Steel City Skeptics

Drinking Skeptically in Pittsburgh has found itself a new home this month and next, as well as a new date during the month.  We have switched to the third Friday’s for November and December to avoid any collision with holiday events. We also found a great space with Claddagh Irish Pub in the South Side Works. They have a great selection of beers (and some seriously delicious onion rings to boot!) and have been more than accommodating with their available spaces. We sure hope you’ll come out and join us this Friday for a cold beer, delicious food and great conversation!

What: Drinking Skeptically in Pittsburgh - November
When: Friday November 21, 2008
Time: Starts at 7:30pm
Where: Claddagh Irish Pub, South Side Works 407 Cinema Drive Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15203

As we head into the final days before the election, the parties flog their messages, trying to attract undecided voters (if there are any). People align themselves with the candidates who reflect their beliefs — or at least seem to offer the best hope that we will all not end up all living in Hoovervilles and eating Ramen noodles.

The rhetoric seems numbingly familiar from past elections, the so-called debate and choices before us dictated by the media to avoid anything off-script or controversial (i.e., meaningful). The discourse has devolved into catch-phrases and sound-bites on both sides.

21st-century America politics, like 21st-century American religion, work and education, seems more about promoting right-thinking and dogma than working mindfully toward solving the myriad problems that confront us. We identify with the correct party or candidate as a way of defining ourselves and feeling that we belong. This is human, but more than a little ironic in a country founded on the principles of individual liberty and choice. There is a religious aspect to all the political proselytizing. The Internet and social networking have only exacerbated the trend. People gravitate toward groups and causes both virtual and personal that reinforce the doctrine they already believe, or prefer to believe.

It’s easy to acquire our identity on the cheap in the marketplace of ideas nowadays. We can avoid the critical work of examining our assumptions and choosing our own path, perhaps marching to a different drummer. Once we’re invested in that tribal identify that gives us a sense of belonging, we filter out facts that don’t conform to the status quo or which challenge our sense of comfort. Kurt Vonnegut wrote humorously about this when he coined the term granfalloon. The darker side occurs when we define ourselves exclusively in opposition to others, dismissing them as human beings and invalidating their opinions and existence often on the basis of minute differences. It happens in the workplace, in church and, as we have seen, in the political process. I have worked in bureaucratic institutions where I was privileged to observe this sort of behavior, which is more about consolidating power and authority than working together to achieve goals.

Bureaucracies have existed as long as civilization. Sometimes they may even serve a purpose. The problem arises when business, governmental and religious institutions become self-perpetuating entities more important than the human beings whom they presumably exist to serve. Politics is no exception. Then the phrases and slogans become empty recitations reminiscent of Orwell’s 1984 or Maoist re-education camps. Instead of facilitating discourse, they indoctrinate right-thinking, whether about free-market economics, intelligent design or some vaporous New Age belief.

The danger of living in the most free consumer society on earth is less that Orwell’s totalitarian state will control our thoughts and actions, than that we will build (or buy) our own prison of thought and belief. We will brainwash ourselves with the soothing nostrums (or Prozac) that promise certainty about world rather than questioning them and being accountable for our decisions and their implications. As Thoreau put it in Civil Disobedience:

“… the respectable man, so called, has immediately drifted from his position, and despairs of his country, when his country has more reason to despair of him. He forthwith adopts one of the candidates thus selected as the only available one, thus proving that he himself is available for any purposes of the demagogue…. The American has dwindled into an Odd Fellow – one who may be known by the development of his organ or gregariousness, and manifest lack of intellect and cheerful self-reliance…”

Happy voting.

Tony Norman wrote a nice piece about Jamy Ian Swiss in Today’s opinion section. Check it out at the Post-Gazette Web site. And don’t forget to attend Heavy Mental and the Science, Magic, and Skepticism workshop this Saturday.

Here is a write-up from the Trib: Workshop, show reveal how ‘mentalists’ work their magic

Last night Pittsburgh CBS affiliate, KDKA gave approximately three minutes of news time to Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik to guilt Catholics into voting for “pro-life” John McCain while repeatedly insisting that he couldn’t tell anyone who to vote for.

“The Pope has said you know we’re so concerned about financial bankruptcy but maybe the question that we’re missing is that perhaps we’re becoming spiritually bankrupt.”

And in considering the issues, the bishop says one should take precedence over all others.

“The one issue that can’t be minimized is the issue about being pro-life.”

In further Catholic church advertisement, they report he will have all of his churches open Monday so that Catholics can pray about how they should vote Tuesday.

