Please click on the link to see the special Christmas video.
Update (1/30/2008): I found a WordPress plug-in that allows me to embed YouTube videos very easily. So here is the updated version of that video with small edits. See if you can spot the difference.
Popularity: 53% [?]
I have two books to recommend to make good reading during the year-end break. The first book, What Evolution Is by one of the greatest evolutionary biologist of our time, Ernst Mayr, is an exceptional book in terms of conciseness and clarity. Pages after pages facts are brought upfront without much fluffing around, evolution concepts and ideas are explained with great clarity and parsimony, occassionally contrasting them with what Creationism could offer. I have yet to finish the book myself having read only halfway through but I feel happy that I already got my money’s worth just the same. This is one book I will be keeping in my library to serve as a handy reference whenever I need to check my facts or give me a hint on how to proceed when questions about evolutionary theory crops up for clarification, or if I simply have to drill down to the details of the updated theory. The book disagrees with Richard Dawkins‘ gene-centric approach to evolution.
The other book is Free To Choose by Nobel Prize in Economics winner Milton Friedman. It’s co-written by his wife, Rose Friedman. This book picks in the latter half of the 20th century where other libertarians left off earlier. Written in the same spirit as On Liberty by John Stuart Mill, this book will not fail to provoke your thoughts, on the ideal relationship of the individual and the state, with emphasis on personal freedom and conscience. The same spirit that I suppose was the intention by the framers of the Philippine constitution, and which remains an ideal rather than a reality.
Enjoy reading!
Popularity: 59% [?]
There is another hot item raging over the internet. This time, it’s a punchline in the highly popular TV series, Desperate Housewives. There is even an online petition demanding that ABC issue an apology and edit the show to remove the punchline in question. Demanding an apology is one but demanding that the supposedly offensive portion be removed is another. As of now, there are close to 100,000 signatures gathered already but this should give us pause. As somebody commented in Lester Cavestany’s blog about the same incident, that Pinoys are overly-reacting to this episode but not in our own home-grown racism by giving as an example a very popular comedian’s take on Indian music but nobody seems to be demanding an apology from our fellow Pinoys. At some point or another and in some context, we are all guilty of the same offense, it’s time that we look within ourselves and grow up.
Popularity: 85% [?]
My email is subscribed to Manila Standard columnist Tony Abaya’s mailing list so I receive copies of his articles for his column On The Other Hand as well as reactions to his articles from his readers. Recently, he wrote about former president Erap Estrada who disgraced himself by becoming the first ever Philippine ex-president to have been convicted of corruption. Not that he is the only corrupt president we ever had but he’s got the distinction of having his successor whose conspiratorial rise to power had to pursue the corruption case to help her in her own issue of legitimacy. Perhaps if GMA have not been facing serious legitimacy issues since her questionable assumption to power, she may not have pursued the case more vigrously but instead let the case fall between the cracks, forgotten, as any other corruption issue that has ever plagued our country. This is why I viewed the conviction as in a good part, politically motivated, regardless of the strength of the evidence. The will to prosecute Erap was sustained by GMA’s political survival considerations. Not too soon after Erap’s conviction, talk of presidential pardon was already filling the political forums - shamelessly. Maybe this is a part of a greater plan by the GMA, regardless of the fact any idiot prosecutor should be able to win the case against the bungling Erap if one only followed the nauseating telenovela of his impeachment. About this presidential pardon, Mr. Abaya wrote that Erap should not be given pardon, to which I absolutely agree. Mr. Abaya’s article elicited a reaction from a letter-writer thus,
“The conviction of Estrada is a first in our history. Even if Estrada is never sent to a real prison, it is a good sign that some form of justice is still alive in our country. We are a forgiving people — that is our weakness and that is also our strength. We believe in divine mercy and divine justice.“
What caught my attention was the letter-writer’s reference to a supposed divine mercy, which is pure wishful thinking and I assert, part of the very issue at hand, the same corrupted system that produced Erap - the corrupted moral ethics of our people as supported by Catholic hogwash. Believing in a just merciful god and imagined divine mercy skews our sense of justice and contributes dearly to why corruption in our country is practically a way of life - it sends out the message that corruption pays since they can always ask for forgiveness and be forgiven. Just look at Imelda. Our people already forgave her even as she still flouts her wealth acquired systematically through two decades of the same thing Erap has been convicted of. This questionable moral system is perpetuated mainly by the Catholics such that our people’s sense of justice is based more on forgiveness and wishful thinking than deterring kleptocrats from plundering the public coffers. Because of this belief of eternal justice and divine mercy, our people are a lot more willing to forgive, forget what happened, and move on since their imaginary god is supposed to mete out whatever is the most just punishment in the after-life. In this sense I agree with the letter-writer that our people’s forgiving nature make our nation weak. That the letter-writer also said that it’s also our strength is debatable. This Christian teaching of mercy and justice, if we are to really get serious about it, should impel us to repeal the laws and abolish the law-enforcement agencies altogether since god will punish offenders, yes? Or better, they can wake up from their daydreaming and embrace real social justice by going after the rest of the looting gang and putting them behind bars.
