Monthly Archives: June 2017

Vince Staples burns through nihilism and house beats on ‘Big Fish … – Mic

Posted: June 29, 2017 at 11:00 am

Vince Staples is the hip-hop equivalent of a great character actor moonlighting as a prestige leading man. This is not a slight on the rapper, but an observation: Despite his current rep as a wisecracking TV personality and celebrated everyman emcee, Staples, the 23-year-old from Long Beach, is hard to pin down. He entered the public sphere via the coattails of Odd Future's early shock-raps; he dabbled in Earl Sweatshirts dim aesthetic around the time of his Shyne Coldchain series of mixtapes, in the first half of this decade; he graduated to high-def gangsta rap with his late-2014 EP Hell Can Wait; and he was then cast as a Kanye-esque visionary with the double-disc creation myth Summertime '06, his universally acclaimed 2015 full-length debut.

His nimble voice allows him to slide in the pocket of most beats, a Trojan horse tactic that sneaks his straightforward and poignant songwriting onto all kinds of songs. (His 2016 EP, Prima Donna, existed mostly as a rapping exercise, rifling through as many styles as Staples could muster). More recently, he floated atop a dramatic Clams Casino beat on the producer's 2016 LP, 32 Levels, and on Gorillaz song earlier this year and was equally impressive on both.

Given how familiar fans are with Staples' versatility by now, it's no small feat that Big Fish Theory, his second full-length album, surprises as much as it does. Here, the Vince Staples experience is condensed and sharpened to startling cohesion 12 tracks that span just over 36 minutes, including a smattering of interludes and set to a new kind of backdrop, one filled with mutating trip-hop and house-inspired beats.

In a recent Reddit AMA, Staples said, "Hip-hop is electronic. Go listen to 'Planet Rock,'" a truth that nonetheless doesn't quite prepare you for the album's jarring, Tricky-esque opener "Crabs in a Bucket." Staples is right hip-hop isn't all break beats and soul samples. But the gulf between the type of music that Staples has made for most of his career thus far and the wide, jittery electronic canvases that make up Big Fish Theory is striking. The new direction almost recalls Danny Brown's Old, the 2013 record that followed the Detroit rapper's career-defining breakout, 2011's XXX. With Old, Brown attempted to unite the two modes that then dominated him as an artist: the psyche-baring lyricist and the hedonistic, festival-crowd-pleasing emcee who wants to dabble in EDM. Big Fish Theory isn't as cynical as that record Vince isn't making pill-popping party music but the wildly divergent sounds on this album can leave fans feeling detached from the guy who wrote tightly woven, comparatively traditional hip-hop songs like "Blue Suede" and "Norf Norf."

Still, Staples remains a confident, engaging rapper. The record's almost-title track, "Big Fish," is a minimal, disembodied banger with a Juicy J hook that feels dropped in from another song, emphasizing an alienation and dread that flows throughout the entire album. "I was going crazy not too long ago/ Women problems every morning like the Maury show/ Swimming upstream while I'm trying to keep the bread from the sharks/ Made me want to put the hammer to my head," he raps, presumably a call-back to the headspace he occupied on 2016's paranoid Prima Donna. On the jumpy, Rick Ross-interpolating "Homage," Staples free-associates to a head-turning degree: "Won't no label have me in limbo/ Too much tempo, in Richard Prince mode/ Robert Longo, black as the Congo/ Pay me pronto or it's no convo."

There are other moments where everything snaps into stunning clarity: "745" is one, the album's most straightforward slice of swagger-rap, in which producer Jimmy Edgar's burping electronic beat emulates G-funk with crayons which is to say it's a worthy imitation, but you can sense something's off. "Yeah Right," the eyebrow-raising collaboration with art-pop auteur Sophie and Kendrick Lamar, mostly sounds how you think it would: Sophie's cartoonishly boisterous beat vaporizes the track, while Kendrick is on autopilot mode, raising goosebumps before getting out of the way.

