left biblioblography

Friday, February 16, 2007

PENTALOGICAL PLAY - QUOTABLE QUOTABLES

My good friend Mesoforte has tagged me for a meme - a fairly apt one, I might add, since I tend to bristle with aphorisms.

So, in descending order:

5. I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain. - Frank Herbert, Dune

4. Youth is a wonderful thing. Too bad it's wasted on the young - G. B. Shaw.

3. "Man, in his ignorance, supposed that all phenomena were produced by some intelligent powers, and with direct reference to him" - Ingersoll.

2. We are not entitled to our opinions; we are entitled to our informed opinions. - Harlan Ellison.

1. ....Drum roll, please......."Be the change that you want to see in the world." - Gandhi.

I now bequeath this dubious honor on Beep! Beep! It's Me! and Stardust.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

PROFILES IN ATHEISM - NOW FOR ONE OF THE BIG BOYS - THE DARK PHILOSOPHER

Many of us are familiar with these words:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is impotent.

Is he able, but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?

Whence then is evil?”

Epicurus was his name, and one sharp fellow was he.

"Epicurus

"Epicurus (Epikouros or Ἐπίκουρος in Greek) (341 BC, Samos270 BC, Athens) was an ancient Greek philosopher, the founder of Epicureanism, one of the most popular schools of thought in Hellenistic Philosophy.

"Biography

"Epicurus was born into an Athenian émigré family; his parents, Neocles and Chaerestrate, both Athenian citizens, were sent to an Athenian settlement on the Aegean island of Samos. According to Apollodorus (reported by Diogenes Laertius at X.14-15), he was born on the seventh day of the month Gamelion in the third year of the 109th Olympiad, in the archonship of Sosigenes (about February 341 BCE). He returned to Athens at the age of 18 to serve in military training. The playwright Menander served in the same age-class of the ephebes as Epicurus.

"He joined his father in Colophon after the Athenian settlers at Samos were expelled by Perdiccas after Alexander the Great died (c. 320 BCE). He spent the next several years in Colophon, Lampsacus, and Mytilene, where he founded his school and gathered many disciples. In the archonship of Anaxicrates (307 BCE-306 BCE), he returned to Athens where he formed The Garden, a school named for the garden he owned about halfway between the Stoa and the Academy that served as the school's meeting place.

"Epicurus died in the second year of the 127th Olympiad, in the archonship of Pytharatus, at the age of 72. He reportedly suffered from kidney stones, and despite the prolonged pain involved, he is reported as saying in a letter to Idomeneus:

We have written this letter to you on a happy day to us, which is also the last day of our life. For strangury has attacked me, and also a dysentery, so violent that nothing can be added to the violence of my sufferings. But the cheerfulness of my mind, which arises from their collection of all my philosophical contemplation, counterbalances all these afflictions. And I beg you to take care of the children of Metrodorus, in a manner worth of the devotion shown by the youth to me, and to philosophy (Diogenes Laertius, X.22, trans. C.D. Yonge)."

He sounds inordinately...cheerful, doesn't he, or is that just me?

"The School

"Epicurus' school had a small but devoted following in his lifetime. The primary members were Hermarchus, the financier Idomeneus, Leonteus and his wife Themista, the satirist Colotes, the mathematician Polyaenus of Lampsacus, and Metrodorus, the most famous popularizer of Epicureanism. This original school was based in Epicurus' home and garden. An inscription on the gate to the garden is recorded by Seneca in his Epistle XXI:

Stranger, here you will do well to tarry; here our highest good is pleasure.

"The school's popularity grew and it became, along with Stoicism and Skepticism, one of the three dominant schools of Hellenistic Philosophy, lasting strongly through the later Roman Empire. In Rome, Lucretius was the school's greatest proponent, composing On the Nature of Things, an epic poem, in six books, designed to recruit new members. The poem mainly deals with Epicurean philosophy of nature. Another major source of information is the Roman politician and amateur philosopher Cicero, although he was highly critical of Epicureanism. Another ancient source is Diogenes of Oenoanda, who composed a large inscription at Oenoanda in Lycia.

"A library, dubbed the Villa of the Papyri, in Herculaneum, owned by Julius Caesar's father-in-law, Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, was preserved by the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 AD, and was found to contain a large number of works by Philodemus, a late Hellenistic Epicurean, and Epicurus himself, attesting to the school's enduring popularity. The task of unrolling and deciphering the charred papyrus scrolls continues today.

