Days Before the World Ends on May 21st, It’s a Good Time to Consider Reason, Rationality and Science

Never try to discourage thinking, for you are sure to succeed. Bertrand Russell, What I Believe, 1925  

In addition to knowing how to make money for Berkshire-Hathaway (BH) and a lot of BH investors over decades of consistent above-average returns, Warren Buffett is a bit of an expert on rationality. He often extols critical thinking as a prerequisite for sound investment and sensible decision-making in all areas - no exceptions. One of his themes in annual BH reports is that rational people do not get in their own way. He often says, Not getting in your own way - that's the key to success.

There are no mysteries about how we get in our own way, nor about how we can learn to stay out of it. Most do things that hurt their prospects for regularly occurring experiences of exuberance in many forms, along with sustaining good health. Think of people you know who do what they know are harmful and self-destructive - smoking, drinking too much, exercising too little and engaging in other high-risk behaviors. However, a lot of self-inflicted, getting in one's own way is done by default.  

What does that look like? How do you hurt your prospects for success, health and a good life by default? This happens when you go along with norms or customs that reinforce mediocrity or worse. It happens when you associate, longer than you must, with backward, negative or dull people. And I think it happens when you continue to respect vacuous rules, ludicrous rituals and nonsensical beliefs that you grew up. Of course, not everything you grew up with was nonsensical, and some fortunate individuals grew up with sound cultures of science and learning.

We are all responsible for doing an inventory at several points along the way after reaching the ages of reason. Eliminate those things which no longer make sense and subject all of it to critical inquiry.  

Do you think I might be on to something here?   

An important skill area that is a foundation of a REAL wellness mindset is a strong regard for and willingness to utilize reason, rationality or critical thinking. Another way of putting it - having a high regard for science. Insist  on evidence concerning customs, dogmas and the like that seem a bit odd or ridiculous. Be alert to anything in your life that no longer make sense now that you are a fully functioning, capable and well-educated adult.  

Another way people get in their own way on the path to wellness is by default. This happens if we neglect to pursue passions, cultivate gifts, express loves and celebrate talents and opportunities. 

At a seminar with Bill Gates a decade ago, Buffett said:

They've asked us to start out talking, the two of us, about what got us here...How I got here is pretty simple...It's not IQ...The big thing is rationality. I always look at IQ and talent as representing the horsepower of the motor, but that the output - the efficiency with which that motor works - depends on rationality. A lot of people start out with 400-horsepower motors but only get a hundred horsepower of output. It's better to have a 200-horsepower motor and get it all into output.

Think of ways you might be blocking your REAL wellness success potentials. Don't overlook default factors. Let rationality, via critical thinking, be your guide to needed changes. It's the best path toward satisfaction and well-being, the true measures of success.

Donald B. Ardell is the Well Infidel. He favors evidence over faith, reason over revelation and meaning and purpose over spirituality. His enthusiasm for reason, exuberance and liberty are reflected in his books (14), newsletter (576 editions of a weekly report) and lectures across North America and a dozen other countries. Write Don at awr.realwellness@gmail.com

The Republican Holy Bible

“Love thy neighbor but don’t get caught.”

GENESIS

“In the beginning was the Constitution and the Constitution was divinely ordained by God because it was transcribed by Righteous Republicans who were America’s chosen “forefathers.” And the forefathers were rich devout Christian white men, in totality. None were atheists or agnostics, or Muslim (or Black), but all were born-again Christians.”

“And whosover contradicts the strict interpretation of the Constitution set in stone by Republicans shalt be damned.”

“In the beginning 6,000 years ago, there were no heavens nor earth nor dinosaurs. Then God said Let there be Light, and there was Light, and he said It is good. Then he said Let there be water, fire, air, darkness, stars and moon. Then he said let there be fowl, fish and furry little creatures running about the planet. And it was so. Finally he said Let there be man, then naked Adam (missing a belly-button) popped up riding a dinosaur. And God said ‘What?’ ”

“There were no females to satisfy the man he’d just created, so God said Let there be Woman, which he ripped from the poor man’s ribcage. So God made Woman to comfort and serve the sore Man recuperating from divine surgery. And he said It is good.”

“And God made Man from his own image (except God made sure to cover his own ass when making missteps by claiming executive privilege). Woman was created as an afterthought only to satisfy the Man.”

