Nuclear Winter

by Patrick Appel

Alan Robock and Owen Brian Toon report on new simulations:

People have several incorrect impressions about nuclear winter. One is that the climatic effects were disproved; this is just not true. Another is that the world would experience “nuclear autumn” instead of winter. But our new calculations show that the climate effects even of a regional conflict would be widespread and severe. The models and computers used in the 1980s were not able to simulate the lofting and persistence of the smoke or the long time it would take oceans to warm back up as the smoke eventually dissipated; current models of a full-scale nuclear exchange predict a nuclear winter, not a nuclear fall.

(Hat tip: 3QD)

Sexual Have Nots

by Patrick Appel

Pascal Bruckner feels that not sleeping around is now socially unacceptable:

Our parents used to lie about their morality, but we lie about our immorality. In both cases, there is a disparity between what we say and what we do. Unlike in Freud’s time, the cultural malaise no longer stems from instincts being crushed by the moral order—it is born from their very liberation. At a time when the ideal of self-fulfilment reigns triumphant everywhere, everyone compares themselves to the norm and struggles to live up to it. That means an end to guilt and the birth of anxiety. However, sexuality is generally still considered something that should remain undisclosed. But people either boast too much to be credible, or hide it for fear of appearing gauche at a time when one’s private life has become a sport of ostentation.

(Hat tip: 3QD)

In A Deterministic Universe

by Patrick Appel

A reader sketches out the ethical problems that arise:

First, in a deterministic universe, it does not make sense to use words like "should" or "ought". In order to say that someone should have done something in a certain situation, then it follows that she could have done something else instead. But in a deterministic universe, by definition, the person could not have done something else, because her actions, thoughts, and feelings were determined by the environment.

Second, in a deterministic universe, values are completely arbitrary. Any values we possess would be by definition merely a result of our environmental programming.

In that situation, subjective terms lose their meanings, since those meanings are defined only by values, which would be the result of arbitrary programming. Hence there are no absolutes (nor responsibilities), and therefore there can not exist concepts like right or wrong, good, better, or problem. If values are arbitrary, then words like "worth" have no meaning. These concepts are defined in terms of values.

Claiming that ethical values can be derived logically and rationally runs into some significant problems (something the new athiests have not come to terms with, it seems). For example, what seems logical to us would only seem so when judged according to a specific pattern of expectations and definitions we inherit from our environments.

Critically, one can not look to science to provide suggestions for the bedrock principles of societal ethics and morality. Scientific inquiry is very powerful, but it does not give answers to questions like that. Certainly, it is possible to logically derive ethical guidelines from a first principle, such as the golden rule for example, but there is no way to scientifically/logically derive that first principle itself…the first axioms have to be accepted on faith.

What, exactly, is scientific about any ethical first principle? For example, what is scientific about "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? What scientific experiment could demonstrate the truth or falsity of this statement? What is the scientific answer to what is "right" or "good" in a given situation?

Why would the golden rule be more "scientific" than a first principle of might makes right, for example? Why, scientifically, should people be treated equally? Especially if people are to be nothing more than a transient arrangement of mental (or energy) states that are mere epiphenomenon determined by the interplay of forces and particles through time in an unending sequence of causes stretching back to the beginning of time? Accepting a determinist universe would be a tall order for anyone.

Depressing Christmas Songs, Ctd

by Chris Bodenner

A reader writes:

Laura Nyro's "Christmas in My Soul" is the most depressing Christmas song. Written about the the Vietnam War, the Civil Right Era, the poisonous politics of those times, and it is just as relevant today, although and perhaps because it contains a call for peace, tolerance and hope.

Lyrics after the jump:

I love my country as it dies
In war and pain before my eyes
I walk the streets where disrespect has been
The sins of politics, the politics of sin
The heartlessness that darkens my soul
On Christmas.

Red and silver on the leaves
Fallen white snow runs softly through the trees
Madonnas weep for wars of hell
They blow out the candles and haunt Noel
The missing love that rings through the world
On Christmas.

Black panther brothers bound in jail
Chicago seven and the justice scale
Homeless Indian of Manhattan Isle
All God's sons have gone to trial
And all God's love is out of style
On Christmas.

Now the time has come to fight
laws in the book of love burn bright
people you must win for thee America
her dignity
for all the high court world to see
on christmas

Christmas in my soul
Christmas in my soul
Christmas in my soul.

Come young braves
Come young children

Christmas in my soul
Christmas
in my soul
Joy

to this world.

Over Multitasking

by Patrick Appel

Nick Carr continues to warn about the dangers of technology:

The problem today is not that we multitask. We’ve always multitasked. The problem is that we never stop multitasking. The natural busyness of our lives is being amplified by the networked gadgets that constantly send us messages and alerts, bombard us with other bits of important and trivial information, and generally interrupt the train of our thought. The data barrage never lets up. As a result, we devote ever less time to the calmer, more attentive modes of thinking that have always given richness to our intellectual lives and our culture—the modes of thinking that involve concentration, contemplation, reflection, introspection. The less we practice these habits of mind, the more we risk losing them altogether.

