Humility isn’t Being Delusional

Posted on July 31, 2016 by Brian H. Gill

Truthfulness and humility are virtues, pride is a sin, and we’re supposed to practice humility.1

So Olympic athletes should say they’re puny?

Small wonder some folks think faith makes no sense.

Accepting Reality

'The Seven Deadly Sins and the Four Last Things,' detail; by Hieronymus Bosch or someone else. (1505-1510 or thereabouts)Humility is a good idea, within reason:

“Humility restrains the appetite from aiming at great things against right reason: while magnanimity urges the mind to great things in accord with right reason.”
(“The Summa Theologica,” St. Thomas Aquinas, translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Benziger Bros. edition, 1947))

“It was pride that changed angels into devils; it is humility that makes men as angels.”
(Augustine of Hippo …, via Wikiquote)

“2 My son, conduct your affairs with humility, and you will be loved more than a giver of gifts.
“Humble yourself the more, the greater you are, and you will find favor with God.
“3 For great is the power of God; by the humble he is glorified.”
(Sirach 3:17–19)

A key idea in that Aquinas quote is “right reason.”

Humility isn’t a psychotic delusion: a morose counterpart to megalomania. Then there’s false humility, what Aquinas calls “irony,” that he talked about in Summa, Question 113.2

Humility is accepting reality.

For me, it involves acknowledging that I’ve got creative talents — including freakishly enhanced language skills.

That’s the kit God gave me.

My contribution has been deciding to do something with the package.

On the other hand, I was born with defective hips — swapping them out a few years back was a huge improvement — which aren’t quite so obviously a blessing. Neither was enduring decades of undiagnosed depression and something on the autism spectrum.

Those are part of the kit I was issued, too.3

On the ‘up’ side, my circumstances helped me learn to see beauty in just about everything: and that’s another topic.

‘Umbleness’ and Reality

Uriah Heep’s unctuous “umbleness” is, happily, fictional.

Self-deprecation can, I suppose, be a useful tool for easing tension. I’m not convinced that it’s a good idea, though: particularly when someone starts believing negative self-talk.

Wanting to seem like more than I really am is definitely a bad idea. That’s what the sin we call pride is about. That sort of pride is as unreasonable as trying to believe I’m stupid. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1784, 1866, 1931, 2093–2094)

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote about boasting, humility and pride, including this:

“…The sin of boasting may be considered in two ways. First, with regard to the species of the act, and thus it is opposed to truth; as stated (in the body of the article and Question [110], Article [2]). Secondly, with regard to its cause, from which more frequently though not always it arises: and thus it proceeds from pride as its inwardly moving and impelling cause….”
(“The Summa Theologica,” Question 112, St. Thomas Aquinas)

“…Humility restrains the appetite from aiming at great things against right reason: while magnanimity urges the mind to great things in accord with right reason. Hence it is clear that magnanimity is not opposed to humility: indeed they concur in this, that each is according to right reason….”
“The Summa Theologica,” Question 161, St. Thomas Aquinas)

“…’A man is said to be proud, because he wishes to appear above (super) what he really is’; for he who wishes to overstep beyond what he is, is proud. Now right reason requires that every man’s will should tend to that which is proportionate to him. Therefore it is evident that pride denotes something opposed to right reason….”
(“The Summa Theologica,” Question 162, St. Thomas Aquinas)
(translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Benziger Bros. edition, 1947))

Definitions — Humility, Pride, Sin, and Temperance; Catholic Style

That’s a Pythagorean cup, a thinking person’s dribble glass, sort of; and yuza no ki — gadgets used for teaching moderation.

Since I’m a Catholic, I take balance and moderation very seriously. it’s what we call temperance. I talked about that three weeks ago. (July 10, 2016)

Since I’m a recovering English teacher, I like to include definitions in these posts:

“HUMILITY: The virtue by which a Christian acknowledges that God is the author of all good. Humility avoids inordinate ambition or pride, and provides the foundation for turning to God in prayer (2559). Voluntary humility can be described as ‘poverty of spirit’ (2546).”
(Catechism, Glossary, H)

“PRIDE: One of the seven capital sins. Pride is undue self–esteem or self–love, which seeks attention and honor and sets oneself in competition with God (1866).”
(Catechism, Glossary, P)

“SIN: An offense against God as well as a fault against reason, truth, and right conscience. Sin is a deliberate thought, word, deed, or omission contrary to the eternal law of God. In judging the gravity of sin, it is customary to distinguish between mortal and venial sins (1849, 1853, 1854).”
(Catechism, Glossary, S)

“TEMPERANCE: The cardinal moral virtue that moderates the attraction of pleasure and provides balance in the use of created goods. It ensures the mastery of the will over instinct, and keeps natural desires within proper limits (1809).”
(Catechism, Glossary, T)

Hubris, Science, and Getting a Grip

At least as far back as Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, we’ve had tales of scientists driven by hubris — self-confidence above and beyond the call of reason.

Cautionary tales like Marlowe’s Faustus, the legend of Daedalus and Icarus, and ‘mad scientist’ movies, can teach useful ideas: like ‘trying to do the impossible may end badly.’

They also give us this sort of dialog:

“Dr. James Xavier: I’m blind to all but a tenth of the universe.

“Dr. Sam Brant: My dear friend, only the gods see everything.

“Dr. James Xavier: My dear doctor, I’m closing in on the gods.”
(“X: The Man with the X-Ray Eyes” (1963), via IMDB.com)

Maybe hubris contributed to hoaxes like Piltdown Man and archaeoraptor; and atrocities like the Auschwitz, Dachau, Tuskegee, and Willowbrook State School experiments.

But I wonder if movies like “Cosmic Monsters,” “The Fly,” and “The Brain That Wouldn’t Die,” teach that curiosity is bad: particularly when it’s scientific curiosity.

