Rationally Speaking

I’m an occasional reader of Rationally Speaking, a blog by Prof. Massimo Pigliucci. He and Richard Dawkins are my favorite scientists/atheists. In this post he publishes an argument with Christian evolutionist Ken Miller. He is an evolutionary scientist and has said that it is not incompatible with evolution. They mostly agree and the argument is mostly picking of nits, but I like that kind of stuff.

I posted a comment that I thought deserved it’s own blog post, and I couldn’t resist expanding on it:
__________________________

Image via Wikipedia

I have long been annoyed that when an atheist suggests that an omni-benevolent god could not have created this world filled with the tremendous suffering of humans and animals, nature red in tooth and claw, they claim that God would then have to make a boring world where nothing can change and nothing can be achieved and free will does not exist.

There are 2 major flaws with this argument, the first is - isn't that exactly what Heaven is supposed to be? Why is Heaven so desirable for after we die but would be a terrible thing to have in this world, here and now?

The second is that there are many degrees in between this world and one with no suffering at all. Imagine a world with no illness, where humans healed as quickly as Wolverine, no earthquakes either. Humans would still be capable of good and evil, cowardice and courage, and the seeking and creation of beauty and science. It would just eliminate the very worst things that can happen in life.

And an all powerful god could easily create such a universe, or any one of an infinite number of such universes that are better than this one, including ones that no human mind could ever think of.

The answer is this world could only come from a god who was either not all powerful or else not all loving. Or, if this really was the best he could do then Heaven has to be just like this.

Image via Wikipedia

The obvious answer, of course, is that this universe appears exactly the way one that grew on it’s own through cause and effect would look, not one that is created. My favorite analogy is to compare a forest untouched by man and a Zen garden. It’s incredibly clear which one has had careful maintenance and which one grew wild.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Dawkins on the Truth of Evolution (littlegreenfootballs.com)

Bipartisanship

Massimo Pigliucci is one of my favorite writers on philosophy and politics. Despite the fact that he’s a scientist he writes often on these things and I’ve found myself in agreement with him almost every time, even more than I agree with Dawkins. He really nails my feelings of bipartisanship in his latest blog entry: Why I don’t believe in bipartisanship:

Let me start with an example from my native country, Italy. For the past couple of decades Italy has been de facto a country with two parties: although there are in theory many parties big and small, they gravitate toward one of two “poles,” and it is one or the other of these two coalitions that has held power in the country for several years at a time. Now, just like in the US, the Italian left often speaks of bipartisanship and cooperation, and they (largely) mean it; as a result, the Italian left gets almost nothing of relevance done while in power. Then it’s the other guys’ turn, and they plunge head down with their agenda, completely oblivious to and even openly scornful of calls for cooperation and compromise. The result is that Italy has been on a steady trajectory to become one of the most regressive, unjust and racist countries in Europe. And unfortunately I do not see a reversal of this slide for many years to come, given the apparent inability of the left to mount any significant opposition to the Berlusconi government.

This is what I’m afraid of, that Obama will bend over backwards to try and create a union with the right wingers and the end results will be actions so watered down as to be worthless or simply obstructionism that prevents anything from getting done. We only have a short time to work before the pendulum swings back to the right so we don’t have time to waste. Even worse, if Obama does not deliver the Democrats might not be in charge past his administration.

When FDR took over and created the New Deal in the 30’s it lasted until 1980 when Reagan started taking it apart. And did Reagan or any Republican ever worry about bipartisanship? Not one damn bit, they plowed ahead and did what they wanted, no matter how outrageous. FDR's legacy of liberalism lasted so long because he was incredibly successful and got a lot done. Obama has to do the same if we want the Democrats to hold power for long. And don't think the Republicans don't know this, they will want to stop as much as they can.

Books to Read

One of my favorite atheist writers is Massimo Pigliucci, his blog is Rationally Speaking. He doesn't write often but when he does it's always worth a read. What he has on today's blog is a list of must read books.

This is his list of Top Ten books on Evolution.

And this is his Top Ten for Philosophy.

This is on Amazon with a note from Massimo on each book. I have to admit I haven't read even one of these, but I've heard about most of them, read parts of them and read people talking about them. It seems odd that a defender of evolution such as myself, with a better than average knowledge of the subject has never read Origin of Species by Darwin. When it comes to scientific stuff I prefer magazine articles, entire books can be very daunting, plus I know that many things have changed in evolutionary science since Darwin's day so I tend to think it's better to read more modern things.

Carnival of the Godless!

Carnival of the Godless is a wonderful little post on Atheist Revolution that has links to quite a few blogs writing about atheism. It's a real treasure trove that could take quite a while to get through. I have to thank PZ Myers of Pharyngula for the link. I usually don't like leaving comments on blogs but I felt compelled to leave some on his earlier postings and he will now be a regular for me on Google Reader.
___________________________

Another good post can be found at Rationally Speaking, a blog by Massimo Pigliucci, talking about the presidential abuse of power in American. We owe a great debt to Washington for refusing to be king. At the end of the revolution many wanted him crowned but he refused, at the end of his 2 terms as president the public cry was, once again, for him to be king. His comment was “I did not battle George the III all those years just to become George I.” Without his great humility we might never have been a democracy. But he was also the first president to invoke Presidential Privilege, which was not mentioned in the constitution when they drew up the blueprint of presidential powers.

Massimo Pigliucci

Massimo Pigliucci is my second favorite skeptic after Richard Dawkins and I just discovered he has a blog! Can't believe I never thought to look for one. It's called Rationally Speaking and I'm going to put it in my links on the right. And on the blog they have links to his other web sites, and there are quite a few; science, skeptic and philosophy.

And on top of of that I also just discovered that Dan Barker does podcasts! What a day this has been!

I have my email friend, Dr. Don, to thank for the links.