|
'PROVIDENTIALLY, MY DEAR DR DAWKINS!' John H Williams (Investigator 108, 2006 May)
Previously I've written about the very human tendency to perceive two completely separate occurrences and assume that they're connected. The superstitious believe that there are items which are associated with previous and future success, such as 'lucky' charms or numbers. (As a kid, I knew that Sterling Moss's racing cars always carried a number seven, and Moss, having survived a long racing career, might well ascribe it to his choice of number). It's a harmless
and
sentimental notion, and
statistically invalid. But many are not well acquainted with the laws
of
chance, and explain certain happenings as being lucky or unlucky, or if
they're religious, to the work of a supernatural being.
DO ATHEISTS NEVER WIN? I've given the example of winning sportspeople who:
Thank
their entity
of
choice for their success,
minimising or ignoring the role of other factors, and posing the
obvious
questions of why other equally faithful believers' weren't 'chosen' to
win, and whether atheists and agnostics had no hope of winning.
When
later
experiencing
no wins likely embrace
cognitive dissonance to 'explain' why. (I say "no wins" rather than
'losing',
as some of those not winning the trophy could well be winning large
amounts
of money, or credits enabling them to enter bigger events, for
'placing'.)
AARON'S 'TEMPORARILY HELPFUL' PERSONAL GOD Regarding the
Australian
golfer, Aaron Baddeley
(Investigator
84, May, 2002). I predicted after his two successive Australian
Championship
wins in 2000 and 2001, and in 2002 not making the cut, that he'd
experience
a period of not winning tournaments, despite his declared belief in the
intercession of a personal god, but that he'd eventually win again. In
the intervening years he hasn't, which might be a severe test of his
faith.
MAYBE NEXT TIME?
I told them that
the
gravitational force
was miniscule, it had happened previously with no ill effects, but to
go
ahead with their trip for the experience. They gave me the same
complicit
and knowing look: another disbeliever not tuned in to what we're smart
enough to 'know'
"YES, HE'S THE ONE WHO KILLED MY WIFE!"
The whole case
was a
travesty beginning with
the 'random' arrest of the boy by detectives who were (to the viewer)
obvious
thugs and liars. One, a large, black, former grid-iron player had
intimidated,
threatened and punched the teenager in an attempt to extort a
confession.
Amazingly the
case was not
thrown out in
its first days as it would have been in Australia and many other
places,
mainly on the basis that the boy had been picked up by police a few
hours
after the murder and brought to the traumatised husband. Asked 'Is he
the
one?" he'd said, "Yes"!
He was adamant
this was
the killer. But it
was another case of mistaken identity perhaps to do with the shock of
seeing
his wife's life snuffed out and the difficulty some white people
experience
in being discriminating about the physiognomy of black faces, as well
as
the natural desire to catch find the killer. Increasingly we admired
the
fine skills and persistence of the defending attorney and his
researcher,
yet they oughtn't have been needed at all!
DO PEOPLE GET WHAT THEY PRAY FOR?
DOES GOD LOOK AFTER HIS OWN? The religious
family and
friends of the teenager
might well believe that his acquittal was the work of their god, when
it
was (to us) a combination of a transparent police conspiracy and the
exemplary
efforts of the attorney in making this plain to the jurors.
Those who'd
prayed but
didn't know what had
transpired in court might well have their belief reinforced, despite it
being clear that 'God looks after his own' is a furphy, mainly due to
'his'
likely non-existence.
CONFIRMATION BIAS AT WORK That a
particular god is
providential in 'allowing' success, health, wealth and happiness to
believers is based
on personal, anecdotal and non-statistical grounds, but the
'connection'
between a person's success and a lifetime of belief and prayer is so
strong
to them that 'it must be so'.
That some
atheists and
agnostics experience
similar levels of success, or that some apparent believers are
unsuccessful,
or do evil acts, such as the churchmen who have sexually abused their
flock,
are dismissed as irrelevant aberrations. Confirmation bias is
notoriously
difficult to undo!
THE 'PROVIDENTIAL' BANANA In Richard
Dawkins' Climbing
Mt Improbable
(p237) I read a most interesting example of Genesis-inspired
providence,
of nature having been 'put there' for human benefit.
