Philosophical Gladiators: A Discussion So Deep It Will Make Your Brain Drip Out Your Ears

Anon writes the following in response to my post What Science Can Never Explain: Why We Subjectively Experience Our Lives

Hi Jake. I think we may be talking past each other. Let me try to clarify my position. You said:

“the assumption that consciousness (defined subjectively, not objectively) is a naturally emergent property of the known laws of physics and chemistry cannot be right.”

To which I ask, why not? That’s what you haven’t shown me yet. My view is consistent with what we all experience in daily life, so the burden is on you to show why what seems to be the case isn’t so.

You follow up your assertion that “subjectivity as a naturally emergent property can’t be right” with a statement about it being subjective, and hence not objective. While I agree that, by definition, “subjective” is not “objective” I don’t see why that implies that objective, measurable phenomena can’t _produce_ subjective epi-phenomemna.

Let’s try an other example or two. We can define and measure objectively frequencies of light that we call “colors.” A wavelength of so many nanometers we call “green” and some other number we call “red.” Those wavelengths are measurable quantities in objective reality.

However, the _perception_ of the color “red” is a subjective mental event.
“Redness” in this sense is not directly objectivly measurable. It is indirectly measurable by asking a sighted person “How red does that look to you?”

I claim that physics gives rise to chemsitry that gives rise to biology that gives rise to complex carbon structures in animals called “organs”. These very objective “organs” amongst other things perform the function of “senses” by translating such and so nanometer wavelenghts into the subjective experience of “green.” This subjective experience of green is represented by a very complex arrangement of firing neurons, embedded in some tissue, fed by nutrients etc..etc..etc… Essentially, I claim that subjective greeness is, objectively, a pattern in space and time of firing neurons. That constellation, that pattern, _is_ “subjective greeness”.

In theory, totally measurable and understandable.

What I’m saying is, subjective experience of “green” (and any subjective experience held by a brain) is apparently nothing more than a currently-poorly-understood complex manifestation of understandable, measurable, discrete, objective physical bits.

Change some chemicals arround inside my brain, or re-wire some neurons, or re-write my DNA to give me color-blindness, and suddenly subjective “green” goes away, even though objectively “green” wavelength light is still there. Reverse those physical changes, and *poof* subjective green is back. Seems like a pretty reliable, repeatable test that shows that subjective experience is a (poorly understood) consequence of the arrangements of many atoms and chemicals and structures.

For an other thought experiment, how about I go and ask one of your Zombies if they have subjective experiences? Is Zombie Jake a liar? He doesn’t need subjective experience to have memories and knowledge, and if in all other ways, his universe is the same as ours, he should be able to tell me that he has no internal subjective life. If you tell me that he has different memories or behavior/responses that will cause him to lie, we are back to my original claim that their universe is _not_ quark-identical with ours, and the bits you’ve removed or changed are , by definition, the bits that are theortically testable and measurable to be the ultimate cause of subjectivity. On the other hand, if he answers exactly as you do because his world is _exactly_ like ours, then you haven’t disproved my claim that the subjectivity is just naturally emergent from comprehensible, in theory, known physics.

Cheers.




Dear Anon:

Thank you for your comment! I live in China, and due to the recent earthquake in Taiwan, China was cut off from the rest of the world internet-wise, so I've been unable to even view my blog for a week.

This entire subject is, in my view, cutting-edge philosophy. There is a lively internet debate going on, and your comment has anticipated some of the views that are being expressed. I find this concept extremely challenging to conceptualize myself, but let me try to respond as best I can:

1. “the assumption that consciousness (defined subjectively, not objectively) is a naturally emergent property of the known laws of physics and chemistry cannot be right.”To which I ask, why not?"

Because the laws of physics and chemistry don't need subjective consciousness in order to provide a 100% complete and accurate description of the physical universe - so by logical extension, there is no particular reason to assert that subjective consciousness exists, any more than there is any particular reason to posit the existence of Thor the Flying Spaghetti Monster . But since subjective consciouness exists anyway (like some sort of free bonus), there must be something wrong with (or incomplete about) the reasoning which falsely states that it doesn't exist. Leading to my ultimate point that materialistic reasoning is incapable of fully describing the universe as we experience it.

The thinking seems to be "subjective consciousness exists, therefore it must be a product of physical processes". But this is an assumption disguised as a conclusion. No mechanism has even been proposed to the best of my knowledge. Sure, science can account for the functions of consciousness, but this is the "easy" problem of consciousness - what you end up with at the end of it all is a mere description of how a given organism will react to a given stimulus - but even a zombie can do that, so materialism remains unable to distinguish between a zombie and a subjectively conscious individual. I would argue that from a materialist point of view, the very existence of subjective consciousness is inexplicable, and that subjective consciousness is by its very essence something that the methods of science (based as they are on objectivity and empericism) are unequipped to study.

2. I would concede your second point (about colors and stuff), but I don't believe that it is fatal to my overall point. I cannot but agree that (at least apparently) physical processes necessarily affect the quality of our subjective perceptions - if I put my hand on a hot stove I'm going to be treated to the subjective experience of pain. But although an analysis of physical processes can successfully predict how my subjective consciousness is going to be affected by a given stimulus (and therefore, what type of subjective experience I will have) , it cannot explain why I have any subjective consciousness to be affected by stimuli in the first place. Zombie Jake, placing his hand on a hot stove, would cry out in pain but he wouldn't experience pain, any more than my mirror image would experience pain as it reflected my anguish.