"After the official approval of Christianity by Constantine, Epicureanism was repressed. Epicurus' theory that the gods were unconcerned with human affairs had always clashed strongly with the Judeo-Christian God, and the philosophies were essentially irreconcilable. For example, the word for a heretic in the Talmudic literature is "Apikoros". Lactantius criticizes Epicurus at several points throughout his Divine Institutes. The school endured a long period of obscurity and decline. However, there was a resurgence of atomism among scientists in the 18th and 19th Centuries, and in the late 20th Century, the school was revived.

"Teachings

Main article: Epicureanism

"Epicurus' teachings represented a departure from the other major Greek thinkers of his period, and before, but was nevertheless founded on many of the same principles as Democritus. Like Democritus, he was an atomist, believing that the fundamental constituents of the world were uncuttable little bits of matter (atoms) flying through empty space (void). Everything that occurs is the result of the atoms colliding, rebounding, and becoming entangled with one another, with no purpose or plan behind their motions. His theory differs from the earlier atomism of Democritus because he admits that atoms do not always follow straight lines but their direction of motion may occasionally exhibit a 'swerve'. This allowed him to avoid the determinism implicit in the earlier atomism and to affirm free will.

"He admitted women and slaves into his school, and was one of the first Greeks to break from the god-fearing and god-worshipping tradition common at the time, even while affirming that religious activities are useful as a way to contemplate the gods and to use them as an example of the pleasant life. Epicurus participated in the activities of traditional Greek religion, but taught that one should avoid holding false opinions about the gods. The gods are immortal and blessed and men who ascribe any additional qualities that are alien to immortality and blessedness are, according to Epicurus, impious. The gods do not punish the bad and reward the good as the common man believes. The opinion of the crowd is, Epicurus claims, that the gods "send great evils to the wicked and great blessings to the righteous who model themselves after the gods.", when in reality the gods do not concern themselves at all with human beings.

"Epicurus' philosophy is based on the theory that all good and bad derive from the sensations of pleasure and pain. What is good is what is pleasurable, and what is bad is what is painful. Pleasure and pain were ultimately, for Epicurus, the basis for the moral distinction between good and bad. If pain is chosen over pleasure in some cases it is only because it leads to a greater pleasure. Moral reasoning is a matter of calculating the benefits and costs in terms of pleasure and pain. Although Epicurus was commonly misunderstood to advocate the rampant pursuit of pleasure, what he was really after was the absence of pain (both physical and mental, i.e., anxiety) - a state of satiation and tranquility that was free of the fear of death and the retribution of the gods. When we do not suffer pain, we are no longer in need of pleasure.

"Epicurus explicitly warned against overindulgence because it often leads to pain. For instance, in what might be described as a "hangover" theory, Epicurus warned against pursuing love too ardently. However, having a circle of friends you can trust is one of the most important means for securing a tranquil life.

"Epicurus also believed (in contradistinction to Aristotle) that death was not to be feared. When a man dies, he does not feel the pain of death because he no longer is and he therefore feels nothing. Therefore, as Epicurus famously said, "death is nothing to us.",when we exist death is not, and when death exists we are not. All sensation and consciousness ends with death and therefore in death there is neither pleasure nor pain. The fear of death arises from the false belief that in death there is awareness.

"In his epistemology he emphasized the senses, and his Principle of Multiple Explanations is an early contribution to the philosophy of science: if several theories are consistent with the observed data, retain them all. "There are also some things for which it is not enough to state a single cause, but several, of which one, however, is the case. Just as if you were to see the lifeless corpse of a man lying far away, it would be fitting to state all the causes of death in order that the single cause of this death may be stated. For you would not be able to establish conclusively that he died by the sword or of cold or of illness or perhaps by poison, but we know that there is something of this kind that happened to him." (Lucretius)

"In contrast to the Stoics, Epicureans showed little interest in participating in the politics of the day, since doing so leads to trouble. He instead advocated seclusion. His garden can be compared to present-day communes.

"The most well-known Epicurean verse, which epitomizes his philosophy, is lathe biōsas λάθε βιώσας (Plutarchus De latenter vivendo 1128c; Flavius Philostratus Vita Apollonii 8.28.12), meaning "live secretly", "get through life without drawing attention to yourself", i. e. live without pursuing glory or wealth or power, but anonymously, enjoying little things like food, the company of friends, etc."

