As an atheist, surely you must have no purpose in life?
I'm certain you've heard that question, or a similar one posed to you, the open atheist. It's both an insulting and an ignorant question. It's insulting because the underlying assumption is that without the acceptance of THEIR personal choice of gods, you must not know what to do with your life. You must be wandering the world aimlessly, without purpose or direction, randomly performing sinful acts and caring for no one but yourself. As an atheist, I can assure you that that is not how my life is lived.
It is an ignorant question because it presumes that purpose is something of a modern creation, or at least since their holy book of choice was written. Purpose has been demonstrated by mankind in many ways throughout time. Early man had the purpose of gathering food and water, staying safe in their environment, and reproduction. Later, purpose may have been more closely tied to communal living, caring for elders, and of course, survival of self and family. In recent history, we have enjoyed the privileged position of being able to wonder why we are here. What is our purpose in the world? Is there a god? We get to spend precious energy helping others not of our familial DNA to live better lives. We can volunteer, donate blood, and truly help people that we don't even know. So purpose has changed through time as the world's societies have grown and changed, and if you are in a position to perform any of these acts you should consider yourself fortunate indeed.
Purpose in life is therefore independent of a deity. You can attribute your life's purpose to your god, as many do, or you can live a good and purposeful life without a god. Purpose existed before god, purpose existed during theistic times, and the individual search for purpose will continue long after science has relegated god to the history books. ~R
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Eucharistic miracles?
Recently, I was asked for my opinion of the following video regarding a supposed Eucharistic miracle occurring in Venezuela. Since twitter limits you to 140 characters, I felt that this would be a more efficient way to summarize my humble thoughts.
Video: http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=vJjErlsxW1A&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DvJjErlsxW1A%26feature%3Dyoutu.be
Brief preface: I do not believe that I am biased, but I am definitely skeptical. If evidence is presented that proves the existence of a god or gods, then I'm in. I have no vested interest in there NOT being a divine creator. But belief for me cannot happen without that proof. No amount of 'you have to have faith' or pleas of 'can't you just feel it?' will get me from atheism to even basic deism.
Eucharistic miracles (basic summary): The wafer that represents the body of Christ in the instances of these miracles, actually undergoes a visible change into something that mimics blood or even, in the Venezuelan case, becomes blood and cardiac tissue that is attributed as being the physical manifestation of the body of Christ. Regardless of the facts, this is how it is being presented to the rest of the world.
I watched the video contained above. If the Venezuelan Eucharistic miracle is current, legitimate, and has tangible evidence, why has it not been submitted to the world as proof of Christ's divinity and of the Christian god? Surely, if the claims are honest, true, and verifiable, this would be compelling evidence supporting the Christian deity. At the very least, the claimants should submit their evidence and collect their prize money via: http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html or http://skeptoid.com/mobile/4372
If the presenter in the video is accurately reporting the 'scientific analysis', his information is inaccurate. The claim is that a wafer placed in holy water has grown into a piece of beating, living, cardiac tissue. He also claims that the scientist that evaluated the sample states that the tissue is human heart muscle (proven easily enough), and specifically that it is from the left ventricle. He continues on with the details of the sample analysis, but this is where I have to stop. Brushing the dust off of my pathology training, there is no way to tell the difference between cells of the left and right ventricles. Vertebrate heart muscle is easily identifiable by its intercalated disks, structures not present in regular striated muscle. Atrial and ventricular cells are slightly different from each other, but the cells of the left and right ventricles differ only in their number relative to the rest of the heart (the left ventricular wall is generally much thicker than the that of the right). The left side has a relatively bigger distribution of purkinje fibers (a network of fibers that help to organize the electrical conduction of the heart so that contractions occur in an organized fashion), but that is also relative to the amount of tissue constituting the myocardium. A piece of cardiac tissue, without the entire organ as reference will not give you an answer as to the ventricle from which it originated (or represents). So, on that fact alone, I call bullshit.
