Homo economicus’ Weblog

American version

British version

The American and British covers of Dawkins new book “The Magic of Reality: How We Know What’s Really True”. Out in September 2011.

More on Dawkin’s website here.

Richard has been talking about this book for over three years, and was encouraged at conferences to write when he voiced the idea. Not long to wait now.

Thought you would enjoy discussion between Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins on his new book which argues science does have something critical to add to the discussion of morality.

Book has arrived recently – looking forward to reading. Review to follow in due course.

Richard Dawkins has recently read a blog that highlights William Lane Craig defending genocide and infanticide in the bible in 2011.

I commented on Craig’s attitude to Genocide in the bible in 2008. In fairness Greta got there before me in 2007.

Four years later Dawkins finds out. And a new lease of life is given to a theologian for Atheists to get angry about when perhaps we should have been angry nearer the time they spouted their hideous non sensical justificatication for divinely sanctioned mass murder.

Not sure if any of the commentators on Dawkins’ website noticed the date of the blog. But bear in mind that the bible promises a genocide of the godless with Armageddon – a genocide never seen in human history. It really should not surprise us that there are Christians out there that believe feverently for it, and others that don’t want anyone to die but think it inevitable. What they hope for is worse than what they may justify in a mythical retailing of Israelite history.

That really should get us angry: “Let thy kingdom come …”

Not that a bus has meta physical or no belief. If you thought buses and railway stations displayed a little too much in the way of religious advertising here is the free thought remedy:

Richard Dawkins, who is matching all contributions given towards the advertising commented:

“Religion is accustomed to getting a free ride – automatic tax breaks, unearned ‘respect’ and the right not to be ‘offended’, the right to brainwash children. Even on the buses, nobody thinks twice when they see a religious slogan plastered across the side.

“This campaign to put alternative slogans on London buses will make people think – and thinking is anathema to religion.” [Daily Telegraph]

The advertising will only go ahead from January if the money is there. The British Humanist Association is handling the fund raising – but in ten hours of launching they had reached the target.

Already making an impression not just on Radio 4 Thought for the Day and newspapers but also on the satirical news quiz Have I Got News For You (the line at the end a particularly good one):

Now if we could get some on the bill board at train stations, or perhaps just some quotes to raise human spirits rather than artificial ones …

Ariane Sherine is the brains behind the campaign and you can learn more at her site here.

I caught a later train than I had intended (household routine disrupted by mortal illness of insanely loved dog — whoever says you can’t love a dog as much as a person doesn’t know what love is) so I unfortunately missed the welcoming session at the conference. I walked in on the first plenary discussion group. Chaired by Caspar Melville, Editor of New Humanist, the members were Ehsan Jami (Dutch politician of Iranian origin), Hanne Stinson (British Humanist Association), A C Grayling (needs no introduction), Fariborz Pooya (one of the organizers, impressive) and Mina Ahadi (Iranian Ex-Muslim leader from Germany, who spoke in German with an interpreter). The topic was Apostasy laws. and the Freedom to Renounce and Criticise Religion. There was little disagreement among the panel. In the Q & A, the chairman established a pattern for the day, which worked rather well. He took questions in bunches of about five, then allowed the panel to answer any one question, with no obligation to answer more than one. As you might expect, A C Grayling was especially impressive, but none of the panellists could be described as lightweight,

At the end of the session, I was assigned a bodyguard, but it didn’t seem necessary while I went out to lunch with Andrew Copson of the British Humanist Association. We had an interesting discussion, and he updated me on our plans for the BHA to distribute, at RDF’s expense, DVDs of Growing Up in the Universe to British schools. Things are looking good on that front.

