Heaving Dead Cats » Think

The New Ten Commandments

Neece — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:45:59 +0000

Awhile ago I wrote about the 10 commandments. I then rewrote them for my personal moral code, calling them Neece’s Principles. No need to have anyone commanding anyone.

Christopher Hitchens just wrote a 3 page piece for Vanity Fair about the 10 commandments titled The New Commandments. He goes through the KJV version and talks about where they are good and where they are not so good. Here is his summation:

What emerges from the first review is this: the Ten Commandments were derived from situational ethics. They show every symptom of having been man-made and improvised under pressure. They are addressed to a nomadic tribe whose main economy is primitive agriculture and whose wealth is sometimes counted in people as well as animals. They are also addressed to a group that has been promised the land and flocks of other people: the Amalekites and Midianites and others whom God orders them to kill, rape, enslave, or exterminate. And this, too, is important because at every step of their arduous journey the Israelites are reminded to keep to the laws, not because they are right but just because they will lead them to become conquerors (of, as it happens, almost the only part of the Middle East that has no oil).

So here is a rundown of how he fixes them:

One to Three can go, “since they have nothing to do with morality and are no more than a long, rasping throat clearing by an admittedly touchy dictator. Mere fear of unseen authority is not a sound basis for ethics.” (the invisible sky daddy flexes his muscles and demands worship.).
He also says we don’t have to ban sculpture and art (idols).
Four. Gone. Pointless. (don’t work on the sabbath, except black sabbath, of course!)
Five, respect elders, sure. But also ban child abuse. What a concept! (I’d add that parents should only get respect like anyone else, when they earn it.)
Six, taken care of by modern law. Don’t murder. (Don’t kill under almost all circumstances.) (although I think assisted suicide for terminally ill people should be legal)
Seven, he seems to destroy too. (adultery) (and yeah, what about saying rape is bad? especially pedophilia and that kind of stuff?)
Eight, ok. This one is good. Don’t steal. (stealing)
Nine, don’t lie. Also basically good. (lying about your neighbor)
Ten, women aren’t property. This one is pointless and harmful in that it makes you a sinner just from your thoughts. (don’t lust after your neighbor’s goods or wife)

Other evils of human society that should be denounced, according to Hitchens:

genocide
slavery
rape
child abuse
sexual repression
white-collar crime
wanton destruction of the natural world
people who talk on cell phones in restaurants (and movie theatres, or who talk on the phone or text while driving!)
people who blow themselves up while shouting ‘god is great!’ (and any other kind of jihadism or crusade)
racism
using people as private property
condemning people for their inborn nature (like homosexuality, etc)

And this is how he finishes:

“Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above. In short: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.”

Good advice! I think I stand by the principles I came up with for myself. What are yours? Do you agree with Christopher Hitchens?

Don’t Assume I’m A Sensitive Soul

Neece — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:30:27 +0000

I received this email from a woman the other day. After careful thought I replied to it and decided it was worth sharing.

Here is the email in its entirety:

Thank you for sharing “Wild Geese”. After Joe Biden used most of this poem as his reflection upon the anniversary of 9/11, I went in search of the poem. The two of Mary Oliver’s collections I own did not include it. I was happy to find it at your site and amazed, actually. Amazed and delighted, because a poem I find so “religious” is at the same time such a balm for you. I grew up Roman Catholic; I am now an Episcopal priest. I am convinced after 20 years that what most people throw away – the cats they heave – are indeed worth heaving. Sometimes we have to go deeper, below the interpretations of history, to find our own deeper truth.

Yes, a “barbarous” God exists in the pages of the Bible: What all-kind God and Father would will the death of a Beloved Son? How could God command Abraham to kill his son Isaac as a test of faith? Isn’t that sadistic? Yes, indeed. On the face of it. For us in the 21st century these stories are barbaric. They are foreign to our experience. They were not foreign to the persons for whom they were written when the “first fruits” in ancient societies were offered up to the deity – including in some cases, the first born child. In some places in later writings there seems to be a critique of these practices in the Bible itself. The question becomes, it seems to me, is it worth reinterpreting these stories for our own time, or do we jettison them and replace them with our own stories of sacrificial obedience and love? Yes, life does involve sacrifice – we give up our children constantly to the gods of war who exact a savage price. There are no rams in the thicket to take their place …

But the same source of barbarism comments on itself in texts of amazing love and mercy. We cannot hear these texts enough.

