Anthony Campbell's blog

My new book, The Assassins of Alamut, is now available from Lulu.

This is a historical study of the Muslim sect known as the Assassins, and includes an explanation of their extraordinay world view.

My new book, Totality Beliefs and the Religious Imagination, is just out and is available from Lulu or from Amazon.com.

Description

There seems to be a widespread notion that belief is, in itself, a good thing, but in this book I argue that, for at least some people, freeing oneself from all belief systems brings a huge sense of belief. I illustrate this by describing my own experience of Roman Catholicism and Transcendental Meditation. I also look at the evidence for miraculous cures for cancer and at ideas about the soul, with particular reference to survival. And I have a discussion of how religions are transmitted, which I think depends on story-telling and language as much as on formal belief.

You can read a review of the book by Taner Edis here. There is also a review by John Floyd at amazon.com.

My book Homeopathy in Perspective is now available from Lulu, both as a paperback book and as a download. It is also available from Amazon.co.uk or Amazon.com.

This is a book about what homeopathy is, how it developed, where it stands today. It is a critical book but not a hatchet job. It is written for people with questioning minds. Anyone who has already adopted a fixed opinion about homeopathy, either for or against, may receive the odd shock.

No prior knowledge is assumed but the book is not only for beginners. Even if you have read quite a lot about homeopathy you will probably find that you view it differently when you have finished.

The book is written with inside knowledge. I was a consultant physician at the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital for over 20 years.

This blog is primarily written for my own purposes, to try out ideas and pieces of writing that interest me but which don't (yet) merit a full-length article on my web page. Like the rest of what I write, the tone is mainly sceptical. In so far as there is a general theme, it's meant to be my own modest contribution to keeping alive the values of the Enlightenment, which seem to be under increasing threat today.

An article in the BMJ (Feb 9 2008) has found that a high intake of fructose in the diet increases the risk that men will suffer from gout. Fructose increases serum uric acid in the same way as alcohol. A comment on this in "Synovium", a newsletter published by the Arthritis Research Campaign, says that it is difficult to know how to advise people who are susceptible to gout. Eating more vegetables than fruit isn't necessarily the answer, because some vegetables also contain fructose. "Why is nothing simple and easy?"

Why indeed? Another item in the same newsletter draws my attention to a French study which shows an association between statins and tendon disorders, especially Achilles tendinopathy. Having suffered from this for about three months I am interested, because I do take a statin. Should I stop it? But there is another complication in my case: I'm also now taking warfarin for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and warfarin potentiates statins, so if I stop the statin I'd have to alter my warfarin dosage. Endless things to consider ...

I'm hearing more and more broadcasters using "reticent" to mean "reluctant", as in: "Jones was reticent to reveal his thoughts about his marriage."

I know that language changes but I dislike this new usage and I am reluctant to accept it as standard English.

The BMA is now supporting the compulsory wearing of helmets by cycling. For a detailed critique of this position, see this excellent paper.

Yesterday's Independent had an article about a forthcoming book by Mark Jacobs, which will claim that Robert Graves plagiarised the ideas in his book "The White Goddess" from Laura Riding, with whom he lived between the wars. We will have to wait for the book to see how far this claim stands up, but my initial reaction is that it is very difficult to know who influenced whom. Riding seems to have been very bitter about Graves after their parting and I don't know how much trust we should place in what she said subsequently.

Incidentally, I was surprised to see that the Independent describes Graves as a war poet. Although he did write poems about the war these are not comparable to those of Wilfrid Owen or Siegfried Sassoon. His prose autobiography "Goodbye To All That" is of course a different matter. The poems for which Graves is best known were written in the years after the war.

I'm glad to see that the government has apparently decided not to go ahead with killing badgers, even if this is partly because there will be an election within two years and public opinion is hostile to the idea.

Last time this came up I suggested that perhaps we should be culling cattle to prevent the transmission of tuberculosis to badgers. This was partly tongue-in-cheek, of course, but there is a serious point. At a time of global food shortage it makes no sense to reserve large areas of agricultural land for the wasteful production of beef. It is far more cost-effective to produce grain for human consumption, and grain doesn't get tuberculosis.

Just posted my review of this book.

The Palace has ordained that women attending Ascot shall wear knickers, but they must not be visible. How, then, can we be sure that this requirement is being complied with?

I've just posted my revies of Trick or Treatment? by Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst. They do much the same for alternative medicine as Richard Dawkins does for religion, and similar comments apply to both. The book is dedicated, tongue in cheek, to HRH The Prince of Wales.

I've just posted three new reviews to my site: My Stroke of Insight, by Jill Bolte Taylor; The Trouble with Physics; and Against All Gods, by A.C. Grayling.

I've tried to like the appellation "Bright" as an alternative to "atheist" but I haven't succeeded. Nor am I fond of "nontheist", "humanist", or other euphemisms. And I'm not much persuaded by the argument that we should avoid "atheist" because we don't speak of "afaryist", "aghostist", etc. I prefer to stick with the old-fashioned "atheist" and "agnostic". The distinction between these two categories isn't rigid and one can oscillate between the two, but I dislike euphemisms.

I haven't posted here for some time, partly from laziness (principally from laziness) but also because I've been in Greece for the last 10 days and it took me some time to get the Internet working here.

Anyway, I've been reading the responses on Edge to the 2008 question: What have you changed your mind about, and why? I was interested to see that several of the participants said that we change our minds (or, more accurately, our minds change themselves) for reasons that are inaccessible to consciousness. The reasons we may give for the change are often confabulations. One can find justification for any opinion, but the opinion comes first.

I reach this conclusion in the final chapter of my new book Totality Beliefs and the Religious Imagination (see sticky entry above), where I describe my evolution from religion through agnosticism to atheism. I'm sure I have good reasons for this position but I know I also had what seemed like good reasons for my earlier opinions.