After lunch we began with a lovely stand-up comedy routine from the comedian Nick Doody, telling good jokes at the expense of religion. One that I remember: Religion is like a very big dog, comforting to the owner but terrifying to everybody else. Then another panel discussion, this time on Sharia Law. The chairman, Andrew Copson, adopted the same policy as before, and again it worked well. Again, one member of the panel, Mahin Alipour [Edit: I wrongly said this was Houzan Mahmoud before, sorry], spoke through an interpreter, which held things up a bit. Other members of the panel were Roy Brown (rightly respected elder statesman of the British Humanist movement, now living in Switzerland), Maryam Namazie (Iranian born leader of the British Ex-Muslim movement), Johann Hari (brilliant Independent journalist), and Ibn Warraq (author of Why I am Not a Muslim and one of the great heroes of today’s secularist movement). This panel showed flashes of real oratory, especially from Johann Hari (for example, on the question of respect: “I respect you as a person too much to respect your ludicrous beliefs”) and from Maryam Namazie, who urged us to put together a lawsuit, in the civil courts, against the Sharia courts who presume to set themselves up in Muslim communities. Theoretically these Sharia courts are supposed to be voluntary: everybody has the option of going to proper British courts, but Sharia courts are available as a voluntary alternative. Speaker after speaker pointed out that this apparent voluntariness is a wicked sham. Women are ordered by their husbands or fathers to go to Sharia courts, not British courts. Many of them don’t even realise there is an alternative. Those who do are accused of being “unislamic” if they opt for real British courts.

The session on Sharia Law provoked some constructive suggestions from the floor, and ended with Maryam in a rousing reiteration of her call for a lawsuit, in the British courts, against the Sharia courts. It sounds as though this might really happen. I want to look into the possibility that RDFRS might make a contribution to the legal costs, although that might be ruled out by our own statutes with the Charity Commissioners.

The next item was a remake of the film Fitna — remade by Reza Moradi, who was also acting as the projectionist and technical expert for the conference. I wasn’t too clear which bits of the film we saw were the original, and which bits the remake, but it was impressive anyway.

After the tea break was my own talk, about the infamous Harun Yahya. It was pretty much based on my article on this website, called something like Slippery Eels, Venomous Snakes and Harun Yahya, with Keynote slides of the pictures of fossils and modern animals that they are — mistakenly — alleged to resemble. I am going to supply Reza with the Keynote slides, so he can drop them into the film he is making of the conference. I spoke for only 15 minutes, in order to leave time for 15 minutes of questions. The question session went well, I think.

The final event of the day was another panel discussion, this time on educational issues, chaired by Keith Porteous Wood, of the National Secular Society, that extremely useful and resourceful body. I was part of this panel, and was joined by Terry Sanderson (Keith’s partner at the NSS, and its current President), Joan Smith (wonderfully trenchant Independent columnist) and two eloquent leaders of the Iranian resistance against the Islamists in that country, Hamid Taqvaee and Bahram Soroush. One of these, I think Bahram, defended Islamophobia. The word is used to stifle opposition to islamism, to which it is a legitimate and understandable response. Everybody in the room, it seems, was deeply disturbed by faith schools, and especially the move to institute new Islamic schools.

This last session typified the whole conference in its conspicuous lack of ‘herding cats syndrome’. It was as though the menace of Islam is so sinister that the normal differences that divide atheists were put aside. A pair of formal resolutions was put to the vote, and carried nem con:

“The conference calls for the immediate release of all those imprisoned for ‘apostasy’, abolition of the death penalty, and cancellation of laws that punish the right and freedom to renounce or criticise Islam.”

“The conference calls on the British government to bring an end to the use of Sharia law in Britain, which is discriminatory towards women and children in particular, and guarantee unconditional equal citizenship rights for all.”

In addition to these two formal resolutions, Keith Porteous Wood called for a vote opposing faith schools. This too was carried nem con

The meeting ended in goodwill, and with a general feeling of solidarity with those Ex-Muslims brave enough to stand up and announce their apostasy.

At the drinks afterwards, I was approached by a young woman, probably about 20, whom I shall not name. She told me she is on the run from her Muslim family who, she believes, want to ‘honour’ kill her because of her apostasy. She is living in an institution that caters to such women, and is feeling rather lost and lonely because she no longer has the support structure of family and friends. She has had to give up her university place because the university is the first place her father would come looking for her, and she is hoping to find a place in another university.

