2014 Maryland GA vote scorecard

By Mathew Goldstein

This year the Maryland General Assembly unanimously approved state licensing of the mostly bogus "alternative medicine" practitioners who call themselves Naturopaths.  Fortunately, three bills that locally removed Sunday restrictions on particular commercial activities with titles "Dorchester County - Class B Beer and Light Wine Licenses - Sunday Sales", "Garrett County - Alcoholic Beverages - Sunday Sales for Off-Premises Consumption", and "Garrett County – Alcoholic Beverages – Sunday Sales for On–Premises" also passed unanimously.  With three exceptions, the other bills that addressed secularist concerns (as identified by the Secular Coalition for Maryland), including more bills that would have removed additional restrictions on local Sunday recreational and commercial activities, did not reach a floor vote.

Three bills addressing secularist concerns received a non-unanimous floor vote.  All three bills, which have been signed into law by the Governor, removed restrictions on Sunday activities.  They were HB0344 and SB0344 "Charles County - Sunday Car Sales Blue Law Exemption - Enabling Authority", HB0406 and SB0472 "Allegany County, Garrett County, and Washington County - Sunday Hunting", and HB0432 and SB0473 "Frederick County - Deer Hunting - Sundays". Twenty three Delegates voted at least once against at least one of these bills.  Four Senators also voted at least twice against at least two of these bills.

Below is a list of the naysaying lawmakers and the bills they opposed.  If any of these incumbents are candidates in your election then you may want to try contact your lawmaker's office prior to the election to ask why he or she voted against these bills. Ask your lawmakers to remove the prohibitions against Sunday recreation and commerce from our state laws.  Washington Area Secular Humanists neither endorses nor opposes any candidates running for public office (regardless of how good or bad those candidates may or may not be). You can also view the complete spreadsheet SCMD General Assembly Votes 2014

Delegates:
Aumann, Susan L. M. Republican 42 Baltimore County
HB0406 SB0472
Barkley, Charles Democrat 39 Montgomery County
SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Bobo, Elizabeth Democrat 12B Howard County
SB0472 SB0473
Braveboy, Aisha N. Democrat 25 Prince George's County
SB0472 SB0473
Bromwell, Eric M. Democrat 8 Baltimore County
HB0344
Burns, Emmett C., Jr. Democrat 10 Baltimore County
HB0344 HB0432
Cardin, Jon S. Democrat 11 Baltimore County
HB0406 SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Frush, Barbara Democrat 21 Prince George's and Anne Arundel
HB0406 SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Howard, Carolyn J. B. Democrat 24 Prince George's County
SB0473
Hubbard, James W. Democrat 23A Prince George's County
HB0432
Jones, Adrienne A. Democrat 10 Baltimore County
HB0406 SB0473
Kach, Wade Republican 5B Baltimore County
HB0406 SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
McDonough, Pat Republican 7 Baltimore and Harford Counties
SB0473
Miller, Aruna Democrat 15 Montgomery County
SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Morhaim, Dan K. Democrat 11 Baltimore County
HB0406 SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Murphy, Peter Democrat 28 Charles County
SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Nathan-Pulliam, Shirley Democrat 10 Baltimore County
HB0432 SB0473
Parrott, Neil Republican 2B Washington County
HB0344
Pena-Melnyk, Joseline A. Democrat 21 Prince George's and Anne Arundel
HB0406 SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Robinson, Shane Democrat 39 Montgomery County
HB0406 SB0472 SB0473
Smigiel, Michael D., Sr. Republican 36 Kent, Queen Anne's, Cecil, Caroline
HB0344
Stocksdale, Nancy R. Republican 5A Carroll County
HB0344
Summers, Michael G. Democrat 47 Prince George's County
HB0406

Senators:
Benson, Joanne C. Democrat 24 Prince George's County
HB0406 HB0432
Jones-Rodwell, Verna L. Democrat 44 Baltimore City
HB0406 SB0472 HB0432 SB0473
Miller, Thomas V. Mike, Jr. Democrat 27 Prince George's and Calvert
HB0406 HB0432
Ramirez, Victor R. Democrat 47 Prince George's County
HB0406 SB0472 HB0432

Is it unethical to criticize bad epistemology?

By Mathew Goldstein

Let's say a person justifies adopting a set of factual beliefs on the grounds of wanting to participate in an ideological based social group.  Or on the grounds of self-committing to some ethical norms that are asserted to be related to that particular set of factual beliefs.  Or on the grounds that holding this set of factual beliefs is psychologically comforting because it provides purpose and meaning.  Or on the grounds that these factual beliefs are matters of personal preference or of faith and are thus self-justifying.  Professing this set of factual beliefs has thus become entangled with ongoing social and ethical commitments and activities and motivations.  Accordingly, this person claims a self-dependency on holding this set of factual beliefs.  