Information and support on and for these events are almost exclusively found on catholic websites and texts. Secular resources treat them at best skeptically, and often just as simple hoaxes. Ultimately, I know what the believer's response will be. Miracles exist outside the purview of science. It's a believer thing, you wouldn't understand.
The want for an event to be miraculous seems to be deep seated within the mind of a religious believer, perhaps as a greatly desired physical demonstration of the things that are otherwise taken on faith. Lack of evidence for a set of beliefs creates this situation. When events happen that defy immediate explanation, those looking for miracles will find them. It's simple confirmation bias and a
common mind-trap of expectation.
I sincerely encourage people to provide rational reasons as to why I am wrong or mistaken in any way. I am particularly interested in the thoughts of those with pathology and physiology expertise. Physicists and neurologists may be more interested in the end of the video. As always, I will consider it a chance to learn something.
But for now, I say keep on moving. There's nothing to see here. ~R
Video: http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=vJjErlsxW1A&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DvJjErlsxW1A%26feature%3Dyoutu.be
Brief preface: I do not believe that I am biased, but I am definitely skeptical. If evidence is presented that proves the existence of a god or gods, then I'm in. I have no vested interest in there NOT being a divine creator. But belief for me cannot happen without that proof. No amount of 'you have to have faith' or pleas of 'can't you just feel it?' will get me from atheism to even basic deism.
Eucharistic miracles (basic summary): The wafer that represents the body of Christ in the instances of these miracles, actually undergoes a visible change into something that mimics blood or even, in the Venezuelan case, becomes blood and cardiac tissue that is attributed as being the physical manifestation of the body of Christ. Regardless of the facts, this is how it is being presented to the rest of the world.
I watched the video contained above. If the Venezuelan Eucharistic miracle is current, legitimate, and has tangible evidence, why has it not been submitted to the world as proof of Christ's divinity and of the Christian god? Surely, if the claims are honest, true, and verifiable, this would be compelling evidence supporting the Christian deity. At the very least, the claimants should submit their evidence and collect their prize money via: http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html or http://skeptoid.com/mobile/4372
If the presenter in the video is accurately reporting the 'scientific analysis', his information is inaccurate. The claim is that a wafer placed in holy water has grown into a piece of beating, living, cardiac tissue. He also claims that the scientist that evaluated the sample states that the tissue is human heart muscle (proven easily enough), and specifically that it is from the left ventricle. He continues on with the details of the sample analysis, but this is where I have to stop. Brushing the dust off of my pathology training, there is no way to tell the difference between cells of the left and right ventricles. Vertebrate heart muscle is easily identifiable by its intercalated disks, structures not present in regular striated muscle. Atrial and ventricular cells are slightly different from each other, but the cells of the left and right ventricles differ only in their number relative to the rest of the heart (the left ventricular wall is generally much thicker than the that of the right). The left side has a relatively bigger distribution of purkinje fibers (a network of fibers that help to organize the electrical conduction of the heart so that contractions occur in an organized fashion), but that is also relative to the amount of tissue constituting the myocardium. A piece of cardiac tissue, without the entire organ as reference will not give you an answer as to the ventricle from which it originated (or represents). So, on that fact alone, I call bullshit.
Information and support on and for these events are almost exclusively found on catholic websites and texts. Secular resources treat them at best skeptically, and often just as simple hoaxes. Ultimately, I know what the believer's response will be. Miracles exist outside the purview of science. It's a believer thing, you wouldn't understand.
The want for an event to be miraculous seems to be deep seated within the mind of a religious believer, perhaps as a greatly desired physical demonstration of the things that are otherwise taken on faith. Lack of evidence for a set of beliefs creates this situation. When events happen that defy immediate explanation, those looking for miracles will find them. It's simple confirmation bias and a
common mind-trap of expectation.
I sincerely encourage people to provide rational reasons as to why I am wrong or mistaken in any way. I am particularly interested in the thoughts of those with pathology and physiology expertise. Physicists and neurologists may be more interested in the end of the video. As always, I will consider it a chance to learn something.
But for now, I say keep on moving. There's nothing to see here. ~R
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)