|
|
|
|
….In This Issue. May 21st
meeting: School Voucher: Fact & Fiction. Quote of the Month. June 1st meeting
in Whittier: "A Brief History of Utilitarianism" by Dave Silva "Ernst
Haeckel" by Jaun Bernal, Ph.D. "A Skeleton in the
Closet" by Benito Franqui. New HAOC Board "CATholic
Cat" humor contributed by Pat Bryant At the May 21st Meeting: "SCHOOL VOUCHERS: FACT & FICTION" George Woods and
Frank Farsad will speak on voucher campaigns around the country. Frank Farsad
teaches science to Junior High students in the Anaheim Union High School
District. He is a member of the Anaheim Secondary Teachers Association. He is joined by
George Woods, Executive Director to several associations in the Orange Service
Center and Teachers United. Mr. Woods is active in matters concerning the
students in several districts in Orange County. In his role as a teacher advocate,
he is involved at the State and local levels. He presents numerous workshops
and lectures on educational issues throughout the year. Vouchers within
public schools are currently available in 37 states. Parents can choose
a school that best serves the interests of their children within a given school
district. This allows the state funds to remain in the public schools where they are needed.
Those advocating vouchers for private schools want public money to be funneled
into many religious schools. Often, many of these private and religious schools
charge fees that are higher than what is spent on students in California. Vouchers issued for
non-schools eventually creates a multi-tiered system where students who are
turned away, for a variety of reasons, will end up in undesirable schools based
on their needs and disabilities not met at the private and religious schools. The speakers will
share some insight into the implications of the voucher system cloaked as
"choice" in California and the nation. A question and answer period
will follow the presentation. Quote of the Month "Give a man a fish and you feed him
for a day. Give him a religion and he starves to death praying for food." ….anonymous. Whittier Humanist June 1st. "A Brief History of Utilitarianism" by Dave Silva Dr. Clay Costner's Whittier Humanist outreach group meets at 7:30 p.m., on the first Thursday of each month at the Whittier Historical Museum, at the corner of Newlin and Philadelphia, in uptown Whittier. We will discuss Utilitarianism, how this ethical system evolved, what it is today and how it functions as compared to traditional mono-theistic moral systems. This presentation is based on my article in the April issue of the HAOC newsletter, John Stuart Mill's "Utilitarianism", which you can find by going to J.S. Mill at the philosophy link at this website, and the book "Utilitarianism: For & Against" by J.J.C. Smart and Bernard Williams. I don't profess to be an authority on this subject and there may be some at the meeting who are better informed; which would be helpful. I do hope to act as a guide to explore what I consider to be the best humanistic ethical system ever conceived by man. Enrnst
Haeckel (1834-1919) By
Juan Bernal, Ph.D. At our April HAOC meeting (4/16/00), Roland Bender gave us a very informative presentation on Ernst Haeckel (1834 - 1919), focusing on primarily on Haeckel’s work on embryonic development and the controversy that resulted. We learned that, although one can criticize details of Haeckel’s work for technical inaccuracies, the main thrust of his work on embryonic development is correct . Haeckel was a respected nineteenth century zoologist and a leading proponent of Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection in Germany, who still inspires a great deal of philosophical and theological opposition. This should not surprise us. After all, Haeckel proposed a general philosophy of human reality that placed humans in the same evolutionary line as the rest of the animal world, thus denying the claim of Christian theologians and others that human existence could be explained only by reference to the supernatural. He also advanced a naturalistic psychology that explained the human mind in terms of biological evolution of nervous system, thus directly opposing the views of of religious theology and much of traditional philosophy, which hold that human beings manifest categorically separate natures: mind (soul) and the body. In addition, Haeckel directly opposed the dogma and supernaturalism promoted by religions and fought against the strong influence that the churches imposed on education, politics and other social institutions in the Germany of his time. In what follows, I will outline some of these aspects of Haeckel’s work which are in many ways a preview of ideas found in current secular humanism and rational skepticism. (My source for the quoted and paraphrased material is an article on Haeckel by Rollo Handy in the Encyclopedia of Philosophy.