Happy Solstice

Happy Solstice to all.  As you've gathered if you have read my previous posts, I hold very little appreciation for the Abrahamic religions.  However, I do have appriciation for the Winter Solstice time of year.  As stressed as people can get during the winter holidays, I see a lot more positiveness from people. This positiveness can be infectious.  It affects a lot of people regardless of their beliefs.  To me, this is a secular side of the holidays.  Yes, this time of year has been dominated by specific religionist systems.  But there is a level of neutrality which occurs and which is contrary to at least one of the belief systems which dominate this season.

FDA changes rules regarding blood donations from men who had sex with other men

I just saw a news article on PBS about FDA's recent decision to change rules regarding who can donate blood.  For many years, a man could not donate blood if he admitted to ever having sex with another man.  An interviewee cited Italy as an example of a country who went the direction of individual risk assessments rather than a blanket ban.  There has been no appreciable increase in tainted blood from donations.  The FDA did not go that far.  The new rule is that men who admits to having sex with another man within the last 12 months prior to donation cannot donate.  This is significant.  I used to donate blood.  But, as a bisexual, I could not legally donate blood.  So I stopped donating blood after my first sexual relationship with another man.  I now have the option to do so during periods when my relationships are heterosexual.  I have never had a sexually transmitted infection of any kind.  Since this is the case, I was very frustrated that I was permanently excluded from donating blood.  I still do not think that the FDA went far enough.  All donated blood is tested for contamination anyway.  But at least the FDA has finally updated their rules to a more reasonable position.

Why

Why is violence more acceptable than sex in entertainment?
Why is violence more acceptable than nudity in entertainment?
Why is it more acceptable to say shit than fuck?

Truth

I became irritated while listening to an introduction to a discussion about belief and doubt.  It began by referencing how several US presidents had conversations with Billy Graham.  The commentator said that the thing about these conversations was that they were about a truth.  The commentator then posed the question as to why they believed as they did.  This was not a religious program but rather an introduction to some TED talks.  I do not know why the commentator used "truth" in that context.  But I think that it is a misuse of the work.  Truth relates to facts and evidence.  Of course, people misunderstand what evidence is but that is worthy of a separate discussion which I think that this will may lead to.  For now, let's look at "truth" for a little while.

I tell you that I ride a recumbent cycle.  You can say that this is a truth for someone who has directly seen me riding.  Beyond that, my statement about cycling cannot really be determined as true for most other people.  It's more like spectrums of belief.  Even accepting my YouTube videos as evidence without close examination is a level of belief.  I propose that the claim of truth should be held to a very high standard.  People have gotten to the point where "truth" and "belief" are used as if they mean the same thing.  But this is inaccurate.  Truth should be limited to things which are fact.  There are degrees of believe, some which come close to truth.  But truth is not relative.  You can say that certain things, like my long hair, were once true but are no longer so.  You can also say that certain things are true in some areas but not others, like I am currently on vacation but others are not.  So there is some relativity to truth.  But I think that it is a disservice to truth to mistakenly call something true when what is actually meant is belief.

I spent my childhood and early teens in the "show me" state.  There was a certain amount of pride about that, until I moved to an environment where many things which I took as fact because people told me they were true turned out to be false.  But childhood habits are sometimes hard to break.  Well into adulthood, I continued to discover how things which I assumed to be true were not.  The quality of communication is corrupted by the misuse and misunderstanding of what truth and facts are.

This reminds me of the Fargo film.  It opens with "THIS IS A TRUE STORY.  The events depicted in the film took place in Minnesota in 1987.  At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed.  Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred."  This is almost completely false.  It was eventually revealed that an entirely different case was an inspiration for the movie.  A woman was killed by her husband in 1886 in Connecticut and chopped up through a wood chipper.  That's way different from what the opening statement says.  Why did the Coen brothers make the statement in the movie?  They said that this was a device for manipulating the audience.  I think that this is horrible.  It's as bad or worse than taking an actual event and changing the details for entertainment or political purposes.  These manipulations happen so much that a lot of people think that things happened which didn't, at least not as was portrayed, like Noah's flood and the Exodus.