Here, I think, are words to live by:

"Tetrapharmakos

Main article: Tetrapharmakos.

"Tetrapharmakos, or, "The four-part cure," is Epicurus' overall statement of how to live the happiest possible life. This poetic doctrine was handed down by an anonymous Epicurean who summed up Epicurus' philosophy on happiness in four simple lines:

Don't fear god,
Don't worry about death;
What is good is easy to get, and
What is terrible is easy to endure.
(Philodemus, Herculaneum Papyrus, 1005, 4.9-14)

"Early Physics: Epicurean Physics

"Epicurus' philosophy of the physical world is found in "Letter to Herodotus": Diogenes Laertius 10.34-83. Below is its paraphrase.

"If a limited form lives within an unlimited void, the form could only wander aimlessly about, because what is unlimited is ungraspable; meaning, the limited form would travel forever, for it does not have any obstacles. The void would have to be limited in quality and the form of an unlimited quality, for an unlimited form can oscillate and seemingly grasp—practically, but not literally—an unlimited number of spots within the limited void. So therefore all living things on Earth are unlimited, and the Earth on which they live and the universe around it, is limited. (This could be furthered ad nauseam in that the universe is limited and that the galaxy is unlimited, etc.)

"Forms can change, but not their inherent qualities, for change can only affect their shape. Some things can be changed and some things cannot be changed because forms that are unchangeable cannot be destroyed if certain attributes can be removed; for attributes not only have the intention of altering an unchangeable form, but also the inevitable possibility of becoming—in relation to the form’s disposition to its present environment—both an armor and a vulnerability to the its stability.

"Further proof that there are unchangeable forms and their inability to be destroyed, is the concept of the “non-evident.” A form cannot come into being from the void—which is nothing; it would be as if all forms come into being spontaneously, needless of reproduction. The implied meaning of “destroying” something is to undo its existence, to make it not there anymore, and this cannot be so: if the void is that which does not exist, and if this void is the implied destination of the destroyed, then the thing in reality cannot be destroyed, for the thing (and all things) could not have existed in the first place (as Lucretius said, ex nihilo nihil fit: nothing comes from nothing). This totality of forms is eternal and unchangeable.

"Atoms move, in the appropriate way, constantly and for all time. Forms first come to us in images or “films”--outlines of their true selves. For an image to be perceived by the human eye, the “atoms” of the image must cross a great distance at enormous speed and must not encounter any conflicting atoms along the way. The presents of atomic resistance equal atomic slowness; whereas, if the path is deficient of atomic resistance, the traversal rate is much faster (and clearer). Because of resistance, forms must be unlimited (unchangeable and able to grasp any point within the void) because, if they weren't, a form's image would not come from a single place, but fragmented and from several places. This confirms that a single form cannot be at multiple places at the same time.

"And the senses warrant us other means of perception: hearing and smelling. As in the same way an image traverses through the air, the atoms of sound and smell traverse the same way. This perceptive experience is itself the flow of the moving atoms; and like the changeable and unchangeable forms, the form from which the flow traverses is shed and shattered into even smaller atoms, atoms of which still represent the original form, but they are slightly disconnected and of diverse magnitudes. This flow, like that of an echo, reverberates (off one's senses) and goes back to its start; meaning, one’s sensory perception happens in the coming, going, or arch, of the flow; and when the flow retreats back to its starting position, the atomic image is back together again: thus when one smells something one has the ability to see it too.

"And this leads to the question of how atomic speed and motion works. Epicurus says that there are two kinds of motion: the straight motion and the curved motion, and its motion traverse as fast as the speed of thought.

"Legacy

"Elements of Epicurean philosophy have resonated and resurfaced in various diverse thinkers and movements throughout Western intellectual history. The Epicurean paradox is a famous argument against the existence of an all-powerful and providential God. The paradox is quoted as this:

"God either wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can but does not want to, or neither wishes to nor can, or both wants to and can. If he wants to and cannot, he is weak -- and this does not apply to god. If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful -- which is equally foreign to god's nature. If he neither wants to nor can, he is both weak and spiteful and so not a god. If he wants to and can, which is the only thing fitting for a god, where then do bad things come from? Or why does he not eliminate them?"--Epicurus (from "The Epicurus Reader", translated and edited by Brad Inwood and L.P. Gerson, Hackett Publishing, 1994, p. 97)

"Epicurus did not, however, deny the existence of Gods, but he did not think of them along the lines that lead to this paradox, but rather as blissful and immortal beings inhabiting the metakosmia, empty spaces between worlds in the vastness of infinite space.