Given this context, is it now unethical for those us who disagree with that set of factual beliefs to publicly argue against them given that there is some risk that such a person could, partially or wholly as a result of exposure to those arguments, lose their beliefs?  Clearly, there is reason here to be cautious.  We do not want to harm anyone by isolating them socially, or by telling them they should give up on ethical commitments, or by telling them there is no meaning to their life or purpose for them to pursue. As secular humanists we are people focused, we oppose abandoning people.  We abandon transcendence, not ethics, nor meaning, nor purpose.

Some humanists argue that we should distinguish between people who respect everyone's civil rights and those who do not.  They say it is ethical to argue against the beliefs of those people who fall in the latter category only.  But is this distinction practical to implement?  Not if one of the goals is to challenge bad justifications for factual beliefs. The same faulty reasoning is common to both sets of people.  

Why focus on challenging bad justifications for factual beliefs?  Because, like it or not, it is not enough to have good ethical commitments.  Ethical commitments are important, but so is proper justification of factual beliefs. Arguably, the worst atrocities have historically been committed by ethical people with the best intentions.  What goes wrong?  Part of the answer is that these people tended to be undisciplined in how they justified their factual beliefs.  Religion in general is built upon, it depends on, and it encourages, promiscuous adoption of factual beliefs.  This is a problem with potential real world negative consequences, and it is not a problem confined to "bad" religion as opposed to "good" religion.

People who make themselves dependent, socially, psychologically, or otherwise, on a particular set of factual beliefs have thereby made a mistake.  This is a problem in and of itself as it interferes with good reasoning.  Furthermore, this is an unnecessary problem. This problem is a result of people turning themselves into ideologues and prioritizing ideology over reasoning.  Rather than perpetuating this problem by falsely declaring it ethically taboo to challenge dubious factual beliefs that are held without proper warrant, it is better in the long run to deal with adults as adults.  It is an elitist attitude to say that as non-religious non-believers we should unilaterally censure our speech to protect religious believers from themselves.  They can stand up for themselves also.  People who experienced a difficult transition from religious belief to non-belief often say that they are now glad that they made that transition. By speaking out publicly for non-belief, maybe we can contribute to making this transition less difficult for religious individuals.

Human Origins at the Folklife Festival

By Gary Berg-Cross

It’s early summer, just past the Solstice and the annual Smithsonian Folklife Festival celebrates the season near and on the Mall between 7th & 14th streets NW. This year it runs until July 6 and features the cultures of China & Kenya. . Kenya: Mambo Poa  focuses on various aspects new and ancient history of the East African country. There’s daily music & events. For runners every morning of the Festival (10:30–11 a.m.) one can meet at the Kenya House, just off the Mall and join Olympic athlete and long-distance track runner Tegla Loroupe for a jog through the National Mall.  If that doesn’t resonate there is a humanist connection to consider.  Some of the oldest artifacts of human/Homo Sapiens existence have been discovered there. Kenya is thus one of the early cradles of human kind. The festival a very nice exhibit on the mall called Searching for Human Origins in Kenya noting this

Kenya has been the epicenter of millions of years of human evolution leading up to our species, Homo sapiens. Before we came along, however, another species roamed the earth for over a million years. Homo erectus was the longest surviving species in human history, and evidence of their success can be found throughout Kenya.

I was there on the first Sunday and was really excited to see Paleoanthropologist  Rick Potts (director of the human origins program at the Smithsonian Institution who has significant wok in Kenya AND China!).

The longest running Smithsonian excavation is in Kenya at site called Olorgesailie. Where Rick Potts and his team have worked to uncover evidence to explain how early humans in Kenya adapted and survived harsh, changing climates.  This Sunday Potts wasn’t at the museum or in Kenya.  He was  signing certificates of kids of all ages as they successfully dug into the fossil

realm as part of the exhibit. It is always wonderful to see kids interested in a science like anthropology exercising its tools and feeling the thrill of discovery and connection.

You could see a range of human origin fossils, replicas & artifacts including the recent, notable Homo erectus discovery in Kenya now widely known as “Turkana Boy.”  It’s an almost complete skeleton that dates back to about 1.6 million years.