As I said Friday, Using the brains God gave us does not offend the Almighty. (July 29, 2016)

Science and technology, studying this universe and developing new tech, is part of being human. Ethics apply, same as everything else we do.4

This isn’t a new idea. One of the Genesis creation stories has Adam, not God, naming critters:

“So the LORD God formed out of the ground various wild animals and various birds of the air, and he brought them to the man to see what he would call them; whatever the man called each of them would be its name.”
(Genesis 2:19)

A scientist occasionally embraces the notion that smart folks are “beyond good and evil,” or that we don’t need God because we’ve discovered that Ussher was wrong by several orders of magnitude.

Interestingly, Anaxagoras got in trouble with Athenian authorities a little over two dozen centuries back for claiming that our sun isn’t the chariot of Helios.

Science and Humility

Folks knew that the universe is vast and ancient when Hemiunu helped build the Great Pyramid of Giza.

That was around the time folks started replacing timber with stone at Stonehenge. A place we call Mohenjo-daro was a major city then, and I’m wandering off-topic.

Learning that the world is bigger and older than some European scholars thought, a few centuries back, doesn’t bother me a bit.

I see it as an opportunity for “even greater admiration” of God’s greatness. (Catechism, 283)

“4 Indeed, before you the whole universe is as a grain from a balance, or a drop of morning dew come down upon the earth.

“But you have mercy on all, because you can do all things; and you overlook the sins of men that they may repent.

“For you love all things that are and loathe nothing that you have made; for what you hated, you would not have fashioned.

“And how could a thing remain, unless you willed it; or be preserved, had it not been called forth by you?”
(Wisdom 11:22–25)

We’re created by God, designed with a thirst for truth and for God — made from the stuff of this world — and made “in the image of God,” creatures who are matter and spirit.(Genesis 1:26, 2:7; Catechism, 27, 355–361)

Using our senses and reason, we can observe the world’s order and beauty: learning something of God in the process. (Genesis 1:26, 2:7; Catechism, 31–35, 282–289)

I think the sensible — and humble — approach to reality is studying God’s universe, accepting what we find, and learning more about it. Insisting that God conforms to ideas published in 17th-century Britain: not so much.

We wouldn’t have science, arguably, if the Church hadn’t been insisting that the universe operates under rational, knowable, physical laws. And that’s yet another topic, for another post.


(From NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA); ESA/Hubble Collaboration; used w/o permission.)

1 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1866, 2468, 2482–2486, 2540.

2 St. Thomas Aquinas discusses truth, boasting, humility, and getting a grip, in Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part, Question 112 and 113. He had a lot more to say, including this:

“…Pride is directly opposed to the virtue of humility, which, in a way, is concerned about the same matter as magnanimity, as stated above (Question [161], Article [1], ad 3)….”
(“The Summa Theologica,” St. Thomas Aquinas, translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Benziger Bros. edition, 1947))

3 “Autism spectrum disorder” is the current name for a cluster of mental/neurological quirks. I’m not convinced that it’s a single disorder, but for now it’s a useful diagnostic label for part of what happens in my head.

It’s also a condition that’s fairly well-known, and generally spotted in infancy or early childhood: today. Back in the mid-20th century, not so much.

There’s almost certainly a genetic aspect to “autism spectrum disorder,” so my wife and I weren’t surprised when some of our kids were blessed with something very much like my quirks. Depression is another matter. The genetic link isn’t as obvious, although I’m guessing that some of us are more likely than others to get hit with it.

More:

4 (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 159, 2292–2296)

Posted in Being Catholic | Tagged , , , | 11 Comments

Studying Thousands of New Worlds

Posted on July 29, 2016 by Brian H. Gill

Scientists studied the atmospheres of two exoplanets, planets orbiting another star, earlier this year. Both planets are roughly Earth-sized, with atmospheres a bit like the Solar System’s terrestrial planets.

Juno arrived at Jupiter last month, and will start its science mission in October.

Finally, scientists found more than a thousand new planets; including more than a hundred Earth-sized ones.

  1. TRAPPIST-1 b and c
  2. Juno at Jupiter
  3. Kepler: More than 100 Earth-Sized Planets Discovered

As usual, I’ll start by talking about science, faith, and dealing with reality.

Joshua, Job, and Poetic Imagery

It’s been decades since an enthusiastic Christian informed me that our sun goes around Earth, not the other way around — because Joshua 10:12–13 says so.

He may have been sincere, but I’m quite sure he’s wrong.

Oddly enough, I’ve never known a Christian who said that Earth is flat. — despite what Job 9:6–7 says.

I could be a Christian, following our Lord, and believe that a solid dome kept the ‘ocean of heaven’ from flooding the earth I walk on.

I could even believe that a 17th century Calvinist was right about the universe being created on the nightfall preceding October 23, 4004 BC.

But ignoring what we’ve learned in the two dozen or so centuries since Mesopotamian culture provided poets with imagery we read in the Old testament is not vital to Christian belief.

Informed Faith

I’m a Christian and a Catholic, so studying this wonder-filled universe and using what we learn to develop new tools is okay. Science and technology are part of being human. Ethics apply, of course. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2293–2295)

Besides, as I say rather often, scientific discoveries are invitations “to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator.” (Catechism, 283)

Studying this immense and ancient creation honestly and methodically cannot interfere with an informed faith, because “the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God.” (Catechism, 159)

Faith isn’t reason: but it’s reasonable, and certainly not against an honest search for truth. (Catechism, 31–35, 159)

This isn’t a particularly new idea.

Dominican friar and Catholic bishop Albertus Magnus, born around 1200, is now patron saint of scientists, students, medical technicians, philosophers, and the natural sciences.

Catholic bishop and scientist Nicolas Steno helped launch paleontology as a science in 1669.

And the Pontifical Academy of Sciences hosted a “Study Week on Astrobiology” in November of 2009.

On the other hand, Third Order Dominican Nicolaus Copernicus delayed printing of “De revolutionibus orbium coelestium” until after his death in 1543.

Can’t say that I blame him. His newfangled ideas upset some folks who apparently had a shaky grasp of distinctions between poetry and science. European politics since 1517 didn’t help, and that’s another topic.

Not My Decision


(From NASA/JPL-CalTech/R. Hurt, used w/o permission.)
(Comparison of the Kepler-186, Kepler-452, and Solar planetary systems. The green area in each is the star’s habitable zone, where liquid water could exist on an Earth-like planet.)

