Soooo...
Miracles.
No.
Here's why:
Miracles are defined as "an event not ascribable to human power or the laws of nature and consequently attributed to a supernatural, especially divine, agency." So a miracle by definition is something that breaks the very laws of nature, something seemingly impossible, incredible, fantastical. The only thing capable of these feats is an omnipotent deity or supernatural force. The conversion of water to wine, walking on water, rising from the dead... pretty impressive. Personally I prefer Derren Brown but each to his own.
So why don't I believe in miracles? Well mostly because I don't ascribe to any particular religious belief (see other posts for why) so when I come across something that doesn't seem to make sense or have a logical cause then I don't just instantly say "[Insert appropriate deity/supernatural force here] has done this! Praise be to [him/her/it]!" I like to find out how and why the event has occurred.
Case in point (and one of the funniest stories in the entire world) the story of the "crying" trees in Frezno, California. A tree outside of a cathedral started to weep the tears of God himself (strange how they didn't say they were the tears of Allah or the tears of the Norse goddess Freyja just went straight for their own god...). People came from all over to bask in the glory of God's wonder. Crying trees. Pretty incredible huh? The one problem with this is that it wasn't actually tears. It was bug poop. Aphids were sucking the sap out of the tree and then pooping out a liquid-like substance that rained down due to the sheer number of the aphids. So people were travelling from all over to go and stand under a tree and get crapped on by aphids whilst calling out to God Almighty. In my opinion funny as Hell.
So how was it that people so easily believed that these were the tears of God? Well first off ignorance. These people didn't know about the aphids. This is perfectly excusable. They didn't know. Fair enough (although it does apparently happen every year and there were trees down the road that were also "crying" but anyway...) people can't be expected to know the reason for something they have never seen before (...every year...) but the way you react to something new is down to you as a person. Why didn't anyone question this? Well the second reason they believed this was a miracle is that they have never had to question anything in their entire lives. This is now just speculation but something tells me that they haven't ever had to think of anything for themselves. Parents, school, politicians and right the way through their lives the Good Book. They have been brought up to follow and at no point was questioning encouraged.
Now I don't see myself as some "free-spirit, man!" or some counter-culture guru who "knows the way things truly are" (I'm not that much of a dick). I am absolutely sure that I have been influenced by my parents and society and all the other various influences that can influence me but what I believe sets me apart from those who believed a tree was crying is that I would ask "Why is this tree crying?"
If I saw a tree crying I would not go "Wow. That's cool. God must have done that" I would find out exactly how plant-life had developed the ability to cry then I would probably offer it a tissue and tell it to pull itself together. My mind boggles that the first person that noticed this just accepted that this must be a miracle and didn't question it which brings me onto reason number kolme (3 in Finnish. Does that count as revision?): These people were looking for a miracle.
It's a sad fact that on this speck of rock and water, which is spinning round a massive (but not that massive in the general scheme of things) ball of nuclear fusion, not everyone is quite content. People are always looking for signs, especially from their chosen deity, because loneliness, for most, is a fate worse than death. In the TV series Vikings, a Northumbrian monk is kidnapped by vikings (surprise!) and contemplates the slaughter and sale into slavery of all his kinsmen. He calls out to God and asks why this has happened and why He won't answer his prayers, desperately looking for a sign that he is not alone because that would be so incredibly crushing.
(Rather cleverly, on the writers part, he hears a noise and then finds an owl has flown into the house. He says "Oh it's just an owl" but if he was a viking he would see this as a sign from the gods. Owl's have no meaning in his own religion and so it is dismissed as a coincidence...)
If you had a sign, anything at all, to show that you weren't alone in this gigantic infinite void we call the universe, how reassured would you be? To know that everything will be ok and you don't need to be scared anymore. Perhaps more importantly that you are right about the way the world works.
"Wait a minute" I hear you say "just because this one was poop doesn't invalidate all the other miracles!" and that's true but I can dismiss a fair few more miracles with only a single sentence.
Why did God perform this miracle?
"Jesus has appeared in my toast!" Why?
"The Virgin Mary has appeared to me on a cork!" Why?
The really stupid miracles where it's Jesus' face on some toast or his mum on a mouldy wall are simply pareidolia (Google it, I'm not doing everything for you...). Why would Jesus turn up on some toast? An omnipotent deity, that can literally create and destroy matter itself spends his time taking selfies with heated bread? Seriously? I kind of talked about this in the post I did on religious hypocrisy but if I was God I think malaria would come higher up on the list of "Stuff I should deal with" than imprinting my likeness with the help of electrical appliances onto wheat products. Anyone that actually believes that that's what God does is essentially insulting their one true deity.
Even the famous ones like turning water into wine and walking on water were (if they have been reported truthfully and accurately in that most inaccurate of books) stupid miracles. Very impressive tricks but it's not going to do much for tsunami victims.
These are just useless miracles, obviously they are stupid but what about when someone is saved from a natural disaster or survives a horrific car crash unscathed? What about when Jesus fed the 5000 or healed the sick? Well I think I can cast a shadow of doubt onto these miracles with one question too:
So God is selective?
Jesus feeds the 5000 but leaves all the other starving people in the world to go hungry? He cures one guys leprosy but doesn't actually eradicate it from the face of the planet? He heals SOME blind and lame people but still leaves open the possibility and opportunity for everyone else to go blind or lame?
This stumps the whole "All loving God" idea pretty good. He saves some guy from a car crash but the kid born with a hole in their heart doesn't get a look in. How loving.
At this point the devout believer in miracles desperately flicks though his papers and tries to find a miracle that can survive this barrage of questioning. They don't find one.
The only way out of this is to accept that their God cares more about toast selfies than dying children, accept that their God is not all-powerful or he isn't all-loving, accept that their God is selective and may well not love them or reject the existence of miracles. I suggest that the last one is the most comforting and doesn't impinge on God (as long as you can live with the whole "part of His plan" thing and that he isn't going to come and save you. You will have to save yourself or look to others for help).
So why doesn't God intervene? Well imagine that miracles are real, the laws of nature are putty in the hands of God. It would be terrifying. The laws of nature could change at any time. What if God decides to turn off gravity or walking on water becomes possible for everyone? What if it was more subtle like increasing the boiling temperature of water by 1 degree? How would you be able to live in this world of uncertainty? It would be utter chaos. But the world is not chaos it is strictly ordered. Why would God create such order and then 6000 years in (there are actually people that think the world is only 6000 years old which isn't actually far out. I mean they are only wrong by a few BILLION YEARS) just go "Screw it I want to walk on water" or "Crap, out of wine. Quick pass me the Evian"?
Miracles make no sense. It's non-sensical. It's bloody stupid.
So next time you see a story in the newspaper or hear of a miraculous occurrence, please stop and think to yourself "Could it just be bug poop?"
Wednesday, 5 February 2014
Sunday, 12 January 2014
Ethics of the Bible
So I said in my last post I would do a post about Bible ethics and here it is! Before we start yes this will probably offend someone somewhere but then again what doesn't? So lets just jump right on in.
There are many people who believe that the Bible contains all of the laws and rules needed to live a good life. If these are transgressed then God will punish you in this life or the next (or both!) Now I'm going to leave out the whole punishment thing because I could talk forever about how eternally damming someone to Hell for exercising the free will that God himself gave us seems slightly insane and instead I am just going to look at what the Bible teaches us and what we have to do to get into Heaven.
So the most famous Biblical laws (and the basis for most Western laws) is the good ol' 10 Commandments handed down to Moses by the good Lord Almighty on two stone tablets. Can you remember them all? I certainly can't. To Wikipedia!
Interestingly the various different religious groups that recognise the 10 Commandments number the rules in different orders to each other. To make this easy I'm going to use the Septuagint version which is apparently the version used by most Orthodox Christians. It's strange really that there can be different versions of universal rules to live by... Anyway here they are:
1. You shall have no other Gods before me. (Jealous much...)
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. (I like to think of this one as God saying "No pictures!" to a group of paparazzi.)
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. (I'm definitely going to Hell...)
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. (It's Sunday today... I better pack a fire extinguisher.)
5. Honour thy father and thy mother. (Have I done this? How do you "honour" exactly?)
6. You shall not murder. (Finally onto the big ones now. Pretty clear this one.)
7. You shall not commit adultery. (If you like it then you should of put ring on it...)
8. You shall not steal. (Does this include music piracy? I would hate to go to Hell because I downloaded some songs when I was 15.)
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbour. (No telling porkies.)
10. You shall not covet thy neighbour's house, thy shall not covet thy neighbour's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbour's. (Green-eyed monster is bad.)
Those are the rules as they are written in (a version of) the Bible. Nice and clear aren't they? I'm sure they worked great during the Bronze Age. Here we come to what I think is the main problem with the Bible and particularly it's laws.
Quick survey how many people out there in internet land own servants? A few of you maybe. A cleaner, gardner or something perhaps. Not everyone though I guess. How many of you own an ox? No-one? Well how do you keep your lawn cut back? Anyway pretty much no-one in the modern world owns an ox. What about a donkey? No? Right...
Why don't the 10 Commandments say "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's iPhone"? How are these laws at all relevant to the modern age? Why don't they mention the internet, man's single most important achievement in my opinion other than walking on two legs, fire, the wheel and space travel (which also isn't mentioned in the Bible at all)?
Could it be that these rules aren't the work of God at all? That these were created by man for man at a very particular time in history where adherence to these laws was the best thing for society? I believe so. Now that isn't a problem at all but society changes. Fixed moral laws enshrined in religious doctrine do not. This is the problem.
You know Christians that say they believe in the Bible and believe homosexuals are evil but continue to wear clothes of mixed fabrics? Aren't they annoying? The Bible clearly states:
Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)
And then they go and cut their hair and shave too the monsters!
Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
You cannot say that homosexuals should be stoned to death because God says so and then just casually ignore these rules. That's picking and choosing and I'm pretty sure the big man upstairs won't like hearing that you are CHOOSING which of his sacred laws are right and wrong. That's blasphemy and if you check your Bible you'll find that that's an executable offense against our one true deity.
