Ex-blog

This blog is defunct.

I just don’t think I have enough to really keep it up these days with the other projects I am working on.

The Humanist Interviews: Jack Rivall, Part 2

Skepoet: How do you think the so-called “New Atheists” have helped humanism? Do you think there are any ways they have hurt it?

Jack Rivall: From what I have witnessed and believe to be the case, the “New Atheists” have helped the causes of humanism in many ways. I mostly examine nonreligious humanism. Imagine if you will a person who identifies as nonreligious. This person may also identify as a humanist concerning where they discern their morals and ethics. We begin with the absence of religion and build on this with humanism. The foundation, though, is the irreligious characteristic. This is also atheism. The “New Atheists” mission is essentially similar to the movements in the 70’s through the 90’s for homosexuals in that the want for openness and understanding is desired, and that the need for the arrest of hatred and malice should cease. A web search of “New Atheists” provides: “An increasingly outspoken community of atheists and agnostics is getting fed up with being marginalized, ignored and insulted.” I think that chances are, if you identify as an atheist, you understand the challenges that come up as a result of revealing your atheism to family, friends, co-workers, and others. You can experience (and even expect) prejudice and bigotry. One might ask: “Why is that so?”.
Thus, by promoting a social advance for nonreligious folk, the group of “New Atheists” by virtue of their websites and their now popular OUTcampaign are most definitely helping the causes of humanists and the public understanding of humanism and nontheism in general. If the drums are loud enough, people wonder where they are coming from.

The only criticism I might have would be the demanding nature of those involved in this movement. Many in the ‘mainstream’ of our culture do not respond well to that. I can hardly blame those involved, though. There is a sense of urgency… for the bigotry and misconceptions are hurting all parties. Atheists and secular humanists do not want to be patronized, belittled, scoffed at, mistrusted, or condescended to any more than another person does. Discrimination can be subtle and indirect, which at times is even worse than outright hatred. The call to be heard is getting louder as atheists grow more courageous and comfortable.

Skepoet: Why do you think atheism is more stigmatized than say humanism? I mean, I label as an ignostic and even though that makes me a functional atheist, I know atheists get a MUCH harder time.

Jack Rivall:I think that, quite simply, the word ‘atheist’ or ‘atheism’ itself has become taboo. It isn’t too hard to find people attack or criticizing atheism and atheists. There are websites devoted to it, people who write columns about it, and you can even find them in letters to the editor of different newspapers. Very little of what you read there is justified. Occasionally, someone will make comments which fairly apply to some atheists, but it is very unusual to find attacks which fairly apply to all atheists or to atheism in general.

Never has there been more misconceptions, misunderstanding, and outright fallacies regarding nontheism. Why? Misunderstandings arise because many theists imagine that all atheists fit a narrow, limited concept of atheism. Reliance on dishonest apologists and cheap dictionaries only exacerbates the problem. Most ‘folks’ hear the word “atheism” and have been brought up in their communities and families to either pity, ignore, condescend to, patronize, or even outright hate a person talking or adhering to such a thing.
Like so many things, education is the answer to this problem.

Skepoet: Anything you’d like to say in closing?

Jack Rivall:Only that I’ve enjoyed your questions and hope that others may continue asking about secular options. My desire is to help promote freethought and an understanding of science in all areas of human interest. A quote usually ties things up nicely: “MUNDIS VULT DECIPI” (The world wants to be deceived) — James Branch Cabell

Poets, priests, politicians, psychics and psychoanalysts, and many others make pleasingly plump livings by simply telling people what they want to hear. It’s up to each individual to digest what they hear and are exposed to. I’d always say a dose of skepticism is prudent when evaluating claims posed as truth.

Education Policy and Obama: Obama, like Bush, likes to have his own “facts”.

The Bridging Difference Blog has a post about Obama’s speech and attempt at policy reform:

I want to go back and discuss President Obama’s big speech on education. At the time I heard it, I was surprised by some of his statistics about how terrible things are, but I didn’t have time (or inclination) to do the fact-checking on my own. I was too busy working on my book, trying to finish a chapter on a different topic.

Just the other day, a friend sent me an item that was posted on FactCheck.org, which is published by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. A group of diligent researchers at FactCheck.org did exactly what needed to be done. They went through every single statement in the speech about the condition of American education and posted the results on March 18. I highly recommend it.

