JR'S Free Thought Pages
No Gods ~ No Masters
~ No Bullshit
|
JR'S Free Thought Pages |
|
Gods, Ghosts, Goblins and other Invisible Imaginary Phantoms P(G) = Probability of Event G (G = Gods, Ghosts, Goblins, Ghouls and other idiotic delusions) The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts – Bertrand Russell Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth -- more than ruin, more even than death. Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habits; thought is anarchic and lawless, indifferent to authority, careless of the well-tried wisdom of the ages. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid ... Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man – Bertrand Russell Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away – Philip K Dick Faith is the not wanting to know what is true – Friedrich Nietzsche God told me to invade Iraq – George W Bush By JR, October 2025
The Phony Phantom Wizard of Oz
It’s All about Fear and Obedience Preface Faith and belief inform us of NOTHING. When Nietzsche declared that “God is dead” he meant belief in God is dead since according to him, the standard conceptions of God are incoherent and empirically impossible. Without meaningful conceptions, evidence and cogent argument faith and belief are epistemic vacuities and essentially worthless as sources for genuine knowledge and the real world. Claiming that something is true because I believe it doesn’t produce any knowledge. Faith and belief are for fools and idiots. Ask any mathematician or scientist. There are literally hundreds f thousands of delusional religious people who pray to their non-existent god to cure their haemorrhoids or whatever else ails them. How stupid is this; it makes a much sense to pray to a pile of dog shit. [1] And there are those are willing to die for their beliefs like the gullible true believers who will kill and die for an abstraction called a “country” or “state” that serves the interests of the privileged and wealthy. It can be argued that both cognitive dissonance [2] and confirmation bias are the two most common deceptions of the true believer, one who only looks for confirmations of currently held beliefs and the psychological angst of holding conflicting beliefs simultaneously. I maintain that that there is an ethical dimension to faith and belief which was similarly held by the mathematician W. K. Clifford (1845-1879) who argued that it is morally wrong to hold beliefs without sufficient evidence or cogency of argument. Because religion and their supernatural entities are illusionary without empirical or evidential grounding and therefore disconnected from the real world, it would be tossed out of any law court. Clifford effectively argued that it is not only unwise to make a claim based on insufficient evidence, it is morally wrong to do so. I offered a lengthy analysis of Clifford’s ethics of belief in my MA philosophy thesis here: https://www.skeptic.ca/MA_Thesis_Skepticism_Critical_Thinking_&_Ethics_of_Belief.htm Would this convince the true believer who bases his belief in the supernatural, faith, theological gibberish, intuition and idiocies such as prayer. Has the reader ever tried to engage in rational dialogue on a Saturday morning with one of these Bible believers who believe, like the moronic George W Bush, they have a direct line with God and believe in a virgin birth, an afterlife and miracles (defined as a violation of the laws of science and nature)? It’s an exercise in futility at best. Moreover, despite all the pious twisted logic it’s quite reasonable to assume that there was no creator of the universe; that this cosmos has always existed since it’s just as reasonable to assume infinity in time as it is in space or defined mathematically as in the Calculus. Nothing can be created out of a vacuum and positing a creator merely creates an infinite regress. Who made this nebulous undefined god who created the universe? Perhaps there is a Super-God? The entire dialogue of creator or as the rapacious capitalist have concocted “intellectual property” is without merit and nothing is even clearly defined. But con men and scams are as pervasive as the bullshit they spin out, people such as Bill Gates who created nothing but has made billions from intellectual property right swindles. Nothing is created out of a vacuum. One could say the same thing about the Donald Trump boot licking dyslexic asshole, Leon “Nazi Salute” Skum. [3] But faith and belief do not deter about 85% of the world’s population from believing in imaginary friends, ghosts, demons, angels and other primarily inculcated supernatural and other mysterious entities and ideas from past pre-scientific medieval cultures. As the late social critic and comedian George Carlin ever tired of telling us in his many brilliant skits, capitalist misinformation, lies and reams of bullshit are disseminated everywhere. Any un-indoctrinated and intellectually uncontaminated child is an empiricist and rejects any entity that is not in line with their sensory perceptions and intuitive common sense. In short, we are all born sceptics and atheists. [4] Of course once the typically religious indoctrination and thought control process succeeds and endures (read Pink Floyd’s great song Another Brick in the Wall, confirmation bias and dozens of other logical fallacies contaminate the mind. {5} And of course one of the key principles of basic logic which is a cornerstone in every in every law court is “Burden of Proof”; the responsibility for an allegation or assertion rests with the claimant. As a corollary to this requirement, the late great Carl Sagan wrote in his wonderful book The Demon Haunted World, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Has the reader ever heard the inane assertion that “you cannot prove that God does not exist”. Can you prove that the Invisible Flying Pink Unicorn (IFPU) does not exist? For some serious scepticism regarding the idiocy of religion taking a few doses dose of H L Mencken may help, especially the last essay called Memorial Service on all the deceased gods throughout history. https://www.skeptic.ca/mencken_on_religion.htm There has