Friday, December 4, 2020

A response to Francis Spufford's "Unapologetic: Why, Despite Everything, Christianity Can Still Make Surprising Emotional Sense"

I'm responding to some of what Francis had to say in his book. His words will be in Italics, mine will not be. Here we go.

~~~~

My daughter has just turned six. Some time over the next year or so, she will discover that her parents are weird. We’re weird because we go to church.

Awww cry me a river. What a baby.

This means—well, as she gets older there’ll be voices telling her what it means, getting louder and louder until by the time she’s a teenager they’ll be shouting right in her ear.

What voices? Who is yelling in her ear? Like - who does that really? Seriously. What nonsense. This translates to "I'm worried my kid will be told the truth about things"

It means that we believe in a load of bronze-age absurdities. It means that we don’t believe in dinosaurs.

Glad you can admit your faults - not sure about the dinosaur bit, but there are some nitwits who do not believe in that, its not MY fault your religion has a bunch of nitwits in it, go fix your own church's. Perhaps, just maybe the system you have is flawed and broken.

It means that we’re dogmatic. That we’re self-righteous. That we fetishize pain and suffering. That we advocate wishy-washy niceness. That we promise the oppressed pie in the sky when they die. That we’re bleeding hearts who don’t understand the wealth-creating powers of the market. That we’re too stupid to understand the irrationality of our creeds. That we build absurdly complex intellectual structures, full of meaningless distinctions, on the marshmallow foundations of a fantasy.

Identifying the problem is a good step to take, but why are you telling me this- seems like something you should be working with a therapist with.

That we uphold the nuclear family, with all its micro-tyrannies and imprisoning stereotypes. That we’re the hairshirted enemies of the ordinary family pleasures of parenthood, shopping, sex and car ownership. That we’re savagely judgmental. That we’d free murderers to kill again. That we think everyone who disagrees with us is going to roast for all eternity. That we’re as bad as Muslims. That we’re worse than Muslims, because Muslims are primitives who can’t be expected to know any better.

I am pretty sure few would call Christens worse then those of the Muslim faith, but hey if you want to flog yourself go ahead flog away! You whiny bleep you.

That we’re better than Muslims, but only because we’ve lost the courage of our convictions. That we’re infantile and can’t do without an illusory daddy in the sky. That we destroy the spontaneity and hopefulness of children by implanting a sick mythology in your minds. That we oppose freedom, human rights, gay rights, individual moral autonomy, a woman’s right to choose, stem cell research, the use of condoms in fighting AIDS, the teaching of evolutionary biology. Modernity. Progress. 

Again, you found part of the problem, but what are you doing to fix this? Oh sorry your not done with your Self-flagellation yet, please - go on.

That we think everyone should be cowering before authority. That we sanctify the idea of hierarchy. That we get all snooty and yuck-no-thanks about transsexuals, but think it’s perfectly normal for middle-aged men to wear purple dresses. That we cover up child abuse, because we care more about power than justice.

Wait are you Catholic? Because they are in fact covering up things - or were, they might still be. Oh no your still flogging yourself with your pretend martyrdom go on then get it out.

That we’re the villains in history, on the wrong side of every struggle for human liberty. That if we sometimes seem to have been on the right side of one of said struggles, we weren’t really; or the struggle wasn’t about what it appeared to be about; or we didn’t really do the right thing for the reasons we said we did. That we’ve provided pious cover stories for racism, imperialism, wars of conquest, slavery, exploitation. That we’ve manufactured imaginary causes for real people to kill each other. That we’re stuck in the past. 

Are you don-

That we destroy tribal cultures. That we think the world’s going to end. That we want to help the world to end. That we teach people to hate their own natural selves. 

Oh my word please get to the point.

That we want people to be afraid. That we want people to be ashamed. That we have an imaginary friend; that we believe in a sky pixie; that we prostrate ourselves before a god who has the reality status of Santa Claus. That we prefer scripture to novels, preaching to storytelling, certainty to doubt, faith to reason, law to mercy, primary colors to shades, censorship to debate, silence to eloquence, death to life.

Bleeping bleep! Are you done yet?!

But hey, that’s not the bad news. Those are the objections of people who care enough about religion to object to it—or to rent a set of recreational objections from Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens. 

Woe! Woe to you - you pour blithering baby!

As accusations, they may be a hodge-podge, a mish-mash of truths and half-truths and untruths plucked from radically different parts of Christian history and the Christian world, with the part continually taken for the whole (if the part is damaging) or the whole for the part (if it’s flattering)—but at least they assume there’s a thing called religion there which looms with enough definition and significance to be detested. 

You are the one who made the strawman, why are you so upset with it?

In fact there’s something truly devoted about the way that Dawkinsites manage to extract a stimulating hobby from the thought of other people’s belief. 

Some religious people like to try to put there imagined opponent onto the same level as they play from, saying that we have more faith then they, calling evolution (or other science) faith beliefs, and then this silliness of treating Dawkins as a pope-type figure. Dude, I know of Dawkins though some lectures I've heard but I do not use anything he says for MY arguments - at least not in the way your silly dumb word "Dawkinsites" suggests - my word - your desperate!

The ones in this country must be envious of the intensity of the anti-religious struggle in the United States; yet some of them even contrive to feel oppressed by the Church of England, which is not easy to do. It must take a deft delicacy at operating on a tiny scale, like doing needlepoint, or playing Subbuteo, or fitting a whole model-railway layout into an attaché case.

What the bleep are you talking about? Like honestly - this is is pure martyrdom wish thinking here. Most of America, sadly, is still pretty pro religion. Would this nitwit vote for an open atheist? Its really hard for open atheists to achieve political stance in the west - STILL. 

No: the really painful message our daughter will receive is that we’re embarrassing. 

Well, now you have a whole book explaining why that is true! So, at least you've given the world ammo to use on you... woops.

For most people who aren’t New Atheists, or old atheists, and have no passion invested in the subject, either negative or positive, believers aren’t weird because we’re wicked. We’re weird because we’re inexplicable; because, when there’s no necessity for it that anyone sensible can see, we’ve committed ourselves to a set of awkward and absurd attitudes which obtrude, which stick out against the background of modern life, and not in some important or respect-worthy or principled way either; more in the way that some particularly styleless piece of dressing does, which makes the onlooker wince and look away and wonder if some degree of cerebral deficiency is involved. 

Again, it seems you have identified the problem...

Believers are people with pudding-bowl haircuts, wearing anoraks in August, and chunky-knit sweaters the color of vomit. Or, to pull it back from the metaphor of clothing to the bits of behavior that the judgment is really based on, believers are people who try to insert Jee-zus into conversations at parties; who put themselves down, with writhings of unease, for perfectly normal human behavior; who are constantly trying to create a solemn hush that invites a fart, a hiccup, a bit of subversion.

Cry me a river.

