Oasis

On the one hand they’re ignorant and rude, but on the other hand… they just forfeited the other hand.

Advertising Lie

“England goes smoke-free on July 1st.”

-NHS

England does not go smoke-free on July 1st, it just becomes illegal to smoke inside public buildings and vehicles - and about time too. In fact the NHS encourages people to go outside to smoke instead. But people smoking outside are the biggest problem. It’s hard to avoid their second-hand smoke when simply walking down the pavement, and from July there will be more of them than ever.

There is a simple rule which should be enforced regarding smoking. It goes as follows:

“It is illegal to smoke in any location where there might be people who have not explicitly consented to breathe your smoke. This includes the private home.”

Reply to a Muslim (3)

A reply of mine to another Muslim:

Salim,

Philosophical enquiry is about getting rid of all your preconceptions,
opening your mind, and coming to your own *independent* conclusions about
the world around you. In many ways is it therefore totally incompatible with
religious dogma, which teaches you that you must believe what a book says,
full stop.

Humanists try to make their moral judgements according to reason and
compassion, irrespective of what the Bible says (the Bible has nothing to
offer on many complex modern ethical dilemmas anyway).

Luckily many people (including self-proclaimed Christians) do not in fact
take their morals from the Bible, which advocates killing people for being
homosexual(1) or for working on Sundays(2), among other horrors, or from the
Koran, which explicitly calls for the faithful to murder all non-believers
in many passages(3) and has a questionable notion of woman’s rights too(4).
Indeed, as you say yourself, “non-believers can be very very moral. Some
atheists are more moral than believers”.

My sources:
(1) “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to
death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”
(Leviticus 20:13 NAB)
(2) “Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the
Sabbath must be put to death.” (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT)
(3) “Slay them wherever ye find them”. (Surah 2:191)
(4) “Forbidden to you are…married women, except those you own as slaves.”
(Surah 4:20-, 24-)

It can sometimes be difficult to make moral decisions, granted, but please
don’t take these texts as your moral guide, or in a civilised society you
are likely to be locked up for other people’s safety.

Regards,

Gavin Orland

Zen

I am not mystical at all but the fact is that some of the teachings of Zen Buddhism are valid. It is not a religion and does not entail worshipping imaginary gods or “sacred” texts; it is more a way of thinking about life - a philosophy (although I prefer to reserve the term philosophy for its academic use). I have a lot of time for it, and have had for many years.

One of the teachings of Zen is that if you stop wanting something, you are more likely to get it. This mismatch would seem at first to be very unfortunate, but it tends to be true. Now, why is this? Is it because of some weird karma or something else mystical? No. It can be explained rationally.

When you want something, it introduces a tension into your life, an anxiety - a visible anxiety which others will notice and which can itself preclude the achievement of your aim in a variety of ways.

Few problems can be solved, and few desires satisfied, directly. They are best approached obliquely. Concentrate on the surrounding pieces, and the key pieces of the jigsaw will fall into place.

In addition to this, the situation is perhaps not so unfortunate, because you are more likely to be a worthy recipient of the prize when you no longer depend on winning it. You show yourself to be a strong and responsible holder of the position. In short, folks - charity begins at home.

The reason that dare speak its name

In quite a few entries on this site I try to do my bit to promote free thought, and I highlight the immoral (not to mention improbable) content of esteemed religious texts.

I have met two people recently who are also atheists, which is great. One is an “escaped” Jehovah’s Witness, a very intelligent and pleasant young man who is also very well read (he had somehow managed to reach to the end of the Koran). He agrees, incidentally, that the mind-washing he received from this cult as he grew up was tantamount to child abuse.

The other is a lady who is in the same business as me - design and programming.

Yet both were a little cautious when the topic of religion arose, not wishing to immediately confess their lack of faith for fear of offending me. (Little did they know! )

Let’s say it loud and clear: lack of faith is a virtue! I don’t care who I’m talking to, I always come right out with it: I think religion is nonsense (and lethal nonsense). If you don’t like it, develop a thicker skin - or better still, give it up.

Like Sam Harris and my friends, I too have some reservations about the term “atheist”, as we are reluctant to even give a term to a negative (for example in comparison there is no term for people who do not believe in the flying spaghetti monster), but nonetheless, show no shame! As AC Grayling said, the time for that is over. The religious certainly have no qualms about continually broadcasting their ill-considered views - it’s high time for reason to dare speak its name too.

Furthermore, if you’re too coy you might miss out on a great friendship with a fellow free-thinker.

People’s pasts

You’re starting to date someone, but you’re concerned about their past. You want to know what kind of relationships they had. How long they lasted. When they finished. How they finished…

It doesn’t matter.

Look at the lesson from Chasing Amy. Take people how you find them. Allow them to disclose information as and when they wish. Don’t bother asking anything. You can’t tell if the answers are true anyway. Look into their eyes and judge them on how they are treating you currently - it’s enough. It’s all that matters. It’s all that’s relevant to your current situation.

Interview cliches

Here are some words and phrases which are over-used by politicians and PR people on TV and radio interviews:

• “a range of… ” (to introduce vagueness)
• “clearly” (when it is not clear at all, and is exactly the point that is in question)

I am listening to such interviews less now but I will add to these as and when I hear them!

Pope “helps”

The parents of missing schoolgirl Madeleine McCann, who have been made celebrities by the media, have been granted the rare honour of an audience with… the Pope. What exactly he, in his wisdom, is expected to be able to do about the situation remains to be seen.

Brighten London!

Most people in London dress in grey and black (I have seen this noted by visitors too). I like black suits about as much as I used to like school uniforms. When they simply serve to eliminate any individuality, why do so many like to people wear them? Perhaps it is partly because many people precisely don’t want to be individuals and want instead to submerge their identity into a group. There is a whole spectrum of colours from which to choose. Choose them, show your individuality, and let’s brighten London up!

Subjectivism

There is a lot of subjectivist talk these days. I argued in favour of subjectivism in my philosophy exams because it was the easiest path. But that doesn’t mean it is the right one, either morally or factually. It might just be a cop-out, and I think it probably is. We are now seeing subjectivism pull our society apart. I am now interested to argue against subjectivism and relativism. I always had a sneaking suspicion of both, but I have been encouraged by Sam Harris and others to “come out” and abandon them completely (I already had no truck with religion!).

Objectivism is difficult to defend and generally frowned upon because it smacks of snobbery. While I detest snobbery, I have a lot of respect for the truth, and if someone does not see the beauty of a landscape, the vulgarity of a tabloid newspaper, or the wrongness of rape, I suggest this is not because the properties are not there to be perceived – rather it is the case that they do not possess the ability to perceive them (exactly as in HG Wells’ excellent short story The Country of the Blind). Furthermore I suggest that a richer experience of life is to be had by perceiving them than by not perceiving them.