SALVATION

“For Bush so loved the world that he gaveth his only retarded son that whosever believeth in him shall not flourish but have a miserable life.”

CONSERVATIVES’ CROWN COMMANDMENT

"Do unto others BEFORE they do unto thee, and do it to them often with all thy might – even if they looketh at thee critically, for thou art my chosen people who hath inherited the earth including all my creation and infidels alike. Henceforth, thou shalt have absolute dominion over the lives of ungodly non-rightwingers to take and do as thou wilt."

THE GOLDEN RULE

"He that hath the gold maketh the rules. We hath the gold so we maketh the rules and whosever breaketh them faceth our wrath."

THE POOR

"The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, because He appointed Me to preach the gospel to the rich. He has sent Me to proclaim release to the white collar criminals, and collect tax dollars to bail out corporate thieves if they face negative returns, to set free those who have stolen billions, to proclaim the favorable dominance of the GOP. Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in America, praise Jesus."

“Blessed are you who are rich, for yours is the kingdom of Republicanism. Blessed are you who are greedy pigs now, for you shall never be made to suffer but be classified too big to fail so taxpayers are forced to bail your fat asses out. Blessed are you who laugh now at the expense of the underprivileged, for you shall laugh later when cashing in foreclosed properties from the same.”

“Did not God choose the rich of this world to be fake in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love money?”

"Accumulate possessions and don’t give to charity. Lay up for yourselves treasures on earth in secret Swiss accounts or off-shore shelters so you can go to heaven with that sense of accomplishment. Seek ye first the Kingdom of Wealth, and all these things shall be added unto thee.”

"When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite the poor, but potential investors or rich neighbors, so that they also may invite you in return, and repayment come to you. But when you give a reception, do not invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, or else you will be associated with them and negatively impacted by them, since they do not have the means to repay you; for you will only be repaid by socializing with the wealthy."

"Cling to your possessions and give nothing away; Tear down your mansions and build bigger. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

"If you wish to obey the Republican god’s commands, go and hoard possessions and give nothing to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come to be known as a Party loyalist greedy pigs. For greed is good and godly."

REPENTANCE

"Confess thy sins, repent for the remission of evil, then go ye, therefore, and tell the whole world that thou art FORGIVEN that ye may be able to win votes from the feeble-minded myth-believers. Henceforth thou canst do anything forbidden because thou art a sinner saved by grace – the very elite of God's chosen disciples. Verily, verily, I say unto you, thou mayeth commit adultery, bribery, theft, war-crimes, and deceit with impunity – for thou art the chosen ones whose sins have been cleansed. Thou art predestined and preordained to be forgiven, so indulge thyself."

BILLIONAIRES’ BEATITUDES

"Blessed are the RICH for they shall inherit the earth with all its bountiful resources to bulldoze, pollute, and cause to go instinct as thou wisheth and shall not be taxed but let the poor pay the utmost.”

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be named on our cruise missiles to bloweth the living shit out of whomsoever gets in our pompous way.”

“Verily, verily I say unto thee: Do bad to those who do good unto thee, curse those who blesseth thee, destroy anyone who looketh cross-eyed at thee or whosoever even seemeth like they would threaten you sometime in the unforeseen future.”

“If someone strikes you on the one cheek, turneth to him with thine other cheek – from thy buttocks (so let it your light shine before men that they may see your self-righteous born-again shiny whiteass and glorify your father which art in Texas), and then blow your alleged enemy's living brains out, for yours is the Kingdom of the Second Amendment."

“Blessed are the meek. Aw, just kidding. Fuck those socialist pussies.”

GOD’S CARETAKERS

“Yea, though I drive my oversized SUV through the shadow of Death Valley, I will fear no climate change, for I know thou art with me, thy hot rod and under-aged staff they comfort me.”

“Yea, though I clear-cut forests causing the planet’s death, I will fear no environmental wackos.”

MAMMON (Money)

"For the LACK of money is the root of all evil. To him that hath not, shall be taken away: And to him who hath, shall be given. The corporates giveth and the corporates taketh away. Blessed be the name of the corporate country."

GOP TEN COMMANDMENTS

ONE: ”Thou shalt not place any loyalty above Party.”

TWO: “Thou shalt not take unto thee any graven liberal image, such as peace symbols, doves and make-love-not-war bumper stickers. But thou shalt dangle crosses about thy neck, flag lapels on thy garments, and anti-liberal bumper stickers on thy carriages.”

