2020 - The Year Sanity and Reason Died

Four years ago, when I realized that reason and sanity are under siege in the US and some other countries, I did not think that it could get any worse. Political polarization seemed like it had reached the unsustainable levels, misinformation from Facebook, Twitter and other social platforms was overwhelming and discussions with friends often resulted in hate and broken friendships.

Fast forward four years, a long and mentally taxing presidency and the pandemic, and we are in the place I have never imagined we could be.

In a short period of nine months from March to December, I have seen friends on line descending into madness and hate of unseen magnitudes. First, they started sharing small misinformation pieces, then they followed with larger, easily debunked conspiracy theories, to end the year with a total denial of reality on every level: science, reason and politics. Even worse, they attack anyone who does not agree with them on a personal level, suddenly employing racism and hate. 

While watching all this is heartbreaking and sad, it has also opened my eyes further into the world of antiscience and religious bigotry. One interesting observation I have made from all the interaction with such people is that the more religious people are on the outside, the more hate they seem to generate when dealing with opposing ideas and political views. I guess this should not come as a surprise to anyone who has watched religious fanatics for any period of time, but it is still hard to stomach when your closest friend are the source.

Interesting article describing the issue can be found here: The pandemic has destroyed friendships and divided families

Let's hope 2021 will be better and less stressful.

Visiting Poland - Better Make Sure You Are Heathly

If Poland is in your vacation plans, make sure you visit your trusted doctor first, stock up on medicine and hope (dare I say, pray) that nothing happens to you, when you are there.

Why? Because faith healing seems to be gaining popularity in that country (full disclosure: I was born there and spent the first 19 years of my life there) and I would not want to be caught sick there, knowing that depending on the doctor you end up with, your therapy might be prayer.

To give you more detail, while the health care is considered to be free and widely available in Poland, the quality is lacking and the availability is restricted by long wait times (months) and extensive restrictions on residency. To top that off, recently, with a strong backing of the very powerful Catholic Church, the doctors there were asked to sign a "Declaration of Faith", which basically gives them a way out of any modern standard of care, based on their "conscience". While signing of this document was voluntary, given the pressure coming from the Church and the local communities, I suspect there will be more and more doctors, who are afraid of performing some controversial procedures, even though they are medically viable and legal under the local law.

While the majority of discussions around this topic were focusing on abortion, it also affects other reproductive rights and many "end-of-life" issues. The problem here is not with anyone's faith, conscience, or anything in between. The problem is with a very personal decision by a someone who should be following scientific knowledge and who is expected to do so in the best interest of a patient. How do we decide where that "freedom of conscience" ends for a given set of beliefs? Is it only abortion, contraception, blood transfusions, separation of men and women in health care, prolonging unnecessary treatments, or refusing some others? Where and how that thin line is drawn? Who makes that decision?

I, for sure, would not want to end up under care of someone who thinks he (or she) knows better, based on their faith and not reason and science. So, if you are going to visit Poland anytime soon, make sure your are healthy, or your best bet might just be to pray (literally).

The Countries I Would Not Want To Visit

... or live in, for that matter.

Here is an interesting article in the Washington Post, that shows what countries in the world have apostasy laws (you get prosecuted for leaving your religion) and blasphemy laws (NO freedom of speech):

MAP: Where offending a religion could get you executed

Unfortunately, my native Poland is on the list of countries with an active blasphemy laws. Not only it has that law on the books, but it is used pretty often to silence people from expressing their views. The cases are numerous: here, here and here (in Polish).

Blasphemy laws are just a way to limit free speech, and there are no excuses for them in civilized countries. We all should have complete freedom of discussion of any topic, as that's the only way to ensure that all ideas have a chance to be heard. Bad ideas and crazy beliefs should be eliminated from the public forum, buy showing their weaknesses, not by legislating them out of existence.

What's the Harm? - Part 2

So, after a brief hiatus on my part, with too many projects to complete to count, I have time to brows the news from time to time again.

And, after my last post, I have another depressing news item to share from the "what's the harm?" department.

There are news links in Polish here and here (sorry, I could not find an English version).