Popularity: 80% [?]
You see, God is a great marketing strategist. Of course, because He is God. Since he created everything your eyes could see, everything your nose can smell, everything your ears could hear, everything your skin could feel and everything your hands would touch. To make it short, damn everything! And because he is such an omni-everything, thinking of a good marketing plan is as easy as kicking a lifeless stone lying around your path. And so he thought of a good plan to promote himself and he gave us this thing called “freedom.” (I would like to emphasize the word “FREE.”) This “freedom” gives us the ability to choose. We can choose weather to believe in Him or not. (I would like to point out that not believing doesn’t mean denying.) But of course, like any other product promotion, it has a catch.
Popularity: 100% [?]
That is the question. And from now on, even spambots should give the answer. The (inactive) forum has been modified to find out if they believe in “god” or not? Even agnostic spambots are given the chance to join. That is, if they also speak Tagalog, the lingua franca of the Pinoys. (Profuse apologies to the non-Tagalogs and non-Tagalog speakers!)
Popularity: 76% [?]
Before I turned atheist, I tried to bury religion and pass it off as a non-issue. As long as it was not affecting my life too much, I could very much try to live my life as if religion didn’t exist or matter. I call this phase of my belief-to-nonbelief journey as my post-religion phase. I had to search the net for the definition of post-religion but could not find any that is short and simple so I’ll make one. On a personal level, post-religion is a state of not caring about religion. A post-religionist thinks that religion should not be given too much time, attention, and thought. On a cultural level, post-religion is what characterizes a society where religion is no longer a considerable influence in the day-to-day events of the society taken as a whole; when religion is a spent force in matters of public policy, and where religion sales force, the priests and bishops and imams and mullahs are no longer considered authorities on truth, morality, and origins. GMA’s recent SONA clearly reminded us that the Philippines is not yet showing signs of transitioning from a religion-based society into a post-religion society. A post-religion society is brought about with considerable push from secularist ideas such as humanism, agnosticism, and atheism.
Going back to my personal experience, and in my post-religion phase, I held the idea that religion is plain absurdity, and as such, I would not have cared much except on certain occasions when it reared its ugly head and coerced me to act in accordance to what is normally expected of every Pinoy given the irrational idea of the majority that to be Pinoy is necessarily to be Catholic (at least in most parts of the country). I always resented it but I chose not to speak up so as not to disturb the peace. This caused an unnecessary amount of internal conflict. Each time, I wished for the day when to the majority Filipinos religion shall have been relegated to where it rightfully belongs: in the fringes of society, a spent force in public policy, and just an after-thought in the personal lives of the average Pinoys. Personally, I don’t believe that atheism is the (sole) answer to bring post-religion about. Atheism, by itself, doesn’t have anything to offer in terms of morality or happiness or apparent meaningfulness of life - three of the most abused arguments supporting the practicality of having a religion. Atheism is simply about the truthfulness of the existence of a being that many religionists worship one way or another. Atheism will not matter much in a post-religion society but rather, atheism (or new atheism) is a reaction to the fantastic, to the outrageous, to the fabulous claims of religion. In a post-religion society where there are less people with religion, there will be more atheists who are also post-atheists.
Popularity: 81% [?]
I received this enterprising version of the Nigerian Scam a few days ago. If there’s a market, there’s a product. This one recognizes the assumption that by using religion, one can assume an air of superior morality, and presumably, sound more credible. Morality through religion is a fallacy perpetrated by the religionists.
Asalaam Aleyikum,
May Allah the most grateful and the most merciful be with you, I write this letter with most concern to our Muslim values and the teachings of Prophet Mohammed (May peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to uplift and defend our religion at all times. I am motivated to write this letter to you after much consideration and with total submission to the will of Allah the most grateful and most merciful.
I am Hajia Kudirat Kargo the wife of Dr Abdul Kargo who was the patron of Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) till he became ill in 1994; he died of cancer in 13th Feb 2005. Until his death we are a devoted Muslim family with the fear of Allah in every thing we do knowing that our reward is not on earth but with Allah. Our marriage was not blessed with any child despite our 30 years of marriage. I have only my husband’s brothers who cowardly became Christian converts because of the pressure on Muslims after July 2005 bombings in U.K.