There’s evidence that, as Howard Rheingold suggests, we can train ourselves to be better multitaskers, to shift our attention even more swiftly and fluidly among contending chores and stimuli. And that will surely help us navigate the fast-moving stream of modern life. But improving our ability to multitask, neuroscience tells us in no uncertain terms, will never return to us the depth of understanding that comes with attentive, singleminded thought. You can improve your agility at multitasking, but you will never be able to multitask and engage in deep thought at the same time.

A Full, Delicious Life

Ogle-dog

by Chris Bodenner

Goldblog has an engaging interview with Jonathan Safran Foer over his new book, "Eating Animals." Here Jeff basically asks Jonathan why he's not militant about his principled stance against meat:

I was really moved, I have to say, by some of the small farms that I went to. I would say that the goodness of good farmers might have surprised me more than the badness of bad farmers. Maybe that's just because I had more exposure to what factory farming was. But I went to farms where animals were treated better than I treat my dog, and it would just be impossible to try to honestly argue that they don't have good lives. So of course, they're killed in the end, but our lives are destined for death also. We're not getting killed, but there are slaughterhouses that kill these animals in ways that they don't anticipate death or feel it. So to argue against such farms, you have to get into a sort of philosophical terrain that I don't get into

(Photo by Alex Ogle)

Depressing (near) Christmas Poem (for Sunday)

by Andrew Sprung

A NOCTURNAL UPON ST. LUCY'S DAY,
BEING THE SHORTEST DAY.

by John Donne

'TIS the year's midnight, and it is the day's,
Lucy's, who scarce seven hours herself unmasks ;
    The sun is spent, and now his flasks
    Send forth light squibs, no constant rays ;
            The world's whole sap is sunk ;
The general balm th' hydroptic earth hath drunk,
Whither, as to the bed's-feet, life is shrunk,
Dead and interr'd ; yet all these seem to laugh,
Compared with me, who am their epitaph.

Study me then, you who shall lovers be
At the next world, that is, at the next spring ;
    For I am every dead thing,
    In whom Love wrought new alchemy.
            For his art did express
A quintessence even from nothingness,
From dull privations, and lean emptiness ;
He ruin'd me, and I am re-begot
Of absence, darkness, death—things which are not.

All others, from all things, draw all that's good,
Life, soul, form, spirit, whence they being have ;
    I, by Love's limbec, am the grave
    Of all, that's nothing. Oft a flood
            Have we two wept, and so
Drown'd the whole world, us two ; oft did we grow,
To be two chaoses, when we did show
Care to aught else ; and often absences
Withdrew our souls, and made us carcasses.

But I am by her death—which word wrongs her—
Of the first nothing the elixir grown ;
    Were I a man, that I were one
    I needs must know ; I should prefer,
            If I were any beast,
Some ends, some means ; yea plants, yea stones detest,
And love ; all, all some properties invest.
If I an ordinary nothing were,
As shadow, a light, and body must be here.

But I am none ; nor will my sun renew.
You lovers, for whose sake the lesser sun
    At this time to the Goat is run
    To fetch new lust, and give it you,
            Enjoy your summer all,
Since she enjoys her long night's festival.
Let me prepare towards her, and let me call
This hour her vigil, and her eve, since this
Both the year's and the day's deep midnight is.

And now, by way of consolation, the best poem about a lovers' separation ever, same guy:

A VALEDICTION FORBIDDING MOURNING.
by John Donne

AS virtuous men pass mildly away, 
    And whisper to their souls to go, 
Whilst some of their sad friends do say,
    "Now his breath goes," and some say, "No."                     

So let us melt, and make no noise,                                       5
    No tear-floods, nor sigh-tempests move ;
'Twere profanation of our joys 
    To tell the laity our love. 

Moving of th' earth brings harms and fears ;
    Men reckon what it did, and meant ;                              10
But trepidation of the spheres, 
    Though greater far, is innocent. 

Dull sublunary lovers' love 
    —Whose soul is sense—cannot admit 
Of absence, 'cause it doth remove                                     15
    The thing which elemented it. 

But we by a love so much refined,
    That ourselves know not what it is, 
Inter-assurèd of the mind, 
    Care less, eyes, lips and hands to miss.                           20

Our two souls therefore, which are one, 
    Though I must go, endure not yet 
A breach, but an expansion, 
    Like gold to aery thinness beat. 

If they be two, they are two so                                          25
    As stiff twin compasses are two ; 
Thy soul, the fix'd foot, makes no show 
    To move, but doth, if th' other do. 

And though it in the centre sit, 
    Yet, when the other far doth roam,                                30
It leans, and hearkens after it, 
    And grows erect, as that comes home. 

Such wilt thou be to me, who must,
    Like th' other foot, obliquely run ;
Thy firmness makes my circle just,                                    35
    And makes me end where I begun.