andrel wrote:
> On 16-Jan-09 6:29, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>> So, yes, there is a "value" that come with it, which you don't have 
>>>> without it.
>>>
>>> I disagree that spirituality without a personal sky daddy is 
>>> necessarily better than a spirituality with a personal sky daddy.
>>>
>> Depends, I suppose, on your definition of "better". Some people seem 
>> to be virtually "incapable" of functioning as rational human beings 
>> without  a god. Frankly, some of those people scare the hell out of 
>> me, since I have either seen them in moments when they questioned it, 
>> or have been told by them what they "imagine" they could do, if they 
>> suddenly found they didn't have a god looking over them. For those 
>> people.. having such a "spirituality" that is derived from the magic 
>> sky faerie, is better then without it.
>>
>> Then there are the others, who use belief in the forgiveness, mandates 
>> from, communication with, and self selected quote mining of his 
>> supposed words, to justify doing all the things that the former group 
>> would do, but **as a result** of having the belief. That category 
>> would be better off if they had to deal with the cold hard truth that 
>> there isn't anything out their that cares about every tiny little 
>> thing they do, and they bloody well better start being nice to real 
>> people on earth.
>>
>> That the majority fall some place between these two, with occasional, 
>> and limited, wobbles in one or the other direction, based on their pet 
>> peeves, doesn't at all, in my mind, suggest that the first group might 
>> have been better off if introduced to moral thinking, instead of fear 
>> based self control, and the later to the concept of humility, without, 
>> in either case, resorting to what has, in one fashion or another, 
>> helped manufacture their rather dangerous mental instabilities in the 
>> first place.
>>
>> For both sets, a spirituality that sees the world for what it is, and 
>> find awe in that, is far superior than one that sees it as all 
>> corrupt, or all made for their own purposes, with only an imaginary 
>> friend there to tell them "how" to use it, or what things to avoid doing.
>>
>> Note, the "spirituality" of those in the middle, while they often walk 
>> a bit close to both lines at times, has "far" more in common with the 
>> naturalist/humanist spirituality they deny believing in, than the 
>> deity based one. So.. it might be argued that, if you examine 
>> religious spirituality, in its purist and untainted form, it has 
>> serious problems. ;)
>>
> I think you are missing at least one other 'pole' i.e. those that think 
> they have a purpose in life. I have met a fairly large group of 
> religious people that feel responsible for their neighbours and the 
> earth in general. That is not because there is a God that is going to 
> count every action when they die and will punish them if the score is 
> negative. They really do have an internal motivation to do this. I also 
> know a couple of atheists with the same drive, in fact almost the only 
> thing that separates these two groups is that one believes in God and 
> the other doesn't.
> If you leave out this group of spiritual people in your analysis you do 
> the religious people unjustice. Note that nearly every new religious 
> group starts here and only later on when people find that being a 
> religious leader gives power over others dogmas start to develop. Note 
> also that gnostic individuals and groups are almost by definition not 
> following authority.

Actually, no, I didn't leave those people out. That is what "in between, 
which has more to do with humanist/naturalist" means. Such people invent 
there own "purpose" to one degree or another, and tend to see part of 
their reason for being on this world one of making it better for 
everyone else. The clear difference is the disconnect that ends up 
leading some, as you point out, into thinking that promoting religion, 
and all too often "inflexible" religion on people is the best means to 
that goal. Some choose to just fight with words, some fight with 
actions, some a bit of both, but, in the end, you can be standing side 
by side with someone and 100% agree with them that "better education" 
will improve the world, for example, and disagree completely on whether 
or not a new church or a new play ground would be "better" for the local 
children. The ones in the middle disagree on what some of us consider to 
be important and serious details, but "in general" we tend to agree more 
than 90% of the time, as long as religion isn't added to the equation, 
on everything else.

And, I do not at all think that the first two groups in my analysis do 
religion any injustice, or, sadly, religious people, any more than they 
do themselves. As Madison once put it, "Experience witnesseth that 
eccelsiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and 
efficacy of Religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost 
fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on 
trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and 
indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, 
superstition, bigotry and persecution."

This was recognized in his time, and yet, it "still" comes as some sort 
of horrifying shock to people of faith 200 years later, when ever 
someone points out that it is still, all too often, true, whenever any 
significant numbers of people become members of any single denomination, 
or even locally, in small ones. The only thing that differs in 
magnitude. A small church has not, in most cases, sufficient numbers, 
loud enough voices, or obnoxious enough prejudices, to greatly upset 
more than those within their own reach, with a few exceptions, such as 
the so called "Catholic League", and its incredibly inflated claims of 
actual membership (by my estimate, even without donations of any kind, 
he would have to have received about $3 from 'every' member he claims to 
have, to match the amount of money he took in last year. This is rather 
odd, given that he has taken in millions in donations.. So, either he is 
lying about the donations, or he is lying about how many "paying" 
members he has). Large organizations, on the other hand, have there 
fingers so deep in everything, its often hard to tell where those 
fingers are, until someone admits to having followed the advise of, or 
professes great admirations for, some mega-televangelist or 
super-church, and they try to make "everything" happen the way they want.

I am, frankly, rather happy that the vast majority, by nature of their 
"faith", opt not to apply themselves to real methods of making such 
things happen, or we would be overrun already, but that the vast 
majority apply themselves to the laughable method of "praying" that it 
will happen, or that some tiny number of loud mouths, who push the 
agendas, will manage to transfix and baffle intelligent people long 
enough to have their goals come to pass, instead of laughing in their 
faces, or telling them to get lost.

But, seriously. Most people are not a problem, even if they are 
believers. Enough of their world is "still" grounded in the real concern 
that they have to "earn" money, instead of praying for it, and a myriad 
of other inconvenient material complications, that they are unwilling to 
dive into the shallow end of the pool, even "when" their church leaders 
insist on continually repainting the sign to say, "Depth = infinite". 
The real problem is those in the other categories, and the frustrating 
tendency of too many in the middle of siding with someone because they 
put a cross on their website, instead of the new "scarlet A", that some 
atheists are beginning to use (or anything else suggesting they don't 
believe in the "magic").

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message