RIP Steve Gey
It's with great sadness and not a few tears that I say goodbye to Steve Gey, someone I never met in person but who nonetheless had a huge influence on my life. Steve was a professor at the Florida State University law school and one of the preeminent First Amendment scholars in the country. He was one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs in Edwards v Aguillard, the case that ruled creation science out of public school science classrooms.
A little over 4 years ago, Steve was diagnosed with ALS, aka Lou Gehrig's disease, and he had to give up teaching about a year later. He was, according to everyone I've ever talked to who took his course, one of the most inspiring teachers in the country. He was revered and adored by colleagues and students alike for his brilliance and his humanity.
Shortly after he was diagnosed with ALS I was able to arrange for him to receive the Friend of Darwin award from the National Center for Science Education. I called Glenn Branch to ask about it and he said that the board had, in fact, just voted unanimously to give him that award but they hadn't yet found a venue in which to give it to him (they typically like to ambush people who win the award and give it to them when they don't expect it).
I told Glenn I knew of the perfect time to do it. A group of his students were running a triathlon a few days later to raise money for ALS research in his name and they were going to be having a banquet afterwards. The NCSE rushed the award down to a friend of mine, who was one of Steve's students and dearest friends. She was so happy to be able to present that award to him.
The country has lost one of its finest teachers and one of its most powerful advocates for civil liberties. And a great many people have lost a man who inspired them.
31 Comments
Glenn Branch · 11 June 2011
NCSE's obituary is here.
John Kwok · 11 June 2011
Ed,
You, his family and his other friends have my condolences. He left us too soon, but at least he left us with an important legal legacy that will be upheld.
Sincerely,
John
Walter · 11 June 2011
Ed,
ALS is an obvious case were science can not find anything to blame its cause on. No germs, no tumors, no substances, no injuries. Science never gets to the root cause of anything. The source of everything one can experience is the mind. Even death is one's conscious choice.
Christian Science means knowledge of God's laws. It is the mind and only the mind is the subject of healing even when there is physical health problem. The body is an effect of the mind. It is not a source of problem. Doctors try to cure the body, but it is a result not a cause. Unless the cause is changed, the body will do nothing. Doctors and scientists do not acknowledge the mind as the cause of illness. The scientific method is foolish. The scientist thinks he is independent of his experiment. The law of cause and effect shows nothing can be independent of the mind. The scientist bias will be in the results of the experiment whether he acknowledges a bias or not. No wonder they are not getting anywhere.
Now when your ship is sinking, do something different. If medicine has no answer, try something different. Don't waste your time with ignorance. The mind carries the answer to any problem. The mind that created the problem can not analyze itself. It does not want the answer. Realize whatever you know does not work so it is of no value. Now the person has chance to learn something.
I have one word this, JACKASS.
Fortunately death is not real and we are not the body. Your friend here is right in your heart where God put him and that can not be changed. You are one with everyone including the Christian Scientists. There is no such thing as loss. You can feel your friend's love right now if you relax a little while. There is the proof. No one can do this for you.
Walter
Dave Luckett · 11 June 2011
It is somehow typical of whackjobs of all stripes that they lack decency as much as rationality. Why not? Empathy is a higher intellectual function, and their every higher intellectual function has been systematically disabled, stunted and atrophied.
So we get something like the above.
Despite its appalling indecency in this place, if it were my place to advise the moderators, I would counsel leaving it there, as a monument to the violently disgusting nature of the people and the doctrine that we oppose here.
Mike Elzinga · 11 June 2011
Dale Husband · 12 June 2011
ben · 12 June 2011
phantomreader42 · 12 June 2011
harold · 12 June 2011
Frank J · 12 June 2011
@harold.
I always get "empathy" and "sympathy" mixed up, and it has just occurred to me why. They pertain to beliefs and feelings, whereas to me what's important is the action. Which is why "authoritarian" is a word I find very useful, and frustratingly underutilized. Anti-evolution activists are not conservative, or even Christian (or Jewish), in the typical connotations. Rather they are driven to "save" others, and to demand handouts from taxpayers to support their mission.
For the same reason, I find the word "creationist(s)" frustratingly overutilized. It makes no sense to use the same word for a Biblical literalist who keeps his belief to himself (possibly knowing that the evidence contradicts it, but believes it in spite), and for a "big tent" ID activist whose only goal is to promote doubt of evolution by any means possible, including discouraging any discussion of the mutually contradictory literal interpretations of Genesis.
harold · 12 June 2011
Frank J. -
I agree with you.
Although it is entirely true that empathy refers to an internal state, rather than actions, it is of importance in understanding behavior.
