| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
11 Jan 2004 09:07:56 PM |
| Object: |
God as a beneficial concept |
The purpose of this thread is not to debate the existence of God in
the real world. The purpose is to discuss the benefit of believing in
the existence of God in the conceptual world, the world of thoughts.
Imagine that a person is having a run of bad luck. They are depressed
and unable to act in their behalf. Then along comes someone who
manages to get them to accept the possibility that God will help them
if they believe.
Imagine that such a person buys into that and as as result begins to
act in a way that relieves their depression - and eventually pull
themselves out of the bad situation they were in. Imagine that this
all happens because they believed in God.
What's wrong with that? Does it really make any difference whether God
exists or not as long as people believe it and that belief prevents
them from sinking into depression where they become ineffectual?
You may not need this kind of beneficial God, but what about all those
who do?
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
11 Jan 2004 10:58:38 PM |
|
|
<spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40020dd8.2469641@news-server.houston.rr.com...
The purpose of this thread is not to debate the existence of God in
the real world. The purpose is to discuss the benefit of believing in
the existence of God in the conceptual world, the world of thoughts.
And the facts be damned.
Ok.
Imagine that a person is having a run of bad luck. They are depressed
and unable to act in their behalf. Then along comes someone who
manages to get them to accept the possibility that God will help them
if they believe.
Ok, so they sit there and believe, and things automatically get better?
Imagine that such a person buys into that and as as result begins to
act in a way that relieves their depression
You mean pray? How exactly does that help?
- and eventually pull
themselves out of the bad situation they were in.
Since they got in the bad situation through "bad luck", wouldn't we expect a
turnaround at some point?
Imagine that this
all happens because they believed in God.
But it doesn't happen because they believe in god, it happens because their
luck turned around.
What's wrong with that?
Uh, it's a LIE?
Does it really make any difference whether God
exists or not as long as people believe it and that belief prevents
them from sinking into depression where they become ineffectual?
Yes, it does make a difference. Wishful thinking doesn't solve problems.
You may not need this kind of beneficial God, but what about all those
who do?
Therapy would be good. Combatting depression with delusion is just a bad
idea.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Erica" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 12:34:02 AM |
|
|
In article <wLadnYSw1fEJtJ_dRVn-sA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
<spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40020dd8.2469641@news-server.houston.rr.com...
The purpose of this thread is not to debate the existence of God in
the real world. The purpose is to discuss the benefit of believing in
the existence of God in the conceptual world, the world of thoughts.
And the facts be damned.
Ok.
Imagine that a person is having a run of bad luck. They are depressed
and unable to act in their behalf. Then along comes someone who
manages to get them to accept the possibility that God will help them
if they believe.
Ok, so they sit there and believe, and things automatically get better?
Imagine that such a person buys into that and as as result begins to
act in a way that relieves their depression
You mean pray? How exactly does that help?
He didn't say pray. He said act in a way that relieves their depression.
I think he's suggesting that if one has hope, and a feeling that one is
not alone, then one will perhaps start to do things that reflect that
hope. Sort of a Benjamin Franklin "The Lord helps those who help
themselves" sort of thing. Or as the camping buddy puts it "God can't
change the direction of a boat that's sitting dead in the water."
- and eventually pull
themselves out of the bad situation they were in.
Since they got in the bad situation through "bad luck", wouldn't we expect a
turnaround at some point?
One would hope, though it's not guaranteed.
Imagine that this
all happens because they believed in God.
But it doesn't happen because they believe in god, it happens because their
luck turned around.
That, or we elected a Democrat into the White House <g>
What's wrong with that?
Uh, it's a LIE?
Does it really make any difference whether God
exists or not as long as people believe it and that belief prevents
them from sinking into depression where they become ineffectual?
Yes, it does make a difference. Wishful thinking doesn't solve problems.
You may not need this kind of beneficial God, but what about all those
who do?
Therapy would be good. Combatting depression with delusion is just a bad
idea.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 07:55:00 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:34:02 -0600, Erica
<scribe53151nospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
He didn't say pray. He said act in a way that relieves their depression.
I think he's suggesting that if one has hope, and a feeling that one is
not alone, then one will perhaps start to do things that reflect that
hope. Sort of a Benjamin Franklin "The Lord helps those who help
themselves" sort of thing. Or as the camping buddy puts it "God can't
change the direction of a boat that's sitting dead in the water."