Believers are people who, on the rare occasions when you have to listen to them, like at a funeral or a wedding, seize the opportunity to pour the liquidized content of a primary-school nativity play into your earhole, apparently not noticing that childhood is over. And as well as being childish, and abject, and solemn, and awkward, we voluntarily associate ourselves with an old-fashioned mildewed orthodoxy, an Authority with all its authority gone. Nothing is so sad—sad from the style point of view—as the mainstream taste of the day before yesterday. If we couldn’t help ourselves, if we absolutely had to go shopping in the general area of woo-hoo and The-Force-Is-Strong-In-You-Young-Skywalker, we could at least have picked something new and colorful, something with a bit of gap-year spiritual zing to it, possibly involving chanting and spa therapies. Instead of which, we chose old buildings that smell of dead flowers, and groups of pensioners laboriously grinding their way through “All Things Bright and Beautiful.” Rebel cool? Not so much.

What reality does this nitwit live in?!

And worst, as I said before, there is no reason for it. No obvious lack that this sad stuff could be an attempt to supply, however cack-handed. Most people don’t have a God-shaped space in their minds, waiting to be filled, or the New Atheist counterpart, a lack-of-God-shaped space, filled with the swirly, pungent vapors of polemic. 

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Question marks - I need more question marks! I'm all out of them! The universe does not have enough for this! WHAT THE BLEEP ARE YOU EVEN TALKING ABOUT?!

Most people’s lives provide them with a full range of loves and hates and joys and despairs, and a moral framework by which to understand them, and a place for awe and transcendence, without any need for religion. 

Really? Based on what study or - wait no I'm being silly again he is just pulling this out of the ass of the construct strawman he made to self flog himself in oh pity me martyrdom. 

Believers are the people touting a solution without a problem, and an embarrassing solution too, a really damp-palmed, wide-smiling, can’t-dance solution. In an anorak.

Yep. You are. So what are you going to do to fix that?

And so what goes on inside believers is mysterious. So far as it can be guessed at—if for some reason you wanted to guess at it—it appears to be a kind of anxious pretending, a kind of continual, nervous resistance to reality. 

This isn't how I viewed myself when I was a believer, I think there is something wrong with this guy, like deep in his brain - like not the religious stuff, but the core of himself. I just - wow. SMH.

It looks as if, to a believer, things can never be allowed just to be what they are. They always have to be translated, moralized—given an unnecessary and rather sentimental extra meaning. A sunset can’t just be part of the mixed magnificence and cruelty and indifference of the world; it has to be a blessing.

For some this might be true. CLEARLY your not one of THOSE types of believers 🙄

 A meal has to be a present you’re grateful for, even if it came from Tesco and the ingredients cost you £7.38. Sex can’t be the spectrum of experiences you get used to as an adult, from occasional earthquake through to mild companionable buzz; it has to be, oh dear oh dear, a special thing that happens when mummies and daddies love each other very much. 

Sex can only be in marriage though right? Also only between man and woman right? I really wish you would get off your high strawhorse and tell us what you ACTUALLY believe, but that would take courage of conviction, something I doubt you really have. 

Presumably, all of these specific little refusals of common sense 

Twice I've told people that this dumb phrase isn't a thing! Here & Here!

GAH don't get me started...

reflect our great big central failure of realism, our embarrassing trouble with the distinction, basic to adulthood, between stuff that exists and stuff that is made up. We don’t seem to get it that the magic in Harry Potter, the rings and swords and elves in fantasy novels, the power-ups in video games, the ghouls and ghosts of Halloween, are all, like, just for fun. We try to take them seriously; or rather, we take our own particular subsection of them seriously. We commit the bizarre category error of claiming that our goblins, ghouls, Flying Spaghetti Monsters are really there, off the page and away from the rendering programs in the CGI studio. Star Trek fans and vampire wannabes have nothing on us. We actually get down and worship. We get down on our actual knees, bowing and scraping in front of the empty space where we insist our Spaghetti Monster can be found. No wonder that we work so hard to fend off common sense. Our fingers must be in our ears all the time—lalalala, I can’t hear you—just to keep out the plain sound of the real world.

Yes, well once again you have found the problem...

The funny thing is that to me it’s exactly the other way around. In my experience, it’s belief that involves the most uncompromising attention to the nature of things of which you are capable. It’s belief which demands that you dispense with illusion after illusion, while contemporary common sense requires continual, fluffy pretending. 

Of course to YOU its the other way around - to you it makes sense to believe in what you believe in, to YOU its not wacky, weird, and strange. To YOU its fine. To YOU its normal. Perhaps you wish people would just see it the way you do, I mean after reading though your silly self-flogging and martyrdom wish fulfillment here that you constructed a strawaman of, its seems clear to me that you think that others think of you in this way - and that you do not like that, not a bit. 

You're tired of being clumped in with the nonsense that other people of faith have - but that is YOUR issue to deal with - that religion is the CAUSE of much of the nonsense is ITS FAULT. So, flip it around - I'M NOT CRAZY - YOUR THE CRAZY ONE. Everything makes MORE sense when you look at it THIS WAY. Now, I have ZERO idea what the bleep you mean when you say "common sense" as I said in the above videos- its not even a thing. 

But as far as dispensing with illusion - ha - yeah sure. Okay, lets start with the illusion of martyrdom you have been dragging out - if we dispensed with that nonsense we would have had a much shorter intro into your book. Just be like "I believe in (X), and I think people think I believe in (Z), and that upsets me." - there you go, much better. But no - you made a whole huge - giant  strawman of woes, you didn't tell any reader what you really believe in - let alone why. All we know is you are upset at what people might be telling your daughter latter in life - no idea what people since you will be around religious people - so if anything your daughter will not come to question how werid the stuff you do is - I wish I knew what stuff you DO but you didn't bother to tell us. But hey, just because you are not dispensing with illusion yourself doesn't mean its a good idea to do so. What about the illusion of Christianity? Its myth - you couldn't accept that, you wouldn't - so what aspect of the religion, of the FAITH are you willing to give up? Hmmm. I wonder, I do wonder.

Pretending that might as well be systematic, it’s so thoroughly incentivized by our culture. Take the famous slogan on the atheist bus in London. I know, I know, that’s an utterance by the hardcore hobbyists of unbelief, the people who care enough to be in a state of negative excitement about religion, but in this particular case they’re pretty much stating the ordinary wisdom of everyday disbelief. (Rather than, for example, rabbiting on about orbital teapots.) 

This shows that lack of respect he has for Russell's teapot, and comes as little of surprise that he doesn't care about it, has no response to it, and just seems to dislike it in general. The bus sign is for closeted atheists, or those on the verge of going over. Its a reminder also -  that religion does not get a monopoly on signs. I saw one during a drive - big yellow sign that just said "Jesus saves."  

That was it - no number, no church - just that. So - we can do it as well. 

The atheist bus says, “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” All right then: which word here is the questionable one, the aggressive one, the one that parts company with actual recognizable human experience so fast it doesn’t even have time to wave goodbye?

