Saturday, September 29, 2012

Parable of the Fallen Bridge

Once there was a group of three climbers who were trying to reach the peak of a gigantic and treacherous mountain.On their way to the summit, they came across a deep chasm spanning a long distance. As they neared the edge, they realized that a bridge crossing the expanse had recently fallen.

Looking down at the remnants of the bridge, the climbers noticed nine people clinging to the ropes and boards. The climbers called to them, but unfortunately, none of them were strong enough to climb up and save themselves.



The first climber looked down, and felt very uncomfortable at the thought of all the lifting and working that would be involved in saving them. He reasoned to himself: "Helping all of the people would be an impossible task. I'm only one person. Even if I tried I wouldn't make much of a difference." Then, pretending not to see the people, he continued on his way up the mountain.

The second climber looked down, and felt a surge of compassion. Not wanting to look inconsiderate like the first climber, he stooped down and threw out a rope. After working for a few minutes, he pulled up one or two of the hapless individuals. Suddenly he realized that it was taking real work to save the needy, and decided he would much rather go on with his life. The second climber thought to himself: "I have certainly done all that can be expected of me. Normal people would have helped much less. After all, I did more than the first climber." Then, ignoring the cries from the people below, he continued on his way up the mountain.

The third climber looked down, and thought to himself: "If I were in distress and holding on for my life, and someone else had the opportunity to help me, I would want to be saved." He then abandoned his aspirations for reaching the peak of the mountain, and started pulling people up. He continued to do for the rest of his life.

The third climber never successfully saved every person on the fallen bridge. He only saved as many as he could.
 -----------------------------------------------------------

"In round numbers there are 7 billion people in the world. Thus, with an estimated 925 million hungry people in the world, 13.1 percent, or almost 1 in 7 people are hungry."

"Children who are poorly nourished suffer up to 160 days of illness each year. Poor nutrition plays a role in at least half of the 10.9 million child deaths each year--five million deaths."

"The world produces enough food to feed everyone. World agriculture produces 17 percent more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago, despite a 70 percent population increase."


Which climber are you?


All statistics taken from: www.worldhunger.org
But why stop at world hunger? There are many fallen bridges in our world.



Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Doubt your Doubts?

Today I heard the phrase "doubt your doubts" one too many times. It was when a concerned Christian was attempting to desuade their fellow believer from asking serious questions about the validity of their faith.

If I may, I must go on a short rant.

What does "doubt your doubts" even mean?? It seems so witty and savy, turning the doubting tables on the doubts themselves, but there is no actual substance to the statement.

For example, "doubt your doubts" could be countered by "doubt your doubting of doubts." This could in turn be countered by "doubt your doubting of your doubting of doubts." And so on and so forth.

I don't understand why someone would find security in a belief system based off of this phrase. "Doubt your doubts" means nothing.

Consider the following story: A person happens to believe that the world is flat. They are presented with some arguments in favor of the sphericallness of the earth. A fellow flat-earthest consoles them by saying "doubt your doubts!" The person goes on believing that the world is flat because they doubted their doubts about the flattness of the earth.

It is much better to dwell in a realm with substance. If you have a doubt, ask yourself why you have it. Perhaps you want an honest answer to a question. Perhaps you are curious. Perhaps you have personal experience or wisdom relating to the validity of certain kinds of claims. Simply doubting doubts does nothing. Addressing the doubts by examining evidence allows you to make progress.

So please, if you have ever heard the phrase "doubt your doubts," I would encourage you to at least doubt your doubting of doubts. Even better than that would be to start looking around for valid types of evidence and coherent streams of logic that pertain to your doubts so that you can draw some legit conclusions.

Rant: completed.

Hedonism


Hedonism is the school of thought that the acquisition of happiness is the ultimate goal of every person. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "Motivational hedonism is the claim that only pleasure or pain motivates us."

'But surely not!' You say. 'We do things that harm ourselves all the time!' This is is true in a sense. For example, giving to charity, becoming a martyr, doing a hard workout, or commuting suicide all seem to harm us.

It may be helpful to note that 'net' happiness is what is sought after. This means that we may do things that are painful, such as taking a biology test or the MCAT. BUT, we only do these things because we think that we will gain a greater amount of happiness from doing so.

