Unsinkable skepducks

Innocuous bath toys or intro to critical thinking?

I was inspired by Neil de Grasse Tyson to look at my daughter’s bath toys with new eyes. In one of his essays in Death By Black Hole – “On Density”, I believe – he writes eloquently about how a cupful of the planet Saturn would actually float in a tub of bathwater. That’s because it’s less dense than water. Since you can’t go out and get a cupful of Saturn, Tyson playfully suggested we introduce rubber Saturn toys in place of yellow duckies in our children’s baths. It would be a good way to promote science early on. I loved the idea.

But where to find such a toy? I was thinking such thoughts when my wife came home with a bag full of little yellow rubber duckies for the bath. “We needed some bath toys,” she said. Well, I thought, why not transform the omnipresent yellow duckie into an educational bath toy (keep in mind our daughter is eight months old)? And since it’s already the symbol par excellence of quackery, why not riff on that? Presto! The skepducks were hatched.

I never forget James Randi’s phrase for the resilience of credulity and pseudoscience, “unsinkable rubber ducks.” I’m making a commitment to my daughter to raise her to think for herself and question received ideas. There’s no better time to start.

The State Crucifix

Review of Il Crocifisso di Stato By Sergio Luzzatto Einaudi, 2011. 127 pages

“Without the crucifix on the wall, they say, Italy would no longer be the same. I agree… it would be fairer, more serious, better.” These words grace the cover of Sergio Luzzatto’s compelling polemic against the “crucifix of the state.”

In Italy, no public building — be it a police station, courtroom or classroom — is without a crucifix appended to the wall. Many have argued that its presence is innocuous, or a matter of traditional identity rather than religious proselytizing. But whose identity? Certainly not that of Italian Jews like Marcello Montagnana, who raised the issue in the 1990s; or his wife, Maria Vittoria Migliano, whose opposition to the omnipresent symbol began in the 1980s. Or the growing number of secularists and non-Catholics who see in the state-sponsored crucifix a flagrant violation of Italy’s constitutional secularity and their right to freedom of conscience.

Luzzatto, who teaches modern history at Turin University, recounts the history of this ubiquitous Catholic symbol beginning with its rise in the Middle Ages as the signifier par excellence of discrimination against heretics, Jews and Muslims. Given its lengthy history of intolerance, it’s ironic that today’s Vatican wishes to pawn it off as the equivalent of a pizza margherita: bland, neutral, inoffensive. Even worse are the politicians who can’t agree on anything but the need for the crucifix — right, left and center all fall in line the moment the pope raises an eyebrow. This is astonishing for anyone familiar with the exceedingly partisan nature of Italian politics.

Author Natalia Ginzburg, according to Luzzatto, furnished the “Ur-Text” of arguments in defense of the crucifix. Her 1988 article was published in L’Unità, the official newspaper of the Italian Communist Party, and has been mined for decades by those wishing to preserve the public exposition of the crucifix. For Ginsburg, the crucifix is “silent,” “represents human suffering” and — perhaps most egregiously — “has always been there.”

Well, no, it hasn’t really. Luzzatto demolishes the inconsistency of Ginzburg’s thesis. The crucifix was affixed to the public wall at a precise moment in Italian history. It became a mandatory presence under Mussolini’s Fascist state. How’s that for benign, silent, universal? This book is a welcome corrective to such historical myopia and — for lack of a better term — bad faith.

From The American

Poison for the mind

It’s hard to think of any other reason for Roberto De Mattei’s latest comments than his deep religious commitment:

The collapse of the Roman Empire and the arrival of the Barbarians was due to the spread of homosexuality. The Roman colony of Carthage was a paradise for homosexuals and they infected many others. The invasion of the Barbarians was seen as punishment for this moral transgression.

It is well-known that effeminate men and homosexuals have no place in the kingdom of God. Homosexuality was not rife among the Barbarians and this shows God’s justice throughout history.

I keep hearing that religion is this necessary good thing that humanity will never outgrow because it needs it. I keep hearing that atheists construct straw man arguments for religious belief to tear apart on their blogs. But all one has to do is listen to a De Mattei to see that the ideas themselves are often pernicious. And that largely the only reason for holding such opinions is the adherence to a religious dogma like Catholicism, with its outspoken antagonism towards anything but the most rigorous “biblical” sexuality. Of course, that’s an invention and they are lying to us. But belief is belief and dogma is dogma. And even a smart fellow like De Mattei is reduced to wicked demagoguery by his piousness.