been and continue to exist at least three massive RACKETS that have corrupted and plagued our fucked up discombobulated morally depraved world: CAPITALIM, RELIGION, AUTHORITRIANISM and WAR which is intrinsically related to the previous three. The latter three are toxic mechanisms invoked to control and indoctrinate the unthinking docile masse for capitalist hegemony, greed and plunder. Not only are humans become moronic and ignorant beyond belief but their adherence to moral principle is nearing zero. The abominations and displays of stupidity we witness every day are perhaps as bad as they have ever been; existing throughout history and are becoming worse and will not go away anytime soon. Brief opportunities to civility and democracy existed post World War Two for a brief period but were squandered and brutally squashed by the fascist police state robber baron kamikaze capitalist system that cares about only one thing: money and profit. US Major Smedley Butler wrote a piece back in the 1930s called WAR IS A RACKET which one might argue is the most vile and duplicitous of all the scams and swindles that have underwritten much of nihilistic monopoly capitalism throughout its four centuries of slavery, land plunder, genocide and off and on fascism. Whenever capitalism is under pressure from financial malfunction, declining profit or revolution from below, fascism will arise with the full force of police and if necessary, the military. After all, fascism in its most formulations has taken place in Amerika and it will always resort to violence, co-option and total control of everything if required in order to restore its dictatorship. The elite one-tenth of one percent own you as we struggle within an undemocratic deeply immoral system without real political freedom that is beyond reform and can only be destroyed. https://gutenberg.ca/ebooks/butlersd-warisaracket/butlersd-warisaracket-00-e.html Read and weep and then ask yourself “cui bono”? (Who benefits from war?) Hint, not the young naïve and credulous men who fight in wars, are maimed and mutilated and die in them, the rich man’s war. It’s all about the money: “ “Money Talks and Bullshit Walks” is one of the classic slogans of a deeply authoritarian and predatory capitalism that has as its only objective, exploitation and profit at any costs including outright theft – the end justifies the means which is the antithesis of what it means to be a morally principled person. The masses are incessantly indoctrinated into this sordid hat is promoted by the schools, corporate controlled ass media and tax exempt Christian churches, the latter being one of the most egregious greedy business “enterprises” on the planet. If manufacturing consent (read Noam Chomsky’s book on this) by incessant brainwashing doesn’t work there are always the police and if needed the military (hired goons of the pampered pay no taxes financial elite and larcenous banking mafia of the 1% who own almost all the wealth). This will always be the backup to keep the generally unthinking docile masses in line. This has been the case throughout history in one form or another, whether theocracy, monarchy or today’s farcical so-called bullshit “democracies”. The USA and UK are two of the most economically unequal countries on the planet with miniscule minority plutocrats controlling at least 95% of the wealth. In the United States which has 4% of the global population, it incarcerates about 25% of all 8 billion people on the planet. It’s a fascist police state pure and simple and speaks volumes regarding what sort of country it is. Neither the USA nor the UK is “great” however defined. They never have been and are surely does not even remotely qualify as genuine “democracies”. I defy anyone to cite any democracy on earth. They are cesspools of corruption, not like my own constitutional monarchy called Canada and its mind destroying national anthem: “God save our home ON native land; we stand on guard for thee, etc. etc. What a pathetic pile of bovine excrement and disgraceful sham! One of my earliest intellectual influences was the great mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell 1872-1970). He had serious criticisms of the education systems throughout the world which he considered sources of indoctrination into the values of wealthy privileged elites. Logic and critical thinking he valued greatly but noticed that it was almost totally absent from the curriculums of both school and university courses which stressed mindless patriotism [6], fear, authoritarianism, obedience, regimentation and militarism, . This did not surprise Russell who realized that “critical thinkers cause “administrative difficulties” for the ruling capitalist classes. Russell was a lifelong libertarian socialist and pacifist and spent jail time for his criticisms of England’s involvement in World War One. Political freedom was as farcical then as it continues unabated today. Notes: [1] Dishonesty, lying to ourselves and willed ignorance. Bertrand Russell’s theory of human rationality that can be traced back to the turn of the 20th century is one confirmed by more recent research in psychology on our fears and avoidance of uncomfortable truths. In what is referred to as cognitive dissonance theory as psychologists and experts in logic today maintain that we tend to avoid unpleasant facts by replacing them in our minds with more comforting fictions and fables. The superstitions of religion such as an “afterlife” “miracles” (violations from natural phenomena) and “resurrection from death” have invariably served this purpose. This was essentially one of Russell’s views of human behaviour, citing the aforementioned religion as one obvious diversion - and a childish and common one at that. Russell invoked a similar critique to the manipulations, deceit, hypocrisy and depravity of an anything goes the capitalist system which now pollutes the minds of the entire planet. Given the thin layer of powerful oligarchic elites who own pretty much everything including the phony global police state fascist governments such as the USA , Russell wrote: Holders of power, always and everywhere, are indifferent to the good or evil of those who have no power, except in so far as they are restrained by fear. This may sound too harsh a saying. It may be said that decent people will not inflict torture on others beyond a point. This may be said, but history shows that it is not true. The decent people in question succeed in not knowing, or pretending not to know, what torments are inflicted to make them happy.” (‘What Is Democracy?’ in Fact and Fiction, 1961). How anyone disagree with Russell’s assertion, not only about the irrationality of the average human, but their lack of discipline, self-control stupidity and appalling behaviour? Cognitive dissonance was first studied in the mid 20th century by Leon Festinger during a participant observation of a cult leader who believed the Earth would be destroyed by a great flood. The research focused on what happened to the cult members, especially the deeply committed ones who had given up their homes and jobs for the delusional cultish kooks when the flood did not occur. While less committed members were more likely to admit they had been mistaken and simply “learned from the experience,” the most devoted members tended to reinterpret the incident to match their beliefs. They claimed the flood didn’t happen because of their rabid faith, fortifying their original convictions and beliefs rather than abandoning them. Festinger’s cognitive dissonance theory claims we want our attitudes and actions to match and feel comfortable with those of our cohorts, much like groupthink, the members of whom want cognitive consistency within the group. When our attitudes and actions don’t agree we feel uncomfortable and try to modify the original beliefs. Fetsinger’s theory doesn’t claim these modifications always work, just that people try to reduce their discomfort as belief runs into a brick wall of fact. {2]) The typical Christian door knocker (they all seem to need disciples and money) can be easily snared into one or more logical fallacies such as circular reasoning or more formally, countless logical fallacies such as “false cause” (post hoc ergo propter hoc), “confirmation bias” and “begging the question. Typically one is faced with this: Sceptic: “How do you know god exists? True believer: “It’s in the Bible” Sceptic: “How do you know the Bible is true?” True Believe: “It’s the word of god! Bertrand Russell had brilliant views on just about every conceivable topic and idea, including the Holy Babble, asserting correctly that “there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence”. [3] Believing without evidence is always morally wrong Francisco Mejia Uribe is an executive director at Goldman Sachs in Hong Kong. He has degrees in philosophy and economics from the University of Los Andes in Bogotá, Colombia, and blogs at The Philosopher Blog. You have probably never heard of William Kingdon Clifford. He is not in the pantheon of great humanists, philosophers and mathematicians – perhaps because his life was cut short at the age of 33 – but I cannot think of anyone whose ideas are more relevant for our interconnected, OCD /AI-driven, dumb and dumber digital age. This might seem strange given that we are talking about a Victorian mathematician Brit whose most famous philosophical work is an essay nearly 150 years ago. However, reality has finally caught up with Clifford. His once seemingly exaggerated claim that “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence” is no longer hyperbole but both a technical and ethical technical reality. In ‘The Ethics of Belief’ (1877), Clifford gives three arguments as to why we have a moral obligation to believe responsibly, that is, to believe only what we have sufficient evidence for, and what we have diligently investigated. His first argument starts with the simple observation that our beliefs influence our actions. Everyone would agree that our behaviour is shaped by what we take to be true about the world – which is to say, by what we believe. If I believe that it is raining outside, I’ll bring an umbrella. If I believe taxis don’t take credit cards, I make sure I have some cash before jumping into one. And if I believe that stealing is wrong, then I will pay for my goods before leaving the store. What we believe is then of tremendous practical importance. False beliefs about physical or social facts lead us into poor habits of action that in the most extreme cases could threaten our survival. If the singer R Kelly genuinely believed the words of his song ‘I Believe I Can Fly’ (1996), I can guarantee you he would not be around by now. But it is not only our own self-preservation that is at stake here. As social animals, our agency impacts on those around us, and improper believing puts our fellow humans at risk. As Clifford warns: ‘We all suffer severely enough from the maintenance and support of false beliefs and the fatally wrong actions which they lead to …’ In short, sloppy practices of belief-formation are ethically wrong because – as social beings – when we believe something, the stakes are very high. The most natural objection to this first argument is that while it might be true that some of our beliefs do lead to actions that can be devastating for others, in reality most of what we believe is probably inconsequential for our fellow humans. As such, claiming as Clifford did that it is wrong in all cases to believe on insufficient evidence seems like a stretch. I think critics had a point – had – but that is no longer so. In a world in which just about everyone’s beliefs are instantly shareable, at minimal cost, to a global audience, every single belief has the capacity to be truly consequential in the way Clifford imagined. If you still believe this is an exaggeration, think about how beliefs fashioned in a cave in Afghanistan lead to acts that ended lives in New York, Paris and London. Or consider how influential the ramblings pouring through your social media feeds have become in your very own daily behaviour. In the digital global village that we now inhabit, false beliefs cast a wider social net, hence Clifford’s argument might have been hyperbole when he first made it, but is no longer so today.
