Author Archives: Scott Bowles

Evidentialism: An Atheist’s Guide to Faith

Image result for faith in reason philosophyDear reader, a confession:

This should have been written years ago. Or years from now. Regardless, the truth is the time will never feel right. For all of the hours I’ve embered over the coals of the topic, it’s never just right. Each new thought bears two more, and so on. Iterations never relent. I guess rough drafts are fine, though.  Even Christians got a practice whack with the Old Testament, right?

So why not now?

Which, I guess, is the point of all this.

 

Jesus.  It’s time to start a new religion.

I discovered this a few months ago, while watching an online debate between believers and non-believers and featuring Jim Jeffries, a talented comedian who wears his atheist badge proudly. And he does a wonderful skit on how the world’s population is essentially a three-car-railroad: the scientists and atheists in the front engine car, wussy agnostics in the one that follows, and the largest in the rear, believers weighing the train down. In the act, he pretends to be one of the atheists in front, considering pulling the pin from cars carrying the dimwits behind him. It’s a great skit. Do check it out.Image result for jim jefferies atheism you're slowing us down

But back to the show. Jeffries, as expected, was on the panel of non-believers, and bristled even at the term “atheist.” It’s absurd, he contended, to label something that doesn’t believe in something, and coyly rejected the label.

And with that, and before he could utter another word, he gave away the debate.

The problem with any argument staged between “believers” and “non-believers” is that non-believers are left in an uphill knife fight. To be of the camp “without faith” is to automatically surrender the debate. 

Because faith is important. We atheists must accept this truth. It is integral to the fabric of what makes us human. We have turned the word into a synonym for religion, but that need not be.

Take early man. He fashioned a spear to hunt food. To do so, he had to use scientifically  cognitive skills to fashion a blade that could pierce hide and kill game. Do we really think any of this would have happened without a fervent belief in evidence combined with ingenuity? Can we say with a straight face that astronauts who strap themselves into jet-powered tuna cans lack faith?Image result for early man spear

Regardless of whether it’s in a god or an otherwise higher agent, we need something to believe in. If anything,  to not believe in something is to waste the miraculous gray matter that sits in our skull and scaffolds our very humanity.We are where we are, from the cosmic to microscopic scale, because of the flawed beauty of faith. So why reject it? That’s simply a rejection of us. Instead, what we need is a faith to buttress the natural world order that binds us all.

Enter Evidentialism.

Evidentialism is faith for atheists, a secular way of thinking parenthesized by belief. 

Science is a Faith More Ardent than Any Religion

Ironically enough, the practice of Evidentialism could not be easier. In truth, nearly every human being practices it everyday, just without assigning a name to it.

This screed is not a rap against atheists, by any measure. But we need to practice what we preach (since we pull the Hypocrisy card on our counterparts). And let’s admit what is hardest to accept on the road to Evidentialism: Science is a Faith.

I know only one scientist, and she is the exception, not rule. Beyond her, I’ve yet to meet anyone even loosely connected to the sciences who will accept that. Proven is proven. H20 is two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. Period.Image result for h20

But there was a time not long ago when scientists of their day believed Poseidon was the barkeep for all matters aquatic. Now, we can measure his realm on the sub-atomic level. Science evolves just as we do, and — unlike religion — is willing to update its commandments when evidence suggests. Why not put the strength of that truth into faith?

I know the mere use of that word brings flinches from non-believers, and this all seems antithetical to an idea as bulky as faith. But consider: Scientists debate the same matters as the shamen, from the ignition of life to its final candle blow. And there is no consensus among scientists. Yet they still make a choice. How? By looking at the work of those that preceded and joining a school of thought. How is that principally different than choosing your house of worship? In both cases, the facts may prove you wrong. So you act on a hunch based on the best probability of a good outcome.

Take Newton’s apple. Einstein’s general relativity is the simplest plausible theory of gravity that can be based on just one symmetric tensor field (the metric tensor). Others include: Starobinsky (R+R^2) gravity, Gauss–Bonnet gravity, f(R) gravity, and Lovelock theory of gravity.Image result for Lovelock theory of gravity.

I have no idea what the fuck the preceding paragraph means. I looked it up and cut and pasted. But that’s the point. We have tools we never once had to underpin our faith.And science is an impressive one. Even with Albert as one of our prophets (which he is, along with Darwin, Hawking, Sagan, etc.), there are branches in his sect that question even his principle. They’re putting their faiths in a different arithmetic. Which, really,  is what Evidentialism is attempting.

http://childpsychiatryassociates.com/treatment-team/donner-dewdney Claims and Proportionate Evidence

The tenet behind Evidentialism is singular and simple: Claims to truth need a proportionate amount of evidence to support the claim. And in truth, it’s simpler than that. Put another way: Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence.

We already apply this in our everyday lives. The weather, for instance, is a small claim, requiring little evidence. But if your weatherman is wrong for a week, you’re going to switch to a more dependable forecaster.

Evidentialism is that theory writ large. If you’re going to claim that a snake spoke or a sea parted, Evidentialism requires something less flimsy than a self-published book written by Iron Age goat herders.

This is not to say fantastic claims cannot be true. But even for atheists, this is where we need to accept that our belief system is just as fantastical as any religion ever scribed. 

Consider the words of our prophets (and please point out the difference from any other faith): The universe may be one of countless; it bends time in its darkest corners; dark matter and energy move invisibly through the cosmos — and us.Image result for dark matter and energy

The beauty of Evidentialism is that it allows us to embrace the wildest claims of science — because it has a better track record than any other god on record. Our god taught us to fly, to breathe underwater, to touch travel the cosmos. Who wouldn’t want to proudly claim that as your faith?

