A Locke for the Reality Challenged

A blog in the tradition of Carneades, Xenophanes, and Montaigne.

Friday, February 17, 2006

New Feature - Who Said It....

"The big thing is to make this country, along with every other country in the world with a few exceptions, quit discriminating against people just because they're gay."

OK. who said it?......
Leave your answers in the comment section.

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

What Science is.....

As I stated previously I have been posting on a conservative website. There is an appalling lack of belief in science in this community. I found a great response to their non-thinking non-belief in science. It said..." Newsflash -- scientific consensus isn't "an opinion lots of people agree with." It's not a goddam popularity contest.

Science doesn't change if your feelings get hurt. Science doesn't change if you don't understand. Science doesn't change if its explanations don't fit with your theology.

The only thing that changes science is more science. Better science, better data, more facts, a new idea that explains existing facts better.

You can say you don't believe in science. But sweetheart, that doesn't make science wrong. So go ahead, don't listen to scientific explanations. But don't be surprised when the folks who believe in science keep being right and you keep being wrong.Which would be much more helpful criticism -- not that this is the orajones' fault -- if the administration ever felt any shame at being wrong."

Great thought. I also have to say that this includes what is oxymoronically called "Intellegent Design". This is because there is also a problem with what is Theory and what is not. Theory must be supported by emperical evidence. Theory must be consistent with FACTS. The only way to disprove a Theory is by emperical evidence. Not by an idea or of a philosophy but by emperical evidence. I am sick of the anti-intellectual ideas being presented as an alternative to real science. I can only hope the American public wakes up.

Saturday, February 11, 2006

What I've been doing lately

I am sorry for not posting anything for awhile. I have been busy reading and posting at a blog called "The Museum of Left Wing Lunacy". Yes really. And while I have been posting I have been trying to evaluate the mindset of the conservative posters there. I have come to some interesting conclusions. First there are different levels of conservatives posting responses.

1. The seriously conservative - these posters have valid points and try and have a serious discussion of salient points.

2. The crazy conservatives (or neo-cons) - these posters show no sign of being able to evaluate a good point or admit one. They also take portions of others posts out of context and cuss at the ones who have a liberal/progressive viewpoint.

Most of the posters are from the second group (big surprise), but there is one poster who seems to go back and forth between the two groups. Depending on how s/he feels I guess.

Something kept bothering me though. For awhile I couldn't figure it out and then it hit me. They were acting just like a cult! Everything fell together then. I studied cults in seminary and remember some of the characteristics of them...

- The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and reguards his belief system,ideology and practices as the Truth,as law.

- Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged and even punished.

- The Leadership dictates ,sometimes in great detail, how memebers should think,act, and feel.

- The group is elitist,claiming a special exalted status for itself,its leader(s), and members.

- The group has a polerized us-versus-them mentality,which may cause conflict with wider society.

- The leader is not accountable to any authorities.

- The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before jioning the group.

- The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

- Members are encouraged to socialize with other group members.

- The most loyal members feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be and fear reprisals if they leave the group.

Sound just like the Religious Right Wing of the Republican party !