But it's not just the crazy Christians like the Westboro Baptist Church and their ilk. Ever met a more "liberal" Christian that respects people if they believe in a different religion? Well...
Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)
Yeah... You can be all inclusive and stuff but according to your holy book you will be going to Hell.
Now of course this is not what I believe. I don't believe in Hell. I don't believe these things are actually wrong. The point I am making is that if you accept that the Bible is the word of God then you cannot pick and choose. That's a copout. That's knowing your religion is actually wrong about a lot of things but putting your fingers in your ears and going "lalalalalalalalala" to make it go away.
The argument can (and has) been made that the coming of Jesus "replaced" the Old Testament laws and that we should now follow the teachings of Jesus and forget the whole stoning stuff. "Love thy neighbour". Well here is something else Jesus said:
Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
That's from Matthew 10:34. Praise Jesus and his... urm... sword. And then there is the story of the fig tree. Jesus was walking along and he was hungry. He saw a fig tree in the distance and so went up to it to get some figs. Now it wasn't the right season for figs so of course there were no figs on the tree. So Jesus, very rationally, CURSES THE FIG TREE! "May you never bear fruit again!" our good Lord and saviour intones! The next day the fig is seen to be withered and dead. Yeah Jesus you show that bastard fig tree! How dare it not have figs when it isn't... actually... in season... (Mark 11:12-14 and 11:20-25, Matthew 21:18-22)
You cannot use the Bible as an ethical rule book because it's the word of God and then leave out the rules you don't like. In my opinion there are really only two options. Either it's all correct and the word of God and you stop cutting your hair and stone homosexuals to death OR you can recognise that the Bible is an ancient text that is important to understand as it is has had a massive effect on the entire world and still is affecting the world today but should not be taken literally as the word of God that has to be followed to the letter. I could continue to ramble on about all the contradictions in the Bible (it's REAL definition of marriage would perhaps change a few homophobes minds about same-sex marriage...) which also show it to be a man-made creation with numerous flaws but I don't need to. I've said enough (I hope) to maybe get some people to question what they think of as Biblical law.
The Bible is an historical text and should be treated as such. Now go shave. That beard looks ridiculous.
There are many people who believe that the Bible contains all of the laws and rules needed to live a good life. If these are transgressed then God will punish you in this life or the next (or both!) Now I'm going to leave out the whole punishment thing because I could talk forever about how eternally damming someone to Hell for exercising the free will that God himself gave us seems slightly insane and instead I am just going to look at what the Bible teaches us and what we have to do to get into Heaven.
So the most famous Biblical laws (and the basis for most Western laws) is the good ol' 10 Commandments handed down to Moses by the good Lord Almighty on two stone tablets. Can you remember them all? I certainly can't. To Wikipedia!
Interestingly the various different religious groups that recognise the 10 Commandments number the rules in different orders to each other. To make this easy I'm going to use the Septuagint version which is apparently the version used by most Orthodox Christians. It's strange really that there can be different versions of universal rules to live by... Anyway here they are:
1. You shall have no other Gods before me. (Jealous much...)
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. (I like to think of this one as God saying "No pictures!" to a group of paparazzi.)
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. (I'm definitely going to Hell...)
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. (It's Sunday today... I better pack a fire extinguisher.)
5. Honour thy father and thy mother. (Have I done this? How do you "honour" exactly?)
6. You shall not murder. (Finally onto the big ones now. Pretty clear this one.)
7. You shall not commit adultery. (If you like it then you should of put ring on it...)
8. You shall not steal. (Does this include music piracy? I would hate to go to Hell because I downloaded some songs when I was 15.)
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbour. (No telling porkies.)
10. You shall not covet thy neighbour's house, thy shall not covet thy neighbour's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbour's. (Green-eyed monster is bad.)
Those are the rules as they are written in (a version of) the Bible. Nice and clear aren't they? I'm sure they worked great during the Bronze Age. Here we come to what I think is the main problem with the Bible and particularly it's laws.
Quick survey how many people out there in internet land own servants? A few of you maybe. A cleaner, gardner or something perhaps. Not everyone though I guess. How many of you own an ox? No-one? Well how do you keep your lawn cut back? Anyway pretty much no-one in the modern world owns an ox. What about a donkey? No? Right...
Why don't the 10 Commandments say "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's iPhone"? How are these laws at all relevant to the modern age? Why don't they mention the internet, man's single most important achievement in my opinion other than walking on two legs, fire, the wheel and space travel (which also isn't mentioned in the Bible at all)?
Could it be that these rules aren't the work of God at all? That these were created by man for man at a very particular time in history where adherence to these laws was the best thing for society? I believe so. Now that isn't a problem at all but society changes. Fixed moral laws enshrined in religious doctrine do not. This is the problem.
You know Christians that say they believe in the Bible and believe homosexuals are evil but continue to wear clothes of mixed fabrics? Aren't they annoying? The Bible clearly states:
Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)
And then they go and cut their hair and shave too the monsters!
Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
You cannot say that homosexuals should be stoned to death because God says so and then just casually ignore these rules. That's picking and choosing and I'm pretty sure the big man upstairs won't like hearing that you are CHOOSING which of his sacred laws are right and wrong. That's blasphemy and if you check your Bible you'll find that that's an executable offense against our one true deity.
But it's not just the crazy Christians like the Westboro Baptist Church and their ilk. Ever met a more "liberal" Christian that respects people if they believe in a different religion? Well...
Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)
Yeah... You can be all inclusive and stuff but according to your holy book you will be going to Hell.
Now of course this is not what I believe. I don't believe in Hell. I don't believe these things are actually wrong. The point I am making is that if you accept that the Bible is the word of God then you cannot pick and choose. That's a copout. That's knowing your religion is actually wrong about a lot of things but putting your fingers in your ears and going "lalalalalalalalala" to make it go away.
The argument can (and has) been made that the coming of Jesus "replaced" the Old Testament laws and that we should now follow the teachings of Jesus and forget the whole stoning stuff. "Love thy neighbour". Well here is something else Jesus said:
Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
That's from Matthew 10:34. Praise Jesus and his... urm... sword. And then there is the story of the fig tree. Jesus was walking along and he was hungry. He saw a fig tree in the distance and so went up to it to get some figs. Now it wasn't the right season for figs so of course there were no figs on the tree. So Jesus, very rationally, CURSES THE FIG TREE! "May you never bear fruit again!" our good Lord and saviour intones! The next day the fig is seen to be withered and dead. Yeah Jesus you show that bastard fig tree! How dare it not have figs when it isn't... actually... in season... (Mark 11:12-14 and 11:20-25, Matthew 21:18-22)
You cannot use the Bible as an ethical rule book because it's the word of God and then leave out the rules you don't like. In my opinion there are really only two options. Either it's all correct and the word of God and you stop cutting your hair and stone homosexuals to death OR you can recognise that the Bible is an ancient text that is important to understand as it is has had a massive effect on the entire world and still is affecting the world today but should not be taken literally as the word of God that has to be followed to the letter. I could continue to ramble on about all the contradictions in the Bible (it's REAL definition of marriage would perhaps change a few homophobes minds about same-sex marriage...) which also show it to be a man-made creation with numerous flaws but I don't need to. I've said enough (I hope) to maybe get some people to question what they think of as Biblical law.
The Bible is an historical text and should be treated as such. Now go shave. That beard looks ridiculous.
Wednesday, 18 December 2013
Religious Hypocrisy
So I'm back (well I never really left) and I thought it was high time that I got back to good hard philosophy but instead of that I am going to complain about religion for however many words this takes. Enjoy! (What am I saying of course you will.)
So what the hell do I mean by "Religious Hypocrisy"? Well I guess there are a number of ways of looking at it (yeah just so you know this could be a long one). One way is just the classic example of a believer spouting: "God says I should love my neighbour!" and then immediately going on to oppress some minorities and homosexuals. I could talk a lot about this but really everyone understands and knows this: "God loves us all", "Forgiveness!", "Charity!", "You're a single parent? DIE HEATHEN!" you know the classic stuff.
However what I find most annoying and self conceited and simply idiotic is more subtle than this simple forgetfulness of the Bible's teachings (I should do a post about Biblical ethical code... Coming soon to this blog!).
Have you ever seen a post on Facebook or more likely a picture of a post on Facebook along the lines of "Wow God is fantastic! My toast didn't burn even a little bit!"or "My toast didn't fall butter side down! Praise Jesus!" (is it obvious I haven't had breakfast yet?) or "I won £20 on the horses! All hail the almighty Cthulhu! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!" (Cause ya know Christianity ain't the only religion around. Elder Gods need love too...)?
Posts like these ROYALLY piss me off. Here's why:
These posts indicate that the author believes that their particular brand of deity is capable of interfering in their creation in favour of their believers whether it's saving your toast from a buttery nightmare (I'm really hungry) or helping you find 20p on the floor.
Now... given that God CAN interfere and that he DOES in favour of his believers, why is there still evil in the world? Seriously none of these idiots (just to be clear I don't think they are idiots because they have a belief, I think they are idiots because they haven't for a second questioned said belief and considered anyone else but themselves) have ever stopped to think "If God can help me pass an exam, why does AIDS exist?" or "If God has the ability to alter the physics of the universe and make my cold all better, why are there tornadoes?"
These people are the worst type of believers in the world. They can't see past their own lives at all! To consider that their God is not a God for all and is in fact a personal God just for them and their friends and family is the very pinnacle of arrogance and vanity.
Now of course I haven't even mentioned that there are perfectly reasonable explanations for good fortune and you don't have to bring in an eternal, omnipotent God into it, but I don't need to. These people are still wrong even if you do accept that God exists and that miracles happen.
Jesus turned water into wine so he could get pissed at a guy's house but eradicating malaria is a bit too hard for him? Jesus walked on water but tape worms are still around?
