Christianity Facing Extinction? Wow. Cool.

An article in The Telegraph warns:

Christianity at risk of dying out in a generation, warns Lord Carey

I know this is disturbing and serious from the point of view of Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, but from mine, it’s heartening and funny.

Christianity is just a “generation away from extinction” in Britain unless churches make a dramatic breakthrough in attracting young people back to the faith, the former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey has warned.

Clergy are now gripped by a “feeling of defeat”, congregations are worn down by “heaviness” while the public simply greets both with “rolled eyes and a yawn of boredom”, he said.

Further,

As I have repeated many times in the past we are one generation away from extinction. We have to give cogent reasons to young people why the Christian faith is relevant to them.

That’s gonna be difficult, sir. We’ve seen what the Christian faith has done in the past and, well, we have other things on our minds now. Like, you know, reality.

Is Handling Poisonous Snakes a Constitutional Right?

Pentecostal Pastors Argue ‘Snake Handling’ Is Their Religious Right

Is it? I’m going to say yes, with certain reservations.

1) The snakes should be protected.

2) Anyone handling them should be experts licensed by the state in which the church exists.

3) The church offering the activity has to have insurance that covers accidents and liability — just as fireworks displays and rodeos have to have insurance — so that if the snakes escape, or if someone is injured or killed during the service or at any time when snakes are present, they’re covered.

4) The right should be an ordinary RIGHT, and not a religious right. No special favors for churches in the possession and handling of wildlife.

Other than that … I think this is a stupid practice, and the people doing it are complete fools. But hell, let ’em.

I’m going to suggest that if the practice is banned, or some of these nice people are prevented from “worshipping” as they wish, they go blackberry picking in East Texas. They’ll have plenty of chances to meet up with diamondback rattlers, and they can just grab up anything that slithers.

Do Atheists Have the Right to Offend Muslims?

The question was posed in an article from The Muslim Times (which features such articles as A challenge for Dawkins: Where did carbon come from? and Conversion of Mr. Bean to Islam?)

Recently some atheists at the LSE Freshers day were asked by university authorities to remove T-shirts depicting the Prophets Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them both) sharing a beer together. Well, to be more exact, they were asked to remove “Jesus and Mo” cartoon t-shirts, where “Jesus” is depicted as a cartoon caricature of the real Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) and “Mo” is ostensibly a ‘body double’ of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Such conflicts are proliferating, and present an interesting challenge to our democratic society in the UK: do atheists have the right to offend Muslims?

On the face of it, this may seem a simple question, and most people probably will start reading this article with a fixed opinion on the issue. But it’s actually a rather complicated question!

That’s pretty much the meat of the article, and it trails off into a few more bland paragraphs. The author shies away from giving any suggestion of an answer, I suspect because reasonable people already know the answer: First, it’s the wrong question, and Second, when you ask the REAL question — “Do Muslims (or any other religious group) ever have the right to use ‘I’m offended!’ as a clinching argument to restrict the freedom of expression of others in public spaces”? — the answer is No, or at least, They Apparently Do But They Damned Well Shouldn’t.

The original incident was described on the website of the  National Secular Society:

A row over free expression has broken out at the London School of Economics after members of the LSESU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Student Society were told they would be physically removed from the annual Freshers’ Fair unless they covered up t-shirts deemed “offensive”.

The group’s response was right on target:

We reject in the strongest possible terms that by wearing a non-violent, non-racist t-shirt we would harass other students or create an “offensive environment”. We reject completely that we were not behaving in an “orderly or responsible manner”. In fact, when faced with the entirely unreasonable request to change or cover up our clothing, we remained calm and asked for clarification on what rules or regulations we were alleged to be in breach of. Even though we completely disagreed with the instructions of the LSE, we still complied, making clear that we would challenge this decision through the appropriate procedures.

As much as we respect and defend the rights of others to wear whatever they choose to wear, we claim this right for ourselves. Our right to free expression and participation in the LSE student community is being curtailed for no other reason than that we are expressing views that are not shared by others. The t-shirts worn are harmless satirical depictions of fictitious religious figures and certainly cannot be considered intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive to anyone by even the most stringent standards.”

The LSESU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Student Society is in the right here, and in the just world they’re working to create, the deeper question of freedom of expression — whether it involved Muslims or some other religious group — would never come up.

