumb, fatty genes onwards to your offspring. No problem. Nothing a little cosmetic nose surgery, liposuction, laser eye surgery, breast augmentation, genetic engineering can't fix, eh?

Because of human ingenuity, environmental changes does not put any pressure upon our gene pool towards any one direction. If it gets too cold, we don't pick short fat people as our champions, we just harvest more fur from more furry critters. If it gets too hot, we don't get freaky with some tall skinny guy, we just invent air conditioners.

Our species may be the only one on Earth which could break free from the demands of Natural Selection. Our generation the last of which to succumb to the scythe of the Reaper.

And because Hitler and the Nazis, we know that the philosophy of eugenics is inherently wrong and against our better human nature. But if we can understand that it is wrong to selectively breed certain human traits, we should also acknowledge that human technology will eventually cause the diversity of our gene pool to produce people that is not entirely in harmony with mother nature.

Do we need to do anything about all the obese kids that are out there? I don't think so, I believe that in the future, drugs and nano-machines will be able solve all the ailments of our fat brethren. And with the looming human induced ice-age coming, we will need all the fat people we can get to carry our seeds to the next generation.

Welcome to the future, children.

Epilogue: What is Wrong With Me?

In the Stanley Kubrick's war classic "Full Metal Jacket", Gunnery Sergeant Hartman once kindly asked one his nice young trooper:

"What is your major malfunction, numbnuts?!?"

I have since often wondered "Yeah! What is my major malfunction?". Why is it that I cannot lead a normal functional life (namely in the facet of relationships)? Why are pretty women repelled by me? Why is it that I cannot converse fluently with women that I am attracted to? Why is it that I cannot raise their eyebrows, make them skip a heartbeat, sweep them off their feet?

I have written a series of blog entries that delve into the possible malfunctioning part of my attractiveness with regards to my hair, physique and face.

But truth be told, I know the major malfunction exist far more deeper than just the superficial stuff... You know, sometimes we all have the urge to conduct a conversation with our favourite imaginary friend, and my conversation with him will flow basically like: this...

And *THAT* is the problem with me. I don't give myself half a chance... with any women... at all... I shoot myself down before I even launch the good ship "Let's Be Friends".

I also think it might have something to do with my first failed venture with the young pretty Caucasian girl... but that shit is in the past. I gotta pick myself up, dust myself off and kick on. I gotta keep hacking at it, keep meeting those beautiful girls until I find one that is remotely attracted to my quirky humour and weird-arse personality.

However, I am not delusional: I know I am NOT that unattractive, BUT I know there is a damn-near-zero-percent-chance that Claudia and I will get freaky-wit-it anytime soon (unless I start learning a bucket load of magic tricks like that ugly bastard David Copperfield).

It is just a matter of knowing what my limits are and being friendly to all the people I meet along the way.

All I wish is that the rejections become easier to swallow...

"If you're stoopit 'n you know it, clap your hands..."

Dear readers, sorry I haven't post for a while. My excuse is that I have been spending my spare time reading a research thesis paper I have downloaded off the web... I know, I know, I am such a cool dude and I am the life of the party wherever I go.

(To be perfectly honest with you, I simply ran out of things to yammer on about :-)

You see, from my surfing a few weeks back, I stumbled across this psychology study entitled:

Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments

Authored by Justin Kruger and David Dunning of Cornell U, it is a fairly old paper, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology during 1999.

The research's preposition is that if a person is hopelessly incompetent in a domain of his life, there is simply no way for that person to recognise his own putrid incompetence in that domain. The authors concluded that:

1. The incompetent will tend to overestimate their ability in the given domain.
2. Given a finished result, the incompetent will be unable to judge what is good work and what is complete rubbish.
3. The incompetent will not be able see that he is an idiot, despite all social evidence to the contrary.

Scary... In fact, I could be that idiot, believing that I am the next Shakespeare, running around naked, writing this completely aimless and inane blog, which is basically the sum of all the pus that is my existence. AND I wouldn't have a clue about how crappy this blog is.

hmmm...

I suppose this study also means that:

1. Given an idiot, when he meets another idiot, they would not be able to tell if each other are completely idiots. They could possibly mistaken each other as geniuses.
2. When this idiot meets a genius, without any skills or base of reference, will believe that the genius is complete nutter.

So what does this mean? I want you, my dear genius readers, to appraise my blog and how stupid it is, or indeed how stupid I am for spewning such a steaming pile of turd. Spare me no blushes...

Promiscuity: Why Men Can't Commit - Part III

Disclaimer: The following link and the opinions contain therin are those of Sam de Brito and does not necessary reflect the opinions that I hold... Even though they are pretty damn close! Please do not leave nasty comments on my blog to point out that I am a fat chauvinist pig (I already know that I am), leave it on his blog instead.

Another politically incorrect, thought provoking discussion with a healthy dollop of truth mixed in:

Promiscuity: Why Slutting Around is Good for the Human Species

Enjoy!

"You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to..."

As you may have read from one of my previous blog entry, two sets of parents in Lexington, Massachusetts are suing a kindergarten for spreading, what they decided to call, "gay propaganda" using children books. You can get all the details from this news article.

The parent's lawyer have stated that his clients do not wish to dictate the curriculum of the education board, they merely want to yank their children out of the classroom anytime and every time when "homosexuality or gay marriage is being discussed" while in the care of the school. The lawyer further quoted:

"What they fear is that their children are being brainwashed."

Hmm. This pose a very intriguing question to me: How do you separate what is Learning and what is "Brain Washing"?

This is an utterly serious question.

On the day we are born, we all begin as blank canvases. And through the many life lessons we encounter, we will paint and repaint every part of our cognitive map. We will be continuously learn and relearn every part of our understanding of our world, of our ideas and of our assumptions.