Well put. The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary
inspiration to get the person to act in his benefit. Faith can move
mountains.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 09:40:55 AM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:4002a731.1188619@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:34:02 -0600, Erica
<scribe53151nospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
He didn't say pray. He said act in a way that relieves their depression.
I think he's suggesting that if one has hope, and a feeling that one is
not alone, then one will perhaps start to do things that reflect that
hope. Sort of a Benjamin Franklin "The Lord helps those who help
themselves" sort of thing. Or as the camping buddy puts it "God can't
change the direction of a boat that's sitting dead in the water."
Well put. The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary
inspiration to get the person to act in his benefit. Faith can move
mountains.
Ask any televangelist!
The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary inspiration to get
the person to act in the televangelist's benefit. Faith can move mountains
of money.
Not caring what the facts are opens one up to all sorts of manipulative
possibilities. If you'll believe one unevidenced story, you'll believe
another.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 11:33:46 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:40:55 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary inspiration to get
the person to act in the televangelist's benefit. Faith can move mountains
of money.
And what is it that your beloved "therapists" do? They move even
larger mountains of money on a per capita basis, and the only thing
they do is feed soma to their clients.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 03:04:57 PM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:4002da3f.14258492@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:40:55 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary inspiration to
get
the person to act in the televangelist's benefit. Faith can move
mountains
of money.
And what is it that your beloved "therapists" do? They move even
larger mountains of money on a per capita basis, and the only thing
they do is feed soma to their clients.
WOW! That's a raw nerve!
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Erica" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 01:20:52 PM |
|
|
In article <4002da3f.14258492@news-server.houston.rr.com>,
(First Maje) wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:40:55 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary inspiration to get
the person to act in the televangelist's benefit. Faith can move mountains
of money.
And what is it that your beloved "therapists" do? They move even
larger mountains of money on a per capita basis, and the only thing
they do is feed soma to their clients.
Mind you, some of us have both.
I have looked at my therapist sideways sometimes when it seems she's
decided, just about as my insurance is running out and I'd have to pay
out of pocket, that I suddenly need new drugs. Suddenly worse all of a
sudden.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Makohin" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 09:52:52 AM |
|
|
In article <4002a731.1188619@news-server.houston.rr.com>,
(First Maje) wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:34:02 -0600, Erica
<scribe53151nospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
He didn't say pray. He said act in a way that relieves their depression.
I think he's suggesting that if one has hope, and a feeling that one is
not alone, then one will perhaps start to do things that reflect that
hope. Sort of a Benjamin Franklin "The Lord helps those who help
themselves" sort of thing. Or as the camping buddy puts it "God can't
change the direction of a boat that's sitting dead in the water."
Well put. The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary
inspiration to get the person to act in his benefit...
Sort of like the soldier who wrote a letter to his parents saying
(paraphrased) "Thank you for praying for my safety, but I hope you
don't mind that I'll be ducking when the bullets start flying, just
the same."
If we should tally up all of Mankind's accomplishments, and count
those that can be attributed because of a religious inspiration, and
compare that number to the number of accomplishments that can be
attributed to legitimate need (like bringing fresh water to an
overpopulated city, or removing sewage from an overgrown town, etc),
or those accomplishments that can be attributed to scientific
research, human curiosity, serendipity, or the greedy little desire to
make a million bucks, we would likely see that in the grand scheme of
things that the "belief in God" has been woefully inadequate for
creating things that have benefited man. We got some nice art and some
beautiful buildings from that, though.
Faith can move mountains.
People also say that "love can move mountains," but there is no
evidence to suggest that this is actually true. By comparison,
volcanoes and tectonic motion have done pretty well at moving
mountains. At best, faith can sometimes be used to motivate _people_
to do some things, like faith in an afterlife motivated tens of
thousands of Egyptians to build great pyramids (or was the punishment
of death for disobeying the Pharaoh the motivation? I'm not sure). But
make no mistake: *people* built the pyramids, not their faith. And in
the vast majority of cases, accomplishments can be attributed to
things other than religious faith.
