Dawkins Makes the Rounds

Richard Dawkins has a new book out, The God Delusion. Here he is on Hufpost , BBC, and Colbert.


I'm someone who thinks Jesus is Santa Claus for adults, and I'm very intrigued by how easily people reject the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution in favor of superstitious faith. At the same time, it's intriguing to me that folks like Dennett, Harris, and Dawkins are so up in arms about religion. They think everyone in the world should be as rational as they are.

Extinguishing the idea of God is as likely as extinguishing the idea of red. Like Voltaire said, "If we didn't have God, we would have to invent him."

Humans are hardwired to expect that animate agents are behind the actions of the world. We need to be alert to danger. Just as it's easy for us to see faces and animals in clouds, it's easy for us to anthropomorphize predators and prey, as well as objects like cars, and rocks, and the Universe as a whole. Dawkins even anthropomorphizes genes. He says they're "selfish."

One of the most important challenges posed by Dawkins is to question how the world would be different if God existed. Consider the question, “Does life have a purpose?” For the religious person, the answer is “yes” if there is a God, “no” if not.

I can’t speak for Dawkins or the others, but as a scientifically-oriented person I concur with the religious person’s answer. That’s how I know I’m free. I make my own purpose. I form my own intention. We as humans can do the same collectively. We’re not sheep who need a shepherd just to find our way to shelter.

Constructive Victory, Part 1: Defining US Interests

History will provide ample time to investigate what this Administration has done wrong, and why. Fixing the problem is more important than fixing the blame. That means being prepared to put things right when power changes hands, starting with a clear definition of overarching American interests.

***

Americans who are committed to a sober analysis of discernable reality understand quite well that the current Administration has created intolerable hardships for US military personnel and their families, and also for countless innocent people in Iraq. A war of dubious pretext has become a calamity of historic proportion.


Though US forces delivered many battlefield successes in both Afghanistan and Iraq early on, the Administration failed to convert those achievements into anything resembling a decisive victory. Given this Administration's persistent legacy of hubris, groupthink, belligerent temperament, and myopic disregard for expert advice, American war fatalities may reach five thousand before the next Presidential inauguration. Iraqi losses could well surpass one million.


"Staying the course" in Iraq is equivalent to driving down a dead-end rut. Yet, two years remain before the current Administration is obliged to relinquish authority. Moreover, there is no guarantee that the new team which takes power in 2009 will have the skill or inclination to seek a political outcome consistent with enduring American interests.


War, wrote Clausewitz, is the pursuit of politics by other means. The source of the Iraq disaster is an incoherent assessment of American political interests. The current Administration’s woefully confused outlook has produced destructive, self-defeating polices. Americans are not about to withdraw from the world stage, of course. We need a strategic doctrine that opens a reliable path to constructive, durable victories as we continue to participate in the global arena.


Toward that end, I offer a proposal in three parts: 1) A general statement of US interests and policy objectives; 2) An outline for a strategic doctrine and policy agenda that is in full accord with those interests and objectives; 3) Suggestions for solutions to the situation in Iraq.


Part 1: What are the overarching interests of the American people?


American interests are those which are properly common to all nations: Standing, security, and wealth, pursued in a manner that respects the rightful interests of others. The United States government, as the constitutional voice of the American people, should seek allies in pursuit of those proper interests, and thereby foster circumstances in which all people of the world can enjoy the benefits of peace, prosperity, human rights, and participatory government.


To advance American standing, the US government must work to establish a solid reputation - through word and deed - that America is not an aggressor state, but a great culture dedicated to the worldwide advance of harmonious peace, rising prosperity, human rights, and democratic freedoms. To advance those norms - the foundations of a normal life - the American people must lead by successful example. We must also consider ourselves obliged to speak out honestly and to act consistently in response to evidence of human suffering anywhere in the world.


To advance American security, the US government must combine able diplomacy with a vigilant surveillance system and an imposing deterrent of armed forces. When called upon, our armed forces must be prepared to fight with lethal precision. To guarantee their professionalism, effectiveness, and high morale, members of our armed forces must be provided with ample material, state-of-the-art training, and generous social support. The volunteers who serve under US command have a right to expect that they are serving the best interests of the American people, and in a way that respects the honor of the United States Constitution, the humanity of innocents, and the lawfully accepted conventions of war.


To stifle suicidal opponents who are beyond deterrence, we must undertake the measures necessary to interdict their movements, and to deny their access to material agents of mass destruction. For the long term, Americans and their allies must fortify a life-respecting global culture, thereby precluding a threatening opponents' access to safe haven, material support, and any sense of ideological endorsement within the human community.