It’s been a year since “Earth 2.0,” Kepler-452b, was in the news. One of the first “Earth 2.0” op-ed pieces I saw was by scientist and former White House Senior Policy Analyst, Jeff Schweitzer.

He has a Ph.D. in marine biology/neurophysiology, probably knows his field very well, and made some all-too-familiar assumptions about Christianity:

“Earth 2.0: Bad News for God”
Jeff Schweitzer, Huffington Post (July 23, 2015)

“…Let us be clear that the Bible is unambiguous about creation: the earth is the center of the universe, only humans were made in the image of god, and all life was created in six days. All life in all the heavens. In six days….”

Some Christians apparently agree with Dr. Schweitzer — that Christianity depends on believing one of the Genesis creation narratives is word-for-word true, from the viewpoint of a contemporary Western literalist.

I don’t see it that way, but I figure that part of my job is appreciating God’s handiwork: not insisting that ancient Mesopotamians were spot-on accurate.

Even if I didn’t approve of the way reality works, it’s not my decision:

“Our God is in heaven; whatever God wills is done.”
(Psalms 115:3)

1. TRAPPIST-1 b and c


(From NASA/ESA/STScl, via MIT News, used w/o permission.)
(“An artist’s depiction of planets transiting a red dwarf star in the TRAPPIST-1 System”
(MIT News))

“First atmospheric study of Earth-sized exoplanets reveals rocky worlds”
Jennifer Chu, MIT News (July 20, 2016)

“Two potentially habitable planets in nearby system are confirmed to be rocky.

“On May 2, scientists from MIT, the University of Liège, and elsewhere announced they had discovered a planetary system, a mere 40 light years from Earth, that hosts three potentially habitable, Earth-sized worlds. Judging from the size and temperature of the planets, the researchers determined that regions of each planet may be suitable for life.

“Now, in a paper published today in Nature, that same group reports that the two innermost planets in the system are primarily rocky, unlike gas giants such as Jupiter. The findings further strengthen the case that these planets may indeed be habitable. The researchers also determined that the atmospheres of both planets are likely not large and diffuse, like that of the Jupiter, but instead compact, similar to the atmospheres of Earth, Venus, and Mars….”

True enough, Earth, Venus, and Mars have atmospheres that stick pretty close to the planet; but those atmospheres are very different.

The atmospheres of Venus and Mars are mostly carbon dioxide — but Venus is hot, 740 K/467 °C/872 °F at the surface, with air pressure 93 times Earth’s. Martian surface pressure is only about 6% Earth’s, and cold enough for carbon dioxide frost in winter.

Earth’s atmosphere is mostly nitrogen and oxygen, and it’s the only ‘habitable’ planet of the trio.

TRAPPIST-1 b and c, the ones studied during this transit, are probably too close to TRAPPIST-1 for life.

They’re almost certainly tidally locked to the star, one side in constant sunlight, with years roughly 1.5 and 2.5 Earth days long. That close to TRAPPIST-1, the star’s ‘wind’ probably blew away whatever water they started with.

TRAPPIST-1d, orbiting at or just beyond the star’s habitable zone1 may have kept its water, but wasn’t studied this time around.

Refined orbital data and calculations, finished only two weeks before the double transit, didn’t give the researchers much time to coordinate with the Hubble team.

A Star, a Telescope, and Colors


(From ESO/IAU and Sky & Telescope, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(TRAPPIST-1’s location in Earth’s sky.)

“…’We thought, maybe we could see if people at Hubble would give us time to do this observation, so we wrote the proposal in less than 24 hours, sent it out, and it was reviewed immediately,’ [MIT’s Julien] de Wit recalls. ‘Now for the first time we have spectroscopic observations of a double transit, which allows us to get insight on the atmosphere of both planets at the same time.’

“Using Hubble, the team recorded a combined transmission spectrum of TRAPPIST-1b and c, meaning that as first one planet then the other crossed in front of the star, they were able to measure the changes in wavelength as the amount of starlight dipped with each transit….”
(Jennifer Chu, MIT News)

TRAPPIST-1 is a very small star. Compared to our sun, its mass is about 8%, with a diameter a little more than Jupiter’s: 11.4% of our sun’s.

TRAPPIST, the Belgian robotic telescope at ESO’s La Silla Observatory in Chile, is named after Trappists: nuns and monks in the O.C.S.O. — Order of Cistercians of the Strict Observance.

The monastic order got its name from La Trappe Abbey, TRAPPIST stands for Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope, and TRAPPIST-1 is an ultra-cool dwarf star.

An ultra-cool dwarf star is a red dwarf with a surface temperature below 2,700 K/2,430 °C/4,400 °F: very roughly the temperature and color of a ‘warm’ LED or incandescent bulb. (www.topbulb.com)

The “artist’s depiction” and that NASA/ESA/STScl animation make TRAPPIST-1 look a whole lot redder than it would seem to someone close enough to see the star as a “sun.”

More:

2. Juno at Jupiter


(From NASA, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)

“Juno probe enters into orbit around Jupiter”
Jonathan Amos, BBC News (June 5, 2016)

“The US space agency has successfully put a new probe in orbit around Jupiter.

“The Juno satellite, which left Earth five years ago, had to fire a rocket engine to slow its approach to the planet and get caught by its gravity.

“A sequence of tones transmitted from the spacecraft confirmed the braking manoeuvre had gone as planned….

“…Tuesday’s orbit insertion has put Juno in a large ellipse around the planet that takes just over 53 days to complete.

“A second burn of the rocket engine in mid-October will tighten this orbit to just 14 days. It is then that the science can really start….”

Data from Juno’s instruments should tell scientists how much of Jupiter is water, and help them map the planet’s magnetic and gravitational fields. That will help sort out theories of how Jupiter, and the Solar System, formed; and what powers its magnetic field.

Another science goal is measuring orbital frame-dragging around Jupiter. Frame-dragging is what happens when moving concentrations of mass-energy drag space-time along with them. It’s also called Lense-Thirring precession, and there will not be a test on this.