Its an ATHIEST bus? No the SIGN is from atheist's ... anyway now what is your beef with the slogan/advertisement or whatever you want to call it?

It isn’t “probably.” New Atheists aren’t claiming anything outrageous when they say that there probably isn’t a God. In fact they aren’t claiming anything substantial at all, because really, how the fuck would they know? 

Now, now - you will make baby Jesus cry with that sort of foul language. You are okay with the word "probably" but you also are not okay with it. What is your argument?

It’s as much of a guess for them as it is for me. No, the word that offends against realism here is “enjoy.” I’m sorry—enjoy your life? Enjoy your life? I’m not making some kind of neo-puritan objection to enjoyment. Enjoyment is lovely. Enjoyment is great. The more enjoyment the better. But enjoyment is one emotion. 

Wow this really got to you didn't it? It really stung. It burns deep, the wound this caused. Let me apply some more salt into that for you - yes ENJOY - because and I know its hard to get because you are still in it - but, Christianity makes you WORRY. Did you sin just now? 

Do you need to ask forgiveness? Maybe you have like a super mega light and fluffy Christen faith (it kinda sounds like you do) but others do have a lot, A LOT of worry in there. The pulpit loves guilt tripping people as well. So - yeah, enjoy. Don't worry, be happy. 

The only things in the world that are designed to elicit enjoyment and only enjoyment are products, and your life is not a product;

Again, I must wonder what the bleep reality this guy lives in - the only things that you are to enjoy are PRODUCTS? Uhhh. No. You can enjoy a sunset. You can enjoy many free things. You said it yourself - its an emotion. But sure, why not - pretend its something you only get from a product. Then say your life is not a product. Well - but your life IS a product. A product of biology - see that equivocation I did just then? Also I swear its like you do not even read your own holy book:

1 Corinthians 6:19-20

"Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies."

You are, in fact, a product.

Acts 20:28

"And now beware! Be sure that you feed and shepherd God's flock--the church, purchased with his blood--for the Holy Spirit is holding you responsible as overseers."

You are, in fact, a product.

Colossians 1:14

"Who purchased our freedom and forgave our sins."

1 Cor 7:23a (Liv) You have been bought and paid for by Christ, so you belong to him.

1 Cor 6:19 (Phi) You are not the owner of your own body.

1 Cor 6:19b-20a (NIV) You are not your own; you were bought with a price.

1 Cor 6:19b-20a (Jer) You are not your own property; you have been bought and paid for.

You are, in fact, a product.

Enjoy your PRODUCT life, because you were BOUGHT by Jesus's blood. 

*source of verses*

But that is only a real problem if the bible is true. Good news - it is not true. So just relax - you don't have to get all so wound up and upset at the fact that there is no god, chill man - have fun.

you cannot expect to unwrap it, and place it in an advantageous corner of your Docklands flat, and admire the way the halogen spots on your lighting track gleam on its sleek sides. Only sometimes, when you’re being lucky, will you stand in a relationship to what’s happening to you where you’ll gaze at it with warm, approving satisfaction. The rest of the time, you’ll be busy feeling hope, boredom, curiosity, anxiety, irritation, fear, joy, bewilderment, hate, tenderness, despair, relief, exhaustion and the rest. 

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.

It makes no more sense to say that you should feel the single emotion of enjoyment about your life than to say that you should spend it entirely in a state of fear, or of hopping-from-foot-to-foot anticipation. 

Okay I think this guy proved the many worlds theory because clearly he is from a universe that uses language in some way that we do not here. I mean, really like - you do not GET what this is saying - like really you can't enjoy things unless they are a product - HUH? 

It doesn't make sense TO YOU, it makes perfect sense to me - because ya know, I'm not being super mega analytical about the word "Enjoy" like you seem to be trying to do - actually your not really even trying to be analytical about it, your just saying you don't understand, and hey far be it from me to stop your appeal to personal incredulity from not making sense of a slogan of all things. My word this one REALLY bothered you! 

Life just isn’t unanimous like that. To say that life is to be enjoyed ( just enjoyed) is like saying that mountains should only have summits, or that all colors should be purple, or that all plays should be by Shakespeare. 

... Its... its a slogan - it didn't say that it should JUST be enjoyed - like... what? Huh?

This really is a bizarre category error.

Your face is a really bizarre category error!

But not necessarily an innocent one. Not necessarily a piece of fluffy pretending that does no harm. The implication of the bus slogan is that enjoyment would be your natural state if you weren’t being “worried” by us believers and our hellfire preaching.

No, you thick wall of human. Its saying that YOU - yes, YOU can enjoy things without worrying about what God thinks about things - BECAUSE - there is no God. Geez your oblivious!

Take away the malignant threat of God-talk, and you would revert to continuous pleasure, under cloudless skies. What’s so wrong with this, apart from it being total bollocks? 

Your construct strawman is a very strange creature, I do not think I've seen one this strange in a long, long time. Its - almost impressive in how absurd it is.

Well, in the first place, it buys a bill of goods, sight unseen, from modern marketing. Given that human life isn’t and can’t be made up of enjoyment, it is in effect accepting a picture of human life in which the pieces of living where easy enjoyment is more likely become the only pieces that are visible. You’d think, if you based your knowledge of the human species exclusively on adverts, that the normal condition of humanity was to be a good-looking single between twenty and thirty-five, with excellent muscle definition and/or an excellent figure, and a large disposable income.

Why are you trying to (and doing a crap job of) analyzing a slogan?? Could you get on track again, do you even have a track - or an argument? At all? Even a little?

Clearly, there are exceptions, such as the lovey-dovey silver-agers who consume Viagra and go on Saga cruises, and the wisecracking moppets who promote breakfast cereal, but the center of gravity of the human race, our default condition, is to be young, buff and available. 

And you’d think the same thing if you got your information exclusively from the atheist bus, with the minor difference that, in this case, the man from the Gold Blend couple has a tiny wrinkle of concern on his handsome forehead, caused by the troublesome thought of God’s possible existence: a wrinkle about to be removed by one magic application of Reason™.

Uh no man, I'm pretty sure you are the only one to draw such an absurd conclusion from a slogan. Also - I love that you trademarked reason - then gave it a capital R. Ah how many times I've seen theists put a capital on Truth. TRUTH! Look - reason is good, but your idea of "Reason" is bad. But to try to reason with you about reason would just be unreasonable.

These plastic beings don’t need anything that they can’t get by going shopping. But suppose, as the atheist bus goes by, that you are the fifty-something woman with the Tesco bags, trudging home to find out whether your dementing lover has smeared the walls of the flat with her own shit again. Yesterday when she did it, you hit her, and she mewled till her face was a mess of tears and mucus which you also had to clean up. The only thing that would ease the weight on your heart would be to tell the funniest, sharpest-tongued person you know about it: but that person no longer inhabits the creature who will meet you when you unlock the door. 