The second argument Clifford provides to back his claim that it is always wrong to believe on insufficient evidence is that poor practices of belief-formation turn us into careless, credulous believers. Clifford puts it nicely: ‘No real belief, however trifling and fragmentary it may seem, is ever truly insignificant; it prepares us to receive more of its like, confirms those which resembled it before, and weakens others; and so gradually it lays a stealthy train in our inmost thoughts, which may someday explode into overt action, and leave its stamp upon our character.’ Translating Clifford’s warning to our interconnected times, what he tells us is that careless believing turns us into easy prey for fake-news pedlars, conspiracy theorists and charlatans. And letting ourselves become hosts to these false beliefs is morally wrong because, as we have seen, the error cost for society can be devastating. Epistemic alertness is a much more precious virtue today than it ever was, since the need to sift through conflicting information has exponentially increased, and the risk of becoming a vessel of credulity is just a few taps of a mind numbing smart phone away. Clifford’s third and final argument as to why believing without evidence is morally wrong is that, in our capacity as communicators of belief, we have the moral responsibility not to pollute the well of collective knowledge. In Clifford’s time, the way in which our beliefs were woven into the ‘precious deposit’ of common knowledge was primarily through speech and writing. Because of this capacity to communicate, ‘our words, our phrases, our forms and processes and modes of thought’ become ‘common property’. Subverting this ‘heirloom’, as he called it, by adding false beliefs is immoral because everyone’s lives ultimately rely on this vital, shared resource. While Clifford’s final argument rings true, it again seems exaggerated to claim that every little false belief we harbour is a moral affront to common knowledge. Yet reality, once more, is aligning with Clifford, and his words seem prophetic. Today, we truly have a global reservoir of belief into which all of our commitments are being painstakingly added: it’s called Big Data. You don’t even need to be an active internet twit posting on Twitter or ranting on Facebook: more and more of the anal and mundane of what we do in the real world is being recorded and digitised, and from there algorithms can easily infer what we believe before we even express a view. In turn, this enormous pool of stored belief is used by algorithms to make decisions for and about us. And it’s the same reservoir that search engines tap into when we seek answers to our questions and acquire new beliefs. Add the wrong ingredients into the Big Data recipe, and what you’ll get is a potentially toxic output. If there was ever a time when critical thinking was a moral imperative, and credulity a calamitous indiscretion (sin?), it is now. [4] An atheist suddenly deciding to believe in God is like a full grown intelligent person deciding to believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. And surely there is no astute thinker who accepts the silly ruse that “there are no atheists in foxholes”. Yes that’s because they are too smart to be in a foxhole fighting the rich man’s war – or any insane war for that matter. [5] An excellent volume by Bo Bennett, PhD lists at least 300 formal and informal logical fallacies titled Logically Fallacious: The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies. This book is a much needed book by at least 95% of the global brainwashed unthinking population effective reasoning, meant to catapult you into a world where you start to see things how they really are, not how generally wealthy people in power want you to believe and internalize as genuine knowledge and wisdom. The focus of this book is on critical thinking and the cognitive traps of logical fallacies, which loosely defined, are simply errors in reasoning. With the reading of each page you ought to be able to make dramatic improvements in the way you think critically, reason and make decisions. As the author Bo Bennett proclaims, "Expose an irrational belief; keep a man rational for a day. Expose irrational thoughts and keep a man rational for a lifetime." - Bo Bennett There are many, but one more recent book on critical thinking and logical fallacies and bogus arguments is Bad Arguments: 100 of the Most Important Fallacies in Western Philosophy. [6] On the idiocy of patriotism Bertrand Russell rightly defined it t thus: Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons.
For Home:
|