But in this case, a religious group complained of supposed intimidation and the university rolled over and REALLY intimidated this other, non-religious, group.

On a side note, The Muslim Times, which calls itself “A Blog to Foster Universal Brotherhood,” says on its About Us page:

We want to applaud the good writings of all the Muslims, the Christians, the Jews, the agnostics and the atheists and others, by sharing them with our readers.

So, hey, maybe I’ll be published on there someday.  Because they’re all over that brotherhood thing.

Reason Riders Are Really Real

You know about my horseback career, I’m sure. But way back when (and still more in the future, I hope!)  I also used to ride motorcycles. Had three of them and rode year-round, as my sole transportation, for several years.

Remember this post? Hey, Where’s OUR Motorcycle Gang?

I posted my mockup of a possible back-patch for atheist riders, and demanded that I be given a charter membership if anyone ran with it.

Someone did!

Pierino Walker sent me an email a while back (I’ve been a while getting to it; sorry Pierino):

It all started with the concept that you came up with initially and I count you as one of the founders. If you would still like some patches let me know where to send them. I just want show the world that we, as atheists, agnostics and non-believers of all types occupy all facets of life. I am starting this club to show that we enjoy fun, the outdoors, adventure and riding just like other people do, but without Hell or Angels or skulls blazing across our backs.

I just want fellow non-believers to come together as a group and ride down the coastline or ride out to Reno or wherever we as a collective decide to go. I feel it’s necessary to show that freethinkers aren’t just a bunch of angry people sitting around plotting to somehow overthrow religion. I look forward to riding with my fellow like-minded bikers.

If anyone outside of my general area would like to be a part of Reason Riders in their own location, they are free to use the Reason Riders emblem. Anyone can get the patches through me, and if you ride with us, all the better! We’ll keep track of the numbers wearing the patch, wherever they ride. There are only five of us right now but that’s enough to get things started and I hope it grows beyond that.

As Pierino notes, my original design with the Darwin inset would have been too expense and complex. His design is a great improvement.

These are small, 4 inches across, more suitable to an arm or front patch than a big back patch. I sort of wish the name line  was a bit bolder, readable from a greater distance. But still, pretty sweet, yes?

If you want one, or want to contact him for more information, email Pierino, who lives in northern California — really GOOD riding country — at:

ktown1213 [at] gmail [dot] com

On my end:

Patches – check. Pierino sent me TWO.

Motorcycle … still working on that little detail. (But then, I have the entire winter to get it worked out.)

Wouldn’t it be nice to get a spring ride together in your area? Cruising down the highway, proudly displaying your colors? Oh yeah, count me in.

Beta Culture: The Stench of Royalty

I’m convinced there are two major classes of people on Planet Earth, with a very sharp dividing line — almost a species division — between them.

The two classes are:

1) Real People.

2) Cattle.

If you’re reading this, you’re probably one of the second category. Just as I am.

Writing the most recent post Beta Culture: To Not Be Owned, I came across this rather annoying article from the 2011 Business Insider, The World’s 15 Biggest Landowners.

Here they are in reverse order, the owners and their total owned area (If it helps, one square mile equals 640 acres, or 2.59 square kilometers.):

15) Ted Turner, 3,124 square miles
14) Sheik Hamad Bin Khalifa of Qatar, 4,375 square miles
13) James, Arthur and John Irving, 5,625 square miles
12) King Mswati of Swaziland, 6,704 square miles
11) Emir of Kuwait, 6,875 square miles
10) King Letsie 111 of Lesotho, 11,718 square miles
9) King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck of Bhutan, 15,000 square miles
8) King Abdullah II of Jordan, 35,637 square miles
7) King Gyanendra of Nepal, 57,000 square miles
6) Sultan Qaboos of Oman, 119,498 square miles
5) King Bhumibhol of Thailand, 200,000 square miles
4) King Mohammed VI of Morocco, 274,375 square miles
3) Pope Benedict/Catholic Church, 276,562.5 square miles
2) King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, 830,000 square miles
1) Queen Elizabeth II, 10.3 million square miles

Granted a few of these seem largely ceremonial, and not all the “owners” are hand-rubbing, cackling Mr. Burns-type evil landlords, but … Holy Skettymon(*)! Really? REALLY??