I ... am at a loss for words now. I mean, talk about red herring! Now your summoning more pretend people to interact with the slogan so you can complain about it more. Like, okay I get it you don't like the slogan. Please move on. Oh no, he has more to say about this. So much more to say...

Respite care would help, but nothing will restore your sweetheart, your true love, your darling, your joy. Or suppose you’re that boy in the wheelchair, the one with the spasming corkscrew limbs and the funny-looking head. You’ve never been able to talk, but one of your hands has been enough under your control to tap out messages. Now the electrical storm in your nervous system is spreading there too, and your fingers tap more errors than readable words. Soon your narrow channel to the world will close altogether, and you’ll be left all alone in the hulk of your body. Research into the genetics of your disease may abolish it altogether in later generations, but it won’t rescue you. 

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Catapult Pancakes.

Or suppose you’re that skanky-looking woman in the doorway, the one with the rat’s nest of dreadlocks. Two days ago you skedaddled from rehab. The first couple of hits were great: your tolerance had gone right down, over two weeks of abstinence and square meals, and the rush of bliss was the way it used to be when you began. But now you’re back in the grind, and the news is trickling through you that you’ve fucked up big time. Always before you’ve had this story you tell yourself about getting clean, but now you see it isn’t true, now you know you haven’t the strength. Social services will be keeping your little boy. And in about half an hour you’ll be giving someone a blowjob for a fiver behind the bus station. Better drugs policy might help, but it won’t ease the need, and the shame over the need, and the need to wipe away the shame.

Please stop. Please make him stop. If I could build a time machine, I would go to whenever he started writing this book, before 2013 - somehow I would find him, because that is a thing you can do easy when you have a time machine. Anyway I would be like "NO STOP." and bop him on the head with a cardboard pipe - BOP! Then I would keep doing that until he stopped writing this. I'm pretty sure that would work. 

So when the atheist bus comes by, and tells you that there’s probably no God so you should stop worrying and enjoy your life, the slogan is not just bitterly inappropriate in mood. What it means, if it’s true, is that anyone who isn’t enjoying themselves is entirely on their own. 

That is what it means TO YOU. Like - no one else has spent this much time hating a slogan so much. Its.. .amazing really. I want to find out who made that and write them a love letter now.

The three of you are, for instance; you’re all three locked in your unshareable situations, banged up for good in cells no other human being can enter. What the atheist bus says is: there’s no help coming. Now, don’t get me wrong. I don’t think there’s any help coming, in one large and important sense of the term.

Look, you made up three people to be reading that slogan, we do not know enough about your made up people to know how they would react to the slogan. For all I know, the kid in the wheel chair breaths out a sign of relief because his parents told him the rock music he loves so much was a product of the devil, and that he would have to give up the only thing that brings him any joy or be condemned by god - now , he doesn't know that is not in the bible, his parents do believe it, and the church he is dragged to believes it and preaches it - but now he sees the slogan and thinks to himself, "Huh, I never thought about it, maybe there is no god... and if so I can enjoy this music I love, and I don't have to worry about being judged!" then he smiles, puts on his headphones and plays some of that rock and roll music as he rolls into the bus.

(I'm adding that the three are waiting for the bus to make this make more narrative sense)

The woman with the deranged lover - she reads this, and realizes that her being a closeted homosexual is not needed - if there is no God, she can be open about this - and because she can be open about this - she can let go of the one who she thought she was stuck with, because that crazy lover no one payed attention to, she had been telling people she was helping the crazy woman as a cover, you see - because she thought they all believed in the God she was raised to believe in - a fag-hatting god. She has been afraid all this time that she would be going to hell, but she found some love - although that love was vile, she saw that as part of God's just punishment upon her. Yet now, reading this slogan, it melts from her, the fear, the self-loathing, the ever-judging-eyes of others, all that slips away as she lets out a breath of air - and with it, knows that she will be leaving that lover today, that she will be coming out to everyone - tonight - and that she will be going to that gay bar she knew about but didn't dare visit - because God would judge her, but there might not be a god - and now she can in fact, enjoy her life.

The drug addicted woman, she reads this and starts to cry. She had sold her life out years ago because she had been molested by a pastor, all this time she has been convinced that she had to punish herself - that god was going to send her to hell for letting her body be defiled, that she was no longer pure - these thoughts had led her to drugs, but now - seeing this sign - it all became so clear, the priest used and abused her, using the pretend idea of god to justify it, and - now that she reads this - she finds that she can get help, she is okay, she will be - now she can get real help- at last, because there most likely is not a god, and she can enjoy her life now.

Yeah, so that was easy, I made your pretend people do other things... see because they do not really exist I can have them do and feel all sorts of things. Now - I suspect very strongly, that your whole bit here was inspired when you waited for a bus, looked around and saw these people, judged them and wrote a story for them in your head, then got REALLY mad when you saw the bus slogan, and started writing down all this nonsense on the bus ride. 

I don’t believe anything is going to happen which will materially alter the position these three people find themselves in. 

Those people were not real people - even if you did as I suggest, base them off of people you saw I think your confusing your CHARACTERS with real humans - you lost yourself in your own writing there.

But let’s be clear about the emotional logic of the bus’s message. It amounts to a denial of hope or consolation, on any but the most chirpy, squeaky, bubble-gummy reading of the human situation. St Augustine called this kind of thing “cruel optimism” fifteen hundred years ago, and it’s still cruel.

When did Augustine say that - what book, when? Where? Citation? Nah. Screw it, trust this guy who made up three people to complain about a bus slogan, sure- I'm SURE 🙄 Augustine was talking about SLOGANS back in his day, the bus slogans back then must really have annoyed him as well. 

Oh bleep there is more... bleep.

BLEEP .... NOoooooooooo.....

Thursday, November 19, 2020

Ten years a skeptic.

 At the age of 32 I deconverted from my faith of Christianity, the label skeptic was applied to me by my brother and I embraced this. I would say the first year I was angry and bitter, I had spent so much of my time in my life praying to something that was not there, looking for signs, believing in this thing above us, because you look up when you talk to God - you just do - God is up there after all, in the "heavens". I also spent that first year learning more logic and sharping my debate skills, mostly in text format on forums. I found the lack of critical thinking of believers to be shocking, when I had encountered a believer back when I still believed that had denied evolution, I had said to a different believer that I had lost respect for them because of that, but it wasn't something you debated. Now, as a skeptic, I debated such things and saw just how crazy people could be about beliefs, going on tangents that had little to nothing to do with the topic at hand. I saw first hand how BAD it really was - that some people - just were lost, they could not, would not accept the facts of science. This occupied my time for two years in full.

On Mar 2, 2013 I joined youtube as "Deconverted Man" and began to post videos, pointing out logical fallacies in arguments and counting them up to show just how many these arguments had. Every darn argument I found was full of fallacies. Every. Single. One. I can not say what the most common is as fact since I have no data on that, but I will guess at it - I think that its the God of the Gaps. It really does seem to come to that - explain "x" oh you can't! Ah HA! Must be God! See the complex things? God! Anytime and every time there is mystery: God dun it. The other thing I would say about my many years on the tubes is that everyone can be effected by bad beliefs, atheists are not immune. Oh boy the stories I could tell. 