A final nod to humanism at the event is a wall that allows visitors to past up ideas on “what makes us human.” It’s a nice thing to explore in the presence of our origins. Poets, like Christy Chiang,  have tried

What makes us human?

Is it love?

So many of us take it for granted

Yet so precious few know how to give it.

Is it hope?

So many of us fall into despair over tiny things

Yet so precious few know how to find strength in it.

Is it intelligence?

So many of us ooh and ahh over what technology can bring

Yet so precious few know how to live in harmony with nature.

Has two thousand years of civilization

Really brought nothing more than destruction?

Has it not also brought realization?

Within time, there is change.

Change for the better, bringing us back from the fringe.

There is always love,

To guide us through storms and roads that are rough.

There is always hope,

To back us while we cope

With our troubles, every day that we live

Every day that the sun rises from the heaving sea.

And though we face a heating Earth,

A dimming of our days,

With our intelligence we can fix it in a thousand small ways.

Human qualities come shining through

They almost always do.

It is the "always" that we dwell upon and have faith in,

So that a new, better age may begin.

There’s a Festival Blog to keep up on this and more.

World Humanist Day 2014

by Gary Berg-Cross

It’s June 21^st, the summer solstice and now World Humanist Day which was established by the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU).

The history of this holiday starts in the 1980s when several chapters of the American Humanist Association (AHA) began to celebrate it. But back then there was no fixed date to celebrate it.  Some chapter took the founding date of the IHEU as the target while other AHA chapter found other meaningful dates. Starting in the late 1980s and continuing into the early 1990s, the AHA and IHEU each passed resolutions declaring World Humanist Day to be on the summer solstice. Finally it stuck.

I like this connection to the celestial-seasonal variation and setting aside a day is a way for the “ spreading awareness of Humanism as a philosophical life stance and means to effect change in the world.” This year (2014) the day falls on the weekend so there will be a number of outdoor events to celebrate. And people do celebrate this longest of days in different ways.

The British Humanist Association’s choir will be holding a “One Life” concert in London, “a variety show for the non-religious in celebration of the one life we have.”

The Central New York Humanist Association summer solstice picnic.  Picnics are popular, even if the World Cup is on TV.

Here in DC we have to hope that the showers will be over by the time for picnics and such planned.  DC Region Atheists are hosting one planned for 3 pm in Rock Creek Park. They are supported by the  Washington Area Secular Humanist (WASH.org) as a chapter and have invited everyone from the various participating groups in the Washington DC Area Coalition of Reason to join them. Humanists of UUCF are coming.

The Maryland Science & Skepticism Meetup Group (306 W. Franklin Street, Baltimore, MD) will celebrate World Humanist Day at 6:30 by Watching "The Lord Is Not On Trial Here Today."

Integrity and Political Behavior

by Gary Berg-Cross

How and why Eric Cantor lost to (convincingly) to a Tea Party challenger has been a big story in Washington. The political elites and chattering class of pundits didn't see it coming, but flash-mob hypothesized about it. One early theory of the “shocked and bewildered”, as Time put it, was religious and cultural in tone:

“One of the more fascinating threads that emerged from the cacophony of ideas put forward in the days following the primary was the effort to find a Jewish dimension to the story. Cantor, the House Majority Leader, was the highest ranking Jewish lawmaker in American history, with aspirations to be Speaker of the House. When one adds to that the fact that Brat is a religious Christian who speaks frequently of his faith, the temptation to uncover a Jewish angle became irresistible. The New York Times, the Washington Post, the leading Jewish weekly the Forward, and a variety of other publications duly turned out articles examining, from every perspective, the Jewish and religious sides of the election…. David Wasserman, a normally sensible political analyst, got things going with a much-quoted statement to the Times suggesting that anti-Semitism was at play in Cantor’s defeat. Cantor was culturally out of step with his redrawn district, according to Wasserman, “and part of this plays into his religion. You can’t ignore the elephant in the room.” Sensationalist headlines soon followed. The Week, a news magazine, ran a story entitled “Did Eric Cantor lose because he’s Jewish?” And the Forward ran an opinion column with the headline “Did Eric Cantor Lose Because He’s Jewish? You Betcha.”

But there was no elephant in the room. There wasn’t even a mosquito in the room. “Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, a writer and lecturer, was President of the Union for Reform Judaism from 1996 to 2012. His writings are collected at ericyoffie.com.