I hope the love, mercy is what you kept when you threw away the dead cat of guilt and the burdens of all that teaching that depressed and suffocated you. If you are still seeking a metaphor or metaphors for the love that is the universe and your place in it, Mary Oliver’s poetry surely hints at it in all its complexity. It is worth the search if you are willing to expand your conversation to include persons who have made a transition through the grief and disillusion you have experienced.

You have purified your heart. You have surrounded yourself with friends eager to share what they’ve rejected. Is it time to resume the search for what you seek and share what you have found as a replacement that has enriched you spiritually, given you new life? Perhaps you have done so.

Please forgive me if I’ve “pried” too much or presumed too much. You are obviously a sensitive soul. Thank you again for sharing a favorite poem.

And here is my reply:

Thank you for your email. I’m glad you enjoyed Wild Geese. It’s a great poem. Funny that you find it religious. It seems very anti-religious to me, which is why I like it. I guess it’s down to interpretation. I also think you are very presumptuous with your assumptions of me. My character is not nearly as weak as you suggest. The poem is not a balm to me. I find it inspirational, but I don’t need to be soothed by it. I find it delightful. Perhaps it might be best to not assume what others are thinking and maybe just ask them.

You immediately go into apologetics with your loose, cherry-picked interpretations of the bible. If a caring, loving god inspired the words of the bible, I’m sure slavery would not have been condoned, nor the rape of daughters, nor the hatred of your own family (that was Jesus, by the way. How loving was that?) If it can’t be taken literally, then the whole book is just about how you interpret it, which means it can mean anything, which means it’s completely worthless as a guide. It IS completely worthless as a guide anyway. It was written in the middle east in the iron age by goat herders. It has zero relevance for today. It is filled with hate and murder with the occasional rape. Lovely. How you can find anything worthwhile in there is beyond me.

What little bit of “wisdom” in the bible is not original or new. The Golden Rule? Older than Jesus. He didn’t come up with it. If he even existed, which is highly doubtful.

So no, it isn’t worth reinterpreting those fables into stories for our own time. We don’t need them. They fuel hate in people who interpret them literally, and just confuse good people who think they are the word of their god. They are completely useless to society.

And no, why do we need to replace them with more sacrificial obedience? Why do you need that? How is that healthy to anyone? Love, sure. We can all use love. But the bible is very thin in that department. Give me a book like The Golden Compass. That has love. And even sacrifice for the good of all mankind. A great epic story with no mixed messages to confuse people. It even has god.

Life involves compromise and sometimes sacrifice. But teaching children ethics, critical thinking and basic philosophy while giving them love will give them the structure they need to build their own moral code. Not one based on blind obedience and fear of eternal damnation if they make a mistake. How could a loving god torture his creation for all eternity just because they aren’t blindly worshiping him? He needs some serious psychotherapy. That’s insane.

I kept nothing from the bible or my early indoctrination into christianity. I have jettisoned the guilt and fear. There was no love to be had. There was only that blind sacrificial obedience you mentioned. That is not love. That is sickness.

And you presumed again that it depressed and suffocated me. I find that offensive that you would presume to know me. Do you talk to your parishioners with such condescension? Why not ask someone what they are thinking instead of arrogantly assuming. I did not experience grief. Although of course I was disillusioned by the lies of religion.

Shaking off the lies of the church, ridding myself of that sick pack of lies was the most liberating, uplifting, positive step I’ve ever taken.

Again, you presume that I am seeking some great truth. How patronizing. For me, the completely natural workings of the universe inspire and awe me daily. That is my truth and I am quite happy to explore it often. I don’t need to find some god or false belief in a supreme being, or the ridiculous reward of an afterlife. I am happy to have nature in all its complexity. Science is fantastic. That’s all I need. It’s quite satisfying to rid myself of superstitions and myths. You should try it. It’s quite liberating. Maybe it will help you to ask people their feelings and thoughts instead of filtering what you think they experience through your own worldview.