Being a skeptic is not denial of reality itself, it used to be that ages ago, that you couldn't know anything or something - but no, that is not what I think of when I use the label. For better or worse the label does not really apply at times, its just a way to identify myself to others to some degree. Yet you will find, as I did, that there are people who are not skeptical of a thing, and the defense they will give of it, is so similar to the arguments you hear creationists give, that its shocking. Here are otherwise thoughtful people, leaving reason & science behind because "not everything can be proven by science" ugh. No, but science is the BEST thing we have. If we say something is a fact - then we better show its a fact somehow, and how the bleep are we going to do that? What is our epistemology?

And so, for almost ten years I've had a very simple epistemology that is thus:

In order to beleve anything I require one of the following:

1 Empirical evidence. 2 Repeatable tests, a 3 valid & sound argument.

1: This is visible evidence either with the naked eye or with the aid of devices to visualize the given phenomena.

2: These are tests that can be done under controlled conditions, observed & retestable by others.

3: This is an argument that has the right format & is free from logical fallacies.

-----

To date, for many beliefs and ideas out there, I've not been given any of the above for them, and as such I submit that not only should I be skeptical of them, but that we should all be skeptical of the conclusions.



Sunday, November 8, 2020

Oh no, Politics!

 I hate talking about this. Everyone has there own view of what is or is not going on. I read the posts, I see the videos, I read the articles. About half of the USA is split with the majority (5 mil strong) going towards one of the people who ran for President. So, its been called. Time to get to bed. 

...

But its not over.

Bleep.

The final counts are not in, so the question is - what happens if the final count is for the other guy? Then the press is shown to be wrong. Then what? Also, last time there was all this talk about election fraud and hackers and such, but now - everything works just fine. That... is weird. Did ... did we fix the system?

...

I do not know. All I know is logic, and logic can not do anything with this mess as far as I can tell. The only message I have to send is one of unification, we need - perhaps now more then ever before - to have nuance - to let people say what they want to say, to hear what they put out. To have CIVAL TALKS with each other. To debate without insults. To put forth the best arguments we have, not loaded, malformed -

But... someone said something that upsets me. Time to lose my mind again...

Wait no, no come back!

Oh well. I wish I could inject us all with logic & reason.

So, here is a post I made. Not much to read here. Just some mussing.

Come next year, January 20th, we will see who really is in charge for reals I guess. Maybe.

I'm sure it will be fine...

Back to being skeptical of other things, politics tires me out.


Wednesday, September 30, 2020

The Presidential debate.

 Lets take a look at a debate... in this case, the Presidential debate. Yay.

First up: How to not ask a question & also how not to answer a question -click-

So the question was "Based on what you have said, and done so far, and what you would do starting in 2021, why should the American people trust you, rather then your opponent."

This question is in reference to what has been said before by each person, & whatever actions were done. Asking after this, a question of why people should trust you, and not to trust the other.

Breaking down the question this is one of emotion, of subjective nature - why trust you / not trust them. I would object to the attack of my opponent, the argument, not the person should be attacked. I could not say/would not say why not to trust them, however what argument could be given to trust me? Such a thing would be emotional in nature, far to subjective to answer, and thus I would object to this question. The moderator has asked a rather loaded and malformed question, nether person can answer without commuting at least one logical fallacy.

However, no one objected, and went forward to respond. (sigh)

Analyzing this will be rather subjective, because I am not dealing with anything but erratic dialogue here, the method is to knock down the opponent. I must try to judge if the words used are doing this, or not.

Joe Biden gave numbers of who has died. how many are currently dying. He then said his opponent said in reference to such numbers "it is what it is" this is I suppose Joe trying to give a reason why not to trust his opponent. I do not see this as being why I should not trust your opponent Joe, at best this is a reason to view him as cold hearted, perhaps, but trust plays no factor here.

Joe says of his opponent, "He has no plan" - well this is a better attack in terms of why I should not trust him, granted I do not know if this is true as its unargued for proposition, but at least you are trying to tell me why I should not trust your opponent. He then laments how long his opponent knew about C19 but did not take action - at least I infer this is what Joe is trying to do, its a bit muddled. "He said he didn't want to tell us because it would cause a panic..." , "You don't panic, he panicked" Joe says. Hold on there, Joe your saying that I should not trust your opponent because he was worried about the public panicking - okay fair enough - keeping information that could save lives might be a reason to distrust him, but I also see the value in not wanting to cause a panic in people, so that makes the person reasonable - perhaps in error, but not necessarily a reason to distrust someone. However your bit that he panicked seems that you are reaching, say what you will about your opponent but he has never panicked publicly that I'm aware of, so I am hard pressed to think he would panic privately, swing and a miss Joe. You claim your opponent did not have people in China do (X) - that might be the case, so okay, a reason to not t rust perhaps. I can't help but note that the moderator did not stop President Trump from saying "Wrong" at you, bad mod is bad. Mute yourself Mr. President! At last Joe gets into what he did or tried to do. So at last telling us we should trust you. "We should provide.." okay, so I guess your saying your opponent is not doing that/did not do that.

Overall I would rate this attack as sub-par. Why should we trust you? You gave us maybe one reason - you proposed doing something. Okay, how hard did you fight for that, did you tell the news, what actions did you take other then just proposing it in some meeting? Flesh out what you tired to do and what you DID do (if anything) but you never said why we should trust you, not really. Then go on the attack. Doing it the other way around (attack then talk about your positives) would work just as well, but it seems like you are making similar error to what Hillary did - not promoting yourself enough.

Back to President Trump.

President Trump fires back blaming China, then said he closed the country, saying that Biden did not want this. Claims a number of people agree that he did a good job. Blames fake news, and highlights that the press blames Trump, praises Biden. Mentions Swine Flu & how Biden failed during this. 

I'd say this is a massive blow to Biden, the amount of times President Trump tosses things at Biden vs how many he had tossed his way, is simply stunning. The man can win an erratic debate if nothing else.

Back to Biden:

He talks about those lost, appealing to emotion, telling us we can't trust him - but no where does he nail this down.

Clip ends.

Biden lost here. Simply put, the goal of erratic dialog is to get to the deeper basis of the conflict, we know in this case that they both want to win over the audience, here they have been asked to knock down each other with words, no matter how I try to cut this, Biden simply is not doing this, and President Trump is. Of course, you can come to your own conclusion here, the problem with this whole thing from an analysis stand point is just how subjective all of this is, attacking each other in this way in my view, should not be part of any debate. Yet, far to many times it is. Who to trust? Well we did not really get that answer. Yet, what we did see here, is a man who can knock down his opponent with words better then the other, and if that is the metric of who wins, then I have to conclude that President Trump wins this round.

I just wish these debates were logical. Ah well.