Data from Gravity Probe B, in Earth orbit, confirmed that frame dragging happens — after heavy-duty statistical analysis. The phenomenon should be easier to measure near Jupiter, since the planet has 317.8 times Earth’s mass and spins more than twice as fast.

Hardware and Science


(From NASA, JPL; via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Juno’s path into Jupiter orbit.)

“Juno Armored Up to Go to Jupiter”
NASA/JPL (July 12, 2010)

“…’Juno is basically an armored tank going to Jupiter,’ said Scott Bolton, Juno’s principal investigator, based at Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio. ‘Without its protective shield, or radiation vault, Juno’s brain would get fried on the very first pass near Jupiter.’…”

Jupiter’s intense magnetic field is much stronger than Earth’s, trapping and accelerating charged particles, forming a doughnut of radiation like Earth’s Van Allen radiation belt; but a whole lot stronger.

Juno‘s path avoids the worst of the radiation, and much of the spacecraft’s sensitive electronics are inside a titanium “radiation vault” with one-centimeter-thick walls.

That should keep the spacecraft working for all 37 planned 14-day ‘science’ orbits. Some of the instruments may not last that long.

The Jovian Infrared Auroral Mapper (JIRAM) should keep working through at least eight orbits, and Jet Propulsion Lab’s microwave radiometer is good for at 11 orbits. That’s the idea, anyway.

After the 37th orbit, Juno is supposed to start a controlled deorbit; a five-and-a-half day maneuver that drops it into Jupiter’s atmosphere — following NASA’s planetary protection policy. Jupiter almost certainly doesn’t support life of our variety, but one of its moons is another matter.

One of the simpler explanations for Europa‘s smooth surface is that the Jovian moon has a large ocean under its icy crust.

If that’s the case, we might find critters living in that ocean. Meanwhile, NASA wants to be sure than any critters on Jupiter’s moons grew there — and aren’t survivors from a crashed spaceship. And that’s yet another topic.

More:

3. Kepler: More than 100 Earth-Sized Planets Discovered


(From NASA, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)

“Kepler telescope discovers 100 Earth-sized planets”
Paul Rincon, BBC News (May 10, 2016)

“Nasa’s Kepler telescope has discovered more than 100 Earth-sized planets orbiting alien stars.

“It has also detected nine small planets within so-called habitable zones, where conditions are favourable for liquid water – and potentially life.

“The finds are contained within a catalogue of 1,284 new planets detected by Kepler – which more than doubles the previous tally….”

As of this week, we’ve found 3,472 planets orbiting 2,597 other stars; 589 of them have more than one known planet. That’s enough to make some educated guesses about planets we haven’t spotted yet.

Scientists figure about one in five sun-like stars have at least one ‘Earth-like’ planet — a planet that’s between one and two times Earth’s diameter — in the habitable zone.1

That seems reasonable, since the Solar System very nearly has two: Earth, and Venus. Granted, Venus is 94.99% Earth’s diameter, and at the inside edge of Sol’s habitable zone.

Assuming 200,000,000,000 stars in our galaxy, that gives us 11,000,000,000 ‘habitable’ planets: 40,000,000,000, if we add red dwarf stars to the mix. That’s a lot of planets, and the nearest one may be within 12 light-years of us.

So where is everybody?

First of all, there’s a big difference between (potentially) ‘habitable’ and ‘inhabited.’

Venus, Earth, and Mars, are (barely) in our star’s habitable zone for terrestrial planets. In the outer Solar System life might find a home in or on Ceres, Europea, Enceladus, and Titan.

The only place in that list that we know has life is Earth. Venus almost certainly is lifeless, Mars might have enough water left to keep microorganisms going, and the rest — we simply don’t know yet.

The rest of the universe may be ‘more of the same,’ or we may learn that life got started on billions of worlds. We may even hit the jackpot, and meet folks who are as chatty as we are. And that’s yet again another topic.

More:

1 A star’s habitable zone, or circumstellar habitable zone, is the volume surrounding a star where a planet like Earth isn’t baked to a crisp, like Mercury, or frozen, like the Solar System’s outer planets.

Posted in Science News | Tagged , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Citizenship and Being Catholic

Posted on July 24, 2016 by Brian H. Gill

I like being an American, most of the time.

I know that my country is far from perfect, but I’d rather be here than anywhere else on Earth.

Living in Sauk Centre, a smallish central Minnesota town, probably helps. I really like it here.

But it’s no Brigadoon, unchanged and unaffected by the outside world.

We’ve even got pretty good Internet service — and clean air, except when someone upwind is stirring a manure pit. On the other hand, crimes happen. Last year the biggest problems were larceny and drug abuse, 68 and 53 offenses respectively.1

Being a good citizen includes not committing that sort of crime, but there’s more to it.

I’ll get back to citizenship, Catholic style, which does not mean trying to force everyone to act just like me.

Being Good Citizens, Wherever We Live

I drove on the right side of the road before I became a Catholic. I also wore pants instead of a kilt, seldom ate with chopsticks, spoke English with one of the American accents, and used “guess” as a verb.

Then I became a Catholic, and kept doing pretty much the same thing.

In a sense, becoming a Catholic made me ‘more of an American.’

Being a good citizen isn’t an option for Catholics. We must contribute to the good of society and take part in public life, wherever we are. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1915, 2239)

Being Catholic doesn’t mean being American, though: or Western.

Japan is a pretty good example. By the end of the 1500s, something like 130,000 folks in Japan were Catholics. Alessandro Valignano’s insistence on respect for Japanese culture and customs probably helped.

The new faith appealed to locals from one end of the economic spectrum to the other: peasants, traders, sailors, warriors, and courtesans.

That’s the good news. The bad news is that some daimyos apparently liked Christianity because getting baptized meant easier access to saltpeter, a vital part of gunpowder.

Then the San Felipe, headed from Manila to Acapulco, ran into a storm and anchored in Urado Bay. I gather that after Japanese authorities seized the cargo, the Spanish ship’s captain said Portuguese missionaries were setting Japan up for European conquest.

That got Toyotomi Hideyoshi‘s attention. He outlawed Catholicism, probably thinking that he was protecting his country from western imperialism.

