I Speak of Dreams

Morton's Demon: It Explains So Much

This was originally written by Glenn Morton, about his growth from being a Young Earth Creationist (YEC). I've edited it to refer to Autism Is Vaccine Injury (AIVI)

The Talk.Origins Archive Post of the Month: February 2002.

When I was a YEC AIVI true believer, I had a demon that did similar things for me that Maxwell's demon did for thermodynamics. Morton's demon was a demon who sat at the gate of my sensory input apparatus and if and when he saw supportive evidence coming in, he opened the gate. But if he saw contradictory data coming in, he closed the gate. In this way, the demon allowed me to believe that I was right and to avoid any nasty contradictory data. Fortunately, I eventually realized that the demon was there and began to open the gate when he wasn't looking.

However, my conversations have made me aware that each a YEC AIVI true believer, is a victim of my demon. Morton's demon makes it possible for a person to have his own set of private facts which others are not privy to, allowing the a YEC AIVI true believer to construct a theory which is perfectly supported by the facts which the demon lets through the gate. And since these are the only facts known to the victim, he feels in his heart that he has explained everything. Indeed, the demon makes people feel morally superior and more knowledgeable than others.

The demon makes its victim feel very comfortable as there is no contradictory data in view. The demon is better than a set of rose colored glasses. The demon's victim does not understand why everyone else doesn't fall down and accept the victim's views. After all, the world is thought to be as the victim sees it and the demon doesn't let through the gate the knowledge that others don't see the same thing. Because of this, the victim assumes that everyone else is biased, or holding those views so that they can keep their job, or, in an even more devious attack by my demon, they think that their opponents are actually demon possessed themselves or sons of Satan. This is a devious demon!

Today: Spread the Word To End The Word

Today is a national day of campaigning to eliminate the use of the word "retarded" and its derivations as an epithet.  I took the pledge to eliminate the r-word from my vocabulary a few years ago.  I hope you will too.

New to me this year is The R-Word Reporter

The reason I started The R-Word Reporter was because we attend a lot of movies and I was tired of hearing the R-word ("retarded" for those who do not know) used consistently in many of the movies we were paying money to go and see.  I searched high and low on the internet for a place to try and find out whether or not the R-word was used and in which films. Unfortunately, I never found such a place and decided that it would be nice to have a place where I could compile this type of information for our family and for others who are also offended by the casual use of the R-word in pop culture.

You can follow @EndTheWord on twitter. If you like the badge, go to http://www.r-word.org/r-word-resources.aspx and pick your preferred badge.

I commend to you now the word,  numpty

Scottish usage: 
a) Someone who (sometimes unwittingly) by speech or action demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject or situation to the amusement of others. 

b) A good humoured admonition, a term of endearment 

c) A reckless, absent minded or unwise person

Large Network of Private Schools Pays $215,000 to Settle Lawsuit Alleging Discrimination Against Children with Disabilities

I don't know what this litigation will mean in the broader universe of independent and private schools that are non-profit.  As I understand it, private and independet schools have the right to be selective in their admissions; to set minimum admissions standards.  This ruling may apply to preschools only.  

Large Network of Private Schools Pays $215,000 to Settle Lawsuit Alleging Discrimination Against Children with Disabilities.

The Justice Department today announced the settlement of a lawsuit filed to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) against Nobel Learning Communities, Inc. (NLC), a private, for-profit entity that operates a nationwide network of more than 180 preschools, elementary schools and secondary schools.   These entities operate in the District of Columbia and in 15 states (Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia and Washington) under a variety of names, including Chesterbrook Academy, Merryhill School and Evergreen Academy, among others.    

 In its lawsuit, filed in April 2009 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Justice Department alleged that NLC violated Title III of the ADA by excluding from its programs children with disabilities, including some children with autism spectrum disorder, Down Syndrome, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and global developmental delays.   NLC denies the allegations.   

“It is illegal under the ADA to discriminate against children with disabilities.   Just like public schools, private schools must make reasonable modifications of policies to permit children with disabilities to participate fully in the programs they offer,” said Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez.   “This agreement ensures that children will not be denied quality preschool and other educational opportunities based upon their disabilities.”   

U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Zane David Memeger, noted, “no child should be discriminated against on the basis of disability.   All children should have an equal opportunity to attend any school for which they qualify, and schools must make reasonable modifications to policies, practices or procedures in accordance with the law.”    

Legal fight over the Cato Institute's autonomy

Back in the mid-1970s, I was an early employee of the Cato Institute, when it was still in San Francisco.

Life moves on.  

Today, I was dumbfounded to read (via a Facebook note from Ari Ne'eman) that David and Charles Koch had filed suit to gain control of the Cato Institute.  Cato has an unusual structure for a non-profit organization: it is owned by four shareholders, the two Koch brothers, Ed Crane (who has been the president since its founding) and the late William Niskanen.  

The Koch brothers' suit argues that they have the right of first refusal to Niskanen's shares.  Crane and other Cato officials argue that the shares belong to Niskanen's widow, Kathryn Washburn, who is also named in the suit (read the complaint here).

At Slate Magazine, David Weigel put the litigation in context, quoting an email from Ed Crane:

They are in the process of trying to take over the Cato Institute and, in my opinion, reduce it to a partisan adjunct to Americans for Prosperity, the activist GOP group they control.”

Later in the piece, Weigel reports on a meeting:

In early November, David Koch met with Bob Levy, chairman of Cato’s board of directors, at Dulles International Airport. They were joined by Richard Fink, Koch's chief adviser, and Kevin Gentry, a vice president of Charles Koch’s charitable foundation who’d been put on Cato’s board of directors. (Former Americans for Prosperity President Nancy Pfotenhauer had joined the board after the same meeting.)

“They said that a principle goal was to defeat Barack Obama,” remembered Levy. “The way David [Koch] put it was, ‘We would like you to provide intellectual ammunition that we can then use at Americans for Prosperity and our allied organizations.’ AFP and others would apply Cato's work to advance their electoral goals.”

Well that's perfectly clear.  Anything to defeat Obama.  But why would the Koch brothers imagine that "research to order" be effective?  The Koch brothers have been a major funder of the Tea Party movement. 

Crane said in a public statement

“Mr. Koch’s actions in Kansas court yesterday represent an effort by him to transform Cato from an independent, nonpartisan research organization into a political entity that might better support his partisan agenda. We view Mr. Koch’s actions as an attempt at a hostile takeover, and intend to fight it vehemently in order to continue as an independent research organization, advocating for Individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace.”

 

• Allen McDuffee and T.W. Farnam: Think Tanked Blog at Washington Post Koch Brothers sue Cato Institute, president
• David Weigel, Slate: Cato Goes to War
• Allen McDuffee: Think Tanked Blog at Washington Post: Save Cato..On Facebook
• Facebook page: Save the Cato Institute