To summarize:

A six moth old girl was found dead a few weeks ago in the town of Brzezna in the south of Poland, while in care of her parents. It was determined that she had died as a result of malnutrition. After some initial investigation, it was also determined that the parents started using a "natural" approach for the baby's care, including refusal of any vaccines, lack of medical care and a whole bunch of holistic feeding techniques. They attempted to follow advice from a faith healer, who allegedly told the parents to use skim milk and herbs as the baby's diet staple. The healer, called "God's Man" in the area, is well known for advocating abandoning regular medical care and using herbs, fasting and prayer as remedies for any ailments (including cancer!!!).

This case is not the first one for the supposedly "godly" man. A few years ago it was alleged that he had caused a death of a five year old boy, who had kidney problems. After initial, positive reactions to the standard, hospital medical care, the mother took the boy to the healer and believed in his "miraculous" approach, which ultimately resulted in boy's death.

Those two cases are clear answers to the argument for the alternative medicine that I hear very often: "what's the harm?". The answer is very simple, the harm is in believing that unproven, often completely nonsensical treatments can and do work. When someone abandons reason and critical thinking in small cases, it is easy to do the same in cases that can cause harm, death and destruction. Belief in miracles, prayer, alternative medicine (like homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture, etc) when your life, or life of your loved ones, is at stake, can really be deadly.

I Don't Understand Creationism

I have never understood creationism... it is so out of touch with reality and so disconnected from any logic that it defies any explanation. Yes, it might have been somehow compelling 500 years ago, when scientific evidence for pretty much anything around us was scarce, but by the last century, there were no reasons to stick with it. One has to have some really strong cognitive dissonance going in order to remain in the pure creationism camp (the earth being 6000 years old, geological strata deposited by a great flood, etc). Even the newer incarnation of creationism, Intelligent Design (ID), does not pass logical and scientific analysis, because it bases itself on faulty understanding of physics and biology.

To illustrate my point I give you the latest Science vs. Nonsense Debate:




What's even more interesting than the debate itself, was an "experiment" done right before it took place, when a reporter asked a bunch of people coming to see the debate to write questions for Bill Nye. Here is the result:

22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution

Some of those questions are pure gold... and for most of the people who have even the basic understanding of science, they are either nonsensical, or very easy to answer, but there are two sources that are worth reading:

Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy Blog: Answers for Creationists
and
Steven Novella's NeuroLogica: Questions from the Nye-Ham Debate

Great Education - Not!

If you want great education for your kids (and who does not), here is a map that shows you where NOT to send them to obtain it:

Map: Publicly Funded Schools That Are Allowed to Teach Creationism.

Sunday School is one place to get religious education and that's where it belongs. Outside of that, public schools, or schools that receive public, tax funds, should be teaching solid science in science classes. I'm disturbed by how Florida looks like on this map. Hopefully, this issue can be addressed by some changes in law to prohibit my tax dollars from being used in that fashion.

Freedom of Speech for Bloggers

Good (if not GREAT!!!) news for all of us bloggers. The First Amendment rights seem to be applying to us the same way as they are to the regular journalist. The courts just affirmed that:

From the FreethoughtBlogs:

The Ninth Circuit U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last Friday that bloggers have the same free speech protections as journalists.

Even more extensive analysis from the Popehat: Protecting The Free Speech of Censors: The Crystal Cox Saga

Why is this important? Because when you criticize ideas in public forums like the Internet, there are always people who don't want discussions based on merits, usually when there is a significant financial gain at stake. This is especially the case with alt-med and faith-based endeavors, which love to intimidate bloggers by sending fake "legal" threat and attempting to sue us into silence.

This legal victory is great for all of us, bloggers and general public alike, as it makes rational criticism protected and it enables discussions that are based on facts, and not someone's opinions.

It's About Money...?

Big hit, lots of money to be made...

In the meantime, anyone can pay sixty dollars to access his webinar guided-meditation series, "Discover Your Own Proof of Heaven," and he's been consulting with a pair of experts in "archaeoacoustics" to re-create some of the music that he heard while on his journey. You can even pay to join him on a "healing journey" through Greece.

If you are not sure what it is about... it's probably about money:

The Prophet

Stupid Quote of the Day

Here is a stupid quote of the day, from a pastor of a church in Texas, who encouraged her flock not to vaccinate, so they got themselves a little outbreak of measles:

"So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts..."

