Comments @ The Net

COMMENTS @ THE NET

≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈

To download this comment with Notes and References, please click → Comments @ The Net

Science and Morality

January, 2018. I read transcript and watched quite interesting speech @ TED2010 – “Science can answer moral questions” by Sam Harris the neuroscientist and philosopher from New Atheism movement [1] – @ TED2010 [https://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_science_can_show_what_s_right]

The speech touched many problems of our society. I intend to concentrate just on two topics chosen from those mentioned by Mr. Harris.

1. Corporal punishment of children

Mr. Harris, saying that in twenty–one states of the US corporal punishment in classrooms is legal, and “hundreds of thousands of children” are subjected to corporal punishment yearly, asserts that “the rationale for this behavior is explicitly religious. The creator of the universe himself has told us not to spare the rod, lest we spoil the child –– this is in Proverbs 13 and 20, and I believe, 23.”

Concerning Mr. Harris putting blame for barbarism of men upon God the Creator, some clarification is needed.

The exact text according to the Septuagint [R]:

He that spares the rod hates his son; but he that loves carefully chastens him

{Proverbs 13:24}

In the Holy Scriptures, there is neither order of God to punish children by a rod nor mentioning by God the rod for chastising a child, although God promised punishment of men who violated the law of God by exposing the transgressors to “rods of men”: by actions of hostile nations (war) and through iniquities of other sinners the chosen people who rejected the law of God and sinned had to be punished {e.g., in: 2 Kings 7:14; Isaiah 10:1–6}. Such statements are similar to warning of Moses that those who reject the law of God and who will not serve God in gladness of good heart because of abundance of all things, will serve their worst enemies in humility and wants, while their land and their possessions will be ravaged by aliens, their wives and children be taken away from them by aliens, and they be sold to their previous masters (heathens) as slaves {Deuteronomy 28:15–68}.

All is correlated and inter–related within our small world and placed at the adequate level of complexity; thus, within the world of the material things, those who live by material things are punished and destroyed with material things.

The rationale for such treatment of men is their rejection of the spiritual freedom that is the realm of those who live by the knowledge and law of God {John 8:31–47; Acts 26:16–18; 2 Corinthians 3:17; Romans 8}. Consequently, those who have rejected God and His law are thrown away and cast into the material realm of slavery, where the heathens – idol–worshipers that serve false gods–idols created by human imagination – are enslaved by false religions, live by false knowledge, and are controlled by inhumane laws that sustain Aristotelian “divine order” of the universe: universal slavery.

Consequently, they are treated as slaves for whom the heathen world, which has rejected the law of God given to initiate and sustain development of the human civilization, reserved corporal punishment, physical mutilation, sacrifice to idols, death for disobedience, and extermination when are not needed or became physically unfit to serve their ownersΣ49.

In summary, if people choose to remain slaves of ignorance and evil, they descend at the level of voluntary slaves, and then, they are treated as slaves [[see Concept of Slavery – Supplement 3 to Selections_&_Reprints]].

Concerning the reference of Mr. Harris to Proverbs 13:24: this instruction is given by the author of the Book of Proverbs – Solomon son of David who reigned in Jerusalem. Solomon the king claims the authorship of the Proverbs and promises wisdom, knowledge and understanding to those who would listen his “hard sayings,” so they would understand true justice, dark speech, etc. {Proverbs 1:1–6}. It means that the Book of Proverbs is creation of mortal king who desired to share his wisdom with other mortals: Solomon interprets for himself knowledge of God and offers his interpretation to his subjects and readers, yet his words are not the words of God the Creator of universe Himself, as Mr. Harris asserts.

Furthermore, teachings of men should always be analyzed with knowledge of political–social–religious system(s), in which men lived and created their teachings, so we would comprehend their meanings of the good and the evil and issuing ideals, moral and morality, purposes, values, and criteria of evaluation, therefore, the circumstances and conditions of their life. Otherwise, instead of historical reality, we would have drawing on the sand washed away by each new wave.

So, the next question would be: who was Solomon son of David and king in Jerusalem, that is in which degree his “wisdom” should be trusted and accepted?

The history of Solomon is described by the Second and the Third Books of Kings, the First and the Second Books of Chronicles [R].

The summary of Solomon’s lifeΣ50:

a/ he began his reign as the wisest of the rulers, because God gave him that what he wanted and asked: the wise and discerning heart to judge people, to decipher their intentions and even thoughts. In addition, Solomon was given riches, wealth, and earthly glory appropriate for the most wise ruler whose wealth and glory would be insurpassable. In other words, Solomon was in possession of wisdom of earthly ruler, which was sufficient to establish the richest state of his time. However, from the very beginning of his reign, Solomon discarded the warnings given by all three parts of the Moses’ prophecy {Deuteronomy 17:14–20; 3 Kings 3; 10:23–29; 11:1–13; 2 Chronicles 9:25–28}, therefore, all his “wisdom” was not sufficient enough to understand that the warning of Moses concerning violations of the law has the direct connection to him in the same degree as to all the people, although he is their ruler

b/ with time, his corruption advanced. Solomon began to violate the First and the Second of the Ten Commandments {Exodus 20:1–6}: he turned after other gods and began to worship idols, which multitude of his women worshiped

c/ in the end of his life, God rejected Solomon for his “harlotry” – apostasy [[the Hebrew Prophets referred to apostasy and idol–worship as to [spiritual] harlotry {e.g., in: Isaiah 1:2–31, esp. 1:21; 57:3–9; Jeremiah 3:1–3; Ezekiel 6:9; 23:28–30, 43–45; Hosea 4:6–19; 7:4; 9:1}]].