The last speaker in the TED talk compilation which I started this was completely confusing belief and truth.  In the end, he was basically saying that every ones individual beliefs are as valid as everyone else's.Now, I am not saying that all truth is absolute.  A lot of things are relative to regions and people.  But that does not mean that all belief's are equal.

Let's look at a non-supernatural spectrum of beliefs.  There are, from time to time, unidentified flying objects.  As a radar operator in the Navy, I had direct experience with this.  I have a bit more validation than people who simply believe that there are UFO's.  But simply a belief in UFO's is not necessarily that far from what is real, since it is, at it's base, an acknowledgement that there are some things in the air which have not been identified.  Now, on the other end of this spectrum are people who assume that UFO's are extraterrestrial. Most of these people don't need any evidence.  They simply believe that extraterrestrials visit our planet.  A believe that there are some things which have not been identified is quite different than connecting the unidentified objects to beings with no confirmation as to their existence.  How can it be said that these are equally valid beliefs?  By the way, I actually do believe that there is a possibility that intelligent life beyond Earth.  But I cannot be abolutist about that nor can I attribute Earthly phenomena to them.  Just as this spectrum illustrates unequal validity in a spectrum of beliefs, I see the same thing in supernatural beliefs.  Accepting the possibility of a super powerful being who may have sparked life is a far cry from believing that this being requires you to perform rituals and obey strict rules with no explanation.

What is physical?

I have encountered people who argue against defining things from a physical perspective by trying to restrict physicalism to physics.  I have seen claims that biology, psychology and so on are beyond the physical as defined by known physics.  From there, some of these people move to metaphysical beliefs such as the mind being some kind of supernatural thing separate from the brain.  But we are not talking about just physics when we talk about the physical.  Physics relates to an aspect of the study of the physical.  It does not mean that the physical can only be defined as what physics defines.  Things need to include what's known in physics but it does not end there.  The physical purely as what physics defines is a misdirection. So I thought that it may be useful to clear the air.  When I refer to the physical, I am referring to physical reality.  I could use the word realism but that is used in a lot of contexts.  Let's look at it this way.  We all have a common realm in which we can interact.  We define this as physical reality.  We can study various aspects of this reality.  I suggest that anything which begins from somewhere outside what's known in reality is less tenable.  Ultimately, things need to fit in or have a relationship to physical reality.  If something outside known reality is posited, then the idea needs to have a consistent connection, at least in the theoretical, back to known reality.  As new knowledge arises, the ideas need to be modified to fit the known.  But a lot of people believe that supernatural beliefs do not need to follow any of this.  But there is a question which I have yet to get a good answer.  "Why not?"

Starting points

Let's get this over with early.  One acquaintance said that all would be clear if I turn my life over to Jesus.  Been there, done that.  I was raised with strong christian influences.  I was even in an understudy for the ministry.  I gave sermons in churches.

I began to doubt Christian beliefs in my late teens.  I became a physicalist in my 20's.  I switched my starting perceptions to the known physical reality.  I continue to do so today.  There does not appear to be any reality to gods, souls and the afterlife.

I was raised with a mother and older brother with mental problems. I did not realize until the early part of my time in the Navy that  I was adversely influenced by them.  I had certain behaviors and mannerisms which I had learned from them.  I studied some psychology while corrected some of those things which where adverse to the relationships and other things needed at the time.  I learned about how children are heavily influenced by their immediate surroundings.  Even thought processes are altered by local influences.  The most local influences in my early life were a mother and brother with mental problems.  I came to wonder why god created us in such a way that we can so easily pick up bad influences while young.  This was the first seed of doubt.