The area of Texas is only 270,000 square miles, which means the top four on this list, royalty every one, each own areas larger than Texas.

Two of these are U.S. billionaires, one is a church, the remaining dozen are royalty.  Between the lot of them, they own 12,146,493 square miles of the surface of the Earth. As the total land surface area of this planet is only 57,308,738 square miles, these FIFTEEN rich bastards own 21 percent of our planet.

To which I say: Well … CRAP.

And here I thought royalty was an amusing relic of the past.

As to Beta Culture: This business spotlights a continuing problem with where and when we live — that we are classed and outclassed by certain social forces, and that it might be appropriate to become a bit more assertive about that.

———————————–

(*) In case you wonder, I love the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but I’ve often wanted some easier way to speak His Holy Name in informal usage.  I’ve decided that for me, at least, “Skettymon” is that easier way. It’s short, has a nice punchy sound, and in its final syllable even lightly graces the Pasta with Rasta.

It came to me in a vision, I swear.

Beta Culture: To Not Be Owned

One of the prime motivations of my life has been independence. I have a deep, passionate sense that my life is my own. Mine, and nobody else’s.

I want nothing to be able to claim any part of me, not by force, not by lies, not by clever manipulation. I want to be owned not by churches, not by corporations, not by the government or the military, not by television, not by addictions, not by sports, not by drugs, not by bullies, not by fads or fame or glorious leaders.

On the other hand, I do like giving of myself. I’ve donated blood, money, sweat and time to others. I’ve cooked for sick friends. I’ve given lengthy rides to hitchhikers. I’ve helped people move, watched their pets or house-sat while they were on vacation. In my cowboy life, I’ve helped at brandings, feeding, and hay-hauling without pay. For a long time, I really enjoyed taking food to work — crock pot dishes, or things I had baked. Just as a gift to the granddaughter of some good friends, I wrote what started as a short adventure story with her as the heroine … but which ended being a 50,000-word novel. I’ve visited with people in the hospital. On more than one occasion, I’ve stopped on the side of the highway and helped change a tire, or called a tow truck. Hell, I get a good feeling when I open doors for people, which I do every day. Also every day, I give people sincere compliments.

So I enjoy giving. Giving to others, helping others make their lives work, sometimes helping them just to get through their day, may be one of the chief pleasures of life.

It has to be me making the decision, though. The second I’m ordered to give, controlled to give, manipulated to give – like in one of those “everybody in the office must donate to this worthy cause” campaigns – the lid of my generosity snaps shut.

Examples of the type of unpleasant “ownership” I’m talking about?

A few days back, as I returned to my work van at a highway rest stop, I saw four young women, early-to-mid 20s, standing about 8 feet away. As far as our society is concerned, all four were genetic lottery winners — slender, blonde, beautiful of face. Grouped in a cozy circle and chatting, all four were standing right elbow on left hand in that ancient posture: Woman Smoking.

Key in the ignition and ready to go, I grappled briefly with the impulse to say something to them about it: “For the time you spend smoking, you’re giving up your Self. You’re owned by a tobacco company.” Decided, no, it would probably only irritate or embarrass them. I drove away and left them to their lives.

But smoking is definitely an issue of ownership. Over the years I’ve watched too many friends and family wrestle with the habit not to know this. Considering the cost, impacts to your health, the fact that it produces a lingering distasteful odor on your clothes and hair and possessions, for the time you spend at it … you are OWNED. You’re not yours, you’re theirs.

It’s pricelessly perverse that tobacco companies have managed to convince generations of victims that smoking is a way to express one’s INDEPENDENCE.

Another example I’ve written about in the past:

Years back, I came across a book titled “Ask the Coupon Queen!” that showed a smiling woman holding up a fan of coupons. The author apparently spent hours each day poring through newspapers and newspaper inserts to find coupons for groceries and such, more hours traveling to the stores that doubled coupons or offered daily specials. For her, coupons were a CAREER. So much so that she was able to write a book about it. Gah. Creepy.

And just imagine the happy day you get to MEET the Coupon Queen: You’re standing behind her in line at the supermarket, as she sorts and searches and fiddles with an inch-thick stack of coupons. Yeah. That lady.