While having normal empathy does not guarantee good behavior, those who lack it have greater difficulty controlling themselves.
While it may not have much to do with "altruism", "free will", or other lofty concepts, feelings that mirror what other people feel provide an instinctive disincentive for behavior like cheating, stealing, unjustified violence, and so on.
Those who lack such feelings may understand that they need some limits. They often, in my opinion, turn to authoritarian ideologies to provide a rationale for limiting their behavior. They also project this type of psychology onto others. They assume that all voluntary limits on behavior are the result of obedience to arbitrary authority.
In addition, although "social contract" reasoning may seem purely intellectual - I don't mug you purely because as part of a deal that prevents you from mugging me - it actually may be somehow related to the concept of empathy, because authoritarians have great difficulty with that, too.
Because to them all rules are arbitrary and whether someone else gets hurt is not relevant, empathy-lacking authoritarians are confused and frustrated by the distinction between malum in se and malum prohibitum. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se
The Biblical system of ethics (please recall that I am not religious, just discussing this) actually implies a society in which empathy/social contract values were prioritized, but forced adherence to cultural rituals, taboos, and hierarchy was also very important. Authoritarians lacking empathy are often confused and frustrated by the concept of such ranking, even though, for example, the traditional concepts of mortal and venial sin express this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_sin
Not everyone who lacks empathy is an authoritarian, and not everyone who has adopted an authoritarian system lacks empathy. But they do tend to go together. Especially since adhering to authoritarian systems by necessity must dampen empathy if it existed in the first place. Acceptance of the idea that people should be severely punished for somewhat arbitrary reasons is generally necessary for acceptance of an authoritarian system.
This may also help to explain why, in countries that have freedom of expression, support for authoritarianism is usually (not always, but usually) coupled with opposition to support for a social safety net (communist authoritarianism has nearly always emerged successfully only where it was proceeded by an equally authoritarian, but economically unequal system). At first these two things may seem unrelated. But lack of normal level of empathy may predispose to both.
mrg · 12 June 2011
Walter looks like one of these trolls with standard verbiage who surfs the net, looking for any opportunity to paste up his script.
I could detail my low opinion of him, but why bother? The only person who would have a high opinion of him would be someone just like him.
John Kwok · 12 June 2011
Suman · 13 June 2011
I met, Prof Gey, the only time ever at Case Western in the run up to the Ohio state board of E "debates". And that was the evening, RBH, when our archivist and curator who has arguably the best collection of ID-Creo literature, had displayed a shelf full of books on the subject. Prof Gey was in form that evening and many of us decided to simply hear him than pester him with questions. What a giant and legal luminary!
Simon Heffer · 14 June 2011
Come guys, if you've nothing to say regarding memories of Professor Gey then why fall for the troll?
You've spoiled a thread presumably started to allow people to remember him and his life's work.
Personally I'd remove the troll and the saps that fell for it (and of course my comment too).
Ray Martinez · 14 June 2011
Dave Luckett · 14 June 2011
Mr Heffer is quite right. I allowed the red mists of outrage at the indecency of the comment above mine to blind me. I regret my post, and request its removal.
I can only express my sadness at the loss of a fine scientist and a good man to a cruel disease that is slowly becoming better understood. Someday it will be defeated by the science that he did so well. I have made a donation in his name to the ALS Association to speed that day. I hope others will do the same.
Just Bob · 15 June 2011
harold · 15 June 2011
Condolences to all people who knew Steve Gey. Apologies for my earlier digression into a discussion of empathy.
mrg · 15 June 2011
phantomreader42 · 15 June 2011
mrg · 15 June 2011
Ray ... have you ever had anything good to say about anyone or anything? If so, provide a link.
I wish a long and healthy life. Because it will taste of bile to for every moment of it, and you deserve every bit of it.
Robin · 15 June 2011
Dale Husband · 15 June 2011
What is it with these crazy people and their remarks about the dead? If this is not evidence of the sickness that extremist religion causes with certain people, what would be?
Stanton · 15 June 2011
harold · 15 June 2011
Just Bob · 16 June 2011
I guess that answers my question.
You do, in fact, have no decency.
mrg · 16 June 2011
Ray, we know what you're going to say, it's always the
same thing, and it amounts to the same every time.
I ask again: have you ever had anything good to say about anyone or anything? Link please.
I wish you a long and healthy life. It amuses me to think for every second of it, it will taste of the bile that has become your permanent diet. You deserve it.
RBH · 16 June 2011
John Kwok · 16 June 2011
Gary · 18 June 2011