I came across an inspiring blog post, " The Dysletic Atheist" in which the writer, jon_poson26, recounts how as a child he struggled with a learning disability but was finally rescued by a retired teacher who took an interest in his plight and became his mentor. Interestingly, the author's handicap was confined to reading but did not interfere with his math and science capabilities.
I can relate to this story, but with a twist. In grade and high school I did well in reading and writing but sucked at mathematics (What! A Jew who can't do math?). In high school I limped through linear algebra and crashed and burned in geometry. Based on my overall family background, this deficit is puzzling. Some of my relatives hold Ph.D.'s in math and physics. Others are—or were (now retired)—in other professions that also require high numeracy and logic skills. But if talent for math were a family inheritance, I was left out of the will.
However, in high school I did well enough in other courses to be recommended for an English honors course which I successfully completed. I vividly remember being the only student in that class that semester (or ever?) who due to my math deficiency was simultaneously enrolled in a" math-lite" remedial physical science course rather than chemistry or physics, both of which require an advanced algebra background. In other words, among my peers there was usually a correlation between math and science skills on one hand and reading and writing proficiency on the other. In that regard I was an oddball and hence can fully appreciate the somewhat parallel although opposite predicament experienced by the writer of "Dyslectic Atheist". Looking back I wonder why a school guidance counselor didn't pick up on this anomaly. After all I was too young and trusting of authority to question the matter on my own.
When I started college, I was required to take a remedial math course which I managed to pass with a "C", and after several attempts I finally passed the examination that would have enabled me to enroll in a college algebra course. However, I wound up not finishing college (the reason that I dropped out was not related to academic performance) and so never got around to taking that subject.
As jon_poson26's story shows, sometimes all it takes is a certain chemistry—a connection—with a teacher to impart a feeling of hope and turn things around. If an educator is not only learned in his field but can also instill enthusiasm for the subject matter and a sense of self confidence in his or her students, that is the mark of a true professional. Such was the teacher who had enough faith in my abilities to get me into an honors course as well as the one who taught that class itself and likewise offered encouragement.
Reflecting further on "The Dysletic Atheist" has made me wonder what direction my own life might otherwise have taken had I also been fortunate enough to get a dedicated teacher or mentor to help me overcome my difficulties with mathematics. No doubt It would have improved my feelings of self-worth which were already low as well. In fact I dare say it was the lack of self-confidence that also kept me in the thrall of God-belief for so many years. In both cases at the time I didn't catch on how the logic of complicated higher math formulas and the reasoning behind atheism have one thing in common: If you take the time to analyze them, they both add up.
I'm a senior citizen now, and one thing on my "bucket list" is to complete my degree. If I do so, the very first class that I will take will be a college math course, whether or not I'm fortunate enough to do so in a class room setting under the tutelage of a skilled instructor, or via the Internet instead. I may even try for credits by taking equivalency test such as CLEP.
Whichever of these options I select, I'll need a great deal of review and preparation. But now that my mind and spirit are no longer chained by some of my previous problems, especially the repression and "ill-logic" of theism, I believe that I can better focus on the task at hand and have a shot at achieving my no longer impossible dream.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
Cognitive Dissonance: My Stressed-Out Sympathies for Israel
As is typical for Jews of my generation, since I was a child I have believed in and supported Israel and the ideals of Zionism. At one time it made pragmatic sense to have a national haven for the Jewish people to return to in light of historical Antisemitism culminating in the Holocaust. Also, supporting Israel was an ace in the hole of sorts--a place of refuge if hatred of Jews were to become as rampant in the U.S as it had been in pre-war Europe.
Equally important, Israel was founded by secularists not just as a Jewish state but a democratic one as well.. Also, at its inception, Israel's very existence was threatened by its hostile Arab neighbors, so it was truly an underdog state. But that was then, and this is now. Times have changed, and I find myself questioning my position of heretofore unwavering support for several reasons.
To begin with, in recent years the country has fallen under the control of the right wing and Orthodox minority who thanks in part to the parliamentary system of government holds a disproportionate amount of political power over the secular majority of Israeli citizens. I find the intolerance and aggressive policies of the Orthodox and its other rightist allies in government abhorrent, in terms of its stranglehold in such matters of conversion to Judaism, marriage, and its refusal to recognize and share power with other branches of Judaism within Israel. Equally obnoxious is the attitude of the Orthodox Jewish establishment in Israel towards non-Orthodox Jews in the Diaspora, which is "You must keep supporting us with your donations and your political support , but don't expect acceptance or recognition from us; not now, not ever."
And in the topic of political support, I think that it's high time for Israel to shed its over-dependence on American aid on both government level as well as from private sources such as AIPAC which as a lobbying organization has itself become too big for its britches. As previously mentioned, Israel is no longer a 97 pound weakling among nations. It is a first world country with a sound industrial base, a kick-ass military, and an eminent producer of software which is highly in demand worldwide as well. So it should not keep putting its hand out for financial assistance.
In addition Israel needs to quit searching for love in all the wrong places. For example there is the matter of the Israeli Government's and Orthodox Jews' climbing into bed with American Christian fundamentalists who support Israel's existence, yet are nevertheless anti-Semitic. If that sounds like a twisted doctrine (which of course it is), here is the "reasoning" behind it: Christianity, especially evangelicals, believe that the establishment ofthe State of Israel heralds second coming of Christ and of God's Judgment Day. At that time those who have not accepted Jesus as their savior will be condemned to hell. This is especially so for the Jews who as a people who "betrayed Jesus". They can only escape God's wrath by seeing the error of their ways and converting to Christianity sooner rather than later. In other words, these Christians refuse to recognize Judaism in its own right and consider Israel's existence only as as a means to an end (as in "End of Days"). How can the leaders of Israel and Orthodox Judaism be so shameless as to accept these people as "allies"? To add insult to inury, Israeli Orthodox Jewish leaders extend a recogniton to these Christian extremists that they refuse to grant to non-Orthodox Jewish movements inside or outside of Israel.
Speaking of acceptance, there is a branch of Orthodox Jews in Israel, the haredim, who refuse to recognizethe State of Israel's existence because according to their belief, Israel will not become a nation until the messiah comes. Thus as a human created establishment, the country is an illegitimate state. Yet these people for the most part do not work for a living. Instead they spend their time in religious studies, are exempt from military service which is compulsory for most other Israeli citizens, and--get this--receive financial support in the form of welfare from the very government that they reject.