Given a choice between abandoning our faith or death, some folks chose death. Six European Franciscan missionaries, three Japanese Jesuits and 17 Japanese laymen, three of them young boys, were crucified on February 5, 1597.2

Other Japanese Christians were deported, or went underground. Two and a half centuries later, the Meiji Restoration restored imperial rule — and religious freedom. Many of the Kakure Kirishitan rejoined the Catholic Church, and that’s another topic.

Emperors, Tyrants, and the Common Good

Japan’s imperial family goes back about 2,600 years. I’m impressed by that sort of continuity.

My civilization’s history is — different.

Back when Emperor Jimmu conquered Yamato, or thereabouts, Psamtik I re-unified Egypt, and the Neo-Assyrian Empire dissolved.

Meanwhile, Corinth was among the first Greek city-states to replace their traditional hereditary priest-kings with tyrants.

Eventually “tyrant” got unpleasant connotations and Rome’s Republic became an empire, which crumbled after about five centuries.

Then Charlemagne became Emperor of the Romans, starting the Carolingian dynasty. After another four dynasties, Saxons and Franks were emperors of the Holy Roman Empire. That lasted until 1809.

Henry VIII of England was, by act of Parliament, ‘imperial:’ but never an emperor.

A little over two centuries later, English colonists in North America got fed up with micromanagement, revolted, and set up a federal republic. A few more centuries, and we may try something else.

Meanwhile, back in Japan, Akihito is the world’s only emperor. It’s a largely ceremonial role at the moment, but that could change in the next millennium.

Japan’s cultural continuity impresses me, but I’m used to the Western habit of kicking over the traces every few centuries.

Happily, the Church doesn’t expect me to insist on a monarchy, democracy, or any other particular form of government.

As long as a local regime works for the common good, and the citizens are okay with how their country’s authorities work, Catholics can live with any system. (Catechism, 1901)

Concern for the “common good” involves balancing individual and community needs, having respect for folks, and that’s yet another topic. (Catechism, 1905–1912)

Unity, Diversity, and Christmas Trees

I like some traditions, like Jack-o’-lanterns.

Some, like Easter eggs, tie in with Christian holidays. The parish church on Sauk Centre’s south side, for example, brings a tree inside during the Christmas season.

The Christmas tree’s origins aren’t entirely certain — but northwestern Europeans liked trees: like Donar’s Oak.

We’re not the only folks who had sacred groves: deodar and Nang Tani are Asian varieties. Then there’s the sad tale of mistletoe and Höðr, and that’s yet again another topic.

Where was I? Faith, culture, Norse mythology. Right.

Catholic Church is καθολικός, universal: united and diverse, not tied to one era or region. I’m not forced into a particular cultural mold.3

I could receive the heart of our faith, the Eucharist, in any parish — and recognize what’s central in the Mass.

The essentials in our re-presentation of the Last Supper haven’t changed in two millennia. Details in how we celebrate vary, according to local culture; and This is okay. (Matthew 26:26–28; Mark 14:22–24; Luke 22:17–20; Catechism, 1145–1149, 1202–1209, 1322–1419, 1668)

Catholic Tradition,4 with a capital T, is a “living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit.” (Catechism, 77–78)

Desperately clinging to old habits and customs — is still another topic.

Citizenship, When to Say “No,” and Voting

Citizenship, Catholic style, includes taking an active part in public life; contributing to the good of society “in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom;” and submitting to legitimate authorities. (Catechism, 1915, 2239)

Submission to legitimate authority is not unthinking obedience.

Sometimes the local or regional boss tells us to do something that violates natural law.5 (Catechism, 2242)

Saying ‘no’ to England’s Henry VIII got Saints Thomas More and John Fisher killed. Nobody said this was going to be easy.

Interestingly, genocide is specifically mentioned as something we’re not supposed to do, and voting when we have that right is an obligation. (Catechism, 2240, 2313)

Elections and Freedom

America’s 2016 national elections are coming in November. The usual blather started in the last election cycle.

I’m not “political.”

I don’t claim that one party or candidate is always right and anyone who disagrees with me is in league with Satan.

Much as I’d like to ignore all the braying and trumpeting, though, I have to pay attention to candidates and issues. Voting responsibly is part of being a good citizen here.

One of the issues I’m concerned about is religious freedom: which does not mean forcing everyone to agree with me. As a Catholic, I must support religious freedom — for everybody. (Catechism, 2104–2109)

And that’s another topic, for another post.

More about life, love, and getting a grip:

1 State of Minnesota Department of Public Safety 2015 Uniform Crime Report, p. 147.

2We celebrate 日本二十六聖人, Nihon Nijūroku Seiji, Saints Paul Miki and his Companions, on February 6. February 5 was already the feast day of Saint Agatha of Sicily.

3 Background:

4 Definitions:

  • “BIBLE: Sacred Scripture: the books which contain the truth of God’s Revelation and were composed by human authors inspired by the Holy Spirit (105). The Bible contains both the forty-six books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven books of the New Testament (120). See Old Testament; New Testament.”
  • “MAGISTERIUM: The living, teaching office of the Church, whose task it is to give as authentic interpretation of the word of God, whether in its written form (Sacred Scripture), or in the form of Tradition. The Magisterium ensures the Church’s fidelity to the teaching of the Apostles in matters of faith and morals (85, 890, 2033).”
  • “TRADITION: The living transmission of the message of the Gospel in the Church. The oral preaching of the Apostles, and the written message of salvation under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (Bible), are conserved and handed on as the deposit of faith through the apostolic succession in the Church. Both the living Tradition and the written Scriptures have their common source in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ (75–82). The theological, liturgical, disciplinary, and devotional traditions of the local churches both contain and can be distinguished from this apostolic Tradition (83).”

And see Catechism, 95, 113, 174, and 126.

5 Natural law is the set of ethical principles woven into reality. These principles do not change. How we apply them changes as our circumstances change. (Catechism, 1952, 1954–1960)

Posted in Being a Citizen, Being Catholic | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Early Agriculture, New Tech

Posted on July 22, 2016 by Brian H. Gill

‘Genetics news’ caught my eye this week.