Moreover, because of Solomon’s apostasy, God destroyed Solomon’s kingdom by dividing it between

Solomon’s son – leaving him authority only over Jerusalem (and only because God promised to keep descendants of David on the throne)

Solomon’s slave, Jeroboam, who was a son of Sarira the harlot {3 Kings 12:24 – δουλος τω Σαλωμων, …Ιεροβοαμ, και ονομα της μητρος αυτου Σαριρα, γυνη πορνη}.

Thus, because of apostasy/harlotry of Solomon, God gave to the son of harlot the most part of Solomon’s kingdom with ten tribes of Israel.

Within the part of Solomon’s kingdom given into his authority, Jeroboam the son of harlot restored idol–worship, initiating therefore, the process of collapse that led to Babylonian captivity and destruction of the first temple built by Solomon; this process of ultimate ruin was completed with conquest of Judea by Roman heathen Empire followed with complete destruction of Jerusalem and demolition of the Second templeΣ51.

In summary, none could expect instruction given by God Himself from the one who

a/ began his reign with disregard of the direct warning of Moses through whom the law of God, which initiated the first human – Judaic – civilizationΣ52, was given

b/ violated the law of God by turning to idols, and therefore, committed spiritual harlotry – apostasy

c/ finished his life as apostate rejected by God

d/ by his idolatry, made his establishment (kingdom) abomination to God, so, it was destroyed by God for violations of His law by its ruler – Solomon son of David.

In conclusion:

1. The people who refer to the Holy Scriptures should know that this Book of Life not only conveys the knowledge and words of God given through the prophets and the Apostles, to which men who want salvation and immortalityΣ39 should strictly follow; the Holy Scriptures also describe and interpret the entire history of the first human civilization and thus, contain descriptions of actions and convey words of sinners and apostates to analyze by comparing them with the knowledge and law of God given through the prophets and then, the Apostles. The human mind evolves into a child of God by wisdomΣ25 that comes to those who desire to live by God; analysis as discernment of the essence (the good or the evil) is inseparable feature of developing mindΣ53 that is absorbing wisdom and learning to live by it.

Besides, people have habit to ascribe to their deities own perversion, cruelty and inhumanity: cruel people have cruel gods.

For instance,

1/ if evaluate overall morality and humanness of heathen societies [[see Ancient_Civilizations_Legacy_Overview]] that lived by Homer’s myths [The Iliad; The Odyssey], the only inference that one can make is that ethics and morality cannot exist within the society whose gods (that, by default, are ideals for humans) from the beginning are perverts, sodomites, murderers and adulterers, commit incest, deceive, and have no mercy. The “divine Muse” of Homer was the Orphism [Thomas Taylor qtd. and ref. in Hall (2003) 74]; his Iliad, Odyssey, and Hymns provide the full description of gods and their deeds, which even ancient heathen moralists characterized as disgraceful subjects of reproach and condemnation [e.g., in: Xenophanes of Colophon Fragment 11 23].

Yet, Homer became the main educator of the ancient Greeks.

In particular, Alexander of Macedonia (who, as any learned Greek, knew Homer’s works by heart) carried Iliad with him during all his military campaigns, and nobody can prove that the crimes of gods had not inspired the ruthless assassinations, slaying of the prisoners of war, self–deification, pillage, and other crimes committed by Alexander [e.g., in: Curtius 240–241; Justinus 60–62, 68; Paulus Orosius 100–101; Plutarch 259–260, 306–307].

2/ For justification of the habit of the papal Inquisition to burn people alive at stake, the papal theologians Henry of Susa (1271) and Jean d’Andre (1348) blasphemously asserted that the papal law to burn people at the stake is sanctioned by “the law of Christ” [ref. in: Vacandard 128].

Hence, whatever people said, wrote, asserted, and did should not be taken without understanding: who, when, why, and in which circumstances has said, written, asserted, and done what.