Tuesday, September 8, 2020

Quiet

 The quiet of night. Just the ac running next to me, no one in the world is awake but me. Alone I sit, alone I stay, this is all there is all there will be, nothing moves, just quiet sounds. The fridge hums the chair squeaks. My mind and me, along again. This is what it is. This is quiet.

A poem about it, that I did write, to quiet to even dare to type. The noise is all but gone away, it will come latter today, for now its nice and I do breath, hear the air moving it seems. Along the way I do inquire, what will change and when will it be, what will I make of this destiny? Is there anything more in life, other then all the insane strife? Yes, there is hope and love. Even if there is no god above. Just humans all around, yet none make a sound.

Quiet is where we are.

Sunday, August 23, 2020

The Informal Fallacy I want to invent: "Special knowledge" / "Mind reading"

For quite some time in my videos on my youtube I've highlighted a fallacy that I called "Special knowledge" &/or "Mind Reading" this fallacy happens if a person/group claims to know (or infers to know) the thoughts/motives of the other person. 

Ie: 
"You made that video because you want to get attention." 
"You are not a Christian because you hate god"
"Republicans hate America and want to destroy it."
"You are just saying that because you do not want to know what is TRUE."
---
Do note that one does not have to SAY they are able to read your mind NOR does someone have to SAY they have special knowledge of your thoughts/feelings and so on. Its implied by the statement(s) they are making.

No one can know your inner thoughts, motives or intent. Thus - if a person/group claims to know "why" someone is doing (X) then the fallacy has been committed. 

The logical fallacies of Bulverism Appeal to motive. are close to this fallacy, The Fallacy of Speculation is in fact called "Mind-Reading" here (click) (number 74) this is almost exactly what I am proposing. As such, mine could simply be called "Special knowledge" to avoid confusion, or maybe it is covered well enough. The idea of making new fallacies is not just mine, this webpage (click) also came up with two new fallacies - by blending other fallacies together.

Granted, none of this is, or perhaps will be recognized by scholarship, and I have zero idea how to get my idea to be even considered. 

You can always of course be skeptical of my fallacy if you want, or maybe you can help me to make it into a "real" one if you know who I would contact to get that ball rolling, or perhaps you can help me shore up the phrasing, if you can - comment on this or email me (my email is found on my youtube channel on my about page, goodness knows what would happen if I put it on this blog)

Thanks for reading. I know you just read this to make me happy.

See what I did there? ;)

Wednesday, August 12, 2020

The God of the Bible is still incoherent, yet people believe anyway.

200,000 to 300,000 years ago, give or take, Homo sapiens emerged from the hominid predecessors they had been, as they slowly made there way out of Africa 130,000 to 200,000 years latter, they also began to develop language 20,000 to 50,000 years after beginning that journey.

At some point Jehovah, Yahweh, YHWH, reached out, and plucked two people from among them to be placed into a garden full of things to eat, it revealed itself to these two humans, let them be tempted by a talking serpent, then when they failed the test, it kicked them out of the garden with a curse that the man would have to work for food, and that the woman would have to have (MORE) painful child birth. At this time, "sin" entered the world.

Before this point, things lived and died and there was natural disasters, all because it just was that way, but now that sin was here, now there was a reason for all that bad stuff. You see, this god of Abraham Isaac & Jacob let bad things happen before the "fall" because.... it did.

Of course, that doesn't really make sense, so actually God made two humans that already somehow knew language and were homo sapiens, and then put them in the garden, once they failed the test then evolution began due to sin and.. wait no that doesn't work... you see its... a metaphor yes- right the Genesis story is just sort of, kind of what happened. I found out I was wrong when I thought I was right, its always the same just a shame, that's all.  

So, how do modern Christian's make sense of any of this?

Well, you could pretend the world was made 6,000 to 10,000 years ago and ignore the realty of how we got to the place we are, in total denial of all evidence that we have of all the things I suppose. Plenty do this, but many do not. 

Yet, how do they, how can they possibly have the story of Genesis fit within reality? BioLogo's tries its best to do this, and when I was a Christian, I felt that these guys "got it" that they were trying to do what made sense - make seance out of what we know is true, and what these stories tell us are true. 

Still - why would God leave it to us puny mortals to do this for it? Why make the world in such a crazy way in the first place? Just what sort of all powerful being does this anyway?

Of course, Christians might have some excuse answer's to this, but I doubt it.

What happened to all the millions upon millions that existed before Jesus, and during Jesus who did not know about Jesus - when they died, what happened to them? What about the ones who were alive, yet had not heard about Jesus? What about those souls? 

Well, uh. God - had a plan for them? I guess. I mean, the bible doesn't say anything about them.

Of course, the bible does not say much about any of the world, other then the tiny part of it that God happened to visit that day. Revealing itself to a select few people. (Count the times that God reveals itself in the Torah/Old Testament...13!!! just thirteen people!!!) but you know, God wants to have a relationship with "everyone". Sure.

God loves me, I am told by those that believe, yet God doesn't reveal itself in such a way that all of humanity would know, without doubts, without questions, without the need of a book of all things. A BOOK mind you... to tell us it exists. 

Its incoherent. Yet, people believe it anyway.


Tuesday, July 28, 2020

I am (X), & it does not matter at all.


I see it happen all the time. A person is called something "bad" and this shuts down the conversation, it makes them an "other" it marks them, stains them. Yet I wonder, why does anyone care about words? What happened to seeing that an ad hominem is illogical?

So, screw it. I'll be all the things. I'll simply declare I am (X), then I shall ask, "What is your argument?"

I'm a racist. I'm a homophobe. I'm a islamphobe, I'm a misogynist. I'm a misandrist. I'm a troll. I'm a neckbeard. I'm a MGOTOW. I'm a incel. I'm a simp. I'm a slob. I'm retarded. I'm an idiot. I'm evil. I'm sick. I'm dumb. I'm stupid. I'm far right. I'm far left. I'm a Nazi. I'm a terrorist. I'm religious. I'm spiritual. I'm a new ager. I'm an atheist. I'm a skeptic. I'm agnostic. I'm anti semitic. I'm in. I'm out. I'm up. I'm down. I'm left, right, forwards, backwards. I'm a sloth. I'm lazy. I'm a workaholic. I'm neurotic. I'm a pencil pusher. I'm a drug dealer. I'm a drug addict. I am everything that is good, bad, & other in the whole God Damned universe.

....

So,

WHAT IS YOUR ARGUMENT?

Wednesday, July 1, 2020

Everything can be known via science. Everything.


A common complaint about "scientism"/"naturalism"/"materialism" is that these things assume the natural, that the first is to narrow, that only using science can not derive truths, the statement, "Everything that is known is known via science" someone might say, is itself a non-scientific statement.

However, I think this is a narrow view of what science is. Its a broad system, that includes maths, logic, testing, verification, and many processes made to try to eliminate personal bias. Its a way to dig at the world, to be critical of it, to find what it really is, not what we wish it to be.