After growing accustomed to the album's amorphous textures, the impression that lingers most is just how sharp Staples sounds on every track. But lyrically, this effort doesn't feel as memorable as his earlier work. "Samo," a Basquiat reference and another Sophie production, is trap music fit for the uncanny valley age, and it's among my favorite songs because Staples is able to create a compelling argument for the enduring allure of the goofy PC Music aesthetic, which Sophie helped establish. On most of the album, a beat's dynamism overwhelms how nuanced a writer Staples is. R&B crooner and longtime collaborator Kilo Kish takes up a large amount of real estate as the album's co-star, appearing on a number of outros and saving Staples from completely dissolving into Big Fish Theory's gumbo of sounds. Appearances from Bon Iver's Justin Vernon, Damon Albarn and A$AP Rocky are largely unrecognizable.

Vince's current ambitious muse is commendable, yet Big Fish Theory's short runtime suggests that is something like a purge. This sort of feels like it's Vince getting out from underneath the long-gestating hype for a proper follow-up to Summertime '06 like how Kendrick fired off this year's streamlined Damn. a scant two years after 2015's massive To Pimp a Butterfly.

The late Amy Winehouse is quoted in the intro to "Alyssa Interlude," from an interview featured in the 2015 documentary Amy: "Sometimes you have to get all the crap out the way before you hit the good stuff, then you're like, OK, I'm getting good stuff now." Whatever led him to this dizzying, defiant new direction, Big Fish Theory is mostly good stuff that leaves you awaiting better stuff to come.

Mic has ongoing music coverage. Follow our main music hub here.

Read more here:

Vince Staples burns through nihilism and house beats on 'Big Fish ... - Mic

Posted in Nihilism | Comments Off on Vince Staples burns through nihilism and house beats on ‘Big Fish … – Mic

A brave new world none of us can see – Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier

Posted: at 11:00 am

Much analysis of Yuval Harari's brilliant new book "Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow" focuses on the harrowing dystopia he anticipates. In this vision, a small, geeky elite gains the ability to use biological and cyborg engineering to become something beyond human. It may "upgrade itself step by step, merging with robots and computers in the process, until our descendants will look back and realize that they are no longer the kind of animal that wrote the Bible [or] built the Great Wall of China." This would necessarily involve the concentration of data, wealth and power, creating "unprecedented social inequality."

"In the early 21st century," argues Harari, "the train of progress is again pulling out of the station -- and this will probably be the last train ever to leave the station called Homo sapiens."

Few of us Homo sapiens are anxious to take such a trip, apart from some "dataists" who pant for the apocalypse. But, as Harari repeatedly insists, the prophet's job is really an impossible one. Someone living in the 12th century would know most of what the 13th century might have to offer. Given the pace of change in our time, the 22nd century is almost unimaginable.

Yet the predictions are not the most interesting bits of the book. It is important primarily for what it says about the present. For the last few hundred years, in Harari's telling, there has been a successful alliance between scientific thought and humanism -- a philosophy placing human feelings, happiness and choice at the center of the ethical universe. With the death of God and the denial of transcendent rules, some predicted social chaos and collapse. Instead, science and humanism (with an assist from capitalism) delivered unprecedented health and comfort. And now they promise immortality and bliss.

This progress has involved an implicit agreement, "In exchange for power," says Harari, "the modern deal expects us to give up meaning." Many (at least in the West) have been willing to choose antibiotics and flat-screen TVs over the mysticism and morality behind door No. 2.

It is Harari's thesis, however, that the alliance of science and humanism is breaking down, with the former consuming the latter. The reason is reductionism in various forms. Science, argues Harari, revealed humans as animals on the mental spectrum, then as biochemical processes, and now as outdated organic algorithms. We have "opened up the Sapiens black box" and "discovered there neither soul, nor free will, nor 'self' -- but only genes, hormones and neurons."

This rather depressing argument is well presented, with a few caveats. Harari's breezy style is sometimes in tension with his utter nihilism. Here is a moral rule: You can either be cheery or you can describe the universe as an empty, echoing void where human beings have no inherent value. But you can't do both.

And Harari's treatment of religion is, charitably put, superficial. He seems to think that the absence of an immortal soul can be proved by dissection. Scientists have "looked into every nook in our hearts and every cranny in our brains. But they have so far discovered no magic spark." For future reference, religious believers don't generally view the liver or the pineal gland as the seat of the soul. And when Harari claims that religion is "no longer a source of creativity" and "makes little difference," it is tempting to shout "Martin Luther King Jr." at your Kindle.