Culture may have played a part (Eric Cantor was called the leading advocate for Jewish/Israeli issues in Congress) and we’ll have to see if conservative Jewish pols and evangelical Christian pols start to diverge. But another factors seems to be Cantor being perceived as lacking in integrity and political deftness. As Time also noted:

“Cantor’s problem was less ideology and more a sense that he stood more for his own ambition than for any definable policies. He frequently reinvented himself with splashy policy speeches, and toured the country raising money and gathering chits for an eventual run for House Speaker.”

There are several character issues here about what Cantor really stood for (aside from what some presume his conservative Jewish culture.). These were noted by a number of observers:

“[It's a] serious wake up call to all incumbents,” said Scott Reed, the top political strategist for the establishment-friendly Chamber of Commerce. “Time for candidates to run like they are running for sheriff… not prime minister.”

I think this is a point to note. In a functioning democracy the welfare of constituents (there perception o this at least) are the ultimate law, at least every 2, 4 or 6 years.

To his up close constituents Cantor showed a mix of avarice, as demonstrated in his numerous steak feasts mixed with a hint of phoniness, folly & cowardice. It’s was, in part, a classic words vs behavior issue. Cantor tried to have it both ways on so many things.  Was he loyal to his base and constituents or to Wall St. and lobbyists?  What does his behavior show?

What did he stand for on immigration reform? His early rhetoric on last year’s government shutdown that had excited the Tea-base (and sunk GOP’s poll numbers)

ended up making him look weak.  It was not enough that Cantor pose as a tea party conservative—his actions must be tea party peevish.  Without real action the veneer, the sheen of words wears off. As Cicero said, “false pretensions fall as do flowers, nor can anything feigned be lasting.”

Cantor like many of the privileged pols we have now (Jewish or otherwise) forgot that reputation and integrity are important. People expect that when in power you will follow through on what you say you’re going to do. It's walking the walk.

Cantor’s credibility eroded rather than built over time if only because people who heard his words could see the contrast to his actions as well as his paid for steak dinners. Perhaps you still can't fool all American voters for very long. Something must ring true.

In the end people and policy are more important than politics...or ideology.

Bumping into Secular Poems from the Middle Ages

by Gary Berg-Cross

Movies can be an art form mix of cultural elements. I probably heard the chanting song of German composer Carl Orff’’s  "O Fortuna" from his  cantata Carmina Burana first in a movie. Perhaps it was the film The Doors.  Since then that rhythmic tune has become a recognized staple in pop culture. Harper's Magazine columnist Scott Horton has commented that:

 "Orff’s setting may have been spoiled by its popularization" and its use "in movies and commercials often as a jingle, detached in any meaningful way from its powerful message.”

Orff’ intended the work as a staged work involving dance, choreography, visual design and other stage action. It seems pseudo medieval. It has monkish parodies of chanting and primitive percussion that provides a background to many situations depicted in movies including pain and misfortune. It does include the words ‘examine the cycle of life and question the source of life’s pain’s’.

 The piece is now usually performed in concert halls as a cantata, but also as Modern Dance.

Only recently did I learn a bit of the background to Carmina Buran setting message which comes out of 13th-century poems. According to one source the Carmina Burana “is the largest and greatest collection of secular lyrics from the Middle Ages. It has proved useful in understanding the (minstrels( goliards, and it has demonstrated that music flourished widely in medieval times beyond the confines of the Church.” 

More on the Goliards later.

Orff subtitled "Carmina Burana" a 'scenic cantata'. The scene or setting comes from dozens of poems and various student songs in Medieval Latin and low German. The additional subtitle tells us an interesting bit more. "Cantiones profanae cantoribus et choris cantandae comitantibus instrumentis atque imaginibus magicis (This has been translated as – ‘Secular songs for soloists and chorus, accompanied by instruments and supplemented by scenery)'.

Secular songs??  This makes it a bit more interesting.  What is the background to this work from the Middle Ages?

One thinks of medieval poetry being like at - it is religious in nature.  But it turns out to be more interesting than that.  A notable exception to being religio-centric is the work of the what is called troubadours and minstrel singers (minnesänger).  They got into celebrating the ideal of courtly love. And among the most famous of these is the manuscript collection of  Carmina Burana, ˈkɑrmɨnə bʊˈrɑːnə/; Latin for "Songs from Beuern." (The manuscript was discovered in 1803 at Benediktbeuern, a Benedictine monastery in Bavaria from which the term "burana" is derived. So monks were involved at discover as well as creation.)