Oh, and you don’t know who my friends are either. Again with the presumptions. I guess you probably don’t think I”m a sensitive soul anymore. Well, when someone I’ve never met claims to know me so intimately, I get a bit irritated. I don’t have a soul. Neither do you. Live this life for today, not for a future promise which doesn’t exist.

I’m glad you enjoyed the poem. But just because I like it too, obviously for very different reasons, doesn’t mean I think like you or share your delusions.

I hope someday you too can shake off the shackles of blind faith, sacrificial obedience, repression and future rewards for constant servitude.

Have a great day!

2 New Symphony of Science Songs, One Helpful Diagram

Neece — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:08:38 +0000

First a funny and accurate poster about The Believer, then awesome science music. Thanks to Pharyngula who found this:

Awhile ago I shared the Symphony of Science, which is music made out of scientists talking using AutoTune (I believe that’s what it’s called). Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Richard Dawkins and many others lend their voices for these songs that are quite inspiring. One thing, they are very different. The first time I heard one, I thought it was really strange and didn’t care for it. But after a few minutes, I really fell in love with them.

There are two new songs. Here are their videos. Go to Symphony of Science to download the songs or videos, or to donate to the project.

The Unbroken Thread (4 minutes)

Lyrics:
(Carl Sagan’s lyrics written by Carl Sagan, Ann Druyan and Steven Soter)

[David Attenborough]
All life is related
And it enables us to construct with confidence
The complex tree that represents the history of life

Our planet, the Earth, is as far as we know
Unique in the universe; it contains life
Here plants and animals proliferate in such numbers
That we still have not even named all the different species

Darwin’s great insight revolutionized the way in which we see the world
We now understand why there are so many different species

[Carl Sagan]
Every cell is a triumph of natural selection
And we’re made of trillions of cells (Within us is a little universe)
Those are some of the things that molecules do
Given four billions years of evolution (We are, each of us, a multitude)

Now how did the molecules of life arise?

[Attenborough]
It began in the sea
Some 3 thousand million years ago
Complex chemical molecules began to clump together

These were the “seeds”
From which the tree of life developed
They were able to split, replicating themselves
As bacteria do

[Sagan]
The secrets of evolution
Are time and death
There’s an unbroken thread that stretches
From those first cells to us

(refrain)

[Jane Goodall]
There isn’t a sharp line dividing humans
from the rest of the animal kingdom
It’s a very wuzzie line

It’s a very wuzzie line,
and it’s getting wuzzier
All the time

We find animals doing things that we,
In our arrogance,
Used to think was “just human”

(refrain)

[Attenborough]
Its continued survival now rests in our hands

The Poetry of Reality (~3 minutes)

Lyrics:
(Carl Sagan’s lyrics written by Carl Sagan, Ann Druyan and Steven Soter)

[Michael Shermer]
Science is the best tool ever devised
For understanding how the world works

[Jacob Bronowski]
Science is a very human form of knowledge
We are always at the brink of the known

[Carl Sagan]
Science is a collaborative enterprise
Spanning the generations
We remember those who prepared the way
Seeing for them also

[Neil deGrasse Tyson]
If you’re scientifically literate,
The world looks very different to you
And that understanding empowers you

Refrain:
[Richard Dawkins]
There’s real poetry in the real world
Science is the poetry of reality

[Sagan]
We can do science
And with it, we can improve our lives

[Jill Tarter]
The story of humans is the story of ideas
That shine light into dark corners

[Lawrence Krauss]
Scientists love mysteries
They love not knowing
[Richard Feynman]
I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things
I think it’s much more interesting

[Brian Greene]
There’s a larger universal reality
of which we are all a part

[Stephen Hawking]
The further we probe into the universe
The more remarkable are the discoveries we make

[Carolyn Porco]
The quest for the truth, in and of itself,
Is a story that’s filled with insights

(Refrain)

[Greene]
From our lonely point in the cosmos
We have through the power of thought
Been able to peer back to a brief moment
After the beginning of the universe

[PZ Meyers]
I think that science changes the way your mind works
To think a little more deeply about things

[Dawkins]
Science replaces private predjudice
With publicly verifiable evidence
(Refrain)

The Secret Divides Part 2

Neece — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:40:16 +0000

The other day I wrote about a woman named Ruth who emailed me asking for some advice. Ruth’s sister Esther (not their real names for their privacy) had been introduced to The Secret by her husband and now avoided Ruth because she said she is toxic. The first post is called The Secret Divides and I gave my initial opinion, then asked Ruth for some clarification, as well as asked you for your take on the situation.