Saying that God can do everything and will do everything to help you is a very impressive statement but you have to expect people to ask "Well why isn't he helping me?" It's beliefs like this that lead to ridiculous headlines like "Gays Caused the Asian Tsunami!" or "Sneaky Sodomists Smash States With Hurricane Sandy!" (that one was fun to make up). Minority groups get blamed for these entirely natural disasters because people don't like to think it's random. That's terrifying. No-one looking out for you, no reason that you shouldn't die. There has to be a reason! Right!? You can be saved from these thoughts though if you accept that it's part of THE PLAN. The Lord moves in mysterious ways (Fun Fact: If you use that phrase within earshot of me prepare yourself for one hell of a philosophy lecture) and seemingly one of those ways is to ineffectually eradicate homosexuality and other sinfulness with the use of natural disasters.
"Yes ok so a few brown people died from a preventable illness but God wanted them to die! It's all part of his plan. I'm sure they were secretly evil. Of course they could be good Christians in which case they should be happy in their suffering because it brings you closer to Jesus!" (Seriously people have actually believed and still believe this crap. Mother Teresa for one. Bet you didn't know that.)
To think that you are so special that God will break the laws of physics for you and only you but will do nothing for starving children is abhorrent. I feel sickened when I see statements to that affect.
Now of course (as I am sure you know) I believe that disasters ARE random. There is no plan or design. It isn't a punishment or a retaliation from God, it's physical processes acting out on a lump of rock spinning around space. When you win on the horses or pass an exam it's entirely within reason for these things to happen and it doesn't need an interventionist God. In my opinion, if God was going to help us he would do more than preserve the deliciousness of our toasted wheat products (I am so hungry). Just off the top of my head, if I was God, I would sort out Syria cause that's one hell of a mess, I would sort out the Middle East because that's one hell of a mess, I would sort out Haiti cause that's STILL one hell of a mess, I would sort out Charlie Sheen cause he's one hell of a mess and I would sort out my room because that is one HELL of a mess (actually it's not that bad but I thought that would make a good joke. You know, needing a deity to clean my room cause it's THAT bad. No? Yes? Answers on a postcard. Or the internet).
With so many problems in the world (a lot of them caused by God in the first place) why doesn't he help us? Why has God forsaken us but still takes the time to help out with toast?
And with that I'm off to have breakfast.
So what the hell do I mean by "Religious Hypocrisy"? Well I guess there are a number of ways of looking at it (yeah just so you know this could be a long one). One way is just the classic example of a believer spouting: "God says I should love my neighbour!" and then immediately going on to oppress some minorities and homosexuals. I could talk a lot about this but really everyone understands and knows this: "God loves us all", "Forgiveness!", "Charity!", "You're a single parent? DIE HEATHEN!" you know the classic stuff.
However what I find most annoying and self conceited and simply idiotic is more subtle than this simple forgetfulness of the Bible's teachings (I should do a post about Biblical ethical code... Coming soon to this blog!).
Have you ever seen a post on Facebook or more likely a picture of a post on Facebook along the lines of "Wow God is fantastic! My toast didn't burn even a little bit!"or "My toast didn't fall butter side down! Praise Jesus!" (is it obvious I haven't had breakfast yet?) or "I won £20 on the horses! All hail the almighty Cthulhu! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!" (Cause ya know Christianity ain't the only religion around. Elder Gods need love too...)?
Posts like these ROYALLY piss me off. Here's why:
These posts indicate that the author believes that their particular brand of deity is capable of interfering in their creation in favour of their believers whether it's saving your toast from a buttery nightmare (I'm really hungry) or helping you find 20p on the floor.
Now... given that God CAN interfere and that he DOES in favour of his believers, why is there still evil in the world? Seriously none of these idiots (just to be clear I don't think they are idiots because they have a belief, I think they are idiots because they haven't for a second questioned said belief and considered anyone else but themselves) have ever stopped to think "If God can help me pass an exam, why does AIDS exist?" or "If God has the ability to alter the physics of the universe and make my cold all better, why are there tornadoes?"
These people are the worst type of believers in the world. They can't see past their own lives at all! To consider that their God is not a God for all and is in fact a personal God just for them and their friends and family is the very pinnacle of arrogance and vanity.
Now of course I haven't even mentioned that there are perfectly reasonable explanations for good fortune and you don't have to bring in an eternal, omnipotent God into it, but I don't need to. These people are still wrong even if you do accept that God exists and that miracles happen.
Jesus turned water into wine so he could get pissed at a guy's house but eradicating malaria is a bit too hard for him? Jesus walked on water but tape worms are still around?
Saying that God can do everything and will do everything to help you is a very impressive statement but you have to expect people to ask "Well why isn't he helping me?" It's beliefs like this that lead to ridiculous headlines like "Gays Caused the Asian Tsunami!" or "Sneaky Sodomists Smash States With Hurricane Sandy!" (that one was fun to make up). Minority groups get blamed for these entirely natural disasters because people don't like to think it's random. That's terrifying. No-one looking out for you, no reason that you shouldn't die. There has to be a reason! Right!? You can be saved from these thoughts though if you accept that it's part of THE PLAN. The Lord moves in mysterious ways (Fun Fact: If you use that phrase within earshot of me prepare yourself for one hell of a philosophy lecture) and seemingly one of those ways is to ineffectually eradicate homosexuality and other sinfulness with the use of natural disasters.
"Yes ok so a few brown people died from a preventable illness but God wanted them to die! It's all part of his plan. I'm sure they were secretly evil. Of course they could be good Christians in which case they should be happy in their suffering because it brings you closer to Jesus!" (Seriously people have actually believed and still believe this crap. Mother Teresa for one. Bet you didn't know that.)
To think that you are so special that God will break the laws of physics for you and only you but will do nothing for starving children is abhorrent. I feel sickened when I see statements to that affect.
Now of course (as I am sure you know) I believe that disasters ARE random. There is no plan or design. It isn't a punishment or a retaliation from God, it's physical processes acting out on a lump of rock spinning around space. When you win on the horses or pass an exam it's entirely within reason for these things to happen and it doesn't need an interventionist God. In my opinion, if God was going to help us he would do more than preserve the deliciousness of our toasted wheat products (I am so hungry). Just off the top of my head, if I was God, I would sort out Syria cause that's one hell of a mess, I would sort out the Middle East because that's one hell of a mess, I would sort out Haiti cause that's STILL one hell of a mess, I would sort out Charlie Sheen cause he's one hell of a mess and I would sort out my room because that is one HELL of a mess (actually it's not that bad but I thought that would make a good joke. You know, needing a deity to clean my room cause it's THAT bad. No? Yes? Answers on a postcard. Or the internet).
With so many problems in the world (a lot of them caused by God in the first place) why doesn't he help us? Why has God forsaken us but still takes the time to help out with toast?
And with that I'm off to have breakfast.
Monday, 25 November 2013
Unnecessary Product Development
Hello once again. In the immortal words of Monty Python "and now for something completely different." Last time I wrote about self defense, this time I'm here to write about "Unnecessary Product Development". Its the title and everything. This post is actually going to be doing what this blog set out to do. Whinge meaninglessly on the internet. Don't expect any intelligent debate or important subject matter here. This one is just me complaining and it's about time too! There has been way too many important discussions going on... So lets not waste time and get right down to it.
Have you ever been shaving or washing something or been brushing your teeth and thought to yourself "This product is good and all, I mean it's perfectly serviceable and does the job it was designed to do very well, but I wish an extra couple of million pounds could be spent on it" or "If only those top research scientists had put a bit more elbow grease into designing this state of the art razor"?
No? Well I don't know how you would answer, this is a piece of text not a conversation, but I would guess no. Even though the majority will say to themselves "These things I own are more than good enough" companies will continue to pump out new products everyday. Just think about all the "advances" in sharp blades to cut off facial hair there have been in the last 10 years. The last 5 years even. Is it really necessary? I would argue no it bloody isn't.
The poster child for this sort of ridiculousness is, of course, razor blades. From my extensive research (2 minutes on Google and reading through a Guardian news story from 2008) this stupid arms race began with the release of the 3 bladed Gillette Mach3 in 1998. Now ignoring the frankly idiotic name ( I could rant for so long about stupid product names) do you want to know how much it cost to research the addition of one blade? To go from the previous 2 blades to the Mach3 3 blades? $680 million. That's like having 680 bags containing 1 million dollars each (just to make it clear).
How many schools could you build with $680 million? How many doctors could you pay? How many nurses could you train? How many people who live in poverty could you feed, clothe and give shelter to? Just think, this isn't the budget for every razor blade developed in the world, this is the budget for ONE razor blade developed in 1998. It's not just razors though is it. There are new washing detergents and surface cleaners ("Kills 99.9% of bacteria!" I need to do a post about how bad this is...) and soaps and anti-perspirants and thousands of other products and literally billions is being spent on their development.
Now don't misunderstand me, I am not a communist. I understand the importance of a competitive market and companies have to spend ridiculous amounts to keep up with the competition. These companies employ a huge number of people and generate millions in tax. So all good and happy. Well...
I can't help but think about how unnecessary it all is. A two or even one bladed razor is really, when you think about it, good enough. Do washing up liquids really need to be any better than they already are? Do tooth brushes really need advancing much further? Is it time we just sort of said "Ok guys thanks for all the hard work but I think we can give it a rest now"? All of these developments have improved peoples lives, people are living longer thanks to these products and aren't risking septicemia every morning tackling their stubble, but we don't need anything more now. This is how these companies work they create need and then fill it for you but what we have to realize is that these are not needs anymore. They were solved years ago. You don't need an electric razor that has a soothing balm or sonically powered super lasers with flashing lights and hundreds of buttons.
I'm not calling for a revolution, I'm not asking people to burn there fancy schmancy electric razors and go back to using flint shards what I'm saying is that now we have these amazingly efficient products lets just stop. Done. Problem solved. More than good enough. Well done humanity! Lots of problems solved by your ingenuity once again! Now can we move onto the other problems in society please?