3. Your third point is perhaps conceptually the most difficult. The crux of the difficulty seems to be:

If Zombie Jake answers "No, I am not subjectively conscious", then the two universes we are comparing would no be physically identical, and those physical differences, even if they are as insignificant as neural firing patterns in Zombie Jake's brain, could be used to provide a measurable physical basis for identifying and recognizing subjective consciousness.

But if Zombie Jake answers "Yes, I am subjectively conscious" - hey, I am telling the truth when I make that statement, but isn't Zombie Jake speaking falsely (although probably not lying, since he is not "aware" that his statement is false)? And if he is speaking falsely, isn't that a difference right there? I would say yes, it's a difference, but not an observable or measurable difference (and thus not a scientifically recognizable difference), because we are assuming that Zombie Jake is subjectively unconscious rather than establishing his unconsciousness on the basis of physical evidence.

But I think that up to now I have still been skating over the surface of the problem. Would Zombie Jake really be speaking falsely if he affirmed that he was subjectively conscious? Would his statement "I am subjectively conscious" be (i) a true statement, (ii) a false statement, or (iii) a statement with no truth value at all?

I have thought about this very question for years, and at this point I am inclined to answer (iii) - the statement would have no truth value at all, because the term "subjective consciousness" can have no meaning in "Zombieland" - but neither would the question, and neither would any other statement or question that could possibly be uttered in Zombieland have any meaning - rather all "meaning" resides in the minds of subjectively conscious beings. Thus it is we, the subjectively conscious "observers" of this imaginary universe who imbue that question, and its answer, with meaning. Thus Zombieland has no truths and no falsehoods until observed (or imagined) by us (whoa, am I getting into quantum physics here? I'm not sure...). And no statement uttered by Zombie Jake could possibly be either "true" or "false" except by reference to an imaginary universe (which would be our universe, from Zombie Jake's point of view)

Another way of describing the same idea: the statement "I am subjectively conscious", uttered by a parakeet mimicking what it heard, would be true from our point of view, but meaningless from the bird's point of view because it was not utttered as a statement but only as a mimicry of what it heard. I can look in the mirror, state "I am subjectively conscious", watch my mirror image utter the same words, and still have no basis for accusing my mirror image of lying (conversely, if I stood in front to the mirror and stated "I am not subjectively conscious, I would have no basis for praising my mirror image for its honesty).

This discussion is taking place at very near upper limit that my meager intellect is capable of, and right now my brain is starting to liquefy and dribble out of my ears...so I might be turning into a zombie soon...make sure to ask me if I'm conscious and see what I say... (-:

By the way, David Chalmers, the philosopher who's probably thought about this problem more than anyone else, maintains (if I understand him correctly) that subjectively consciousness is not derived from physical processes but nevertheless is a natural rather than supernatural phenomenon - he argues that "qualia" (as he calls it) is a natural phenomenon that is just as basic as space, time, and the laws of physics.

Theistic Delusionary Disorder: Our Nation's No. 1 Mental Health Problem

January 2106: American Psychological Association’s yearly White Paper refers to belief in God as a “delusion”. Christian groups protest the “coming wave of persecution”; APA issues an official response that states, “Christian paranoia constitutes further evidence of pathology”.

January 2107: APA White Paper defines a new mental illness - Theistic Delusionary Disorder (“TDD”) – the belief that one can converse with “god” or spirits.

January 2109: APA White Paper revises TDD definition to include any belief in the existence of god, spirits, or the supernatural.

September 2109: Atlanta Center For Disease Control adds TDD to its list of infectious diseases. Coins the term “Dawkins Meme Virus”, which it identifies as the medium of TDD contagion. The Dawkins Meme Virus is the first non-biological virus ever to be identified as a cause of disease in humans.

July 2112: California judge takes 8-year-old daughter away from TTD-infected mother because she was home schooling her using the Bible. Daughter is enrolled one of the 2,100 boarding schools owned by the Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. Mother committed to a mental institution (as a “danger to others” based on her attempt to spread TDD to her daughter). Mother sues California under habeus corpus arguing that her First Amendment rights were infringed.

April 2114: Mother vs. California appealed to Supreme Court. Excerpt of Court’s 8-1 decision:

“…a man who claims to be Napoleon may correctly observe that he has a First Amendment right to make this claim; however, the fact remains that such a claim constitutes objective evidence of a scientifically established mental illness. While the First Amendment protects him from punishment, it does not immunize him against treatment. If his illness renders him a danger to himself, commitment to a mental institution may be advisable, and if his illness incapacitates his ability to make an informed decision on treatment, then it is society’s duty to protect him by appointing a guardian (for example, his doctor) to step in and make the commitment decision on his behalf. If he is a danger to others then society has a duty to protect itself, using force if necessary, by compelling confinement and treatment. It is not his statement “I am Napoleon” per se that results in confinement (after all, such a statement made in jest would not result in confinement), but rather the underlying psychosis that his statement evidences.

Correspondingly, the APA has determined that TDD is a mental illness, and the Center for Disease Control has determined that it is infectious (and thus a danger to society). It is not the place of a judge to question the conclusions of qualified mental health professionals. It is, however, our place to clarify the legal issues involved. It is not the plaintiff’s free exercise of her religion that is being “prohibited”, but rather the underlying mental illness (merely evidenced by her “free exercise”) that is being treated...when she regains her mental health, she will likely come to appreciate the wisdom of the authorities in preventing her from infecting her daughter with her own disorder…”

April 2115: The American Bar Association estimates that since the groundbreaking Mother vs. California precedent, over 45,000 TDP sufferers have been committed to mental institutions or compelled to submit to supervised treatment.