Ruth said the following:

My sister and I are 5 years apart, she is in her late 30s I am in my early 30s. We live on opposite sides of the country.

[Esther and I] talked on Christmas – but only if I agreed to be play nice. We did exchange gifts. As long as I am willing to play along, she will speak to me – but it is obviously strained and only to make my mom happy. I have always had issues with hypocrisy or injustice – and I hate the fact that she doesn’t have the respect for me and my feelings that she expects for herself – but I try.

Is there anything within the teachings that I can use to help her see my even a tiny bit of the pain that we feel when she says Dad, Grandma or I got what we asked for? I don’t want to destroy her belief – she has a right to it and I can respect that – as hard as it is for me to refrain from argument.

I am not the kind to sit and let people wallow in ignorance. I take serious exception when someone comes to a conclusion based on erroneous fact or assumption – that is my job. It is my job to present evidence and arguments and win. I can’t do that here – and that alone throws me so off balance I am unsure how to proceed.

I have been thinking about this for 2 days. I’m afraid I can’t really give Ruth what she’s after. I don’t have a copy of The Secret but I am quite familiar with the law of attraction as I spelled out awhile ago in a post called The Law of Attraction, and the Secret, are Bullshit. For your convenience, here are the basic rules for the law of attraction again:

Thoughts have an energy that attracts like energy (sometimes borrowed from Quantum Mechanics, minus any evidence). You must control this energy by practicing four things:

Know what you want.
Ask the universe for it.
Feel and behave as if the object of your desire is already with you, or is on its way to you.
Be open to receiving it.

Of course, if you think negative thoughts, the universe will manifest those negative thoughts in your life as well. So you must think positively at all times so that the universe will manifest all of your desires.

You might notice a few things when you read over the basic concept. Namely, the narcissistic and egocentric worldview, devoid of thinking about the needs and desires of our fellow man. The whole universe magically follows your every thought, tallies them up and does your bidding if you concentrate those thoughts. So the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth, the universe revolves around YOU. It’s sort of like having your own personal genie or god.

Where in all of this can you find compassion for our fellow man? Nowhere, especially if those less knowledgeable about the petty workings of this busybody universe are normal humans who worry and have negative thoughts. Whatever misfortune befalls those poor saps had it coming to them. That is an extremely harmful worldview, not to mention devoid of reality, common sense and compassion.

So Ruth is feeling the full sting of The Secret. Her sister has deemed her toxic because she has had physical problems since she was in her early teens. According to Esther, Ruth has attracted her ailments to her, that she asked to be sick.

This is the farthest concept from empathy I can think of when it comes to someone who is suffering. Instead of showing compassion for her sister, she avoids her, presumably to avoid the magical negative vibes. That’s pretty heartless and uncaring.

So how can Ruth get through to someone who is so cold and self-centered? Esther demands that Ruth play nice, but does she do the same? Esther can make the universe bend to her will, yet she can’t show compassion to her own sister who has health problems, that Ruth’s real-life situation makes her toxic? It has nothing to do with anything based in reality. A book tells her to avoid the negative so she disposes of her sister.

There’s just no way to reason with, or appeal to the emotions of, someone who is willing to do that for her own gain through the manipulation of the universe through her thoughts. It’s self-serving. It’s a belief that is extremely appealing, and easy to confirm whenever the slightest positive thing happens. And if something negative happens, it’s easy to make excuses and use that as a confirmation as well. Cherry-picking extraordinaire!

You can’t make people see the world the way you do. We are all in our own head in that sense. While Ruth can try to gently win her sister over and show through example that life is full of happy and sad, negative and positive, ups and downs, and it’s what you make of it all, well, maybe someday she might change her mind. But Esther seems to have embraced this magical thinking at any cost.