THREE: “Thou shalt not take the name of Money, thy god, in vain.”

FOUR: “Remember Christmas to keep it wholly commercialized to be used as a political wedge by the right and a favorite news item on FOX every season.”

FIVE: “Honor thy father and mother. Except if they’re Dems or libs or favor gun control.”

SIX: “Thou shalt not kill anybody except liberals, Muslims, Mexicans, gays, or any political opponent. Oh, hell, kill them all and let God sort them out.”

SEVEN: “Thou shalt not commit adultery. P.S. It’s not adultery if you’re a wide-stanced Republican politician in a bathroom stall with another man.”

EIGHT: “Thou shalt not steal except from the poor, middle-class, taxpayers, government, and dumb-saps down at the fake Christian megachurch.”

NINE: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy fellow Republicans but circulate all sorts of false stories about liberals and Democrats. But thou shalt bear false witness to incite wars and assassinations.”

TEN: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house except if it’s white and on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and the current resident happens to be not white; Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife except if she works on your staff, nor his male servant except if he’s a page that you can sext to without getting caught, nor his female servant (same), nor his ox (‘nuff said), nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's except his bank account, luscious wife or daughter or handsome son.”

RONALD REAGAN’S ELEVENTH COMMANDMENT

“Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. But thou mayest speak ill and spread malicious rumors against anyone else – fair game.”

ADULTERY

“Love thy neighbor but don’t get caught.”

EXCLUSIVITY

"He who art not with me is against me. If thou canst not agree with every word proceeding out of my mouth, thou art against me. For verily, verily I say unto thee, I – as the Republican image -- am the final judge of good and evil and what I say goes. Anyone not with me will be at the receiving end of God’s wrath.”

“No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. Thou canst not serve both the Republican Party and the nation. Thou must choose the Party of God over country.”

“Trust in the GOP with all thy heart and lean not unto thine own understanding; in all thy ways acknowledge it, and it will direct your path to wealth, power and fame.”

“GOP does spell GOD.”

SCOTLAND THE BRAVE

Will May 2011 go down in history as the beginning of the end of the United Kingdom in its present form? Until now the suggestion that the UK might actually break up any time in the foreseeable future has been dismissed by political commentators and constitutional pundits as the pipe-dream of romantic nationalists – a proposition not worthy of serious consideration. Now, following Britain’s local government and Scottish parliament election results and the outcome of the AV referendum on May 6^th, the prospect cannot be so easily dismissed. North of the border, the Scottish National party (SNP) has been swept to power with an overall majority. This is a development of enormous significance and by far the most important outcome of a national poll which has seen the Liberal Democrats wiped from the electoral map throughout most of Britain. Before commenting more fully on the Scottish result, a few observations may be made about the elections in the rest of the UK.

Most informed commentary in the immediate aftermath of the polls has concentrated on the collapse of support for the Lib Dems and the crushing defeat for the “Yes” campaign, a centre-piece of their policy, in the referendum on voting reform. It has been clear for many months that the Lib Dems would pay a heavy electoral price for their decision a year ago to go into a coalition with the Tories. The leader of the party, Nick Clegg, now deputy prime minister, has suffered a more dramatic fall from grace than any political leader of modern times. He shot to stardom in the leadership debates preceding last year’s general election only to sink rapidly into public obloquy as he was perceived (correctly) to have reneged on firm commitments he had made to those sections of the electorate whose support he sought. The Tories have emerged from the English elections relatively unscathed. Given that they lead a government in the process of implementing the most severe cuts in public spending since the 1930s, this seems surprising. Their vote in the south of England and in their rural heartlands further north has held up. From a strong base the Tories made a net gain of three councils, giving them a total of 152; Labour made a net gain of 26 councils giving them control of 56. The Lib Dems lost 9 and gained none, leaving them in control of only 11 councils. Labour gained support in Wales at the expense of the Tories and Plaid Cymru (the Welsh Nationalists) leaving them one short of a majority.