To advance American wealth, the US government must promote a thriving, sustainable economy that offers all Americans the chance to enjoy a rich quality of life. Generations of immigrants and their descendants have benefitted from the natural abundance of the American land, and from the American preference for a dynamic culture that allows personal freedom and technological innovation to flourish. American-style capitalism enhances one's private capacity to choose where to work, where to live, and what to buy. That underlying commitment to freedom and property rights encourages an ethic of industriousness that augments the wealth of the entire society.


Just as the elimination of restrictions on the flow of goods, capital, and labor between American states has underpinned our country's wealth and unity, liberal economic policies have advanced peace and prosperity throughout the world. Americans welcome the challenge of competition in a globalizing economy, but we also recognize that the benefits of open international trade incur the vulnerabilities of interdependence. To mitigate the consequent effects, we agree that citizens of every nation may rightfully expect: a fair return for their labors; proper conduct in the negotiation and performance of contracts; respect for private property, and; diligent care for our shared natural environment. To fulfill those expectations, the US government must seek collaboration with other governments. Building constructive, trustworthy partnerships will advance the common goal of a thriving, sustainable global economy.

***

In summary, standing, security, and wealth are legitimate pursuits of all sovereign peoples, and it is desirable to construct a global political environment in which sovereign peoples agree to pursue those interests with mutual respect. Attention to core values - including human rights, peaceful stability, and ethical business practices - offers a solid foundation for this new approach. Each nation's victory along this course would be shared by the others.


The American people can lead this victory. It is in their interest to reframe their doctrines of national power accordingly, in word and in deed.

***

Note. I'll be done with Part 2 in a week or so, which proposes a doctrine I call normalization.


Also, for those who are interested, the idea of standing, security and wealth is derived from Nicholas G. Onuf's World of Our Making. Onuf's three-part system aligns in interesting ways with approaches described by some well-known political theorists.

Political Conceptions of Motivations and Interests
Author	Category
Thucydides/Pericles	Immediate Motivator	Disgrace	Fear / phobos	Disgrace
Thucydides	Positive Motivator	Honor / doxa	Safety / asphelia	Profit / kerdos
Machiavelli	Groups/Humours	People/Peace	Army/Cruelty	Nobles/Greed
Hobbes	Causes of Quarrel	Glory	Diffidence	Competition
Hobbes	Motives of War	Reputation	Safety	Gain
Morgenthau	Sources of Power	Alliances	Military	Wealth
Osgood	National Self-Interest	Prestige	Survival	Self-sufficiency
Laswell	Ends	Deference	Safety	Income
Onuf	Domain Heading	Existence	Material Control	Discretionary Endeavor
Onuf	Immediate Ends (Interests)	Standing	Security	Wealth

Rectification of Names

Just read a truly thoughtful article by Tom Engelhardt, about the obfuscating manipulation of language by members of the Bush Administration.

His mention of an old Chinese practice called the "rectification of names" intrigued me. The point is that the start of a new regime is a wise time to restore harmony between language and reality.

It seems to me that the concept can have a wider application... Anyone who ties their spirituality to textual dogma might do well to undertake a silent rectification of their own.

Are We Disgusted Yet?

Remember how Clinton’s popularity ratings actually went up after his sexual encounters with Lewinsky came out? That scandal put the public in a good mood. The Foley mess, however, is turning everyone’s stomach.

As we all know, sex makes people a little stupid. Reading the salacious details about hot-blooded stupidity between consenting adults tends to put most people in the mood for some of their own. It’s a fair guess that even members of the Piety Party who tut tutted about a married man having sex with a subordinate found the Starr Report’s reality porn quite stimulating. I’d bet a dollar that there was a little baby boomlet nine months after it came out.

But Foley’s IM transcripts go way beyond foolishness, and we can feel the ick factor rise in our guts with each new disclosure. Most Republican’s feel it, too. The whole thing is a major turn-off. Yes, there are a few true-believing “blame the democratic secular humanist liberal media culture” spinmeisters like Rush Limbaugh, but most people will simply agree, “Foley was bad.” A few might even go as far as saying “Something must be done.” Hopefully, the story of Foley’s predation won’t get any worse than what’s been heard so far.

Unfortunately, we don’t experience the same collective sense of upchucking ick on cue each time Bush’s war of choice in Iraq claims another innocent victim. We tend to be far more curious about the behavior of pedophiles or the backstory of prurience than the proper conduct of foreign policy. But that’s the point. Sex makes us stupid.