And when you have a false belief based on nothing but a silly book (ahem, religion, anyone?), people who don’t believe the same way are actually a threat to you. They threaten your constructed worldview with facts, reality and conflicting evidence. You are in danger of your belief system falling like a house of cards. It seems like it’s in your best interest to avoid or attack those “others”, even if they are family.

Well, actually it’s in your best interest to seek out differing philosophical perspectives, ask a lot of questions, read and study real science and the actual workings of the universe. The real world is so achingly beautiful. It’s so fascinating and complex. We understand but a small drop in the bucket of nature. There is so much out there that is real and true and interesting and exciting. Why do people feel the need to search for a supernatural answer? That is so lazy. Nature itself will blow your mind if you observe it. There is so much to learn. And it’s all natural. No accountant genies or gods needed.

I have to say a few more things. In talking this over with my friend and my husband, we all agreed that if our sister treated us like Esther, we would probably take a cue from her and think it was a good idea to avoid her for awhile. Why try to have a relationship with someone who doesn’t want one in return? I know, that’s not how we are raised in society. But in my life, my friends and husband are much more important to me than my blood relatives who are all crazy, dysfunctional and dare I say it, toxic. I make my own family with great friends and my husband. True empathy, affection, love and respect are more important to me than similar genes and a childhood history together. But that’s not for everyone.

I also have to say that my opinions are probably a bit more pragmatic and less optimistic than other people might have. If you have differing opinions for Ruth on her situation, please feel free to comment. Or if you want, you can email me privately and I’ll forward it on to Ruth. Also feel free to share any experiences you’ve had with law of attraction. It might be helpful.

The Secret Divides

Neece — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 22:05:08 +0000

As you may know, I make no bones in saying books like The Secret and their ilk are complete bullshit. I wrote about it awhile ago – The Law of Attraction, and the Secret, are Bullshit. Beyond the bullshit I have found them to be harmful if swallowed. If you believe what the book says, you will have a distorted worldview. This can be extremely detrimental to your own thought processes, and as you will see below, can also skew how you look at someone who is in an unfortunate situation.

For example, let’s say you believe that your thoughts dictate what will come to you. Then someone steals your wallet while you’re at the grocery store. According to The Secret, you brought that negative event to you by worrying and thinking negative thoughts. Because you were afraid of having your wallet stolen, you worried about it in the back of your mind, and that made that guy behind you decide to run up and steal it. Wow! You are so powerful! The universe listens to your thoughts and acts upon them, even when you aren’t paying attention!

In this fantasy world, the universe is a busy-body accountant, tallying your thoughts and then scheduling events to correspond. Ridiculous!

So wow, what would happen if you really focused your attention? What would happen if you got rid of all of your negative thoughts (not humanly possible or healthy) and wished for only good things? Perfect health? Wealth? A perfect spouse? Sure, why not! If you can dream it, you can make it happen. (cough cough BULLSHIT!!)

Of course, here’s the catch. It doesn’t happen overnight. In fact, it might be years and years of wishful thinking before something comes true. (Coincidence?!) Oh, and most likely you actually DID things to make it finally happen. Maybe you made decisions and took actions that led to you finally acheiving your dream.

But that’s not magic. The universe doesn’t work the way The Secret says it does. If it did, my life would be very different because of the power of my thoughts.

What do I think about a lot? Well, actually even though I’m a rather happy atheist (with a heart of gold), I tend to worry. I often worry about Butch (my awesome husband) when he drives to and from work. I’m worried he’ll get in an accident. Since we moved to West Virginia the threat of a deer running in front of him has increased drastically than when we lived in Florida. Plus now we have snow and ice instead of just rain and other bad drivers texting and talking on their cell phones. But you know what? My thoughts DO NOT LEAVE MY HEAD unless I speak them, write them down or act upon them.

In 5 years of worrying, Butch has never been in an accident. Could he get in one tomorrow? Yes. But that would be a coincidence, not magic. See? It’s nonsense.

One of the most insidious and hateful parts of the Secret is the idea that people who are in a bad situation made it happen with their negative thoughts. So if a woman gets raped on her way home from work one day, she is at fault because she had negative thoughts and worries that attracted the negative energy and therefore the attack on her.