As an atheist, I have a hard time coping with all this religious craziness. Yet, in spite of everything, I feel that turning away from Israel--and from my relatives living there as well-- would be not just disloyal, but by default would put me on the same street as anti-Zionists who claim only to oppose Israel's existence and want to drive the Jews into the sea. Certainly, there are people who oppose Zionism and who do so without harboring a hatred for Jews and Israel. But for the most part "Zionist" is used pejoratively by Muslims and other anti-Semites as a code word for "Jew".
Perhaps it was the Six Day War in 1967 that showed Israel was a powerhouse of military strength and not to be taken lightly, even by its enemies. It also brought the Palestinian question issue into the world spotlight, although that issue had been festering in one form or another for years prior, and of course ever since. There is plenty of blame to go around. Israel has been wrong and ham-handed in many ways that it has dealt this matter. But a major source of the problem is the Arabs' decision to leave Palestinian refugees to rot in squalid camps and exploit them as pawns instead of absorbing them into the Arab nations as Israel did for Jewish refugees who were expelled from those same countries as soon as Israel achieved nationhood in 1948.
It's one thing to criticize and second guess Israel from the outside (and by someone like myself who has never even been there). But its quite another from within. Please see "We Have Lost Our Way", a beautifully written essay by an Israeli about her country's wayward policies and culture . The sadness that the writer expresses over Israel's straying from its compassionate Zionist roots is almost palpable. On the other end of the spectrum is an equally moving "Only Israel". This video rightly condemns the hypocrisy of those in the international community who criticize Israel for the very acts that they themselves likewise commit. Yet why does Israel frequently shoot itself in the foot and put itself in untenable positions in the first place? In doing so it needlessly furnishes ideological ammunition to its enemies and even alienates many Jews as well. (See "American JewsWho Reject Zionism Say Events Aid Cause".) For Israel to then say that it is no less guilty of international law violations than its detractors is a poor rationalization. Two wrongs don't make a right.
One noteworthy ideal of the aforementioned early Zionist roots was the willingness of the pioneers in Israel in the late 19th century through the mid 20th century to tackle menial jobs and perform hard physical labor required to build the country. In time as the country prospered, this scut work was handed off to Palestinians laborers. After the Intifada when these workers became scarce, the country began importing workers from other places such as those in Southeast Asia. Sad to say that these laborers often face such abuses as unsafe working conditions and unpaid wages. By turning a blind eye to the exploitation of these workers by ruthless employers.("Israel Grows Uneasy Over Reliance on Migrant Labor"), that country is following the lead of its Arab neighbors who are infamous for their inhumane treatment of migrant laborers. I reside in the Philippines, and tales of horror abound in the local media about Filipino overseas workers who have suffered at the hands of their Arab employers. Is Israel on the slippery slope to that same kind of barbaric behavior? And what are the all powerful Orthodox Jewish leaders who are self-proclaimed experts on morality doing to stop these violations of human dignity?
In short, many of Israel's missteps and inconsistent policies are the result of the delusions of its religious establishment. If it could overthrow this pernicious influence, the Jewish state would very likely become a more humane, coherent, andprogressive society. In turn it might regain the worldwide respect that it once enjoyed.
Suggested reading: "What Is Israel Doing Wrong?" I happened to read this essay after I wrote this post and found that many of the views of the writer, David Solway, are identical to mine. However, many are diametrically opposed. (More cognitive dissonance!).
Equally important, Israel was founded by secularists not just as a Jewish state but a democratic one as well.. Also, at its inception, Israel's very existence was threatened by its hostile Arab neighbors, so it was truly an underdog state. But that was then, and this is now. Times have changed, and I find myself questioning my position of heretofore unwavering support for several reasons.
To begin with, in recent years the country has fallen under the control of the right wing and Orthodox minority who thanks in part to the parliamentary system of government holds a disproportionate amount of political power over the secular majority of Israeli citizens. I find the intolerance and aggressive policies of the Orthodox and its other rightist allies in government abhorrent, in terms of its stranglehold in such matters of conversion to Judaism, marriage, and its refusal to recognize and share power with other branches of Judaism within Israel. Equally obnoxious is the attitude of the Orthodox Jewish establishment in Israel towards non-Orthodox Jews in the Diaspora, which is "You must keep supporting us with your donations and your political support , but don't expect acceptance or recognition from us; not now, not ever."
And in the topic of political support, I think that it's high time for Israel to shed its over-dependence on American aid on both government level as well as from private sources such as AIPAC which as a lobbying organization has itself become too big for its britches. As previously mentioned, Israel is no longer a 97 pound weakling among nations. It is a first world country with a sound industrial base, a kick-ass military, and an eminent producer of software which is highly in demand worldwide as well. So it should not keep putting its hand out for financial assistance.
In addition Israel needs to quit searching for love in all the wrong places. For example there is the matter of the Israeli Government's and Orthodox Jews' climbing into bed with American Christian fundamentalists who support Israel's existence, yet are nevertheless anti-Semitic. If that sounds like a twisted doctrine (which of course it is), here is the "reasoning" behind it: Christianity, especially evangelicals, believe that the establishment of
Speaking of acceptance, there is a branch of Orthodox Jews in Israel, the haredim, who refuse to recognize
As an atheist, I have a hard time coping with all this religious craziness. Yet, in spite of everything, I feel that turning away from Israel--and from my relatives living there as well-- would be not just disloyal, but by default would put me on the same street as anti-Zionists who claim only to oppose Israel's existence and want to drive the Jews into the sea. Certainly, there are people who oppose Zionism and who do so without harboring a hatred for Jews and Israel. But for the most part "Zionist" is used pejoratively by Muslims and other anti-Semites as a code word for "Jew".
Perhaps it was the Six Day War in 1967 that showed Israel was a powerhouse of military strength and not to be taken lightly, even by its enemies. It also brought the Palestinian question issue into the world spotlight, although that issue had been festering in one form or another for years prior, and of course ever since. There is plenty of blame to go around. Israel has been wrong and ham-handed in many ways that it has dealt this matter. But a major source of the problem is the Arabs' decision to leave Palestinian refugees to rot in squalid camps and exploit them as pawns instead of absorbing them into the Arab nations as Israel did for Jewish refugees who were expelled from those same countries as soon as Israel achieved nationhood in 1948.
It's one thing to criticize and second guess Israel from the outside (and by someone like myself who has never even been there). But its quite another from within. Please see "We Have Lost Our Way", a beautifully written essay by an Israeli about her country's wayward policies and culture . The sadness that the writer expresses over Israel's straying from its compassionate Zionist roots is almost palpable. On the other end of the spectrum is an equally moving "Only Israel". This video rightly condemns the hypocrisy of those in the international community who criticize Israel for the very acts that they themselves likewise commit. Yet why does Israel frequently shoot itself in the foot and put itself in untenable positions in the first place? In doing so it needlessly furnishes ideological ammunition to its enemies and even alienates many Jews as well. (See "American JewsWho Reject Zionism Say Events Aid Cause".) For Israel to then say that it is no less guilty of international law violations than its detractors is a poor rationalization. Two wrongs don't make a right.