Here is the whole story from NPR: Texas Megachurch At Center Of Measles Outbreak

Now... That's Funny!!!

Here, laugh away!!!

Is Science an Enemy of Humanity?

There is an interesting debate going on, on the virtual pages of the New York Times. It's a rather standard creationism vs. science/evolution exchange of ideas, started by an article "Why I'm a Creationist", written by Virginia Heffernan, that attracted some well-deserved criticism, and was answered by Steven Pinker in an article titled "Science Is Not Your Enemy". I have to confess that I find myself much more attached the Pinker's side (obviously):

In other words, the worldview that guides the moral and spiritual values of an educated person today is the worldview given to us by science. Though the scientific facts do not by themselves dictate values, they certainly hem in the possibilities. By stripping ecclesiastical authority of its credibility on factual matters, they cast doubt on its claims to certitude in matters of morality. The scientific refutation of the theory of vengeful gods and occult forces undermines practices such as human sacrifice, witch hunts, faith healing, trial by ordeal, and the persecution of heretics. The facts of science, by exposing the absence of purpose in the laws governing the universe, force us to take responsibility for the welfare of ourselves, our species, and our planet. For the same reason, they undercut any moral or political system based on mystical forces, quests, destinies, dialectics, struggles, or messianic ages. And in combination with a few unexceptionable convictions— that all of us value our own welfare and that we are social beings who impinge on each other and can negotiate codes of conduct—the scientific facts militate toward a defensible morality, namely adhering to principles that maximize the flourishing of humans and other sentient beings. This humanism, which is inextricable from a scientific understanding of the world, is becoming the de facto morality of modern democracies, international organizations, and liberalizing religions, and its unfulfilled promises define the moral imperatives we face today.

than to any of his opponents, especially, the religious and the politically motivated ones. Like the one from Ross Douthat:

Because we know the universe has no purpose, we must imbue it with the purposes of a (non-species-ist) liberal cosmopolitanism! Because of science, we know that modern civilization has no dialectic or destiny … so we must pursue its “unfulfilled promises” and accept its “moral imperatives” instead!

Ouch... do I smell "ad-hominem" attack? Call Pinker some names, and disregard his stance that only rational analysis and scientific thinking has been proven to better the human race for ages.

There is also a typical "science requires faith too" gibberish:

But this belief in science collapses on itself: there is no scientific evidence to prove that science is the only reliable way to discover truth. Once we take unproven hypotheses and dogmatize them, we have moved beyond scientific evidence into philosophical reflection on truth and the scientific method. Naturalist or not, when it comes to the world’s origins, we are all in the realm of faith.

Nope... there is no faith in science. Not in the way you would want to. It's just about simple rational thinking and understanding that, only via this avenue, we can learn anything useful about the world that surrounds us.

It's good to see that there are some, who understand it:

We need not, however, enter into simplistic debates that lead to endless conflict. Rather, we can bring science and the humanities together to explore a new synergy of scientific fact and human values. Recognizing that we are now understanding these evolutionary processes through science and appreciating them through art, poetry, literature, music and spirituality gives us an opportunity to discover our own role in this unfolding story.

Science does not invalidate humanism, poetry, art, and countless other "soul-based" activities. It enhances them and makes them work pursuing, especially when we realize we have very little time to do it.

What Do We Do?

Summer, vacation, whatever... I was not able to pass by this one.

We are in a real pickle...

On one hand, following the Pope on Twitter gets you out of purgatory:

[...] a Vatican court has ruled that following Pope Francis online and on Twitter can earn believers time off from their sentence to purgatory for confessed and forgiven sins...

On the other hand, the Saudis say that Twitter takes you straight to Hell:

Sheikh Abdul Latif Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh said anyone using social media sites - and especially Twitter - "has lost this world and his afterlife".

So... what do you do? I'd say, we need to break the tie, maybe consult a third party?

Yes, It Is Summer...

It's vacation time, so no posts for a while. No time, and no energy. Too bad, because there is plenty of woo-woo and craziness to go around, despite the lazy time of the year.

Check this out: Pastor behind Koran burning looking for Tampa Bay location

Some neighbor to have, huh? All we need is for the Westboro Baptist Church to show up, and we are all set as far as nutcases go.