2. For Christians [[Orthodox ChristiansΣ47, who know that Catholicism and Christianity are not compatibleΣ18, and therefore, do not recognize Catholicism as ChristianityΣ43 and who do believe that abuse of children by papal clergy [18a] is the mortal sinΣ54]], treatment of a child is defined by the words of God {in: Matthew 18:5–6; 25:31–46} that the one who receives a child in His Name, receives Him, and

Inasmuch as you did it to one of these the least of My brothers [fed, sheltered, attended], you did it to Me

Inasmuch as you did not do it [fed, sheltered, attended] to the least one, neither did you do it to Me

{Matthew 25:40, 45}

and, especially, concerning grave responsibility for offenseΣ54 of a child {in: Matthew 18:1–7}:

whoever causes one of these little ones believing in Me to offend,

it is better for him that a millstone turned by a beast of burden

be hung on his neck, and he be sunk in the depth of the sea.

Wow to the world from offenses!

It is a necessity for the offenses to come,

yet wow to that man through whom the offense comes!

{Matthew 18:1–7}

Therefore, for any person with the normal reasoning, it should be clear that Christianity and any harm and any offense [[including corporal punishment and any kind of abuse – physical or psychological]] to a child are not compatible. There are other – intellectual, psychological and spiritual – means to secure attention and obedience of a child; they should be used: they include

a/ mutual love and respect of parents and children

b/ parents’ steadfastness to adopted principles of parenting/nurturing and strength of mind that are necessary for efficient control of child’s behavior, correction of his mistakes, and development of his personality

c/ establishment of the bond of trust and mutual respect between a child and an educator.

3. In my understanding, corporal punishment, especially, legally permitted, is barbaric inheritance of institutionalized slavery, which plagued the US during centuries of slave trade; it deprives a child of dignity of human being coercing him to submission because of fear of physical pain and humiliation. Corporal punishment produces Aristotelian slaves, not freemen with dignity and intelligence.

Corporal punishment should be banned in all states and all educational institutions – public, private, and religious.

2. Science and Morality

Mr. Harris asserts that, in spite of absence of official science’s opinion concerning the good and the evil, “the separation between science and human values is an illusion.” He points out that it is dangerous illusion in the time of current crisis of humanity, and asserts that “values” are “facts.”:

In my understanding, by mentioning “values” and speaking of “dangerous illusion,” Mr. Harris implies that science should have at least some connection with conscienceΣ55 – the realm allotted to meanings and interpretations of the good and the evil embodied into values and morality.

This particular assertion reveals that Mr. Harris the philosopher, in compliance with Aristotelian logic of simplificationΣ56, mixes up the levels of complexity by considering moral values and material things/facts at the same level of complexity, and therefore, does not take into consideration the law of adequate complexityΣ57 upon which the normal human reasoning/mind should operate, if the mind’s purpose is creation of the adequate – true – knowledge.

However, inadequate complexity of human reasoning is exactly the thing that, with such means of self–extermination as contemporary ethics–free sciences, is destroying human habitat, perverts human nature and nature of other beings, and makes pointless any expectation of human development instead of advancing degeneration [[the process of advancing degeneration is, for instance, proudly demonstrated by the recent and current history: world wars, incessant wars destroying lands of Middle East, Asia, Africa, ISIS, accommodated potential of weapons of mass destruction, including chemical, biological, nuclear, cyber, and other means of destruction, man–made catastrophes of Chernobyl and FukushimaΣ58 polluting land, ocean, air [11], organ–harvesting, human and drug trafficking, epidemic of crimes and drug addiction, etc., etc., etc.]].

Nothing good can be expected from the atheistic–materialistic science that interprets morality–conscience and spirituality that are the source of values at the same level of material things, and therefore, for instance, could award AI with status of something more than technical gadget intended to facilitate operations with material things [2]. If man rejects God the Creator, he loses normal reasoning; then, he can design Fukushima, transplant pig organs to other men, be managed by AI, worship AI, and live in fear before own creation, while AI is nothing more than tool for achieving purposes as well as computer, weapons, ballistics missiles are.

The actuality is that the one cannot create anything that exceeds its own level of complexity. It means that AI never will exceed potency of human mind. Those who do not understand that may form contingent of worshipers of AI and perhaps, even die or begin to sacrifice to it own brethren because of fear before it.

Currently, official sciences are ethics–value–neutral/free and, following Francis BaconΣ59 and Max WeberΣ60, reject any connection with non–material things, especially, with theology and philosophy, to which realms morality, values, and conscience belong. Official foundation of sciences includes atheismΣ61, concept of incompatibility of science and religion [3], doctrines of AristotleΣ73 (based upon the OrphismΣ27), Aristotelian logic of simplificationΣ56, Marxist dialectics, Darwinism (natural – for the earth, and social – for human societies), and swarm of assertions contributed, for instance, by such “prophet” of the heathen cult of insanity as NietzscheΣ42, by WeberΣ60 who celebrated beginning of world war, and by atheists, including Sigmund Freud who identified man as his reproduction organ and excrementΣ62.