-Steve Makohin | Reply to
| (hotmail acct is spam catcher)
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 11:37:31 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:52:52 -0500, Steve Makohin
<smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote:
If we should tally up all of Mankind's accomplishments, and count
those that can be attributed because of a religious inspiration, and
compare that number to the number of accomplishments that can be
attributed to legitimate need (like bringing fresh water to an
overpopulated city, or removing sewage from an overgrown town, etc),
or those accomplishments that can be attributed to scientific
research, human curiosity, serendipity, or the greedy little desire to
make a million bucks, we would likely see that in the grand scheme of
things that the "belief in God" has been woefully inadequate for
creating things that have benefited man. We got some nice art and some
beautiful buildings from that, though.
That is not the subject of this discussion. I don't know how one can
claim that religious belief doesn't play a role in man's achievements.
Rose Wilder Lane, in her masterpiece "The Discovery of Freedom" has
some powerful words to say about this matter:
+++++
"The control of human energy is individual control. An individual's
desire to achieve some aim is the stimulus that generates human
energy. The individual controls that energy. He always controls it
in accordance with his personal view of the desirable, the good.
"In other words: Every person acts on a basis of his religious faith.
(I am not discussing religions. My interest is wholly in the
unprecedented effectiveness of human energy in protecting and
enriching human life, in these United States during the past century.)
"Conciousness itself is an act of faith. No one can prove that he
exists. No evidence of the senses, and no effect of logic, can
demonstrate the existence of the element that everyone means when he
says "I." I simply know that I exist.
"In the same way, by faith, everyone knows that a standard of values
exists. You can not know that you are cold, without having a standard
of temperature. You can not like or dislike or want or not want,
anything, without having a standard of good. You can not generate
energy to act, without desiring something that (to you) is good. You
can not think, without faith that you exist and faith that a standard
of value, a God, exists in the universe.
"Of course, millions do not believe that Jehovah exists, or Jupiter or
Brahma or Allah or Christ. It is always possible not to believe in
any God in whom other men believe. But it is impossible not to
believe in God. The human mind will not work without a standard of
value. Anyone who imagines that he has no religious basis of thought
and action is merely using another name for his god.
"Hitler truly says that no Nazi can be a Jew or a Christian. He
persecutes Jews and Christians, and they say that he attacks religion.
Actually he has a pagan faith that he is the Savior, the mystic Leader
ordained by superhuman Powers to establish on earth the rule of the
Master Race, the Millennium.
"Lenin hated "religion, the opiate of the people." His devoted
disciples destroyed the icons, persecuted the priests, defiled the
churches--and ardently preached and practiced an utterly
self-sacrificing faith in The Party. History (they have faith to
believe) mystically ordains The Party to establish on the whole earth
the millennial peace, plenty and justice of The Communist
Commonwealth.
"Read any so-called attack on religion. Listen to any man who claims
to be an athiest. He bases his argument on faith in The Truth; he has
a standard of good, a God. He must have one; the human mind will not
work without it.
"Since every individual is self-controlling, he acts in accordance
with the standard of values in which he believes.
"This is true, whether his God is the God of Abraham and Christ, or
Reason or Destiny or History or Astrology or Economic Determinism or
the Survival of the Fittest, or any other god by any other name. The
majority of men have always believed in innumerable pagan gods. They
still do.
"Since the actual control of human energy is individual control, and
individuals control their energy in accordance with their religious
faith, the actual control of the combined energies of any large group
of persons, at any time, is the religious faith prevailing among them
at that time.
"This faith is whatever a majority of individuals believe to be the
nature of the universe and of human beings."
+++++
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Makohin" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
13 Jan 2004 12:15:31 PM |
|
|
In article <4002da9c.14351025@news-server.houston.rr.com>,
(First Maje) wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:52:52 -0500, Steve Makohin
<smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote:
If we should tally up all of Mankind's accomplishments, and count
those that can be attributed because of a religious inspiration, and
compare that number to the number of accomplishments that can be
attributed to legitimate need (like bringing fresh water to an
overpopulated city, or removing sewage from an overgrown town, etc),
or those accomplishments that can be attributed to scientific
research, human curiosity, serendipity, or the greedy little desire to
make a million bucks, we would likely see that in the grand scheme of
things that the "belief in God" has been woefully inadequate for
creating things that have benefited man. We got some nice art and some
beautiful buildings from that, though.
That is not the subject of this discussion...
I was just responding to a statement you made:
In article <4002a731.1188619@news-server.houston.rr.com>,
(First Maje) wrote:
...The purpose of belief in God is to provide the necessary
inspiration to get the person to act in his benefit...