The Tories are gloating over these results. They are particularly pleased about the failure of the campaign for the alternative vote (AV), which was overwhelmingly defeated in the referendum by 68% to 32%. This leaves the first-past-the-post system intact, pretty much ensuring that governments in Britain will continue to be elected on as little as 35% of the poll. This system has always favoured the Tories. Many – perhaps most –Tory MPs are gleeful at the humiliation of Clegg and the Lib Dems. Some are hoping that their coalition partners will crack up and break with the government, thus precipitating a new election which they are confident of winning. Such confidence is not necessarily misplaced. At first sight it seems puzzling that the Tories are not suffering more than they are. There are several reasons why they are not. In the first place the Labour party in opposition has not really opposed. They have not shaken off the mantle of “New Labour”. Ed Miliband has done little to convince potential supporters that he has either the personality or the policies to justify their support. The parliamentary party seems supine in the face of the Con Dem assault. Both Tory and Lib Dem ministers constantly repeat platitudes about the need to “clear up the mess inherited from Labour” and “act together in the national interest”. Most of this goes without challenge. Then there is the press. Of the eight main national daily newspapers, five, with a combined circulation of several millions, support the Tories. These papers were all firmly opposed to AV. The Lib Dems have largely themselves to blame for their present plight. They accepted the Tory offer of full coalition which bound them to every decision taken by the government. The volte face on student tuition fees did enormous damage to the party, and to Clegg personally, from which they have not recovered. There was no majority in the 2011 election for the severe austerity measures being enacted, and by throwing in their lot with the Tories the Lib Dems have aroused the intense hostility of the majority of those who voted for them. They have taken far more of the blame than their Tory partners. Now they are caught between a rock and a very hard place. They cannot afford to jump ship as they fear their fate in an ensuing election. They can only cling on in the hope that the hoped-for economic recovery resulting from the present pain will restore their fortunes by 2015. Now back to the most dramatic story of the day: Scotland.

Prime Minister Cameron may have a self-satisfied smile on his face today, but it is unlikely to survive his first encounters with Scotland’s first minister, Alex Salmond. The Scottish result is truly historic. For many years in British general elections, Scotland has been almost a Tory-free zone. In the 2010 election, from 59 constituencies they returned one MP to the Westminster parliament. Labour returned 41, the Lib Dems 11 and the SNP 7. This led Nick Clegg to say that the SNP was irrelevant. Now consider the outcome of the May 2011 elections to the Scottish parliament. The SNP returned 69 MPs, Labour 37, the Tories 15 and the LIB Dems 5. In addition, 2 Greens and 1 Independent were elected. In Edinburgh’s 129 seat unicameral chamber it gives the SNP an overall majority of 9 seats. This is an extraordinary breakthrough because the electoral system devised for the devolved parliament in the 1997 Scotland Act provided for a legislature elected by a combination of first-past-the-post and proportional representation. Intended to prevent any one party achieving an overall majority, it was specifically directed against the SNP whose ultimate aim was independence for Scotland. Since 2007 the SNP has led a minority government with Salmond as first minister. Needless to say all the other main parties are totally opposed to Scottish independence, which they rightly recognize would mean the break up of the United Kingdom. Now, there is a majority at Holyrood (seat of the Scottish parliament) of twelve for parties committed to independence, as the two Greens and one Independent are also in favour. But does this mean that it is likely to be achieved during the term of the present Westminster parliament? Most “informed opinion” says no. Indeed, according to such opinion, it will never happen. But, behind such certainties may be detected a creeping tone of apprehension. David Cameron, commenting on the prospect of a referendum on independence, says “If they want to hold a referendum, I will campaign to keep our United Kingdom together with every single fibre I have.” He may not be as lucky as he was in his opposition to AV.

According to current opinion polls support in Scotland for full independence stands at around 30%. It may well be that things will not have changed much in four or five years time. But these are very fluid and unpredictable times and it is possible to foresee a tide of opinion rising in favour of independence. Scotland has been part of the United Kingdom for more than 300 years, since the Treaty of Union of 1707.There has always been a vocal minority in Scotland against the union. During the past forty years there has been much bitterness at the way Scottish interests have been handled at Westminster. This became intense in the late 1970s with the scuppering of the devolution bill. In fact, the withdrawal of SNP support from Callaghan’s minority Labour government led indirectly to his defeat on a confidence motion in 1979. This was followed by the defeat of the government in the election which brought Thatcher to power, leading to eighteen years of Tory rule. During those years Scottish opinion hardened decisively against a government that was responsible for the destruction of the Scotland’s mining and manufacturing industries and the exploitation of Scotland’s North Sea oil with scant regard for its declining economy.

