Candide

roman catholic by birth; scientific atheist by choice; sinner by merit. blogging on brains, evolution and language. gaidhlig-speaking neuroscience student at oxford. likes to Question Everything!

From the NYT.

“My practice as a scientist is atheistic. That is to say, when I set up an experiment I assume that no god, angel or devil is going to interfere with its course; and this assumption has been justified by such success as I have achieved in my professional career. I should therefore be intellectually dishonest if I were not also atheistic in the affairs of the world.”

—   JBS Haldane
diverse-distractions:

selchieproductions:

Today’s homophobic, offensive petition is brought to you by the Catholic Church in Inverness.

We signatories to this petition are in favour of retaining the current legal definition which has served Scotland well for centuries. We are opposed to redefining marriage in Scotland and we call for a referendum on this issue.
Marriage is the union of one man to one woman, for life, to the exclusion of all others. It is the best environment for raising children. We note that homosexual couples already have full legal rights available through civil partnerships.
We are deeply concerned about the implications for what will be taught in schools if marriage is redefined. We are also concerned that the definition of marriage may be rewritten further so that, for example, polygamy may be legalised at some future point.
Our chief concern is for the general welfare of the people of Scotland. In addition, we do not wish to see the rights of conscience eroded for those who disagree with homosexual marriage.
Employees should not face discrimination at work because they support traditional marriage, neither should parents be criticised by schools for refusing to allow their children to take part in lessons which promote same-sex marriage. Organisations and people of all religious traditions must retain their freedom to speak and act according to their religious beliefs.


I hadn’t really considered this argument before:

We are opposed to redefining marriage in Scotland and we call for a referendum on this issue.
Marriage is the union of one man to one woman, for life, to the exclusion of all others.

Surely as far as Scottish law (and that of most of Europe and the US) is concerned marriage has already been redefined- it is possible to obtain a civil marriage and a  civil divorce, so marriage is no longer for life.

The priest in Eriskay spends five minutes at the end of mass every Sunday telling every to hurry up and sign the above petition.
The fact that no one bothers has made the people of Eriskay rise in my esteem. I have a feeling most people (including Catholics) just take an attitude of ‘I don’t really give a shit whether they can marry or not, and if they want to, why not let them - its not like it affects me.’
On any issue, whether it be Gay rights, animal rights, Syria, the Gaidhlig language, whatever, the majority of the population just want to get on with their lives. They don’t have time to be concerned about fighting for or against gay marriage. Only a small minority will vocally support either way. But in terms of tacit support, and the popular zeitgeist, the Catholic church is swimming against the current…

diverse-distractions:

selchieproductions:

Today’s homophobic, offensive petition is brought to you by the Catholic Church in Inverness.

We signatories to this petition are in favour of retaining the current legal definition which has served Scotland well for centuries. We are opposed to redefining marriage in Scotland and we call for a referendum on this issue.

Marriage is the union of one man to one woman, for life, to the exclusion of all others. It is the best environment for raising children. We note that homosexual couples already have full legal rights available through civil partnerships.

We are deeply concerned about the implications for what will be taught in schools if marriage is redefined. We are also concerned that the definition of marriage may be rewritten further so that, for example, polygamy may be legalised at some future point.

Our chief concern is for the general welfare of the people of Scotland. In addition, we do not wish to see the rights of conscience eroded for those who disagree with homosexual marriage.

Employees should not face discrimination at work because they support traditional marriage, neither should parents be criticised by schools for refusing to allow their children to take part in lessons which promote same-sex marriage. Organisations and people of all religious traditions must retain their freedom to speak and act according to their religious beliefs.

I hadn’t really considered this argument before:

We are opposed to redefining marriage in Scotland and we call for a referendum on this issue.

Marriage is the union of one man to one woman, for life, to the exclusion of all others.

Surely as far as Scottish law (and that of most of Europe and the US) is concerned marriage has already been redefined- it is possible to obtain a civil marriage and a  civil divorce, so marriage is no longer for life.

The priest in Eriskay spends five minutes at the end of mass every Sunday telling every to hurry up and sign the above petition.

The fact that no one bothers has made the people of Eriskay rise in my esteem. I have a feeling most people (including Catholics) just take an attitude of ‘I don’t really give a shit whether they can marry or not, and if they want to, why not let them - its not like it affects me.’