As a lover of science, to ask for an end to research is akin to a member of the Taliban asking if Allah is really all that great or a fireman asking if they really need to put out the fire because "it's just an orphanage" but I think we have more pressing troubles in the world right now, more interesting avenues of research than the length of people's facial hair. Think of all the scientists and researchers staring at videos of razors under microscopes. I feel for them... I don't know how to bring about the change so that everyone goes "You know what? This one is good enough." but I do so hope that one day it happens. Man's love of novelty has unfortunately created as many problems as it has helped to solve and I believe one of those problems is being fascinated with the newest fanciest razor simply because it's the newest.
Please next time you see the release of a fancy new product that tells you its 150% better than the previous product just think, is an extra 150% of product really needed?
Have you ever been shaving or washing something or been brushing your teeth and thought to yourself "This product is good and all, I mean it's perfectly serviceable and does the job it was designed to do very well, but I wish an extra couple of million pounds could be spent on it" or "If only those top research scientists had put a bit more elbow grease into designing this state of the art razor"?
No? Well I don't know how you would answer, this is a piece of text not a conversation, but I would guess no. Even though the majority will say to themselves "These things I own are more than good enough" companies will continue to pump out new products everyday. Just think about all the "advances" in sharp blades to cut off facial hair there have been in the last 10 years. The last 5 years even. Is it really necessary? I would argue no it bloody isn't.
The poster child for this sort of ridiculousness is, of course, razor blades. From my extensive research (2 minutes on Google and reading through a Guardian news story from 2008) this stupid arms race began with the release of the 3 bladed Gillette Mach3 in 1998. Now ignoring the frankly idiotic name ( I could rant for so long about stupid product names) do you want to know how much it cost to research the addition of one blade? To go from the previous 2 blades to the Mach3 3 blades? $680 million. That's like having 680 bags containing 1 million dollars each (just to make it clear).
How many schools could you build with $680 million? How many doctors could you pay? How many nurses could you train? How many people who live in poverty could you feed, clothe and give shelter to? Just think, this isn't the budget for every razor blade developed in the world, this is the budget for ONE razor blade developed in 1998. It's not just razors though is it. There are new washing detergents and surface cleaners ("Kills 99.9% of bacteria!" I need to do a post about how bad this is...) and soaps and anti-perspirants and thousands of other products and literally billions is being spent on their development.
Now don't misunderstand me, I am not a communist. I understand the importance of a competitive market and companies have to spend ridiculous amounts to keep up with the competition. These companies employ a huge number of people and generate millions in tax. So all good and happy. Well...
I can't help but think about how unnecessary it all is. A two or even one bladed razor is really, when you think about it, good enough. Do washing up liquids really need to be any better than they already are? Do tooth brushes really need advancing much further? Is it time we just sort of said "Ok guys thanks for all the hard work but I think we can give it a rest now"? All of these developments have improved peoples lives, people are living longer thanks to these products and aren't risking septicemia every morning tackling their stubble, but we don't need anything more now. This is how these companies work they create need and then fill it for you but what we have to realize is that these are not needs anymore. They were solved years ago. You don't need an electric razor that has a soothing balm or sonically powered super lasers with flashing lights and hundreds of buttons.
I'm not calling for a revolution, I'm not asking people to burn there fancy schmancy electric razors and go back to using flint shards what I'm saying is that now we have these amazingly efficient products lets just stop. Done. Problem solved. More than good enough. Well done humanity! Lots of problems solved by your ingenuity once again! Now can we move onto the other problems in society please?
As a lover of science, to ask for an end to research is akin to a member of the Taliban asking if Allah is really all that great or a fireman asking if they really need to put out the fire because "it's just an orphanage" but I think we have more pressing troubles in the world right now, more interesting avenues of research than the length of people's facial hair. Think of all the scientists and researchers staring at videos of razors under microscopes. I feel for them... I don't know how to bring about the change so that everyone goes "You know what? This one is good enough." but I do so hope that one day it happens. Man's love of novelty has unfortunately created as many problems as it has helped to solve and I believe one of those problems is being fascinated with the newest fanciest razor simply because it's the newest.
Please next time you see the release of a fancy new product that tells you its 150% better than the previous product just think, is an extra 150% of product really needed?
Friday, 22 November 2013
Self Defense
Hey y'all! So with this post I'm going to be writing about something a little different to the usual philosophy, ethics type thing. I'm going to be talking about self defense! Exciting isn't it? Basically I'm going to go over what self defense martial arts training has taught me, what I think is important to take away from it and I might throw in some handy hints I've picked up that could help you in a pickle (I have so wanted to use that phrase and I've finally found a good place for it!). I'm sure a lot of people who will read this will either already know the stuff I am going to go over or will be thinking "Well duh! That's just plain obvious!" and to you I say I don't care. It's my blog dammit and I do what I want. So anyway lets crack on!
Now I think a lot of you who read this will know already but I am actually a Black Belt (Does it need capitals? Well it looks cooler...) in a little-known Korean (the good Korea) martial art Choi Kwang-Do. It's a fairly new martial art compared to say karate or judo only being developed in 1987. You might think of this as a draw back but due to the fact it is new, it is based much more on modern research into biomechanics and emphasizes fluid motions to prevent stress and strain on the joints unlike older martial arts which focus on straight line movement which can jar and cause damage to your joints. Another plus of Choi Kwang-Do over other arts is that it is constantly changing and adapting. If something isn't working or could be done better then it is adapted. Nothing is set in stone which is a good way for it to develop and help improve it's effectiveness. I've been training for... um... well around 5 or 6 years (I should find out for definite) and I've really enjoyed it. I think it's improved my confidence and I've learnt a lot from it.
Now before I go on to tell you some of the super awesome ninja moves I know I should clear something up. I don't actually like the word self defense. I think self preservation is a better term to describe dealing with a mugging or street fight simply because if you are in a situation where you could very well come to serious harm, punching and kicking and grapples and throws are not the only things you can do o get out of the situation. That's the stuff I think of when I think of defense but if I was walking down the street and someone pulled out a knife and told me to give them all my money do you know what I would do? Would I jump in the air do a 360 spin and kick them in the throat? No. I would give them my money. Mugger gets his money, I don't get stabbed. Everybody wins. I have preserved myself without needing to get into a fist fight.
This answer might surprise people. "You spend all that time learning all these moves then don't use them?" Yeah basically. If you go into a fight you will be hurt. That is the first thing you have to understand. If they have a knife you will be cut. You could be a master in every martial art in the world and it's still likely that you will get at least grazed if they are waving a knife around. The first rule of self defense is avoid the fight entirely if you can. The average mugger just wants the money. They don't actually want to stab you, the knife is just there for intimidation. They just want you to hand over the money and then they can disappear. If you do that then they will go in the majority of cases. If you can run then run, shouting as you go to draw attention to yourself and the situation. You aren't being a coward or a chicken you are being sensible. Why have a fight when you have a way out? That's why in these situations I prefer the term self preservation. It's not just about 360 spinning kicks.
Now if the situation is different and they don't want your money, what they want is you on the ground in pieces, then that's different although again if you can run, run. If you can't straight away there are a few things you can do to put them off before you even throw a punch. First off shout. Now I don't mean scream or act the victim I mean roar. Like really all the way through you roar (this is called a Kihap in Choi Kwang-Do or "Spirt Yell". Basically it's to show you mean business). At the same time move into a fighting stance: feet shoulder width apart, one foot forward, one foot back, fists up, one fist guarding the side of your face the other held out towards the other person to create distance. Imagine it from their perspective. "I'm going to go for this guy/girl and I'm going to punch them in the... oh. Ok they mean business. Not sure if this is worth it now." People who want a fight go for easy targets. Show them that you are not an easy target. A good roar will scare the crap out of them and get people around you interested in what's going on. Both of these will deter the person picking the fight.
If your roar hasn't put the fear of God (and I said there wasn't going to be any philosophy in this post) into them then like I said before you have to be prepared to get hurt. Best accept it and think of ways of minimising this. The first thing to think about is distance. They can't hit you if they can't reach you. If you are in the ready fighting stance described above then one quick step can put a big gap between you. Move your front foot backwards so that you are now in the ready stance again but with your back foot now at the front. Switch arms at the same time so your guard hand is now out in front and your front hand has moved back to guard your face. Straight away that could be a good foot, foot and a half distance you have created. You have to be light on your feet and keep moving. Don't stop for a second. Go backwards and sideways, duck and dodge. Now when it comes to punching the first thing I'll say is don't punch. Yeah I know but hear me out. If you punch someone with a closed fist and you hit them in the jaw you will break your hand. Old fashioned bare-knuckle boxers never punched to the head because they knew this was stupid. They would always go for the body. Now hitting someone in the body can really hurt them and cause a lot of damage but it typically won't end a fight quickly and that is what you are aiming for in a situation like the one I've described. You want a fight to last less than half a minute not 20 minutes. So where do you aim for and what do you do? You have to find the weak spots on the person. Typically these are the eyes, nose, face, neck, pit of the stomach, the groin and the joints. There is no such thing as honour in self defense. If you have to claw at their eyes to get away from a situation then claw away. The shorter a fight the better.
A good strike that can be safely (safely?) delivered to the face is an Open Palm Strike. You open your hand and use the fleshy part of your palm to strike. If you have your fingers sightly bent then this should help prevent your longest middle finger from getting caught and bending back but, you know, don't stand their staring at your hands making sure your fingers line up, strike quickly! You can strike with either hand but you have to strike correctly. You can't just move your arm, you have to put your whole body into the strike, throw all your weight forward (don't overbalance!) and really slam it home. Move your hips forward first then have your shoulder and arm follow, your wrist, elbow and shoulder should be parallel with the ground with the strike going straight ahead. Make sure your arm is bent not straight as this will reduce the strain on your elbow. Once you hit your target don't just stop but follow through the target. You have to imagine that you are trying to touch the space just behind their head and you have to go through their face to get there. Gruesome I know but that's how you have to think in order to give the strike enough power.