One noteworthy ideal of the aforementioned early Zionist roots was the willingness of the pioneers in Israel in the late 19th century through the mid 20th century to tackle menial jobs and perform hard physical labor required to build the country. In time as the country prospered, this scut work was handed off to Palestinians laborers. After the Intifada when these workers became scarce, the country began importing workers from other places such as those in Southeast Asia. Sad to say that these laborers often face such abuses as unsafe working conditions and unpaid wages. By turning a blind eye to the exploitation of these workers by ruthless employers.("Israel Grows Uneasy Over Reliance on Migrant Labor"), that country is following the lead of its Arab neighbors who are infamous for their inhumane treatment of migrant laborers. I reside in the Philippines, and tales of horror abound in the local media about Filipino overseas workers who have suffered at the hands of their Arab employers. Is Israel on the slippery slope to that same kind of barbaric behavior? And what are the all powerful Orthodox Jewish leaders who are self-proclaimed experts on morality doing to stop these violations of human dignity?
In short, many of Israel's missteps and inconsistent policies are the result of the delusions of its religious establishment. If it could overthrow this pernicious influence, the Jewish state would very likely become a more humane, coherent, and
Suggested reading: "What Is Israel Doing Wrong?" I happened to read this essay after I wrote this post and found that many of the views of the writer, David Solway, are identical to mine. However, many are diametrically opposed. (More cognitive dissonance!).
Friday, June 18, 2010
An Open Letter to The President of The Philippines, Benigno S. Aquino III
Dear President Aquino,
As an expatriate American residing in the Philippines, I followed the election here last month which you won handily. I offer you my congratulations and best wishes on your victory.
I find interesting parallels and similarities between that contest and the 2008 Presidential race in the United States. When President Barack Obama was elected by an overwhelming majority, the millions of Americans who had supported and voted for him, myself included, were elated. After the the long dark night of the repressive and dishonest Bush administration, we looked forward to a new day and the progressive agenda for our country that Obama had promised in his campaign.
I'm sure the millions of voters who elected you now hold a similar trust, in this case that you will lead the Philippines out of the wilderness of corruption and poverty; or based on the likelihood that such a change might take generations to accomplish, that you will at least make a strong impact against these twin evils and set the country on the road to brighter future.
I hope that you do not sacrifice your goals in the name of unrequited bipartisanship and that you do not make unreciprocated concessions to your opponents in order to needlessly placate them.
I hope that should an ecological disaster strike the country, whether natural or man made, you will exercise decisive leadership immediately. If the calamity was the result of human error or negligence, I hope that you will immediately hold the perpetrator(s) accountable and not allow them to stall and make excuses while the situation worsens. If the violators acted in collusion with the officials in government department that oversees and monitors their operations, I hope that you will pursue the latter as well.
I hope that you will order an investigation into the crimes such as treason and human rights violations that were committed by your predecessor and whoever else was involved in these abuses no matter how powerful or influential and that if they are convicted, you will use the power of your office to let the chips fall where they may.
I hope that you will reverse the population control policies of the last administration and that you will not be intimidated by religious extremists who want to impose their will on those who want to make their own personal choices in such matters as family planning,contraception, and sexual identity.
I hope that you will change the economic policies of the previous president, specifically that you will back a policy requiring businesses and wealthy individuals to pay their fair share of income taxes, and that the resulting revenue will be used to rehabilitate and expand the country's infrastructure and improve the educational system.
Remember, Mr. President, you were elected by a landslide. You have a mandate from the people to make significant changes in the political landscape and an opportunity to turn the Philippines around.
I hope that you will utilize it.
Very truly yours,
Rick Levy
As an expatriate American residing in the Philippines, I followed the election here last month which you won handily. I offer you my congratulations and best wishes on your victory.
I find interesting parallels and similarities between that contest and the 2008 Presidential race in the United States. When President Barack Obama was elected by an overwhelming majority, the millions of Americans who had supported and voted for him, myself included, were elated. After the the long dark night of the repressive and dishonest Bush administration, we looked forward to a new day and the progressive agenda for our country that Obama had promised in his campaign.
I'm sure the millions of voters who elected you now hold a similar trust, in this case that you will lead the Philippines out of the wilderness of corruption and poverty; or based on the likelihood that such a change might take generations to accomplish, that you will at least make a strong impact against these twin evils and set the country on the road to brighter future.
I hope that you do not sacrifice your goals in the name of unrequited bipartisanship and that you do not make unreciprocated concessions to your opponents in order to needlessly placate them.
I hope that should an ecological disaster strike the country, whether natural or man made, you will exercise decisive leadership immediately. If the calamity was the result of human error or negligence, I hope that you will immediately hold the perpetrator(s) accountable and not allow them to stall and make excuses while the situation worsens. If the violators acted in collusion with the officials in government department that oversees and monitors their operations, I hope that you will pursue the latter as well.
I hope that you will order an investigation into the crimes such as treason and human rights violations that were committed by your predecessor and whoever else was involved in these abuses no matter how powerful or influential and that if they are convicted, you will use the power of your office to let the chips fall where they may.
I hope that you will reverse the population control policies of the last administration and that you will not be intimidated by religious extremists who want to impose their will on those who want to make their own personal choices in such matters as family planning,contraception, and sexual identity.
I hope that you will change the economic policies of the previous president, specifically that you will back a policy requiring businesses and wealthy individuals to pay their fair share of income taxes, and that the resulting revenue will be used to rehabilitate and expand the country's infrastructure and improve the educational system.
Remember, Mr. President, you were elected by a landslide. You have a mandate from the people to make significant changes in the political landscape and an opportunity to turn the Philippines around.
I hope that you will utilize it.
Very truly yours,
Rick Levy
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
The Church's Damnable Damage Control
As a rule, when I create a post I don't knowingly duplicate a topic from another blog site, especially a recent one from the blog list in my sidebar, in this case "Atheist Revolution". I believe that doing so is intellectually lazy. However, due to the gravity of the issue and the enormity of the report relating to that topic as related by that esteemable site, I'm making an exception. I feel that it's imperative to bring this matter to those of you who may not have read this story.
So here's the deal. Just when I thought that the Catholic Church pedophilia scandal couldn't get any uglier than what's already been revealed, I was proven wrong. To see what I mean, you can either click on the above link to "Atheist Revolution", or click here to read the article that the post will refer you to.
