July 14, 2010 § 9 Comments
The definition of “prophecy” is this (according to “The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language“):
Though it is pretty clear what this means in abstract terms, I feel that this description is actually written in reverse order for it to make logical sense.
Firstly, a prophecy is a prediction of the future. Predictions of the future happen all the time. I do it every day, as do you. We look at the world around us and make a call as to what will happen next based on past experience and from our own learning. For example, if a car were to swerve in front of me onto an oily surface, I could predict that car will lose control and crash. If it happens, my prediction was correct. If the driver manages to regain control of his vehicle and avoid collision, I was incorrect. This is a prediction based on what I know of the physical world.
Some people make their living from making predictions, like stock brokers, meteorologists, climate scientists, doctors, trend-hunters, sports commentators etc., and these people look at patterns that have emerged in the field, the society or in the world and look where things appear to be headed. This is prediction based on data and how that affects the potential future for the person/market/environment. Long term, short-term, medium term predictions, these are all based on the information we gather and the projected outcomes. They are not always right either, even from so-called experts in these fields
But it seems clear from the description above that a prophecy must be an “inspired” or “divine” prediction. What does “inspired” mean? What does “divine” mean? These are both psychologically loaded terms, and once something is labeled inspired or divine that somehow psychologically places it above or beyond the stance of normal human experience. Thus we tend to see the words of prophecy as special, or sacred or outside understanding.
Thus we have the idea of predictions coming from a “prophet”, a person who can, apparently, see into the future and has definite knowledge of the future based on “divinely inspired” information given to them by an unseen presence. These people are revered all over the world, prophets and soothsayers abound in all religions, even in your local newspaper where the astrologer tells you how your day will be.
There is a reason we like to trust information given to us by prophecy.
Humans like to believe that our lives are somehow mapped out for us, that no matter what we do, everything will turn out in just the way it was intended. If we just believe, our predetermined destinies will be fulfilled. We like to feel that when all seems bad or in turmoil that if we can just see a little into our futures we will see a light at the end of the tunnel. And there are a multitude of ways that we can apparently tell our futures; from tarot to shamanistic visions, to numerology and the casting of bones. But any person with a semblance of logic and rationality should be able to see past these as simple hocus pocus, that explain our own gullibilities and similarities as people better than they predict our personal futures.
James Randi famously held an experiment at a college campus, which effectively shows how astrology works, or more to the point, how it makes us want to believe in what it tells us.
Astrology deals in vague and uncertain terminologies, using words and phrases that can be interpreted in a myriad ways. The experiment above can be repeated with the same outcomes almost anywhere where astrology appears in the newspapers. But people still want to believe.
I’m using astrology as an easy target for debunking because it is easily disproven, to illustrate the kinds of vagaries that prophecies use. Fortune tellers use the same vague language, and feed from body clues of their victims (or subjects) to steer their “prediction” or contact with the “other side” in a direction that the subject will react to in a personal way. And these people are very good at manipulating people into believing that what they are saying is truth.
People who believe in the “predictions” of Nostradamus may say that the passage below refers to the 9/11 attacks on New York City.
Volcanic fire from the center of the earth
will cause trembling around the new city:
Two great rocks will make war for a long time.
Then Arethusa will redden a new river.
In this (there are many ways to translate it) translation of the words of Nostradamus, he makes reference to several tangibles. If read literally,”Volcanic fire from the center of the earth will cause trembling around the new city” could be a volcano with trembling and all, “Two great rocks will make war for a long time” sounds like two boulders banging against each other, and “Then Arethusa will redden a new river” could mean a water-nymph will kill herself by slashing her wrists(?) maybe.
People who believe in the prophecies of Nostradamus will read the above quatrain and THEN look at historical events, and retro-fit their ideas, even misrepresenting words and stretching definitions, to suit a situation that has even vague similarities. If it had said something like “Two steel birds will smash into the giant towers, and many will blame the people of the middle-east, and there will be a second war because of it, and this war will last longer than the previous one,” then maybe we could give it some credence. But unfortunately, the vagueness of the language means that people can freely interpret whatever they please into this “prophecy”. And people will read these interpretations and connect the dots to create something that is not there by itself.
The worst and most insidious form of prophecy is that coming from religious texts, because they have been re-translated more than the words of Nostradamus, have been altered and changed to suit the wants of different religious leaders over time, and have been interpreted to mean many, many things over time, as parables to illustrate what people should do according to their religion in any given situation. (Note: The Qur’an is apparently to be excluded from the alteration claim because it has apparently been copied over and over in its exact form many times without any changes. It is however only ever allowed to be interpreted by an Islamic male.)
When people read a religious text, they connect what is happening to the world around themselves. Because of confirmation bias, the information makes more sense than that coming from experts, and they believe it despite any cognitive dissonance they may encounter if and when they analyse what they have read.