The ban on creationism established bu EU bureaucracy and even confirmed by US Supreme Court [3a] leaves no doubts in atheist–Marxist–Darwinist–Freudian orientation of the mainstream sciences [[especially if to consider Freudian universal comprehensive sexuality education guidelines issued by UN, UNESCO, UNFPA [3b] for global promotion of “rights of a body,” “right on sex” of children, perversion and corruption of children]].

To such “bans” and “guidelines” researches employed by official science and commercially–oriented research institutions must unreservedly follow, if they desire to keep their employment, titles, receive grants, subsidies, public recognition, and other perks.

It means, that for God and His attributes such as Absolute good, wisdom, virtues, righteousness (for humans – morality), which are the pillars of human conscience, there is no place in science: those who make science should severe any connections with any and all doctrines based on Christian theology and philosophy of the absolute good.

It was not always so. Initially, special activity of human reasoning–intelligence–mind now identified as science was referred to as fruits of wisdom: understanding of the foundations and nature of the world. The mind of thinker [[researcher in contemporary terms]] therefore, was focused on study of the Absolute good distributed by God among different realms of the universe and studies of different kinds of nature as different embodiments of the Absolute Good of the Creator. The traces of this phenomenon can be discerned in list of learned knowledge {Wisdom 7; list of learning in: Wisdom 7:15–21} given to author of the Book of WisdomΣ63. As of today, the most part of the list, still, is not in possession of the contemporary science.

AristotleΣ73, who was a pupil of Plato the Orphic, began separation of the sciences from wisdom and from the Absolute good [Magna Moralia I.]. He asserted material things desired by all as the highest good, and therefore, instead of the Absolute Good embodied into intelligence and wisdom, which the ancient wise men held to be the greatest value of thinker, elevated materialismΣ23 of the agora (market) at the place of the highest authority and judge over the good and the evil.

Mr. Harris’ assertion of “values” as “facts,” which casts immaterial/spiritual phenomenon at the level of material things, belongs to the same logical reality as Aristotle’s concept of morality that associates virtues with physical pain or pleasureΣ65.

In this commentary, I would like to stress the fact that through doctrines of Aristotle and his followers, the contemporary sciences absorbed the most lethal inheritance of the heathen Orphic philosophy of serpent–worshipers: inadequate complexity and inadequate levels of consideration, and therefore, have no capacity/potency for decision of any of the vital mankind’s problems.

In particular, the sciences disregard the actuality that in our hierarchical, arranged by complexityΣ31 of knowledge world, studies/research of material things, objects, phenomena occupy the lowest levels of complexity, while human conscience as the realm of beliefs, values, morality, ethics, which (conscience) is derived of knowledge and perception of the good and the evil, belongs to the highest level: human perception of the good and the evil defines science as inquiry into the truth, determines acceptable methods and means of search for knowledge, and evaluates results.

In general, the entirety of actual/true knowledge, by which the mind should live according to its nature, might be seen as the outcome of the first knowledge frameworkΣ26. The structure of the first – universal – knowledge framework is the following correlation:

1.Theology 2. Philosophy 3. Logic

Theology or the knowledge of God provides the overall framework for existence of the human reasoning–intelligence–mindΣ53. The mind–reasoning–intelligence transforms the theological knowledge into the philosophical doctrines, which explain the world and form the foundation for the methods of inquiry and research (science).

Word philosophy means love to wisdom. If to assume that wisdom is the foundation of the intellectual life of mankind, then, philosophy may be seen as a tool through which wisdom of human mind may be embodied into its creations: social–political–other constructions–establishments–systems. Thus, each philosophical doctrine that explains the universe, and therefore, conveys general perception and understanding of the world, is a part of foundation of a particular religious–political–social – civilizationΣ52, empire, state, nation.

In general, philosophy might be identified as

the summary of assumptions concerning the nature of the world and the purposes of man… the foundation on which the mind creates thoughts and intentions, arranges them into political, social, military and other doctrines, and embodies into establishments, with which it expects to secure and to optimize own existence (such establishments include civilizations, cultures, states, societies, social, political, research institutions, systems of defense, etc.)

the set of tools, techniques, criteria, and rules of creation and interpretation of knowledge of the lower levels of the cosmos – the world of the matter and organization of human life within it, which the mind employs in its efforts to survive, to accomplish own purposes, to actualize own nature, and to dominate the world.

While theology defines the system of beliefs, meanings of the good and the evil, philosophy transforms the theological doctrine into practice: philosophical doctrines – the sum of assumptions that transform values into purposes and criteria of evaluation are the derivatives of a particular theology. Sciences are the product of the third level – logical reasoning, which is based on philosophy derived of theology. They work at the levels of arrangement of material things according to the purposes of men, and therefore, are focused on obtaining knowledge of material things, objects, phenomena, facts, etc.

Hence, philosophy may be seen also as a vehicle for transporting/embodiment of meanings of the good given by a particular theology into the practical activity: choice of purposes and criteria of evaluation, behavior and interactions of men, and arrangement of their establishments.