Well there is a courtly tradition but these quasi-vernacular poems and pieces in in Medieval Latin were organized by someone into parts that deals with topics like mortality and fate (That is O Fortuna mixed with some mockery in the Introduction) and nature in its first part.  So we have Fortune plango vulnera (Fortune's blows do I lament)", with following three parts:

Part I: In Springtime (Primo vere) with the songs "Veris leta facies (Of Spring's fair-countenanced delight)"; "Omnia sol temperat (The sun rules over everything)"

Sunlight warms all the fields

gently now and purely,

to a new world it reveals

April’s face completely;

to love itself now yields

the spirit of mastery,

and the boy-god wields

the power to make all happy.

, and "Ecce gratum (Anticipated)"; and On the Lawn (Uf dem Unger) with an orchestral dance, then "Floret silva nobilis (The noble woods bloom)"  These are quite a contrast with the drummed warning of fortune. 

Chramer, gip die varwe mir (Shopkeeper, please, a bit of pink)" is a charming musical piece, a very peaceful Round Dance (Reie) and Songs consisting of "Swaz hie gat umbe (Here are maidens in the round)", followed by "Chum chum geselle min (Come, pretty maid of mine)", and "Were diu werlt alle min (Were the enitre world mine)".

“Were the entire world mine” seems to set a rambunctious, sensual tone for the rest of the work. In it, the Chorus sings:

"Were the entire world mine from the ocean to the Rhine, the whole of it would I forsake that mighty England's queen awake in my arms intertwined"!

The next part deals with tender, romantic & courtly love but also but also up close, explicit, and highly sensual love. Reality intrudes into the medieval fantasy and there is plenty of it - 131 love (CB 56–186). An example is Sleep and love:

Come, come keep me company,

I beg you, please be kind to me.

I beg you, please be kind to me,

come, come keep me company.

Red lips have me under a spell.

Come, kiss me and make me well.

The poem and story collection (you can read translations here) concludes with bawdy tavern life and drinking which adds a tasty, irreverent, and satirical sauce. It’s a bit more like the Canterbury tales than one suspected and Orff’s music is much more varied than the monkish images associated with O Fortuna.

What do we know about some of the people who created these poems?  Among the anonymous authors of Carmina Burana were frocked and defrocked priests and monks, reverent and irreverent  students, and wanderers.  Some we know  including Peter of Blois, Walter of Châtillon and an anonymous poet, referred to as the Archpoet. 

Collectively they have been called 'Goliards' and were defrocked monks and minstrels who, according to a webpage who info is attributed to the Charles Cave's "Carmina Burana" webpage, were:

 "better known for their rioting, gambling, and intemperance than for their scholarship."

 And this source continues to inspire creative source david Bintley, for example provided a modern interpretation of "Carmina Burana" - an “Everyman” story that follows three seminarians as they reject their faith and explore the pleasures of the flesh, including lust, love, greed and gluttony.

“It’s really about what can happen if you abandon your spirituality and seek gratification in temporal appetites,” Bintley explained in a 2011 interview about the ballet.

Bintley premiered "Carmina Burana" in 1995 as his first work as artistic director of Birmingham Royal Ballet (BRB).

“It is beyond sensational, beyond moving, beyond thrilling,” said The Shropshire Star writer Andy Richardson in a 2011 review:

 “BRB director David Bintley has created a masterwork that will live long in the memories of those who witnessed his electrifying, tender and deeply intelligent work. The dancers, set alongside Carl Orff’s spellbinding choral tour de force, were a feast for the senses. Live entertainment does not get better than that.”

As an atheist, are you a hard core extremist, or are you an accomodationist?

I was perusing FaceBook this morning briefly, and ran into an argument about how Atheism should act as a movement.  There were two sides - those who argued that the Extremists were too harsh and intolerant and those who were defending the position, with the argument centered around Dawkins.  As in, Dawkins is either a Grade A Number One Dick, or he's the best thing to come along since sliced bread, at least for the Atheist Movement.

While I agree that Dawkins can be acerbic at times (especially when confronting Theist idiots), but in general, he is pretty British in arguing his positions.  Meaning that he can be very polite while tearing you a new a**hole.

But he isn't counted as one of the Four Horsemen of Atheism for nothing.  All four - Dawkins, Denning, Harris and Hitchens (may he long be remembered for his cutting wit...) are known as such because they performed a singular function.  They are responsible for awakening the world to the growing number of atheists in this country (and indeed world-wide) by being, in a word, A**holes.

They served the same function as the Gay Pride movement, namely, attracting media attention to our existence and our growing numbers.