But wait. There's more. Just to show how depraved and cynical that the Church hierarchy, whom millions of people throughout the world place their trust, has become, please read this post from "Atheist Revolution".
BTW now that I've introduced you to "Atheist Revolution", I hope that you will join me as a regular reader of that site. The author "Vjack", is extremely prolific and comes up with at least one provocative new topic almost every day.
So here's the deal. Just when I thought that the Catholic Church pedophilia scandal couldn't get any uglier than what's already been revealed, I was proven wrong. To see what I mean, you can either click on the above link to "Atheist Revolution", or click here to read the article that the post will refer you to.
But wait. There's more. Just to show how depraved and cynical that the Church hierarchy, whom millions of people throughout the world place their trust, has become, please read this post from "Atheist Revolution".
BTW now that I've introduced you to "Atheist Revolution", I hope that you will join me as a regular reader of that site. The author "Vjack", is extremely prolific and comes up with at least one provocative new topic almost every day.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Not Even Dust In The Wind
According to scientific evidence, our existence as living beings requires the right mix of chemical ingredients and "Goldilocks" conditions inside and on the surface of our planet and in the surrounding cosmos, e.g. "just right" surface temperature, atmospheric conditions, the distance of Earth from the sun, etc. (And speaking of our sun, there is really nothing special about it. It's just an ordinary star on the edge of the Milky Way and just another face in the crowd, indistinguishable from the billion or so other stars [some of which may also have inhabited planets] that populate our galaxy and from those in the billions of other galaxies in the cosmos; so much for the notion of the world's and man's special place in creation).
Despite the staggering odds against the above mix of circumstances serendipitously coming together, this extraordinary convergence of events did happen. Thus life in its simplest form began on our world. And, as a result of the path that evolution happened to take once life did start, humankind is here to tell the tale. All in all, the whole thing is pretty amazing.
Yet in a sense life is abstract and is not the same as being alive. Although humans are hardly even specks against the backdrop of the universe, as sentient beings we have to ask ourselves what it means to be alive and have awareness, i.e. to look outward from the inside of our minds. However, we have nothing against which we can compare existence. There's no evidence of life after death or for past lives through reincarnation prior to the time of our conception. So when we say that it's wonderful to be alive and that we should be thankful for being born; well, being born and alive versus--what? Nothingness? If that's the case then had we not been born, then how would we know the difference? And when we die, we will return to oblivion, most of us to be eventually forgotten.
This is not to trivialize love of life or the survival instinct that drives it, just to put matters into perspective. I believe that while we are here we should try to enjoy ourselves constructively, enrich our knowledge of the world around us, and seek an understanding of the human condition. I further believe that to achieve these ends, we need to reject such shallow values as greed and materialism. After all, the thrill that many people derive from acquiring and possessing things won't add even an extra second to their lives.
Of course, theists, especially the fundamentalists, have solved this the issue of man's insignificance by inventing a god who they insist brought the universe into existence, created man in his image, gave us life through reproduction, and a soul which will be taken to an eternal afterlife when we die. They will not listen to evidence to the contrary perhaps because they cannot handle the concept of a world without a supreme being pulling the strings. It would be tantamount to jumping into an abyss.
Despite its limitations, the great thing about our existence is that no two humans are identical. We are of course individuals. As such I believe that it is incumbent upon us as a society to ensure that people's basic needs are addressed so that each of us can flourish and be productive. By doing so we can celebrate life even as we acknowledge and accept our role as bit players in the eternally unfolding pageantry of the universe.
Despite the staggering odds against the above mix of circumstances serendipitously coming together, this extraordinary convergence of events did happen. Thus life in its simplest form began on our world. And, as a result of the path that evolution happened to take once life did start, humankind is here to tell the tale. All in all, the whole thing is pretty amazing.
Yet in a sense life is abstract and is not the same as being alive. Although humans are hardly even specks against the backdrop of the universe, as sentient beings we have to ask ourselves what it means to be alive and have awareness, i.e. to look outward from the inside of our minds. However, we have nothing against which we can compare existence. There's no evidence of life after death or for past lives through reincarnation prior to the time of our conception. So when we say that it's wonderful to be alive and that we should be thankful for being born; well, being born and alive versus--what? Nothingness? If that's the case then had we not been born, then how would we know the difference? And when we die, we will return to oblivion, most of us to be eventually forgotten.
This is not to trivialize love of life or the survival instinct that drives it, just to put matters into perspective. I believe that while we are here we should try to enjoy ourselves constructively, enrich our knowledge of the world around us, and seek an understanding of the human condition. I further believe that to achieve these ends, we need to reject such shallow values as greed and materialism. After all, the thrill that many people derive from acquiring and possessing things won't add even an extra second to their lives.
Of course, theists, especially the fundamentalists, have solved this the issue of man's insignificance by inventing a god who they insist brought the universe into existence, created man in his image, gave us life through reproduction, and a soul which will be taken to an eternal afterlife when we die. They will not listen to evidence to the contrary perhaps because they cannot handle the concept of a world without a supreme being pulling the strings. It would be tantamount to jumping into an abyss.
Despite its limitations, the great thing about our existence is that no two humans are identical. We are of course individuals. As such I believe that it is incumbent upon us as a society to ensure that people's basic needs are addressed so that each of us can flourish and be productive. By doing so we can celebrate life even as we acknowledge and accept our role as bit players in the eternally unfolding pageantry of the universe.
Friday, April 30, 2010
It's All About Fairness
It's really too bad that the State of Arizona had to pass such a stringent law as the one that was recently enacted in dealing with illegal immigrants. Whether this legislation passes judicial muster remains to be seen. However, the Federal government has abdicated its responsibility in this matter, and just by the sheer number, the situation at the border and beyond has obviously gotten out of hand.
One aspect of the illegals problem that is not often discussed is that their very presence in the U.S. and their insistence on recognition is a slap in the face of foreigners who have gone to the trouble of properly legalizing their status as aliens in a rather straightforward manner: by complying with immigration and naturalization requirements. For example, when my wife and some of her family members immigrated to America, they, like other law-abiding foreigners, neither expected nor received special treatment or shortcuts. They are now either now American citizens or permanent residents, even thought it took years to complete the process. Yet, there are millions of undocumented aliens in America, especially from Mexico, who when faced with deportation, whine that their "rights" are being violated. What is so hard to understand that if you did not enter the U.S. legitimately, the only right that you have is a one-way ticket back to your country of origin.