Hence, as the means to achieve human purposes, sciences cannot be separated from philosophy [[that, for instance, defines the choice of the means to accomplish the purposes, their means, and criteria of evaluation]] and theology [[that establishes the meaning of life: the good and the evil, and therefore, determines which kind of purposes a human being should pursue in accordance with his understanding of life and the good and the evil]].

For the ethics–free sciences, theological foundation is atheismΣ61 that, although apparently rejects the very idea of deity, that also is a religion, and the most intolerable one.

Hence,

1/ any assertion that science can define moral values is not consistent with the foundations of the human reasoning

2/ Mr. Harris’ assertion that separation of sciences and human values is a dangerous “illusion” is adequate. Fallacy of separation of human values and any activity of men, especially, in politics and sciences, is easily illustrated with just three example.

1. In IV B.C., Hippocrates the Orphic who is referred to as “a father of medicine,” made the practical inference from the Orphic myth about the main Orphic deity – the “absolute divine animal” arch–serpent, whose body is a container filled with all forms of living beings: as soon as all living creatures are created by this “absolute” animal and their forms [[that is forms of Plato’s doctrine]] are contained within it, the human nature and nature of animals, beasts, all other living creatures are similar, and all living creatures, including men are similar, because they are unified by the very source of their creation – arch–serpent.

So, Hippocrates began to vivisect the animals and apply his observations concerning animal bodies toward understanding of human nature.

Current bio–medical sciences did not challenge Hippocrates assertion, and, following Hippocrates, develop drugs for treatment of human diseases by studies and experiments on rodents, pigeons, monkeys, other animals, birds, and insects, because they do not consider human nature to be different from the natures of animal, birds, and other living beings. Consequently, the bio–medical sciences work with genetically modified creatures and violate law of adequate complexity by mixing different levels of complexity [[e.g., combining biological materials of different species, or using stem cells for treatment of adults]] and crossing boundaries among the species without understanding that such modifications and mixing result in changes of the original nature(s) and, therefore, whatever other conditions and terms are, the main point is that their finding cannot be adequate and cannot result in any positive outcome for human beings [4].

For instance,

Professor B.F. Skinner did not discern “essential difference” between man and laboratory animals such as cats, rats, pigeons, and monkeys [Skinner ref. in: von Bertalanffy (1967) 119]

American psychologist Edward Tolman (1886–1959) inferred existence of a cognitive map from observation of behavior of laboratory rats; subsequently, he offered to apply his discovery “to other organisms as well, including human beings” and described a cognitive map as the dynamic model and picture of the world within the human mind [5], [Laszlo et al 3–4]. So, if according to Tolman, the human mind is not different from the mind of rat, can the society expect that the rats’ morality, memory of rats’ ancestors, and the rats’ experience would compose the adequate basis for recommendation concerning behavior of the society members, for exploration of the meaning of the world, replacement of “religious tenets,” and so on? The part of rats’ existence is consumption of human waste, and if rats do not have enough food, they eat the weakest rats. So, should we expect the scientifically proved recommendations of cannibalism and complete self–utilization for the societies with insufficient food resources?

the storm that killed laboratory mice population in NYU [6] also revealed that grants on biomedical research sustain manufacturing the transgenic rodents, which are used in student and postdoctoral research. Definitely, the purpose is not improvement of life of mice, they are expected to be applied to humans: new generation of researchers is molded according to Orphic serpentine theology

lethal poisonousness of drugs developed by pharmaceutic industry may be confirmed by current opioid addiction epidemic [7], as well as some other examples [8].

However, the one’s inference that studies and research of rodents and monkeys applied for understanding of human nature are pointless because they are based upon the mythical serpentine theology and are not consistent with the nature of men, will not stop gigantic slaughter machine of the commercial rodent–based biomedical sciences.

Furthermore, even acknowledgment of the reality that decades of rodent–monkeys+ studies produced no expected results [[for instance, such as creation of effective remedies without deadly consequences on human health and elimination of cancers in human beings while science consumes taxpayers and public funds studying rodents, human problems are not resolved]] will not change the current Orphic–based science until the very foundation – the Orphism and derived of it philosophical doctrines and logics of inquiry – is identified and dismissed.

Until then, the based on rodents–pigs–monkeys science will continue; never mind that trans–species mixing of DNA already made humans susceptible to animal–avian diseases [9], such as avian flu (birds), swine flu (pigs), zika virus (monkeys) [[zika’s deadly effect on human brain (microcephaly) [9a] may be seen as the terrifying deadly irony of nature: if humans put themselves at the levels of monkeys and use drugs and vaccines developed on monkeys, why they should have the full–sized human brains?]]. Besides, such irresponsible practice may trigger unpredictable virus mutations, which the contemporary science is not able to foresee and will not be able to control and neutralize.

Creation of false knowledge, which, although is accumulated during last 25 centuries (starting with Hippocrates), has not resolved any of human problems, esp., health: plagues, cancers, different malfunctions and perversions, physical and psychiatric disorders and diseases known since the Antiquity still are loyal companions of mankind. Even common flu became concerns of epidemic proportions, and medical errors are the third leading cause of deaths in the US [10].