On any issue, whether it be Gay rights, animal rights, Syria, the Gaidhlig language, whatever, the majority of the population just want to get on with their lives. They don’t have time to be concerned about fighting for or against gay marriage. Only a small minority will vocally support either way. But in terms of tacit support, and the popular zeitgeist, the Catholic church is swimming against the current…

(via a-curious-creature)

Creating God In Our Own Image

source:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/mar/04/jesus-liberals-conservatives 
jesus

Love thy neighbour, so long as he is not an illegal immigrant. Blessed are the poor, so long as they are deserving. And, though it may be harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than to pass through the eye of a needle, multimillionaires should have no problem passing through the door of the Oval Office.

Religion and politics have always made uneasy bedfellows; yet how can Christians from all shades of the political spectrum reconcile their diverse views with the teachings of a single man?

A study led by Lee Ross of Stanford University in California has found that the Jesus of liberal Christians is very different from the one envisaged by conservatives. The researchers asked respondents to imagine what Jesus would have thought about contemporary issues such as taxation, immigration, same-sex marriage and abortion. Perhaps not surprisingly, Christian Republicans imagined a Jesus who tended to be against wealth redistribution, illegal immigrants, abortion and same-sex marriage; whereas the Jesus of Democrat-voting Christians would have had far more liberal opinions. The Bible may claim that God created man in his own image, but the study suggests man creates God in his own image.

Yet both groups recognised that their own views were not always identical to those of Jesus. The researchers divided issues into those concerned with fellowship (wealth distribution, immigration), and those concerned with morality (gay rights, abortion). Conservatives envisaged a Jesus with views close to their own on morality issues; but they recognised that the man who gave all his possessions to the poor would probably have advocated more progressive taxation policies than those of the Republican party. Conversely, liberals saw Jesus as having similar views as themselves on fellowship issues but they believed his views on gay rights would be to the right of their own.

The social psychologist Leon Festinger coined the term “cognitive dissonance” for the discomfort felt when we recognise conflict between our ideas and perceptions. He proposed that we tend to reduce conflict by altering our view of reality. This process of “dissonance reduction” (“I didn’t want that job anyway”) has been used down the centuries to reduce the conflict between a person’s religious convictions and their actions. When in the 13th century the Abbot Arnaud Amaury was asked by crusaders what do with the citizens of the town of Beziers who were a mix of both pious Christians and heretical Albigensians, he famously initiated a massacre of all the town’s inhabitants with the instructions, “Kill them all. God will know his own.” Similarly, in the 19th century, Christian slavers insisted that the enforced transport and enslavement of millions of Africans was justified because it brought God to a pagan people.

The researchers discovered that conservatives believe Jesus would have prioritised the moral issues close to their own hearts, and that disparities in wealth or the treatment of illegal immigrants wouldn’t have been high on his agenda. Liberals believed the opposite.

Ross and his colleagues suggest that dissonance reduction takes place not only within the individual, but as a collective enterprise. Preachers, politicians and co-believers tend to emphasise and de-emphasise different aspects of the Christian canon; so conservative Americans study the Old Testament with its homophobic rhetoric and eye-for-an-eye morality, whereas liberals look to the New Testament Jesus who was sympathetic to the poor and the meek.

Evangelical politics is not, of course, limited to the US. Many social conservatives in the UK align themselves with the Christian right, and MPs such as Nadine Dorries take inspiration from US campaigns against abortion or gay rights. But perhaps the most striking aspect of the study is that it turns on its head the claims by many religious politicians, such as Republican nomination candidates Rick Santorum (“I’m for income inequality”), Rick Perry (“Homosexuality is a sin”), or the UK’s Nadine Dorries (“My faith tells me who I am”), that their politics is inspired by their God. This study suggests instead that their God is inspired by their politics.

Question Everything

http://candide94.tumblr.com/ask

Willing to answer questions on science, philosophy, language, religion, politics, history, gaelic and scotland. 

I’m quite knowledgeable (though no expert) on neuroscience, evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, linguistics, minority languages, gaelic, catholicism, moral philosophy, the philosophy of biology, british politics, scottish history, polynesian history and general European history.

I always make the effort to provide long interesting answers. Why not ask me? You’ve got nothing to lose!

Also, if you’re that way inclined, I will answer personal questions!!!

http://candide94.tumblr.com/ask

marcescence asked: Heym, just came across your blog on the athiesm tag. I haven't read any of your posts yet, but I also think that "His Dark Materials" was a huge factor in my becoming athiest after 15 years of Catholic school. Glad to know that story has opened up other people's minds as well!

