Home | Writings | Resume | Links | RSS Feed
A Proud Member of the Reality-Based Community
About Me :
I'm a grownup nerd living in the Boston burbs. I write computer programs for a living and plays for fun.
I'm married to a wonderful woman, and we share a nice little house with our daughter and our cats.
I'm a humanist, a technologist, an artist, and an idealist. I believe in reason, freedom, love, equality,
and democracy. (Did I mention that I'm
an idealist? I did, OK.)
I'm also a pragmatist and an empiricist. I reject ideology and dogma, especially when they conflict with
practical facts (i.e., pretty much always). I particularly hate willful ignorance, which tends to go hand-in-hand
with ideology and dogma.
Like the alignment of the planets, this blog gets updated as I have the time, inspiration, and inclination to do so.
Like the alignment of the planets, this blog gets updated as I have the time, inspiration, and inclination to do so.
Wednesday, December 22, 2004
Not Descended From No Monkey
When I was in high school, I once got into a conversation with my mother on the topic of evolution. I think I was reading a lot of Stephen Jay Gould at the time, and I asked my mother what she thought of evolution.
"Well," she sniffed, "all I know is, I'm not descended from no monkey."
"Okay," I responded, "why do you believe that?"
"Because I know it. I'm not descended from no monkey."
I wasn't going to point out that no scientist has ever proposed that humans are descended from monkeys. I thought that the bigger problem was the fact that my mother was sticking to an emotional judgement instead of being rational.
"Yeah, but what's your evidence?"
"I don't need any evidence. I'm not descended -- "
"-- from no monkey. We've firmly established that. But out in the real world, whatever is, is, no matter what you think. So, suppose evolution is true?"
"It's not."
"Fine, but let's just say for the sake of argument that it is."
"But it's not."
"For the sake of argument, okay? Not really, but let's say it is. Then, when you say, 'I'm not descended from monkeys,' you're just wrong, right? No matter how strongly you feel about it."
"I'm not, and that's all there is to it."
This is where we left it.
My conversation with my mother was a miniature of the so-called "debate" between creationism and evolution. It's not even a debate, because nobody can even agree on the ground rules. One on side of the conflict, you have people who believe that we can observe the world, apply reason to our observations, and deduce rules which correctly describe the way the world works. On the other side, you have people who believe that all facts, observations, knowledge, and reason must be ditched in favor of the inerrancy of a rather thin book of the mistranslated myths of an ancient nomadic desert shepherd tribe. You just can't tell these people that when your beliefs come into contact with the facts of objective reality, reality always wins. You may fervently believe that you can fly by flapping your arms and reciting the Lord's Prayer, but that doesn't make it true. Rationalism seems to win eventually, but it takes generations, like it did to persuade people that the Earth moves around the sun. Believe it or not, they used to burn people at the stake for saying that.
You can't use reason to persuade irrational people to be rational, and therefore, it seems the "debate" will continue for a very long time to come; because my mother isn't descended from no monkey.
0 comments
When I was in high school, I once got into a conversation with my mother on the topic of evolution. I think I was reading a lot of Stephen Jay Gould at the time, and I asked my mother what she thought of evolution.
"Well," she sniffed, "all I know is, I'm not descended from no monkey."
"Okay," I responded, "why do you believe that?"
"Because I know it. I'm not descended from no monkey."
I wasn't going to point out that no scientist has ever proposed that humans are descended from monkeys. I thought that the bigger problem was the fact that my mother was sticking to an emotional judgement instead of being rational.
"Yeah, but what's your evidence?"
"I don't need any evidence. I'm not descended -- "
"-- from no monkey. We've firmly established that. But out in the real world, whatever is, is, no matter what you think. So, suppose evolution is true?"
"It's not."
"Fine, but let's just say for the sake of argument that it is."
"But it's not."
"For the sake of argument, okay? Not really, but let's say it is. Then, when you say, 'I'm not descended from monkeys,' you're just wrong, right? No matter how strongly you feel about it."
"I'm not, and that's all there is to it."
This is where we left it.
My conversation with my mother was a miniature of the so-called "debate" between creationism and evolution. It's not even a debate, because nobody can even agree on the ground rules. One on side of the conflict, you have people who believe that we can observe the world, apply reason to our observations, and deduce rules which correctly describe the way the world works. On the other side, you have people who believe that all facts, observations, knowledge, and reason must be ditched in favor of the inerrancy of a rather thin book of the mistranslated myths of an ancient nomadic desert shepherd tribe. You just can't tell these people that when your beliefs come into contact with the facts of objective reality, reality always wins. You may fervently believe that you can fly by flapping your arms and reciting the Lord's Prayer, but that doesn't make it true. Rationalism seems to win eventually, but it takes generations, like it did to persuade people that the Earth moves around the sun. Believe it or not, they used to burn people at the stake for saying that.
You can't use reason to persuade irrational people to be rational, and therefore, it seems the "debate" will continue for a very long time to come; because my mother isn't descended from no monkey.