2. Nazism with science that was expected to sustain and carry out

implementation of Adolf Hitler’s purpose to create “Aryan mankind”

compliance with definition of the state as “a community of physically and mentally equal human beings” which is formed upon the principle: authority of the leader “towards below and responsibility towards above,” and which has the purposes of “the furtherance” of human species through preservation of the race, realization of “the most sacred” right/duty of its subjects – preservation of the pure German blood, and achievement of a dominant position in the world

actualization of the main purpose of the Nazi state: modeling or fashioning of the physical and mental equality that is standardizing and alteration of human beings in accordance with the state standards, control of procreation of citizens, and obtaining the world dominion

accomplishment of the mission of the German people who have to form Hitler’s racial state, which transcends boundaries of all other states and collects “the most valuable” racial stock of “racially primal elements” with the purpose to preserve racial superiority of the Germans and lead them to world domination [Hitler (1940) 195, 594–596, 600–601, 606, 670; (1940a); Cornwell; Poewe].

In the context of the Hitler’s adherence to social Darwinism, the sterilization laws, genetic experiments, and “the laws of breeding” intended to preserve “purity” of German blood and to produce the race of supermen, these processes signify also a practical implementation of the concept of deified state: the racial state becomes the creator of human species through the control of procreation and modification of the nature of its subjects, then, it takes the place of the highest authority of the world – and all these accomplished by Nazis scientists absorbed into military oppressive machine of the Nazi state.

3. To produce weapons of the mass destruction and to test them on living beings, for instance, as it was done by Japanese military researchersΣ66, may be done only by those who have completely separated human values, the main of which is human life, from their “scientific” research. However, if admitted, indifference to human well–being never leaves by itself: man–made Fukushima disaster is the result of reckless disregard of any consideration of deadly consequences for humans by having nuclear plant in earthquake– and tsunami–risk zone [11].

Current inhumane experiments with development of biological weapon, genetic “editing,” concerning which Mr. Clapper, Director of national intelligence said that the genetic editing techniques (CRISPR–Cas9 system) constitute the same level of threat as nuclear tests and chemical weapons [12], organ harvesting [13] fueled by inability of contemporary medicine to cure internal organs diseases [[especially liver and kidney, which collapse, because of inability to neutralize poisons that human beings receive with polluted water, genetically modified food, drugs developed on rodents, DNA of other living species on which drugs and vaccines are developed or whose biological materials are used to treat humans]] manufacturing of human–animal–vegetable chimeras, use of vaccines and drugs developed on chickens, pigs, monkeys is leading to melting borders among the species, therefore, to their incompatibility with the world [14]. Even by Darwinist standards (fitness to the environment) such incompatible with the environment/nature beings should be exterminated because of the perverted nature that made them not the best fitted species. The current ethics–free science with its ignorance and arsenal of poisonous drugs, vaccines, biological, genetic, and other weapons of mass annihilation it has created, and with experiments on human embryos [15], became the greatest danger to mankind survival.

In conclusion:

a/ I would like to acknowledge courage of Mr Harris who, in his speech, attracted attention of his audience to one of the greatest problem – illusion that science can be separated from the morality and values [[that is also illusion that science cannot be judged and controlled by conscience]], although he attempted to attribute to atheistic science an ability to answer questions of the good and the evil, that is, in fact, to assert connection of science and religion [[setting moral values is the business of religion]], while even hint of compatibility of science and religion is deadly heresy for people of his level [3]

Furthermore, for the ordinary scientists and researchers, to agree that Mr. Harris rightly identified the dangerous “illusion” means to disregards works of Roger Beacon, Max Weber, and other “fathers” of contemporary ethics–values–free/neutral science – that is to ruin entire current edifice, which was built during 25 centuries, starting with Aristotle’s rejection of the Absolute Good and separation of sciences from their philosophical and moral foundation. Does it mean that, in compliance with the hymn of revolutionaries that invented Marxist–Bolshevist–Leninist–Stalinist International Movement for establishing Marxism as the global authority, Mr. Harris could initiate demolition of the old world of ethics–free science up to its very foundation, so, on the ruins, new world in which the one who was nothing would become everything may be built?

b/ In my opinion, assertion that science can answer moral questions and to be “authority on moral issues, shaping human values and setting out what constitutes a good life” [1], is the deadly misconception. Incompatibility of atheist science with normal human values is illustrated by “metapsychology” of atheist Sigmund FreudΣ62 as well as referred above “fruits” of the contemporary sciences. Although there are attempts to re–introduce ethics in education, for instance, in computer science [16a] that prepares professionals for IT plagued by hacking, assumption that ethics may exist without theological foundation is simplification, thus, misconception.