The only way this should be on the news is if it is followed promptly by “This just in from the IRS: ‘Pittsburgh’s Catholic Diocese loses non-profit status.’”

Video of this non-news item can be found at KDKA’s news website.

One Thing, Real Quick: Sarah Palin’s irrational beliefs are absurd. In this article (another version here), she tells James Dobson from Focus on the Patriarchy that “the election rests in God’s hands.”

Dobson asked whether Palin was discouraged by polls showing the GOP ticket behind. “To me, it motivates us, makes us work that much harder,” Palin said. “And it also strengthens my faith, because I’m going to know, at the end of the day, putting this in God’s hands, that the right thing for America will be done at the end of the day on Nov. 4. So I’m not discouraged at all.”

If her ticket loses, will she admit that she & McCain weren’t the right thing for America? Has every president elect been the right thing for America, seeing as how God always makes sure the “right” thing is done at the end of the day? And if God is going to wrap it all up for her anyway, why bother working hard or campaigning?

I don’t think for a minute that Palin actually believes what she is saying here. She can’t believe it, or she wouldn’t be campaigning. It’s like praying when you get sick but going to the doctor anyway. You know prayer won’t work, but you talk about it despite that fact. You go through the motions. You tell yourself it’s powerful when nothing is happening to actually support that belief.

Palin’s statements are the type of mindless spiritual platitudes that religious people pull out of their pockets every Sunday to “encourage each other in the faith.” Without a second thought, they’ll talk about “God’s will being done” and the necessity of working to eradicate some societal “evil” in the same conversation. Perhaps talking about an omnipotent superman makes them feel less helpless, giving the illusion that everything is under the control of a deity that conveniently shares all their individual beliefs, prejudices, and presuppositions (which vary widely even within Palin’s Christian community).

The problem comes when those mindless spiritual platitudes turn into mindless theocratic dogma. Think: California’s Proposition 8. Watch this video of Palin speaking about her support for a constitutional amendment to make gay marriage illegal. Here’s what I transcribe from this speech:

I have voted in Alaska to amend our Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish that on the federal level, that’s where we’d go. I don’t support gay marriage. I’m not going to be up there judging individuals, telling them what they can and cannot do, but I certainly can express my own opinion here and take actions that would be best for traditional marriage, and that’s casting my vote….

Of course. And the KKK can express their own opinions and take actions based on those opinions as well. This doesn’t change the fact that the Constitution and Bill of Rights, which should be defended and upheld by those in public office, exist largely to protect the rights of the minority from the will of the majority. That’s why we’re not a direct democracy, where whatever 51% of the public wanted would become law.

No matter how many people (percentage-wise) want African Americans to become slaves again, the egalitarian laws of the land don’t allow the majority to discriminate–even though the Bible sanctions slavery. Your religious freedom means that you don’t have to associate with gay people if you don’t want to; it shouldn’t mean that you can pass legislation that denies them the same privileges you enjoy. We all have to live together, despite personal differences of opinion, hatred, religion, and preference, in a society that, as flawed as it might be, legally provides equality for all.

Want to impose your bigoted personal prejudices on others? I wish I could say, “Too bad, this is America,” but the presence of people like Sarah Palin in public office makes me realize how dangerously close we are to sacrificing the ideals of equality and liberty to theocratic morons who can’t see the difference between personal prejudice and national law because their heads are buried in hateful bronze-age rantings warmed over for mindless Sunday consumption.

REMINDER: THIS MONDAY!
October 27 - 7:00 PM
Porter Hall, Carnegie Mellon Campus

Join Us for an Evening with

Toni Van Pelt
Director of CFI’s Office of Public Policy in Washington, D.C.

“Promoting Science & Reason in Law and Policy”

Scientific thinking is being challenged culturally in the United States today as never before. Despite the success of science and technology in providing us with unparalleled benefits, religious fundamentalists and some postmodernists seek to inhibit free inquiry. This is a highly charged political issue, because both science and secularism are under attack. While a number of organizations lobby and work to defend science politically, so far no organization has worked to defend science and inquiry in all important areas of human endeavor more than the Center for Inquiry.

In it’s first two years, CFI’s Office of Public Policy - with the indispensable help of our members - has established the necessary credentials for action in our government’s halls. Please come to learn the ways the Center is standing up, speaking out, and demonstrating the responsibility and privilege necessary to maintain a civil society - and learn how you can help!