That kind of thinking is hateful and evil. Unfortunately, I can tell you, once you believe such a baseless lie, it can really get stuck in your head. I still have to remind myself when I worry about something or think a negative thought that the thought doesn’t leave my head and the universe is not keeping track of them. (By the way, if you know of a way to stop worrying, let me know)

This all leads me to Ruth (not her real name. If you have a list of cool names that I can use for when people send me emails that they then let me post anonymously, let me know! Maybe I should use biblical names. How funny would that be? I went back and changed her name to Ruth… )

Anyway, Ruth sent me an email asking for my advice and assistance. She wrote the following:

I was reading through your discussion of ‘the secret’ and need some help. I see you said you have experience with the lie of attraction, and now reject it. My sister is lost to me because I am a toxic influence in her life. I am crushed, and she is ambivalent. I would rather she hate me, at least then I would exist. How can I make her see how much this hurts? That I miss and love her, that her beliefs insult and degrade me? That it is painful when I read that she thinks my chronic debilitating illness is my own fault and I was asking for it through negative thoughts? Is there anything I can do? Do you know of any other resources I can turn to? Any help is truly appreciated!

I asked Ruth if I could post this question to you, my wonderful readers, because maybe you would have some great advice or thoughts to help too. I haven’t answered her yet because I have to say, my first thoughts were kind of negative about her situation. So what I did was send a follow-up list of questions to her to get more information. I’ll let you know when she answers.

Unfortunately when someone wants to believe, and fully accepts the bullshit of the law of attraction or other psuedo-science, they can be just as dogmatic as a True Believer of religion. They want to believe. They feel the need to believe. And anything that gets in the way of those beliefs must be discarded.

It goes something like this. Ruth’s sister is looking for an easy fix. She buys The Secret, reads it and believes it. After that, she will cherry-pick her experiences and memories to support the law of attraction working in her life, and conveniently ignore all the evidence that says the universe follows natural laws and is otherwise random. Then it becomes a dogmatic belief. If Ruth disagrees, and is ill, then of course her sister will assume she’s toxic and bringing in bad vibes. The book has told her that Ruth made herself ill. Ruth has to be avoided. The Secret, in this situation, divides families.

Unfortunately when someone is dogmatic, in my experience there’s no getting through to them, at least not in the short term. My initial advice to Ruth, before I get more information, is the following:

You can’t make someone behave and think the way you want them to. The best advice I can give at this point is simply to live your life as best you can. Don’t try to talk to her about the law of attraction. It’s rare to get through to someone who believes something completely. You will only drive them away because when you threaten their belief system, the easiest way for them to deal with the conflict is to get rid of you, as opposed to changing their worldview.

Your best bet is to show by example. Take care of yourself, be realistic and try to make the best of your personal situation (your illness), and reach out to her if she lets you. But when you reach out to her, make it benign and non-confrontational.

Of course, the other side of the situation is a bit less pleasant. If your sister is willing to discard you so easily over the lies written in a mindless book, perhaps that’s something to think about. Maybe for right now, she’s the one who’s being toxic? But that’s just a thought. I really don’t have enough information about the situation to know.

That being said, I think you have to move on, take care of yourself, make the best of your situation, and wait it out. Occasionally reach out with a non-confrontational hello. Don’t talk about the law of attraction, your illness, or how you are hurt by her actions. Keep it friendly and avoid inflammatory issues.

Maybe things will change. Maybe they won’t, but at least you’re living your life to the best of your ability and finding happiness where you can. That’s all any of us can do.

So if you would like to share some thoughts with Ruth, feel free to comment. I will let you know when she answers my questions. (edit: see below for a link to part 2)

Logical Fallacy 10: The Slippery Slope

Neece — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:57:46 +0000

The logical fallacy known as The Slippery Slope wrongly assumes that one thing must lead to another, and another and before you know it you get to something awful. Therefore you can’t do the first thing. This is a very common fallacy. It’s also known as the Fallacy of the Beard.

In an argument, it is the situation where acceptance of a minor detail of the opposing position will greatly weaken your position.

This is Part 10 in a series about Logical Fallacies. We are going through one fallacy at a time. There are many types of fallacious arguments. I’m going to try to explain them with examples then find ways to help you refute those arguments when they occur. Please comment or email if there’s a particular fallacy you want me to tackle, or if you have success with refuting an argument using a good technique you can share.