June 2115: President R. Dawkins IV, acting on the recommendations recently published by the Universal Tolerance Council, announces the commencement of the “War on TDD”, which he identifies as the nation’s #1 health problem, and proposes funding of over $200 billion over the next five years to expand the number of mental health professionals, educate the public on the dangers of TDD, and to create a nationwide network of “TDD Confined Treatment Clinics” which will more than triple the current bed space in mental institutions.

October 2115: Congress approves $189 billion of the President’s “War on TDD” funding proposal and passes new summary procedures to allow for non-adversarial commitment proceedings to place TDD sufferers in TDD Confined Treatment Clinics based on documentary evidence alone.

December 2115: Supreme Court rules that habeus corpus petitions can only be filed by those charged with a crime, not by those confined for treatment for mental illness.

January 2116: APA’s yearly White Paper hails 2115 as “the most progressive year in the history of mental health treatment”.

March 7, 2116: Cardinal B.S. Lawton, the Vatican’s top official in the United States, is commanded to appear at a commitment hearing based upon a preliminary diagnosis of TDD.

March 9, 2116: Cardinal Lawton declares at his TDD commitment hearing that Catholic doctrine “is an essentially secular ideology that attempts to therapeutically reconcile the Id and the Superego of the believer”. A three-judge panel pronounces Cardinal Lawton mentally healthy and not subject to commitment after Pope Judas I intervenes with a promise that the Vatican will revise its doctrine to more clearly reflect its secular purpose.

March 10, 2006: Jimmy W. Babylon, President of the Southern Baptist Convention, issues a press release stating, “On behalf of all the faithful, the Southern Baptist Convention hereby declares that ‘god’ is not an actual being, but rather a shorthand expression of our highest collective aspirations of peace, harmony, and tolerance.”

November 30, 2116: The Vatican III Statement of Faith, issued by the Catholic Church, states that “the Catholic god is a symbol of the human Superego, not to be understood literally.”

April 20th, 2117: Financial history is made when the Southern Baptist Convention, the ACLU, and the National Council of Churches undergo the largest share merger in the history of the nation to form a new corporation named “The United Church for the Actualization of Human Potential”. Dissenting shareholders of the acquired entities are subject to forced buy-outs at a record premium. New CEO J.W. Babylon signs a renewable employment contract granting him nearly $4 billion in stock options over a five-year period; Chairman of the Board of Directors Dr. B.S. Lawton urges employees to “always be willing to go the extra mile to enhance shareholder value.”

January 2118: Congress designates the 20th century John Lennon song Imagine as the nation’s new national anthem. The new “Lennon cent” is issued, replacing “In God We Trust” with the nation’s new official motto, “Above Us Only Sky”. Revisionist historian B.W. Greenwald issues a statement reiterating his controversial claim that Lennon was actually from Alabama.

May 2120: The Department of Citizen Psychosocial Development reports that weekly church attendance in the United States has reached a record high of 86.2%.

November 2120: Reported incidence of TDD among the general population dips below 10%, falling to second place among communicable diseases (below AIDs). The Surgeon General warns against complacency, asserting that the addition of still-unidentified “silent sufferers” may double this figure.

December 2120: A press release issued by the Congressional Budget Office asserts that the government’s 2020 tax revenue from taxes paid by the United Church is projected to exceed tax revenues from all other sources combined.

January 2121: Congress abolishes the Individual Income Tax, replacing it with mandatory shareholding in the United Church and compulsory tithing obligations. It also authorizes the creation of an “Army of Reason & Tolerance” funded and manned by United Church shareholders to defend the nation against “the Forces of Superstition and Ignorance still flourishing abroad.”

March 2121: APA approves the use of electroshock therapy to treat chronic TDD sufferers.

June 2121: APA identifies extreme paranoia as a recently emerging treatment complication of TDD electroshock therapy. Frontal lobotomies are authorized to treat TDD sufferers who fail to respond to electroshock therapy.

November 2123: Congress creates the new crime of Godcraft, defined as the mimicry of any TDD symptoms by mentally healthy individuals for the purpose of financial gain. The terrorist group Christian Underground releases a surprising video in which CU leader Thomas Marshall praises the new law. United Church officials question its authenticity.

October 2125: Terrorist Thomas Marshall, convicted of Godcraft in absentia over last year’s armed entry of a TDD Confinement Clinic and simultaneous kidnappings of 37 TDD sufferers, is captured in a cave in Montana along with 27 of his victims. His lawyer pleads insanity and Marshall is acquitted but committed to a TDD Confinement Clinic. After electroshock and lobotomy treatments, he is pronounced cured of TDD and released into the custody of his mother. Although unable to speak, a written press release is issued on his behalf recanting all belief in supernatural entities and expressing deep contrition for his “demented acts”.

January 2128:The United Church introduces a new Sacrament - the actual brain of Richard Dawkins, secretly preserved in formaldehyde for over 100 years, Exact marble replicas are to be placed at the top of every United Church steeple. The Church also announces that the archaic TDD ritual of Communion will be re-instituted in modified form: Saint Dawkins’ brain will be genetically duplicated and micro-slices will be issued to each United Church outlet and placed in a public shrine for adulation and obeisance under an engraving reading, “This is My brain - partake thereof.” This announcement sparks widespread protests from shareholders objecting to the consumption of a Holy Relic.

October 2128: The United Church’s “Holy Relic Schism” is amicably resolved when the Church agrees to limit Communion consumption of Saint Dawkin’s brain to genetic copies only rather than original brain tissue, thus preserving the Holy Relic in its original form.