I suggested that, if she feels threatened, she should go to the police. I should have known better. She had tried that. The law does not allow the police to take any action until the would-be victim has actually been physically molested — by which time it is likely to be too late. At a loss to know how to help her, I introduced her to a woman who, I felt, might be well placed to help her (again, I shall not name her, in case it helps the girl’s father to track her down). I left them together, the girl close to tears (the kindness of strangers often moves me to tears too). Before saying goodbye, I gave her my email address, and encouraged her to write in to this website, assuring her that she would find many friendly people of goodwill here, so I hope she does. If she does, please treat her extra specially well. She is vulnerable, and extremely courageous to have defied her odious father over the matter of religion. She told me how he had the habit of beating his children if they failed to memorise the Koran accurately.

I think Reza plans to release his film of the whole conference, and I’ll talk to Josh about getting a link to it on our site. Meanwhile, if you know any Ex-Muslims, or Muslims on the brink of the brave step of apostasy, please offer them support and friendship and encouragement to renounce and denounce that vile and despicable religion.

Richard

Reposted from here and here from the richarddawkins.net Forum

OTHER BLOGS:

Council of Ex Muslims of Britain video of Conference

Dawkins was talking at the Council of Ex Muslims of Britain’s first International Conference, October 10 2008. Harun Yahya as well as writing the book Atlas of Creation is behind the richarddawkins.net being baned in Turkey – a move which the National Secular Society is trying to have included in the EU report on Turkey’s suitability to join.

OTHER BLOGS:

Richard Dawkins on the Counicl of Ex Muslims of Britain

Richard Dawkins Website access barred in Turkey

International Conference Council of Ex Muslims of Britain (CEMB)

Next week Richard gives the tenth and final Simonyi Lecture, as he has retired from the Oxford University Chair for the Public Understanding of Science.

Max Hammerton’s article below mentions a skepticism about the success of public understanding on science – largely because it is hard and difficult. Studies reveal that more formal years of education and those that took voluntary course in mathematics and science were more likely to express an interest in science.

In terms of understanding, a survey in the United States [source]:

The percentage of correct responses to most of the NSF survey questions pertaining to basic science facts, concepts, and vocabulary has remained nearly constant.(See appendix table 7-9.) For example, more than 70 percent of those surveyed knew that:

• Plants produce oxygen.
• The continents have been moving for millions of years and will continue to move.
• Light travels faster than sound.
• Earth goes around the Sun (and not vice versa).
• Not all radioactivity is manmade.

In contrast, about half the respondents knew that:

• The earliest humans did not live at the same time as dinosaurs.
• It takes Earth one year to go around the Sun.
• Electrons are smaller than atoms.
• Antibiotics do not kill viruses.
• Lasers do not work by focusing sound waves.

A study conducted for the People for the American Way Foundation took a closer look at the question of teaching evolution and found an overwhelming majority of Americans (83 percent) agreeing that it should be taught in the classroom. However, there is also strong support for teaching creationism. A detailed breakdown of the survey findings shows a wide range of opinion on the issue:

• 20 percent favor teaching only evolution and nothing else in public schools;
• 17 percent want only evolution taught in science classes but say that religious explanations can be discussed in other classes;
• 29 percent do not have a problem with creationism being discussed in science classes but believe it should be discussed as a “belief,” not a scientific theory;
• 13 percent believe that both evolution and creationism should be taught as scientific theories in science class;
• 16 percent want no mention of evolution at all;
• 4 percent are in favor of teaching both evolution and creationism but are unsure about how to do it; and
• 1 percent have no opinion (People for American Way Foundation 2000).

While Dawkins is based in the UK, answering those questions right is for him a concern. I thought it was disconcerting that 14% of men in the poll thought the earth did not go round the sun – when reading that 34% of women thought the sun went round the earth I was dumbstruck. If this is a realistic sample of the American public the upcoming election will be won with less of a majority than those that do not know the orbit of the earth. Thankfully the world keeps on going around no matter what people think.