For those who sympathize with the illegals, imagine that you are in a long line at the supermarket, maybe at or near the back of the queue which is just inching along. All of a sudden you notice that some people have cut to the front of the line. When challenged, they say it's their right to do so, because they don't give a damn about rules or discipline. And not only that, they want free groceries as well. This is exactly what illegal immigrants are doing to aliens who are in America legally and to those would-be immigrants who are waiting in their respective homelands for their visas to be approved before leaving for the U.S. By entering the country illegally, undocumented aliens are refusing to wait their turn in line, which their counterparts who are playing by the rules are doing And as if that were not enough, the illegals want to be rewarded for their narcissism with amnesty (again as in 1986) What chutzpah.
And by the way, I know what it's like to be an alien. As my blog site profile indicates, I'm a natural born American citizen living in the Philippines as a permanent resident. Yes it's true that my wife's status as a former Filipino citizen enabled both of us to relocate and reside here. But the point is we did it legally. We would never think to do otherwise. Yet, this country also has a problem with illegal aliens, mainly people who overstay their visas, rather than sneak into the country taking jobs from the natives. These people are not likely looking for work anyway as foreigners are effectively barred from employment, as they well should be. There is an insufficient number of job for the people here as it is.
.
Such is not the case in the U.S. Part of the problem there of course is that the government has never properly dealt with employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. If there had been a consistently enforced program all along of meaningful sanctions against companies that fall into this category, the problem might have been solved long ago. But instead, certain businesses such as the meat-packing industry for example not only hire illegals, they recruit them. As a result wages in that occupation have dropped and working conditions have deteriorated to near those depicted in Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". Employers know that their illegal and therefore docile workers don't dare complain. In turn, this has had a ripple effect that negatively affects the wages and working conditions of all (non-union) workers including those of American citizens.
What's particularly galling is that not only do illegals refuse to play by the rules to enter America, many of them refuse to acculturate and /or obeys the laws of the land once they get here. This is especially the case with undocumented aliens from south of the border. I know this from personal experience of seeing the neighborhood where I once lived decline to almost unlivability as these people took over the area bringing peace disturbances, vandalism and gang activity with them.. Yet, a recent article, "Arizona May Prods Feds to Finally Act", described illegals in America as "mostly good people supporting their families." This begs the question as to why do they have families in the first place--often large ones at that-- knowing that they can't support them. Moreover, it's not America's job to do what the Mexican government refuses to do: address its own economic and demographic problems by means other than dumping their surplus population on the U.S. And as for "good people", it can't be overemphasized. that those aliens who follow the rules before and while they're in America are a lot better people.
In that same article, another writer implies that we should bring the illegals "above ground" (read amnesty) because there are 11 million of them and thus too many to deport. So what happens if America does that?. Doesn't that send an invitation for another 11 million or however many more to sneak into the country? Where and when does it end?
The step that the State of Arizona took to stem the tide was a drastic one, but the present situation there vis-Ã -vis the overwhelming multitude of undocumented aliens is untenable. And unless the federal government acts resolutely to solve this problem in a manner that is equitable for American citizens and legal immigrants, isn't it just a matter of time before the entire country is likewise overwhelmed by illegals whose selfishness and disregard for the law of the land gives them the mindset that what they want for themselves is the only thing that matters?
One aspect of the illegals problem that is not often discussed is that their very presence in the U.S. and their insistence on recognition is a slap in the face of foreigners who have gone to the trouble of properly legalizing their status as aliens in a rather straightforward manner: by complying with immigration and naturalization requirements. For example, when my wife and some of her family members immigrated to America, they, like other law-abiding foreigners, neither expected nor received special treatment or shortcuts. They are now either now American citizens or permanent residents, even thought it took years to complete the process. Yet, there are millions of undocumented aliens in America, especially from Mexico, who when faced with deportation, whine that their "rights" are being violated. What is so hard to understand that if you did not enter the U.S. legitimately, the only right that you have is a one-way ticket back to your country of origin.
For those who sympathize with the illegals, imagine that you are in a long line at the supermarket, maybe at or near the back of the queue which is just inching along. All of a sudden you notice that some people have cut to the front of the line. When challenged, they say it's their right to do so, because they don't give a damn about rules or discipline. And not only that, they want free groceries as well. This is exactly what illegal immigrants are doing to aliens who are in America legally and to those would-be immigrants who are waiting in their respective homelands for their visas to be approved before leaving for the U.S. By entering the country illegally, undocumented aliens are refusing to wait their turn in line, which their counterparts who are playing by the rules are doing And as if that were not enough, the illegals want to be rewarded for their narcissism with amnesty (again as in 1986) What chutzpah.
And by the way, I know what it's like to be an alien. As my blog site profile indicates, I'm a natural born American citizen living in the Philippines as a permanent resident. Yes it's true that my wife's status as a former Filipino citizen enabled both of us to relocate and reside here. But the point is we did it legally. We would never think to do otherwise. Yet, this country also has a problem with illegal aliens, mainly people who overstay their visas, rather than sneak into the country taking jobs from the natives. These people are not likely looking for work anyway as foreigners are effectively barred from employment, as they well should be. There is an insufficient number of job for the people here as it is.
.
Such is not the case in the U.S. Part of the problem there of course is that the government has never properly dealt with employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. If there had been a consistently enforced program all along of meaningful sanctions against companies that fall into this category, the problem might have been solved long ago. But instead, certain businesses such as the meat-packing industry for example not only hire illegals, they recruit them. As a result wages in that occupation have dropped and working conditions have deteriorated to near those depicted in Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". Employers know that their illegal and therefore docile workers don't dare complain. In turn, this has had a ripple effect that negatively affects the wages and working conditions of all (non-union) workers including those of American citizens.
What's particularly galling is that not only do illegals refuse to play by the rules to enter America, many of them refuse to acculturate and /or obeys the laws of the land once they get here. This is especially the case with undocumented aliens from south of the border. I know this from personal experience of seeing the neighborhood where I once lived decline to almost unlivability as these people took over the area bringing peace disturbances, vandalism and gang activity with them.. Yet, a recent article, "Arizona May Prods Feds to Finally Act", described illegals in America as "mostly good people supporting their families." This begs the question as to why do they have families in the first place--often large ones at that-- knowing that they can't support them. Moreover, it's not America's job to do what the Mexican government refuses to do: address its own economic and demographic problems by means other than dumping their surplus population on the U.S. And as for "good people", it can't be overemphasized. that those aliens who follow the rules before and while they're in America are a lot better people.
In that same article, another writer implies that we should bring the illegals "above ground" (read amnesty) because there are 11 million of them and thus too many to deport. So what happens if America does that?. Doesn't that send an invitation for another 11 million or however many more to sneak into the country? Where and when does it end?