November 2128: Thousands flock to the small town of Fouk, Arkansas after a woman discovers an image of St. Dawkin’s brain in the pattern of grease stains on the side of her refrigerator. United Church earns over $117,000 selling T-shirts at the site. The Church buys the refrigerator as well as the site, places a protective seal over the Image, and decrees that all shareholders are thereafter required to make a pilgrimage to the site (First Class on United Churchways) at least once during their lifetimes, in return for which they will be granted an Indulgence to commit at least one Anti-Social Act (excluding any act of Godcraft) within Fouk city limits during the immediately following 30-day period. The slogan “What Happens in Fouk, Stays in Fouk” is adopted for this new fund-raising campaign.

January 2129: The President, speaking in his State of the Union Address, declares that the War on TDD has been “won”, noting that as of December 25, 2128, reported incidence of the disease officially fell below 1% of the general population, virtually all of whom are either enrolled in TDD Confined Treatment Clinics or hiding in underground caverns. Congress designates December 25 as a new national holiday, “Triumph of Reason Day”.

March 2129: The new urban area of Fouk, Arkansas is designated by the Census Bureau as both the fastest-growing city area in the United States and the metropolis with the highest per-capita income.

May 2129: In a stunningly successful raid, TDD terrorists temporarily occupy the Dawkins Mausoleum on the grounds of the United Church World Headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, dig up Saint Dawkins’ body, and find it spinning on a vertical axis at the rate of nearly 40 revolutions per minute. After watching a live video feed of this event, an obviously stunned United Church CEO J.W. Babylon is caught on camera commenting, “Maybe there is a God after all…” Church Attorney General Lawton announces the formation of a Grand Jury to investigate whether charges of Heresy, Blasphemy, and Godcraft should be brought against him.

June 2130: The Mausoleum Five are acquitted of Terrorism and Heresy after 15 minutes of deliberation; Dawkins’ body remains uncovered and under 24-hour observation by scientists. The United Church officially changes its Corporate Slogan from “Man is the Measure of All Things” to “Give Glory to God in the Highest”. American Psychological Association removes TDD from its list of mental disorders, adds “Atheistic Delusionary Disorder”. United Church commands shareholders to repent and begins rounding up unbelievers for commitment in mental institutions. At 7:06 a.m. on June 21 a loud groaning sound begins to emanate from the vicinity of Dawkins’ body, at which point its rate of revolution begins increasing exponentially until the centrifugal force causes an earthquake that completely swallows Church Headquarters. Subsequent excavations find no trace of the building but do reveal the site to be an ancient Native American burial ground. Witnesses report hearing periodic giggling from various locations on the site beginning every night as soon as the sun goes down.

Ideas Have Consequences: Bondage to Tradition, East and West

I am not my own. I belong by birth to a long Chinese tradition that stretches back thousands of years and that hopefully will endure for thousands of years to come, of which I am but a small link. Although I am nothing on my own, within the context of the Tradition I am something, albeit very small. Although I am small, the Tradition is big. Although my life is short, the Tradition lives forever. The Tradition is greater than I am, and it is the Tradition that is the only thing that gives my life any significance beyond scratching for food and comfort for the few short decades of my individual life. I am a physical part of this tradition by virtue of being descended from its founders and being the future ancestor of generations yet to come. Therefore, I belong to the Tradition by birth. It does not belong to me or to “us” (those of us currently alive). Neither does the Tradition belong collectively to me, my countrymen, my ancestors, and my descendents – rather, we all belong to it. This is because the Tradition is not only greater than any one of us, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, and thus the Tradition is greater than all of us put together. Yet the Tradition cannot continue to exist unless my countrymen and I continue to follow it. Therefore I have a moral obligation from birth to follow this Tradition, to heed its strictures and principles, and to defend it against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. This is my highest duty in life, and it is more important than whether I am happy or not; it is more important than whether I live or die, and it is more important than whether my family and loved ones are happy or whether they live or die. We must all be willing to sacrifice our individual lives for the sake of the Tradition.

The Tradition was created by the unmatched wisdom of our ancestors, and no one who has come after them or who will ever come after them can match their wisdom. Therefore we must not question Tradition, try to improve it, or try to start another one – to do so would be blasphemy against our Ancestors. Our lives should be dedicated to stability and moderation, and we must avoid risk and innovation in our lives, because the Tradition must be kept stable and unchanging. Our job is to protect what already exists rather than to create something better or try to improve upon what is. Accordingly, except for the abstract concept of Tradition, we must focus on the concrete over the abstract – the maintenance of traditional ways, and the focus on the concrete over the abstract. Money and food are concrete, passionate love is abstract. Passionate love is as dangerous as excessive happiness, because both destabilize us emotionally, distract us from our duty to Tradition, and encourage us to exalt mere transient individuals over the ageless, impersonal, indifferent Tradition.

I have spoken of “Tradition” from the point of view of Chinese because I live in China and have been observing it. Nevertheless, a very similar mentality prevails among the Christian churches in the West, although the tradition is different (I speak as a Christian). The view that what is transcendent is static and unchanging rather than dynamic and vital is the difference, in Christianity, between bondage to the law and the freedom of grace, between Christianity as religion vs. Christianity as relationship, between the Old Testament and the New Testament, between worshipping the Bible vs. worshipping God, and between Christianity as a dead relic with the church as a museum and Christianity as a living faith. God must see mankind as foolish – offer us the precious gift of freedom and we tear the ribbon off the package and bind ourselves with it…

PS To any Chinese readers (or non-Chinese readers with a good knowledge of Chinese culture): I invite you to comment and correct any errors I have made in my understanding of Chinese traditional thinking. I am particularly interested in confirming whether Chinese see their culture as having been created by the ancient sages (Confucius, Mencius, etc.) or having been handed down from Heaven through the ancient sages. What is the ultimate source of a traditional Chinese’s obligation to serve that tradition?