However, it is vacation time after all, time for relaxation and rest, so no more grim news.

Republican Denial of Reality?

I would like to make my point from a few days ago (can you be smart and a Republican at the same time) even stronger, so I present you with a few more interesting bits of information I stumbled upon on the Web.

1. An article from Slate, by Phil Plate: Why is Our Government Attacking Science?
2. Again, from Slate: Mandating Scientific Discovery Never Works, by Lawrence Krauss.

Both authors are great scientist (see Plait's "Death from the Skies!: The Science Behind the End of the World" and Krauss' "A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing"), and both of them understand how science works extremely well. On the other hand the Republicans in the government seem to only accept science that is convenient for them, either politically, or ideologically. And that, of course, will take us back to the times where science, "reason" and philosophy were in the service of the rulers. We still call those times "The Dark Ages", and for a very good reason.

On Cognitive Dissonance, or How We Reinforce Our Beliefs

We all go through life with a set of solid, well established beliefs. We acquire some of them from our parents, other ones in a process of our education, and some we seek out on our own, settling into something comfortable and familiar that drives our everyday lives.

This process of establishing one's identity is interesting, but what is even more captivating, from my point of view, is how we hold on to those beliefs throughout our lives. After all, we get most of them in our formative years, when we are young and easily influenced. However, we manage to hold on to many of them for the rest of our lives, even when they don't make sense, even when facts and everyday experiences tell us there are absolutely no reasons behind them.

This ranges from deeply "spiritual" beliefs, to those that might affect our health (e.g. alternative medicine vs. science-based medicine), to something as mundane as superstitions (knock on wood anyone?). I've been always fascinated with how this works... people, who are seemingly very rational, who pride themselves in conducting their daily lives based only on rational, methodical decisions, who spend better part of their education in science, can completely disregard reason and logical thinking when it comes to some beliefs, which seem to be completely immune from any criticism and skepticism. How many rational people would use oscillococcinum, or echinacea for cold, even though there is no clinical evidence that they work. Why do we ridicule homeopathy, but think that some other alternative medicine modality will help? Why do we laugh at beliefs from other parts of the world, but get offended when someone does the same to our own convictions?

Of course, in psychology, this is not a new question. A theory of cognitive dissonance has been around since 1957, and it states:

The theory of cognitive dissonance in social psychology proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by altering existing cognitions, adding new ones to create a consistent belief system, or alternatively by reducing the importance of any one of the dissonant elements.^[1] It is the distressing mental state that people feel when they "find themselves doing things that don't fit with what they know, or having opinions that do not fit with other opinions they hold."^[4] A key assumption is that people want their expectations to meet reality, creating a sense of equilibrium.^[5] Likewise, another assumption is that a person will avoid situations or information sources that give rise to feelings of uneasiness, or dissonance.

Even better source of popular information about this fascinating topic is a book by Caroll Tavris and Elliot Aronson: "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts".

It is easy, in line with the theory of cognitive dissonance, to point mistakes in others, to see their foolishness and stupidity, but much harder to do the same to ourselves. As great physicist and Nobel Prize winner, Richard Feynman once said:

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool."

But the first step of not fooling yourself is the knowledge of the principles and psychological mechanisms of such processes. Questioning every belief, and every idea, seemingly set in stone, is the only way to weed out the nonsense and superstition.

Breakthrough In Physics: Florida Figures Out Time Travel!!!

Yes, that Nobel Prize winning feast has been accomplished in Marion County, in Central Florida, where they are bringing back beatings in elementary schools.

Gradebook reports:

Marion schools bring back paddling punishment

As the Ocala Star Banner reports as well:

The board ruled that paddling can be used only if a parent gives a standing written OK once a year. In addition, the principal must obtain verbal permission at the time the punishment is handed down. Under the policy, corporal punishment can only be used at the elementary school level. It can only be used on a child once a semester.

I would giggle reading it, if it weren't a bit scary. It also made me double-check the calendar to make sure we are in 2013. So, I guess, they did figure out how to go back in time after all. Not very shocking, since that area of Central Florida is very "conservative", if you know what I mean.

