November 25th, 2013

a-links

[links] Link salad was out on the road today, saw a Black Flag sticker on a Cadillac

Milo Fowler is giving away a personalized copy of my new novella from Prime Books, Love in the Time of Metal and Flesh

Famous Novelists on Symbolism in Their Work and Whether It Was Intentional — Boy, do I have a lot to say about this. (Via Beverly Block.)

You, Me, and Every Word We Know — Ta-Nehisi Coates on the languages of labeling, in-groups and out-groups. Wise, as always this man.

Sculpting with Light — This is cool. (Via Scott Frey.)

Meet the flying machine that was inspired by a jellyfish

Brain region key to decision-making discovered

Bringing Back My Real Self With Hormones — Ah, the American healthcare system.

The Internet of Things, Unplugged and UntetheredA startup called Iotera wants to let you track your pets, your kids, or your belongings without relying on commercial wireless networks.

Printing BatteriesNew inks and tools allow 3-D printing of lithium-ion technology. That is just whack. Admirably, SFnally whack.

Gynecologists Run Afoul of Panel When Patient Is Male — Ok, this is deeply stupid. (Via [info]danjite.)

One third of all American women have an abortion in their lives. Are they all immoral? — Unlike opposition to gay marriage, which is pure and simple bigotry, usually clothed in religious privilege, I can readily see an intellectually consistent and upstanding moral opposition to abortion. I can even more readily see that almost no one from the conservative forced pregnancy movement is in fact following that intellectually consistent and moral position.

Christians have not been ‘reading the Bible this way for 2,000 years’ — The problem with being a Biblical literalist is that you have to be literally-minded well beyond the point of willful ignorance and deep into rank, knowing stupidity. Some people just need the comfort of certainty, no matter the cost to their souls or the lives of others.

Kentucky's ACA rollout is a reminder of what can happen when the law isn't being sabotaged — Even now, the jackbooted Socialist hordes of blah people are breaking down the doors of Sarah Palin’s Real Americans all across Kentucky.

On the second killing of Trayvon MartinSo deeply, bizarrely invested was she in the idea of Trayvon as thug that she could not distinguish between a fair-skinned man with tattoos, and a brown boy with no visible markings. Literally, they all look alike to her. And once again, a conservative movement which argues with airy assurance that American racism died long ago, disproves its thesis with its actions. The conservative movement: failing America and Americans every day in every way, all for the sake of generating enough angry white guys.

America’s angriest white men: Up close with racism, rage and Southern supremacy Up close with small-town white rage, with bitter, scary men who feel left behind by economic and cultural change. These are America’s core conservatives, the people who drive the agenda of Your Republican Party. These are the angry white men the GOP needs to keep generating in order to stay in power. Does it make you proud?

Town Forgets to Have Election Again — Ah, patriotic heartland values.

The Senate Did Not Really Abolish the Filibuster — Exactly what did happen in the Senate? Remember, the starting point for this isn’t some Democratic power grab. The starting point for this is Republican senators filibustering more of Obama’s executive and judicial nominees than all other presidents in history combined. A fact my conservative friends (as well as their enablers in Your Liberal Media) conveniently refuse to admit in their manufactured outrage at the Democrats carrying out a parliamentary maneuver first proposed by the GOP in 2005. (Via David Goldman.)

Cruz: Filibuster Rule Change 'Will Poison The Atmosphere Of The Senate' — Yeah, because up until now open-minded Republicans acting in the best interests of the nation as a whole had so carefully preserved Senate comity and cooperation rather than privileging their minority’s partisan agenda.

?otD: Can you ever turn back?




11/25/2013
Writing time yesterday: 0.0 hours (chemo brain)
Hours slept: 7.25 hours (solid)
Body movement: 30 minute stationary bike ride
Weight: 241.2
Number of FEMA troops on my block closing down donut shops: 0
Currently reading: n/a (chemo brain)

cancer-do-not-want

[cancer] A bit more on CEA levels

For those of you who might be curious about the continuing progress of my CEA levels (a key blood marker for tumor activity with my type of cancer), as previously reported here: [ jlake.com | LiveJournal ], they continue to climb, though not at a doubling rate. At least for now.