"Epicurus was one of the first thinkers to develop the notion of justice as a social contract. He defined justice as an agreement "neither to harm nor be harmed." The point of living in a society with laws and punishments is to be protected from harm so that one is free to pursue happiness. Because of this, laws that do not help contribute to promoting human happiness are not just.

"This was later picked up by the democratic thinkers of the French Revolution, and others, like John Locke, who wrote that people had a right to "life, liberty, and property." To Locke, one's own body was part of their property, and thus one's right to property would theoretically guarantee safety for their persons, as well as their possessions.

"This triad was carried forward into the American freedom movement and Declaration of Independence, by American founding father, Thomas Jefferson, as "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

"Karl Marx's doctoral thesis was on "The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature." [1]

"Epicurus was also a significant source of inspiration and interest for Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche cites his affinities to Epicurus in a number of his works, including The Gay Science, Beyond Good and Evil, and his private letters to Peter Gast. Nietzsche was attracted to, among other things, Epicurus' ability to maintain a cheerful philosophical outlook in the face of painful physical ailments. Nietzsche also suffered from a number of sicknesses during his lifetime. However, he thought that Epicurus' conception of happiness as freedom from anxiety was too passive and negative.

"In a purposefully unfavorable expression, Epicurus is titled in Modern Greek idiom as the so-called "Dark Philosopher."

In truth, it sounds like Epicurus was more of an apatheist than an actual atheist, as follows: "An apatheist is someone who has little or no interest in deities to point that he or she does not care whether deities exist and, typically, is not interested in deciding whether he or she believes in deities."

A truly fascinating individual, who laid a great deal of groundwork for centuries to come.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

THE MAGNETIC HELM OF AWE - AEGISHJALMUR SINGS THE BRAIN ELECTRIC

The Helm of Awe in the title is an obscure reference to Siegfried of the Niebulung Ring cycle (most of you are probably aware of Richard Wagner's Der Ring des Nibelungen) - the Norse word is a reference to a rune that warriors drew on their foreheads prior to battle as a talismanic protection.

I was reading Bidstrup's article, Experiencing God - the Neurology of the Spiritual Experience when I came across this interesting tidbit:

"Dr. Michael Persinger, working at Laurentian University, in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, has pioneered a method for inducing the religious, spiritual experience of the shaman. Without drugs, herbs, hypnosis or invasive surgery, he can quite literally flip a switch and induce the experience of "god."

"Using an ordinary striped yellow motorcycle helmet purchased at a sporting goods store, which he has modified with electromagnetic coils, he can place the helmet on your head, connect the wires to a device he has constructed that generates the proper signals, and when the magnetic fields produced by the coils penetrate the skull and into the temporal lobes of the brain, the result is the stimulation of those lobes and a religious experience results.

"In common with the Hindu view that a confrontation with God is a confrontation with the self, the nine-hundred plus people who have undertaken the experience produced by Dr. Persinger's helmet have had some very profound experiences. Four out of five say that they've had experiences so profound they would be life-changing had they not understood the mechanistic underpinnings of what they had experienced.

"How does Dr. Persinger's helmet work? It works by inducing very small electrical signals with tiny magnetically induced mechanical vibrations in the brain cells of the temporal lobes and other selected areas of the brain, located in the skull just above and forward of the ears. These lobes are the portions of the brain that produce the "Forty Hertz Component" of the brainwaves detected in electroencephalograms. These mysterious "forty hertz components" are present whenever you are awake or when you are in REM sleep. They are absent during deep, dreamless sleep. What the "forty hertz component" does is not well understood, but we know that it is always present during the experience of "self." We cannot have a "me" experience without the forty hertz component being present."

Intrigued, I went exploring (luckily, I've installed an 'answers.com' applet, that allows me to outline a word online, right-click, and answers.com looks it up. Neat, no?).

Here is Persinger's page, here is work done by an associate of his, and here is a page on 'microwave hearing'.

Anyways, there is now a GOD HELMET. In 2003, they experimented on Richard Dawkins, no less, who experienced zilch, zip, de nada. Of course, Persinger qualifies it thusly: "Dr Persinger has explained away the failure of this Transcranial Magnetic Stimulator. Before donning the helmet, Prof Dawkins had scored low on a psychological scale measuring proneness to temporal lobe sensitivity."