FactCheck notes the irony: President Bush left office boasting of the great improvement in U.S. education performance as a result of No Child Left Behind. Then comes President Obama, painting a dismal portrait of a nation whose education system is locked in steep educational decline.

Let’s look at what factcheck had to say:

Whether the education system in the U.S. has improved greatly or needs great improvement may depend on whether a president is nearing the end or just beginning his time in office.

In his final State of the Union address, President George W. Bush claimed student test scores had gone up after enactment of his education legislation. As we said at the time, he was mostly correct. Bush said for example that in 2007, fourth- and eighth-graders “achieved the highest math scores on record.” We noted that the “record” of scores dates back only to 1990, and also that Bush failed to note a decline in reading scores for eighth-graders, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress. But, in general, test scores have risen since enactment of the No Child Left Behind law.

Touting those cheery stats, however, wasn’t exactly on President Barack Obama’s agenda last week when he spoke about education to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. Just as Bush left out any mention of less-than-rosy assessments of the nation’s education system, Obama didn’t say too much about how smart our kids are. And some of his gloomy claims were just plain wrong, or misleading.

And what Obama said about the drop-out rates in the America are the EXACT opposite of truth:

But the claim that “our high school dropout rate has tripled in the past thirty years”? That’s not even in the ballpark. According to the Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics, the “status dropout rate” – defined as the percentage of people between ages 16 and 24 who are not in school and do not have high school diplomas or GEDs – was 9.3 percent in 2006. In 1976, 30 years before that, it was 14.1. That’s actually a 34 percent decrease in the high school dropout rate.

Of course, dropout rates are notoriously hard to measure and compare. For instance, while NCES shows a status dropout rate of 9.3 in 2006, the high school completion rate for that year was only 74.8 percent. Why the discrepancy? Instead of counting people of a certain age with a diploma or equivalency certificate, this figure compares the number of high school freshman in a certain year to the number receiving a high school diploma four years later. Those who take more than four years to finish aren’t counted, nor are students who get GEDs instead of diplomas. But using this calculation still doesn’t back up Obama’s claim. The dropout rate – that is, the discrepancy between incoming freshmen and graduates – would have been 25.2 percent in the 2006-2007 school year. The rate in 1976-1977 was 25.6 percent.

Even pessimistic accounts don’t show a tripled dropout rate. According to a report by the Educational Testing Service, titled “One Third of a Nation” after the number of students they say are high school dropouts, high school completion rates peaked at 77.1 percent in 1969 and dropped to 69.9 percent in 2000. (NCES shows higher numbers in both years.) That would put dropout rates at 22.9 and 30.1 percent respectively – a 30 percent increase over 31 years. As many sixth-graders could tell you, tripling would mean a 200 percent increase.

Just like there was unblinking credulity in some of the improvement under NCLB, the narrative of decline in this country seems more culturally embedded than entirely factual.

I could speculate on the “golden age” mentality at play here and how it hints that even American progressivism is by and large reactionary in its outlook. I, however, don’t know that…

I do know this, I don’t trust anybody, even bodies I voted for, to give me straight facts that contradict their political agenda.

I don’t say this because I completely disagree with President Obama’s agenda or even with a good deal of the criticisms he made of public schooling… I don’t know that he was being deliberately dishonest. All I am that this is an exercise in realizing that confirmation bias is something that politicians of ALL stripes depend on you not questioning.

Battle Ground Texas: The Creationist Counter-Assault Appears to have worked

If the Creationists in Texas think they have a win, I don’t pay much attention. When Ed Brayton agrees with them, however, I pay attention:

The problem is that in a couple years the same State Board of Education is going to be considering the purchase of new textbooks. And the creationists are making very clear that they consider the new standards a victory because they can use them to pressure textbook companies to include a whole range of creationist nonsense about common descent, stasis in the fossil record, “irreducible complexity” in the cell and the origin of life.

And because Texas is such a huge state, any changes made in textbooks for that state will be made nationwide. They’re right, they won and they won big. The “strengths and weaknesses” language turned out to be a big distraction. While we managed to close that door up front, they were busy opening up the big double doors in the back of the building so trucks could drive through and deliver loads of creationist propaganda.

The wedge strategy is beginning to pry open the door past Dover.