The SNP led government has achieved a lot. They have shielded the welfare state from the assaults that are decimating services south of the border. Higher education and care for the elderly have been protected. Salmond has picked up the social democratic banner discarded by New Labour. The SNP now stands to the left of Labour in Scotland. With an overall majority in Edinburgh they have the wind in their sails and Salmond shows every sign of using his majority to wrest greater concessions from Westminster. There will be stormy days ahead and it is impossible to know how things will turn out. But there is every reason to hope that he will continue to operate with the skill he has shown over the last four years and it is not unrealistic to imagine that he may eventually carry a majority with his party to push for complete independence for Scotland. Such a development would lead to the most severe confrontation with the full power of the British state. If Scotland were to achieve independence it would deliver a well-deserved blow to a sclerotic institution and help reconstitute the territories of these islands as a federation more suited to the modern world.

Are All Religions Equally Crazy and If So Or Even If Not, What Can You Personally Do About It? I Have a Suggestion!

One of my favorite bloggers, Greta Christina, recently (May 13, 2011) asked (and answered) the question, "Are All Religions Equally Crazy?"

"No," I thought upon reading this headline, "some are much more equally crazy than others."  Of course, any sensible debate on the relative Orwellian equality of pious lunacies requires agreed-upon criteria to objectively assess levels of craziness. It might be hard to gain such a consensus, especially if believers were to participate in the process. Their contempt for miracle claims and the historical record is deeper than that distain common among us infidels - except, of course, for their own myths. The latter seem totally sensible and beyond question, which is possible when you have faith, faith being the capacity to fervently believe what you know ain't so. 

Ms. Christina notes that we non-believing skeptic rationalists extend the courtesy of polite restraint about those religious beliefs that seem moderate and progressive. We only "trash the low-hanging fruit of hard-line fundamentalism." But, she argues and I agree, they are all wacko (or "nutty" or "batshit" or "lunatic" or what have you). Consider:

Mormons - magic underwear, retroactive baptism of the dead, becoming a god on your own planet after death, secret magical golden plates through a magic hat and so. 

The rest of Christianity - talking snakes, living inside giant fish, a single boat that saved two of every living creature on the planet from a flood, magic crackers that transform into the body of your god when eaten, a fruit that seriously diminished the quality of life of everyone who was born on the entire planet after one person ate it, a virgin birth, water made "holy" that inoculates babies so they won't have to burn forever in Hell, a 6,000 year old earth and a god who commits suicide to save the world from the punishment he himself would otherwise have to administer - and so on. 

Other religions (including but not limited to Jehovah's Witnesses, Scientology, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam) - ritual washing in a polluted river, shifting sins to chickens, covering women head to toe, compulsory hats, no drawing pictures of real things allowed, cutting of the clitoris, trimming the tip of the penis, etc. ad nauseam. 

All this and a great deal of other beliefs are not "out of step with cultural norms" but are "out of touch with reality," as Christina sees it and I certainly agree. Nevertheless, where religions have a large following, their sacred truths, dogmas and rituals are safe from ridicule, most of the time in nearly all places, for many reasons, including these: 

* The religions are popular and powerful - and do not take dissent gracefully, let along irreverence ("blasphemy").

* Most people are polite and nice, and try to get along by going along and, if amused or horrified by religious beliefs, keep it to themselves. 

* When so many believe something, you have to wonder - there must be something to it. 

* The really weird stuff gets reinterpreted to make it seem a bit more plausible, and most believers don't fully understand or even want to know about the lunatic stuff that was part of the program in earlier times. 

But, let's face it - Christina's right - they are all equally crazy. Superstition is nonsense, period. The supernatural is implausible. Believing that which is supported by no evidence is irrational. Most beliefs conflict with science. Most distort verifiable history. Reality deserves our respect, improbably claims do not. 

Ok, enough already. If all this is just common sense, totally consistent with what you have concluded long ago (or even recently), wouldn't it be nice to say something, to make a point about religion that would actually be seen by lots of people? Want to come out of the closet and go public with a statement about the bare-ass emperor that is all religion? If so, I have a suggestion.

