"Beyond A Reasonable Doubt"

"Beyond a reasonable doubt is a legal standard of proof required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems.[1] It is a higher standard of proof than the balance of probabilities (commonly used in civil matters) and is usually therefore reserved for criminal matters where what is at stake (i.e., someone's life or liberty) is considered more serious and therefore deserving of a higher threshold.

"The prosecution in criminal matters typically bears the burden of proof and is required to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. This means that in order for a defendant to be found guilty, the case presented by the prosecution must be enough to remove any reasonable doubt in the mind of the judge or jury that the defendant is guilty of the crime with which one is charged." (Wikipedia)

- - - - - - -

Our perception of reality is not perfect. Our brains have many cognitive flaws and biases. Science, our best method of understanding reality, is not certain as it uses inductive reasoning to develop tentative theories that can be modified with further objective evidence in the future. The legal system uses abductive reasoning in an attempt to find "the most likely" as it is less certain than a scientific theory. While science uses objective evidence only, the legal system also uses the less-certain subjective evidence as well.

Steven Pinker In-Depth

"Even as a young teenager, Dr. Steven Pinker (@sapinker) prized rationality as a virtue, and considered himself an anarchist. He changed that belief, however, when evidence indicated that anarchy was not a path to human flourishing. In this special episode, a co-production with the New Enlightenment Project, previous Podcast for Inquiry guest Lloyd Hawkeye Robertson returns as a co-host. Together, Lloyd and Leslie explore with Dr. Pinker whether universities are betraying their mission, how the human brain spectacularly fails while also working wonders, the loose connections between science and technology with social and moral progress, and what humanity needs to do to continue to thrive for the next 50 to 100 years."

Steven Pinker is a world-renowned intellectual who has many detractors regarding his focus on the red herring of a "woke" academia and other Neo-Liberal/Conservative thinking (link)(link). However, click on the link below for a deep and broad picture of his views on several important topics:

Steven Pinker Discusses Rationality and Humanist Values

Presuppositional Apologetics Exposed

Christian apologetics GENERALLY is an irrational and obfuscatory exercise of denial of the lack of objective evidence for the claims that there is a God, let alone the Christian variety. However, there is one branch of this worthless process that is extraordinarily devoid of reason:  Presuppositionalism:

• Presuppositionalism is the idea that only the Christian worldview can account for logic, morality, science, induction, consciousness itself, and that all other worldviews are absurd. Presuppositionalists often go further and assert that both classical and evidential apologetics are sinful and blasphemous, as they savor "autonomy" and make human reason the judge of God's existence.

Click on the link below for a 25-minute video that exposes this vapid thinking clearly and succinctly:

"We Don't Need Evidence"

Catholic Apologist Rebutted

Bishop Robert Barron is a noted Catholic Evangelical, with a particular focus on atheism. He recently sponsored an Ad on Facebook offering a free download of his 22-page ebook entitled "Answering the Atheists." I downloaded it, edited it with some comments, and sent it back to him via email. Below is a synopsis of the content and essentially my responses (in red):

• The Introduction included this sentence: "Today's atheists, in their condescending and often snarky dismissal of all transcendent truths, seem to be playing at atheism rather than seeing to the bottom of it."
• My response: What ARE "transcendent truths?" There is objective truth only. 
• He presented four "claims" that he thinks atheists make and then attempted to refute them.
• Atheist Claim #1: There is no evidence for God.
• His answer to Claim #1: There are plenty of "rational warrants" for belief in God.
• My response: There is no objective evidence for any God. Reason/intuition/philosophy ("transcendence?") will never trump objective evidence (science) as the brain alone has flaws and only science can justify its assessments. All syllogisms used by Christian apologists have at least one false premise. The theist is making the claim, thus, is obligated to provide the objective evidence. Christianity makes claims on our objective reality, thus, science can evaluate the claims. Science has rejected them all. Why should religion get an exemption from this process?
• Atheist Claim #2: What caused God? This is special pleading.
• His answer to Claim #2: Nothing, as God is not contingent on anything else. It is the "First Cause."
• My response: To say that God caused our reality is an argument from ignorance (God of the Gaps). Physics shows that an uncaused, eternal multiverse is at least as plausible as a God.
• Atheist Claim #3: Science has disproved God.
• His answer to Claim #3: This is Scientism (science is the only way of knowing). Other rational methods like philosophy transcend science.
• My response: What you label pejoratively as "Scientism" is only talking about objective evidence. Of course, there are other ways of knowing. I have already addressed transcendence. No atheists I know make the positive claim that there is no God. We only say that we can't accept the claim because of the lack of objective evidence.
• Atheist Claim #4: The Problem of Evil is a barrier to belief.
• His answer to Claim #4: A finite mind cannot take in the workings of an infinite mind.
• My response: You first have to show the evidence for an infinite mind. The Christian God supposedly is All-Good and we do not see evidence of such a reality, thus, it is falsified.