This got me thinking about the other major influence in my early life.  That was religion, specifically the Christian religion in the form of first Pentecostal and then Baptist denominations.  I saw the different religious influences while overseas.  I realized that most people's religious beliefs are heavily influenced by what is given to them as children.  They did not believe in my deities because they were raised to believe in others.  Someone in one of the countries posed a question about how I know that my religious influences are any more truthful than the ones which I reject.  I came to realize that I really did not.  I was conditioned to believe certain things.  Could I actually validate the beliefs as knowledge in real things?

I had done more than most Christians I knew.  I had read the christian bible, old and new testaments, in its entirety twice.  I had read it 2 more times while skipping all the begats.  But I realized that these readings were from completely, unquestioningly inside the belief.  They were also at the same time when I was being influenced by mentally disadvantages relatives.

I decided to step out of the believer's perspective and read the bible without assuming the truthfulness of what was written.  I eventually realized that the bible is not what I was raised to believe.  It is a compilation of written and verbal stories from primitive people who did not even know why the sun sets.  I do not find it to be useful in the morals department.  There are actually some things rather antithetical to ethics.  It's far from being historically accurate for either natural or human history.  I don't even find anything that's particularly good poetically. 

I tried out other religions but eventually realized that most of them have a common fundamental flaw.  They do not begin with knowledge.  They begin with a top down assumption that supernatural elements exist.  If that is flawed,  then most that develops from that assumption may be flawed.

So I switched to a more real perspective.  Starting from the known physical, I build up my knowledge from there.  So far, I find no evidence for gods, souls or an afterlife.  And I cannot approach it from faith.  That seems to simply be a variation of conditioning.

Where do I go from here?

I was doing some writing about my past, sort of a memoir.  It's been something which I've worked on for a while.  I'm not sure what I will do with it.  Right now, it's more about getting things recorded for my own personal use.  Here's a quick synopsis.

I was born to parents who could not make their relationship work out beyond my 3rd year of life.  I was raised with both a mother and brother who had mental problems.  Our family's primary income was from my maternal grandmother's work and later retirement, as well as child support from my father.  My father would visit for a weekend every 2 - 4 years.  My childhood had difficulties.  A mother and brother with mental problems, religious fanaticism, beatings. 

I went into the Navy at 17.  There were some issues due to some people's attitude toward some of my behaviors and mannerisms.  In some ways, I was a bit of a Gomer Pile.  It took a while to neutralize the influences of retarded mother and brother.  But things were eventually worked out and things were progressing well.  I thought of making a career in the Navy.  But I decided for reasons too lengthy to describe here to leave the Navy after the first enlistment was up.  I reached E-5 (PO2) before getting out.  I did 1 West Pac and some other excursions during the 4 years.  I worked for the Navy as a civilian firefighter for another year before deciding to travel for a while.

The civilian job ended after a year because the project was turned over to active duty Navy.  I decided to travel for a while.  I intended the travels to be for just 1 - 2 years.  But it wound up being for around 7 years.  I eventually settled in Santa Barbara, CA.  I did residential maintenance for a while.  I moved onto working in automotive for several years.  But it was a corporate company which made some mistakes.  I should have left a couple years before but had grown too settled in the job.  I eventually moved to the printing industry, staying with 1 company for 10 years.  Trying to stay with a dying company, I transferred to San Diego.  A triple whammy occurred.  I left the job of 10 years, had a relationship end badly and got severely beaten by 3 guys.  This all put me into a bit of a mental fog.  I up and ran away to Texas.

Why Texas?  I sometimes think that it was the concussion from the beating.  Well, I managed to get a good job and I think that I will probably retire with this company.  But the question remains.  "Where do I go from here?"

My life experiences could be described as diverse.  It has also been described as chaotic.  Taking the starting point into account, it definitely could have been worse.  But I also could have done better.  I did not inherit the physical causes of my mother's and brother's mental problems.  But there were influences.  I had managed to eliminate most of them.  But I believe that some of my mistakes and misperceptions were from residual affects from them.  I've had successes and accomplishments.  I've had good relationships and experiences.  But there have been stormy periods.  The end result is hard to describe.