» More on Roberto De Mattei here and here.

Which of these novels have you read?

I love the fact that the Bible is included on this list, where it belongs. Now, what about the Qur’an, the Book of Mormon and Dianetics? I suppose they didn’t want to risk it. (My answers are in red.)

Oh this is fucking brilliant

I think I have a new hero: Tim Minchin. As I have a ton of studying to do for my driving exam, I’ll leave you to enjoy this animated short in praise of God science. Haven’t we all a Storm or two in our lives?

Proselytizing, again

The meme is gaining ground. How does one combat the accusation that expressing one’s views is a form of proselytizing? Funny word, that; it’s clearly picked to draw a parallel between the ways of religious missionaries and the ways of outspoken non-theists. (We’re apparently unable to remember the Golden Rule: If you don’t believe in god, shut up and keep it to yourself. Doh!)

Here’s one answer I came up with, though:

Yep.

The homeopathy illusion

This is an awesome optical illusion which serves to teach us a little lesson not just about homeopathy, but everything else as well. Don’t trust your perceptions; they are very probably missing something. When it really matters – i.e. when you need a doctor, etc… – remember that just because the lines seem bent doesn’t mean they are. Apply ruler!

For the full experience you must go here. (Via Edzard Ernst)

This is an illusion. The lines are straight.

Good Times

Remember this show? Who knew there were sophisticated debates about atheism? It was just after school television. But, beyond the canned laughter, they were dealing with “serious” issues. I wonder if the same can be said for today’s shows.

Via Freethought Kampala.

Today I embraced the Lord Jesus Christ

APRIL FOOLS’! Well, you knew that was coming, right? Now I’m going to enrich that predictably adolescent gag with a tidbit of extra trivia. “April Fools'” is called “Pesce d’aprile” in Italy – “April Fish.” I can only imagine it has something to do with this:

 

Fooled ya!

There’s a sucker born every minute. Save yourself; be skeptical.

More fun with comments

The following brief exchange is from the comments section to my recent post. I’d mentioned that Martin Yanosek – a commenter from Stanley Fish’s original NYT piece – wasn’t being clear. Did he agree with Fish, or did he agree with the judges? Or, improbably, both?

Anyway, he found my blog and cleared things up as best he could. I admit I’m still in the dark about his reasoning, though, and I’ve begun to suspect he may have been one of the judges in Strasbourg.

Martin Yanosek says:

Hello there, Mr. Di Martino! I agree with the court and, although I admire Dr. Fish’s analysis, I think Italian parents should be allowed to let their kids study in the presence of the crucifix. You’re right, though. I don’t know about “all” Italian parents. Only God does! You do believe in God, dontcha!?*

Oh, Mr. Di Martino, I see that I missed answering your question about how the crucifix is Christianity’s greatest symbol. In its evolution as a symbol one must take into consideration the cosmic irony of the crucifix’s meaning over time. The crucifix’s meaning has evolved from that of a purely utilitarian implement of torture to today’s meaning of everlasting life. I think the tremendous irony inherent in the evolution of the crucifix’s meaning is what makes it Christianity’s greatest symbol. I hope I answered your question. Regards, Martin Yanosek

Marc Alan Di Martino says:

Martin, I appreciate you taking a moment to clarify your stance. That said, your position is still unclear. You wrote, “If the Vatican was headquartered on Long Island I would probably disagree with the court’s ruling.” Why is that? Were that the case, and by your logic, American parents would have the right to have their children educated “in the presence of Christianity’s greatest symbol.” Or is it okay if it’s in a country you don’t live in, but not okay when it’s in yours?

As for the symbol itself, does it matter at all that most Christian denominations don’t recognize the crucifix as their symbol? Not to mention non-Christians and non-theists – which is quite a lot of us, even here in Italy. Don’t we have the right to have our children educated in the presence of our symbols? Or are we expected to submit before the irony of the holy Roman torture device?

Martin Yanosek says:

Long Island doesn’t have the tradition of Roman Catholicism that Italy does. Long Island has more of a Great Gatsby tradition. Without our traditions life would be as shaky as a fiddler on the roof of St. Peter’s Basilica! We should submit to the irony of everlasting life! Peace be with you, Mr. Di Martino! Amen.

Marc Alan Di Martino says: 

Just to recap, Italy has numerous traditions other than Roman Catholicism. It’s still just another religious confession, and it’s not even the oldest one we have. Shalom, Mr. Yanosek.

*No.