But Harari has one great virtue: intellectual honesty. Unlike some of the new atheists, he recognizes that science is incapable of providing values, including the humanistic values of Locke, Rousseau and Jefferson. "Even Richard Dawkins, Steven Pinker and the other champions of the new scientific worldview refuse to abandon liberalism," Harari observes. "After dedicating hundreds of erudite pages to deconstructing the self and the freedom of will, they perform breathtaking intellectual somersaults that miraculously land them back in the 18th century."

Harari relentlessly follows the logic of reductionism as it sweeps away individualism, equality, justice, democracy and human rights -- even human imagination. "Yes, God is a product of the human imagination, but human imagination in turn is the product of biochemical algorithms."

This is the paradox and trial of modernity. As humans reach for godhood, they are devaluing what is human. "Omnipotence is in front of us, almost within our reach," Harari says, "but below us yawns the abyss of complete nothingness." A humane future will require someone to offer a bridge across the chasm.

Read the original here:

A brave new world none of us can see - Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier

Posted in Nihilism | Comments Off on A brave new world none of us can see – Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier

London’s experimental new ice-creams and sorbets – Evening Standard

Posted: at 11:00 am

It is an edible optical illusion. The latest ruse from Dominique Ansel looks like a kiwi fruit, its fuzzy on the outside and tangy sharp within. But this is no virtuous fruit, its hedonism in the form of chocolate and ice cream what more would you expect from the creator of the Cronut and winner of the Worlds Best Pastry Chef 2017?

In a month of record temperatures, ice cream has been an essential part of diets. Iced coffees popularity is waning because it takes too long to make you will be the most hated person in the caf as a queue forms behind you. Instead, London is making advances with iced cream.

As well as the kiwi fruit theres black ice cream and frozen eclairs. Ansel describes his dessert as a sorbet for summer.

Kiwi has a unique taste and texture a sweet, slightly tart and juicy centre, that works really well as a cold, refreshing sorbet, says Ansel. I recreated that fuzzy skin with a layer of milk chocolate so that its actually edible, and rather than actual kiwi seeds we use poppy seeds, which adds a little extra bite.

Unique: Dominique 's Ansel kiwi ice cream

Meanwhile, the clair-specialists at the Melba coffee shop on the Strand have concluded that ice cream is the ideal way to improve the French classic. Savoy executive chef Ludwig Hely is letting customers choose from a range of mouth-watering ice cream flavours and toppings to personalise their Icclairs, which are (as the name suggests) an ice cream and clair mash-up.

When the redesigned Melba reopens on Monday, customers can choose from popping candy, cookie dough and candyfloss toppings (along with more grown-up options such as caramelised hazelnuts and chocolate pearls) to lash over scoops of dark chocolate, Sicilian pistachio and wild berry ice cream.

The endless variety means there are plenty of excuses for repeat visits, and if the Icclairs taste anywhere near as good as they look then youre in for a good dessert.

Similarly eye-catching is Judes pitch-black coconut ice cream, flavoured with coconut ash. This emo sounding ingredient creates an intense coconut flavour but the only way to know for sure is to head to the Pear Tree Caf in Battersea to try it yourself. Its bound to make you stand out from the next person with a 99.

Its possible to have a perfectly varied diet of different ice creams. Summer has never been so cool.

View post:

London's experimental new ice-creams and sorbets - Evening Standard

Posted in Hedonism | Comments Off on London’s experimental new ice-creams and sorbets – Evening Standard

Liturgical Muggles and Losing the Sacramental Imagination – Patheos (blog)

Posted: at 10:59 am

This post is the first in a new series on the Sacramental Imagination and is designed both to celebrate 20 Years of Harry Potter and to whet the appetite.

This week marks the 20th anniversary of J.K. Rowlings Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone. For starters, Alan Jacobs of Wheaton wrote a delightful piece on Harry Potter in 2000 and the piece was recently re-published by First Things. Anyone who knows me will know that I am a diehard-Potter fan. I discovered the books early into the series, I believe it was in between the publishing of Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkaban. Since my adolescence, I have read the books with vigor, attended 4 midnight book releases, watched the movies with a mixture of joy and zealous criticism, listened to the books while I paint, and most recently I attended Harry Potter in Concert with the Kansas City Symphony at the Kauffman Center. I feel a bit like Paul at this point in giving my credentialsonly slightly jokingbut I do this to suggest that I am not some squib jumping on the HP bandwagon.