Make a billboard. Put up a comment next to your name and photo picture. Of course, it must be brief! It's a billboard, not a book. Go to the website of the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) and set one up - it's free. Here's a summary from the FFRF billboard campaign:

"Declare and share your non-belief! Although the nonreligious — including one in six U.S. citizens — are a significant segment of the world population, many Americans have never knowingly met a nonbeliever. You can help dispel myths, educate and promote reason by adding your voice, face and message to FFRF's friendly neighborhood freethinker campaign. FFRF's 'Out of the Closet' billboards and bus signs are going up around the country. Although we can't put everyone on a real billboard, every nonbeliever can participate in this unique 'cyberboard' campaign. (Yours might even be chosen, with your permission, for an actual billboard.) This is your chance to proclaim you're a freethinker and why. It's working for the gay rights movement. Now it's time for atheists and agnostics to come out of our closet. Many faces make Enlightenment work."

I did, Here's my billboard. Now show me yours!  

Don's Prediction: The Monarchy will End Soon - and Will and Kate will Abdicate

I like Will and Kate - and Betsy's a good egg, too. For instance, in a recent (December 10, 2010) address to the General Synod of the Church of England, the good Queen Elizabeth II said something that endeared her to freethinkers everywhere forevermore: "In our more diverse and secular society, the place of religion has come to be a matter of lively discussion. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue and that the well-being and prosperity of the nation depend on the contribution of individuals and groups of all faiths and of none."

Unfortunately, this modest British nod to separation of religion from government was not present during the wedding vows exchanged by Prince William and Catherine 'Kate' Middleton. The gigantic wedding, held on April 29, 2011 at The Collegiate Church of St. Peter (Westminster Abbey) in London, was witnessed by tens of millions of commoners via television throughout the world. They heard the following religious references, courtesy of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams: That the couple would "... live together according to God's law in the holy estate of matrimony." The exact nature of that law was not explained, nor did secularists learn what "holy estate" means. That was mild compared with the weird idea that came next - the blessing of a ring. Really. The high priest actually did a ring blessing, as follows: "Bless the Lord this ring. And grant that he who gives it and she who shall wear it may remain faithful to each other and abide in thy peace and favor and live together in love until their lives end through Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen."

So, now the Princess has a magic ring. Aren't supernatural powers wonderful? 

However, despite the magic ring and all the other folderol, the royals are like the rest of us homo sapiens - oxygen breathing, carbon-based, mildly alkaline life-forms who sleep/defecate/drink/pee/bathe and otherwise maintain the pH in their lungs and kidneys within the 7.35 to 7.45 range, the better to maintain homeostasis and avoid hospitals and graveyards. They all do the things we do, for better or worse, in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. But, we should not forget that even a "good monarchy" (excuse the oxymoron) is undemocratic, irrational and demeaning. Despite their likability, Britain's Will/Kate/Queen and the entire brood of privileged dukes and duchesses, princes and so on must end - and sooner would be preferred over later. 

Everyone - pay attention! This royalty business is ridiculous. The emperors are butt naked. The wedding is much taa taa about nothing! It's pure entertainment - and should be totally unrelated to government. The media saturation coverage is a great madness. To call it "frivolous nonsense," as did one writer in the St. Petersburg Times, is too kind. Jeff Brinckman nailed the entire business of royalty - saying it should have ended long ago: "No one has a divine right to anything. No one should by birth become a king, queen or prince. Monarchy has nothing to do with merit. A person with no particular talent has no right to be elevated to a royal position. The British throne is also institutionally sexist. The monarchy is not accountable, yet taxpayers in the United Kingdom must finance the royals' lavish lifestyles. The current royal family needs to be the last. The easiest way for that to happen is for Charles and others in line to simply abdicate."

Hear hear. Just so. 

In my official capacity as ... well, if I had an official capacity, I would declaim and even without one do hereby proclaim or rather politely ask the kind and thoughtful Harry and Kate to go ahead and have a royal time at public expense for a while, but soon thereafter to do a great service for Brits and democrats everywhere. Inform the British nation and the world that the time of monarchy has passed. Give us all a royal reverse post-wedding present - announce the abdication and graceful termination of thrones and all that is regarding concepts of royal blood.

As to Buckingham and all those palaces and coaches and cool crowns and robes, etc., well, all that can be turned into museums or sold off to lower the deficit.

They might bid adieu to royalty with the immortal words from the the memorable and revered film Casablanca: "Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life."