Another very easy strike that can quickly end a fight is a Hammer Fist. I haven't been taught this in Choi Kwang-Do but I have seen it used in various videos and it does seem to be effective and easy. Basically if you have your hands up you can very quickly make a fist and ram downwards into someones face before they even realize you moved. What you do is make a fist as if you were going to punch and ram downwards, from hands up around your head, hitting with the fleshy part of the bottom of your hand as if you are slamming your fist down onto a table. You can use one hand (which I would suggest as you can use your other hand to defend your face) or both hands. There is a very short distance from your hand to their face so it is fast and effective. Going straight for the eyes and nose will quickly incapacitate the attacker or at the very least will give him something else to think about.
Moving onto kicks, I must say that I have been taught lots of fancy kicks, twisting kicks, swing kicks, spinning reverse swing kicks (they really kill your hips I'm telling you) and there are only 2 that I would actually use in a fight. Front Kick and Heel Kick. Even then I would rely on strikes as they are much faster and harder to stop and block. If you throw out a kick and miss then you are off-balance, on one foot and you can practically be pushed over. Kicks are really very slow but the main kick I would suggest if there really isn't any other option would be a Front Kick. You can do it from either foot from the ready stance but you have to be aware of your foot position. Too far apart and you will barely be able to lift your leg. Too close and you might end up kicking yourself (trust me it does not look cool). To simplify things I'll talk you through the Rear (back leg) Front (kicking forward) Kick. Very first thing you do with this kick is square your hips. Stand up on your back foot so your hips are directly facing forward towards your attacker. Your front foot should also be facing forward. Now you have to lift your back leg up and balance on your front leg. This is called chambering your leg. As you chamber come up onto your toes on your front foot to gain extra height for your kick. You then move your chambered leg forward bringing your knee up as high as you can (the higher your knee the higher the kick). You then kick out bringing your leg back in a circle motion as if you are cycling backwards. Once you have made contact and cycled back you land forward this way you move all of your weight into the kick and give it as much power as possible. So broken down it's:
1. Pivot your hips forward coming up onto your toes
2. Chamber your leg ready to kick coming up onto your toes
3. Bring your leg forward and raise your knee as high as you can
4. Kick out
5. Cycle back and land forward
Now you might be worried that you can't get your leg up very high. You may not be able to get them right in the face and neither can I. I might be a black belt but I am far from flexible. I can just about get someone low in the chest if they are a bit short and I'm warmed up. You really don't have to be flexible for this kick to work. Go for a lower target. The groin. That will end a fight very quickly especially if they are a bloke. People lose the will to fight very quickly after that. Like I said their is no such thing as honour in these situations. If you can't get that high, go for the knee. If you hit hard enough and in just the right place you could break their knee or at least dislocate it. Can't reach the knee? Crush their foot. Can't stand, can't chase, you can make your get away.
Something else that could be useful to think about is distractions. Are you wearing a hat? Gloves? Scarf? Take them off and throw them towards the other person. A distraction that lasts for even just a second can make a big difference. In the Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes film this is used by Holmes in a fight where he throws up a handkerchief to distract his opponent and it's not just a silly film idea, it could be useful. Distract the other person and then strike quickly. Try and see the open areas that you can hit quickly and effectively. Constantly moving and changing position can help you find the open spots.
So a quick summary:
1. Avoid a fight at all costs. Give them your money, run away. Your life is more important than your money or your pride.
2. If they have a weapon, you will in all likelihood get hurt. If you can get out, get out.
3. If there is nothing you can do and you have to defend yourself then move onto step 4.
4. Muster all of your energy and freaking ROAR at them. The more explosive and violent the better. Gets your blood pumping, alerts everyone around and scares the crap out of your attacker (hopefully).
5. At the same time get into stance. You aren't afraid and you are prepared. Have confidence.
6. Move. Don't stop moving. Not for a second. The only time you stop, jumping, dodging and running is once you are at home safe and sound.
7. If you get the chance to strike, strike hard and fast and as many times as you can until they are incapacitated or are distracted enough for you to escape.
8. If you can get one really good kick in, then that can be the fight over instantly. Put all your weight through and hit hard.
9. Use distractions if you can. Try to find openings and unprotected areas.
10. Once the fight is over (hopefully they have come off worse) then run. Don't hang around, get out. They could have friends around or they might stand back up and pull out a knife. Run.
(Completely by accident they add up to 10. "Joe's 10 Simple Rules for Self Preservation!" I like it...)
These techniques I have described can be incredibly dangerous. So dangerous that they are potentially lethal so a disclaimer is in order:
By practicing any of the techniques I have described you are assuming full responsibility for your own actions and any injury that may result from your actions. Basically you can't blame me if you hurt yourself or someone else.
If you use these moves then you could be liable to prosecution if you use more than reasonable force. What I'm saying is that you should use this to escape not to kill the other person or to purposefully greatly injure them. Once you have an escape route take it. Don't hang around to practice your 360 spinning kicks.
Now I have described these moves because they can serve a use and could perhaps save someone's life, but I must stress again that these should only ever be used in a life or death situation. I have known and practiced these moves for a long time and do you know how many times I have used them for real? Zero and I plan to keep it that way. I am not some Zen master that can defeat any opponent. I'm not stupid. There will be someone (lots of someones) that could very easily beat me to a pulp. If there is any other way out, then I will take it. Fine take my money, I don't care if it's to save my life. I don't care if people think I'm a coward for running away from a fight because I would rather be thought of as a coward than remembered as that guy that got stabbed to death in an alley. These moves are the very last resort. Don't get into these situations. Walk away, apologise even if you did nothing wrong, cross the street, ask someone to walk along with you (and that's not just to the girls out there). Swallow your pride. People who rob people, who attack people, look for the easy targets, the weak, the vulnerable, so one method to deter them is just to walk confidently, back straight, not running but not timidly tip toeing along either. Hold up your head and don't act the victim. I know that this can be hard and it's taken me a long time to have the confidence to do this and I still find it hard especially if it's dark and especially if I'm alone but you are much less likely to be messed with if you look confident. Hopefully me explaining these moves (in very little detail, incredibly quickly and simply) will inspire some confidence in you if you maybe have a bit of a practice (yes I know you look silly but so do I). Of course, if you are going to practice, make sure you have enough space and you are sensible with this. It's actually pretty fun and is good exercise and most importantly you have it there if you should ever need it. It's very unlikely that you will ever be in this situation but you could and it's better to know it and not need it than need it and not know it. Another good reason to practice is that you will have to keep coming back to my blog to check you are doing it right and then I get more page views :D
I hope you understand the point of this post and can take something away from it. I don't proclaim myself to be some wise teacher that knows all the answers. This post is me simply passing on a few tips I have picked up. If it has sparked an interest in martial arts for you then great. Go find a real teacher who is a Zen master and can teach you all the fancy kicks and the proper techniques. This is just my rough guide. Be safe.
Now I think a lot of you who read this will know already but I am actually a Black Belt (Does it need capitals? Well it looks cooler...) in a little-known Korean (the good Korea) martial art Choi Kwang-Do. It's a fairly new martial art compared to say karate or judo only being developed in 1987. You might think of this as a draw back but due to the fact it is new, it is based much more on modern research into biomechanics and emphasizes fluid motions to prevent stress and strain on the joints unlike older martial arts which focus on straight line movement which can jar and cause damage to your joints. Another plus of Choi Kwang-Do over other arts is that it is constantly changing and adapting. If something isn't working or could be done better then it is adapted. Nothing is set in stone which is a good way for it to develop and help improve it's effectiveness. I've been training for... um... well around 5 or 6 years (I should find out for definite) and I've really enjoyed it. I think it's improved my confidence and I've learnt a lot from it.
Now before I go on to tell you some of the super awesome ninja moves I know I should clear something up. I don't actually like the word self defense. I think self preservation is a better term to describe dealing with a mugging or street fight simply because if you are in a situation where you could very well come to serious harm, punching and kicking and grapples and throws are not the only things you can do o get out of the situation. That's the stuff I think of when I think of defense but if I was walking down the street and someone pulled out a knife and told me to give them all my money do you know what I would do? Would I jump in the air do a 360 spin and kick them in the throat? No. I would give them my money. Mugger gets his money, I don't get stabbed. Everybody wins. I have preserved myself without needing to get into a fist fight.
This answer might surprise people. "You spend all that time learning all these moves then don't use them?" Yeah basically. If you go into a fight you will be hurt. That is the first thing you have to understand. If they have a knife you will be cut. You could be a master in every martial art in the world and it's still likely that you will get at least grazed if they are waving a knife around. The first rule of self defense is avoid the fight entirely if you can. The average mugger just wants the money. They don't actually want to stab you, the knife is just there for intimidation. They just want you to hand over the money and then they can disappear. If you do that then they will go in the majority of cases. If you can run then run, shouting as you go to draw attention to yourself and the situation. You aren't being a coward or a chicken you are being sensible. Why have a fight when you have a way out? That's why in these situations I prefer the term self preservation. It's not just about 360 spinning kicks.
Now if the situation is different and they don't want your money, what they want is you on the ground in pieces, then that's different although again if you can run, run. If you can't straight away there are a few things you can do to put them off before you even throw a punch. First off shout. Now I don't mean scream or act the victim I mean roar. Like really all the way through you roar (this is called a Kihap in Choi Kwang-Do or "Spirt Yell". Basically it's to show you mean business). At the same time move into a fighting stance: feet shoulder width apart, one foot forward, one foot back, fists up, one fist guarding the side of your face the other held out towards the other person to create distance. Imagine it from their perspective. "I'm going to go for this guy/girl and I'm going to punch them in the... oh. Ok they mean business. Not sure if this is worth it now." People who want a fight go for easy targets. Show them that you are not an easy target. A good roar will scare the crap out of them and get people around you interested in what's going on. Both of these will deter the person picking the fight.
