Hey there friends, strangers, and stalkers, how's it going? I'm Jared. I have a pretty busy life and don't really have *too much* time to spend here, so if it's important, it's better to email me (you guys remember email, right?).
I solve problems for a living. If you come to me with yours, I'm happy to offer any insight I may have on the topic. I have an analytical nature, and am good at examining all possible causes and solutions. I know I am not perfect. All I ask is that you be respectful and a good communicator-- because it is almost impossible to hold any discussion without some lack of clarity, and yet I cannot know when or where clarification is needed unless you make some sort of indication. I'm working very hard on mind-reading, but I've not quite perfected it just yet, so until then: ask, tell, express-- use smoke signals, charades or morse code if you must-- so long as you don't rely on my telepathy. We are conditioned to suppress our thoughts and feelings because we are used to them not being given reasonable, fair consideration, or being summarily dismissed. (We also may fear the ego-hit if we are found "wrong", being mocked, emotionally abused, and a myriad of other things.) The point is, while that inclination (to suppress our thoughts and feelings) is perfectly understandable, it only exists because of our experiences and interactions with those who do not fully embrace reason, those who aren't very intelligent, are controlling/manipulative, dishonest, and those who are not emotionally sensitive (enough [subjective to you], that is).
I can assure you that out of all of the above groups of people, the only group I might possibly fall into is the very last one, "possibly not being emotionally sensitive enough for you". That is the only thing I cannot guarantee that I am *not*. If you are a fragile, delicate creature emotionally ill-equipped to handle any amount of constructive criticism, then you definitely do not want to ask me for it. However, if you can handle a little sarcasm, intelligent discussion and lots of playful banter, then I'm a great guy to have around (when I'm free). If you think you're somewhere in the middle, I will offer you this: that it is never my intent to hurt for the sake of being hurtful. Any emotion or passion I may exhibit is never without an underlying foundation of reason, nor is it something you aren't allowed to question. (Sometimes, believe it or not, I am wrong, and you will get major points if you can pin me on it.) The notions that discussions are competitive rather than productive, that it is somehow my goal to personally attack you, that the defense of all of your knowledge, integrity and credibility is dependent on your defense of one particular position, and that my only real motivation is to "win" are all grossly untrue. Usually notions such as these are projections made by the conversational combatant (and I use the word "combatant" playfully here) based on what s/he is used to observing from college and/or pre-college arguments, because we are brought up very pressured to "succeed" and "get good grades" so that we can "get into a good college" and then "land a prestigious job in a lucrative industry", etc etc. Somehow, through all of this being said to us and repeated since birth, we become very competitive. It (being competitive) has its evolutionary advantages, I suppose, but then again, so does rape and murder! So it's hardly the thing by which we should base our ethics. A more intelligent person will not confuse "what is natural" with "what is moral", "how things have always been" with "how things SHOULD be", and "faith" with "belief based on evidence". These are very common (though nonetheless myopic) misunderstandings. It is my contention that it is only because of fallacious, unclear, superficial thinking such as this that anyone allows him/herself to entertain supernatural belief, to consider him/herself a "believer". I do not believe that faith, which by definition is belief without evidence, is anything to be proud of, much less deserving of blind, unmitigated respect, or that it is somehow exempt from justification.
Many "theists" are very curious about what life without supernatural belief is like, and I'm often asked a lot of questions. THIS IS GOOD! Keep questioning! I cannot encourage this type of thinking enough. Challenge. Disbelieve. Require evidence. Have a healthy sense of skepticism. Don't be a schmuck! These traits are all manifestations of intelligent, clear thinking, so keep it up!! And never take anyone's word for anything, including MY OWN-- please, by all means, look it up, ask around, find a better argument and come back to me with it. A red flag for your b.s. detector should be **the discouragement of investigation**. What could possibly scream "nervous insecurity" louder than that? What incentive could anyone possibly have to ***discourage you from looking for evidence*** other than the fear that you will discover that there isn't any?
Some good Richard Dawkins quotes:
(A clarification for those with the mistaken idea that evolution is entirely random:)
"Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators."
"It is a telling fact that, the world over, the vast majority of children follow the religion of their parents rather than any of the other available religions."
"No doubt soaring cathedrals, stirring music, moving stories and parables, help a bit. But by far the most important variable determining your religion is the accident of birth."
(On Astrology:)
"Aquarius is a miscellaneous set of stars all at different distances from us, which have no connection with each other except that they constitute a (meaningless) pattern when seen from a certain (not particularly special) place in the galaxy (here)."
Carl Sagan quotes:
"The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true."
"I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking."
"I try not to think with my gut. If I'm serious about understanding the world, thinking with anything besides my brain, as tempting as that might be, is likely to get me into trouble." (When asked a question to which he didn't know the answer and after he firmly said so and the questioner persisted: 'But what is your gut feeling?')
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"Once we overcome our fear of being tiny, we find ourselves on the threshold of a vast and awesome Universe that utterly dwarfs — in time, in space, and in potential — the tidy anthropocentric proscenium of our ancestors."
"It is sometimes said that scientists are unromantic, that their passion to figure out robs the world of beauty and mystery. But is it not stirring to understand how the world actually works — that white light is made of colors, that color is the way we perceive the wavelengths of light, that transparent air reflects light, that in so doing it discriminates among the waves, and that the sky is blue for the same reason that the sunset is red? It does no harm to the romance of the sunset to know a little bit about it."
"If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us, that we are the reason there is a Universe, does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?"
"Widespread intellectual and moral docility may be convenient for leaders in the short term, but it is suicidal for nations in the long term. One of the criteria for national leadership should therefore be a talent for understanding, encouraging, and making constructive use of vigorous criticism."
Other quotes:
"(Religion) With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion" -Steven Weinberg
"The US constitution outlaws religious discrimination, but polls show only 45 per cent of Americans would be willing to vote for an atheist candidate for president, even if he or she was the best-qualified."
- The UK Telegraph 5/7/2007
Some good articles:
Does a scientific explanation for any given phenomenon diminish its beauty or its ability to inspire poetry and emotional experiences?
Life, the Universe, and Everything: An Interview with Douglas Adams
Atheism FAQ
Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit
Wikipedia: Critical Thinking