And again, there’s that paradox: By using the coupons you can “save money” on your groceries … but you wouldn’t need to do that if the stores charged less for what they sell.

It may be that you won’t get the distinction. I’ve said this to a number of people and gotten blank looks. “But you’re really saving money!” they chirp.

But follow me on this: THEY set the coupon-savings price of the product, but THEY also set the original price. So YOU are not “saving” anything.

They set the price both times. Where’s the savings? They could simply set a lower price, and you wouldn’t need a coupon. But they don’t. This is pure manipulation – by the supposed savings of a few cents or a few dollars – to get you to come into their store, buy their brand. Worse, they rotate the “savings” week by week, forcing you – if you want to “save money” – to look for the newspaper ads, forcing you to spend time on them, reading, clipping, calculating, figuring out your route from one store to the next to get the best “bargains.”

They compete to keep you hooked on their store, or their products. They CONSUME some of your limited, precious life time, and they do it with the lure of pennies.

Speaking just for myself: Hey, I might be a whore, but I’m not a cheap one. If you want ME to spend all that time and effort digging around in the newspaper, and then shuffling those damned coupons every time I go shopping – if you want several hours a week of my all-too-limited life – you better at least give me a car.

I don’t use coupons. At all, ever. I don’t get the “savings” my friends get when I go into the supermarket. But I also don’t have to spend two seconds of my time – MY time – thinking about coupons. At least in this way, I’m not owned.

So why is it that I, Mr. Independence, keep talking about Beta Culture? Something people would have to join, to give up something of themselves in order to become a part of?

Ha. Glad you asked that. Here it is:

My view of culture, from my own experience of my native East Texas Cowboy culture, is that it both TAKES something from you and GIVES something to you. Your culture owns you, a little bit or a lot, but hopefully it also empowers you in some measure.

Of course, the home culture you grow up in, you barely notice what it takes from you. However uncomfortable you might be in your home culture at any one moment, you think that’s the way things are supposed to be, and you just accept it and make the effort. Witness various Earth cultures’ continued devotion to un-anesthetized surgery, poking, burning, slitting, shaving, braiding, scarring, dyeing, tattooing, binding, beating, shrouding, cloistering and all sorts of other physical and behavioral control. (Not to mention forcing you to show up for Thanksgiving dinner so you can be grilled by your aunts about why you’re not married yet, or if you’re still dating That Loser.)

It’s only when you view it from the outside that you can see how painful and unnecessary – and SILLY – most of this stuff is.

What your culture gives you is a place to belong. Friends and family, and familiar ways of doing things. Traditional stories and myths. A roster of acceptable career aspirations, and – sheepskin or lion skin – the clearly delineated pathways into them. Home. Favorite foods. Acceptable clothing, hats, footwear.

The question is: Is it worth it?

At some of those same highway rest stops as the one where I saw the young women smoking, not far from New York City, I also frequently see Hasidic Jews. You may know who I’m talking about – the guys with the long side curls. Not long back, I saw a couple of young men sporting side locks that hung almost down to their shoulders. Both of them also had short-cropped, almost shaved heads, with little islands of foot-long hair on each side of their heads, like a limp, curly version of Pippi Longstocking pigtails. Even to my eyes, they looked faintly ridiculous.

I admit, not being from New York, the first time I saw these Jewish ultra-conservatives, I thought they look funny – straggle-bearded men in black coats and odd little flat-brimmed hats, accompanied by mousy women herding wide-eyed waifs peering at strangers as if every one might be a melodramatically nefarious child snatcher. The nearest match in my head was a comically-costumed Woody Allen in the movie Annie Hall.

But it took me all of 30 seconds to see it in terms I could understand: “Oh! This is their version of cowboy hats!”

My cowboy hat might look funny to others – from the number of times people have joked about it, I know it does – but I could wear it to the White House and feel perfectly at ease. To you, it’s a funny costume; to me, it’s a wearable piece of Home. Cowboy is what I am. It’s what MY people do and say and wear.

Ditto for Hasidic Jews. To them, their clothing and manners are not funny. They’re homey. Comfortable. Safe.

And yet I differ from them in this way: I can take off the hat, I can leave the boots and big buckle at home, I can remove every visible evidence of my western persona, and just be Joe Anybody.