They have been brain washed to abandon Muslim faith and the teaching of Islam. I have been battling with the same cancer that killed my husband for all these years. Recently my doctor told me that I have to be strong in spirit, I knew probably I am approaching my end, but I am happy that I have lived an exemplary life worthy of emulation, even if I die today I know I will be with Allah. My only worry is the money (Fifteen Million, five Hundred Thousand Dollars) my husband deposited in a Bank Vault before his death. I have been deliberating over this issue within my self on what will happen on event of my death or if I become incapacitated as i am ill and hospitalised now.
“Will I disclose this information to my husband’s brothers who are now Christian Converts”? NO!! After much deliberation I came to the final decision to use this money for the propagating of Islam and I have chosen you for this course . I want you to use this money for the building of Islamic schools, Mosques and helping of Muslim widows and children. Helping those who have no body to fed for them and pursuing the course of Islam in your entire region. Please you should not divert this money from the purpose it is meant for. I would want you to signify your interest for this course so that I will give you all details and documents that will enable you claim the fund from the Bank . You shall act on my behalf as the general overseer and the next of kin to the fund. Meanwhile i am now in Burkina Faso where my late husband owns a mansion and also where the Bank is situated.
You must respond urgently to this mail so as to make alternative arrangement, would you be capable to handle the course of Allah. Please do contact me back immediately as i am no longer strong and i will hand over all the process to my account manager in the Bank who will direct you on how and what to do in order to have this fund in your possession as I am always with my husband brothers and I wouldn’t want them to know anything about this arrangement please.
May Allah be with you!
Hajia Kudirat Kargo.
Yes, may Allah be with you, sucker!
Popularity: 71% [?]
Today is Independence Day. From what are we supposed to be independent from, I don’t exactly know. Is it from foreign masters or local slave-drivers? AS I survey the Pinoy landscape, I don’t know if I should feel happy or feel weak with weeping because there is at least one thing we should all be free from: organized superstition. The majority of Pinoy mind is yet to be set free from institutionalized religious dogmatism of the churches and preachers who are just as ignorant as anybody else in the flock. On Sunday, Catholic churches around the world like the one in Yotsuya in Tokyo will fill again, sometimes to the brim, with Filipinos praying for their daily bread and deliverance from evil. They will keep to heart with unquestioning faith the absolute truths as set forth by the religious hacks. What a sad affair it is. If there is only One Truth and if it is supposed to be absolute, then you don’t need your Church to tell you that because the priests don’t know any better. Read your bible or qur’an with open mind and see the truth for yourself. I hope one day more Pinoys realize the value of a truly independent mind.
Popularity: 56% [?]
What is god?
God is a being. God is a concept. God is a metaphor. God is nature. God is the sum total of our collective ignorance.
In short, god means different things to different people. Oftentimes, God means different things to different people of the same faith. So what really is god? Can we arrive at a universal definition of god? Much of the roots of misunderstanding in a god debate is that god is not well-defined and atheists usually suspect that because god exist only in the mind of its believers. For any dialog to continue, there must be a common ground where points of view can continue coming back to - a concept that should work as the pivot of the discussion. Specially in a god debate, god should not be left undefined or unbounded. Otherwise, the debate will most likely just go limbo. So what are some definitions of god? Recently, I came across a possibly new definition of god. Richard Dawkins says god is a scientific hypothesis. By this he means that the god hypothesis is in the realm of scientific inquiry and hence can be empirically verified or falsified. He is referring narrowly to a certain flavor of the god of the Abrahamic religions. I call this scientifically verifiable-falsifiable god the Dawkinsian god. This god is the god that is micro-managing the lives of some believers as the born again Christian would say “surrendering their lives to Jesus.” The Dawkinsian god is a god who is meddling with the natural world by influencing its events and outcomes by, presumably, its actions. Another attribute of this Dawkinsian god is that it’s hypothesized by the Creationists and Intelligent Design camps as The Creator, a designation shared by the Deistic god. According to orthodox Dawkinsian thinking, since god is the intelligent designer, and since ID hypothesizes that the irreducible complexity is the proof that there is an intelligent designer, i.e., god, this can be falsified by showing that the irreducible complexity is nothing but a failure of venturing further to really honestly find out what other natural cause or mechanism produced the apparent complexity.
What is your definition of god?
Popularity: 64% [?]