High profile, indeed!  They wrote books, gave interviews, went on TV, established web sites, then blogs and have, in general, made themselves into tremendous pains in the a** for influential theist leaders everywhere.  By telling the world that we are here, we are growing in numbers and influence and will NOT go away.  (and by ripping their theology into very small, very insignificant pieces...but that's another discussion.)

And we've got opinions about religion that are in the process of upsetting the balance of power in, especially, the First World.

As for the argument, there is a contingent that argues that being an a**hole and intolerant of the beliefs of theists isn't changing minds.  That it is counter-productive because it turns them off and makes them ultra-defensive.

Of course it does.  So did the in-your-face Gay Pride movement.  They paraded around the country in big cities where they had the numbers to defend themselves and got people talking.  They allowed others like themselves in less gay-populated areas to realize that THEY WERE NOT ALONE!  They made the media pay attention.

As time has gone on, the methods used by the Gay Movement have mellowed.  They do still have Gay Pride parades, but you don't see the radical dressed-up outrageously decked out folks in those parades like you used to.  These days, you can hardly (even if you squint) tell them from the regular folks who also march with them in support!

Which is kinda the point - gays are just like us.  They have lives, loves, jobs, dreams and debts.  Just like straights.

So do atheists.

We, too have lives, loves, jobs, dreams and debts.  Heck, walking down the street, one can hardly tell an atheist from a god-lover these days!  Ahem!  Sorry, I digress...

Which is why the Four Horsemen were and are needed - to wake people up.  To show them that we ARE HERE, and we are NOT going away.  We live alongside you, we are in your schools, your grocery stores, your parks, even in your churches!

And the more people see atheists as normal people, who do not eat babies nor worship Satan, the more they will see that we have common interests - like the Separation of Church and State.

Those who are derisively called "accomodationists" ARE needed.  Yes, it is Ok to be tolerant of others' religious beliefs.  Yes, we need to work with theists to bring together this society to push out the extremists of all kinds so we can learn to live together.  So we can build a country (and a world) that is neutral at the governmental level so everybody can hold and discuss opinions different from others.  So we can have political disagreements and discussions that will not result in violence and hatred.

In short, this is a big world, with a lot of different people in it.  Just as there are as many religious opinions as there are people, there is room in our movement for many differing techniques for approaching the theist audience, depending on who they are, and what interests we may have in common.

Instead of bad-mouthing other atheists who don't approach the subject like you do, try to understand who they are trying to reach, and discuss how to make them more effective in that effort.  Discuss how YOU can be more effective in reaching YOUR audience, too.  Try to see how the different approaches can be used effectively together, instead of accusing each other of being hurtful.

We've got billions of people to reach, and we can't reach them all using just one technique.

Cooperation works better than infighting.

Robert W. Ahrens

The Cybernetic Atheist

Transcendence (2014)

Movie reviewed by Bill Creasy

This movie starring Johnny Depp is, in my humble opinion, a real science fiction movie. There have been a lot of special effects and action movies recently that borrow sf elements, but this movie has actual thought behind it, and I found it to be very worthwhile.

The movie is about a computer scientist named Will Caster, played by Depp, who uploads his conscious mind into a computer network. (This is not a spoiler, since it is in the movie trailer.) Before doing so, he gives a speech at a conference referring to the Singularity, the idea promoted by Ray Kurzweil and others. The Singularity is the predicted time when computer or artificial intelligence capabilities exceed the brainpower of organic human beings. When this happens, technology will presumably be out of human hands, and the entire experience of being human will change. In the movie, an audience member asks Caster whether he intends to create God. Caster answers, "Isn't that what humans have always done?"

The scientist is happily married to Evelyn, played by Rebecca Hall. At the same conference, she paints a rosy picture of the way that such a transcendent intelligence could fix environmental problems.

Events that follow the uploading of Caster's mind are fantastic but naturalistic predictions of what the Singularity could accomplish. Nanomachines are developed that perform medical miracles. The nanomachines are self replicating and spread over the planet, and they begin to fix ecological problems.

There is a resistance movement that opposes these advances. The members of the movement question whether Caster is still human and whether he can be trusted to care about the best interests of the rest of humanity. However, they also sound like conservative technophobes, so the viewer has to decide how much credibility they deserve.

The resolution of the conflict between Caster, his wife, and the resistance is thought-provoking. It is perhaps not what the most forward-looking people would like, but it is also not depressing or too optimistic.

I will discuss the ending in the comments, with appropriate warnings to those who haven't seen it and want to avoid spoilers.

Bill Creasy is on the WASH Board and is coordinator of the Baltimore chapter. The review was printed in the May issue of WASHline.