New Car

Down House

Well it is nearly that time of year again, when we all troop off to the World Atheist Conference, and indulge in an orgy of feeling (and being) morally and intellectually superior. Nothing of course, could make up for the absence of Christopher Hitchens, although in that regard, as Humphrey Bogart said in Casablanca, "We'll always have YouTube, kid" We will however be entertained by the remaining superstars of the movement, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris, and my personal favourites, AC Grayling and Ayaan Hirst Ali.

I was trying, the other day, to account for the great popular success that Richard Dawkins has enjoyed recently, and have come to the conclusion that a key reason is the clear, precise, accessible and non technical language in which he expresses himself. In this he resembles his idol Charles Darwin himself. Of Dawkins popular works, all of which I have, my favourite is "Climbing Mount Improbable" Like Stephen Jay Gould, Dawkins has shown himself to be a Darwinophile, not just interested in propagating, explaining and expanding Darwin's theories , but also fascinated by the minutiae of Darwin's personal life and his times. I can identify with that idea - I went to the Galapagos, followed Darwin's footsteps in South America, and the Falklands, and recently walked the Hobart foreshore, where Darwin's presence during the voyage of the Beagle is commemorated. In pursuit of that Darwin groupie experiences, I may in fact have gone one better than Richard Dawkins himself. I have visited Down House, Darwin's house in Kent on many occasions, and have walked the famous Sandwalk dozens of times. Darwin often referred to Down House, which ironically was a former vicarage, as "My ugly house" but to my eyes, it is magnificent, and its setting the acme of gracious living, a la Mr D'arcy. It was my first visit however which was the most memorable. I had obtained a guide book which noted the closing time of Down House to be 5.30pm , and armed with that information, arrived in the afternoon, with the intention of exploring the house for a couple of hours. The garden was obviously going to be out of bounds, as it was snowing heavily. I had failed to read the pamphlet properly, and shortly after gaining access, was interrupted by a young fellow who was wandering around the house, asking all visitors to make their way to the exit. When I remonstrated with him, he pointed out that Winter opening hours extended only to 4 O'clock. As the other guests departed, I explained to him that I was a certified Darwinophile, I had come all the way from Melbourne just to look at this sacred site, etc.. I am afraid that I laid it on a bit thick. He responded by saying that my ticket was valid for another visit, but I countered by explaining that I was flying out to Australia the following day. (That bit at least was true) He looked gratifyingly concerned, and once the door closed behind the last of the other visitors, gestured for me to follow him. We walked along the corridor, and then into Darwin's study. There was a rope barrier which allowed only limited access to the room, and this he removed. "Take a seat in that chair" he said, and I did as I was told, and settled into a battered leather chair which had prominent arms. He picked up a broad plank of wood from the floor next to the chair and settled it across the arms, enclosing me, and forming a type of desk. He said quietly, presumably in order not to be overheard by the other employees, "Although he had many tables and desks, Darwin wrote while sitting in that chair using that plank to rest his paper on. He sat where you are, when he wrote the Origin of Species." Has Dawkins bum enjoyed such historical propinquity, I wonder ?

Garden Tango @ Mt Stuart House

The usual

Age letter

The real climate change debate

Q "Do you think climate change is happening ?"

A "Of course, the science seems undeniable"

Q "Do you think that we are contributing to global warming ?"

A "Certainly, there is unanimity amongst serious researchers, and climate change sceptics have been exposed as either crackpot British Lords, or conscience free employees of the coal industry"

Q "Do you think that as a nation we should act?"

A "I demand that as one of the highest per capita polluters in the world, Australia acts immediately and decisively to reduce carbon emissions"

Q "So you are willing to pay a little more in tax to help the transition to a green economy ?"

A "Get stuffed you socialist-communist bastard, I am off to vote for Tony Abbott"

Courier letters

Dear Sir,

Your correspondent Mr Mangan (Courier 20/1) should be congratulated on his keen knowledge of history. He was right to point out that in Democratic Greece, and Antique Rome, homosexuality was considered an unimportant fact of life, occasioning little comment. Christianity took away the right of people to be gay, while at the same time launching an attack on learning in general and science in particular, that is when they weren't busy burning heretics, and repressing Jews. This period of christian domination was called the dark ages for a good reason. Thank heavens we've all (except perhaps Mr Mangan) come to accept many of the values of that earlier, more enlightened age.

Dear Sir,

Your correspondent George Mangan (Courier 14/1/2012) objects to the word 'gay' being used by the homosexual community worldwide, and to the use of the word 'marriage' to describe same sex couples. Now whilst most people would reasonably dismiss his letter as the rantings of a homophobic bigot, I am pleased to write in his defense. His obvious motivation is not a nasty, uncharitable and ignorant prejudice, but rather a noble concern for linguistic purity. I myself have noticed for example, that the word 'mouse' which is an omnivorous rodent, is being used by some to describe a computer related device. The word 'awful' means not unnaturally full of awe, or inspiring, yet people who should know better often use it to mean 'something bad'. Mr Mangan presumably supports the governments decision to limit by legislation the use of the word marriage to heterosexual unions, so perhaps we should be lobbying the politicians to make it similarly illegal to use word like 'manufacture' (from the Latin 'to produce by hand) to describe the actions of machines. How about substantial fines and possible imprisonment for improper, or definitionally ambiguous use of nouns ? I am sure Mr Mangan would approve. On the subject of definitions however, I have one small quibble with Mr Mangan. After all the definition of 'voter' in this country was clear and precise, 'a male person over the age of twenty-one' Some good people, while acknowledging the accuracy of this definition, held it nonetheless to be immoral, so guess what ? - they changed the definition. I have a sneaking suspicion that Mr Mangan probably still hasn't reconciled himself to that act of linguistic vandalism.

Dear Sir

For centuries, biblically mandated slavery was the bedrock of society. For centuries, discrimination against women was obligatory. For centuries, clerically approved anti semetism was the norm. Who today would use the past ubiquity of these abhorrent practises to argue for their retention, or re-introduction ?

I personally would be embarrassed to argue, as your correspondent Mr Keogh presumably does, that a Kardashian marriage of a few weeks merits society's approval, whereas a twenty year long same sex relationship somehow does not. Same sex couples do not want special rights, or more rights - they simply want the same rights as everybody else. I don't think that two women getting married in Daylesford will destroy my marriage - but I could be wrong, I'll keep you posted !

Mr Keogh did however get one thing right, legalising same sex marriage would promote the idea that it is a normal and acceptable choice. Good !