My assessment of this apologetic is that it is just another failed Christian apologetic. Only gullible, magical thinking atheists would fall for these arguments. Science-based thinkers, who are the atheists I know for the most part, would not be impressed, to say the least.

National Day Of Reason - 2020

NOW, MORE THAN EVER, AMERICA NEEDS A DAY OF REASON

(Click on the link above)

https://ffrf.org/uploads/images/NYTAdFinalVersionMay2020.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2Qy6hx8DwrlsR3Dh647c2nCcLfwoEl_9R88UrL-jX64nHbzDHC_Io7Jrc

The Atheist/Freethought "Movement"

Us atheists are being swept up in the disagreements within the so-called Atheist or Freethought "Movement."  Frankly, I see more heat than light being generated by many prominent "Members" of the "Movement."  Many are painting perceived disagreement in one or a few areas of controversy as total depravity of individuals.  This doesn't seem rational or fair and I personally reject it.  I am not part of a "Movement" any more than I am a member of any US political party.  I consider myself reasonable, a science-based thinker, and a humanist.

Following are some articles that illustrate what I am talking about:  link; link; link; link.

Inductive And Deductive Reasoning

Austin Cline has posted a short essay defining deductive and inductive reasoning, with support for the superiority of inductive reasoning in finding new knowledge, even though its conclusions are not as certain as deductive reasoning .  By the way, inductive reasoning is the main tool of science.

My Dream for the USA

I have a dream that one day the voters in the USA will understand the power of the Constitution: We the People of the United States can attenuate the corrupt politicians and the powerful.

I have a dream that one day all people will be fully recognized as being created equal, as such is supported by science.

I have a dream that one day those holding the power in the nation will be making decisions based on evidence and not unsupported dogma.

I have a dream that all opinions not supported by evidence will be marginalized.

I have a dream today.

(With respect to MLK)

There Is A Better Way

Yes, politics in the USA is extremely polarized, with the Republicans being hijacked by the NRA and the Evangelical Christians and all.  So, what to do?  Realizing, that, by its very nature, compromise is necessary to move forward, from a practical, non-ideological perspective, this article present a wise way to handle it.  

Reflections On The Trump Victory

The USA has just finished one of the longest and the most polarized, nasty election in my memory.  Virtually half of the country is in the state of depression and worry with the other half ecstatic and happy.  What do we do within this reality?  Do we hunker down within our ideology or do we try to get along and understand each other better?

Is there an approach to political action that can tap into the shared values of most people in our constitutionally secular democratic republic?  I propose that we come together using wisdom, reason and humanism, informed by science.

Following are links to articles in today's Charlotte Observer that I think are beneficial for all to reflect upon:

A close election and a divided America

Our hopes for a Trump presidency

Trump wins: 4 tips to help depressed progressives beat post-election blues

This article is directed toward those who voted for Donald Trump.  Please understand that those of us who accept the truth that science is the best way to know reality are deeply concerned about Trump's views on science.

“Donald Trump’s presidential election win stuns scientists”

This article will summarize my opinion of those who voted for the man.

Why it is so hard to empathize with Trump voters

What make Trump tick, in his own words, and how it is against what has worked historically in the USA:

http://www.vox.com/a/donald-trump-books

In closing, THIS is the REAL record of Obama's accomplishments during his eight years as President of the USA. Here's hoping that you, Mr. Trump, will at least come close to achieving what he did. Oh, please note: he did this with minimal Republican cooperation.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/obama-leaves-legacy-of-extraordinary-accomplishments-858804803834