I was listening to the original NPR announcement of Harry Potter this morningit can be found hereand something grabbed my attention. Margot Adler predicted that the word muggle would become a big thing in common language and then shared an audio clip from Rowling discussing it further. Within the HP series the term muggle simply means non-magical person. However, Rowling shared that she began receiving letters and emails from fans who began expanding the term for modern, non-literary usage. In this form the term came to mean something like dull and unimaginative person. And I cannot tell you why, but it was like a lightning bolt scared my brain (see what I did there) and it got me thinking:

What if there are liturgical muggles? What if the loss of the sacramental imagination is like the difference between magic and muggle (or at least squib)? I suppose the easiest place to begin is first with the sacramental imagination and its loss.

Before I go on, please hear: I am not suggesting that the liturgy is an actual form of magic or that words spoken over bread and wine is a spell or an enchantment like Stupefy or Avada Kedavra. I am not looking to debate hocus pocus (hoc est enim corpus meum) or medieval superstitions. If you find yourself arguing with me on these points then youve missed my meaning entirely. The reader may continue

We are heirs of the Enlightenment. Our collective sacramental imagination has shifted over the course of 2,000 years. The ways in which we interpret information, tell stories, share experiences, and view the world today as Christians in the democratic, capitalist West is different from the earliest centuries of the church in the East and in Rome, it is different from the medieval church, it is different from the overwhelming majority of church history. Why does this matter?

Because we no longer actively view the world as being full of Gods glory, imbued with his presence, overwhelmed by his love, rich with encounters of him, Gerard Manley Hopkins lyric, The earth is charged with the grandeur of God makes no sense to us. Our imaginations, our sense of awe and wonder, our belief in the movement and action of the Holy Spirit is greatly diminished. There is a reason that Harry Potter, Lewis Narnia, the Force in Star Wars, and many similar stories capture our imaginations. Its because it is so other than what we know and what we are used to. Its not that these stories view magic positively but that they show a world teeming with possibilities, of a world where the supernatural is bumping against the natural regularly, where things arent always as they seem.

And that brings me to the liturgy

Our post-Enlightenment, Protestant worship has seen a minimalist approach to liturgy and a dwindling view of enchantment, wonder, awe, and terror before God. These have been replaced with rationalism, with Bible, with Sermon. In many Protestant, evangelical churches the sermon is the centerpiece. Rather than a dually climactic service where Word and Table play off of and interpret each other, these worship services are almost exclusively comprised of worship songs and a long, highly intellectual (though not always) sermon. The mind is what matters here, and how it affects the hands and the feet afterward, but the body is left relatively alone.

Enter the liturgical muggle. Remember that I am using muggle as a dull and unimaginative person.

This is the subtle shift from sacramental worship to rational worship, from Word and Sacrament to more and more Word. I think, and I may be mistaken, that it is obvious how this shift would result in making liturgical muggles. But those in more historical, liturgical conditions arent entirely off the hook. This isnt an us vs. them situation. It is entirely possible to be(come) a liturgical muggle within the liturgy because, for me, liturgical muggles are those who have lost the sacramental imagination.

Even amid liturgical worship, we have lost a sacramental consciousness, awareness, and imagination as the sacraments have less and less to do with reality and more to do with vague and ethereal signs and symbols. Baptism becomes more about the confession of faith (or covenant promise) than the reality of and individual being washed in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, of being made a new person, of being anointed with the Holy Spirit. Or Eucharist is about nourishment for the spiritual journey, or a political act of the highest degree (dont get me started), or a sign of socio-economic equality in the Kingdom of God and not about bread and wine becoming Body and Blood, joining the worship of the cosmos in the heavenly throne room. I could go on and on and on here, but suffice it today that for liturgical muggles water, oil, bread, and wine are always just that. There is no imagination, there is no magic (be careful here) per se. Worship is dull and unimaginative because it is focused exclusively on what our minds can handle and conceive rather than that God is doing in and among us, breaking into our midst regularly, sacramentally.