Perhaps there is always going to be a minority that will not concern themselves with basic science. It seems that parents do care that their children get a good science education, and when it is an issue that directly effects them, or gets a lot of media coverage they take a keen interest. The answer to me is that science has to become more connected to the everyday – to excite and encourage inquiry in early years so that science in secondary school builds on that interest.

Why does this matter? Well:

Without a grasp of scientific ways of thinking, the average person cannot tell the difference between science based on real data and something that resembles science—at least in their eyes—but is based on uncontrolled experiments, anecdotal evidence, and passionate assertions…[W]hat makes science special is that evidence has to meet certain standards (Rensberger 2000, p. 61). [ibid]

The key thing is being accessible and available. On that score, Richard Dawkins has achieved and those that wanted to understand had somewhere to go, where science could be explained in its beauty to those interested. Everyone else could fuck off.* That attitude to the role is why Dawkins succeeded with a job title beyond ability to deliver.

The above article re posted from here.

*To paraphrase what a New Science editor said; often wrongly thought to originate with Dawkins.

OTHER BLOGS:

Great Ideas of Biology – 9th Simonyi Anniversary Lecture

Me and Douglas Adams [Richard Dawkins helping me to understand Evolution]

Quentin Letts is right wing, Daily Mail posh gossip tit bit journalist often found trying to be as amusing as Mark Mardell on This Week and failing spectacularly. So it should be no surprise that he has written a book on Fifty People Who Buggered Up Britain. He rails against the removal of corporal punishment from schools, that Britain is broken and the European super state is coming, when what we need is some more church going.

So it should be no surprise that Richard Dawkins comes in at number 30:

30 Richard Dawkins

Anti-religionist Dawkins, the best-known English dissenter since Darwin, is the merciless demander of provable fact.

He is the Charles Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science and tours the world lecturing the elites of the West that they are stupid to believe in any god.

He proselytises against the proselytisers, most of his targets wishing they had a fraction of his apparent certainty.

He is the anti-preacher whose sermons are designed to erode churchgoing and, with that, weaken our happiness.

A man less obsessed with himself and with the narrow calculations of men in white coats might realise that religion, although never offering proof of God’s existence, can sugar catastrophe and brighten chasms.

In times of turbulence, the human being is little different from the vole or the dormouse. It will take shelter where it can.

No amount of superior lecturing from an anti-Christ, not even one with so important a title as his, will alter that. [Daily Mail]

Mind you, if not altering anything was the measure of what a person should not do then Quentin Letts would be unemployed moaning about the traitor Edward Heath, waiting for last orders at the Saville Club. He misses the point that The God Delusion is aimed at those that do not know that there is a credible alternative to non belief in a supernatural entity. There is a choice beyond thinking there is something out there.

If church going is what the happiness of the nation rests then we are a sorry nation. Because happiness is not faking reality or what we do not know but accepting it and being able to move on with our lives.

Click the photo for a Ken Ham talk I went to

Perhaps sometimes it really is not worth it. Because you may find that the mud slinging offers itself up as a dirty fight, one that you do not want to wage because you do not want to wallow in the filth. Facts, evidence and keeping to the point should be enough for a rational conversation. Otherwise avoid.

Using the good old tag surfer on WordPress I came across this blog which mentioned that a loved one’s ashes could now be turned into a diamond. The only thing was that the person claimed that the technological process that allows this was proof that the earth had been designed in a short period of time. That this was another part of the jigsaw to prove a global flood and the earth being created in 6 days. This also apparently proved evolution wrong though the discussion was about geology.

Yep a Young Earth Creationinst. Got to love these guys, and the way they make an argument.

So I commented:

Human technology in the creation of diamonds does not prove there was a designer for the natural processes that create them, let alone a global flood. Nor does it have any bearing on evolutionary biology.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761557986/diamond.html

Synthetic diamonds have been around since the 1950s. However, rumours that all you need is peanut butter, a microwave and some coal are hugely exaggerated.

The blogger responded:

I know it doesn’t prove anything as a stand alone contribution. It simply adds to the pre-existing mountain of evidence confirming a young earth.

