gens4010-mzw-blog

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

The End of The Course

Just thought I would write a little bit to summarise my experience with GENS4010. I can't say I've left this course a completely new person but there are definitely lots of things I haven't considered in relation to religion/ personal beliefs. I feel there was a good balance of different sciences - things like religion and psychology, and religion and neuroscience were particularly new to me, but topics such as religion and environment were quite familiar.

It was really great to see the discussions going on on BlackBoard - I've never had the opportunity to have relatively reasonable discussions with so many people about so many aspects of science and religion before - in real life the debates are often too heated to be constructive.

Overall the course was easy to navigate and I was able to tie in some of the topics to my regular field of study. Some concepts I still find hard to understand, such as miracles and creation, but at least the course has offered many perspectives.

Cheers!

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 12 - The End Of The Universe

I've never really thought about the end of the universe as relevant to me... the closest thing I feel relevant to me personally is the death of my family and people I care about, and my own death. These are the things that worry me - the end of the universe hardly seems relevant! For me it makes no sense that we should have to worry about the universe - such a vast vast place, with so much unknown - surely that isn't as relevant as focussing on being a good person, for example.

Here British physicist Brian Cox tries to explain the state in which everything will become... though the thought doesn't cover as much as the scientific explanations in the lecture (no cosmic background radiation or neutron stars!), I found this quite relevant to me and also an understandable way of accepting the end of things.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 11B - Psychology and Religion

It was good to see something I recognised this week in the lecture - Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Here it is again:

I'm pretty sure that Maslow in writing this hierarchy of needs was not coming from a religious approach! For example, on the physiological level, Maslow states that "breathing, food, water, sex, sleep, homeostasis, and excretion" are the basic needs for any human. This should be an interesting perspective for somebody who values traditional Catholic values, who would not view sex as part of the fundamental, physiological needs of a human. A biologist might disagree.

What was also interesting in the lecture was the part about the psychology of religion... the vocabulary was definitely confusing, and I'm not sure whether there can ever be an successful scientific explanation of spirituality or religiousness... to me that is a bit like using a magnet to find a bit of plastic!

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Make your own clothes, don't touch your husband and sleep outside: How one woman spent a year living according to the Bible

A blogger who spent one year following all of the Bible’s instructions for women, from making her own clothes to 'submitting' to her husband, has now written a book about her experience. Rachel Held Evans’ book, A Year of Biblical Womanhood, chronicles her 12 month attempt to obey the Bible's commandments for women. The Bible gives hundreds of rules for women to follow, both explicit and implied, in the Old Testament and the New. For example, women should dress modestly, submit to their husbands - passages of the Bible insist that husbands are the masters of their wives - and remove themselves from their communities while menstruating. Leviticus Chapters 15 to 18 has a passage detailing rules for women to live by - with particularly stringent rules coming into play while the woman is menstruating, stemming from the theory that women on their periods are untouchable.

...continue reading

When I first read this I thought I was stumbling across a joke that was meant to poke fun at the way the Bible influences the lives of all people - another version of the flying spaghetti monster perhaps..., yet a look at Rachel Held Evan's blog here shows that she was serious. I haven't read the book so we don't know whether Rachel has reached the conclusion that women should be acting in that particular way, but as of now, as a female I find that honestly a little bit offensive. In my opinion a woman should no more be separated from the community when menstruating than a man be condemned for having a penis! This just goes to show how times have changed but people are still hanging onto some things which only make sense in the past...

Perhaps she was just being devout and was curious to see how much of the Bible she could follow in a contemporary context, I don't know. Would be interesting to find out!

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 11A - Consciousness and Neuroscience

I found this lecture quite dense and never really thought about consciousness in so many ways before. Only towards the end of the lecture when there were several positions summarised, did I realise that people thought about their consciousness in so many ways. Personally I feel like I can related to 'dual-aspect monism' the most.