In particular, expectations that computer sciences may have “medicine–like morality” (while contemporary medicine that applies to humans drugs developed on animals, creates chimeras, conducts experiments on laboratory–developed human embryos is incapable of any morality), and “ideal” solutions may be transformed into computer codes [16a] do not differ from Pythagoras’ attempt to describe divinity with number nine and elevation of mathematicsΣ67 at the place of the universal science capable to describe and to convey the essence of theological doctrines (e.g., Aristotle’s geometrical theology). In other words, the attempt to ascribe to science ability to express moral values does not differ from the attempt to express theological and philosophical doctrines with mathematics initiated by Pythagoras and carried out by long line of his spiritual descendants including Catholic philosophers and theologians: both are fruitless, because both mix subjects with incompatible levels of complexity.

c/ To return human values as foundation for inquiry and research, the one needs to return to God. Only then the contemporary science [[which now is dead trunk of a tree without foundation–ground–roots [theology] and without branches bearing the fruits – good for human beings]] may receive the proper place among human mind activities and may evolve into the means to secure survival of mankind.

3. Overall Impression

1. The speech demonstrates inclination to religious mode of thinking, and essence of Mr. Harris’ “New Atheism” is not new, as it is rightly pointed out by religious scholar Reza Aslan [16].

In particular, it is evident that

a/ Mr. Harris is in a business of establishing new religion. His science–based religion is created by reversing the normal foundation of human intelligence:

instead of

1. Theology → 2. Philosophy → 3. Logic (science)

he offers

1. Logic/science → 2. Philosophy → 3. Theology= science as authority shaping human values

In other words, Mr. Harris

follows the example of ancient philosophizing theologians and divinersΣ2 that created their mythical religions with their own imagination, that is created their gods with the logic of their reasoning. Potency of such deity–creating business and its relation to actuality may be illustrated with Aristotle’s assertion that “it is possible to prove truth by falsehood, as it is clear from Analytics.” Analytics is Aristotle’s work in which he describes the syllogism: “A man is a stone, but a stone is an animal, therefore a man is an animal” [Eudemian Ethics I.vi.6]. According to Aristotle’s logic, two false statements (a man is a stone, and stone is an animal) produce the true statement that man is an animal.

Yet, false does not have the inner logical structure – reflection of true reality, which would be similar to the inner logical structure of truth. The false cannot serve as the confirmation of the truth. False might be likened to the putrefied corpse of the logical structures of reason, because false gives as much knowledge of the actuality as the decomposed cadaver gives knowledge of life. Summary: man is not an animal, and the false produces only the false

with the Aristotelian logic of simplification that is still is the main method of contemporary inquiry, attempts to establish a new idol, to which the scientist and “free thinkers” of New Atheist movement should worship.

b/ The idol–creating technology applied by Mr. Harris is not new; it always was and still is a loyal companion of all those who have rejected or have been deprived of knowledge of the One Only true God and seek other deities, because the truth is that a human being cannot live without God.

If the one does no know the True God, he invents new deity that corresponds his inner essence, even if this deity is the idea that there is no deities, yet there is some faceless “common good” intrinsic to human materialistic mind, in which the thought is by–product of the matter, which (matter) appeared by chance, created humans by chance, and, in its indifference to its creations, reminds van Hartmann’s “the Unconscious” [von Hartmann 2:11–13, 15]. Van Hartmann invented “the Unconscious” that unconsciously designs torments, suffering, and death of humankind and covers the process of extermination with the name “development” or “Darwinian evolution.” In the same time, following Jung, Freud, and others of a kind, human nature is proclaimed to be “intrinsically evil.” For the normal mind that operates with normal logic, it is evident that common good cannot be of any concern for the “intrinsically evil” nature.

c/ Mr. Harris’ assertion that science can shape moral values is a fruit of digestion of Aristotle’s argument: as soon as the moral character determines man’s attitude toward other men, the moral character is the foundation and subject of social or political science [Magna Moralia I.i.1–3, 7–8, 27]. This argument later became a foundation for ideology. The author of the term ‘ideology’ – Antoine Destutt de Tracy (1754–1836) – intended to establish the science of creation of the better people [Eatwell 2]. Other founding fathers of ideology presumed the possibility to modify the human nature with the political and social means [e.g., Joseph de Maistre (1753–1821) ref. in: O’Sullivan 55]. Most advanced ideologies include Communism and NazismΣ68.

2. Mr. Harris’ activities contain new element. What is new, is that by its destructive potency, his new idol – science that is expected to hold “an authority on moral issues, shaping human values and setting out what constitutes a good life,” already has proved itself to be the most bloodthirsty and deadly idol from all those ever existed in the heathen world. If the one is to judge this deity – science – by the deeds its followers – researchers, the one may conclude that deified beasts and reptiles fed by human flesh, Moloch, Phoenician Baal, and other idols worshiped with human sacrifices and washed with human blood are the children toys in comparison with the ethics–free/value–neutral sciences, which now are efficiently destroying mankind, yet eager to accelerate total annihilation [4; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 14; 15].