Donald B. Ardell is the Well Infidel.  He favors evidence over faith, reason over revelation and meaning and purpose over spirituality.  His enthusiasm for reason, exuberance and liberty are reflected in his books (14), newsletter (573 editions of a weekly report) and lectures across North America and a dozen other countries. Write Don at mailto:awr.realwellness@gmail.com 

The Rationalizing Animal, Part I

Yep, that’s us, Homo sapiens, the much vaunted human race, “the paragon of animals,” widely believed to have been fashioned from dust and ribs by the omnipotent and benevolent Creator of the Cosmos – and in His own image, no less. That’s us, the only earthly species capable of rationalizing, a capacity we constantly push to delusional, self-aggrandizing extremes, especially here in the U.S. in recent years.

Webster defines rationalize as follows: (to) “attempt to explain or justify (one's own or another's behavior or attitude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate.” My own working definition goes along these lines: making up plausible, often elaborate and ingenious explanations to support ideologically mandated beliefs or to defend the perceived integrity of one’s self concept.

The use of rationalization as a “defense mechanism” has been studied extensively by psychologists and is one of the key elements of cognitive dissonance theory. This venerable theory posits that conflicting ideas held simultaneously create an uncomfortable emotional feeling (dissonance) that motivates efforts to relieve it. The most intense dissonance results from information that threatens to undermine strongly held beliefs that are integral to one’s self-concept or public identity. Whatever motivates it on any particular occasion, rationalization is the self-serving opposite of objectivity, the opposite of basing one’s beliefs and opinions on evidence and reason. It’s what we humans naturally do, something we’re really good at, at least when playing to a sympathetic audience or to ourselves in the theater of our own mind.

Rationalization is by no means the only mechanism for reducing dissonance: other time-honored, universal techniques include confirmation bias, denial, blame, and changing one’s actions or beliefs. The last is admirable when done with the intention of bringing behavior and beliefs in line with evidence and sound reasoning. Call it scientific thinking, which seems comparatively rare outside of scientific circles. And as I have argued in earlier columns, it does not come naturally, but requires training and discipline. Even many scientists appear to abandon it as soon as they step outside their science milieu.

So once again I am compelled to return to my recurring, doomsday theme of the fatal flaws of human nature. Now, more than ever, it’s essential we get things right. Now, more than ever, too many of us are denying and rejecting science and reason.

“How’s that?” someone might ask. “Isn’t that very human nature you decry the reason for our survival? Didn’t it see us through much more difficult challenges in our distant past?”

To which I must unequivocally answer, “Yes and maybe.” If our evolved nature, in all its stupendous complexity, had not been adapted to the conditions of the ancient environment, we wouldn’t be here to argue about it. So evolution clearly worked for the human species, to such a degree that, for better or for worse, we now dominate a small planet – except, of course, for the things that are beyond our control. What’s discouraging is how many of those things appear to be self-inflicted and wholly preventable.

But the real question is about our future, and whether we even have one. As I understand evolution, it is, by our standards of reckoning time, gradual. As in very, very slow, except at the microscopic level. Evolution is also local, which is to say that species gradually evolve to survive in their local habitats. If the habitat changes too quickly, the glacially slow process of natural selection cannot keep pace and the species may go extinct.

Now consider humanity’s contemporary habitat, planet earth, that has changed so rapidly in the past few hundred years (which, of course, is a tiny blip in evolutionary time). Biologically we are not significantly different from the people who founded this nation. Yet some of the planetary physical and social changes we have wrought since then are so ominous that it’s difficult even to be cautiously optimistic. But I remain optimistic in this limited sense: We have the knowledge and the intellectual tools to cope, even at this late hour; but we must choose to use them. Unfortunately, there are formidable obstacles of our own making standing in the way, foremost of which are primitive belief systems that have gained alarming traction in this country. I’m speaking of right-wing political and religious dogmas, which I view as dangerous, collective mental illnesses.

I’m not qualified by training or knowledge to describe and explain biological human nature, a fascinating topic that is under active and fruitful scientific investigation. But I am persuaded that it has been shown to be a real and meaningful concept, that we are not blank slates inscribed only by our respective environments. Any more than we are special creations implanted with immaterial minds, supernatural souls, and free will, whatever that incoherent concept can possibly mean.

