Pascal's Wager

The first time I heard Pascal's Wager, the flaws in his reasoning were clearly apparent. It amazes me that anyone still takes it seriously. But it crossed my mind today, so I checked Wikipedia today to see what they had on it. I was surprised to find that they don't mention the most obvious problem with the argument. Even if we grant Pascal's claim that heaven represents a reward of infinite value, the expectation value of belief is only infinite if the probability of god's existence is non-zero. If the probability of god's existence is zero, then the expectation value of belief is also zero, which means Pascal has made a bad bet. Pascal gives no evidence to support the idea that there is a non-zero probability that god exists. To be fair, neither has anyone else.

But, just for fun, let's kick the crap out of Pascal's Wager by taking the Argument from Inconsistent Revelations to its logical extreme. According to that objection, since there are multiple inconsistent god claims, Pascal's Wager can be applied equally to any of them, leaving us with no reason to choose one religion over another. But there's no reason to stop with the finite set religions that currently exist. There is no logical reason to prefer an existing religion to a new one we make up tomorrow. New religions are created all the time. In fact, the number of possible religions is infinite. But if the number of possible religions is infinite, then in the limit the probability that any one of these religions is correct goes to zero. Which means that even within the logic of Pascal's Wager, the promise of heaven made by his god is worthless. But then, we already knew that, didn't we.

Cloverleaf?

So my parents are in town, which means I have the joy of trying to help them navigate the Northern VA, DC area. At one point my father fixated on the question of whether a particular intersection along his route was a cloverleaf, as if this was the critical piece of the puzzle. It is difficult to explain the absurdity of the idea that there would be any value in putting a label on one of the hundreds of variations on the intersection that occur in the Gordian knot we call a road system around here.

To create something worthy of a label in this area, you'd need to hire the engineering team of Kafka, Dali, and Escher. If you spiked their coffee with LSD, they might manage to come up with something to compete with local landmarks like "seven corners" and "the mixing bowl".

Let me describe the average NoVA commute. Drive straight up Satan's asshole. Your exit is somewhere around his tonsils. Good luck with that. No, you can't have a map. The mapquest directions are "kill yourself".

Push the Boundaries

Sometimes the loud and obnoxious among us have a positive duty to be loud and obnoxious. Of course, not every atheist is comfortable making others uncomfortable, but at least a few of us must be. The only way to move the middle is to push the boundaries. It expands the range of acceptable ideas so those who consider themselves reasonable and moderate have room to examine their own beliefs. So whenever the discussion turns to religion, I try to figure out where the line is and deliberately cross it. Not too far, mind you. The trick is to find the point where it is easier for the group to resolve the social tension by moving the boundary than in some other way. The other day I moved the boundary so far over the course of the conversation that I was able to refer to the bible as the collected scribblings of a bunch of bronze-age sheep fuckers. By that point the closet skeptics in the group felt safe to say what they really think. Mission accomplished.

Note: I never initiate a conversation about religion. Ever. But I also never shy away from it when it comes up, which is more often than you would think. This may be because the fact that I'm open about being an atheist invites conversations about religion. Sometimes it starts with religious people wanting to take me on. More often it starts with closet skeptics looking for someone to draw fire, making it safe for them to express their doubts.

Draw Mohammad Day

I decided to give "Draw Mohammad Day" a miss... not because I disagree with it, but because the fact that its even necessary is just too depressing. Think about it for a second. Think of all that humanity has achieved and discovered. And yet there are still people on this planet who are so hopelessly, skull-crushingly, pig-fucking ignorant that they actually think the appropriate response to a drawing that pisses them off is murder. I'm sorry, but at that point you have fucked the goat, and no decent person on the planet should interact with you in any way other than to heap scorn and ridicule upon your miserable, empty head.

And there are actually zealots from other religions who envy these fuckwits. Jihad envy. They'd love nothing more than to brutalize anyone who disagrees with them, but they are restrained by western society. For now, anyway. Let them sink their claws a little deeper into government and all bets are off. There are a few countries in Europe where you can still be thrown in jail for offending the local religious morons, so don't go thinking that Islam has a monopoly on oppression.

So anyway, I'm not going to draw a picture of Mohammad. Let's just cut to the chase.

Islam is bullshit. The Koran is bullshit. Every religion ever created is bullshit. Every religious text ever written is bullshit.

If that upsets you, feel free to say that atheism is bullshit if that makes you feel better. Say whatever the fuck you want. I promise I won't try to hurt you over it.

Rats!

Nova on PBS is one of the few programs on television worth watching. One episode that sticks in my mind is Rat Attack. Its about a huge bamboo forest in India that flowers en masse once every 48 years. When the bamboo fruit falls it provides a sudden but temporary spike in the available food supply for the rats that live in the forest. Their population explodes, but the food doesn't last long. Once it runs out, the area is left will millions of hungry rats that rush out of the forest looking for food. They devour any crops in the area, and when the crops run out, they starve to death.

Fossil fuels have allowed a massive increase in food production. We use them to run farm machinery, power irrigation, create pesticides, create fertilizers, transport crops to market, and more. But at some point these resources will run out, just like the bamboo fruit. The question is, are people smarter than rats?

Gay Marriage

The whole gay marriage fight is a perfect example of how the failure to maintain the separation of church and state creates problems where they would not otherwise exist. The root of the problem is that the state currently treats marriage as both a civil and a religious institution. The reasonable solution would be for the state to confine itself to the legal rights and obligations of the civil institution. Basically this would be the "civil union" solution, but for everyone. That would leave the churches free to define the religious institution of marriage as they see fit without trampling on the rights of anyone else.

Ah, but that last bit - that's why the religious opponents of gay marriage would never stand for such a solution. Trampling the rights of others is the point. Destroying the separation of church and state is the goal. They're right when they say that the gay marriage issue is a slippery slope, but the slope is towards theocracy and they're pushing with everything they can find. Bigotry against homosexuals is just another tool for them.

Drill Idiots Drill

So... all you morons who were chanting "Drill Baby Drill"... remember all those environmentalists who had the gall to suggest that this might not be such a great idea? The ones you called liberals, tree huggers, elitists, and so on? It turns out they were right. Again. And you were wrong. Again. So suck it. No, really. Carry your stupid ass down to the gulf coast and pick up a fucking straw. And you know what? Everyone in the current administration who thought increased off-shore drilling was a good idea can join you. When you're done cleaning up the mess, maybe we'll be able to have a reasoned discussion about energy policy.