The step that the State of Arizona took to stem the tide was a drastic one, but the present situation there vis-Ã -vis the overwhelming multitude of undocumented aliens is untenable. And unless the federal government acts resolutely to solve this problem in a manner that is equitable for American citizens and legal immigrants, isn't it just a matter of time before the entire country is likewise overwhelmed by illegals whose selfishness and disregard for the law of the land gives them the mindset that what they want for themselves is the only thing that matters?
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Earth Day: Just A Token Ritual?
Are occasions such as Earth Day really necessary for people to show support for the environment? . After all, what good is it for the world to give lip service respect to nature one day out of the year and then trash it the rest of the time?
To be sure, the intent that led to the beginning of this celebration as an annual affair was honorable, even noble. But as I look around and read about the ongoing degradation of our planet on both an individual and institutional basis, I feel that this day has become meaningless.
For the same reason, last month my wife and I did not bother to shut off our electrical usage in observance of Earth Hour (Come to think of it, the only "light" that was on anyway was our television). Why should we? When it comes to conservation, we walk the talk daily. So for those who like us live a modest life style there's no need to guild the lily with a symbolic gesture.
If advocates of Earth Day really care about nature and the environment there are so many ways to express this concern, and to rehash them here item by item is unnecessary. Suffice to say that using common sense and prudence in daily living and refraining from materialistic overindulgence are a start. (As for the various festivals that will mark Earth Day, I wonder how many people will drive to these events in SUV's and leave a mountain of litter behind when they depart.)
The key to making a better world of course is action. Those individuals who are self- motivated to make an effort to improve their surroundings know in their hearts why doing so is vital, and not just once a year at that.. It is people such as these who are likely already making a contribution to the world and who make everyday "Earth Day".
I suppose that the argument can be made that Earth Day as a consciousness raising occasion can inculcate these very values in others, especially the uncommitted. However, it seems to me that unless a sense of concern about the planet is already a part of one's character, then special days that focus on the future of our planet won't begin to make a bit of difference to people whose world begins and ends only with themselves.
To be sure, the intent that led to the beginning of this celebration as an annual affair was honorable, even noble. But as I look around and read about the ongoing degradation of our planet on both an individual and institutional basis, I feel that this day has become meaningless.
For the same reason, last month my wife and I did not bother to shut off our electrical usage in observance of Earth Hour (Come to think of it, the only "light" that was on anyway was our television). Why should we? When it comes to conservation, we walk the talk daily. So for those who like us live a modest life style there's no need to guild the lily with a symbolic gesture.
If advocates of Earth Day really care about nature and the environment there are so many ways to express this concern, and to rehash them here item by item is unnecessary. Suffice to say that using common sense and prudence in daily living and refraining from materialistic overindulgence are a start. (As for the various festivals that will mark Earth Day, I wonder how many people will drive to these events in SUV's and leave a mountain of litter behind when they depart.)
The key to making a better world of course is action. Those individuals who are self- motivated to make an effort to improve their surroundings know in their hearts why doing so is vital, and not just once a year at that.. It is people such as these who are likely already making a contribution to the world and who make everyday "Earth Day".
I suppose that the argument can be made that Earth Day as a consciousness raising occasion can inculcate these very values in others, especially the uncommitted. However, it seems to me that unless a sense of concern about the planet is already a part of one's character, then special days that focus on the future of our planet won't begin to make a bit of difference to people whose world begins and ends only with themselves.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
To Life
Yesterday, my friend, Alan Perlman and I discussed on line a post "The Day The Philippines Stands Still" which I had written last year for my other blog site, "Your Guide to Living In The Philippines". Briefly, that post discusses the Philippine culture's fixation on death, an example of which is the observance of Good Friday and Easter in which the Filipino focus is on the crucifixion story of the former rather than on resurrection as represented by the latter.
After reading the post, Alan posited a fascinating question: Why haven't Jews who are better acquainted with death than Filipinos made it a dominant theme in Jewish culture? Indeed, the destruction of the Temple centuries ago should have been the end of us as a people. But like the Energizer Bunny, we've kept on going and going in the face of incredible adversity and hostility.
My semi-educated guess which I hope doesn't beg the question is that since for the Jews the long awaited messiah who God promised did not arrive in the early days of the diaspora, it was hope and the resulting optimism that he would do so sooner than later. An example of this thinking is Maimonides' Principle of Faith: "I believe with perfect faith in the coming of the Messiah, and though he tarry, I will wait for him." In turn this kind of confidence sustained the Jews and made life bearable even under miserable circumstances.
Progressive Jewish movements have of course long since abandoned the notion of an anointed savior who will redeem the Jewish people. How did this happen? The Enlightenment promised a new day for mankind. It infused many Jews with its ideals and gave them an awareness that each of us is his or her own messiah and is responsible for our own personal deliverance from centuries of persecution and humiliation endured by the Jewish people. It was this bold departure from traditional Jewish theology by Enlightenment-influenced thinkers such as Theodore Herzl, a founder of modern Zionism, that brought about the State of Israel, not the Orthodox and other theistic Jews who still wanted to continue waiting for the Messiah to appear and lead us to back to the promised land.
In the Philippines, on the other hand, perhaps the self-hatred and necrophilia that had been inculcated in the people here as the result of three hundred years of oppressive Spanish and Church rule ran too deep even for such brilliant Enlightenment thinkers as Jose Rizal to successfully remove in all but the handful of people who led the revolution against Spain, and who themselves were usurped by the Americans. Maybe Jewish determination like that of the majority of Filipinos would likewise have been pounded into submission if we too had been confined to one geographical location for the many centuries that we were persecuted. Could it be that despite the confines of the ghetto on one hand , the diversity that we encountered and experienced as "wandering Jews" on the other actually worked to our genealogical and cultural benefit? In this regard, Filipinos likewise make significant contributions to the countries to which they immigrate or serve as "OFW's" (Overseas Filipino Workers) as they are referred to in the local idiom.
Once again I want to emphasize that I'm not an academic expert in Jewish or Philippine history. My knowledge is relatively fragmentary at best in both fields. I leave it to professionals to decide whether or not the above observations have merit and look forward to feedback on them.
After reading the post, Alan posited a fascinating question: Why haven't Jews who are better acquainted with death than Filipinos made it a dominant theme in Jewish culture? Indeed, the destruction of the Temple centuries ago should have been the end of us as a people. But like the Energizer Bunny, we've kept on going and going in the face of incredible adversity and hostility.
My semi-educated guess which I hope doesn't beg the question is that since for the Jews the long awaited messiah who God promised did not arrive in the early days of the diaspora, it was hope and the resulting optimism that he would do so sooner than later. An example of this thinking is Maimonides' Principle of Faith: "I believe with perfect faith in the coming of the Messiah, and though he tarry, I will wait for him." In turn this kind of confidence sustained the Jews and made life bearable even under miserable circumstances.
