15AR20-32
( - previous issue - )
AR 20:32 - Jehovah's Witnesses, and what might have been
Apologia Report 20:32 (1,261)
September 10, 2015
In this issue:
CULTURE - online trolling, sin ... and business strategy
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES - recent Pew study supports perceptions of a built-in, long-term growth handicap
ORIGINS - where the "boundary between science and speculation has been entirely washed away"
PHILOSOPHY - John Warwick Montgomery, still in the game
------
PLEASE NOTE: Our office will be closed for next two weeks. Look for Apologia Report to resume the week beginning September 20.
---
CULTURE
This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture, by Whitney Phillips [1] -- "a lecturer in the Department of Communications at Humboldt State University offers a fascinating and insightful look at the phenomenon of online trolling - the abusive, often hateful and hate-filled posts and contents on social media intended to insult, rile, and offend. Skeptical of the common perception that trolls are deviant anomalies in the online world, Phillips argues that they are in fact very much a part of, and product of, culturally sanctioned impulses. Phillips describes the relationship between trolling and sensationalist corporate media, noting that for trolls, exploitation is a fun pastime; for media [think paparazzi - RP], it's a business strategy. Phillips offers an incisive look at the culture and motivations of online trolls - a ubiquitous subject online but one that has received scant scholarly attention." Skeptical Inquirer, Jul/Aug '15, p57. [6]
For a bit of related *pre-social* media history that's closer to home, consider David Aikman's 2007 article, "Attack Dogs of Christendom," which reflects upon the harsh words frequently employed in disputes within Christian online environments that are "so drenched in sarcasm and animosity that an agnostic, or a follower of another faith tradition interested in what it means to become a Christian, might be permanently disillusioned." Aikman muses that "No attribute to civilized life seems more under attack than civility." Christianity Today, Aug '07, p52.
---
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES
In a recent email exchange which found its way to our office, after examining the Pew Research Center's recent "Religious Landscape Study" <www.goo.gl/OH8XHs> Joel Groat (Director of Ministries for the Institute for Religious Research <irr.org>) noted that "it appears the JW religion appeals to those who are of a lower income and are less-well educated." IRR Executive Director Rob Bowman added that the study's findings support the understanding that "the JW religion actually fosters a lifestyle that includes less education and lower incomes. This is because JWs are taught that Armageddon is around the corner and that long-term careers and significant engagement in the culture are pointless and even unfaithful to Jehovah." (If this were not the case, it's difficult to imagine how much larger the influence of this movement would be. - RP)
From the study:
Jehovah's Witnesses, Age
34% = 30-49, 29% = 50-64, 23% = 65 & up, 15% = 18-29
Jehovah's Witnesses, Gender
65% = female
Jehovah's Witnesses, by State
% of adults in each state who are Jehovah's Witness:
WY = 3%, all others ~1% or less
Income Distribution among Jehovah's Witnesses
% of Jehovah's Witnesses who have a household income of ...
34% = < $30K, 4% = $100K and up
Educational Distribution among Jehovah's Witnesses
% of Jehovah's Witnesses who have completed ...
63% = HS or less, 9% = college, 3% = post grad
---
ORIGINS
In his review of God's Planet by Owen Gingerich [2] for First Things <www.goo.gl/WlsT0V>, Stephen M. Barr (professor of physics at the University of Delaware) reflects on the tendency to view science and religion as "separate domains, [which] deal with different questions.... Some religions make claims about matters on which science has something to say. And some scientific discoveries are relevant to important philosophical questions. So theology cannot be walled off from science. But it is also the case, as Owen Gingerich shows in this set of lectures, that science itself is often influenced by wider currents of thought. ...
"God's Planet consists of three lectures Gingerich gave at Gordon College in 2013 as the Herrmann Lectures on Faith and Science. The first two deal with the theories of Copernicus and Darwin. The third ranges over several questions in modern cosmology." (Visit <www.goo.gl/0WTMGK> for videos of all three.)
It is in the third lecture that Gingerich shows how "the domains of science, philosophy, and theology again overlap. ... The lesson of the Copernican controversy, for [some physicists], was that science must avoid any trace of anthropocentrism, such as the idea that we live in a special part of the universe. This was formulated as the 'Copernican Principle,' according to which all regions of the universe must be qualitatively alike. ...
"The issue of anthropocentrism looms large in two other much-debated questions that Gingerich discusses toward the end of his book: Is there intelligent life elsewhere in the universe? And are the laws of physics 'fine-tuned' to make such life possible? This latter idea is often called the 'Anthropic Principle.' Ironically, it was Fred Hoyle who discovered one of the most famous and impressive examples of 'anthropic fine-tuning': He showed that if a certain property of the carbon-12 nucleus were not precisely what it is, the universe would have very little carbon, an element crucial for life. This led Hoyle, once an outspoken atheist, to say, 'A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology,' to make life possible. ...
"Nevertheless, most physicists remain hostile both to anthropic explanations and to the multiverse idea as untestable and therefore not belonging in science." Barr concludes that "in some areas, the boundary between science and speculation has been entirely washed away. Science began with philosophical speculation twenty-five centuries ago, and it seems likely that it will end in the same place."
---
PHILOSOPHY
While on "a recent perambulation," John Warwick Montgomery (Department of Theology and Philosophy, Concordia University) picked up a fourth edition copy of John Hospers' long-lived textbook Introduction to Philosophical Analysis [3] and found it a classic example of "how philosophers go wrong" regarding its discussion of miracle evidence.
He explains that the text's "philosophy of religion section ... provides an opportunity to see the kinds of endemic error rampant in secular attempts to discount the value of miracle evidence supporting religious claims," examining it in detail. Philosophia Christi, 17:1 - 2015, pp199-203.
-------
SOURCES: Monographs
1 - This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture, by Whitney Phillips (MIT Prs, 2015, hardcover, 256 pages) <www.goo.gl/QsyLFE>
2 - God's Planet, by Owen Gingerich (Harvard Univ Prs, 2014, hardcover: 192 pages) <www.goo.gl/oKyGCj>
3 - An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis (4th Edition), by John Hospers (Pearson, 1996, paperback, 282 pages) <www.goo.gl/2PbPt5>
------
( - next issue - )