I would argue that even in cases of suicide, people are attempting to gain the most happiness. A suicidal person sees the future as containing a net negative happiness, and so decides to end their life.

On a less bleak note, I think that everything we do is motivated by a search for happiness. Going to school, going to work, helping someone with homework, getting married, having kids, going on a search for truth, we do all of things with our own best interest in mind.

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

4 Stats on World Hunger

Lately I have been trying to raise awareness about various humanist efforts. Here are a few facts about world hunger that everyone should be aware of. All my stats come from this website: http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm. If you need specifics on the meaning of certain terms or would like more information, go check out www.worldhunger.org!

4 Stats on World Hunger
  1. The world produces enough food to feed everyone
  2. In 2010, there were 925 million hungry people
  3. The primary cause of world hunger is poverty
  4. The number of people who are hungry in the world is increasing

I find it quite unfortunate that we produce enough food for everyone, and yet not everyone gets food.

I will also point out that the increase in the number of people who are hungry is probably related to the global population increase. An increase in population complicates the process of keeping people fed. Unfortunately, feeding people also increases the world population. This means that fixing the problem actually makes the problem harder to fix.

Anyway, a complicated issue to be sure. Hopefully we can make progress!

Specific References:
  • http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Number_of_hungry_people_in_the_world
  • http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Does_the_world_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyone
  • http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#What_are_the_causes_of_hunger
  •  http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Progress_in_reducing_the_number_of_hungry_people_

Monday, September 24, 2012

What if I told you that someone died today whom you could have saved?

I realize this is a very complicated issue, and I haven't even begun to address it with a few paragraphs of text. Right now all I want to do is start a conversation. Hopefully it will be a conversation that will result in lives being saved.

But really, what if I told you that someone died today whom you could have saved?

Yes, this is likely going to be depressing. Most people will probably choose to ignore this so that they can remain comfortable.

Anyway, the truth is that there are people that died today who could have been saved by you and I, had we chosen to take the initiative.

Let's say that the person living next door to me is starving. They never ask me for food, but I know that they are starving. Instead of doing something about the problem, I heat up my microwave dinner, plop down on the couch, start watching TV, throw away the vegetables that I didn't feel like eating, and after a few weeks, my neighbor dies of starvation. What kind of person am I?

Due to massive jumps in technology, the globe has been radically connected. Thanks to this website: http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm, we have plenty of statistics on world hunger. In addition, we have the ability to do something to effect the number of starving people. This drastically increases the number of 'neighbors' that we have.

Sure, it might cost us time and money, but if we tried, we could prevent some of the starving people from starving.

Thank you to those who are already trying to make a difference!

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Humanist Maximalism

The ultimate goal of Humanist Maximalism is to obtain maximal happiness for humanity in terms of quality of life and percentage of the global population that is effected. If this goal were reached, 100% of humans would be extremely happy.


Because this primary goal is very likely impossible, a secondary goal must be introduced. Namely, that the maximum amount of improvement towards the primary goal must be realized.

Here are a few examples of what a Human Maximalist would attempt to accomplish:
  • End poverty
  • End slavery
  • End war
  • Modify human society such that we won't destroy our environment
  • Provide education to everyone who wants it
It is quite obvious that these are lofty goals. Keep in mind, however, that just because a goal is lofty does not mean that it is impossible to accomplish it. In addition, if everyone had the mentality that lofty goals should not be pursued because it would take a lot of work, then the world would be a terrible place.

Because of this, it is most helpful to attempt to make as much progress towards each of these goals as is humanly possible.

As a Human Maximalist, I hope to develop and carry out strategies to make as much progress as I can towards making as many people as possible as happy as I can make them.

Monday, September 17, 2012

Honors Thesis Outline

Hi everyone!
I've been making a lot of progress on my Honors Thesis. Here is the road map that I will use to press forward. If you have any suggestions for additional resources I should tackle in my Literature Review, let me know!