Here are just a few of the miracles Evidentialism can claim:

1. Two people were reportedly cured of HIV:

In 2009, a man received a stem-cell transplant from a donor who was genetically resistant to HIV and leukemia. He became the first person to be reportedly cured of HIV. Then, again, in 2019, another individual received a stem-cell transplant that replaced their white blood cells with HIV-resistant versions and had no sign of the virus returning.Image result for 1. Two people were reportedly cured of HIV:

 

2. Partial vision was restored to six people who were blind:

In 2019, it was reported that six trial participants who were blind had received an implant that transmitted video images to their brains. The system, called Orion, works through a video camera that is attached to glasses that send footage to electrodes implanted in the visual cortex of each individual’s brain, allowing them to have partial vision.Image result for 2. Partial vision was restored to six people who were blind:

 

3. A developer was able to control JavaScript with her thoughts:

In 2018, Charlie Gerard was able to successfully mind-control JavaScript. For instance, she moved a 3D cube forward in her browser just by thinking about pushing it. The “mental commands” Charlie created are: push, pull, lift, drop, left, right, rotate left, rotate right, rotate clockwise, rotate counter-clockwise, rotate forward, rotate reverse, and disappear.Image result for 3. A developer was able to control JavaScript with her thoughts:

 

4. “Smart” gloves could recognize American Sign Language and translate it into text:

The glove was created in 2017 by researchers at the University of California San Diego. They are able to translate ASL into digital text on a corresponding computer or smartphone. When someone wearing the glove signs ASL, the letters are recognized by variances in the electrical resistance in the glove. The variances allow an on board computer to figure out which letter is being signed.Image result for "Smart" gloves could recognize American Sign Language and translate it into text:

 

5. 3D technology was used for brain surgery, cast alternatives, and so much more:

Sichuan Revotek is a Chinese biotechnology firm that was able to 3D-print blood vessels made from stem cells and implant them into monkeys. The 2017 discovery is an advance toward developing artificial organ transplants.Image result for Sichuan Revotek

Can I get an Amen?

A Few Minutes Ago, in a Galaxy Down the Street

Image result for mandalorian

The Force appears strong with this one.

Anchored by a solid debut of The Mandalorian, Star Wars‘ first live-action series, Disney entered the on-demand fray with a glitchy bang. And the splash may alter the future of Star Wars, Netflix and the streaming universe.

The company’s new streaming service, Disney+, has already seen 10 million sign-ups since launching Tuesday, the company announced Wednesday. Disney’s stock was up more than 7% on the news. Netflix shares were down more than 3%.

Even a technical bug didn’t dampen the debut. The launch Tuesday was beset with technical errors that prevented some users from connecting with the service (I was disconnected three times). But that didn’t stop customers from flooding the sign-up page.

At $6.99 per month, or $69.99 per year, Disney+ is significantly cheaper than competitors such as Netflix, which charges $12.99 for its most popular standard HD plan.The membership fee for Amazon Prime is $119 per year, or $12.99 per month. That gap will likely narrow as Disney + lures more subscribers, but other changes seem inevitable in wake of the report:

Disney will be your kids favorite channel in a month. Even a cursory glance through the studio’s immense catalog suggests this race is already over. The library alone will favor Disney+ in the youth and young parents market. And that doesn’t include it’s catalog under the Pixar, Marvel and Star Wars brands.Image result for bambi

Netflix will become the HBO of streamers. For the past two years Netflix has been in a headlong chase for a Best Picture Oscar, last year with Roma and this year with The Irishman. The service, which already excels at documentaries and horror films, may look to become the go-to streamer for adults.

Star Wars may be headed for a TV universe. Mandalorian was an unmitigated success with fans and critics, early reviews show. The series, the brainchild of Jon Favreau, is some of the best Star Wars material to hit screens, big or small, in decades. And at its heart, Star Wars was always a soap opera deep down. Mandalorian actually looks better on a smaller screen, which is more forgiving of the series’ reliance on digital effects.Image result for mandalorian

Measuring Disney’s splash is still up in the air. The studio is offering a seven-day free trial, so likely not all of the sign-ups represent customers who will continue to pay for the service. Verizon is also offering its customers a free year of Disney+, which could further boost its subscriber numbers.

But there’s no denying the impressive opener. Disney+ has already achieved huge sign-up numbers, while competitors such as Netflix and Hulu needed years to build their subscriber bases. Disney has already signed up more than 10% of the high end of its forecast of 60 million to 90 million subscribers by the end of 2024. And Disney+ has yet to roll out to many countries beyond the U.S., Canada and the Netherlands, which were included in Tuesday’s launch. The platform will be available in Australia and New Zealand on Nov. 19. More countries will get Disney+ in the coming months.

For comparison, it took CBS about five years to reach 8 million streaming subscribers combined for CBS All Access and Showtime. Disney-owned Hulu, which has an advertising-based streaming model, claimed more than 28 million subscribers in May. Of those subscribers, 26.8 million are monthly paying customers, while the remaining have promotional accounts. Netflix claimed more than 60 million paid domestic members in its third quarter of 2019 and more than 97 million international paid members.

In other words, the mouse came to brawl. And the battle could be cutthroat, Pat Esser, the president of Cox Communications, the nation’s third-largest cable carrier, told the New York Times.

“They’re about to enter a space where the consumer, with a click of a button, will decide to be your customer or not to be your customer,” he said.