An example of believing prophecy, apart from the many times disproven end of the world scenarios we have encountered, is the tendency of religious people to be “looking for signs” that what they believe to be true is actually happening. Anything can be a sign. If the religious text says something about “bloodied skies” then a believer may take a particularly red sunset to be a sign. If it mentions “plagues of insects” then the next time there is a natural over-abundance of a single species, it is a sign.
Anything can be a sign. It just depends on what you’re looking for.
And there are those who not only see the “signs”, but welcome the end of the world, as it means they will be released to heaven for eternal peace with their god. They will openly welcoming the hastening of the coming of the end of days. And there are those who will actively participate in this demise, believing that’s what the prophecy foretold them to do.
That is really scary.
We are definitely in a time when our decisions for how we deal with the world and how we treat one-another can make be a big decider in what the future holds. And we are more connected than ever at this time. If you take all the information we have about event happening right now, of course it looks like things are bad. And they are bad, but not everywhere at once. Filmmakers have used this information overload as a device to show the future dystopia on many occasions, and yes if you put one bad thing against the next, the world is pretty screwed up right now.
But believing in the hocus pocus of prophecy is the last thing we need right now. When coupled with religious zealotry and war, these prophecies become very, very dangerous. For those of us who see these prophecies as they really are, open-ended and vague stories, mistranslated, misrepresented, sometimes fanciful and allegorical, sometimes intentionally misinterpreted tales passed via word of mouth, they hold no credence. And nor should they.
June 25, 2010 § 3 Comments
Humour me while I ramble off a bunch of random thoughts I’ve been having.
I like to think that when I write I try to see the things from a reasonable perspective. Without having too much preconception, I try to use the information I have gathered and show my opinions in a rational and reasonable manner without flooding the ideas with too much preconceived dogma or un-backable opinion. But inevitably I will show my weakness and just write something that is emotionally driven or at worst completely false. I’m usually pretty good at keeping my emotional opinions out of my blogs and as time goes on I get better at it.
But one thing I pride myself on is my ability to calmly address comments that I disagree with, and reason out my standpoint. This is a skill that any reasonable debater who expects to be take seriously must be good at, and again I am getting better at it.
One part of blogging in the manner that I do, critiquing society, cultures and religious beliefs, is that I have to expect the occasional backlash, as I touch on ideas that are so ingrained into people’s lives and are hard for them to see beyond. All people think that their standpoint is the only and the right one. All religious people think that their God or religion is the “One true path”. And if I am to address these people in a respectful manner, I must remain calm and lucid throughout.
But I expect the same amount of respect for me as I try to give to them (and you) as readers in return, and for the most part I get that. And I hope that people will stop to think about what it is that they are writing in the replies before they press “Submit”.
One thing I have noticed is that some (not all) religious people, when talking of their understanding of the universe, seem to switch off that part of their brain which allows for and promotes critical thinking. Daniel Dennett in this interview puts it quite well.
I sometimes feel that the people who are constantly being badgered in interviews about atheism can sometimes go too far, and be less than empathetic toward the people they criticise. But at the same time, when people do switch off critical reasoning in the name of faith, the do themselves a disservice and a potential disservice to those around them.
I have accused of being “closed-minded”, “dogmatic” and even “sickening” in comments to this blog. It hurts the first time, but my skin has gotten significantly thicker in the past eight months that I’ve been writing this blog. The one comment has left the deepest impression on me was the one about being “closed-minded”. But the thing is, my idea of being closed-minded is to stick to ones convictions of what they believe to be true, and often at the excuse of what is provable or what is repeatable, or what I like to call “facts”. I learn new things every day and am always re-evaluating my stand on things, but thanks to logic and reason, and the ability to critically assess what information I am taking in.
Conversely there is such thing as being too open-minded too, to get a seed of doubt in your brain and let it fester into a fully blown conspiracy theory, or leading one to deny modern medicine or science, or to read the tarot or astrology or homeopathy.
Tim Minchin wrote a little song he uses as part of his live comedy set entitled “If You Open Your Mind Too Much Your Brain Will Fall Out” which very much sums up how I feel about the accusations of being “closed-minded”.
“If anyone can show me one example in the history of the world of a single Psychic who has been able to prove under reasonable experimental conditions that they are able to read minds
And if anyone can show me one example in the history of the world of a single Astrologer who has been able to prove under reasonable experimental conditions that they can predict future events by interpreting celestial signs
And if anyone can show me one example in the history of the world of a single Homeopathic Practitioner who has been able to prove under reasonable experimental conditions that solutions made of infinitely tiny particles of good stuff dissolved repeatedly into relatively huge quantities of water has a consistently higher medicinal value than a similarly administered placebo
And if anyone can show me one example in the entire history of the world of a single Spiritual or religious person who has been able to show either empirically or logically the existence of a higher power with any consciousness or interest in the human race or ability to punish or reward humans for there moral choices or that there is any reason – other than fear – to believe in any version of an afterlife
I’ll give you my piano, one of my legs, and my wife”
Sorry for the ramble, but not every blog piece can be a well-considered and cohesive piece.