In my opinion, and I say this with all sincerity and humility, we need to guard against making more liturgical muggles and losing even more of the sacramental imagination. Our Christian worldview needs to shift, and shift pretty dramatically. A deeper, richer, more robust view of the Sacraments will help us avoid becoming liturgical muggles. At the end of the day, rationalist worship or rationalist Christianity is a separation of mind from body, of head and heart, of brain and soul. It may not appear that way, it certainly wasnt intended that way, but it is its own form of escapism, of isolationism, of segregation. The reintegration of these elements, the reintroduction of Sacramental teaching and imagination will result in a holistic, fully-formed, fully informed, fully alive worship and a Christian spirituality that is committed to working within the world we inhabit rather than railing against it constantly.

See the rest here:

Liturgical Muggles and Losing the Sacramental Imagination - Patheos (blog)

Posted in Rationalism | Comments Off on Liturgical Muggles and Losing the Sacramental Imagination – Patheos (blog)

Do we still believe in free speech? Only until we disagree – Kansas City Star

Posted: at 10:58 am


Kansas City Star
Do we still believe in free speech? Only until we disagree
Kansas City Star
After a century of building free speech rights into our laws and culture, Americans are backing away from one of the country's defining principles. Set off by the nation's increasingly short fuse, students, politicians, teachers and parents are not ...

Read more:
Do we still believe in free speech? Only until we disagree - Kansas City Star

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on Do we still believe in free speech? Only until we disagree – Kansas City Star

1964 | A Libel Suit Yields a Vigorous Defense of Free Speech – New York Times

Posted: at 10:58 am

L. B. Sullivan, an elected commissioner in Montgomery who supervised the police department, sued The Times for defamation, even though he was not named in the advertisement. He sought $500,000 in damages, an amount equivalent to about $4 million today.

The lawsuit arose, his lawyers said, because of a wilful, deliberate and reckless attempt to portray in a full-page newspaper advertisement, for which the Times charged and was paid almost $5,000, rampant, vicious, terroristic and criminal police action in Montgomery, Alabama, to a nationwide public of 650,000.

Mr. Sullivan won his case in the Alabama courts but the matter wound up at the Supreme Court, where The Times and the free press generally won a stunning victory in 1964.

We consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wideopen, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials, the liberal Justice William J. Brennan Jr. wrote for the majority, which included Chief Justice Earl Warren.

The present advertisement, as an expression of grievance and protest on one of the major public issues of our time, would seem clearly to qualify for the constitutional protection, he continued. The question is whether it forfeits that protection by the falsity of some of its factual statements and by its alleged defamation of respondent.

Authoritative interpretations of the First Amendment guarantees have consistently refused to recognize an exception for any test of truth, whether administered by judges, juries or administrative officials and especially not one that puts the burden of providing truth on the speaker.

Justice Brennan noted that there is evidence that The Times published the advertisement without checking its accuracy against the news stories in The Timess own files.

But he went on to say, We think the evidence against The Times supports at most a finding of negligence in failing to discover the misstatements, and is constitutionally insufficient to show the recklessness that is required for a finding of actual malice.

Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, the publisher of The Times, welcomed the decision. The opinion of the Court makes freedom of the press more secure than ever before, he said.

He might well have said so. Heed Their Rising Voices may have paid greater dividends than any advertisement The Times has ever run.

See the rest here:
1964 | A Libel Suit Yields a Vigorous Defense of Free Speech - New York Times

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on 1964 | A Libel Suit Yields a Vigorous Defense of Free Speech – New York Times

Assembly deserves praise for free speech — Sandy Wedel – Madison.com

Posted: at 10:58 am

I am extremely proud of the Republicans in the Wisconsin Assembly, whichpassed the Campus Free Speech Act last week. I earned my master's degree from UW-Madison in 1973 and lived through many violent protests during my time there.

Violence and disruption are neither free speech nor intelligent. They are anti-intellectual and tyrannical. The kind of bullying that happened at Ben Shapiro's talk at UW last November is being tolerated in major universities across America these days. I am proud that the state of Wisconsin, in regards to my alma mater, has more common sense than that and has stood up for civility and true freedom of speech for everyone.

It should alarm us that the students with such hostility, intolerance and irrational thinking might some day be leaders in our country. Perhaps, if the Assembly's bill passes in the Senate and is signed into law, it will encourage those aggressive young people to learn more adult-like behavior.