Formula:

If A happens, B will happen. If B happens, C, D, E, … Z will happen! (oh noes!)
We don’t want Z to happen.
Therefore A can’t happen.

Example 1:

If I take aspirin, I’ll start taking Oxycontin for headaches. If I take Oxycontin, I’ll start buying it on the street. If I do that, I’ll start looking for heroine to shoot up. If I start shooting up heroine, I’ll get a dirty needle and get HIV, then die of AIDS….
I don’t want to do heroine and die of AIDS.
Therefore I can’t take anything for my headaches.

Of course this is not logical. For most people we have the ability to moderate and restrain ourselves to some degree. It is possible to stop after the first step and not go down the slippery slope.

Example 2:

Man: Will you have sex with me for a million dollars?
Woman: Sure!
Man: How about for ten dollars?
Woman: What kind of woman do you think I am?
Man: We’ve established that, now we’re just arguing over price.

The woman has lost her argument over what seemed like a minor concession.

The Fallacy of the Beard term comes because what constitutes a beard? If you see a man and he has a beard, if he had one less whisker would it still be a beard? Two less? A thousand whiskers less? There is no clear cut line. Just because the difference between beard and no beard is vague (or bald versus hairy, etc), doesn’t mean that there’s no difference between the two. The difference is in degree. A big enough difference in degree can amount to a difference in kind.

How to Refute the Slippery Slope Fallacy?

My first suggestion is to state the fallacy and explain it. I think that’s important in most circumstances. I think often people don’t realize they are falling into fallacious arguments.

Once you’ve briefly explained it, I would recommend talking about moderation and how people every day all over the world restrain themselves thousands of times more often than not. Maybe even bring up how the person you’re talking to has restrained themselves in some way recently, perhaps by restricting how much they ate or drank, etc (might not work if they are obese or an alcoholic, but you get my point). For instance, I really love coffee, but I only drank 2 cups for breakfast instead of the 5 I could have easily consumed.

Sources used:

Replacing Everlasting Life

Neece — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:48:03 +0000

Yesterday my local atheists group met and talked about many different topics. One question a woman asked was something I think most people who give up god and the supernatural have to face. I will paraphrase:

If there is no god, no heaven, no life after death, or no reincarnation what do you replace that with?

In other words there is a comfort that many people find in religion, that they will live after death in some fashion. But when you come to understand that there is no god, then soon after you have to give up this comfortable idea in life after death, that our consciousness survives death and lives on in some other way.

For me, I became an atheist but still believed in reincarnation and the idea that there was some part of us, our soul, that somehow lived on. I was a spiritual atheist. Over time I realized that there is no evidence for a soul or any kind of supernatural and eventually gave it all up. For me, giving up the comfort of the supernatural was much harder than giving up the fear of god. But I had to be honest with myself and rely on science instead of my own fanciful wishes. For me, I didn’t really replace the idea of the supernatural and the soul with anything. I just gave it up. If there was an exchange it was reason and science that replaced wishful thinking.

Butch, my husband, was raised catholic. He read Revelations in the bible, about how 144,000 Jews’ names are written in the book of life, so that was the limit for heaven. He assumed he’d go to hell. So when he gave up religion and god it was a relief more than anything else.

I know a few atheists that still believe in ghosts and the supernatural. I see the appeal, as I went through that stage myself, but I wonder why we feel the need to cling to such beliefs.

The woman at the meeting asked what do you replace the comfort of life after death with. So I am asking you, my nonbelieving friends. What process did you go through? How did you transition? What did you replace the soul with, if anything? Was it easy for you, or did you struggle?

If you want to reply and it’s lengthy, you can email me or leave a comment, whichever you prefer. I’d love to hear your story.

Heaving Dead Cats » Think

The New Ten Commandments

Related posts

Don’t Assume I’m A Sensitive Soul

Related posts

2 New Symphony of Science Songs, One Helpful Diagram

Related posts

The Secret Divides Part 2

Related posts

The Secret Divides

Related posts

Logical Fallacy 10: The Slippery Slope

Related posts

Replacing Everlasting Life

Related posts