It’s a wonderful, beautiful series.

Your question has inspired me to write up how I rejected God.

Yeah, when I was a kid I loved science, especially astronomy, and geology, evolution and dinosaurs. And I remember really struggling to reconcile what I knew about the history of the world with the story of a Biblical creator. I came to the conclusion independently that it must just be metaphor and was happy to say that til age 9ish. Then I read HDM and it opened my eyes to the idea that, wow, there were people that actually criticized the Church. I was coming from a place where everyone is Catholic and goes to church every Sunday - I had never met a Protestant, or a Hindu, or a Muslim, or whatever. I didn’t really know they existed. Anyway HDM sowed the seeds of doubt in my mind and it was a philosophy book called the Philosophy Files that crystalized for me the implausibility of a personal God. I was astounded and excited about this. I thought I’d made an amazing discovery. Age ten I walked into school and during RE proceeded to explain to the teacher that the Bible wasn’t the written word of God, and that the New Testament was cobbled together in the 5th century AD. I told her there wasn’t much evidence for God. And she started crying! I mean actually, crying. She thought I was going to hell.

Then the headteacher came and started shouting at me that I was an arrogant little brat and how dare I think I was right when everyone else in the world believed in God.

My parents didn’t believe me. 

Ever since that day I realized God was irrational. I was forced to go to Church still tho.

When I was sixteen I said I was done, and refused to go to mass anymore. My dad said I would go to church as long as I lived under his roof, and that I’d get kicked out if I didn’t. I was banned from everything and ignored. I live in a crazily Catholic community and not going Church is equated with evil. In the end i decided that they were all too childish to change their minds and so, I’m ashamed to say, I caved in and I still grit my teeth to go to mass to keep em happy… I don’t want to fall out with them, as I need to finish my education.

When i turn 18 I’m gonna try again to quit. I’m gonna have a talk with them before my birthday and explain why as an adult I deserve the respect to choose my own views. While I was a kid I ‘respected’ their blind faith, now I ought to get some respect too.

Father Allan MacDonald of Eriskay

This was written for a historical society exhibition. It’s basically a short essay from which we took out good captions for photos etc. It’s far more breezy than my usual style, and lacking in any historical analysis. I had to write for an audience - namely, the religious and fact(as opposed to analysis)-loving average Eriskay person… 

(WARNING: You will notice I assume religious faith is a good thing. Again this is called ‘selling-out’ and is sometimes necessary when writing with someone else in mind)

Who was Father Allan, the man? Allan MacDonald - priest, poet, and folklorist - was born on the 25th October 1859 in the luxurious surroundings of Fort William Hotel. Despite having indeed been fortunate enough to obtain a room at the proverbial inn, from a young age his dream was to serve Christ as a member of the priesthood. At first, he studied at Blairs College, Aberdeenshire, and thence to Vallodolid in Spain where he undertook most of his training in the San Ambrosio College. 

Following ordination he was sent Oban as assistant priest. The people were fond of this young and popular priest yet, in 1884, he was transferred to Daliburgh parish which, at the time, was the poorest parish in the poorest diocese in all of Scotland. The people depended on him as an educated person to represent them in matters temporal as well as religious.  He laboured for ten happy but hardworking years in South Uist. However, A School in South Uist tells us it was always his desire to minister to and then die with “the simple fisher folk of Eriskay,” When, due to exhaustion, the Bishop relieved him of the burden of the St Peters, he crossed the sound to the island of Eriskay. An island he loved despite it being “bare of  barley!”

The impact he had on this little island at the edge of nowhere can hardly be exaggerated. But Fr Allan’s greatest legacy )of many) is - of course - the church, which stands imposingly alone atop the hill known as Cnoc na Sgrath.

Prior to Fr Allan’s arrival on the island, the people of Eriskay worshipped in a damp and smoky blackhouse, situated where the statue of Our Lady is now. The roof was full of holes and the visiting priest literally did have to walk on water in order to say mass. There were no seats, therefore the congregation all stood in cramped and crowded conditions. It was obvious to Fr Allan a new building was required, for how could he minister to his flock if the Chapel wasn’t even a worthy home for sheep?

Funds were needed and fast. This was mostly raised from subscriptions paid by Fr Allan’s rich friends plus, most importantly, the pious fisherman donated the takings from one catch a week to the appeal. On the designated day, the people gathered to pray for fruitful fishing, and it is claimed that these Church catches were far larger than the rest of the week’s. The faith of the Eriskay congregation was such that the construction of the church became a community endeavour, with sand being carried by the schoolchildren during their break and the men giving up their time to shift the large stones up the Rubha Ban.