I'm a 50-something who is still trying to work things out.  Most people find me pleasant and, at times, exciting to have around.  But I have difficulties maintaining long term relationships.  I am now physically active but have substantial room for improvement.  I am fairly sane but still feel influences from the more chaotic aspects of my past.

As I work out what to do to have things go in the direction which I want and where they should go for the remainder of my life, I though that some of the processes may be useful to other people.  So I will use parts of this blog to record relevant aspects of my life.  Part of it is also to help myself by recording things better.  I also think that some aspects of this may be helpful to others who are working to change parts of their lives.

Pax / Astra series

I am reading Andre Norton's Pax / Astra series.  This series contains 2 novels, written in the 1950's.  The first is The Stars Are Ours and the second one is Star Born.  Descriptions and links are below.  One thing which came to mind is how events in the Star Born novel compares to our involvement with questionable leaders and factions in other countries.  Afghanistan in particular comes to mind.  The novel involves Earth people who go to a planet which is inhabited by multiple intelligent species.  The Earth people initially side with one group who turn out to be bad people.

The Stars Are Ours
Earth in 2500AD is no place for a young man with a dream of freedom. And Dard Nordisis worse off than most. His brother was killed for covert activities as a Free Scientist in a world where science is outlawed and blamed for all evils. Now Dard and his niece are hunted and trying to find his brother's friends before their enemies find them and execute them as well. The stakes are high-- he can be shot down and killed like his brother or escape to the stars in a spaceship that the Free Scientists have built in secret!
Audiobook link

Star Born
When Raf Kurbi's spaceship from Earth burst into unexplored skies of the far planet Astra, it was made welcome by the natives of a once-mighty metropolis. But Kurbi was unaware of three vital things: (1) that Astra already harbored an Earth colony - descended from refugees from the world of the previous century; (2) that these men and women were facing the greatest danger of their existence from a new outburst of the inhuman fiends who had once tyrannized Astra; and (3) that the natives who were buying Kurbi's science know-how were those very fiends - and their intentions were implacably deadly for all humans, whether Earth born or star born! Much of the planet's hopes lie with young Dalgard Nordis and his companion, Sssuri, a telepathic native of this alien world. If they fail, their planet will be subjugated and enslaved by that inhuman race.
Audiobook link

Here is a link to a combined ebook at Amazon.

Humans as unfinished products

I recently read Steven Pinker's How the Mind Works.  I found it to be informative and thought provoking.  One of the thoughts which came to me is that humans are unfinished products.  Our brains are a mix of new and old.  I know that this is not entirely accurate since the old parts have evolved along with the new parts.  But the older parts of the brain have functions and neurochemistry which are still similar to what other animals have.  These brain elements influence and are influenced by the parts which are exclusively human.  As advanced as humans have become, the ways which our brains work are still developing.  The cognitive abilities mix and are sometimes overwritten by the more animalistic neurochemical responses.

I think that a danger with modern humans is that there is too little understanding of how our fairly new brain has some problems with the interactions of the parts.

Don't stop learning or thinking

I saw a talk by a person who was saying to stop learning and start thinking.  The talk was problematic.  Learning and thinking are intricately involved.  My experience and reading indicates to me that excluding either leads people into false perspectives.  Just knowing things without adequate cognitive skills seems to stifle progress.  I have the opinion that some of the industrial and commercial abuses come from not taking cognition far enough.  in those cases, I refer to the cognitive ability to work out enough of the consequences of things.  But emphasizing thinking or rationalizing (not always the same thing) without adequate knowledge is foolish.  There is certainly bad "learning" where people are given false information.  But not looking at what is physically known and actually proven leads to pseudo knowledge.

I have doubts that there really is a true separation between learning and thinking.  But it is clear to me that there are bad learning and bad thinking.  But I think that the quality of both learning and thinking are tied together.

