Comments for FilmTraveler http://www.filmtraveler.com Hollywood Ending or Bust Sat, 31 Jul 2010 22:21:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3 Comment on Wolfram Alpha Figures Out Religion by Jaden Flores http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/25/wolfram-alpha-figures-out-religion/#comment-221 Jaden Flores Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:12:02 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/25/wolfram-alpha-figures-out-religion/#comment-221 actually it doesn't matter what Religion you may have, as long as you treat the other person right.;-, Comment on Wolfram Alpha Figures Out Religion by Courtney Lloyd http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/25/wolfram-alpha-figures-out-religion/#comment-219 Courtney Lloyd Mon, 24 May 2010 06:49:53 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/25/wolfram-alpha-figures-out-religion/#comment-219 In reality, no single religion could guarantee us a place in Heaven. In the end, what matters is how we a treat other people.:,` Comment on Intelligent Design is a Hoax by Harlow House http://www.filmtraveler.com/2008/04/18/intelligent-design-is-a-hoax/#comment-218 Harlow House Tue, 27 Apr 2010 06:49:17 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2008/04/18/intelligent-design-is-a-hoax/#comment-218 A little off topic maybe, but a plea for you to think about the ethics of buying items like designer clothes. Do try and consider, for example, the things the item is made with, the conditions of the factories where they're made and the green credentials of retailers. And endeavour to recycle instead of throwing away. Thanks!!!! Comment on I Read It for You: On the Origin of Species (pt 0) by Traveling Matt http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/27/i-read-it-for-you-the-origin-of-species-pt-0/#comment-209 Traveling Matt Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:33:55 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/27/i-read-it-for-you-the-origin-of-species-pt-0/#comment-209 Thank you, Sheila! I have several more already ready to go. : ) And as for religion, yes, he did walk kind of a tightrope. It's clear from his writings that he wasn't interested in offending anyone, and respected people's right to believe whatever brought them comfort. Not only that, but it apparently he was terribly bothered by the worry that his work might upset people. Comment on I Read It for You: On the Origin of Species (pt 0) by Sheila Walters http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/27/i-read-it-for-you-the-origin-of-species-pt-0/#comment-207 Sheila Walters Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:51:57 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/12/27/i-read-it-for-you-the-origin-of-species-pt-0/#comment-207 Thanks for this series - it should be fun. Apparently Mr. Darwin was a very, very cautious man about whatever he wrote or published. Especially regarding his balancing act with religion, I think. Comment on Three Vague Words on Pottery Prove the Bible True by Traveling Matt http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/01/09/three-vague-words-on-pottery-prove-the-bible-true/#comment-202 Traveling Matt Mon, 28 Dec 2009 04:24:37 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/01/09/three-vague-words-on-pottery-prove-the-bible-true/#comment-202 <p>Thanks for the very thoughtful commentary, Tony! I actually would have written something a great deal like it only three short years ago. I very much appreciate the importance of solace to a person's soul, and would not begrudge it anyone--so we are MOSTLY in agreement, except in some cases I have recently come to see as exceptions.</p> <p>I do not respect a comforting belief which causes harm to the believer, and actively dispute one which causes harm to others. Your child's school bus driver is entitled to a belief in Ganesh the elephant god, but he is NOT entitled to believe that because of Ganesh's protection he doesn't need to swerve out of the way of the Mack truck heading straight for him and his forty schoolchildren. The man sitting next to me is entitled to believe in Allah, but not that it's his duty to take over this airplane and fly it into a football stadium. Parents who withhold life-saving medical treatment from their children go to jail, no matter how deeply comforted they are by their belief in the healing power of God. It's not merely a matter of religious belief; when a loved one finds solace in a whiskey bottle or needle, it's not only appropriate to protest but our duty. So I do understand your point, and agree that a comforting belief is usually none of my business to contest; but have come to see how some others are in fact our business after all.</p> <p>Your example of the teacher who taught the earth was 6000 years old, was not merely heartbreaking, but also highly disturbing, because I find the crippling of young minds an unconscionable act. Neil deGrasse Tyson said about this exact type of incident that preventing it is "not about the need to separate church and state; it's about the need to separate ignorant, scientifically illiterate people from the ranks of teachers." Texas schoolchildren receive an inferior science education due to precisely this pattern, and in such a populous state it drags down the literacy of the entire nation. Not just due to dragging down national averages, but also due to the fact that the textbook guidelines made by the grossly scientifically-illiterate fundamentalist Texas school board are so financially influential, they determine the content of textbooks available to EVERY other state. It is not merely a matter of what brought that woman solace. Your own son was unnecessarily upset (I consider his coming home "fit to be tied" a dreadful thing for that teacher to have done to him), your own parenting interfered with, and the possibility introduced of being ostracized by his peers for failing to cohere. I have heard many stories of children traumatized by fears of hell which were very real to them, or by taunting for failing to share a common belief. I myself believe it is immoral to cause either physical or intellectual harm to a child (like teaching them false information about the world which hinders them from prospering in it) but because it damages our national competitiveness in the sciences and cripples reasoning ability, which has far-reaching implications in every area of life and political policy since poor judgment leads to poor decisions. Imagine instituting a nationwide curriculum whereby all schoolchildren are taught that disease is caused by invisible fairies: would our medical system be improved or degraded by such a belief? If you think this is a fanciful example, it's not so far off--anti-vaccination crusaders have caused the resurgence of several once-rare diseases, and are responsible for the deaths of many thousands of children worldwide. All because they are incapable of distinguishing a fact from a comforting belief.