Relative Morality

My interest in moral dilemmas was "tickled" recently, when I had heard a religious person stating that "stealing a dollar from a rich person is not as bad as stealing it from a poor one". Now, my reaction to such a statement in any other setting would be to ask a few follow up questions, but in this case, what struck me the most is the fact that the statement came from someone, who would be the first one accusing others (especially non-religious) of moral relativism.

In my mind, if we do not have any additional information, the question is simple to answer: there is no difference, when you are stealing from poor, or rich. A theft is a theft and, since your actions cause harm (physical, or mental) to others, they are morally wrong. We can, of course, expand this problem, by introducing variables, like your own wealth, or your current situation (Les Miserables comes to mind), and such differences can considerably change the outcome.

In any case, the answer might never be as obvious as one would expect, but my surprise was not so much with the problem itself, but with the person who stated it and "solved" it using some pretty relativistic criteria.

To follow up, here are some interesting readings on various moral philosophies and dilemmas:
1. Moral Dilemma: Would You Kill One Person to Save Five?
2. Stealing from the Rich
3. On ethics, part I: Moral philosophy’s third way
4. On ethics, part II: Consequentialism
5. On ethics, part III: Deontology
6. Of trolleys and morality

Why Do We Pick Idiots To Run Our Country?

Yes, I agree it's rather harsh to say that, but after Florida's very own senator, Marco Rubio said this:

I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

in an interview for GQ, as an answer to the question about the age of the Earth, the only two choices are:

1. Crackpot.
2. Liar, who knows the real and scientific answer, but lies to all of us for political reasons.

I admit, #2 is very probable for any politician, but I also want to believe that nobody would consciously and purposefully, expose himself or herself to this kind of ridicule, so I'll stick with my initial assessment.

Let me point to an excellent Bad Astronomy blog, for an expanded explanation of why we all should start picking our government representatives a bit more carefully: they are elected to make decisions that are very complex, require critical thinking skills and can affect all of us (and sometimes even the world). Of course, this is not new and not even rare, especially from the politicians on the right (a.k.a. the Republicans). The scary part is that Rubio is considered a "rising star" in the Republican Party and we might have to endure his misguided views more than we care for.

Finally, the 2012 Election is Over

I'm very glad the crazy political season in America is over. This time around it was especially annoying, with all the adds and calls and e-mails, and just plain insanity of pushing one candidate over the other (and that's not to mention all the local political ads that were equally bad, if not worse).

I'm also very happy with local Florida voters overwhelmingly rejecting a few constitutional amendments, including misguided Amendment 8, which, despite its name (Florida Religious Freedom Amendment), was not about religious freedom, but rather about tax dollars funding religious activities. Amendment 6 also went down in flames and for good reasons, as it was injecting politics into personal health care issues.

Generally speaking, while it's good to see reason and critical thinking winning (I'm glad our president will not be making important decisions peering into a magic hat), it's still pretty scary to see that "unreason" can be sold to almost 50% of the nation, hook, line and sinker.

I also hope that, after highly political campaign, when some issues could not be mentioned, out of fear of loosing precious votes, we might finally deal with problems like global warming, especially since the Hurricane Sandy clearly showed us what direction our planet is heading.

Now, it's time to move on to more important things, like everyday skepticism and fighting lack of critical thinking in our lives.

Quote of the Day - From a "Science-Loving" Politician

So, where are we heading as a country, if a person, who sits on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology says something like that:

“All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell, and it’s lies to try to keep me and all the folks who are taught that from understanding that they need a savior.”

Impressive and scary, given the fact that this guy, U.S. Rep. Paul C. Broun (R., Ga.), is partially responsible for making decisions that drive science and engineering in this country and potentially affect our future.

But... Mr. Broun is not alone on the committee. Salon.com has some additional "science-literate" politicians:

Least scientific members of the House Science Committee

It's also good to see the Science Guy, Bill Nye weighting in:

Bill Nye: Paul Broun 'Unqualified To Make Decisions About Science, Space, And Technology'

I guess, your brains are not really important in politics, but it should not come as a surprise after all. You can go pretty far in this country, believing that Jews came to America in 600 B.C. and left their story written on the golden plates that can be translated by looking into a magic hat with some stones in it... Priceless!