Speaking of bad learning and thinking, Some media are seriously foul.  We have commercials which tout things as fact which were basically made up.  We have "journalists", bloggers and vloggers stating things as fact which have either not been proven or have been proven wrong.  The 10% brain usage is an example  Even a casual study of actual neuroscience or biopsychology shows that the idea that we only use 10% of our brains is a myth.  Yet this is touted as fact  by many sources.

Wealthy Versus the Poor

I attended a group discussion in Second Life today.  The topic was economics.  Some of the attendees seemed to be a bit absolutist about the evilness of wealthy people.  I noted that things are not always that black and white.  Not all wealthy people got wealthy by abusing the poor and some poor people are poor because of their state of mind and other personal faults.  This did not go over well with some.

Now, I am not wealthy.  I was once quite poor.  My poverty was due to a combination of inadequate education, bad social conditioning and a lack of focus.  When in that level of poverty, I saw a variety of people who were poor for a variety of reasons.  I knew of nobody who was poor purely because of abuse by the wealthy.  There were some cases where bad decisions by the better off did affect some of them.  But the reasons for their and my poverty were mostly a complex mixture of things.  I eventually stabilized my life and worked up to a middle class income.  But it took a lot of changes on my part.

I once had some access to the lives of the wealthy.  This was through some of the sons and daughters of wealthy parents.  Some of the parents were away a lot. The offspring would have parties and other events at the mansions when the parents were away.  I had a chance to see some aspects of the wealthy which showed me that the sources of wealth are at least as complex as the sources of poverty.  It is true that some wealthy people have done really bad things and others have a mixed record.  It is also true that there are wealthy people who are quite negligent.  Even too many of the people who made their wealth by hard work and who try to treat all people respectfully do not do things as well as they should.  For instance, once father made his wealth in some kind of environmental business which I do not recall.  The son and daughter both claimed that the father cared for the environment.  Yet there was no solar panels at the house and they had multiple large vehicles.

The point is that discussions about how to get people out of "poverty" need to include a discussion of the various contributing factors and not simply lay blame on one side or the other.  That is not to say that we should not place blame where it is due.  But we need more honesty in the conversations.

Music Appreciation

I love music. I listen to music most of the time. I like a wide range of genres. Although not so much into country and rap, I have those genres in my collection as well. Although I have my musical preferences, I don't knock any music. If people like it, it's OK by me. There are just 2 areas where I sometimes have issues.

Although I have no issues with musical styles, I sometimes have issues with lyrics. For instance, I have a large heavy metal collection. But some bands' lyrics are too negative. Violent and hateful lyrics are a turn-off for me. That's not to say that some of the negative lyrics don't always fit. They sometimes do. There are real issues in the world and some musicians attempt to portray them in various ways. I'm OK with that. I do like provocative and progressive lyrics. But I also like light weight lyrics. I don't think that lyrics have to mean much.  In general, I tend to treat vocals as instruments.  So I tend not to focus so much on what is being said.  But I try to at least know what the general focus is.  I tend to not want to support people, including musicians, who promote violence, hatred, racism, sexism, supernaturalism or eccessive emphasis on drugs. Some say that I take what people say too seriously.  But I think that lyrics are more important than some people think.  Songs tend to be repeated. Over time, lyrics are sometimes incorporaterd into people's thoughts.

I have problems with sound invasion.  Most people are respectful of others enough to adjust their volumes to levels which do no become invasive to neighbors. Although I make no judgement on musical styles, everyone has preferences. Plus people who play music or TV so loud that neighbors hear them disregard the point that others may be listening to something else. I will admit that some music sound great loud.  But living near people, like in apartments, requires respect for neighbors.

Devil's in the details

With all the US budget issues, I thought it was interesting to discover that a government department spent $630,000 for purchasing Facebook fans from click farms.  The department stopped the practice after its inspector general criticized the expenditure.  This came from an 01.05.14 Associated Press article about 'click farms'.