I was disappointed to see that there was no mention of other religious reactions to consciousness in the lecture. It would have been interesting to see how Hindu people think about consciousness! I was taught by family relatives that a Buddhist approach to consciousness involves thinking about ourselves not as an entity, a being, but a mere series of complex and constantly changing mental states... which we form normally to make our 'consciousness'. The approach is really interesting because so far it makes a lot of sense to me, but it is basically saying that we should strive for a "no-self"... but when is that even possible?? I can't imagine.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Not the God Helmet mentioned in the lecture but an interesting device nonetheless which 'maps' implicit commands from the brain and transfers them onto a 'Cognitive Suite'.

I'm not really sure if I anticipate the day when devices like that will ber commercialised and cheaply available to the consumer market... that said, in Japan, there are already some products that claim to be reacting to human brain waves - whether or not this is as useful as the device above I'm not sure!

Product available readily here

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 10B - Neuroscience

Really enjoyed reading this lecture and never really thought about the relationship between neuroscience and religion. I think some of the arguments provided are a little bit dodgy however. For example this statement from Newberg:

“However, what we can say is that the brain has two primary functions that can be considered from either a biological or evolutionary perspective. These two functions are self-maintenance and self-transcendence. The brain performs both of these functions throughout our lives. It turns out that religion also performs these two same functions. So, from the brain's perspective, religion is a wonderful tool because religion helps the brain perform its primary functions. Unless the human brain undergoes some fundamental change in its function, religion and God will be here for a very long time.”

I understand that he is trying to say that we intrinsically desire something in our conscience that will aid us in our self-maintenance and self-transcendance, but on what basis does he say that religion also performs these two functions? Maybe that applied to him... for many non-religious people we manage to gain those elsewhere.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 10A - Evil and Suffering

Found this video on YouTube about a Christian rationale for the existence of evil in the world... the trouble I am having with this explanation is that, well, if there is indeed to be an all-knowing God, then wouldn't He be able to overcome the 'duality' of Good and Evil in order for Good to prevail? The flaw of the logic also lies in fact that good and evil here are portrayed as black and white, which is not the case of how good or evil manifests itself in real life.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Jean-Paul Sartre, Nausea, pg 39.

Just a particularly resonant passage from Jean-Paul Sartre's Nausea which I am really enjoying (I have yet to finish it). The last two sentences in particular are quite powerful and often something I find myself thinking.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Some pictures showing a successful case of sustainable development in Montford Boys Town, Fiji.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

"Rev. Dr. James Tonkowich, Senior Fellow at Cornwall Alliance, compares the fundamentally opposing beliefs of the Christian church and Environmentalists."

A Christian perspective on the way which Christianity is opposing the Environmental movement. Basically the message is that we are only here to "[make the world] a better place for human habitation".

For me the part where Reverend James says that "sustainable development invariably means no development, or negative development... except for the elites" is just about the clearest example of how the two concepts are conflicting. There are two parts to which I found this quite difficult to take in. The first part is when he says "sustainable development ...  means no development". I think by saying that he is embodying the Christian thought that the Earth is to be taken advantage of for "human habitation" and that no other option is to be considered as 'development'.

When he said "... except for the elite", I think he is neglecting the hundreds of successful examples of sustainable development benefiting the less 'elite'. It is also ironic considering that he would be part of that elite.

*

Successful Sustainable Development in a Less 'Elite' Population

This is an excerpt from an essay I wrote for that sustainability course which I took in second year. I think it pretty much outlines how sustainable development can be used to an advantage for those in less economically developed countries, and to say that “sustainable development … is no development” is pretty much denying a large body of evidence.

In Montfort Boys Town, Fiji, successful implementations of biomimicry principles have shown positive results, and little labour is used to generate mushrooms from beer grain waste, by-products of a local brewery. In turn, the waste produce from each stage thereon can be re-applied into another process. The waste beer grain eventually indirectly feeds pigs and poultry, produces methane as energy and nutrient-rich water for fish, and even generates increased income for the school, from the average two thousand dollars per year to sixty thousand dollars a year. Local farmers of the school have also observed improved conditions for surrounding ecosystems, and younger generations receive education and heightened awareness about the interdependency of our existence with nature. The processes are also described as low-maintenance, not energy intensive, allowing for more time for social interaction between local communities. This project, described as “low-tech but intelligent” by Merson (abc.net.au, 2000), is a clear example of how simple biomimicry can be used to create closed-loop systems to make use of and benefit not only financial and manufacturing capitals, but also human and natural capital (University of New South Wales, 2011).