* ) 1. A Darwinian evolutionary philosophy: Haeckel applied Darwinian evolutionary theory to develop a general philosophy of nature and human existence. Professor Handy tells us that "(Haeckel) .. was convinced of the essential unity of organic and inorganic nature and argued that the simplest protoplasmic substances arose from inorganic carbonates through spontaneous generation." This implies that he did not see any rational justification for dividing up reality into different categories, e.g., material and mental. All of reality, inorganic, organic, including human reality, could be explained solely in naturalistic, material terms. Thus, he opposed all forms of theological and philosophical dualism that were prevalent in his period and are still very much in evidence today, dualisms that invoke mysterious non-material categories of reality such as spirit, mind or soul. 2. A materialistic view of reality and human consciousness: His monistic materialism is a general philosophy of reality that rejects any reference to non-material, non-natural entities. For him, even human thought or consciousness can be explained in terms of the evolution of the human organism and human nervous system. "(Haeckel) ..was confident that "consciousness, thought, and speculation" are "functions of the ganglionic cells of the cortex of the brain," Handy also points out that in the general area of psychology Haeckel attempted a scientific account of the soul as natural phenomenon. For him, psychology is a natural science, part of physiology. But he recognized the difficulty of establishing a naturalistic psychology, which he saw as requiring "a complete knowledge of the human organism, especially the brain." Haeckel regarded consciousness as the central mystery of psychology, and the citadel of all mystical and dualistic errors, viz. the mind-body dualism: "The prevalence of mind-body dualism in psychology has led to great confusion." To avoid this problematic dualism, Haeckel argued that consciousness is a natural phenomenon, dependent upon a material substratum. 3. Opposition to supernaturalism and religious dogma: As a result of his commitment to rational inquiry and the scientific method, he carried on a life-long struggle against entrenched religious dogma and supernaturalism. As Handy notes: "Haeckel rejected revelation and theological faith. He combated the superstitions associated with the major religions and attacked the influence of the church as an institution in politics and education. He was no respecter of religious heros, prominent clerics, sacred myths, or widely held dogma. He tried to show that theological beliefs are incompatible with scientific data, unreasonable or merely dogmatic" He was a rational skeptic concerning all claims of religious miracles, and likely also was critical and doubtful about claims of the mystics and clairvoyants. 4. Advocate of Humanistic Ethics and Rational Religion: He saw a need for a form of humanistic ethics and "rational religion", as vehicles by which the rationalist could express his sense of moral and spiritual values. As Handy states it: "Haeckel’s admiration of Spinoza and Goethe, and his belief that man’s ethical aspirations needed some support, led him to advocate a monistic religion. ... Haeckel wanted to give rational support to the true, the good and the beautiful. . . Truth is to be found in the study of nature by means of critical observation and reflection, and hence revelation must be rejected." On the subject of ethical virtue, Haeckel held that "..what we call virtue, in our monistic religion, coincides with the early Christian idea of charity, toleration, compassion, and assistance. These are humanistic as well as Christian precepts, and are to be emphasized in the monistic religion. . " 5. Opposition to all forms of theism. According to Haeckel, a pantheism that identifies God and substance is necessarily "the world system of the modern scientist." All scientists who think that theism can be reconciled with science are, in Haeckel’s view, either dishonest or confused, or victims of sophistry. Of course this implies that Haeckel did not classify pantheism as a form of theism; or as Handy says, "Haeckel (probably) agreed with Schopenhauer that pantheism is only a polite form of atheism." 6 Advocated progressive, social reform. Because of his belief in progress and social reform, Haeckel reminds us of later naturalistic, humanistic philosophers such as John Dewey: He was very interested in the need for social reform and saw social progress as a law of nature. He saw a great social need for greater education in the sciences. He decried the many impediments to free inquiry, but was optimistic about the consequences of an improved system of education. A Precursor to modern Secular Humanism and Rational Skepticism: Besides being a zoologist and leading exponent of Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection in Germany, Ernst Haeckel was a philosopher and rational skeptic whose humanistic outlook can be seen as a precursor to the secular humanism and rational skepticism of the twentieth century. Very much in spirit of Thomas Paine, Robert Ingersoll and John Dewey, Ernst Haeckel was a nineteenth century fighter for rationality and humanistic values, long before many dared carry on that fight against the established religious doctrines and the prevailing dualistic philosophies. * Source: The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol 3, (Collier-Macmillan, 1967, New York; article on Ernst Heinrich Haeckel by Rollo Handy, pp. 399-402) Juan Bernal (Worker in the field)