On the answers.com link, it says: "Persinger reports that at least 80 per cent of his participants experience a presence beside them in the room, which they variously say feels like God or someone they knew who had died."

However, Swedish scientists testing this in 2004 were unable to verify it via double-blind tests.

Interestingly enough, you CAN actually purchase a 'God-helmet' of sorts, the Shakti Neural stimulator. Here is an article about someone who experimented with it - but it's a prelim setup, no follow up, what did said experimenter discover afterwards? No data either way. Did he perhaps slip into an altered state, and having achieved 'nirvana', never came back? Or is it like some Lovecraftian story, he encountered nether-beings from beyond Euclidean space, who wanted their alien anonymity to be kept, and so abruptly ended his voyages? (I'm engaging in a little hyperbolic fantasy here, never fear.)

This of course, is directly related to Temporal Lobe Epilepsy, of which the answers.com entry says: "UFO Researcher Albert Budden and cognitive neuroscience researcher Michael Persinger assert that increases in local electromagnetism, triggering the temporal lobe can stimulate TLE and trigger hallucinations of apparent paranormal phenomena, for example ghosts and UFO's. [....] Quite possibly, as neurotheologians have speculated, then, individuals with temporal lobe epilepsy, who have a natural aptitude for "religious" states of consciousness (such as euphoria or samadhi) have functioned in human history as religious figures or as shamans. Persinger's theories, however, remain controversial."

So, oh wow, it's all in your head. What a shock indeed.

Read More...

Sunday, February 11, 2007

HOWDY, NEIGHBOR! - MCGRATH'S STRAWMAN OF CHOICE

I am currently reading Dawkins' The God Delusion when I stumbled across something I hadn't known, nor considered. I actually came across mention of McGrath here, and broke down and read the whole post (good ole copy 'n paste), after body-slamming some of the more...obtuse theistic blatherings.

Sir Richard cites one John Hartung (pg. 253) as saying that 'Love thy neighbor' is very much a localized phenomenon.

I blinked. What? Prior to going to this site, I dug around, testing the veracity of this claim.

First, I went to my hardbound KJV bible, and dug up a few nuggets. The word 'neighbor' used in both Matthew AND Luke is the word pelas, which my KJV gives the meaning in the lexicon as "pelas - Greek - (near); (adv.) close by; as noun, a neighbor i.e., fellow (as man, countryman Chr. or friend); near, neighbor", and the site linked to has this to say:

"RV wrote that palai originally meant 'a short time ago', so that it can be derived from the same root as Greek pelazo 'to ome near', pelas 'near', plesion 'near'."

(Reader, please note: I deliberately chose a linguistics site, so as to avoid the inevitable accusation of arsenic in the water table - hehehehe.)

I found this - well, startling:

Matthew 5:43 - 'love thy neighbor' is direct from Leviticus 19:18.

So of course, what's my motto, troops? Oh yeah - LOOK IT UP.

"NET You must not take vengeance or bear a grudge 1 against the children of your people, but you must love your neighbor as yourself." NIV biblegateway Lev 19:18

"Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself." NASB biblegateway Lev 19:18

You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself. NLT biblegateway Lev 19:18

"Never seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone, but love your neighbor as yourself." MSG biblegateway Lev 19:18

"Don't seek revenge or carry a grudge against any of your people. Love your neighbor as yourself." BBE SABDAweb Lev 19:18

Do not make attempts to get equal with one who has done you wrong, or keep hard feelings against the children of your people, but have love for your neighbor as for yourself." NRSV bibleoremusLev 19:18

You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against any of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself." NKJV biblegateway Lev 19:18

You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself." - KJV

Six out of eight translations bear it out: the 'neighbor concept is a local phenomenon: it isn't meant to be construed on a global scope.

What does McGrath say about this?

"In the first place, Jesus explicitly extends the Old Testament command to "love your neighbor" to "love your enemy" (Matthew 5.44). Far from endorsing "out-group hostility," Jesus both commended and commanded an ethic of "out-group affirmation." As this feature of the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth is so well-known and distinctive, it is inexcusable that Dawkins should make no mention of it. Christians may certainly be accused of failing to live up to this demand. But it is there, right at the heart of the Christian ethic.