The Church’s positioning on Cnoc na Sgrath was inspired in that it can be seen from all corners (of the populous part) of the island, as if it were a kind of beacon to the people, a physical focal point for the isle and also as a lighthouse shining to the sailors in the sound. Although some might argue it could just as easily be called a watchtower surveying the island!

As well as the Church, Fr Allan’s legacy to Eriskay includes the bringing of the telegraph line, which in turn led to telephone and electricity lines. He also led the people in the construction of a road out to Bun a’ Mhuilinn. This was the first road in Eriskay; “An Rathad Ard,” and it is still used today by walkers. With one road, people demanded more, a desire eventually manifesting itself in the causeway, built in 2000.  One could argue Fr Allan, in building the first road, sent us down the road of crossing the sound by causeway. I imagine he would be very pleased to see cars driving across the causeway, thinking of the days he spent by the fire at Taobh a’ Chaolais awaiting a boat to ferry him over to say mass.

Fr Allan was a community leader who loved his community. He loved their Gaidhlig language and his book, Gaelic Words And Expressions From South Uist, demonstrates the meticulous detail with which he recorded the fading Hebridean culture. His notebooks are a treasure trove of observations of the distinctive Eriskay way of life. As a priest he wanted his congregation to understand the message of God and, therefore, years before Vatican II, he decided to translate the mass into Gaidhlig. He composed many hymns which are still heard at mass to this day. 

As a collector of folklore Fr Allan was renowned throughout Scotland. However, being a generous man, when Anna Goodrich Freer visited him he quite happily gave her free-reign with his note-books. Years later she published his work under her own name. Fr Allan’s many friends were angered. Fr Allan was upset that people were arguing and, to the loss of Gaidhlig scholarship, he ceased collating folklore for fear of causing more controversy.

Fr Allan is easily the most celebrated person every to call themselves an Eirisgeach His impact is such that it would be remarkably difficult to find someone living on the island today who wasn’t aware who Fr Allan was, even if they were aware only that he built the Church. In his time, Fr Allan was regarded as a kind of father to the isle, ministering to all the needs of the people, be they spiritual, medical or social. But the nature of his work wore him out before his time. Fr Allan died of Acute Pneumonia in October 1905 when he was only 46 years old. In his short life he did more for the people of Eriskay than anyone ever had or will. Despite more than one hundred years having passed since his death, he lives on in St Michael’s his pride and joy, in the hymns sung and mass said every Sunday, and in the great Celtic Cross (erected by the people) which guards his grave. Finally, every summer the boats are blessed in Acarsaid Mhor, a tradition began by Fr Allan for which he received a special papal dispensation. The priest blesses the fishermen’s boats so they will have a safe year at sea, and Fr Allan, that lover of the “simple fisherfolk of Eriskay”, himself a great fisher of men, would be very proud to see that this unique tradition has continued for more than a century. A fitting legacy for a man who braved howling winds to cross the sound every Sunday to say mass.

“Suppose that every memory, written word, and piece of technology on earth was destroyed all at once, leaving humanity to start completely from scratch. Everything we have come to know about science would eventually be discovered again. Given a few thousand years, people would figure out chemistry, and rediscover all of the same elements we know about now. people would once again understand biology, including its evolutionary origins. People would eventually see the motions of other galaxies in the sky, and work out the details of the big bang. This is the glorious part about science, it can and would all be replicated. I can assure you, however, that your story about a talking snake would be gone forever.”

—   Unknown

Question Everything - http://candide94.tumblr.com/ask

http://candide94.tumblr.com/ask

Willing to answer questions on science, philosophy, language, religion, politics, history, gaelic and scotland. 

I’m quite knowledgeable (though no expert) on neuroscience, evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, linguistics, minority languages, gaelic, catholicism, moral philosophy, the philosophy of biology, british politics, scottish history, polynesian history and general European history.

I always make the effort to provide long interesting answers. Why not ask me? You’ve got nothing to lose!

Also, if you’re that way inclined, I will answer personal questions!!!

http://candide94.tumblr.com/ask

Laminin is a glycoprotein crucial to the maintenance of tissue. It influences cell differentiation, migration and adhesion. It is also a creationist argument in favour of the Christian God!