In fact, in my everyday life (in New York State, remember), I seldom do wear any of that stuff. Oh, I’ll put it on for visits out West. I’ll proudly wear my gear to rodeos, or just for the hell of it when I’m out socializing. But mostly, you’d never know I was a cowboy.

And when I’m not wearing that stuff, I don’t miss it. I don’t feel lost, or uncomfortable, or somehow less ME. I’m comfortable being who and what I am, no matter what I wear.

So: For each individual within it, culture pays off. But it also carries a cost which can vary from middling expensive to the cost of life itself.  (Families in the U.S. pro-military subculture sometimes pay this highest of prices.)

A foundational goal in designing Beta Culture, first as a way to create something new, but second, to make it more likely that people will actually buy into it, see the possibilities, is to make sure it gives more than it takes.

How might one do that? I have some ideas.

Education:

First, I’d expect Beta Culture to place a very high value on education, both the college-degree kind and the continuing-life kind. Betas learn things, all their lives, and it pays off.

It’s not that other people – even other cultures – don’t place a high value on education, it’s that we very specifically DO. Not just as random individuals embedded in a larger culture that doesn’t value education very much (cough*Texas*cough), but as a full-on culture of education, every person of which values it immensely. Every person within Beta understands that education is something you MUST get, MUST continue. If you don’t continue to learn, there’s something a little bit wrong with you, and this place is not a good fit for you.

Does that sound a little bit off-putting? Maybe it is, but as I’ve said before, this isn’t going to be for everybody. There’s already one hard edge in Beta, one absolute gateway, and that’s atheism. As I’ve said elsewhere, if you’re not able to free yourself from the fetters of religion, Beta is the exact wrong place for you.

Likewise, as I imagine it, if you don’t read books, don’t maintain an interest in the workings of your world, don’t understand science, don’t develop new skills or hone existing skills throughout your lifetime … you’re probably better off somewhere else. There’s an entire world out there where you’ll fit right in, and be none the worse for it.

However! What downside is there to education? I can’t imagine any. Education empowers you, empowers the people around you. Empowers the entire culture in which you live … far beyond those which think reading your last book as a senior in high school is an acceptable way to laze your way through the world.

Being encouraged to educate yourself throughout your life, considering the returns to you and yours, seems a very small price to pay.

Further, if Beta Culture grew big enough to swing it, I’d hope it would aspire to even grander goals, such as a FREE education to its young people. Every graduating senior would get a full-ride scholarship to the college of his choice. I can imagine several scenarios that might make this affordable – one would involve a large endowment by generous existing members, another would include some sort of agreement with grads that they would eventually donate some percentage of their adult income back into the program.

Safety:

I see Betas as anything but pacifists. I don’t mean they’d be war-mongers; decidedly the opposite. But I don’t think they’d shy away from protecting themselves – or their loved ones – against threats. Whether receiving training in self-defense or the handling of weapons, or just the willingness to file a lawsuit against transgressors, I envision a culture-wide air of assertiveness that doesn’t ask or beg for, but DEMANDS respect from the larger cultural surround.

Community Center and Beyond:

I’ve referred several times to the Beta Nexus, a meeting place and house-of-all-purposes in each sizable city. Every time I think of that place, I imagine more that could be done with it. Meetings, classes, temporary lodging for speakers, child care and kindergarten, a place for non-religious weddings and memorial ceremonies, so much more. Hell, it could even house its own coffee house, a nice place that welcomed – and gently proselytized to – local college students. (Free coffee to hard-science majors!)

Eventually, I see no reason why the Beta community shouldn’t own hospitals, publishing houses, web servers, resorts, real estate, all sorts of mainstream businesses just as existing churches and religious organizations currently own. (Did you know the Mormon Church is now – pending certain approvals – the largest private landowner in Florida? Or that the Catholic Church is the third-largest land owner on Earth? Whoa. We’re starting damned late, people.) All of this aimed not solely at profit, but at enlarging the lives of the people within Beta. As well as – and this is important – the surrounding natural world.

With some serious forethought, there are endless possibilities to build huge empowerment into the culture, at the cost of small amounts of personal dedication on the part of those opting – and this is all very much optional, I stress – to become part of it.