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 9B - Environment

I'm quite passionate about the environment so this week's lecture was definitely interesting, and I was able to make several connections related to my study. It was intriguing to see this passage again:

God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” (Genesis 1:28)

This was the exact same passage that was shown to me in another course I was doing at university, except their viewpoint on it contributing to environmental destruction was definitely much stronger. I suppose that would be because fundamental teachings of the Bible (as I have come to know anyway, I might be wrong!) rarely place emphasis on the environment.This much was covered in the lecture and brief outlines of other religions and their relationship with the environment were given, but I was a bit disappointed that there wasn't much more. I feel like our environment is integral to our personal development, whether religious/ non-religious, and how we interact with it tells a lot about our beliefs.

In traditional Australian Aboriginal culture, for example, the ideas are very different. Their beliefs stem from a mutual dependency between the individual and their surroundings, and that drives many of their lifestyle choices. In the architecture history course I'm studying it is revealed that Australian writers such as Robin Boyd often criticised the Aborigines for using such 'primitive' methods, but as we move onto a more environmentally friendly (and less racist) focus I suppose those methods are not so primitive afterall, but actually stemming from a great history of belief and culture, and far less damaging to the environment as other houses.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

'Amadeus' is one of those movies I've watched many many times.... and this is one of the most memorable scenes for me. Many many years ago when I was much younger I remember watching this scene and feeling such a sense of understanding from this actor, and what he was describing about the way music touched a person... but at the same time I couldn't understand how I would feel the same as I was far from religious. To me there is an unexplainable quality about music (just like art and film and dance) and to attribute this emotional connection as 'God' seems like a justifiable explanation to many Christians but I can't say I agree because I have seen music move a completely atheist person to a heaving, desperate sob.

Just a short thought 'deposit' on this one.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 9A - Bioethics

I looked a little bit into some political issues surrounding a particularly controversial use of in-vitro fertilisation by Nadya 'Octomum' Suleman. I did mention her in the lecture discussion board but I feel like there are many undiscussed issues surrounding her case. Religion is only one of the many factors affecting the persons' opinions towards the following:

The actual use of IVF itself In the Octomum case the woman claims to be religiously celibate, yet has used artificial insemination multiple times (for all her 14 kids!). Now for me I think the controversy doesn't really lie in her religion/ IVF conflict, but just the extent to which she used IVF. Personally I am not against the use of IVF. People who are radically against artificial insemination are in my opinion being hypocritical... there are already thousands of kilograms of cloned meat circulating the market, as well as genetically modified crops, patented seed genomes, and the use of artificial hormones to create 'perpetually pregnant' cows for milk production. Are these individuals against the use of those things, too? There have been many discussions I've been involved in with people who are against IVF, and yet they are happy to eating a 'typical ham and cheese sandwich'. By this 'typical ham and cheese sandwich' I mean to say that they are probably already using products which have also been made by scientists 'playing God', the concept they are so repulsed by: the bread made from genetically modified wheat, with a slice of cheese made from a hysterically pregnant cow's milk, the ham coming from a pig whose birth and death was designed by humans solely for consumption. From an environmental perspective it is very well to say that no, these things are not right because they are wrecking the Earth in ways we cannot control and that in merely economic and health terms, it is not actually beneficial to us at all. From a religious perspective I see little resistance to the agricultural use of 'playing God', and an IVF is really little different in essence, yet hugely reacted to.  

The ethical position and responsibility of healthcare professionals, and the constant religious dilemmas they face In the case of the Octomum the main controversy was that the doctor had followed through the Ms Suleman's request of planting 6 embryos (some say it was later revealed to be 12!) into her womb for birth, even though the standard recommendation is that no more than 3 should be planted as this is potentially life-threatening for the woman, and causes both pre-natal and post-natal complications for both woman and children. From what I've understood reading about her, she's claimed that she requested for this procedure for religious reasons. To me this is problematic because for the sake of however many potential babies she had produced in the lab, she decided to risk the life of the other ones that she would eventually give birth to...  Sadly this is the kind of irresponsible religious reasoning I cannot come to respect and largely what holds me back from approaching religion. I wonder what quality of life her children would have...  