Bible Worship vs. True Christianity

“You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is these that bear witness of me, and ye will not come to me that ye might have life.” - Jesus Christ (John 5:39-40)

The Bible is like a finger pointing towards Jesus. What happens when you try to point something out to a dog? He looks at your finger, of course. And that is what most of the Christian church is doing today - they study the finger, they talk about the finger, they do everything but pray to the finger, which is why the church has lost its way. Much of the fuel for the “positive atheism” movement comes from disgust at the greed, hypocrisy, and mindlessness of the modern church. Bible worship is idolatry, and people like Ted Haggard have done more to advance the cause of atheism than Richard Dawkins could ever do.

A word to the “fundamentalists”: Look in the mirror and ask yourself who you most resemble: the apostles who died for Jesus, or the Pharisees who killed Him? The Pharisees were the “fundamentalists” of their day.

“A dog returns to its own vomit.” 2 Peter 2:22

“Come out of her, my people, so that you do not take part in her sins, and so that you do not share in her plagues; for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities.” —Revelation 18:4-5

Mailbag: Jake Danger Gets a Spanking

Paul has commented on one of my previous posts, Science Needs a Spanking (arguing against the scientific materialist notion that there is no evidence for the existence of God), thusly:

"I have yet to hear a reputable scientist make this claim. Most scientists who are atheists do not believe that the nonexistence of God can be proven, but that it is unreasonable to believe in God without having any evidence to go by. So the paradox is, how can an atheist not believe in the existence God because of a lack of evidence, while there is no evidence to support the nonexistence of God. However, if you take an objective look at that paradox it becomes clear that the theist reasoning is flawed. If there is no evidence to support the existence of something, why would one assume that it does exist. I presume that you don’t believe in Thor, of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, even though there is no evidence that they do or do not exist.

To quote Steven Hawking, “What I have done is to show that it is possible for the way the universe began to be determined by the laws of science. In that case, it would not be necessary to appeal to God to decide how the universe began. This doesn’t prove that there is no God, only that God is not necessary.”

Science and history also shows that it is very possible for society to create gods and for religions to spread like a disease."

Ouch! Indeed, perhaps I am the one upon whose tail a paddle might be more meritoriously applied. Nevertheless...

My point was that by assuming that all physical phenomena are caused by the “laws” of science, scientists have thereby defined out of existence any evidence that could lead to any conclusion other than an impersonal universe (because such evidence would lead to an unacceptable conclusion ). Any such “evidence” would be described as an “anamoly” and deemed unworthy of future study (except to find out which “laws” were responsible for the phenomena) because “miracles” by definition do not regularly repeat themselves . Then they turn around and, after having defined such evidence out of existence, make the claim that “there is no evidence for the existence of God”. It’s circular reasoning.

Another point that I haven’t raised until now: even if it were proven that the way the universe (and life) began where determined by the laws of science, so what? Where did these ‘laws’ come from anyway? Steven Hawking also said, “Even if we came up with a complete description of the universe, all we would have is a description, which would still not explain why the universe came to be in the first place in order to be described.”

Carl Sagan said “Now that we no longer need God to push the planets around in their orbits, what is there left for him to do?” My answer is, “Yes, He does, and you have described just how He does it with admirable mathematical precision”. After all, if not God, then what exactly is it that “pushes the planets around”? The “law of gravity”? After all, the “law of gravity” cannot cause anything to happen. Where is this “law” located? Is it made of matter or energy? How much does it weigh? A “law” of science is simply a description that simplifies our observations in order to make a mass of data comprehensible to a human mind and allow us to make predictions. Although it is useful, it ultimately “exists” only in the minds of those who comprehend it.

With regard to your last point, although I am a Christian, I agree with you that religion (including so-called “Christianity”) is a virus and a disease (see the post Pop Bible Quiz and the page of my other website entitled A Surprise for more on this and on why this blog’s title contains the words “lunatic”. I see evidence around me everyday… (=:).

By the way, Thor the Flying Spaghetti Monster happened to be one of my best friends (until I ate him). So I agree that Thor does not exist (anymore!).

YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME! Plus I don't mind being disagreed with - it always gets another article out of me...

Personal Statement - Graduate Program in Film Directing

Put succinctly, I hope to become a better director in order to better express what is already in my heart - I have a few things to say that are simply screaming to come out of me. After I learn to become a commercial director, I will consider the precise nature of my contribution in more detail. I don’t know what they will say about me in the end – will my primary contribution be characterized as filmmaking skill, or artistic prowess? Hopefully the latter; however, there is only one way to determine that – film and ponder, then film and ponder some more. I believe that training in the art of directing can serve as the soil above which a mighty oak will someday tower.

Independent production is fascinating magic. By means of innovative stage lighting, makeup, performances, and stage props, a realistic web of illusion can be weaved for the viewer. I am fascinated by the extent to which a director will become so caught up in his artistic vision that he will virtually ignore many of the formalities of the “process”. Yet during this creative journey, a good director can somehow ensure that all participants clearly grasp the artistic vision, even though the process of bringing it to life can get messy sometimes.

Academic Journey

I spent most of my college years “breaking myself in” (that is, getting to know myself), progressing from a young man who understood nothing of art to a passionate artist-in-bloom. My freshman grades were mediocre - 11th in a small class. This vexed me greatly, of course. I found art to be a strange world indeed, and I sometimes wondered if perhaps I had been admitted to the Shanghai Theatrical Institute by virtue of a clerical error.