DNA from barley that’s been sitting in a cave for six millennia is helping scientists learn about agriculture’s origins.

A fits-in-your-hand Biomolecule Sequencer is at the International Space Station. If it works, folks up there won’t have to send samples down for analysis.

Finally, the world’s first farmers were an unexpectedly diverse lot.

  1. Ancient Barley
  2. Testing a DNA Sequencer in Space
  3. First Farmers, DNA, and Origins

Science? In a “religion” blog??

Dogs, Wolves, and Laban’s Sheep

We’ve known that traits are inherited for upwards of 10 millennia, and applied that knowledge.

Paleontologists and archaeologists figure that agriculture, planting genetically-modified plants and harvesting them, started independently in several spots; with folks in southwest Asia getting there first.

The last I checked, they’re still not sure about dogs. The genetic evidence is clear enough: a particular breed of wolf started hunting with humans somewhere between 27,000 and 40,000 years ago, and eventually became today’s dachshunds, akitas, and mutts.

Quite a few researchers insist that a particular sort of wolf started being really good at getting along with humans without any help. Maybe, but I’ve learned to be skeptical about assertions regarding “primitive” people.

I figure that when an apex predator ‘just happens’ to start helping us, we helped the process along. Folks who lived during and just before the Last Glacial Maximum were as human as I am: and that’s another topic.

Getting back to agriculture, livestock, and all that, Jacob’s deal with Laban in Genesis 30:27–3:13 at least hints that Jacob knew how to make a bumper crop of dark sheep and spotted or speckled goats. Laban doesn’t come across as the brightest bulb in the box.

Attack of the Mutant Macaroni?

We don’t think of “domesticated” animals as “GMOs,” but today’s cattle are the result of more than ten millennia of genetic tweaking.

Genetic engineering tech like gel electrophoresis is new — but genetic manipulation isn’t. Unless you’re a hunter, the odds are pretty good that you’ve never eaten food that didn’t come from a genetically modified plant or animal.

We’re developing new technology: but people have been using ‘synthetic’ organisms like chickens, macaroni wheat, and dogs, for a very long time.

We’ve come a long way from the days of, for example, introducing a red junglefowl and grey junglefowl and hoping for the best: but gene-swapping between species has been going on for — most likely — billions of years. What’s new is that we’re doing the swapping.

I don’t see ethical issues with tweaking the genetics of livestock and plants. We’ve been doing that for — a very long time, not that ‘we’ve always done it’ is an excuse for bad behavior. More to the point, grafting olive trees is a metaphor in Romans 11:19–24: and those verses apparently don’t condemn the practice.

Maybe someone’s assumed that Deuteronomy 22:9 forbids grafting; or condemns marrying someone with a lower Dun & Bradstreet number, or whatever.

I don’t: particularly since it’s about seeds, and comes between a rule about parapets and another about using draft animals.1

Thinking is Not a Sin

I’ve run into folks who act as if they think God gave us brains, and is offended when we use them: particularly if we start wondering how things work.

That doesn’t make sense, not to me.

I’m a Catholic, so I see the universe as a place of order and beauty: being created and upheld by God, in a “state of journeying” toward an ultimate perfection. (Genesis 1:1–31; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 31–32, 302, 341)

We’re rational creatures, created in the image of God, “little less than a god;” left in charge of this world, with the power and frightening responsibilities that come with our nature. (Genesis 1:26–27, 2:7; Psalms 8:6; Catechism, 355–373, 2402, 2415–2418, 2456)

Forgetting that “little less than a god” isn’t “God” gets us in trouble, and that’s yet another topic.

Studying this world is okay. Using reason, we can see God’s work in the universe. (Catechism, 35–36, 282–289, 1704, 2292–2295)

Thinking is not a sin. Using the brains God gave us is part of being human. (Wisdom 7:17; Catechism, 35, 159, 1730–1738)

1. Ancient Barley


(From Paul Shaw, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
(“Barley fields of 6,000 years ago may have looked very similar to those of today”
(BBC News))

“Ancient barley DNA gives insight into crop development”
(July 18, 2016)

“An international group of scientists have analysed the DNA of 6,000 year old barley finding that it is remarkably similar to modern day varieties.

“They say it could also hold the key to introducing successful genetic variation.

“Due to the speed at which plants decompose, finding intact ancient plant DNA is extremely rare.

“The preserved ancient barley was excavated near the Dead Sea, the journal Nature Genetics reports….”

Folks harvested that grain about the time Uruk, or Erech, depending on what you’re reading, was starting to grow into an important city.

About two millennia later, Utu-hengal, governor of Uruk, led Sumerian cities against Tirigan, the last Gutian ruler in Sumer.

Then Ur-Nammu took over and started the Third Dynasty of Ur. He’s mostly famous for the Code of Ur-Nammu, and that’s yet again another topic.


(From Ningyou, based on “Atlas of the Bible Lands,” C S Hammond & Co (1959); via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)

Over the next two millennia, the Old, Middle, and Neo-Assyrian Empires were a big deal until the Achaemenid Empire took over; then Alexander the Great rolled over that part of the world.

Meanwhile, Abraham and Sara’s descendants were planting crops, building cities, getting conquered, and rebuilding. Some of that shows up in 1 and 2 Kings. Alexander’s generals inherited pieces of his empire, including Yehud Medinata/Province of Judea.

The territory changed hands a few more times before Pompey took over. That was a little before the Roman Republic’s leadership went sour.

Found in Masada’s Yoram Cave

Folks in Iudaea Province revolted a few decades after our Lord stopped being dead, and that’s still another topic.

It was not a good time to be in Jerusalem.

Rebel forces held out in an unconquerable fortification on Masada until Roman forces re-engineered the terrain and conquered it.

Fighting didn’t reach Yoram Cave, in a southeastern cliff of the Masada Horst, so the grain stayed there.

Another two millennia of assorted good times and bad passed before researchers found it.

They selected ten grains and spikelets and split them, one set of halves getting analyzed to work out how old they were; the other half getting their DNA extracted and studied.

