Assorted Notes

SUNDAY, 20 DECEMBER 2015

How can you believe anything if you cannot verify for yourself whether something is true or not?

Fact is, I have to believe other people when they say or write that Napoleon lived, and had lost his final battle at a place called Waterloo. I have to believe other people when they say or write of a monster who went by the name of Adolf Hitler. I have to believe other people when they say or write that there was a conservative old geezer called Paul Kruger, and other men called George Washington and Abraham Lincoln and Henry VIII. I have to accept other people’s arguments or proofs that the earth is round and not flat, that the earth revolves around the sun, that there is an ever-expanding universe, that humans descended from earlier creatures that looked more like chimpanzees than modern humans, and even that I consist of tiny particles called atoms – which in turn consist of even smaller particles.

So, how do you believe anything if you cannot collect data yourself, scrutinise historical sources, and do your own sophisticated laboratory experiments?

You listen to two or more explanations for something that differ on all the main points. You listen to people who represent different viewpoints, and you look carefully at what they submit as evidence. Then you listen to how they insult each other, how they deconstruct each other’s arguments, and how they construct counterarguments layer by layer.

Then you decide: Which version sounds more reasonable? How thoroughly has evidence been examined and on what grounds were evidence rejected and arguments refuted? Which version has a higher probability of being true?

Finally, when you have decided on A, or B or however many options there are, you have to ask yourself why you think that specific version sounds more reasonable, and has a higher probability of being true. Very important: Is it possible that you have a deep-seated need for that version to be the truth? Also, do you choose one version over another because your membership in some or other group is at risk, especially where membership is something that gives value and meaning to your life?

Someone who accepts a particular explanation because they need it to be the truth is like a judge who convicts a man of theft because another man had stolen something from him a long time ago, and ever since he has been carrying around this desire for revenge. What this person needs is one thing; evidence that the guy is guilty is something completely different.

* * *

Just for fun, here are a few issues about which people argue until they are blue in the face.

1. Is evolution one of the most important discoveries ever made about life on earth, or is it nonsense?

Read and decide for yourself:

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

12 Arguments Evolutionists Should Avoid

The Scientific Case Against Evolution

How To Argue For Evolution: 7 Common Creationist Arguments, Debunked

Objections to evolution

2. Was John F. Kennedy assassinated by a single sniper named Lee Harvey Oswald, or was there a larger conspiracy behind the assassination?

Read and decide for yourself:

John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories

What is the Case Against a Conspiracy in the JFK Assassination?

What is the Case For a Conspiracy in the JFK Assassination?

3. Was the 40^th President of the United States, Ronald Reagan a bastion of freedom and democracy, or was he a bully who destroyed more than he built?

Read and decide for yourself:

Not Even a Hedgehog: The stupidity of Ronald Reagan

Ronald Reagan: Impact And Legacy

Five myths about Ronald Reagan’s legacy

The Sad Legacy of Ronald Reagan

4. Was Mother Teresa a hope for the poorest of the poor, or was she a “fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud”?

Read, or watch, and decide for yourself:

20 Facts About Mother Teresa

Mother Teresa of Calcutta

Christopher Hitchens – Mother Teresa: Hell’s Angel

Mother Teresa: Why the Catholic missionary is still no saint to her critics

______________________

TUESDAY, 15 DECEMBER 2015

Stir up the topic of the possibility of a purpose to human existence, and you necessarily bring up the origin of the human being.

I reckon there are three possibilities: humans were created by a deity; humans were slowly evolving from earlier life forms, then beings from outer space arrived and injected their DNA in an earlier incarnation of what would eventually become modern humans; humans evolved slowly over millions of years from earlier life forms into the organisms we see today, with no interference from cosmic deities or aliens from outer space.

Each of these possible origins has unique implications for the possibility of a purpose to our existence.

If a deity created humans, it makes sense that we should start our search for the purpose of our existence with this deity: Who is this deity? What does this deity want from us? Why did the deity create us? What will happen if we do not do what we ought to do, or if we fail for various reasons to figure out what we ought to do?

If what we are today is the result of interference from beings from outer space, the questions are similar: Who are they? Where did they come from? Why did they come all this way to interfere with our biological ancestors? What are we supposed to do? What will happen if we fail to do what we have to do, or if we can’t figure out what they want us to do?

If we have developed slowly over millions of years, and if perhaps as many as hundreds but probably at least dozens of different incarnations passed before we came to be the organism we call Homo sapiens today, we cannot reasonably look for something beyond ourselves that had a plan or purpose in mind for us a long time ago.

If we owe our existence to the latter process – a highly probable yet strangely enough highly controversial possibility, we can make a reasonable conclusion. It would mean “purpose of existence”, like identity, is something we came up with to help us get through the proverbial day. In other words, it isn’t really real.

Important to note that something does not have to be actually real to have practical value. Identity is one example: I am not really “Brand Smit”. Or, “Brand Smit” is not a real thing like a dog or an elephant or a pencil. It is something that was originally devised by my parents, and then I contributed a little, and others lent a hand, and when I became older I got a little more creative with it, and nowadays other people sometimes play along with what I say, and sometimes they don’t. But “Brand Smit” does have practical value. Not only does it help the author of this text to get through his day and get along fairly well with other organisms and creatures in his environment, it may even motivate him to sacrifice some of his time and money to assist other people and animals.

Most of the people who will benefit from his selfless actions won’t care too much how he thinks about the purpose of his existence. For example, he can start a soup kitchen to feed hungry people sleeping at the train station, and I reckon they won’t grumble too much if the helper declares that he is doing so because he sees it as the purpose of his existence as revealed by beings from outer space.