In the second place, many readers would point out that the familiar story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10) makes it clear that the command to "love your neighbor" extends far beyond Judaism. (Indeed, this aspect of the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth seems to have resulted in people suspecting Jesus of actually being a Samaritan: see John 8.48). It is certainly true that Jesus, a Palestinian Jew, gave priority to the Jews as God's chosen people, but his definition of who was a "true Jew" was radically broad. It included those who had excluded themselves from Judaism by intimate collaborators with Roman occupying forces. One of the main charges leveled against Jesus by his critics within Judaism was his open acceptance of these out-groups. Indeed a substantial part of his teaching can be seen as a defense of his behavior towards them. Jesus' welcome of marginalized groups, who inhabited an ambiguous position between "in" and "out" is also well attested in accounts of his willingness to touch those considered by his culture to be ritually unclean (for instance Matthew 8.3, Matthew 9.20-25)."

I can go along with all of this. My problem is (besides the fact that of C.S Lewis' alleged 'trilemma', I think the fourth option, 'Legend' is the default), is that this applied primarily out-groups within a specific culture. A valid point can be made that this was a parable only, as being illustrative. But the legendary Nazarene also claimed that he came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it?

Here, let me pitch a few curve balls here: first off, I agree with Holding, that the literature was written in the language of the times. Second off, I also agree with his (as well as others) stipulation that the Hellenistic viewpoint of the individual first, community second deeply influenced the culture of the Middle East of that time.

But we are talking about Jews of that time period. Fiercely insular. An exclusive worldview. Distinct tie-ins (I still say the author of Matthew was incompetent) to the Old Testament. The person he told the Good Samaritan parable to was a lawyer, supposedly skilled at interpreting the Torah. But this 'rabbi' didn't exclude the Gentiles! you cry.

Oh yes, he did:

"Jesus told his followers that they were to teach the word of God only to the chosen few: "Go not into the way of the Gentiles....but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 10:7)

There are a variety of mixed messages that contradict one another, both in the gospels and the books that follow them, but I shan't go into that here.

The point is (and sorry if I belabor it) that in no way can that utterance, echoed both in Luke as well as Matthew be construed as loving everyone or being a global neighbor. It distinctly points to an individual or group of like mind, or more likely, someone of geographical proximity (I'd say I'm being fairly open-minded on the former).

Questions, criticisms, or just plain gossip? Discuss freely among yourselves.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

THE THIRD GENDER - THE SEXUAL TRILEMMA OF THEOLOGY

One of my favorite tactics, when I argue online with a theist about the civil right issue of gay marriage , is to hit them with 'What about intersexuals? Who do they get to marry?'

Finally, one of them started asking cogent questions (the usual response is a 'fum-fah, sputter sputter, ummmm' sorta thing), such as how many actually exist, are there any studies about this, etc.

I recall many years ago, reading in a Taoist book (the title eludes me for the nonce) about how the ancient Taoists actually considered the intersexual a sort of holy creature, being composed of equal amounts of Yin and Yang.

I think this speaks to the constant badgering that those of us hear when debating this hot topic ('one man/one woman paradigm', you know the drill, and if you don't? You'll hear it soon enough, trust you me).

Thus, armed with a mission, the Internet, and an inquiring mind (no, not that of the tabloid variety, thanks much!), I went net-fishing.

Caught a few prizes along the way, to boot.

Here is an entry (and this is South Asia alone):

Hijra -

"In the culture of the Indian subcontinent a hijra (also known by a number of different names and romanised spellings) is usually considered a member of "the third sex" — neither man nor woman. Most are physically male or intersex, but some are female. Hijras usually refer to themselves as female at the language level, and usually dress as women. Census data does not exist, but estimates range from 50,000 to 5,000,000 in India alone.

Although they are usually referred to in English as "eunuchs", relatively few have any genital modifications.[1] A third gender has existed in the subcontinent from the earliest records, and was clearly acknowledged in Vedic culture, throughout the history of Hinduism, as well as in the royal courts of Islamic rulers."

Wow. And of course, thanks to gender-phobia, many of them are forced into prostitution, and are harshly mistreated in their own country. Gee, that sounds familiar, doesn't it?

I will skip over the Kathoeys of Thailand, as they tend to have cosmetic surgery to become the third gender.

There's not a whole lot of information about the Winkte of the Native American, except that they were held in high esteem. There's even less about the Berdache.

The Arabian Khanith is apparently a transgendered (transvestitic) individual, but not hermaphroditic. The Roman Galli were priests who voluntarilly castrated themselves (brrhhh!!), and thus do not fall into this category.