Genetic Time Capsules

Looks like folks were “tampering with things man was not supposed to know” long before Uruk became a city.

“…The DNA analysis showed that these 6,000 year old seeds were remarkably similar to modern day crops in the same region. Meaning that at the time they were harvested barley was already an advanced crop that had been heavily domesticated.

” ‘These 6,000 year-old grains are time capsules, you have a genetic state that was frozen 6,000 years ago. This tells us barley 6,000 years ago was already a very advanced crop and clearly different from the wild barley,’ Dr Nils Stein of the IPK Plant Genetics institute in Germany told BBC News.

“He added: ‘Already 6,000 years ago the barley fields may have looked very similar to barley that is grown today.’…

“…As well as providing a detailed insight into the archaeology and history of this ancient crop, the seeds could provide the key to ensuring successful reintroduction of genetic variation in modern day species….”
(BBC News)

That doesn’t bother me, partly because I remember when quite a few folks thought science and technology would solve all our problems; or at least make “the future” a magical place.

Now that we’re living in “the future,” it’s easier to find folks who fear that science and technology will destroy us all; after killing all the cute animals. I think that’s as silly as the old ‘science will solve all problems’ attitude.

Science and technology aren’t transgressions: they’re tools. Ethics apply, but studying this universe and using that knowledge to make new tech is part of being human. It’s part of our job. (Catechism, 2292–2296, 2402–2405, 2456)

Re-Diversifying

Tweaking a wild grass like barley let folks spend time developing things like writing, bronze tools, and barley beer: which I think is okay. (July 10, 2016)

Over the last several millennia, we got really good at fine-tuning domestic plants and animals.

The good news is that our harvests brought in high-quality barley, wheat, and potatoes.

The bad news is that by now quite a few domesticated critters are monocultures: pretty close to clones of each other. We got things like the Great Famine (Ireland) when a ‘clone crop’ caught a disease and died.

It’s not entirely bad news, though. We’re learning a great deal about how genetics works: including potato blight‘s coding. That’s Phytophthora infestans, for folks who like scientific/Latin names for microcritters.

The name for that sort of name is Binomial nomenclature, which goes back to Carl Linnaeus.2

There’s a great deal left to learn, too, but I’m reasonably confident that we’ll develop ways to re-diversify barley, potatoes, and goats.

More than you may want or need to know about:

2. Testing a DNA Sequencer in Space


(From NASA, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)

“DNA sequencer sent to space station”
BBC News (July 18, 2016)

“Nasa has sent a DNA sequencer to the International Space Station in an effort to help astronauts monitor their own health.

“A SpaceX cargo ship sent the sequencer into orbit on Monday, along with other items for the crew.

“It was developed by the UK-based company Oxford Nanopore Technologies.

“The device is designed to show whether DNA sequencing is possible in microgravity….”

NASA calls the experiment “Biomolecule Sequencer:”

“…The objectives of Biomolecule Sequencer are to (1) provide proof-of-concept for the functionality and (2) evaluate crew operability of a DNA sequencer in the space environment. The immediate capabilities from the sequencer are, but are not limited to, in-flight microbial identification for crew and vehicle health assessments….”
(NASA)

The rest of NASA’s page is informative, but a trifle on the dry side.

The facts are straightforward enough. If this gadget works as expected, folks on the ISS won’t have to send samples down and wait for lab results. Sounds like a good idea to me.

That didn’t stop me from wondering if someone’s glanced at the headlines after watching Leviathan, Gattaca, and Babylon A.D. — and started writing a screenplay about genetically-engineered game show hosts, NASA, and international corporations.

3. First Farmers, DNA, and Origins


(From Thinkstock, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
(“The new study analysed the genomes of early farmers from Iran’s Zagros mountains”
(BBC News))

“First farmers had diverse origins, DNA shows”
(July 15, 2016)

“Analysis of DNA from some of the world’s first farmers shows that they had surprisingly diverse origins.

“Researchers compared the genomes of ancient Neolithic skeletons from across the Near East, where farming began.

“The results shed light on a debate over whether farming spread out from a single source in the region, or whether multiple farmer groups spread their technology across Eurasia.

“The findings by an international team appear in the journal Science….”

These farmers lived in part of the Zagros Mountains that’s now in Iran. The earliest of them lived around the year 8000 BC, the others from roughly 7450 to 7100 BC.

Their genes were more than a bit like folks in today’s Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran: and Sardinia, an island off Italy.


(From Broushaki1 et al., via Science, used w/o permission.)
(Map showing how descendants of these farmers settled in other parts of the world.)

I’m interested, but not particularly surprised, that descendants of these farmers traveled around over the next 10 millennia. Folks move for many reasons: but sooner or later, we’ll head for the horizon and settle somewhere else.

My ancestors didn’t arrive in central North America until about a century back, after a long layover in northwestern Europe, and that’s — you guessed it — another topic.

Or maybe not so much.

My family tree has roots in southern Norway — we’re the short, dark-haired Norwegians — and the northwest part of the British Isles. That overlaps areas where folks from the Zagros Mountains settled, which gives me a personal interest in their story.

More:

  • “Early Neolithic genomes from the eastern Fertile Crescent”
    Farnaz Broushaki1, Mark G Thomas, Vivian Link, Saioa López, Lucy van Dorp, Karola Kirsanow1, Zuzana Hofmanová, Yoan Diekmann, Lara M. Cassidy, David Díez-del-Molino, Athanasios Kousathanas, Christian Sell, Harry K. Robson, Rui Martiniano, Jens Blöcher1, Amelie Scheu1, Susanne Kreutzer, Ruth Bollongino, Dean Bobo, Hossein Davudi, Olivia Munoz, Mathias Currat, Kamyar Abdi,, Fereidoun Biglari, Oliver E. Craig, Daniel G Bradley, Stephen Shennan, Krishna R Veeramah, Marjan Mashkour, Daniel Wegmann, Garrett Hellenthal, Joachim Burger; Science (July 14, 2016)

Last week’s ‘science’ post:

1 I take Sacred Scripture seriously. (Catechism, 101-133)

I also realize that cultures have changed in the 26 centuries since Deuteronomy was written.