* * *

There is a good chance that both identity and belief that our existence serves a purpose are things we invented ourselves. It is also true that some of us view these things as if they are holy truth that cannot be altered to any significant extent.

Is it good to think your existence serves a purpose?

I have mentioned the example of someone providing hot soup and bread to hungry people without compensation and at no cost to the person who gets the soup and bread, possibly because he or she believes it expresses the purpose of their existence.

Then there is the guy who does not believe his existence serves any purpose; that he was born and that he will eventually die, and in between he will do his best to get along with his neighbours, stay out of trouble most of the time, and make his life as much worth the effort as he can manage, since he can easily enough end his own life.

Personally, I have no problem with someone who doesn’t believe their existence serves a purpose. And if the person at the soup kitchen says she is a creature of extraterrestrial origin who is simply doing what she was commanded to do, I won’t have a problem with her either – as long as the soup and bread are of a quality that can sustain ordinary earthlings throughout the day.

On the other end of the spectrum I will certainly mind if someone wants to cut off my head because they say ancient writings instruct them to do so, that it is indeed part of the purpose of their existence as revealed by this ancient text.

The belief that your existence serves a purpose is, like identity, not inherently good or bad. Both can help you get through the day in one piece and in reasonably good shape, and not end up in prison or a mental institution. Both can also make your path to the prison or mental institution remarkably short and straight. And both can enable you to live in relative peace with most members of the community, or it can set you on a warpath with them or with members of other communities.

Who are you, at the end of the day? And do you believe your existence serves a purpose? If you do, what is this purpose, and from where did you get the idea that this ought to be the purpose of your life?

______________________

WEDNESDAY, 30 SEPTEMBER 2015

“Jung was an atheist, but he preferred Christian socialism to the atheist communism he saw coming. He predicted that the freethinking atheist would fare better under the frowning brow of the Christian myth than under the trampling boot of the communist one.”

Source: SamHarris.ORG

FRIDAY, 20 NOVEMBER 2015

I believe in cooperation. And I believe the world can be a better place for everyone if people are more reasonable in their views, in their beliefs, in how they behave and in their attitudes towards other people.

Simple enough, you’d think.

THURSDAY, 3 DECEMBER 2015

Life is …

* what was given to you – genetic makeup, socio-economic background, language, culture and ethnicity;

* what other people do;

* your own choices;

* other people’s reactions to your choices and actions; plus

* what nature does.

In other words, life as we know it consists of three parts over which we have or had no control, one part where free will makes some difference, and one part that flows from our choices and actions but over which we have little control.

______________________

THURSDAY, 19 NOVEMBER 2015

As I am working on material I wrote in 2005 I realise that eventually I am going to be finished with 25 years’ worth of notes – typed, edited, translated and published.

Twenty-one years ago I was 23 years old, at the beginning of my adult life; I am in my mid-forties now, halfway to being elderly. I can imagine what someone would think if they followed the notes all the way from 1994 until the most recent notes from this week. I wouldn’t be surprised if they pulled up their shoulders and asked: “That’s it?”

I am aware of the fact that there has not been much adventure in my life. (Or has there been, and I just dismiss it? I have after all lived in three different countries since 1994.) I did meet someone and started a life with her, but happiness does not necessarily make for good literature. And except for my failures to make more money over the past ten years, there haven’t been many great challenges I have had to overcome.

Is this a call to action? Should I do something to make my writing more interesting? I mean, if I have been writing fiction I could have gotten away with a dull life. Or if I have been writing about topics other than my own life …

WEDNESDAY, 9 DECEMBER 2015

To undertake a month-long trip through Asia to end up in a museum or a palace in France would give the life I have already established more colour, and a few unforgettable memories – there can be no doubt about that.

But I am also regularly reminded that people chase after adventure because adventure is part of their ideal life. This note is the most recent manifestation of the fact that I have pursued my ideal life, my dream, and that I have managed to fulfil that dream to a significant extent.

* * *

On Saturday, 19 September 2015, I wrote the following:

Two views of my life of the past twenty years:

1. I pursued a creative life and made sacrifices in the process.

2. I did not make enough sacrifices to pursue a creative life.

______________________

THURSDAY, 5 NOVEMBER 2015

My position since at least “To talk about God” (written in November 2001) has been as follows: You cannot believe in “God” without defining “God”. And when you have defined “God”, you have created an idol – like Moses’ brother Aaron created an idol of gold and jewellery, so people do it with words.

FRIDAY, 6 NOVEMBER 2015

Many people will be ready with a counter-argument: “I don’t define God. I believe what God has revealed about Himself.”

Okay, I’ll say, let me try again: You cannot believe in “God” without first defining “God”. And when you have defined “God” …

“Nobody defines God. He has revealed himself.”

How do you know? I will ask.

And so the back and forth will continue until you realise you are knee-deep in an argument with absolutely no rules. Because how do you argue with “I believe so because I feel so”? How do you argue with, “I believe what I believe because a book that was written by God Himself who moved the authors’ hands in a certain way says that is how it is. And the book must be right because the book says it is right. And my feeling confirms it. And feelings I have had in the past also confirm it. And almost everyone I know agrees with me.”

How do you argue a point if the other person is saying whatever he wants with no reference to independent research and no confirmation other than other people who also have a strong personal stake in the matter?

“This is the shell of a dragon egg,” says someone with an ostrich egg shell in her hand.

“How do you know it’s a dragon egg shell?” another person asks.

“Because I feel it’s true, and you can’t say anything that would convince me that what I feel isn’t true.”

______________________