Those are just some of the thoughts I've come up with a few issues. More questions surrounding this topic include:

The responsibility of the human towards themselves - to what extent are we supposed to be responsible for our own health and our own decisions for them, and when do healthcare professionals 'get a say'? What role does religion play on an individual when making these decisions?

I feel a little bit apprehensive about making any further judgements as yet, as I'm not too familiar with ethics (such a broad field!), nor bioethics in particular, nor Christian ethics. This lecture overall raised more questions than provided answers!

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

The Hindu milk miracle was a phenomenon considered by many Hindus as a miracle which occurred on September 21, 1995. Before dawn, a Hindu worshiper at a temple in south New Delhi made an offering of milk to a statue of Lord Ganesha. When a spoonful of milk from the bowl was held up to the trunk of the statue, the liquid was seen to disappear, apparently taken in by the idol. Word of the event spread quickly, and by mid-morning it was found that statues of the entire Hindu pantheon in temples all over North India were taking in milk. A small number of temples outside of India reported the effect continuing for several more days, but no further reports were made after the beginning of October. Skeptics hold the incident to be an example of mass hysteria, and when reports of the Monkey-man of New Delhi (item 3) began to appear in 2001, many newspapers harked back to the event.

[gens4010-mzw-blog]

Lecture 8B - Miracles

It is extremely easy to explain why it is that Jesus's followers after his death.. would want to believe in miracles, and would build up stories which then would be believed by their followers...

- Richard Dawkins (from the 8B lecture)

After hearing the quoted part from the lecture this week I immediately thought of Arthur Miller's play 'The Crucible'. I read through this book briefly after high school English literature class had introduced me to Miller, and was really intrigued by how Miller was trying to make a point of his own based on the historical accounts of witch trials. Now, it seems like miracles and witch trials would be at the opposite end of the spectrum of positive-negative events, but how I see it is that they are both a form of mass hysteria.

"I want to open myself! . . . I want the light of God, I want the sweet love of Jesus! I danced for the Devil; I saw him, I wrote in his book; I go back to Jesus; I kiss His hand. I saw Sarah Good with the Devil! I saw Goody Osburn with the Devil! I saw Bridget Bishop with the Devil!"

The Crucible is a pretty simple story about a low-rung orphan girl called Abigail Williams who has an affair with a married man John Proctor, and gets extremely jealous of his wife. At the same time there are some strange events which are causing panic among the community in Puritan Salem. Abigail realises that accusing others of witchcraft in the context of these strange events will distract others from her lustful sin, and starts 'confessing' to align with the theology of Salem. She stirs a large-scale hysteria in which several characters all accuse each other to escape death sentences. The story ends when John, convinced that it would preserve his integrity, would rather die than accuse somebody else of witchcraft.

I can't say that this story is a historical account of what happened in Salem due to religious hysteria but I can say that it is ironic that Proctor, who is portrayed as the character most just in the book, ends up being falsely sentenced to death. As a result the entire experience of the book is really unsettling and honestly, I usually feel the same way when people (especially Christians! Since there are so 'miracles' in the Bible) talk about miracles... I feel like there is a certain kind of hysteria which I cannot understand. Looking into mass hysteria due to religious behaviour, it is interesting to see the kind of research that comes up (such as the events highlighted by this article)

The other point I feel like is relevant when talking of miracles is one of personal agenda. Everybody has an agenda, and when yours is desperate enough (such as how Abigail starts to accuse others into believing falsities when realises that, with her low status within the community, she is likely to be trialed to death for witchcraft), you will use desperate measures to protect yourself.

Overall I'm not quite sure where the notion of miracles came from, especially in Judeo-Christian theology, and I can't help but feel that these accounts are

a) metaphorical, hence not an actual miracle b) created on some part by somebody with quite a desperate agenda...