A creationist had written Dawkins listing what he believed was an example of providence in the form of the banana:
"Shaped
for the
human
hand
Has a non-slip surface Has outward indicator of inward condition (green/yellow/black) Has a tab for removal of wrapper Wrapper is perforated Wrapper is biodegradable Is shaped for the mouth Has ease of entry via a pointy tip Is pleasing to taste buds Is curved towards face to facilitate eating process." 'Convenient' evidence for intelligent design! The genus Musa is a native of SE Asia. Wikipedia says that it originated in the Kuk swamp in the Western Highlands of Papua New Guinea, around 5000BC to 8000BC. Several species of wild bananas are still found in PNG, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.
A long
succession of
cultivars have led us
to the current dominant Cavendish type, one which is vulnerable to the
threat of destruction by diseases, due to the fact it lacks genetic
diversity.
So, this useful
plant was
around before 'creation',
and it was taken to the Middle East, received its name ('banan' is
Arabic
for finger), scored a mention in the Qu'ran, and joined the multitude
of 'providential' plants and creatures appropriated by H sapiens
sapiens.
MEGAFAUNA ONLY 'PROVIDENTIAL' UNTIL EXTINCT Those who eat
kangaroo
meat or who feed it
to their pets might think that macropods are providential too, although
they may wonder at Noah's family managing to catch and transport a
breeding
pair and how they made it back 'Down Under'.
The
Advertiser's
Education Special
(31/1/06) has no mention of this, instead offering fossil evidence of
'ancestral'
megafauna, three metres tall and weighing 200 kilograms, which became
extinct
soon after the arrival of the Aborigines. Procoptodon goliah
and
other giants disappeared, according to Dr Tim Flannery, due to "human
hunting
pressure".
The time
disparity between
archaeological
and palaeontological findings and the Young Earth/Great Flood is
significant.
If the former aren't so, why hasn't it been clearly explained why their
findings are wrong?
DID SPINOZA NEVER RIDICULE? As a skeptic,
one would
like to follow Spinoza's
fine credo: "I have made ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to
bewail,
not to scorn human actions, but to understand them." Readers may think
that I'm not good at this, and I admit to having a low tolerance for
'arguments'
based on the supernatural and the inerrancy of a set of ancient books.
Perhaps the best approach is to use humour to question obvious human inventions such as gods, angels, virgin birth, life after death, limbo, purgatory, heaven and hell. While Rev Andrew Dutney was pontificating on the latter on ABC-891 Radio, a listener from Paradise phoned with these definitions, based on (politically incorrect) national stereotypes:
HEAVEN:
where the
industrialists are German,
the lovers are Italian, the chefs are French, the comedians are
British,
and it's managed by the Swiss.
HELL:
where the
police
are German, the lovers
are Swiss, the chefs are British, the movies are Bollywood musical
romances
(my addition), and it's managed by Italians. (The Penguin Book of
Australian
Jokes by Phillip Adams and Patrice Newell, 1994, has a "Religiously
Observed" section, pp 403-42 and has a version of this 'aphorism').
John H Williams Baddeley was second in the Chrysler Classic in '04, his best result, winning US$324, 000. He failed to make the cut in about a third of the 58 events he played over the two years, the inverse side to what is clearly a lucrative and successful career, strongly suggesting that this highly talented player receives no supernatural aid, despite the big financial flow! I am a
life-long Seventh
Day Adventist,
a vegan with the occasional egg or two. I'm over 50, and weigh almost
what
I did when I was in high school. I enjoy aerobic activities, and have
few
grey hairs. All of these benefits I owe to God, who has blessed me and
given me a knowledge of the simple ways to care for my body.
The false logic shown here is a good example of confirmation bias: Didn't Mr McDonald probably rave a strong genetic inheritance? Aren't some non-believing seniors just as healthy? Those disposed to the providential view may surface during an election campaign, and suggest that voters "prayerfully consider" candidates, "vote with their spiritual eyes open" and call for "righteousness in our nation", as did the Rev Rob Tann of Port Lincoln in The Advertiser Letters on 8/3/06. Rob is obviously a supporter of the Family First Party, though he didn't name it, while he named the ALP for "undermining the sanctity of marriage by promoting "alternatives". "Abortion", "sexuality" and "religious presence in schools" were mentioned, typical of the religious right, to which I'm strongly opposed. The SA electorate gave Rob the answer he wasn't seeking, and Labor had a very big win, while Family First won no seats in the Lower House, and even in the conservative seat of Flinders (which includes Port Lincoln) it did not do well. (The FFP did better in the Upper House, winning about 6% of the votes). The bitter irony is that many of those energetically praying for a conservative right agenda didn't have their prayers answered, while many non-believers did! I am uncomfortable with the involvement of Christian church groups in the political process, and I hope that what exists in the USA never happens here.
|