History, some say is not science, but I beg to differ. We have forensic science, a study of the past. We have archaeology, a study of the past. Both require data collection, testing, verification and so on.
In fact, when doing history we must apply the ideas of science to it, if we read in some writing that something beyond what we know can be done now was done, we categorize that as myth, a person flying around like Superman is myth, because we have no reason to think that is even possible, then or now. Some object that this is an assumption, well - how could someone do something in the past that is not possible now? They then must assume that magic or something else allowed that person to fly, the assumption that no, its not possible is what can be observed to be, whereas the other one can not. Simply put, those who want to believe that there myth is true, will make all sorts of excuses to justify it. The one who does science only needs to show the data, the tests, the process, the results. Reality does not require back flips to prove, it does not require dodging, nor does it require excuses, its there, it can be known, though science.

Logic as well, is I think, a sub-set of science, it has a robust yet changing system, its a structured format. It can be used as a short cut, however its limited, one must still check with reality to see if the premises are true, thus one must consult science to discover if it is in fact true.

So it is my contention that everything is known or can be known via science.

Update, my views on this have been challenged, and I think that, yes this is incorrect on technical linguistic norms. I do think that we could view the above things in the category of science, although it currently is not. But, things change. Would it be useful to change to my idea? Hmm, I do not know.



Saturday, May 30, 2020

Madness


The year was 1992, the place was Las Angles, city of angels. The people were unhappy, and they had been at a number of things, for quite some time.

African-American and Korean-American communities came in conflict. The former feeling insulted, and perhaps, displaced or pushed back by the latte, after all, this had been "their" community, who were these new comers? Was this about jobs, or lack of jobs, maybe, Korean would hire Korean, but not the other way around, because of language mostly, but also maybe because of lack of trust, these people simply did not know each other, and no one seemed willing, or able to bring them together. Where was the effort of someone to step forth to unite these people? Should the mayor do something, shouldn't someone? No one did, thus the tension built. This reached a point where a Korean was killed by the African-American. Black on yellow violence, if you will.

Alongside of this, the LAPD had been reported numinous times by many prominent blacks and others as being to brutal in their ways, using excessive force, at this time, no mention of the color of the officers was mentioned, perhaps latter people did, but them being white was not the issue, it was that they, collectively had been abusing their power, stepping over the line, and not being punished for it, those that were enforcing the law were also breaking the law. When one Rodney King got beaten by several officers, the tension in the community bubbled and boiled up, the blood was boiling hot. Then, a trial was held. Finally, justice would be done... but the officers were found not guilty.

Then hell broke out. Riots happened over the next several days. Destruction of personal and private property, people beating up other people, and there were hero's risking their well-being to save others from attacks, harm, and assault.

Yet, too few heros to stop the madness, the anger was there, mob mentality and group think had taken over many, "oh look, they are doing bad, I guess I can do bad as well" a single person might be sensible, but a group of people can be insane, and if so — become a mob.

I was thirteen at the time. We wrote about the event in school. I do not remember what I wrote, or what we were told about this event, it was far away, and I saw it as something wrong, something unjust yet it was not something I understood.

Today I am forty-one, and we see, again that a number of things have been building. People HATE the President, and the media is helping them to hate him. The left vs right has become a cold war of sorts, or so some would lead us to believe that is the case, mutters of civil war, negation of free speech, a rise of cultural Marxism, all sorts of things happening all around the same time that are making people upset. The men are the problem feminists say, the whites are the problem some say, white males who are heterosexual are the problem, someone other than the one complaining is at fault for how things are. Yet things are pretty good, all things considered.

Then C19 hit. A virus that spread quickly and killed old and young, and those whose health is bad. It was global, and the government's had no idea what to do. Lock down was called. People had been, mostly, keeping at home, loss of jobs was stress, lack of freedom was stress. It had only been a few months, but people were TIRED of being stuck inside, they demanded freedom, protesting in numbers. Not a wise idea. A giant bee that kills other bees was around, and oh right, a black person had been killed by the police.

Uh oh.

So we see again, riots. I'm not sure where the hero's are out there, the protests grow, people have forgotten or perhaps do not care about C19 now, they are ANGRY they are MAD, justice was not done, again! How many blacks have been killed by whites anyway? If it was the other way around and a black man had killed a white man, there would be lynching right? Justice — what a joke.

Or so some believed. Why? Oh, many reasons, BLM did not help anything. Spouting a false narrative that blacks are dispositional harmed to whites, that everything is about race. (studies contradict such narrative but who cares about data), and lo — its history repeating. On a new cycle. Yet, people will pack up at some point, as they always do, something else will distract them and bother them. C19 might take a few of them out. No one can know what will happen next for sure, yet I do think that its madness.

I reflect on how wrong the Rodney King beating was, and yet, how it was not about race, and it was not. It was an abuse of power, but the narrative has changed, every time anyone that is black is harmed, it is because of race. No idea when that happened, but that seems to be what we are being told, or telling our own self's. I do not believe it, because the data says otherwise.

It should not be about the color of our skin. It should always be about doing the right thing. About being the hero, not the villain. If you want to protest, do it like Marten Luther King Jr. there was a man that knew how to lead, how to speak, and how to protest properly to make a lasting change. His dream came true, well... sort of. Segregation ended, but then became self-imposed. Opportunities  opened, but people took the wrong paths. I do not know why, I can not pretend to have the answers to what was, or to say what will be or even what should be.

I can just look at it, as all of you can and sigh and ponder when the madness will end, oh also its getting hotter all over the world and that is changing weather like crazy, so there is that as well.
Bleep me. We really need some hero's. Some brave people to step forward from the dark, to speak just and right into this void. To say kindly, yet firmly (X) is wrong, yet we will not do wrong, we will do right. To bravely face hate with love. To fight war with peace. Oh for those brave hero's, wherever they might be, I long for them.

Yet, here I am, wondering who will save us all, could I be that person? Could I get up and speak?

Could you?

Well, last time no one did anything to change things it went badly... so maybe, just maybe we will learn from the madness of the past.

Yet, here we are, repeating it all the same.

Madness.

Monday, May 4, 2020

Reconstruction Man:


When I had faith in Christ, and the whole Christian ideas, mindset, bible, God & so on, my life was largely shaped by those ideas. I would ask God for direction, although none really came, it was always me directing myself, but at the time, I didn't know or believed that. I tried to think the right thoughts, impure thoughts were bad, looking at porn was bad, desiring sex was bad. The things that a typical teen & young adult want, perhaps need to do are "bad", because this is how the meme (and the belief of God is a meme) takes hold of our brain, and keeps hold of it. The meme only exists as long as we believe the meme is real, it stops once you no longer believe in it.

Yet this writing is not about my deconversion per say, but my reconstruction after it took hold. For a year or so, I was an angry atheist. I was bitter, depressed, and low. Nothing mattered. I simply existed, barely from day to day. Yet, I was still learning, still reading. I realized, I had to say something about this nonsense. I had to go back to making videos again. I loved to do it, I wanted to. This was my thing, as Deconverted Man. This music video (click this) shows this transformation well I think.