In order to teach myself what art is, I performed many jobs including screenwriter, lighting engineer, play director, and stage designer. As I began to work harder and harder my grades shot up, and by the time I was a senior my grades were No. 1 in my class. I also published two theses. One was entitled The Communication Frequency Hypothesis; it dealt with my theory on the effect of surroundings and individual biology on communication responses among groups of people interacting with each other. This is an intellectual interest that I plan to follow up on later in my lifetime. The other thesis was entitled The Relationship between the New Internet Media and the Old Television Media; it explored the implications of the development of new technologies such as P2P and IPTV on the current and future media landscape.

I got a late start academically. Early on I decided to major in Broadcast & Television Hosting, only to find that directing was my greatest interest. Furthermore, I realize that my GPA rise from No. 11 to No. 1 doesn’t add up to the best cumulative GPA in my class. However, I can say with confidence that this number proves that my “GDP”, at lest, is the highest in my class. I like to think of myself as the best stock pick on the market.

Professional Journey

Shortly after entering college I organized and established the “Shanghai Theatrical Institute Space Film Society” and made our first student short film entitled Yangzhi Sells His Sword. To my delighted surprise, this film was one of the few that was selected to represent the Shanghai Theatrical Institute at the Tokyo International Film Festival.

In 2006 I established a studio, and since then most of the films that I direct are independently produced there. Although my studio serves both individuals and companies, in the short time since its establishment I have come to realize that my training in this field is still insufficient – I still lack depth of understanding. Perhaps that is because my film and television skills are all basically self-taught. I filmed a video for a domestic hit song in an MV called “Bund 18” （see http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=QtKGTLqIaFc）, which was broadcast all over China by satellite. After the video became popular, I was interviewed by a TV station and two magazines, and was tagged as “…one of the most promising talents among China’s new generation of directors.” All of this occurred during my junior year at the Shanghai Theatrical Institute.

This year I played “first banana” in an officially sponsored Beijing Olympics CCTV infomercial and walked the CCTV Red Carpet on the day of its premier. But on that proud day, the hearts of actors, directors and commentators alike were filled with mixed emotions because of the tragic earthquake in Sichuan province that occurred during the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics and took 80,000 lives. Some of us lost loved ones in that quake, and all of us grieved. I began thinking about how I could make a different kind of contribution. I ended up directing a non-profit MV entitled Hand in Hand – We are Family to express condolences for the victims and to comfort the survivors. I was gratified when it was broadcast for an entire month all over China. This year I also played the leading role in China’s first-ever skateboarding film, for which I served as executive director. Switching between the roles of an impulsive skateboarding youth and a cool-headed executive director was a unique experience for me.

Nevertheless, I don’t like to think in terms of traditional categories such as “career”. After I complete my artistic mission, I intend to retire to the contemplative life to pursue a long-held intellectual interest that could most easily be classified as a form of social psychology. Although I am not sure exactly when that will occur, it will be no earlier than the age of 50.

Why XXX?

I look forward to the opportunity to find a balance between theory and practice at XXX.
Furthermore, XXX has an illustrious history and is constantly reforming and reinventing itself. With a mindset like this, I am fully confident that XXX is capable of training future directors such as me. XX has produced many successful directors, including XXXX. I am a big fan of their works because they are “right up my alley” and in harmony with my thinking. Most importantly, in LA/New York, it is possible to run into just about any kind of person in the general vicinity of the university, including “wierd” directors and interesting moviemakers – the kind of people that can keep me young at heart. It is for all of the foregoing reasons that I decided to apply to XX.

Chemical Engineering Personal Statement

I am an undergraduate student currently majoring in Environmental Science and Engineering at Fudan University. I decided to continue my graduate study in Chemical Engineering because I think Chemical Engineering offers a better approach for solving certain environmental problems (specific reasons and explanations are included in my Personal Statement). Although I am not a Chemical Engineering major, I have taken various chemical and engineering related courses that are able to prepare me for study and research in the field of Chemical Engineering. Environmental Science and Engineering is an interdisciplinary major and chemistry is definitely an important part of it. Courses include General Chemistry (including Thermodynamics and Chemical Kinetics), Organic Chemistry, Physical Chemistry (covering Fluid Mechanics, Electrochemistry, Surface Phenomena, Colliod Chemistry and Advanced Thermodynamics and Chemical Kinetics) and Environmental Chemistry. A course I took entitled Basics of Environmental Engineering also covers mass and heat transportation. I understand that my undergraduate background did not cover chemical engineering as comprehensively as if I had majored in the field, and there are still some important courses in your undergraduate Chemical Engineering program that I did not cover (reaction design process control, for example, and some other lab courses). Nevertheless I believe that I should have no problem making up for it. I will be happy to take some of the courses I missed if necessary. My background knowledge combined with my willpower will surely get me through any academic difficulties.

I am a fast learner once I put my mind to something. During my junior year I joined Professor Liu’s research group where I had the chance to participate in a number of research projects. Most of these projects are related to the physical-chemical treatment of wastewater, such as the oxidation processes using Fenton’s reagent (more details can be found in my Curriculum Vitae). These experiences taught me how to analyze a problem, how to approach to it, and how to discover feasible solutions. It was not long before I was doing my own research on the effect of a new reagent for treating municipal wastewater. Carrying out my own research has given me the opportunity to put what I have learned into further practice and gain a deeper understanding of the subject. Although the research problems in environmental science and chemical engineering are quite different from each other, the scientific approaches are similar. I am certain that I will be able to quickly adapt to the field of chemical engineering.

