Random Rantings

I had my chemo infusion at the hospital yesterday and I wear the chemo pump until tomorrow. I think and hope that 20 years from now people will look back at chemotherapy for the treatment of cancer the way we look at trephination for the release of evil spirits. My mom accompanied me to chemo, as usual, and departed for Maine early this morning.

Some people have asked me about the LGBTQ reference in a previous blog post. I have seen/heard that extended to LGBTQQIA for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, and Allies. I am an ally and proud of it. At WWU I served on the LGBT Advocacy Council. I have a placard on my office door that signals that I intend to be an ally and a safe resource.

Technically, LGBTQ is an abbreviation or initialism, not an acronym, because it does not form a pronounceable word (I don't think). SCUBA (Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus) is an acronym because you can say it as a word (in fact, by now it can be considered a word in its own right). IRA (Individual Retirement Account) is a borderline case because it can be pronounced as a word (like our Dr. Hyman's first name) but is often said as letters (I-R-A).

If you haven't seen it before, I like this classic satirical essay about homosexuality and the Bible:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp

Like a good liberal/progressive, I think our interpretation of texts such as the Bible or the Constitution can and should evolve as our culture evolves. I think originalism, such as that promulgated by Justice Scalia with regard to the Consitution, is a ridiculous philosophy. Should we consider blacks as 3/5 of a person in the census because the Founding Fathers did? Should women have the right to vote? Clearly the existence of an amendment process shows that the Founding Fathers recognized that things change as new issues and knowledge arise.

For example, the 2005 Supreme Court decision to ban the execution of individuals who were minors when they committed their crimes (Roper v. Simmons) overturned a 1989 Supreme Court decision to allow the practice. Justice Kennedy, who switched positions, wrote the 5-4 majority opinion and cited "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." Needless to say, Scalia dissented.

The American Psychological Association (APA) supported the Roper v. Simmons decision, citing research that adolescents are not cognitively mature as evidence that the consequences of their actions should be judged differently from those of adults, and that minors should be given a chance to mature into productive members of society. In his dissent, Scalia, I think cleverly, argued that the APA was being inconsistent because in a 1989 case the APA submitted an amicus brief that argued that adolescents are cognitively mature enough to make abortion decisions without necessarily obtaining parental consent. The APA responded that the cases and considerations are different enough that there is no inconsistency, but I think Scalia succeeded in calling into question whether the APA's positions are based on objective scientific facts or subjective moral-political biases.

I doubt this would make either side happy, but modern philosophy of science holds that there are no such thing as "objective scientific facts." Scientific beliefs are continually revised in light of new evidence, and the research process cannot be entirely insulated from human biases. But at least scientific beliefs are based on evidence and not simply personal taste, popular vote, or antiquated tradition, and the research process and replication can control for, if not eliminate, individual biases.

Ethan