If your roar hasn't put the fear of God (and I said there wasn't going to be any philosophy in this post) into them then like I said before you have to be prepared to get hurt. Best accept it and think of ways of minimising this. The first thing to think about is distance. They can't hit you if they can't reach you. If you are in the ready fighting stance described above then one quick step can put a big gap between you. Move your front foot backwards so that you are now in the ready stance again but with your back foot now at the front. Switch arms at the same time so your guard hand is now out in front and your front hand has moved back to guard your face. Straight away that could be a good foot, foot and a half distance you have created. You have to be light on your feet and keep moving. Don't stop for a second. Go backwards and sideways, duck and dodge. Now when it comes to punching the first thing I'll say is don't punch. Yeah I know but hear me out. If you punch someone with a closed fist and you hit them in the jaw you will break your hand. Old fashioned bare-knuckle boxers never punched to the head because they knew this was stupid. They would always go for the body. Now hitting someone in the body can really hurt them and cause a lot of damage but it typically won't end a fight quickly and that is what you are aiming for in a situation like the one I've described. You want a fight to last less than half a minute not 20 minutes. So where do you aim for and what do you do? You have to find the weak spots on the person. Typically these are the eyes, nose, face, neck, pit of the stomach, the groin and the joints. There is no such thing as honour in self defense. If you have to claw at their eyes to get away from a situation then claw away. The shorter a fight the better.
A good strike that can be safely (safely?) delivered to the face is an Open Palm Strike. You open your hand and use the fleshy part of your palm to strike. If you have your fingers sightly bent then this should help prevent your longest middle finger from getting caught and bending back but, you know, don't stand their staring at your hands making sure your fingers line up, strike quickly! You can strike with either hand but you have to strike correctly. You can't just move your arm, you have to put your whole body into the strike, throw all your weight forward (don't overbalance!) and really slam it home. Move your hips forward first then have your shoulder and arm follow, your wrist, elbow and shoulder should be parallel with the ground with the strike going straight ahead. Make sure your arm is bent not straight as this will reduce the strain on your elbow. Once you hit your target don't just stop but follow through the target. You have to imagine that you are trying to touch the space just behind their head and you have to go through their face to get there. Gruesome I know but that's how you have to think in order to give the strike enough power.
Another very easy strike that can quickly end a fight is a Hammer Fist. I haven't been taught this in Choi Kwang-Do but I have seen it used in various videos and it does seem to be effective and easy. Basically if you have your hands up you can very quickly make a fist and ram downwards into someones face before they even realize you moved. What you do is make a fist as if you were going to punch and ram downwards, from hands up around your head, hitting with the fleshy part of the bottom of your hand as if you are slamming your fist down onto a table. You can use one hand (which I would suggest as you can use your other hand to defend your face) or both hands. There is a very short distance from your hand to their face so it is fast and effective. Going straight for the eyes and nose will quickly incapacitate the attacker or at the very least will give him something else to think about.
Moving onto kicks, I must say that I have been taught lots of fancy kicks, twisting kicks, swing kicks, spinning reverse swing kicks (they really kill your hips I'm telling you) and there are only 2 that I would actually use in a fight. Front Kick and Heel Kick. Even then I would rely on strikes as they are much faster and harder to stop and block. If you throw out a kick and miss then you are off-balance, on one foot and you can practically be pushed over. Kicks are really very slow but the main kick I would suggest if there really isn't any other option would be a Front Kick. You can do it from either foot from the ready stance but you have to be aware of your foot position. Too far apart and you will barely be able to lift your leg. Too close and you might end up kicking yourself (trust me it does not look cool). To simplify things I'll talk you through the Rear (back leg) Front (kicking forward) Kick. Very first thing you do with this kick is square your hips. Stand up on your back foot so your hips are directly facing forward towards your attacker. Your front foot should also be facing forward. Now you have to lift your back leg up and balance on your front leg. This is called chambering your leg. As you chamber come up onto your toes on your front foot to gain extra height for your kick. You then move your chambered leg forward bringing your knee up as high as you can (the higher your knee the higher the kick). You then kick out bringing your leg back in a circle motion as if you are cycling backwards. Once you have made contact and cycled back you land forward this way you move all of your weight into the kick and give it as much power as possible. So broken down it's:
1. Pivot your hips forward coming up onto your toes
2. Chamber your leg ready to kick coming up onto your toes
3. Bring your leg forward and raise your knee as high as you can
4. Kick out
5. Cycle back and land forward
Now you might be worried that you can't get your leg up very high. You may not be able to get them right in the face and neither can I. I might be a black belt but I am far from flexible. I can just about get someone low in the chest if they are a bit short and I'm warmed up. You really don't have to be flexible for this kick to work. Go for a lower target. The groin. That will end a fight very quickly especially if they are a bloke. People lose the will to fight very quickly after that. Like I said their is no such thing as honour in these situations. If you can't get that high, go for the knee. If you hit hard enough and in just the right place you could break their knee or at least dislocate it. Can't reach the knee? Crush their foot. Can't stand, can't chase, you can make your get away.
Something else that could be useful to think about is distractions. Are you wearing a hat? Gloves? Scarf? Take them off and throw them towards the other person. A distraction that lasts for even just a second can make a big difference. In the Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes film this is used by Holmes in a fight where he throws up a handkerchief to distract his opponent and it's not just a silly film idea, it could be useful. Distract the other person and then strike quickly. Try and see the open areas that you can hit quickly and effectively. Constantly moving and changing position can help you find the open spots.
So a quick summary:
1. Avoid a fight at all costs. Give them your money, run away. Your life is more important than your money or your pride.
2. If they have a weapon, you will in all likelihood get hurt. If you can get out, get out.
3. If there is nothing you can do and you have to defend yourself then move onto step 4.
4. Muster all of your energy and freaking ROAR at them. The more explosive and violent the better. Gets your blood pumping, alerts everyone around and scares the crap out of your attacker (hopefully).
5. At the same time get into stance. You aren't afraid and you are prepared. Have confidence.
6. Move. Don't stop moving. Not for a second. The only time you stop, jumping, dodging and running is once you are at home safe and sound.
7. If you get the chance to strike, strike hard and fast and as many times as you can until they are incapacitated or are distracted enough for you to escape.
8. If you can get one really good kick in, then that can be the fight over instantly. Put all your weight through and hit hard.
9. Use distractions if you can. Try to find openings and unprotected areas.
10. Once the fight is over (hopefully they have come off worse) then run. Don't hang around, get out. They could have friends around or they might stand back up and pull out a knife. Run.
(Completely by accident they add up to 10. "Joe's 10 Simple Rules for Self Preservation!" I like it...)
These techniques I have described can be incredibly dangerous. So dangerous that they are potentially lethal so a disclaimer is in order:
By practicing any of the techniques I have described you are assuming full responsibility for your own actions and any injury that may result from your actions. Basically you can't blame me if you hurt yourself or someone else.
If you use these moves then you could be liable to prosecution if you use more than reasonable force. What I'm saying is that you should use this to escape not to kill the other person or to purposefully greatly injure them. Once you have an escape route take it. Don't hang around to practice your 360 spinning kicks.
Now I have described these moves because they can serve a use and could perhaps save someone's life, but I must stress again that these should only ever be used in a life or death situation. I have known and practiced these moves for a long time and do you know how many times I have used them for real? Zero and I plan to keep it that way. I am not some Zen master that can defeat any opponent. I'm not stupid. There will be someone (lots of someones) that could very easily beat me to a pulp. If there is any other way out, then I will take it. Fine take my money, I don't care if it's to save my life. I don't care if people think I'm a coward for running away from a fight because I would rather be thought of as a coward than remembered as that guy that got stabbed to death in an alley. These moves are the very last resort. Don't get into these situations. Walk away, apologise even if you did nothing wrong, cross the street, ask someone to walk along with you (and that's not just to the girls out there). Swallow your pride. People who rob people, who attack people, look for the easy targets, the weak, the vulnerable, so one method to deter them is just to walk confidently, back straight, not running but not timidly tip toeing along either. Hold up your head and don't act the victim. I know that this can be hard and it's taken me a long time to have the confidence to do this and I still find it hard especially if it's dark and especially if I'm alone but you are much less likely to be messed with if you look confident. Hopefully me explaining these moves (in very little detail, incredibly quickly and simply) will inspire some confidence in you if you maybe have a bit of a practice (yes I know you look silly but so do I). Of course, if you are going to practice, make sure you have enough space and you are sensible with this. It's actually pretty fun and is good exercise and most importantly you have it there if you should ever need it. It's very unlikely that you will ever be in this situation but you could and it's better to know it and not need it than need it and not know it. Another good reason to practice is that you will have to keep coming back to my blog to check you are doing it right and then I get more page views :D
I hope you understand the point of this post and can take something away from it. I don't proclaim myself to be some wise teacher that knows all the answers. This post is me simply passing on a few tips I have picked up. If it has sparked an interest in martial arts for you then great. Go find a real teacher who is a Zen master and can teach you all the fancy kicks and the proper techniques. This is just my rough guide. Be safe.
Monday, 4 November 2013
Fairy Tale Morality
Greetings once more. In this post I'm going to be writing about something that is very important to me (what am I saying? This is a blog everything I write is important to me...) and that something is the idea of Fairytale Morality. Now I made up that title but I would be frankly amazed if someone else hasn't already pondered this subject so I am not going to claim that this is an entirely original idea that no one else has considered. I would have to be a lunatic to think that I was that special and insightful to think of this first. But anyway lets get down to explaining what exactly I am blathering about.
Hansel and Gretel push the witch into her own oven and she horrifically burns to death. Hooray for Hansel and Gretel! The evil Queen is crushed under a gigantic rock by the dwarves and is squashed to death. Hooray for the dwarves and Snow White! The woodsman cuts the wolfs stomach open and out jump Red Riding Hood and her lovely old granny and the wolf bleeds painfully to death. Hooray for the good guys!
All of these stories are usually described as being fairy tales. Fictional folk stories passed down the generations, told to children before bed time, used to impart knowledge and teach children about what is moral and right and what is evil and wrong.
But do these stories really give off the right message?