Honors Thesis Outline
A Biologist’s Perspective on the Fine-Tuning Argument


· Introduction
o   Topic and Purpose of Thesis
§  Topic: The fine-tuning of physical parameters in phase space
§  Purpose: To examine the fine-tuning of four parameters
·         The Speed of Light
·         Planck’s Constant
·         The Gravitational Constant
·         The Cosmological Constant
o   Literature Review: History of Fine-Tuning
§  Explain major contributions up to this point
·         Lawrence Henderson – The Fitness of the Environment
o   1913
·         Robert Dicke, 1961
·         Fred Hoyle – Intelligent Universe
o   1984
·         John Gribbin and Martin Rees – Cosmic Coincidences
o   1989
·         William Lane Craig
·         Stephen Hawking – The Grand Design
o   2010
·         Victor Stenger – The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning
o   2011


· Background- provide reader with necessary information to understand parameters
o   Biology
§  Define Life
§  Outline requirements for life
§  Planet, Solar System, and Universe level parameters
o   Parameters in phase space
§  Dimensionless numbers
o   Physics
§  Light
·         Relativity
§  Planck’s Constant
§  Gravity
§  Cosmology
·         Cosmic Inflation
§  Multiverse Theory
·         String Theory


· Main Argument
o   Phrase argument utilizing sharpness of peaks and half-height widths for parameters
§  The slope, or sharpness, of peaks corresponds to how finely-tuned a parameter must be.
·         Examples
o   As the Gravitational constant is made larger or smaller, the universe rapidly becomes unsuitable for life.
§  The Gravitational Constant has a sharp peak.
o   As the speed of light is made larger or smaller, the universe slowly becomes unsuitable for life.
§  The speed of light has a curved peak.
o   Address objections
§  Additional peaks may exist for individual parameters
·         These hypothetical peaks should be disregarded because of their speculative nature.
§  Changing multiple parameters at once may introduce additional possibilities
·          Once again, it is better to hold all but one parameter constant and measure the steepness of individual peaks that speculate as to how life would be affected by combinations of changes.


· Response to Stenger
o   Examine Stenger’s reasoning concerning the speed of light.
§  Holding all else constant, the speed of light can be fine-tuned
·         Utilize the height of a door analogy
·         Address complications introduced by relativity.
·         Address complications introduced by the granular nature of the universe.
o   Stenge
o   Stenger’s reasoning concerning the speed of light is the same for the speed of light as it is for Planck’s Constant and the Gravitational Constant.
o   Because the speed of light displays fine-tuning, Planck’s Constant and the Gravitational Constant also display fine-tuning.
o   Establish the Cosmological Constant as a parameter which is fine-tuned.
§  Stenger admits that the Cosmological Constant is ‘up for discussion.’


· Address Additional Objections to Fine-Tuning
o   Multiverse
§  General explanation of Multiverse theory
·         Not enough evidence to support Multiverse Theory at this point
§  If Multiverse Theory were supported, additional characteristics of the Multiverse would need to be established before it would affect the fine-tuning argument.
·         The number of universes would need to be high enough to make the odds possible
·         Parameters would need to differ from universe to universe
§  If the existence and certain characteristics of the multiverse can be established, the fine-tuning argument will become invalid (unless a secondary fine-tuning argument applies to the formation of the multiverse).
o   Life Could Evolve Differently
§  Evolution will have a significant effect on planet and solar system parameters (for example, the speed of light), but will have no bearing on universe level parameters (Gravity, Planck’s Constant, and the Cosmological Constant).
§  Evolution will drive life towards peaks, thereby generating steep slopes.
·         Does not apply to universe level parameters.


· Conclusions
o   Certain parameters display fine-tuning.
§  The Speed of Light – curved peak
§  Planck’s Constant – sharp peak
§  The Gravitational Constant – sharp peak
§  The Cosmological Constant – sharp peak
o   The three ‘sharp-peaked’ parameters are sufficient to demonstrate that the universe is not fine-tuned for life due to chance.

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Website!!!

While I can't pretend to know anything about web sites, I now have one.

If you are interested in checking things out during this preliminary stage, feel free to go snoop around! The only thing you will find there right now is a link to a presentation I have created. The presentation is a work in progress. If you go there now, you will find some fun stuff, but there are many loose ends. I will be working on it every day or so adding on new material and editing. I think the presentation is pretty cool. =D

www.honestsearchfortruth.com