Progressive Jewish movements have of course long since abandoned the notion of an anointed savior who will redeem the Jewish people. How did this happen? The Enlightenment promised a new day for mankind. It infused many Jews with its ideals and gave them an awareness that each of us is his or her own messiah and is responsible for our own personal deliverance from centuries of persecution and humiliation endured by the Jewish people. It was this bold departure from traditional Jewish theology by Enlightenment-influenced thinkers such as Theodore Herzl, a founder of modern Zionism, that brought about the State of Israel, not the Orthodox and other theistic Jews who still wanted to continue waiting for the Messiah to appear and lead us to back to the promised land.
In the Philippines, on the other hand, perhaps the self-hatred and necrophilia that had been inculcated in the people here as the result of three hundred years of oppressive Spanish and Church rule ran too deep even for such brilliant Enlightenment thinkers as Jose Rizal to successfully remove in all but the handful of people who led the revolution against Spain, and who themselves were usurped by the Americans. Maybe Jewish determination like that of the majority of Filipinos would likewise have been pounded into submission if we too had been confined to one geographical location for the many centuries that we were persecuted. Could it be that despite the confines of the ghetto on one hand , the diversity that we encountered and experienced as "wandering Jews" on the other actually worked to our genealogical and cultural benefit? In this regard, Filipinos likewise make significant contributions to the countries to which they immigrate or serve as "OFW's" (Overseas Filipino Workers) as they are referred to in the local idiom.
Once again I want to emphasize that I'm not an academic expert in Jewish or Philippine history. My knowledge is relatively fragmentary at best in both fields. I leave it to professionals to decide whether or not the above observations have merit and look forward to feedback on them.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Straight From The Heart
I think that I might be more tolerant towards and even respect theists who oppose atheism if I were convinced that the motivation for their beliefs was a sincere love for the supreme beings who are the center of their respective religions. However, most believers seem to connect with their deities out of fear, guilt, a sense of duty, habit, appearance, or a combination of these forces. Few believers who I meet really seem to be inspired soley out of a truly heartfelt reverence.
I know few fellow Jews, for example--even those who are Orthodox--who can truthfully say that they genuinely love God, the Torah, Talmud and / or their derivative teachings. I have attended Shabbat (Sabbath) services at an Orthodox synagogue and observed the behavior of the congregants. Many of them engage in idle chatter during the services, pray mechanistically, and remove their tallises (prayer shawls) as though they can't wait to get out of them even before recitation of the final blessing (which is led by the rabbi but which they don't even bother joining in. It's as though by that point the congregants are already just too bored to bother. Yet if they were really committed, wouldn't they sit through the entire shebang and giving their wholehearted attention to boot? So Perhaps the real reason that most of the members join the synagogue and attend services is mainly to socialize (which along with sumptuous luncheon buffet would be my own reason for being there). If so, there's nothing wrong with that if they just would just be straightforward about it and dispense with the rituals and pretense in the process.
Among Roman Catholics, the reasons for church attendance appear to be identical. I've met very few Catholics who really love going to mass and taking communion for its own sake, and when offering confession are truly contrite and repentant for their sins, real or imagined. More often than not confession is perfunctory and is mainly a" get out of hell free" card which creates an endless cycle of recidivism and confession. Prayer to the Trinity and the saints as intercessors is usually in the form of asking for personal favors rather seeking guidance to become a better person.
Ultimately,when it comes to religion, whether or not people can reconcile their practices with genuine love for their faith and for that matter their fellow man is of course their own business, as long as they stay out of mine and don't try to infringe on my rights and those of other non-believers. Such is not the case with Christian evangelists who proselytize not from love for their fellow man but from an attitude of moral superiority. Christianity, after all, is rooted in the belief that humankind is basically wicked because of original sin and that we can only be saved from God's eternal punishment (actually for doing nothing more evil than being born--how's THAT for a loving God?) by turning to Jesus. But those who refuse to yield to the these fundamentalists are not only considered unworthy of God's grace but inferior as well. Perhaps that's why these zealots try to undermine the U.S. Constitution and want to impose a "my way or the highway" theocracy on American society. Too bad that they can't walk in the storied humble ways of their savior.
Whether theists can square their shallow approach to religion with a true love of God and humankind is between them and their consciences. But if they can't act in good faith (pun intended) and walk the talk, then isn't it to time that they question their values and ask themselves what is really worth believing?
I know few fellow Jews, for example--even those who are Orthodox--who can truthfully say that they genuinely love God, the Torah, Talmud and / or their derivative teachings. I have attended Shabbat (Sabbath) services at an Orthodox synagogue and observed the behavior of the congregants. Many of them engage in idle chatter during the services, pray mechanistically, and remove their tallises (prayer shawls) as though they can't wait to get out of them even before recitation of the final blessing (which is led by the rabbi but which they don't even bother joining in. It's as though by that point the congregants are already just too bored to bother. Yet if they were really committed, wouldn't they sit through the entire shebang and giving their wholehearted attention to boot? So Perhaps the real reason that most of the members join the synagogue and attend services is mainly to socialize (which along with sumptuous luncheon buffet would be my own reason for being there). If so, there's nothing wrong with that if they just would just be straightforward about it and dispense with the rituals and pretense in the process.
Among Roman Catholics, the reasons for church attendance appear to be identical. I've met very few Catholics who really love going to mass and taking communion for its own sake, and when offering confession are truly contrite and repentant for their sins, real or imagined. More often than not confession is perfunctory and is mainly a" get out of hell free" card which creates an endless cycle of recidivism and confession. Prayer to the Trinity and the saints as intercessors is usually in the form of asking for personal favors rather seeking guidance to become a better person.
Ultimately,when it comes to religion, whether or not people can reconcile their practices with genuine love for their faith and for that matter their fellow man is of course their own business, as long as they stay out of mine and don't try to infringe on my rights and those of other non-believers. Such is not the case with Christian evangelists who proselytize not from love for their fellow man but from an attitude of moral superiority. Christianity, after all, is rooted in the belief that humankind is basically wicked because of original sin and that we can only be saved from God's eternal punishment (actually for doing nothing more evil than being born--how's THAT for a loving God?) by turning to Jesus. But those who refuse to yield to the these fundamentalists are not only considered unworthy of God's grace but inferior as well. Perhaps that's why these zealots try to undermine the U.S. Constitution and want to impose a "my way or the highway" theocracy on American society. Too bad that they can't walk in the storied humble ways of their savior.