Beta Culture: Signs in the Heav … uh, News

I keep seeing news stories — a LOT of them — that spark this thought: Hey, that fits right in with the Beta Culture idea!

By which I mean it makes me think the time is ripe for creating a novel, independent, reason-based culture.

Here: Majority of Americans want a third party

Self-identified Democrats and Republicans were equally likely to see the need for a third party—49% of Democrats and 52% of Republicans said they saw the need for a third party—but a full 71% of Independents supported the idea of a third party.

Without knowing it, a lot of us want something new. But faced with either Option A or Option B, we either hold our noses and pick the one LEAST annoying, or we hold back and grumble at both.

Isn’t it time for Option C, the new direction, the new option that WE create?

Start with something. Anything. And then begin to build into it all the things we’d like to see. Maybe not everything is possible. And maybe after living in THIS culture, the one that’s killing us but that we are so familiar with, maybe we’ll have a hard time imagining better solutions.

But really, think about how utterly crazy some of the shit going on now is, and try to imagine the existing system — politics, government, religion, corporate business, social order, entertainment (hell, the news media!) — presenting us with any of the things we dream about in any near-term future.

When you keep getting the same result, you don’t continue with the same actions. You try something new, don’t you?

Time for some experimenting, seems to me.

 

The World Is Ending. Michele Bachmann Says So.

I love this quote from the Daily Kos story:

Rep. Michele Bachmann is a member of Congress. She’s one of the people currently celebrating the shutdown of the American government as being a fine thing. She is on—and I am not making this up—the House Intelligence Committee.

This is a person who gained so much respect in her home district, where people KNOW her, that she has been repeatedly elected to public office — first the Minnesota state senate, later the U.S. House of Representatives — since 2000.

Which makes her voice more resonant than the guy standing on a corner mumbling about Jesus:

Now what this says to me, I’m a believer in Jesus Christ, as I look at the End Times scripture, this says to me that the leaf is on the fig tree and we are to understand the signs of the times, which is your ministry, we are to understand where we are in God’s End Times history.

Rather than seeing this as a negative, we need to rejoice, Maranatha Come Lord Jesus, His day is at hand. When we see up is down and right is called wrong, when this is happening, we were told this; these days would be as the days of Noah.

I’m out of the loop on whatever sect this phrase comes from — Maranatha Come Lord Jesus — but isn’t that a magical-sounding thing? Makes you want to throw it into your own conversations.

I took the dog for a walk today, Maranatha Come Lord Jesus, and the fall colors were wonderful.

No, I did my homework, Maranatha Come Lord Jesus, but my little brother tore it up.

Maybe we could start abbreviating it and it could replace LOL as a frequent interjection in online conversations:

You were drunk as hell at the party and took off your top in front of everyone, MCLJ!

The boss bent over at the water cooler yesterday, MCLJ, and it was like looking at the Grand Canyon, only with pimples and hair.

I also love this bit from Wikipedia:

Bachmann is under investigation by the House Ethics Committee, the Federal Election Commission, the Iowa Senate Ethics Committee, the Urbandale Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation because of alleged campaign finance violations in her 2012 campaign for President.

And I especially like this:

On May 29, 2013, Bachmann announced that she would not seek re-election to her Congressional seat in 2014.

A little more than a year before the Bachmann Crazy Show goes off the air.

If All Your Friends Jumped Off a Bridge … (repost)

A phrase popped into my head yesterday while I was thinking about something completely different, and I’d like to toss it at you: “challenge food.”

A challenge food is that stuff you’re expected to eat, not because it’s good, not because it’s something you would normally like, but to prove to your friends that you’re tough. Or daring. Or … willing to go along with the joke.

How many times have you heard people rave about chili hot enough to bring tears to your eyes? Or read some story about the search for the hottest-ever chili pepper?

There are other challenge foods. Raw oysters come to mind. Mountain oysters (bull calf testicles). Sheep’s eyeballs.

Considering where I came from, sushi was a challenge food for me. At least until I took my first bite, and discovered it was heavenly!

There are also plenty of challenge drinks. Everclear. Metaxa. Hell, even beer, if you’ve never had it before.