For the interested reader, there's more at Wikipedia.

For an interesting article concerning self-impregnation by these individuals, see here.

Are there censuses being done? I'm making an educated guess here, but from what I've learned (about this country as well as information about others), I have the distinct impression that these folks aren't volunteering a whole lot of the time, for obvious reasons. Gender discrimination, outcasting, you know, all those wonderful things that mark the religious as a rule.

All the research having been done, it is then incumbent on us as moral beings, to approach the question: what about these individuals? It doesn't matter if there are 5 million or just five individuals. The theist (usually those of the 'the way gawd made them' variety too, I have no doubt) will do an about-face and trumpet for elective/cosmetic surgery on the child (which doesn't usually take very well: as I understand it, this accounts for a large percentile of the folks who want 'corrective' surgery later in life, i.e., a sex change).

I feel this subject puts the theologian on further shaky ground. For one thing, how would a theist judge this? Is this the Devil's doing, or God's? How do they choose? Would these 'aberrations' (that's sarcasm, by the way) qualify as a miracle? Could it be that this is actually the true image of their deity...not male, nor female, but a combination of the two? Was Plato closer to the mark, in his Symposium? And how does free will factor into this? Does the child, when grown into an adult, get the option to reverse the gender choice? If not, why not?

Is it best to kow-tow to the opinion of the majority? Is that the Christian God's will? What happened to 'His ways are mysterious, a wonder to behold'? And if no surgery is performed, then who on earth do they get to marry? While I'm guessing that one set of genitalia will take precedence over another, there may be the individual who has fully functioning sets of both - what then? Are they doomed to a life of loneliness, prostitution, deemed as 'less than human', making the odd porn film here and there? Relegated to the dim, gloomy gutters of humanity, consigned to the status of circus freak (a more terrible form of 'schadenfreude' I cannot imagine), resigned to the pointed finger, the whispered palm, viewed as something less than human?

Mind you this: I'm not blaming religion for the phenomenon of xenophobia. That's a part of the feral processes that we inherited from evolution. But somehow, religion tends to reinforce this territorial inclination in the human animal. 'Conform!' they cry, waving that evil grimoire of theirs. 'Leper, outcast, unclean!' they bellow from the pulpits, from the rooftops. Somehow, religion tends to shear away their empathy for all except those in their inner circle. While there may be some who view the issue I present here with the compassion they are called upon to display, they are by far in the minority. Prove me wrong on this, please.

The world shall be a better place, when we stop regarding what is different as evil - no harm, no foul. When the whisper of old ghosts who never were have no sway in the world of the living, the breathing, in short: reality.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Saturday, February 10, 2007

I AM THIS SUPERVILLAIN...AND I AM THIS SUPERHERO

Courtesy of Pharyngula.
You are Apocalypse



































Apocalypse
57%
Dark Phoenix
54%
Poison Ivy
47%
Dr. Doom
46%
Riddler
43%
Magneto
40%
Mr. Freeze
39%
Lex Luthor
38%
Juggernaut
37%
Mystique
33%
Kingpin
33%
Catwoman
32%
The Joker
31%
Venom
28%
Green Goblin
17%
Two-Face
5%
You believe in survival of the fittest and you believe that you are the fittest.

Click here to take the "Which Super Villain am I?" quiz...

I'm not sure what I expected...someone misunderstood, or a bad guy who changed sides, perhaps?
As always, there are two sides to every coin...
You are Hulk























Hulk
70%
The Flash
70%
Green Lantern
60%
Superman
60%
Catwoman
55%
Robin
53%
Supergirl
53%
Spider-Man
50%
Wonder Woman
48%
Iron Man
40%
Batman
30%
You are a wanderer with
amazing strength.

Click here to take the "Which Superhero are you?" quiz...

Wow, guess it's time to take anger management classes, no? Hehehehe.

Read More...

Friday, February 09, 2007

NOW FOR A BIT O' HUMOR...

The following video is from a movie entitled 'The Fourth Sex'. I am thoroughly unclear what the movie is about, outside the fact that

  1. Somehow, Jesus Christ is a central character, and
  2. It's foreign (Italian? Unclear).
The following is a Deathmatch between JC and Apollonius of Tyana.



The choreography isn't too bad. Time to start singing a chorus of 'Everybody was Kung-Fu fighting,' hehehehe.

Read More...