Whether theists can square their shallow approach to religion with a true love of God and humankind is between them and their consciences. But if they can't act in good faith (pun intended) and walk the talk, then isn't it to time that they question their values and ask themselves what is really worth believing?
Friday, February 19, 2010
Riddles About the Universe
In an attempt to explain the origin of the universe, astronomers once held that the cosmos had always existed and that matter was constantly coming into being. This was known as the Steady State Theory. Eventually, this principle was refuted and replaced by the "Big Bang" Theory, which based on strong evidence, shows that that the universe has not existed eternally after all and in fact was "born" about 13.5 billion years ago.
If you think about it, Steady State harmonizes with the concept of a God--a universe as timeless as the eternal supreme being who created it. Such is not the case with the Big Bang. If a beginning point in time has been established, the very existence of this point of origin for physical matter and energy means that there was nothing--not even space or time (an almost unimaginable concept) before the instant that the first particle flared into existence.
Obviously time is a measurable dimension and began at the instant that the universe popped into existence. One question that comes to mind (well mine anyway) is why did this event happen at the particular moment that it did, i. e. why 13 billion years ago? Why not 20 billion or 11 billion? In other words, why did God pick that particular time to start the ball rolling? What was he doing before then?
In addition there are so many contingencies after the birth of the universe that had to happen for physical matter to evolve and coalesce into galaxies which in turn are composed of stars one of which had the right characteristics to allow the formation of our planet. In turn, our world had to have just the right balance of chemical elements--and even a moon of the right size and distance for life as we know it to begin here. Then over eons, that life evolved from primordial soup to humans--and everything in between.
The intricacy of all these events is so staggering that (as Richard Dawkins points out in The God Delusion) for all this to have happened as the result of creation by a god who would have had to be even more complex than the universe and its laws does not make sense. One reason is the "first cause" conundrum. If God created the universe, who created God? It's not satisfactory to say that "he" has always been "there." Where was "there" if nothing existed prior Big Bang?
But back to the question as to why Big Bang occurred 13 billion years ago, for that matter why did it happen at all? Science has offered various conjectures. One of these is that Big Bang and the resulting formation of our universe was the result of a disturbance in a larger metaverse, and there may be an infinite number of other universes in other dimensions that were born in a similar manner.
In the distant future Earth will eventually become uninhabitable as the sun follows the typical life cycle of other stars. The sun's heat and size will grow to the point that Earth will be obliterated. By that time, humankind (assuming that we have not annihilated ourselves in the meantime)--or whatever we will have evolved into-- will have likely colonized other star systems. But the problem is nothing lasts forever, and that includes the cosmos. According to cosmological predictions, eventually, the universe itself will also come to an end in one of two ways.
Since the time of the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Eventually, this expansion may reverse itself, and the universe will collapse in on itself in the "Big Crunch". There is even speculation that the Big Bang, expansion, and Big Crunch have happened in the distant past and will repeat themselves in a never ending cycle.
The other possible finale will be an endless expansion and dissolution of the cosmos into infinity as every galaxy pulls further apart from each other, unravels, and every star eventually dies out. So just as it had a beginning, the universe will at some point have an end. Thus the cosmos carries within it the seeds of its own destruction, either with a bang or a whimper. This leads to the question why would God create the universe only to ultimately destroy it?
Through experiments that simulate the Big Bang, cosmology is bringing us closer to understanding the details of how universe began. But will it ever be able to explain the reason that out of what had been eternal nothingness, in a split second came the the beginning of everything that ever has been or ever will exist?
For a more expansive and articulate discussion than I could ever present on the questions raised in this post, I recommend the book Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene.
If you think about it, Steady State harmonizes with the concept of a God--a universe as timeless as the eternal supreme being who created it. Such is not the case with the Big Bang. If a beginning point in time has been established, the very existence of this point of origin for physical matter and energy means that there was nothing--not even space or time (an almost unimaginable concept) before the instant that the first particle flared into existence.
Obviously time is a measurable dimension and began at the instant that the universe popped into existence. One question that comes to mind (well mine anyway) is why did this event happen at the particular moment that it did, i. e. why 13 billion years ago? Why not 20 billion or 11 billion? In other words, why did God pick that particular time to start the ball rolling? What was he doing before then?
In addition there are so many contingencies after the birth of the universe that had to happen for physical matter to evolve and coalesce into galaxies which in turn are composed of stars one of which had the right characteristics to allow the formation of our planet. In turn, our world had to have just the right balance of chemical elements--and even a moon of the right size and distance for life as we know it to begin here. Then over eons, that life evolved from primordial soup to humans--and everything in between.
The intricacy of all these events is so staggering that (as Richard Dawkins points out in The God Delusion) for all this to have happened as the result of creation by a god who would have had to be even more complex than the universe and its laws does not make sense. One reason is the "first cause" conundrum. If God created the universe, who created God? It's not satisfactory to say that "he" has always been "there." Where was "there" if nothing existed prior Big Bang?
But back to the question as to why Big Bang occurred 13 billion years ago, for that matter why did it happen at all? Science has offered various conjectures. One of these is that Big Bang and the resulting formation of our universe was the result of a disturbance in a larger metaverse, and there may be an infinite number of other universes in other dimensions that were born in a similar manner.
***
In the distant future Earth will eventually become uninhabitable as the sun follows the typical life cycle of other stars. The sun's heat and size will grow to the point that Earth will be obliterated. By that time, humankind (assuming that we have not annihilated ourselves in the meantime)--or whatever we will have evolved into-- will have likely colonized other star systems. But the problem is nothing lasts forever, and that includes the cosmos. According to cosmological predictions, eventually, the universe itself will also come to an end in one of two ways.
Since the time of the Big Bang, the universe has been expanding. Eventually, this expansion may reverse itself, and the universe will collapse in on itself in the "Big Crunch". There is even speculation that the Big Bang, expansion, and Big Crunch have happened in the distant past and will repeat themselves in a never ending cycle.
The other possible finale will be an endless expansion and dissolution of the cosmos into infinity as every galaxy pulls further apart from each other, unravels, and every star eventually dies out. So just as it had a beginning, the universe will at some point have an end. Thus the cosmos carries within it the seeds of its own destruction, either with a bang or a whimper. This leads to the question why would God create the universe only to ultimately destroy it?
Through experiments that simulate the Big Bang, cosmology is bringing us closer to understanding the details of how universe began. But will it ever be able to explain the reason that out of what had been eternal nothingness, in a split second came the the beginning of everything that ever has been or ever will exist?
For a more expansive and articulate discussion than I could ever present on the questions raised in this post, I recommend the book Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)