</p> <p>So an adult who, through a process of reflection and reason, comes to believe the earth is only 6000 years old is entitled to it and I won't begrudge them any more than a person who believes he's visited nightly by Elvis. But to teach it to an impressionable young mind is exactly the "bringing someone to it before they are ready" that you yourself wisely warn me against. You correctly point out that "to insist that they must believe the earth is older, is no better than them insisting on others believing it is not." But there are two little issues I have with the statement nonetheless: first, I don't think I've suggested anybody should insist young-earthers should change their mind, but just that they should not have their belief RESPECTED any more than the Elvis guy, and certainly not permitted to teach it to children in accredited schools. (See <a href="http://xkcd.com/154/">http://xkcd.com/154/</a>) And second, I really have to point out that even if I were insisting such a thing, it would in fact be better than them insisting on others believing the earth is not older than 6000 years. Not because I'm morally superior, but because the weight of evidence is so clearly, indisputably, laughably, overwhelmingly in favor of the claim I have made. It is better but for the same reason it is better to insist to your child that he cannot jump off a three-story building and fly, than for her to insist that she can. To claim moral equivalency just because they are both beliefs is like saying that elephants and ticks are the same size because they are both animals. It is actually IMMORAL, in my view, to excuse a destructive belief (and the erosion of our educational system and position among civilized nations is dreadfully destructive) just because it brings its adherents solace. So I definitely understand the spirit of your sentiments, and in most cases actually agree with them. But the ones I now choose to make noise about are the cases where harm is being done, and being given a free pass for it because good folks like you and I so highly value tolerance.<p> Thanks for the very thoughtful commentary, Tony! I actually would have written something a great deal like it only three short years ago. I very much appreciate the importance of solace to a person's soul, and would not begrudge it anyone--so we are MOSTLY in agreement, except in some cases I have recently come to see as exceptions.

I do not respect a comforting belief which causes harm to the believer, and actively dispute one which causes harm to others. Your child's school bus driver is entitled to a belief in Ganesh the elephant god, but he is NOT entitled to believe that because of Ganesh's protection he doesn't need to swerve out of the way of the Mack truck heading straight for him and his forty schoolchildren. The man sitting next to me is entitled to believe in Allah, but not that it's his duty to take over this airplane and fly it into a football stadium. Parents who withhold life-saving medical treatment from their children go to jail, no matter how deeply comforted they are by their belief in the healing power of God. It's not merely a matter of religious belief; when a loved one finds solace in a whiskey bottle or needle, it's not only appropriate to protest but our duty. So I do understand your point, and agree that a comforting belief is usually none of my business to contest; but have come to see how some others are in fact our business after all.

Your example of the teacher who taught the earth was 6000 years old, was not merely heartbreaking, but also highly disturbing, because I find the crippling of young minds an unconscionable act. Neil deGrasse Tyson said about this exact type of incident that preventing it is "not about the need to separate church and state; it's about the need to separate ignorant, scientifically illiterate people from the ranks of teachers." Texas schoolchildren receive an inferior science education due to precisely this pattern, and in such a populous state it drags down the literacy of the entire nation. Not just due to dragging down national averages, but also due to the fact that the textbook guidelines made by the grossly scientifically-illiterate fundamentalist Texas school board are so financially influential, they determine the content of textbooks available to EVERY other state. It is not merely a matter of what brought that woman solace. Your own son was unnecessarily upset (I consider his coming home "fit to be tied" a dreadful thing for that teacher to have done to him), your own parenting interfered with, and the possibility introduced of being ostracized by his peers for failing to cohere. I have heard many stories of children traumatized by fears of hell which were very real to them, or by taunting for failing to share a common belief. I myself believe it is immoral to cause either physical or intellectual harm to a child (like teaching them false information about the world which hinders them from prospering in it) but because it damages our national competitiveness in the sciences and cripples reasoning ability, which has far-reaching implications in every area of life and political policy since poor judgment leads to poor decisions. Imagine instituting a nationwide curriculum whereby all schoolchildren are taught that disease is caused by invisible fairies: would our medical system be improved or degraded by such a belief? If you think this is a fanciful example, it's not so far off--anti-vaccination crusaders have caused the resurgence of several once-rare diseases, and are responsible for the deaths of many thousands of children worldwide. All because they are incapable of distinguishing a fact from a comforting belief.