If analyze reaction of Mr. Harris’ audience, and overall advancement of New Atheist movement, a new religion of deified science capable of shaping human values and securing good life [[therefore producing–modifying human beings according to requests of the global government]] has a potential to evolve into a unified world religion [17]

especially, with promise of “digital immortality” [17a]

and

especially, as the competitor to more complicated version, which the current pope is amassing from the Catholicism, Marxism, and Islam [18] and which already entered the stage of practical unification of Catholicism with Marxism under the umbrella of totalitarian communist state [19], and which is intended to unify entire mankind into one religiously obedient flock under authority of the global elite led and inspired by the popeΣ75, especially, if deified science will be smart enough do not pretend on the place of deified global government.

Aristotle has elevated economics and politics at the level of gods that define the good and the evil of men. As a result, some contemporary researchers recognize Aristotle as the founding father of the political religion [[in the political religion, politics, as “the source of morality and law” and the plans of men, takes the place of the laws of God [Rushdoony 220], and the state or other form of ruling establishment, which determines the politics, becomes the main deity]].

Then, in Germany, the science sustained by Nazi military and state was transformed into “scientific neopaganism”; the survivors later formed different neo–heathen cults and movements, for instance, such such as Ludendorff’s League and Hunke’s League of German Unitarians. For her “German cultural works in the European spirit” [[combination of European, Arabian, Oriental, ancient Greek, etc. heathen thought]], Sigrid Hunke the founder of the Unitarianism received the Schiller prize, distinction from Egypt, and a place in the highest Council for matters concerning Islam [Poewe 157–171].

Perhaps, the science that currently is in a process of deification reveals no lesser aspirations?

3. I think that the current world with its multi–religious environment became indeed the most dangerous place for normal human reasoning,

and not only because of popular opinion that all problems that divide people stem from different religious beliefs [20]

and not only because elimination of religious differences and divisions for some part of population could even justify globalization, even for the price of acceptance of unified global religion that would become the greatest heresy from all heresies, which plagued mankind after ManichaeismΣ6.

The greatest problem is concurrence of two most significant consequences of rejection of the very foundation of life that is knowledge and law of God:

inhumanity in all spheres of social and political life of societies that have rejected human ideals and values based on Christian theology and philosophy of the Absolute good only to discover that life without human values and “progress” of ethics–free/value–neutral sciences have transformed societies into the cages, in which – in best traditions of social Darwinism and rat morality – predators consume weaker predators, and a human life has lost any value

religious intolerance, which, historically, was and still is sustained by the doctrines that justify the forceful conversion and persecution of the different–minded and apostates (those who converted into another religion).

Such religious intolerance is the inseparable part of the largest world religions, and religious freedom is under threat worldwide [20a].

[[For instance,

during centuries, Catholics forcefully – with use of fear of execution, imprisonment, confiscation of property and exile – converted JewsΣ69 and followers of other religions into the papal faith, burned alive “heretics,” persecuted and imprisoned different–minded, especially philosophers, researchers, and free thinkers who did not accept the narrow–minded misery of Aristotelian logic, rejected Aristotle–Aquinas’ political theology, with which the papacy supplanted Christian teachings, and did not recognized self–deified pope as the earthy deity that has right on the place of God in His templeΣ70

during centuries, Islamic politician–religious–social system/civilizationΣ20 that now is advancing toward global superiority, practiced forceful conversion, religious persecution, and extermination of the people of other faiths [21].

To the contrary, since establishment of the Christian ChurchΣ72, Christian Orthodox theologians recognized freedom of religion as the inseparable human rightΣ22. The notion of freedom of religion is also based on words of Lord Jesus Christ, the WordGod, that only because of the will of God the Father the one comes to Christ and becomes a Christian: the choice of God, not the choice of man, determines access to Christianity {John 3:5–21; 6:44; 15:16–19; 17:6–26}.]]

Therefore, the only proper decision, which would reconcile some with the global order and would be consistent with freedom and dignity of human being, is protection of freedom of religion at global and all hierarchical levels: by each political–social–religious system/establishment that sustains life and secures survival of human society.

Contemporary science and its deified fruit that, according to Mr. Harris, could answer moral questions and have “authority on moral issues, shaping human values and setting out what constitutes a good life” [1] also incapable to be the means of finding any humane decision for any kind of human unity and any progress and any positive development. Even if to set aside its essence [[that is a contemporary version of Orphic worship of arch–evil]], as any heathen religion, atheistic–materialistic science is intrinsically intolerable to any freedom, especially, freedom of thinking, freedom of conscience, and freedom of religion. Therefore, it can decide the problem of division of the mankind only by repressing freedom of worship and exterminating different–minded and followers of other religions.

February 21, 2018

≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈

Notes and References are included in Comments @ The Net

Notes numbers (for instance Σ70) refer to Notes to entire file Comments @ The Net

To download file (pdf), please, click → Comments @ The Net

≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