We’re very pleased to welcome Toni to Pittsburgh to give us a first hand look at what the OPP is doing to represent secular humanists to the Federal Government. This is an excellent opportunity for all of us to get a better handle on the issues that affect us and learn what is being done to resolve them. It will also give a greater appreciation of the scope of the Center’s activities and their importance to our world today.

See you Monday!

For more information about this and other CFI Pittsburgh events, please call (412) 384-5893 or visit www.centerforinquiry.net/pgh.

Magician, mentalist and skeptic Jamy Ian Swiss will explore the parallels between magic and skepticism at the Carnegie Science Center on Saturday, November 1.

Swiss will be hosting two events: A magic show titled Heavy Mental at 7:00 p.m. and a workshop from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. called Science, Magic, and Skepticism: A Natural Relationship.  The workshop also features Point of Inquiry host D.J. Grothe and Pittsburgh magician and founder of Deceptions Unlimited Rick Maue.

Swiss has appeared on tons of shows including Penn & Teller’s Sin City Spectacular. Check him out:

More details and CFI’s full press release after the jump.

Continue reading →

With Halloween just around the bend, this time of year brings to mind crisp cold weather, pumpkins and of course - ghosts, goblins and zombies!  As a rather sensitive person, I never really got too into scary movies or monsters.  I was (and still am a little) afraid of zombies -  It’s a completely irrational fear of course, but a lot of fears are irrational.  I was terrified of Michael Jackson’s Thriller video (turns out that fear is somewhat justified).   But there was something about Zombies that seemed plausible to the young mind.  The fact that all human beings die and our bodies decompose, that was a striking image as a child.  Zombies were the souless undead evil version of humans.  But the scariest thing about Zombies that got me hiding under the sheets was the fact that they EAT BRAINS.  In theory - can you blame them?  I’m sure our brains are dense with protein; animal brains are considered a delicacy in some nations, so perhaps Zombies are more cultured than we think.

This morning I came across this lovely little article this morning on The Invisible Pink Unicorn that discusses the Boston Globe’s interview with Paul Bloom, a psychologist and Yale researcher.  Bloom primarily studies why people are religious and has an interesting theory with regard to brain science, dualism and the concept of the human “soul.”  He claims that the human brain naturally tends toward dualistic thinking, especially when it comes to see our mind as a separate entity from our body.  However, all the things that are functions of the soul or mind, are actually being controlled by the brain - things like memory and self-control.  “Your mental life is a product of your brain,” says Bloom.

So I am having a change of heart regarding Zombies; perhaps they have known all along that the brain is where it’s at.  It’s what holds our consciousness, our memory, even our morals.  Perhaps they just long for the days when they had self-control, rather than a hunger for your temporal lobe.  Then again, perhaps they are much smarter than I originally gave them credit for - they know our greatest weakness, our Achilles’ heal.  Perhaps my childhood fears were more justified than I thought… (*wink*)

Phil Plait's Death from the Skies: These Are the Ways the World Will End . . .

What could be more perfect October reading than a book about all of the ways that the universe could destroy life as we know it?

Out this week is the much anticipated second book by Dr. Phil Plait (the Bad Astronomer) Death from the Skies: These Are the Ways the World Will End. I’ve added it to the Steel City Skeptics recommended reading list, and if you read it we welcome your review here or at our reading group on GoodReads.com¹.

Are tales of Ultimate Doom, a little too much to take during this already astronomically sized plague of political and economic dramas raining down upon us? Don’t worry, this is no “The! End! Is! Near!” sandwich-board screed from a subway stop nutter. Fans of Phil² can attest to his thoughtful, reassuring, upbeat style that will, no doubt leave you with a renewed sense of awe at how very fortunate we are not just to be here, but to still be here.

And, hey, as Phil points out in detail — things could be worse!

¹ SCS is everywhere!
² Pretend with me that following someone on Twitter puts us on a first name basis.

A recent comment on the blog asked an important question: What is Secular Humanism, and why do you adhere to it? One of our CFI-Pittsburgh members, Victor Benard, wrote an excellent essay about Secular Humanism, and I’m reprinting it here with his permission. Enjoy.

What is Secular Humanism? One Humanist’s View

It is a common pastime among secular humanists to argue about the definition and meaning of Secular Humanism. But as every secular humanist has their own definition, nothing is ever agreed upon. That being said, the best short definition of Secular Humanism that I have found is the following:

Secular Humanism is that moral philosophy which teaches that the goal of all political and moral action should be the protection and promotion of individual human welfare.

Continue reading →