Now when I say Snow White or Sleeping Beauty or Beauty and the Beast you are probably thinking of the Disney film version of these stories if you are from the same generation as I am. Disney became the company it is today off the backs of the Brothers Grimm but the original stories they collected have hardly anything in common with the animated films. The original stories were quite frankly horrific. You might think the evil Queen being crushed by a rock was bad but in the original story Snow White becomes the queen of the neighboring kingdom and invites the evil Queen to a fancy ball. The evil Queen doesn't know that Snow White is the new queen until she arrives at which point
"a pair of glowing-hot iron shoes are brought forth with tongs and placed before the Queen. She is forced to step into the burning shoes and to dance until she drops dead"
Now am I the only one that thinks that's pretty messed up. I mean seriously twisted. Red-hot shoes... dance until she drops dead... I would personally prefer the rock...
All of the Grimm's fairy stories have been pacified for modern audiences with many of them having much more gruesome ends because it was thought that these horrible punishments and executions would be damaging to the little children listening to them. The thing is is that I think these stories are still damaging but perhaps in a slightly more subtle way.
This is where the idea of Fairy Tale Morality comes in. I have already explained my views on morality in other posts (moral nihilism, no such thing as good and evil, man-made constructions and rules etc.) so I won't go into all that again but I will say that although I don't believe moral laws actually carry any weight on a universal scale, in human society they carry A LOT of weight and have far reaching consequences.
Fairy stories (particularly the Disney versions) have a very basic structure, a structure that is used by almost every story, plot and tale that has ever existed. It is at it's most basic:
Good guy. Bad Guy.
Bad Guy does Bad Thing or plans on doing Bad Thing.
Good Guy has to stop Bad Guy/ save someone from Bad Guy/ save the day from Bad Guy/ all of the above.
Good Guy hits some problem.
Good Guy recovers from/ solves problem and feels even more determined to stop Bad Guy.
Good Guy beats Bad Guy.
Everything turns out great. Bad Guy dies or goes to jail or something (who cares they are the BAD GUY!)
Think of the last film you watched. Chances are buried under all those plot devices and dialogue this story is at it's heart whether it's Snow White, The Lord of the Rings, Doctor Who, Harry Potter, The Matrix or Big Momma's House 2. This idea of how a story should progress is everywhere and it is the basis of Fairy Tale Morality.
What films like this teach us is that there is a Good Guy and there is a Bad Guy. The Bad Guy is Bad and the Good Guy is Good. Now this idea works fine in a film or a book or a story but in real life...
There is no Good Guys and Bad Guys. This might seem like a simple enough idea but when I first realized this it was a revelation. I can remember as a kid watching the news and trying to work out who were the Good Guys and who were the Bad Guys and who I should be supporting and really neither were wholly good or bad. These stories and this idea of Good Guys and Bad Guys I believe has had massive repercussions in modern society. Everyone is always trying to see who is in the right and who is in the wrong but this is a false dichotomy. Morality is a grey area, it is far from black and white. It is this type of Fairy Tale Morality that leads to people being branded in the press as "monsters" and "evil" no matter what the circumstances of their upbringing, the people and influences around them or what made them think the actions they were taking were the right ones. Humans are much more complicated than one word, one character type.
Lets take an example.
Genghis Khan. Founder and ruler of the Mongol Empire from 1206 to 1227. Known for bloody military campaigns and the wholesale murder of civilians in Mongol occupied territories. During the Mongol occupation of modern day Iran, it is estimated that between 10 and 15 million people were killed. Some historians have estimated that Iran's population only fully recovered from the Mongol invasion in the mid-20th century. Wow pretty evil guy huh?
Genghis Khan. Founder and ruler of the Mongol Empire from 1206 to 1227. Known for uniting the Mongolian tribes and creating the first written Mongolian laws which laid the foundations for the modern country of Mongolia. He also increased the communication of ideas, cultures and technology between the West, Middle East and Asia, promoted equality under the law and religious tolerance throughout his Empire.
See what I mean?
Just because someone has done something bad doesn't mean they are incapable of doing good and it works the other way.
Martin Luther King Jr. is thought of as the father of civil rights. He might not of been the first to argue for equal treatment for all but it was he that truly brought the inequalities of segregation into the light and is a source of inspiration for people around the world. He also had numerous extramarital affairs.
No-one on this planet is good or bad. We are all a blend of actions, some justifiable, some are seen as wrong by society. If we continue to believe that in every situation there is a Good Guy and a Bad Guy someone will always be thought of as less, as a monster, as a degenerate, as a low-life and all that wonderful human potential for advancement, for betterment, for improvement will be lost as they are thrown in the corner with all the other Bad Guys.
Fairy Tale Morality has no place in modern society. We have to look at people as more than the sum of one action. We must look on people as a fluid, changeable person. If someone does something that appears wrong to society they must be taken in and shown why it is wrong not made to dance in red hot iron shoes until they die.
Hansel and Gretel push the witch into her own oven and she horrifically burns to death. Hooray for Hansel and Gretel! The evil Queen is crushed under a gigantic rock by the dwarves and is squashed to death. Hooray for the dwarves and Snow White! The woodsman cuts the wolfs stomach open and out jump Red Riding Hood and her lovely old granny and the wolf bleeds painfully to death. Hooray for the good guys!
All of these stories are usually described as being fairy tales. Fictional folk stories passed down the generations, told to children before bed time, used to impart knowledge and teach children about what is moral and right and what is evil and wrong.
But do these stories really give off the right message?
Now when I say Snow White or Sleeping Beauty or Beauty and the Beast you are probably thinking of the Disney film version of these stories if you are from the same generation as I am. Disney became the company it is today off the backs of the Brothers Grimm but the original stories they collected have hardly anything in common with the animated films. The original stories were quite frankly horrific. You might think the evil Queen being crushed by a rock was bad but in the original story Snow White becomes the queen of the neighboring kingdom and invites the evil Queen to a fancy ball. The evil Queen doesn't know that Snow White is the new queen until she arrives at which point
"a pair of glowing-hot iron shoes are brought forth with tongs and placed before the Queen. She is forced to step into the burning shoes and to dance until she drops dead"
Now am I the only one that thinks that's pretty messed up. I mean seriously twisted. Red-hot shoes... dance until she drops dead... I would personally prefer the rock...
All of the Grimm's fairy stories have been pacified for modern audiences with many of them having much more gruesome ends because it was thought that these horrible punishments and executions would be damaging to the little children listening to them. The thing is is that I think these stories are still damaging but perhaps in a slightly more subtle way.
This is where the idea of Fairy Tale Morality comes in. I have already explained my views on morality in other posts (moral nihilism, no such thing as good and evil, man-made constructions and rules etc.) so I won't go into all that again but I will say that although I don't believe moral laws actually carry any weight on a universal scale, in human society they carry A LOT of weight and have far reaching consequences.
Fairy stories (particularly the Disney versions) have a very basic structure, a structure that is used by almost every story, plot and tale that has ever existed. It is at it's most basic:
Good guy. Bad Guy.
Bad Guy does Bad Thing or plans on doing Bad Thing.
Good Guy has to stop Bad Guy/ save someone from Bad Guy/ save the day from Bad Guy/ all of the above.
Good Guy hits some problem.
Good Guy recovers from/ solves problem and feels even more determined to stop Bad Guy.
Good Guy beats Bad Guy.
Everything turns out great. Bad Guy dies or goes to jail or something (who cares they are the BAD GUY!)
Think of the last film you watched. Chances are buried under all those plot devices and dialogue this story is at it's heart whether it's Snow White, The Lord of the Rings, Doctor Who, Harry Potter, The Matrix or Big Momma's House 2. This idea of how a story should progress is everywhere and it is the basis of Fairy Tale Morality.
What films like this teach us is that there is a Good Guy and there is a Bad Guy. The Bad Guy is Bad and the Good Guy is Good. Now this idea works fine in a film or a book or a story but in real life...
There is no Good Guys and Bad Guys. This might seem like a simple enough idea but when I first realized this it was a revelation. I can remember as a kid watching the news and trying to work out who were the Good Guys and who were the Bad Guys and who I should be supporting and really neither were wholly good or bad. These stories and this idea of Good Guys and Bad Guys I believe has had massive repercussions in modern society. Everyone is always trying to see who is in the right and who is in the wrong but this is a false dichotomy. Morality is a grey area, it is far from black and white. It is this type of Fairy Tale Morality that leads to people being branded in the press as "monsters" and "evil" no matter what the circumstances of their upbringing, the people and influences around them or what made them think the actions they were taking were the right ones. Humans are much more complicated than one word, one character type.
Lets take an example.
Genghis Khan. Founder and ruler of the Mongol Empire from 1206 to 1227. Known for bloody military campaigns and the wholesale murder of civilians in Mongol occupied territories. During the Mongol occupation of modern day Iran, it is estimated that between 10 and 15 million people were killed. Some historians have estimated that Iran's population only fully recovered from the Mongol invasion in the mid-20th century. Wow pretty evil guy huh?
Genghis Khan. Founder and ruler of the Mongol Empire from 1206 to 1227. Known for uniting the Mongolian tribes and creating the first written Mongolian laws which laid the foundations for the modern country of Mongolia. He also increased the communication of ideas, cultures and technology between the West, Middle East and Asia, promoted equality under the law and religious tolerance throughout his Empire.
See what I mean?
Just because someone has done something bad doesn't mean they are incapable of doing good and it works the other way.
Martin Luther King Jr. is thought of as the father of civil rights. He might not of been the first to argue for equal treatment for all but it was he that truly brought the inequalities of segregation into the light and is a source of inspiration for people around the world. He also had numerous extramarital affairs.
No-one on this planet is good or bad. We are all a blend of actions, some justifiable, some are seen as wrong by society. If we continue to believe that in every situation there is a Good Guy and a Bad Guy someone will always be thought of as less, as a monster, as a degenerate, as a low-life and all that wonderful human potential for advancement, for betterment, for improvement will be lost as they are thrown in the corner with all the other Bad Guys.
Fairy Tale Morality has no place in modern society. We have to look at people as more than the sum of one action. We must look on people as a fluid, changeable person. If someone does something that appears wrong to society they must be taken in and shown why it is wrong not made to dance in red hot iron shoes until they die.