Actions that prevent the free speech of others are not free speech. Remember the adage: "My right to swing my arm ends where your nose begins."

Sandy Wedel, Great Falls, Montana

Go here to read the rest:
Assembly deserves praise for free speech -- Sandy Wedel - Madison.com

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on Assembly deserves praise for free speech — Sandy Wedel – Madison.com

New Names for Old Gods – Patheos (blog)

Posted: at 10:58 am

The philosopher William James was one of the turn of the centurys greatest examiners of the religious experience, noting its varieties and studying its phenomena, albeit with the kind of distanced, unheated air characteristic of an academician of that era. But the psychologist Carl Jung was the thinker who intellectually legitimized the religious impulse as a constituent part of the human species.

Jung said that a fundamental part of life is an intense desire to know the divine, a yearning to experience that which is larger than the self. For modern man, a loss of the religious center resulted in all kinds of maladieselevated concerns to realize ambitions, inordinate delight over material possessions, anxiety over the retention of passing beauty, strength, grace, etc. Caretaking of the soul was a remedy for these things, though for modern man an acceptance of that fact proved difficult. Hence, neurosis.

Its not surprising that a being with so limited a life span and skill set, but with such unlimited imagination and intuition, would look up from his stone ax at some point and stare out into the horizon. The earliest evidence of worship seems to stretch back even as far as the Paleolithic, when burial rituals provided food and weapons for a type of transcendence for the deceased.

Adopting a burial itself, rather than abandonment, makes no sense except as a religious practice, if it was ever more than that at all. There might be modern hygienic reasons for caretaking of corpses, but that would unlikely have been a concern of ancient peoples, and even so there are easier ways to rid oneself of pestilent nuisances than burying them.

So there must have been some early concept of a spirit, one that could dissociate itself from the physical body. The idea of another life into which that spirit passedwhether or not it was conceived as eternalwas at least something that was in play from earliest history.

But contemporaneously with that concept is evidence of a totemism of some type, involving hybrid creatures, half-man and half-animal, as depicted on cave walls. So not only did the early worshipers have one of the essential notions of any religiontranscendence, as expressed through passagebut they also had anotherthe notion of a deity (atonement, another definitive notion, could be equally as old, depending on the reason sacrifices and scapegoating were practiced: as a means to appease the gods for sin, or as a means to flatter the gods for favors).

Eons passed, and the gods became plenteous. No longer was the bulbous-figured fertility goddess with enormous breasts the only shape that the divine took. Gods of all kinds appeared, and for all purposes. Gods associated with the cycles of life, with the passage of time, with joy and pleasure, and with fear and loathing, sprang forth to claim their due. And these gods claimed that due in the form of statuary and other means of depiction, which required obeisance. The gods couldnt very well remain out in the cold and heat, so they were given houses, or temples, and at that point mankind was at a place very near the place we currently possess.

The point of all this is to say that one aspect of the religious impulse Jung spoke of is the theophanic desirethe need for the god to manifest. Its not enough for the gods to have names and functions; they have to have faces. After all, we are sentient beings and ultimately cannot be contented with things that remain purely ghostly.

One of the telling features of our times is that the religious impulse in the first world has been transitioned, or transferred, to causese.g., the identification with certain political and environmental stances. In the first world, the vestiges of orthodox worship of a deity remain, of course, but more and more the majority of people profess a spirituality rather than a religiosity, one that rids itself of the traditional aspects that are at odds with the secular episteme.

So God has lost his face and bodyhas un-manifested, as it were. Now, god is often meant, if not written, with a little g, and is accompanied by a superfluity of pronouns to cover all bases. Its fair to say that the old practice of pantheism has returned, the finding of the godlike in all thingsparticularly seas and trees and bees, etc.with its attendant rituals of ecological adoration and stewardship.

But from the purely anthropological standpoint, I dont think it will last. Theres too much history that says otherwise. Witness New Zealands recent bestowal ofpersonhood upon the Whanganui River, the third largest in the country. Its importance to the natives is ancient, but this is the first time that a natural feature has been given equivalent rights with human beings.

Where it gets really interesting is the fact that the river will have guardians, who will for all intents and purposes enjoy the rights of the Whanganui and enforce obligations owed to it. They will, in a legal sense,bethe river when the river needs to leave its ancient banks, put on a suit, and go to the bank or to court.