I intend to work myself up to a fairly high academic level in my graduate studies. Although I am only applying to a master’s program, I plan to finish with a PhD degree because I want to be at the frontier of the scientific development, leading the way instead of just following it. My interests in the field of Chemical Engineering are mainly focused on sustainable energy. Research in alternative sources of fuel might provide a permanent solution to the world’s energy problems. I am particularly interested in your program’s research into fuel cells. The in-depth study of the mechanisms of electrochemical processes and efforts to make fuel cells a commercial reality are exactly the kind of research I have been looking for. I want to make contributions to help improvre our current energy system—making it a more “virtuous cycle” instead of the current one-way consumption of eons of accumulation. I think your Chemical Engineering program is just the right choice for me to realize that goal.

My great passion for my academic future will be more than enough to carry me through any program of study. I would love to have a chance to do what I have always wanted to do - make a difference.

Moral Rules Lead to More Sin, Not Less

This post appeared on the Churchianity blog ChurchRelevance under the heading "Five Rules for Avoiding Moral Trouble". It is typical of the legalistic attitude of modern Churchianity that is producing a new Ted Haggard every five minutes:

Five Rules for Avoiding Moral Trouble

Ministry is a privilege that comes with a heightened level of accountability. To help you avoid compromising situations, consider the following five rules from Christianity Today:I will not, under any circumstances, ride alone in a car with a female other than my wife or an immediate family member.

I do not counsel a woman in a closed room or more than once.

I do not stay alone in a hotel overnight.

I speak often and publicly of my affection for my wife, when she’s present and when she’s not. Marriages that are failing often become silent in public before they become loudly negative. If a pastor neglects publicly affirming his wife, it may reveal a private deterioration of that relationship.

Compliment the character or the conduct, not the coiffure or the clothing.

These are five great examples of rules that you should have for yourself to help keep you morally accountable. You don’t have to use these same rules, but be sure that you establish some guidelines of conduct.What rules would you add to the list?

Jake Danger sez:

Why not just have the women all wear burquas and the men all take those drugs to eliminate their sex drive like they do to sex offenders? Moral fiber is the ability to resist temptation, not skill at running and hiding from it. Of course every man has his limits and should know them well (which is why Paul advised Timothy to "run from anything that stimulates youthful lust"), but we should be encouraging people to gradually develop the ability to withstand temptation by remembering what is truly important to them.
“WARRIOR POET”, JAKE DANGER’S FULL LENGTH NOVEL, IS NOW AVAILABLE IN HARD COPY AND E-BOOK! CLICK HERE (POST CONTINUES BELOW)

READ A SAMPLE CHAPTER OF JAKE DANGER’S NOVEL “WARRIOR POET”

If a man is so weak that he can't be in a room alone with another woman without being in danger of cheating on his wife, then he needs to work on his marriage and his character, not add another 157 rules to his already bulging "rule library". It's a perfect example of what Paul spoke of as living under the law, not under grace.

For the ultimate results of a morality based on rules, see Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggert, etc. Or better yet, see above: "I speak often and publicly of my affection for my wife, when she’s present and when she’s not. Marriages that are failing often become silent in public before they become loudly negative. If a pastor neglects publicly affirming his wife, it may reveal a private deterioration of that relationship." So here we have a leading Christian magazine teaching ministers to actively deceive their congregation in order to conceal marital problems. Perhaps in order to preserve the illusory "moral authority" to lecture parishoners on how to run their own marriages? Unbelievable.

Basing righteousness on rule after rule is like trying to save a dying rosebush by propping up its leaves with a system of ropes and pulleys. Try watering the plant. That's why Jesus told the woman at the well he had "living water", and that's why he gave the parable of the vine.

One more point before I finish my verbose little rant - the world will attack us and slander us, and if we let their gossip run our lives then we will be paralyzed. I can think of many instances when I have led so-called "bad girls" to Jesus' doorstep while present in places (like girlie bars) where no "decent" Christian would be caught dead.

Would it have been better for me to avoid temptation and let the "bad girls" go to Hell? Or wait till they show up in church (about the time Hell freezes over)? After all, Jesus associated with a known prostitute and notorious sinners, and as a result he was called a glutton and a winebibber. But that didn't stop him, thank God.

George W. Bush - Forgive Him, For He Knows Not What He Does

I am a patriotic American. Politically, I consider myself slightly to the right of center. But if I held George Bush fully responsible for everything he has done, I'd consider him a war criminal. The only reason I don't see him that way is that, after watching him, I have concluded that the man is simply unconscious. There's nothing unusual about that - in fact it's quite a common condition. Indeed I wonder just how much I am unconscious of. After all, we can't be aware of what we're unaware of, if that makes any sense.

In my humble opinion, this is what is wrong with W:

1. He is utterly blind to his own unconscious motivations

George W. Bush invaded a sovereign nation that no longer posed a threat to the United States - in order to prove that he was just as much of a 'man' as his father. The pattern was established long ago - why do you think he got into the oil business? I honestly don't think he realizes it.
“WARRIOR POET”, JAKE DANGER’S FULL LENGTH NOVEL, IS NOW AVAILABLE IN HARD COPY AND E-BOOK! CLICK HERE (POST CONTINUES BELOW)

READ A SAMPLE CHAPTER OF JAKE DANGER’S NOVEL “WARRIOR POET”

We all deceive ourselves sometimes - at least those of who have an emotional investment in thinking of ourselves as good people. But thinking of yourself as good doesn't make you good anymore than sticking feathers up your tail makes you a chicken. Suppose I want to do something bad that will gain me some perceived benefit. The cost of that benefit would be to abandon the idea that I am a good person. This presents me with a dilemna - I must either give up the benefit or give up my good opinion of myself. But wait - there's a way I can keep both! All I need to do is come up with a bogus justification for my bad action and then work really hard to convince myself that it's true. After all, how can God fault me when I'm so sincere? We can deceive ourselves just as easily as we can deceive others.