I bring all this up because challenge foods illustrate a line in human thinking, the line between “I should like this” and “This should be good.”

Or, more fully, the difference between

I should like this because everybody says it’s good.

… and …

If I’m going to like this, it has to be good.

Do you see the difference? The first one is a follow-along belief that says one’s judgment about what’s good should be based on what other people say is good. The second follows one’s own internal compass, saying that if something’s good TO YOU, you’ll like it, and not otherwise. In other words, the food is going to have to live up to you (your judgment), and not you live up to the food (in other people’s judgment).

I fell for the chili challenge oh-so-many times when I was growing up in Texas. Friends would make the burning hot stuff and gather to rave about how hot it was. “WOO!! That stuff just about burns the hair outta yuh nose, don’t it! Sweet Jesus, somebody git me a fahr hose! I think my eyeballs is meltin’! That chili’ll git the wax runnin’ outer yer ears!”

Until the day I said to myself “Dammit, I don’t want to FIGHT with my food. It’s either gonna be something I like, or I’m not going to eat the goddam stuff.” Ever since, I’ve enjoyed my own very-mildly-spiced recipe for chili, and none other.

I was surprised the first time I tasted champagne. I’d seen it in all the movies, you see, and people were sipping it and laughing, obviously enjoying it. I expected it to be sweet and light and fizzy. Instead it was this … bitter pisswater. I didn’t exactly spit it out, but I took two small sips – the second to be sure I’d been right about the first – and then put the glass down.

In fact, compared to my high school and cowboy buddies, I was very late in taking up drinking at all. I was 22 before I drank down an entire beer, or finished an entire mixed drink on my own. Beer simply didn’t taste very good to me. And even after I started drinking seriously (!) with my cowboy buddies in California, I divided mixed drinks into my own two private categories: Candy and Hair Tonic. Candy drinks – Tom Collins, Rum and Coke, etc. – I would drink. Hair tonic drinks – Martinis, etc. – I would not.

(Bear in mind this is all based on my much-younger sense of taste. Champagne no longer tastes like bitter pisswater, but it also doesn’t taste very GOOD. And still today, a six-pack of beer, which I do buy occasionally, will last me several months.)

Not to say that I wouldn’t try some of that stuff when I was out with the mule packers and had already had a few. I know what Metaxa tastes like, for instance (it probably rises into a third category – Paint Stripper, perhaps, or Human Rights Violation), but I would never, ever order it on my own.

Let’s look at those two mindsets again, though:

“I should like this” is hauled up from the deep, deep well of tribal solidarity:

This is justice because my neighbors say it is. This is right because the Pope says it’s right. This is a justified war because my countrymen say it is. This is good because everybody else seems to think it’s good. This is okay because it’s always been this way. This is the best way to do it because this is how my people do it. I should think this, and agree to this, and go along with this, because that’s what I’m supposed to do. This is real and true because the Bible says it is.

“This should be good” springs from the fountain of individual judgment:

Waitasec, is that right? Hmm, I don’t like this; is there something wrong with ME, or is it something wrong with THEM? Hell, I’m not going along with that. Jeez, I wonder why everybody thinks that’s okay? This tastes awful; I’m not eating/drinking/smoking it. I don’t like the way this is going; I’m outta here. No way am I going to put up with this. Well, shoot, that’s just silly; I didn’t sign on for this. Why is everybody standing around — can’t they see those people need help? Or even: What the fuck is up with you idiots? Can’t you see this is wrong?

I’m not knocking tribal solidarity, but there are limits. I’m pretty sure completely giving up your Self, vanishing totally into the herd, is just wrong. If you’re exactly like everybody else, you don’t really exist. I mean, you might still be walking around and breathing and stuff, but there’s no YOU in you. You become a nebbish, a puppet, a faceless, selfless nothing, pushed here and there by the tides of public opinion, or the will of corporate advertisers, or the driving whip of political manipulation.

If you default on the necessity of being an individual, you vanish in some way. You become a … thing.

But where do you draw the line between the two? On the one hand, there’s the risk you might become a non-entity. On the other, you face the danger of turning into something of an egotistical monster.

It’s not possible for me to really advise you on the thing, but several things come to mind in thinking about it:

First, the unspoken foundation of freethought is a willingness to take on the responsibility of making these kinds of choices. Once you become aware that there IS a choice, you’ll figure out where to draw your own line.