Poseidon became the manifestation of the Sea, Aphrodite of Love, Artemis of the Hunt, and on and on. Whether they sprang from sea foam or erupted from a volcano, the gods eventually took a shape. And once they had, they expected and received their due from their disciples.

Is such obeisance really distinguishable from the recent theophany of the Whanganui, and the many gods that will doubtless join her/him/it in due timeEverest, Amazon, Eriewith their claims upon our consciences?

Considering the world we live in now, whos willing to bet against this happening? We may have phones and jets, but one wonders how fundamentally different we are from our forebears when it comes right down to things such as these. A.G. Harmon teaches Shakespeare, Law and Literature, Jurisprudence, and Writing at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. His novel, A House All Stilled, won the 2001 Peter Taylor Prize for the Novel.

Above image by Miguel Virkkunen Carvalho, used with permission under a Creative Commons License.

Continued here:
New Names for Old Gods - Patheos (blog)

Posted in Pantheism | Comments Off on New Names for Old Gods – Patheos (blog)

Science Finally Realizes Atheists Are More Close-Minded Than The Religious – The Daily Caller

Posted: at 10:57 am

New research has found what many conservatives have argued for years: Religious believers are more tolerant of differing viewpoints than atheists.

The study found that while atheists may like to think of themselves as more open-minded, theyre actually less tolerant of dissenting opinions than their religious counterparts.

The main message of the study is that closed-mindedness is not necessarily found only among the religious, Dr. Filip Uzarevic, a researcher at Catholic University of Louvain who co-authored the research, told PsyPost.

Uzarevicconfirmed thatthe religious and nonreligious each have their own particular targets of prejudice, but atheists and agnostics were generally less open todiffering opinions than Christians.

This contradicts long-standing findings of previous psychological research which found that the religious were more biased than atheists.

In our study, the relationship between religion and closed-mindedness depended on the specific aspect of closed-mindedness, Uzarevic said. Somewhat surprisingly, when it came to subtly measured inclination to integrate views that were diverging and contrary to ones own perspectives, it was the religious who showed more openness.

The study was based on 788 European adults, 445 of whom were either atheist or agnostic. The 255 of the remaining religious believers were of various Christian denominations, but the researchers also included 17 Muslims, 3 Jews and 17 Buddhists.

The idea started through noticing that, in public discourse, despite both the conservative/religious groups and liberal/secular groups showing strong animosity towards the opposite ideological side, somehow it was mostly the former who were often labeled as closed-minded, Uzarevic said. Moreover, such view of the secular being more tolerant and open seemed to be dominant in the psychological literature.

Uzarevic speculated that since the atheists in his study came from highly secularized and nonreligious Western Europe,they likely hadnt had a many opportunities to engage with religious believers, making them more intolerant.

Being interested in this topic, we started to discuss whether this is necessarily and always the case: Are the religious indeed generally more closed-minded, or would it perhaps be worthy of investigating the different aspects of closed-mindedness and their relationship with (non)religion, Uzarevic said.

Uzarevic also determined that strength of belief in either religion or atheism was directly correlated to how close-minded people were.

Follow Andrew on Twitter

Send tips toandrew@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact[emailprotected].

Go here to read the rest:
Science Finally Realizes Atheists Are More Close-Minded Than The Religious - The Daily Caller

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off on Science Finally Realizes Atheists Are More Close-Minded Than The Religious – The Daily Caller

NATO: We will do more to fight terrorism – Deutsche Welle

Posted: at 10:55 am

One of US President Donald Trump'srepetitive complaints about NATO was that the military alliancewasn't addressing what he considers the major threat facing the world: terrorism. In an evolution that was already underway, but quickened underthe harsh glare from Washington, the alliance has repackagedsome of its activities and taken new steps to maximize its counterterrorism contributions.

Traditionally, counterterrorism was not in NATO's job description. But neither was figuring out how to deal with "little green men" [masked, unmarked, and green-cladsoliders in the 2014 Ukraine crisis] or internet trolls. The alliance is evolving to respond not only togenuine new and hybrid threats, but also topublicexpectations of its role as a security provider.