” ‘When you build a new house, put a parapet around the roof; otherwise, if someone falls off, you will bring bloodguilt upon your house.

“1 ‘You shall not sow your vineyard with two different kinds of seed; if you do, its produce shall become forfeit, both the crop you have sown and the yield of the vineyard.

“You shall not plow with an ox and an ass harnessed together.”
(Deuteronomy 22:8–10)

2 Carl Linnaeus published “Systema Naturae” in 1735.

Those were exciting times.

In 1778 Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon published his “Les époques de la nature,” saying that Earth was about 75,000 years old. He’d measured how fast iron cooled in his laboratory. The Sorbonne condemned Leclerc’s ideas, and he issued a retraction.

Physicist William Thomson, using similar methods in 1862, calculated an age of Earth at somewhere between 20,000,000 and 400,000,000 years. That was pretty good work, considering that scientists didn’t know about heat from radioactive decay, and effects of convection currents in Earth’s mantle yet.

This sort of thing fascinates me. Your experience may vary.

Posted in Science News | Tagged , , , , , | 6 Comments

Art, Truth, and Reflecting

Posted on July 17, 2016 by Brian H. Gill


(“Not All Times” – posters, art prints, greeting cards, and postcards available on DeviantArt.com.)

“l’art pour l’art,” “Art for art’s sake,” popped up in the early 19th century.

The idea is that “the only ‘true’ art, is divorced from any didactic, moral, or utilitarian function.” George Sand, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Chinua Achebe, said it was an empty phrase, self-contradictory, and Eurocentric, respectively. (Wikipedia)

I think it’s a silly idea: at least when applied to anything other than doodling to pass the time.

Come to think of it, in that case creating the doodles is meant to pass time.

At another extreme, there’s the idea that art must be ‘relevant’ — serve the state, be useful in worship, or be ‘uplifting.’

I won’t go that far, either: particularly if it means “art” must be propaganda or persuasion pieces like Currier’s “Drunkard’s Progress” over there.

That sort of thing can backfire, like “Reefer Madness,” and I talked about that last week. (July 10, 2016)

Then there’s sacred art. We’ve two millennia of traditions (lower-case “t”) expressing “…in images the same Gospel message that Scripture communicates by words….” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1159-1162)

Taking Tradition with a capital “T” seriously doesn’t mean trying to live as if it’s still the 1st, 11th, or 19th century, and that’s another topic. (Catechism, 75-83, 1200-1206)

Facets

The stuff I make, like Hangar 7, isn’t even close to being sacred art, which doesn’t bother me. That’s because I try to show some facet of truth and beauty in each picture.

Some, like Night Shift and Inventory, aren’t particularly pretty: but I paid attention to principles of symmetry and composition, and the images may resonate with a viewer’s memories.

Then again, maybe not.

Art and Being Human

Oddly enough, although I think art should involve truth and beauty; every picture is, in a sense, a lie.

René Magritte‘s “La trahison des images/The Treachery of Images,” for example, isn’t a pipe. It’s an image of a pipe — and I am not going to get sidetracked by Plato’s theory of forms, virtual reality, and metaphysics.

Not today, anyway.

I was going somewhere with this. Let me think – – – got it!

Truth is very important:

“‘You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.”
(Exodus 20:16)
“‘Again you have heard that it was said to your ancestors, “Do not take a false oath, but make good to the Lord all that you vow.””
(Matthew 5:33)

I’m pretty sure that representational art isn’t ‘lying,’ since folks I’ve known can easily tell the difference between a picture and the real thing: just as most folks realize that saying “a cat” isn’t the same as a cat.

And that gets me into communication theory: never mind.

Not everyone is an artist, but creating art is part of being human:

“…art is a distinctively human form of expression; beyond the search for the necessities of life which is common to all living creatures, art is a freely given superabundance of the human being’s inner riches. Arising from talent given by the Creator and from man’s own effort, art is a form of practical wisdom….”
(Catechism, 2501)

I think art is important, but it shouldn’t be the most important thing in my life:

“…To the extent that it is inspired by truth and love of beings, art bears a certain likeness to God’s activity in what he has created. Like any other human activity, art is not an absolute end in itself, but is ordered to and ennobled by the ultimate end of man.”
(Catechism, 2501)

There’s more to say, but that’ll wait for other posts. For now, I’ll add a few quotes and call it a day.

Artists, Icons, and Reflecting Divine Beauty

From a letter to artists:

“None can sense more deeply than you artists, ingenious creators of beauty that you are, something of the pathos with which God at the dawn of creation looked upon the work of his hands. A glimmer of that feeling has shone so often in your eyes when—like the artists of every age—captivated by the hidden power of sounds and words, colours and shapes, you have admired the work of your inspiration, sensing in it some echo of the mystery of creation with which God, the sole creator of all things, has wished in some way to associate you.”
(Pope St. John Paul II (April 4, 1999))

About icons and sacred images:

“…Art for art’s sake, which only refers to the author, without establishing a relationship with the divine world, does not have its place in the Christian concept of the icon. No matter what style is adopted, all sacred art must express the faith and hope of the Church. The tradition of the icon shows that the artist must be conscious of fulfilling a mission of service to the Church….”
(“Duodecimum Saeculum,” Pope St. John Paul II (December 4, 1987))

Art and being human:

“…Art certainly must be listed among the noblest manifestations of human genius. Its purpose is to express in human works the infinite divine beauty of which it is, as it were, the reflection. Hence that outworn dictum ‘art for art’s sake’ entirely neglects the end for which every creature is made. Some people wrongly assert that art should be exempted entirely from every rule which does not spring from art itself. Thus this dictum either has no worth at all or is gravely offensive to God Himself, the Creator and Ultimate End.

“Since the freedom of the artist is not a blind instinct to act in accordance with his own whim or some desire for novelty, it is in no way restricted or destroyed, but actually ennobled and perfected, when it is made subject to the divine law….”
(“Musicae Sacrae,” Pope Pius XII (December 25, 1955))

Sources:

Posted in Being an Artist, Being Catholic | Tagged , , | 2 Comments