A Skeleton in the Closet? By Benito Franqui There has been some gossip in certain quarters that the neo-Darwinian emperor may after all not be clothed as well as is generally believed. If these rumors were confined to creationist circles, humanists would be justified in dismissing them without further thought. When a scientist with impeccable credentials and no apparent creationist axes to grind ( Dr. Arne A. Wyller ) makes similar claims, however, fairness demands that his views be impartially investigated. Carl Sagan would have done no less. This issue should be of particular interest to humanists since prejudice is unethical as well as unscientific. We have just learned about how the contributions of another pioneer in evolutionary biology ( Ernst Haeckel ) were unjustly dismissed for many years. Other ideas which eventually proved sound (such as stones falling from the sky and continental drift) were also being ridiculed not too long ago. Should the neo-Darwinist paradigm indeed be afflicted with some serious weaknesses, it would behoove us to help insure that these flaws are not swept under the carpet. We take pride in our open-mindedness -- here's an opportunity to demonstrate that we're not spooked even by the specters of creationism and Lamarckism, and are theerefore able to confront them with truly unfossilized minds. DR. WYLLER'S CLAIMS: Dr. Wyller's claims are well documented in his book "The Creating Consciousness"(TCC). Because of the risk of his being mistaken as an advocate of creationism, the best way to understand his claims is by actually reading TCC. In a short review like this one, I can only touch on a few of his main points. In TCC, Dr. Wyller argues that the currently accepted neo-Darwinian theory of evolution is afflicted with serious weaknesses which cast doubt on its claim to be a truly rigorous scientific theory: 1. Darwin's original work does not contain a single line of mathematics. 2. Even today, neo-Darwinism has not yet provided any predictions which can be compared with actual observations. In TCC's own words: "The lack of mathematization and of predictive capability even in current post-Darwinian theory is the reason the Darwinian revolution is discussed in this book in the context of humanism. Darwinian theory is not a bona fide hard natural science like physics, nor is it as soft a science as, for example, anthropology, although it leans more in that direction. ... in the development of molecular biology and its coupling to something known as information theory, evolutionary biology may occupy a unique position as the only natural science deeply related to the humanistic disciplines. Thus, evolutionary biology may bridge the gap between the two fundamental areas of human intellectual endeavors: the creative arts and the natural sciences." How about the claim by Richard Dawkins ("The Blind Watchmaker" ) that computer simulation studies have validated neo-Darwinism? This is what TCC has to say: "But this is an intellectual sleight of hand of the worst kind, because the whole point is that the computer should not know beforehand the content of the model sentence and be able to compare each successive try with this model sentence. Dawkin's book has passionately argued that evolution is a BLIND watchmaker." Dr. Wyller's viewpoint has probably been shaped to a large degree by his training in astrophysics, a field in which he is expected to back up his claims with comprehensive mathematical analyses leading to quantitative predictions which can then be either confirmed or negated through experimental observations (the methodology of the so-called hard sciences). Dr. Wyller deserves credit for trying to apply this methodology to the study of the evolution of life. Whether this can actually be done in practice still remains to be seen. SUPPORTING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE: TCC contains an excellent account ( which by itself makes the book well worth reading ) of the evolution of the universe as currently understood by science, all the way from the "Big Bang" through galaxy formation, star formation, planet formation, earliest life forms, and the development of "intelligent" life forms. Some familiarity with this description is essential in order to acquire an adequate grasp of the tendency of the universe to evolve towards more and more complex forms. The more familiar we become with this description, the less likely it seems ( at least to me ) that all of this complexity has arisen entirely out of accidental processes, without any assistance at all from some agency which could in some sense be called "intelligent". CONNECTIONS WITH HUMANISM AND PHILOSOPHY: TCC also highlights the history of the conceptualization of "God" by theologians, philosophers and metaphysicians. CONCLUSION: For the above reasons, I regard TCC as "must" reading for anyone seriously interested in possible ways in which evolutionary biology may itself evolve in the future, and in the connections of evolutionary biology to humanism and philosophy. New HAOC Board There have been a few changes on the HAOC board. Frank Farsad will replace Lou Regal as Vice-president and program director. Lou did a great job as program director, which is a time consuming position. We want to thank both Lou and Callie Becker for serving on the board. Also, we are very pleased to have Juan Bernal and Benito Franqui as new board members. If HAOC is to grow and contribute to the welfare of its members we need board members with enthusiasm and good ideas. The CATholic Service: Contributed by Pat Bryant A farmer named
Muldoon lived alone in the countryside with a pet cat which he loved and doted
on. After many long years of companionship, the cat finally died, so Muldoon
went to the parish priest: "Faerther, my
dear old cat is dead. Could you be after sayin' a mass for the creature?" Father Patrick
replied, "I am so very sorry to hear about your cat's demise. But,
unfartunately we cannot have sarvices for an animal in the churich. However,
there's a new denomination down the road, no tellin' phwhat they believe, but
maybe they'll do somethin' for the poor beast." Muldoon said,
"I'll go right now. ..Do you think $500 is enough to donate for the
sarvice?" Father Patrick:
"Phwhy didn't you TELL ME the cat was Catholic?!!" |