We are the same species that has been on this planet for something on the order of 200,000 years; and it’s beginning to look as if our technological success has dangerously exceeded our scientific self-understanding and collective maturity. That’s why I think it’s of utmost importance to help sound the alarm that a worthwhile future depends upon accepting the fact that we ourselves are fully natural creatures and not the quasi-mystical beings of ancient mythologies. The latter viewpoint is where our human nature has taken us over the eons, and it is simply no longer viable – the world is just too dangerous. I worry along with Sam Harris “that religion is one of the forces that has balkanized our world” and we won’t be able to survive our religious differences indefinitely. I’m also on board with Richard Dawkins, who concluded his classic book “The Selfish Gene” with these stirring words:

"The point I am making now is that, even if we look on the dark side and assume that individual man is fundamentally selfish, our conscious foresight – our capacity to simulate the future in imagination – could save us from the worst selfish excesses of the blind replicators. We have at least the mental equipment to foster our long-term selfish interests rather than merely our short-term ones …We have the power to defy the selfish genes of our birth and, if necessary, the selfish memes of our indoctrination. We can even discuss ways of deliberately cultivating and nurturing pure, disinterested altruism – something that has no place in nature, something that has never existed before in the whole history of the world. We ... have the power to turn against our creators. We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators."

Which brings me back to religion in this country, specifically the fundamentalist/evangelical strains that are major sources of “the selfish memes of our indoctrination.” These religions aggressively assert that virtually all the important moral, ethical, and political answers are contained in a particular ancient holy book. Never mind that it’s filled with brutality, misogyny, and all manner of bizarre and inhumane ideas. According to believers, it was directly inspired by a supernatural, all-powerful Creator and therefore it is the Absolute Truth. The faith-heads who are guided by the words in this book are well organized and constitute an alarming cultural and political force. There seems to be no limit to their use of rationalization, denial, blame – all the mechanisms discussed above – to defend their primitive world view against the dissonance of the modern world, especially scientific evidence and reason.

My next installment, “The Rationalizing Animal, Part II,” will present chapter and verse – a generous sample of the horrors found in the Bible as well as the bizarre words of some of the most prominent fundagelical leaders. It is important to hear what these aspiring theocrats actually believe, because they are deadly serious; and if their ideas prevail we are all in for some real-life horrors. With the Republican majority in the House and in state houses across the nation, we’re already getting a sense of what could be in store. In the abortion wars, for example, they’re proposing to force women to carry the fetuses of rapists to term. And that’s just one example in a nationwide onslaught of irrationality based on primitive religion.

One of the accusations leveled against the so-called new atheists (Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, et al.) is that they caricature religion. But as Harris writes, “We do no such thing. We simply . . . take the specific claims of religion seriously.” And all of us need to be aware of what those claims are, because many of them are egregiously incompatible with the Constitution and our democratic traditions.

Another accusation is that the new atheists either don’t understand or else ignore more sophisticated theology. It must be conceded that Dawkins has made many provocative comments, including “What makes anyone think that ‘theology’ is a subject at all?” So in fairness, let me conclude with recent words from Dr. William Lane Craig, arguably the most sophisticated fundamentalist theologian in the country. He is talking about the genocide and infanticide the Old Testament God ordered the Israelites to carry out against the Canaanites:

“So whom does God wrong in commanding the destruction of the Canaanites? Not the Canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgement. Not the children, for they inherit eternal life. . . . the death of these children was actually their salvation.”

Now there’s some of that old time “sophisticated theology” for you. Genocide and infanticide are just hunky-dory as long as God commands it. Makes you wonder how widespread that kind of thinking is in our democracy?

The wonderful non-theist writer Greta Christina asks why statements like Craig’s don’t get more press, why he hasn’t been widely condemned from Christian pulpits and in church publications across the land?

“Because the things he said are not that unusual. . . . Because lots of people share his views. . . . Because these kinds of contortions are far too common in religious morality. Because all too often, religion twists even the most fundamental human morality into positions that, in any other circumstance, most people would see as repulsive, monstrous, and entirely indefensible.”

Rationalize, deny, blame – anything to maintain their depraved belief that every word in their Holy Bible is literally true. So I’m also asking, where are the moderate Christian voices? Why aren’t they forcefully repudiating the hatred and lunacy being promulgated in the name of their god? Back in my Catholic youth we used to pity and/or ridicule these Holy Roller religious nuts. Now they have vast political power and everyone’s afraid of them. Well, fear is one thing; but totally misplaced respect is something else. Why can’t moderates stand up and say that what the religious right espouses is nonsense?

In the meantime the fundies’ political influence keeps growing, with potentially devastating consequences for women, children, education, freedom of expression, world peace . . .