You can drag someone to the fountain of knowledge but you cannot make them drink.

However, the person came over to my blog and made some comments – which I thought I would share (free speech) but decided not to give the person a free reign to post without moderation:

On reading About Me:

You left one cult (J.W.) To join another (atheism)??

“Atheism is the religion of the deranged and evolution is their creation story”.

Well there is a difference between the Jehovah’s Witnesses which are a cult and atheism. For one the hours are better. I do not have to ask myself whether my inner thoughts confirm to the wishes of a supreme being that has the ability to mind read. Nor am I kept in line by images that the majority of people are going to be destroyed in a forth coming war, with only door bell ringers of the good news that you will die in Armageddon being saved. Though not as soon as The Society (governing body of J.Ws) assumed in the past.

I do not have to worry whether my clothing confirms to a designated style. No fellow atheist will demand that I get a hair cut or else I am letting down atheism. Nor does my status in the pecking order depend on towing certain tenants. Among the fellowship of atheists there is ammo shot at the four horsemen as with plenty reserved for those that would trounce on hard won freedoms from religious bigotry and refuse the evidence of science. I am encouraged to think things through and to look at the evidence, rather than relying on someones authority to tell me what is true.

I also accepted the theory of evolution before I was an atheist. It helped when I could actually find out about the theory when I read beyond the books published by The Society. My atheism is not based on evolution theory. It is more based on the reasons that Bertrand Russell articulated.

On reading Labelling yourself:

You are the personification of deranged. You are in favor of keeping the scum of the earth alive and yet also in favor of killing unborn children who have never done wrong to anyone.
“Atheism is the religion of the deranged and evolution is their creation story” – Michael D. Shoesmith

Funnily enough the blog was not about abortion or the death penalty. As a European it is not really a surprise that I do not favour the death penalty. That is because there can be no appeal from the grave, and there have been too many instances where miscarriages of justice would have led to people being put to death though the evidence was not conclusive, and those found guilty were on later review released.

The other argument is to try and understand what makes people criminals so we can better protect the law abiding. Whether that takes you on a voyage like Marilynn Rosenthal who used her experience in academia to find out about the 9/11 killer of her son who died in the south tower or Richard Dawkins calling for us to learn about genocidal murderers so we can stop people like Saddam Hussein getting to power rather then put them summarily to death and squander that opportunity. The death penalty is about revenge, as an ultimate punishment. It does not cancel out the evil done, nor bring loved ones back. What it does do is add to the body count in the fight against crime. The death penalty is opposed by religious groups too.

As to abortion – well I do not favour abortion. I see women being able to have legal, professional medical access preferable to backstreet abortions. McCain was of the same opinion before realising he needed the religious right that now controlled his party. I do not want the legal system to be used to enforce a personal view that a fertilized egg has equal rights with a fully grown woman. This stance does not mean that I take pleasure in how many women have abortions. Reproductive issues are a matter for the individual not the state. I would hope every conception brings a healthy, loved, and wanted child that can be provided for. Society needs to see how to address that. I want women empowered to make a real choice. Banning abortion will not solve the social ills that belay our countries. Some religious groups feel that too:

“The directorate of the [United Church of Christ]‘s social action office first addressed the abortion issue in 1970, affirming freedom of choice for women, calling for church action supporting the repeal of overly restrictive abortion legislation and encouraging the expansion of sex education programs.  Freedom of choice in reproductive matters was first affirmed by the General Synod in 1971 and has been reaffirmed in one way or another by several General Synods since.”

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Unitarian Universalists in the United States be urged to promote passage of federal legislation to:

guarantee the fundamental right of individual choice in reproductive matters [source]

As for a delusion well the definition is:

A false belief that is resistant to confrontation with actual facts; The state of being deluded or misled; That which is falsely or delusively believed or propagated; false belief; error in belief. [source]

On that score, Young Earth Creationism fits perfectly. Below is Eugenie Scott on YEC:

Part One:

Part Two:

OTHER BLOGS:

Atheist at Ken Ham talk in Leicester