So an adult who, through a process of reflection and reason, comes to believe the earth is only 6000 years old is entitled to it and I won't begrudge them any more than a person who believes he's visited nightly by Elvis. But to teach it to an impressionable young mind is exactly the "bringing someone to it before they are ready" that you yourself wisely warn me against. You correctly point out that "to insist that they must believe the earth is older, is no better than them insisting on others believing it is not." But there are two little issues I have with the statement nonetheless: first, I don't think I've suggested anybody should insist young-earthers should change their mind, but just that they should not have their belief RESPECTED any more than the Elvis guy, and certainly not permitted to teach it to children in accredited schools. (See http://xkcd.com/154/) And second, I really have to point out that even if I were insisting such a thing, it would in fact be better than them insisting on others believing the earth is not older than 6000 years. Not because I'm morally superior, but because the weight of evidence is so clearly, indisputably, laughably, overwhelmingly in favor of the claim I have made. It is better but for the same reason it is better to insist to your child that he cannot jump off a three-story building and fly, than for her to insist that she can. To claim moral equivalency just because they are both beliefs is like saying that elephants and ticks are the same size because they are both animals. It is actually IMMORAL, in my view, to excuse a destructive belief (and the erosion of our educational system and position among civilized nations is dreadfully destructive) just because it brings its adherents solace. So I definitely understand the spirit of your sentiments, and in most cases actually agree with them. But the ones I now choose to make noise about are the cases where harm is being done, and being given a free pass for it because good folks like you and I so highly value tolerance.

]]> Comment on Three Vague Words on Pottery Prove the Bible True by Tony Robinson http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/01/09/three-vague-words-on-pottery-prove-the-bible-true/#comment-198 Tony Robinson Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:44:48 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/01/09/three-vague-words-on-pottery-prove-the-bible-true/#comment-198 ...However people find meaning, hope, joy from many places. Begrudging them that source before they are ready to move on from it is at best going to put them on the defensive, and at worst potentially crushing. I understand your dedication to rationality and reason. However, bringing someone to it before they are ready is a lot like exporting Democracy by military force. Until the people have the kind of philosophical revelations that our founding fathers did...they just aren't ready to handle it. And in their hands it will be disastrous. Sorry so long. Comment on Three Vague Words on Pottery Prove the Bible True by Tony Robinson http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/01/09/three-vague-words-on-pottery-prove-the-bible-true/#comment-197 Tony Robinson Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:39:06 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/01/09/three-vague-words-on-pottery-prove-the-bible-true/#comment-197 I have just discovered your website. I have found your articles intriguing, but I couldn't pass up the chance to comment on this one. I realize it is an old article, but I hope you will still see this post. I am a recovering literalist. I still believe generally in a creator and more specifically in Jesus Christ (just background not proselytizing) but I no longer believe in 7-day creation, a 6000 year old earth, etc. My wife loves to study ancient cultures and anthropological subjects, as a side-line of course, because music is her first love. This is a fascination she has passed on to my son. While attending a Christian school a couple of years ago, my son was flabbergasted when the teacher corrected the Macmillan Earth Science book, which stated that some rocks are millions of years old. "But of course we know that the earth is only 6000 years old." At recess, my son approached his classmates, "Can you believe she thinks the earth is only 6000 years old?" only to find that to a student each one of them believed as she did. By the time he got home, he was fit to be tied. What I explained to him, and what I am saying to you, is that different people find solace and hope from different places. Each person is at a different place in their spiritual journey. To insist that they must believe the earth is older, is no better than them insisting on others believing it is not. You say you have found "the greatest meaning in creativity, generosity, friends, and family" and that is wonderful. It also very closely matches my own experiences. (Continued) Comment on I Swear I Will Not Kill Anyone by Cat http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/07/20/i-swear-i-will-not-kill-anyone/#comment-184 Cat Wed, 02 Sep 2009 01:52:25 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/07/20/i-swear-i-will-not-kill-anyone/#comment-184 Wow -- I thought I was the only liberal in favor of tort reform! (This is even more ironic if you consider the industry in which I currently work.) Comment on How to Be Wrong by Traveling Matt http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-183 Traveling Matt Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:08:54 +0000 http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-183 I love your story, Kristin. You should post it on Facebook. Also, I hope your grandmother recovers well (if it's anything to recover from). Mine is 90 and still going strong, but I've spent lots of time with my grandfather in a hospital room and know how stressful it is.