So isn't the entire human experience just one massive brain washing session?

I understand that those parents in the US are disapproving of the school's attempt to open the minds of these young impressionable children to a world that their parent frown upon. But is there a possibility that this is just a matter of education of young minds? Could the parents be preventing the children from learning about reality?

Also, every time the dad storm into the kindergarten, huffing and puffing, fire and brimstone, dragging his kids out of the classroom by the arm before the teacher can begin to discuss about homosexuality, could this be brain washing?

I guess it just depends on the perspective of the speaker when using the word education and brain washing.

"I am right, therefore I am teaching the kids the right things. They are wrong, therefore they are a bunch of brain-washing tree-hugging hippies."

Well, my perspective is simply that we are all brain-washers and we are all being brain-washed at the same time. It is all one big sud party, yeah... and I am just going to hang mine out to dry right now.

Stupid and Inane?

A very entertaining and enlightening read about religion, namely "Christ-inanity":

So Many Morons, So Little Time

Why Men Can't Commit - Part II

I'm sorry I haven't posted for a while. Not feeling too well.

Contracted a bad throat infection last week and I am slowly but surely losing my voice. Sometimes I would try to speak and nothing would come out. Sometimes I might sound like a poor man's imitation of Barry White. Other times I would be imitating an out of breath Mickey Mouse.

In the mean time, you can read Sam de Brito's essay on why marriage is such an archaic construct, and hence why men can't seem to commit to one woman anymore.

What a Mind Trip!

The reason why I love reading Scott Adam's blog is that he always find some way to make me:

1. laugh loudly;
2. think deeply;
3. question reality as we know it.

These blog entries is of the latter categories, where he attempts to define intelligence and what entity actually possess it:

• Intelligence and The Big Bang
• Objections to his definition of Intelligence

Please engage an open mind and enjoy his wacko theories.

Why Men Can't Commit

Hypothetical Cavemen Days

A typical early male homo sapien will scour the land and meet maybe a dozen or two potential female mates.

He picks two or three that his instincts say will provide the best genetic material to provide good quality heir, he clubs her over the head and proceed to spread his seeds. He cannot pick too many females or his herd may starve from the lack of resources to hunt food.

All of this will have to take place in quick time, because at 16 years of age, a young caveman probably have a further fifteen years of seed production before his seeds run dry or being ingested by a big-toothed-big-cat (no, not Fat Cat).

Hypothetical Modern Days

A typical modern male will scour the Internet and find thousands of potential mates.

Due to society and religious conditioning, he is only allowed to choose one potential female to procreate with.

Due to media's perpetuation of the 'Love & Romance' myth, he must spend a few months wooing just one at a time, taking her out to dinner and parties and weekend getaways, all the while expending his resources to do so.

Before too long he find this potential mate is a psychotic/neurotic/controlling/dependent nut-job. He must spend a further few months trying to wash his hands of the relationship and reset his life to a point where he is ready to find another mate.

In the back of his mind, he is thinking: "It's OK, Rupert Murdoch is a father at 70-odd, I've got plenty of time... I just gotta be patient, take my time and choose CAREFULLY".

Reality is, he is not Rupert Murdoch and he is unlikely to find anyone that he feels is the pinnacle woman, who is worthy of carrying his heir, i.e. "The One™".

He will die, a single lonely man, from ingesting too much bovine burgers and alcoholic beverages.

THE END

Inspired by Sam de Brito.

How About Self-Immolation?

Two days ago, there was a huge kerfuffle in the UK over a group of Big Brother UK's contestants racially vilifying one of the other contestant in the BBUK house. The target of these abuse was directed at a Bollywood actress named Shilpa Shetty (a tasty dish who allegedly can't cook):

The details of the verbal salvo was chronicled here.

I won't comment on the nature of this argument because everyone have their opinion on this stupid show and the unfortunate incidents, so I wouldn't be saying anything that hasn't been said before.

What I would like to comment about is the ensuing fallout from this BBUK show. The Prime Minister of UK, Tony Blair, is dragged into apologising about something he have no clue about. The country's unwitting diplomats to India have to condemn something they haven't seen before and have zero control over. Silliest of all was this protest in India:

"In India, Shetty's treatment was front page news, prompting about 25 people, most of them men, to march down a street in the eastern Indian city of Patna chanting "Down with Big Brother." The protesters burnt an effigy representing the program's producers before being dispersed by police."

I wonder what would possess a man, or 25 of them for that matter, to think:

"Damn! I am angry about this. I am pissed off about this. I am absolutely filthy about this... this injustice... this malice. You know what I am gonna do? Do you, Huh?

"I'm gonna dig out my fifth grade paper mache kit, craft me a man-size doll of the producers (who lives halfway across the world, whom I never met before and dunno what their faces looks like), lug the bloody thing to a public place and... and... and... set it on FIRE...

"That's right baby, I am gonna call up Apu... and maybe his cousin Jepal... and we gonna be toasting some producer's arse tonight... Feel the heat you racialist producers, YEAH!"

So 25 of these silly sausages congregate on the streets of Patna (in a city of 1.2 Million other people who, I assume, are largely amused by this spectacle). Then they do some angry sounding chanting, like a bunch of rabid pom-pom-wielding cheerleaders and roast some cheap-arsed blow-up doll.

Fantastic... a country that has gone from the great master of peaceful protest to a bunch of sadistic girls torturing their dollies. If they want to protest with fire in the future, perhaps they could consider Thích Quang Đuc's method. A damn sight more emotive I reckon.

Jepal: "What are we doing here again?"
Apu: "Dunno, he just told me to bring some kerosene,
I was hoping for a BBQ really..."