Friday, 25 October 2013
Religious belief
Hello again folks! Actually I'm not sure if this blog has "regular readers". This is only the 4th post so it's a bit hard to tell at what point people become "regular readers". Funnily enough today's blog post (or this week's or this month's, I don't know I'm not keeping track) asks a similar question about religious belief...
The whole idea for this post came from the news story
(http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/23/christian-worker-court-right-not-work-sundays)
that a Christian women had taken her former employers to the court of appeal as they refused to accommodate her request not to work on Sundays due to the Sabbath being holy.
Now a quick disclaimer (as always it seems (has there been enough posts for me to say "as always"?). I really need to stop being so controversial...):
^
Now that's what I call punctuating a sentence. I punctuated the heck out of it. The best thing is some of it's correct!
If you find the idea of someone questioning a belief system that you believe in either: abhorrent, evil, sinful, corrupting, satanic or a crime against your very existence then please leave this blog. There is the metaphorical door, go walk your metaphorical shoes right through it and don't let the metaphorical door hit your metaphorical self on the way out. If you continue to read and get offended don't come whining to me. Whining is my job. It's in the title and everything.
Now religious belief is thought by many to be special. It defines people's entire lives, on occasion it dictates their actions and people hold it as dear to them as they do their own children. But why are religious beliefs thought of as special? What is it that makes religious beliefs different from my belief that roast potatoes are the pinnacle of human achievement and shall never be surpassed? Would I be justified in taking my employers to the court of appeal because they wouldn't let me sit at my desk in a bath of roast potatoes?
Dictionary.com defines religious belief as "a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"
Ok then that makes sense. A belief in a supernatural power or power over human destiny is obviously nothing like the belief that roast potatoes are the BEST THING EVER OMG I LOVE ROA- sorry got carried away there. So it would seem that the belief in a omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God trumps roast potatoes. I would be laughed out of court for my ridiculous suggestion that my love for roast potatoes should be protected by law. But why is it ridiculous?
If I were to create a religion based solely on the preparation, consumption and adoration of roast potatoes why wouldn't it be taken seriously? What's different between Christianity and the Church of the Latter Day Roast Potatoes? Christianity is older? It's got more members? Its started more wars (oooooo controversial. This is what that disclaimer was all about)?
Religion (I'm talking generally about religion. Christianity has only been mentioned so many times so far because the story is about a Christian and I am from a country that is built on the foundations of Christianity) is entirely based on faith. There is no empirical, testable evidence that can be provided to prove it correct or otherwise. "Evidence" has been provided in the past in the form of witness accounts of miracles and religious experiences but no miracle has been scientifically verified as being directly caused by divine intervention and there is a growing body of evidence that religious experiences (angels talking to people, visitations from Jesus etc) are are most probably entirely created by the brain. Even so how can you prove or disprove that someone had a religious experience? You can't! It's all down to faith.
Now I could say I had a visitation from the the Holy Roast Potato that told me to go forth and spread the word of his crunchy-but-fluffy-on-the-inside teachings and there is absolutely no way that you could prove that I hadn't been visited by an anthropomorphic roast potato. None. I decide to write down the the Commandments from his Crunchyness and thus proclaim to the world that:
THOU SHALT NOT NOT (MAKE NOTE OF THE DOUBLE NEGATIVE THEY ARE SUPER IMPORTANT TO ROAST POTATOES) SIT IN A BATH OF ROAST POTATOES ON TUESDAYS.
THOU SHALT ALSO THROW ROAST POTATOES AT THE QUEEN FOR SHE IS NOT ROASTED ENOUGH TO BE MONACH.
THOU SHALT NOT EAT RAW POTATO FOR I DECREE THAT IT MUST BE ROASTED. CRISPS AND CHIPS ARE OK BUT REALLY YOU SHOULD HAVE ROASTED THEM.
Should my teachings be protected by law? If not why not?
"But you just made that up for a joke!"
Does that matter? If I believe in it then it doesn't mater how it started does it?
"But you were never visited by an anthropomorphic roast potato!"
Oh so you were in my mind experiencing everything I was experiencing and can categorically say that I never had this experience?
"But you don't really believe in it!"
Prove that I don't. Go on prove it.
"Aha! You weren't in a bath of roast potatoes last Tuesday!"
I'm a high priest/prophet so I'm exempt from the 1st Commandment of his Roastyness... And I'm tax exempt...
Now all that roast potato stuff is ridiculous but there is a point wrapped up in all of that roasted vegetable matter (probably...)
When does a religion become "real"? At what point should religious practices be protected by law? Some people describe their religion as Jedi and are laughed at for it but lets look again at the definition of religious belief:
"a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"
Did I hear someone say the Force? Just because the Jedi were made up by a guy really into sci-fi doesn't mean it can't be a religion, I mean look at Scientology (please send all legal challenges to my lawyer).
My point is is that I don't believe this women should have Sunday's off because an invisible beardy guy in the clouds says she should because that beardy guy might as well be a roast potato and that Sunday off might as well be a Tuesday spent sitting in a bath full to the brim of roast potatoes.
May your dreams be golden brown on the outside and white and fluffy on the inside. HIS CRUNCHYNESS BE PRAISED!
The whole idea for this post came from the news story
(http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/23/christian-worker-court-right-not-work-sundays)
that a Christian women had taken her former employers to the court of appeal as they refused to accommodate her request not to work on Sundays due to the Sabbath being holy.
Now a quick disclaimer (as always it seems (has there been enough posts for me to say "as always"?). I really need to stop being so controversial...):
^
Now that's what I call punctuating a sentence. I punctuated the heck out of it. The best thing is some of it's correct!
If you find the idea of someone questioning a belief system that you believe in either: abhorrent, evil, sinful, corrupting, satanic or a crime against your very existence then please leave this blog. There is the metaphorical door, go walk your metaphorical shoes right through it and don't let the metaphorical door hit your metaphorical self on the way out. If you continue to read and get offended don't come whining to me. Whining is my job. It's in the title and everything.
Now religious belief is thought by many to be special. It defines people's entire lives, on occasion it dictates their actions and people hold it as dear to them as they do their own children. But why are religious beliefs thought of as special? What is it that makes religious beliefs different from my belief that roast potatoes are the pinnacle of human achievement and shall never be surpassed? Would I be justified in taking my employers to the court of appeal because they wouldn't let me sit at my desk in a bath of roast potatoes?
Dictionary.com defines religious belief as "a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"
Ok then that makes sense. A belief in a supernatural power or power over human destiny is obviously nothing like the belief that roast potatoes are the BEST THING EVER OMG I LOVE ROA- sorry got carried away there. So it would seem that the belief in a omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God trumps roast potatoes. I would be laughed out of court for my ridiculous suggestion that my love for roast potatoes should be protected by law. But why is it ridiculous?
If I were to create a religion based solely on the preparation, consumption and adoration of roast potatoes why wouldn't it be taken seriously? What's different between Christianity and the Church of the Latter Day Roast Potatoes? Christianity is older? It's got more members? Its started more wars (oooooo controversial. This is what that disclaimer was all about)?
Religion (I'm talking generally about religion. Christianity has only been mentioned so many times so far because the story is about a Christian and I am from a country that is built on the foundations of Christianity) is entirely based on faith. There is no empirical, testable evidence that can be provided to prove it correct or otherwise. "Evidence" has been provided in the past in the form of witness accounts of miracles and religious experiences but no miracle has been scientifically verified as being directly caused by divine intervention and there is a growing body of evidence that religious experiences (angels talking to people, visitations from Jesus etc) are are most probably entirely created by the brain. Even so how can you prove or disprove that someone had a religious experience? You can't! It's all down to faith.
Now I could say I had a visitation from the the Holy Roast Potato that told me to go forth and spread the word of his crunchy-but-fluffy-on-the-inside teachings and there is absolutely no way that you could prove that I hadn't been visited by an anthropomorphic roast potato. None. I decide to write down the the Commandments from his Crunchyness and thus proclaim to the world that:
THOU SHALT NOT NOT (MAKE NOTE OF THE DOUBLE NEGATIVE THEY ARE SUPER IMPORTANT TO ROAST POTATOES) SIT IN A BATH OF ROAST POTATOES ON TUESDAYS.
THOU SHALT ALSO THROW ROAST POTATOES AT THE QUEEN FOR SHE IS NOT ROASTED ENOUGH TO BE MONACH.
THOU SHALT NOT EAT RAW POTATO FOR I DECREE THAT IT MUST BE ROASTED. CRISPS AND CHIPS ARE OK BUT REALLY YOU SHOULD HAVE ROASTED THEM.
Should my teachings be protected by law? If not why not?
"But you just made that up for a joke!"
Does that matter? If I believe in it then it doesn't mater how it started does it?
"But you were never visited by an anthropomorphic roast potato!"
Oh so you were in my mind experiencing everything I was experiencing and can categorically say that I never had this experience?
"But you don't really believe in it!"
Prove that I don't. Go on prove it.
"Aha! You weren't in a bath of roast potatoes last Tuesday!"
I'm a high priest/prophet so I'm exempt from the 1st Commandment of his Roastyness... And I'm tax exempt...
Now all that roast potato stuff is ridiculous but there is a point wrapped up in all of that roasted vegetable matter (probably...)
When does a religion become "real"? At what point should religious practices be protected by law? Some people describe their religion as Jedi and are laughed at for it but lets look again at the definition of religious belief:
"a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"
Did I hear someone say the Force? Just because the Jedi were made up by a guy really into sci-fi doesn't mean it can't be a religion, I mean look at Scientology (please send all legal challenges to my lawyer).
My point is is that I don't believe this women should have Sunday's off because an invisible beardy guy in the clouds says she should because that beardy guy might as well be a roast potato and that Sunday off might as well be a Tuesday spent sitting in a bath full to the brim of roast potatoes.
May your dreams be golden brown on the outside and white and fluffy on the inside. HIS CRUNCHYNESS BE PRAISED!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)