And so presto - Iraq was suddenly filled with Weapons of Mass Destruction. And if none were found later - hey, I 'genuinely' believed they were there, so the Man in the Mirror is still a good person. Besides, we're already out there now; we might as well 'stay the course'. It is only because I prefer to give W the benefit of the doubt that I consider him too unsophisticated for this kind of unconscious bargaining with God.

Afghanistan I can understand. But Iraq? How quickly the lessons of Vietnam have been forgotten! My government seems to have a memory little better than that of the average goldfish.

2. He is indifferent to the suffering of others

John Hinkley shot the President of the United States to impress a girl. George W. Bush killed 600,000 people (and counting) to impress his father. According to yesterday's headlines, Saddam Hussein looks to be Number 600,001, and I for one will not shed a tear over him. But most of the others, being fellow human beings, were worthy of more tears than I have in my head to cry. How does God bear it all?

JFK was America's first Television President. When W was growing up, 'Pong' hadn't even been invented yet, but he is nevertheless America's first Video Game President. Previous war presidents aged decades while in office, but W seems good as new - apparently the deaths of over half a million people doesn't keep him up nights. This is no strength - it's weakness. It's easy to deal with the deaths of that many people when it has no more significance than PAC Man eating 600,000 dots. It amazes me how anyone could be so detached from such an ocean of suffering. Is this man awake or asleep? I fear that events that are soon to take place will cause history will judge the invasion of Iraq to be a foreign policy mistake of historic proportions, along the lines of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

I suppose I am asking for it by criticising my own government so harshly. But allow me an answer: I love my country, but I fear my government. I reckon you can't get much more American than that.

Ted Haggard and the Modern Day Pharisee Christian Church - Would They Crucify Jesus All Over Again?

News: The Rev. Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, admitted Friday that he bought methamphetamine and received a massage from a male prostitute. Haggard, who condemned both gay marriage and homosexuality, resigned after a Denver man named Mike Jones claimed he had many drug-fueled trysts with Haggard.

Commentary: I am a Christian who seldom walks into a church these days. I gave up on the church after I saw a striking similarity between the attitudes prevalent all over the Christian church and what I read in the Bible about the Pharisees who had Jesus killed. Ted Haggard is just the latest in a long line of high profile Television Ministers caught in activities that your average Satanist would think twice before engaging in. Why does 'Churchianity' have such a long rap sheet? Allow me to venture an answer.

1. "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom"

If you consider yourself a basically good person, why do you do good things? (1) Because you love values like truth, kindness, mercy and justice and detest their opposites - or (2) because you're afraid God will "get" you if you don't? If your answer is (2), then you're no better than a thief who doesn't steal because he's afraid he'll get caught. It's a 100% selfish motivation. "Fear of the Lord" may indeed be the beginning of wisdom - but for the end of wisdom, see James 4:18: "There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear..he that fears is not made perfect in love". But alas, congregations are much more docile and easy to fleece if you focus on fear. Meanwhile, the real message of the Bible gets lost under the bills in the collection plate.
“WARRIOR POET”, JAKE DANGER’S FULL LENGTH NOVEL, IS NOW AVAILABLE IN HARD COPY AND E-BOOK! CLICK HERE (POST CONTINUES BELOW)

READ A SAMPLE CHAPTER OF JAKE DANGER’S NOVEL “WARRIOR POET”

2. "Be satisfied with what you have"

It's a popular and holy-sounding thing to say. But who is really satisfied with what they have? And why should they be?

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst." - Jesus

Even the richest among us are poor beyond measure. Our knowledge of our true poverty is one of the best measures of our wisdom. Trying to convince people not to desire is a lost cause. And rightfully so. Because when we cease to desire, we cease to live. The primary tenant of Buddhism is that desire is the root of all evil, and that enlightenment is obtained through the extinction of desire. But didn't even Buddha desire to achieve enlightenment?

I submit that the problem is not that we want too much - rather, the problem is that we are FAR too easily satisfied. We follow our lust when true love is attainable. We want a Mazzarati when uproarious laughter lurks just behind our lips. We want a houseful of "stuff" when FREEDOM is available. We desire a yacht - but would we own it, or would it own us?

Corpses do not desire, and they are never dissatisfied. But if you are reading this, you are still alive. Alive! Don't just 'be alive' - LIVE! To live is to desire, and to desire is to live.

Walk into a modern Christian church and what you'll hear often sounds more like Buddhism than Biblical Christianity. "Accept your lot in life" seems to be the prevailing mentality. In the more conservative churches, all forms of strong desire seem to be presumptively suspect as potential sin (especially sexual desire, even for your spouse!).

And sitting in the pews with the bland and timid suburban congregation, the shallow, soul-numbing messages of mediocrity keep on coming: "Do whatever the preacher tells you to do", and "God wants you to give us money". And above all, "Get out there and sell, sell, SELL!" I could go on and on. If the church is losing membership (and therefore tithes), it's "bloom where you're planted". Nobody planted me, jack. I am not a vegetable. Jesus had it right the first time around: "You scour the earth to win a single convert; then you turn him into twice the sons of Hell that you are!" Sadly, I find more honest people at bars among the prostitutes and tax collectors that Jesus hung out with.

Nelson Mandela summed it up just about as well as anyone ever could:

"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, 'Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, fabulous and talented?' Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Playing small doesn't serve the world. It doesn't help anyone to shrink so that other people don't feel insecure around you. We were born to manifest the glory of God that is within us...

...and as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give permission to others to do the same. We are liberated from our own fear. Our presence automatically liberates others..

Fight the good fight every moment, until your last breath provides one last nourishment to a sleepwalking, zombie world.