Learning informal logic, helped me to place myself properly. Having a label "skeptic" helped me focus. Looking at arguments and analyzing them gave me purpose. So, yes when or if you deconvert, it might be hard, it might be easy, for me it was rough on the emotions, but I am glad to be a skeptic now, because, for the first time in my life, I can honestly LEARN anything - ANYTHING and never worry that it will hurt my beliefs, because I hold none to be hurt, or any that I do, I have become willing to challenge, willing to question, eager to learn something new, something amazing. Wow, I didn't know that was how that worked! Cool! I no longer have to worry about "bad" thoughts, I am not slowed down by looking to the sky for answers, they come from me, and when I do not know, I can ask others.

Rebuilding is something I did on my own, but I hope that I can somehow help if you need it and are reconstructing after deconversion, if you want said help, let me know via twitter @deconvertedman or via email.

Best to you, and yours, always.

Saturday, February 1, 2020

The Good Place

The Good Place (NBC, September 19, 2016, to January 30, 2020) was a great, and fun ride.
Very funny, and also, deep, but not super deep.

The question of afterlife, what would it be like to get everything you wanted, forever? You would get tired, you would get board, and this happens. The answer: actual death. A way to leave when you are done.
There is a hint that the particles that made up "you" go on to effect others in some small way. The wave returns to the ocean. 

Its a nice way to think about it. Also there is that, you don't really know, and no one knows what it is to die. Not even the all knowing Janet knows. That seems very, human.

Unanswered, and perhaps for the best is why the system exists at all - why was the universe made, why is there any afterlife at all? Who made all of this? No real answers are given. This is just the way it is.

No clear devil or god, just demons and angel like beings who are not perfect. (They run away leaving Michel in charge of the Good Place)

The other idea of the Good Place being the Bad Place at first - and them all working though this together, improving along the way, its a nice idea.

What is the point, if any, of life? How to be ethical? Is it all just a test? The Good Place says it is a test, sort of, but then you get tested over and over until you pass, or I suppose if someone never passes then they do, in fact, go to the Bad Place. But, its never made clear.

As a skeptic, I do not believe in an afterlife, but I do ponder what would it be, or how could it be, what would make sense, or how one should be judged, if one is to be judged, fairly. I think that the Good Place has a nice system, but not a perfect one in mind. Perhaps, in the end, that is also the way it is, even an afterlife is not perfect. 

I enjoyed the show, and it was a nice send off, may we all find a Good Place here, and now. Perhaps we must make it. No idea how, but its worth trying.

x

Tuesday, January 21, 2020

My reflections on: Being Functional by Atticus Blake

Life is wondrous, hard, unfair and strange. There is a beauty in the symmetry that Atticus has woven into his life, whether by his masterful writing or because I'm a pattern seeking human and find patterns, regardless this is beauty & art, honest & true.

There is a moment in the book, where he writes about this pastor who has been counseling him, he writes "what comes next..." and I think to myself, "oh no! he is going to be molested!" although, in that moment, I had forgotten that Atticus had said in the opening of his book that he had not suffered that, yet then the pastor does something that is far worse in a way then molestation - he does an exorcism. By "driving out" the demons, this otherwise well meaning man has instead infused my online friend with demons that will haunt him for years to come. He had spiritually molested him.

There is this chapter that begins the year with a maglite smashing a window, and a man yelling. The year ends with his ""friends"" (not enough quotes in the universe to indicate how much of "friends" they were to him) who broke into a house and used a maglite- I forget now as I write this review if they used it to bash in the window, but that would be fitting. That is how he frames this year, a black maglite. Yet, I saw a second frame that could be there, as he is yelling now at the boy who he loves (& who uses him) giving him what for. Here is a man out of control yelling at the start, here is a man yelling in control at the end. Insanity vs righteous anger. What a wondrous tapestry.

I get excited when I find people's names from youtube I know. "Hey I know that persons work! Oh yay!" I get even more excited far latter as he mentions the "deconverted" & mentions as well as explains logical fallacies and talks about being a skeptic. I think to myself, "Yay! I know what those things are!" I feel like he is talking to me though this book.

I feel for him, as he painfully struggles with OCD, something I've had for a very long time. The god believe interacts with this, and makes it worse then otherwise. What would Atticus be like had he never been made aware of this God concept? Who can say, or know. We know he will deconvert, yet this isn't about that, not really. I was surprised at how little of this book is his deconversion, as if that was taken care of on youtube, its all the life leading up to that moment that needs to be told.

He tells it. I want him to succeed, I worry what will happen to him next, and want things to go his way, yet I know as I read that this is life, and there is random chaos here, who knows what will happen next?

Yet he makes it, by the skin of his teeth so to speak. He worries about being an adult - "Am I an adult now?" he ponders, I smile, grateful that someone besides myself has worried about such things.

I wanted to ask Atticus what he would write about me, if there was a part two, but his next book will not be about real life things. Alas, I wanted to know how he would frame me in his writings, what would he say about "Deconverted Man" what were his thoughts on me? Could my ego handle it? Would it be good, bad or bland? Who knows. Perhaps its best I not know in a way. Yet, because I'm highly narcissistic I find myself wondering about "me" - as I read his life story, I wonder about my life story, I think about how I would write my story. I wonder how Atticus can remember whole conversations. I reflect upon what his life was vs what my life was. Perhaps this is what it is to read anyone's biography, although he calls it his memoir.

Regardless, I've had the pleasure to interact with this man online from time to time, and in my brain I think of him as an "online friend" whatever that means, these labels are not always helpful. I guess what I mean is that I would want him to be a friend in "real life" as if the internet is not real life as well, in a way it is not, in a way it is. The people I've connected with online, are they friends or just online friends? Is there a difference? Should there be? Ah low, Atti, you've gotten me thinking deeply. Was that what you intended?

Anyway, I like him in my own way. I beat him in a debate once. So badly that he exploded the video in fact. I'm not going to let him forget that Lobsters won. I'm sure he will say that Turtles won. Since the video is gone I could explain this, but I'll let it be an inside joke for those who were around to have seen that video, and for him and I to share publicly this silly thing we did online together once. Something I hope to redo one day, if I can get him to do it of course.

The book is well written. I want more. I want to read everything and anything he writes. He is really, really good. I like the short chapters. I like how he can make you want more - he will write things like "the next thing was even worse" Yet, this is not over done, nor is it in every chapter, yet it was enough that I didn't want to stop reading.

His final statement in the book is profound, I think Atticus wanted to say something epic to conclude this bit of his life story, and I think he did. Is it odd to enjoy someone's life story? I do not know, but I did, I saw much of myself here as I did of Atticus. Again, maybe that is the point.

Life is a tangled tapestry of travesty and turtles, lo lob the lobsters towards logic: May it save us all.