NATO's new role

That NATO must take on un-envisioned roles isjust the way it is, explained Bruno Lete, a transatlantic fellow with the German Marshall Fund's Brussels office.

"NATO member states recognize this is not NATO's core business," he said. "Nevertheless the reality of today's threats require the alliance to think more creatively [about]how it can engage in this field as well, so I think it's positive that NATO tries to play a helpful role in counterterrorism, even if its contribution concerns mainly indirect measures."

The alliance has indeed made a dramatic shift in just the last couple of years. The most obvious example is in its approach to the US-led Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS [the US government's favoredacronym for the "Islamic State"].

In 2014, when the multinational coalitionwas created, some NATO allies were uncomfortable with the mere fact that the alliance'sheadquarters would beused for a coalition meeting. Germany in particular insisted that there would be no NATO connection to the effort; no NATO logos allowed in any media coverage,which was kept minimal. NATO officials explained repeatedly in the following yearsthat there was no "need" to join the coalition itself since all allies already belonged.

Not only that, NATO would remind everyone thatit was fully engaged leadingthe ongoing counterterrorism effort known as thewar in Afghanistan. NATO troops and partners are still going head-to-head with the Taliban and the relatively newly arrived IS fighters, andmore troops are still needed.

But with the added pressure from the Trump administration bearing down on NATO, arguments against joining the coalition were ultimately outweighed by the practical and political advantages, andlast month the alliance finally slid into a seat of its own at the coalition table.

Speaking on Wednesday, the day beforea defense ministerial meetings, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg touted the decision. "This not only sends a strong message of unity in the fight against terrorism," he said, "it also serves as a platform for practical cooperation. NATO is now fully integrated into the information-sharing and decision-making structures of the coalition." NATO had already agreed to a US request to make more use of the one AWACS aircraft allocated to coalition surveillance efforts.

Stoltenberg was also able to announce the activation of a new "Terrorism Intelligence Cell" within the recently created Intelligence Division that will help coordinate information and activities among allies. Other measures cited as counterterrorism contributions include expanded training of Iraqi forces andsoon-to-comeassistance for the UN-recognized Libyan government.

Daniel Keohane, a senior esearcher at the Center for Security Studies at ETH Zurich, says the steps are mostly cosmetic. "Part of this is NATO adapting to Trump, showing its worth on his priority issue of defeating ISIS," Keohane told DW. "It gives the new US president an easy political win to sell at home: 'see I got NATO to do more to fight ISIS'. But I don't yet see how this will greatly change how the allies are fighting ISIS outside of Europe."

Public insecurity about -- and US focus on -- the Islamic State has led NATO to include more counter-terrorism measures among its activities.

When it comes to fighting terrorism on its own territory, which is instinctively the priority of citizens in allied countries, the hurdles are also high for NATO to provide true added value. European governments are notoriously reluctant to share intelligence with each other, especially on issues as sensitive as terrorism, and do so almost exclusively bilaterally. Such issues remain in the hands of national governments, and within them, with police and security forces and the judicial branch.

Jan Techau, director of the Richard C. Holbrooke Forum for the Study of Diplomacy and Governance at the American Academy in Berlin, says the new counter-terrorism initiative are not entirely pointless but neither will they be particularly effective. His bigger point is that counter-terrorism should not be confused with NATO's core task of providing stability, nor should resources, including time and attention, be diverted to it.

"We should be debating other strategic issues including transatlantic solidarity," Techau told DW."We should not be discussing turning NATO into the primary agency for fighting terrorism,"

Techau says for NATO territory to truly be secure, innovations such as a new intelligence coordination cell inside alliance HQ won't help. "Transatlantic security ultimately is decided in the White House," he said. "And and so as long as there is lingering doubt about whether the person occupying the White House is fully dedicated to it or not, as long as that risk is still kind of looming in the background we do have at least a lingering crisis if not a real one."

Pew Research Center statistics from a poll taken this week shows high levels of doubt in the Trump Administration from NATO nations and beyond.

But perhaps theTrump pressure has helped the alliance in other ways. A separate Pew survey shows opinions of NATO have sharply risen on both sides of the Atlantic.

Go here to see the original:
NATO: We will do more to fight terrorism - Deutsche Welle

Posted in NATO | Comments Off on NATO: We will do more to fight terrorism – Deutsche Welle