2013_11_04 CEA Lifetime to Date

There's nothing surprising about this, of course, as it is consistent with my recent CT scan results and the trend in my CEA levels since last spring.

So it goes. I stumble another few steps closer to my own death.

religion-belief_rev2

[cancer|religion] Faith, science and the afterlife

I put my stick in the faith-and-reason hive yesterday again, in comments on this post, and then on my Facebook presence here.

What I said in the blog comments was:
Actually, we have perfectly good physics that refutes the existence of the afterlife. It’s called entropy. You or anyone else has an extremely high burden of proof to surmount in order to counter that with objective evidence.

As for metaphysics, that is of course another word for faith, which rarely if ever has validity outside the individual faithholder’s frame of reference.

Then:
I am curious, as you challenge my statement of basic truth as if it were ragtag belief system. What objective, repeatable evidence does exist for the survival of self beyond the death of the brain?

I’m talking testable, empirical evidence, not scripture and faith statements. Faith can be a bedrock truth in the private universe of the individual that holds it, but articles of faith very rarely translate into characteristics of the physical universe we all inhabit

I then vented on Facebook with this comment:
Claiming we don't have enough science to disprove the afterlife is like denying evolution. It's a defect in your education, not in science.

Pretty much every time I get into this topic, people seem to think I’m denying the power or value of faith. As I said downthread in that Facebook post:
I have an immense respect for faith and its power. I have a profound disrespect for confusion between the truths of faith and the truths of testable, empirical reality

As one might imagine, my interest in the experience of death and dying is much sharpened of late. However, I’ve had this basic issue on my mind for years. Science is a process, a mode of thinking. It’s not some institution with the power to bury some ideas and elevate others. If there were some testable, provable hypothesis about survival of the self beyond the clinical death of the body, the medical journals would be full of it. That is, after all, one of the central questions of human culture for as far back as we have any history of human culture to evaluate.

But the whole burden of proof of afterlife is on those who would assert that as empirical reality. Science can no more disprove the afterlife than it can disprove the existence of pink unicorns. Less so, in fact. The question is a logical null.

However, to state the simple truth that there is no evidence of life after death is profoundly offensive to many people, and profoundly discomforting to many others. Speaking as someone who’s wrestling with precisely those fears, I say tough shit to them. It’s not a disrespect to your faith to state that your faith claims have no empirical basis. The universe doesn’t care if you’re Catholic or Hindu or Voudoun or Seventh Day Adventist or an atheist or what. It functions perfectly well without the lens of faith. In fact, the universe functions precisely as well without faith as it does with faith.

But human hearts and minds do not. What to me is an obvious conflation of wishful thinking and faith narrative is to others a truth so profound as to be indistinguishable from the sunrise or the tides or the fingers of their own hand.

Which is precisely my point. Privileging one’s faith narrative so strongly that one views science as unable to answer faith questions is a failure of one’s own education and worldview, not a failure of science. The process of science can test the assertions of a faith narrative as easily as it can test assertions of chemistry and physics.

The whole purpose of a faith narrative is not empirical testability. One does both science and faith a disservice when one tries to hold faith up to the standards of science.

Think of it this way. Science works in a completely testable, repeatable manner for anyone, anywhere, with the right education, data and equipment. Faith is so profoundly individual that there are about 41,000 Christian denominations in the world, and thousands, possibly tens of thousands of other religions. Many if not most of them proclaim a monopoly on the truth, but they cannot each and all in their tens of thousands of revelations be in sole possession of the truth. To hear most religionists tell it, only one faith can be right. Theirs. In other words, faith is not testable and repeatable for anyone, anywhere; rather, it is profoundly individual.

Very nearly the opposite of what science seeks to do.

Meanwhile, I’m still dying. When I’m dead, I’ll still be dead. If 40,000 years of human history and culture haven’t managed to come up with any repeatable, empirical evidence to the contrary thus far, I don’t think the next six or nine months are going to make much difference now. Regardless of anyone’s sincerely held beliefs. Or their irritation at my pointing out the obvious.