Which means, given the fact that this is the real world, and we’re only human, in the thousand SMALL decisions of daily living, a lot of it will involve the familiar “Go along to get along.” It’s just too tiring to do any different. As long as you realize there’s a small price you pay each time you go against your own values, and you judge either that the price is too small to bother with, or that the benefits outweigh the cost, you’re set.

Second, in the BIG decisions of your life — the health and welfare, life and death of you and your dependent loved ones – it has to be you making the decision. Every time.

Third, if the choice involves another person – a friend or relative, for instance – be sure it’s your decision to make. If it’s them paying the price of the choice, I would suggest it’s not your place to make that choice.

Finally, there is one decision-making arena where you can ALWAYS reliably default to your own personal judgment: Anytime you’re expected to follow along completely, to obey without questioning, that’s the time you must not follow along. The time when you have to back out, call a halt, and take the time to exercise your own ability to investigate, evaluate, and judge.

Whether it’s pressure from peers, the danger of official sanctions, or just a context of unspoken expectations, if the situation suddenly turns your life into a cattle chute, you must — at least in your head — refuse to be a cow.

A good thing to remember the next time you’re asked to go along with a war. Or with a church.

_______________

By the way, do click on the photo to embiggen it. It’s one of mine, and of someone I know. The bridge is about 65 feet high, the young man is 19, and … dayyum. (Yes, he survived.)

Beta Culture: Listing of Posts

I’m due at a meeting of a new social group here in Schenectady, “The Sunday Alternative,” a Freethinkers Meetup group.

At a casual glance, it’s something along the lines of the “atheist churches” that seem to be springing up, with the reservation that the people involved here are not necessarily all atheists, and probably nobody involved likes to think what we’re doing is “church.”

But it’s something new, it’s somebody actually doing something, it’s practically within walking distance of my apartment, and it fits within my so-far-loose conception of Beta Culture.

My bit of Show and Tell for the group is this listing of posts on Beta. I know it’s ugly — I’ll come back and clean it up later. I just wanted to have something to show.

These are in chronological order rather than conceptual order, mostly because I haven’t worked out any sort of conceptual order just yet. I shotgun out a post at irregular intervals, and it’s whatever is in my mind at the time — maybe something basic and preliminary, maybe something a dozen steps down the road after the thing is well established.

This is not everything I’ve ever written on the subject. I’ve been writing about it since late 2010, and I also have several hundred pages of notes to turn into finished posts.

Anyway:

Feb 1, 2012
The Book of Good Living – Preface

Aug 2, 2012
First Person Revolutionary — Part 1

Aug 31, 2012
A Basic Motivation for Atheism+ … and for Beta Culture

Sept 2, 2012
Beta Culture: The Heart and Soul of American Ideals

Sept 18, 2012
Beta Culture: A Place to Stand, and People to Stand With

Sept 19, 2012
Beta Culture: Preliminary Musings

Oct 30, 2012
Beta Culture: Drowning Puppies So You Don’t Get Dogs

Dec 17, 2012
Connecticut Shooting: Warm Lies, Cold Truth, Free Minds

April 15, 2013
Beta Culture: A Community Nexus

April 21, 2013
Beta Culture: Bonsai Civilization and the Future of Humanity

April 22, 2013
Shoving Orphans Away From the Table

March 10, 2013
Beta Culture: Adrift in an Ocean of Lies

April 7, 2013
Beta Culture: Patheos Intro, Part 1
Beta Culture: Patheos Intro, Part 2
Beta Culture: Patheos Intro, Part 3

May 4, 2013
Beta Culture: 13 Early Questions

May 6, 2013
Beta Culture: Replies to Comments 1

May 8, 2013
Beta Culture: Big Funny Hats

April 23, 2013
Beta Culture: Earthman’s Journey – Part 1 of 8

May 9, 2013
Beta Culture: Never Doubt the Power of Religion

May 25, 2013
Beta Culture: Bridges and War and All Things Daft

Sept 1, 2013
Beta Culture: Self Defense in the Age of Fuck You

Sept 23, 2013 from Sept 3, 2012
Beta Culture: Don’t Teach the Controversy (repost)