I interpreted "his benefit" to mean Man's benefit.
I don't know how one can claim that religious belief doesn't
play a role in man's achievements.
If you could provide proof that supports your opinion that it does,
perhaps I and others like me could be swayed to share your opinion. I
am sure that religious inspiration was the motivating force behind
some accomplishments, but I suspect they are in the small minority, in
the grand scheme of things.
-Steve Makohin | Reply to
| (hotmail acct is spam catcher)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 07:54:52 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 22:58:38 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
And the facts be damned.
Ok.
Ok, so they sit there and believe, and things automatically get better?
You mean pray? How exactly does that help?
Since they got in the bad situation through "bad luck", wouldn't we expect a
turnaround at some point?
But it doesn't happen because they believe in god, it happens because their
luck turned around.
Uh, it's a LIE?
Yes, it does make a difference. Wishful thinking doesn't solve problems.
Therapy would be good. Combatting depression with delusion is just a bad
idea.
And who says that this "therapy" is not a delusion?
Look at the record. Survey after survey has shown that religious
people are happier, healthier, more productive, etc.
By contrast, what do you have to show for your attitude other than a
cynical outlook on life. If anyone needs therapy it is you, not the
person who has faith in God.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 09:49:46 AM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:4002a6df.1106400@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 22:58:38 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
And the facts be damned.
Ok.
Ok, so they sit there and believe, and things automatically get better?
You mean pray? How exactly does that help?
Since they got in the bad situation through "bad luck", wouldn't we
expect a
turnaround at some point?
But it doesn't happen because they believe in god, it happens because
their
luck turned around.
Uh, it's a LIE?
Yes, it does make a difference. Wishful thinking doesn't solve problems.
Therapy would be good. Combatting depression with delusion is just a bad
idea.
And who says that this "therapy" is not a delusion?
Results, if it shows the therapy works. At least I don't have to lie to
someone.
Look at the record. Survey after survey has shown that religious
people are happier, healthier, more productive, etc.
Even if I grant that, which I don't, you're only saying lies make people
happy.
Well DUH!
By contrast, what do you have to show for your attitude other than a
cynical outlook on life.
Hey, you're the one that has to lie to yourself to get through it.
If anyone needs therapy it is you, not the
person who has faith in God.
I'm not the one deliberately fooling myself.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 11:32:32 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:49:46 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
And who says that this "therapy" is not a delusion?
Results, if it shows the therapy works. At least I don't have to lie to
someone.
Therapists lie worse than priests.
Look at the record. Survey after survey has shown that religious
people are happier, healthier, more productive, etc.
Even if I grant that, which I don't, you're only saying lies make people
happy.
Well DUH!
I think your cynicism is making you bigoted.
The underlying theme here is the "power of positive thinking". That's
the same snake oil your beloved "therapists" peddle to their wretched
clients - and they charge them exhorbitant amounts of money to get
them to imagine that they are getting something "valuable". What a
crock.
By contrast, what do you have to show for your attitude other than a
cynical outlook on life.
Hey, you're the one that has to lie to yourself to get through it.
Who said I am an advocate of any of this. Read that quote by Gilson I
just posted to get a better handle on my real state of mind.
If anyone needs therapy it is you, not the
person who has faith in God.
I'm not the one deliberately fooling myself.
Yes you are if you think religious belief is less effective than witch
doctors who pawn themselves off as "therapists". The drugs they
administer are not even as effective as illegal drugs in alleviating
the pain of mental illness.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 03:01:29 PM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:4002d906.13944911@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:49:46 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
And who says that this "therapy" is not a delusion?
Results, if it shows the therapy works. At least I don't have to lie to
someone.
Therapists lie worse than priests.
Well, if you say so it MUST be true!
Not.
Look at the record. Survey after survey has shown that religious
people are happier, healthier, more productive, etc.
Even if I grant that, which I don't, you're only saying lies make people
happy.
Well DUH!
I think your cynicism is making you bigoted.
Instead of insulting me, why not address the point?
The underlying theme here is the "power of positive thinking". That's
the same snake oil your beloved "therapists" peddle to their wretched
clients - and they charge them exhorbitant amounts of money to get
them to imagine that they are getting something "valuable". What a
crock.
No, the underlying theme here is LYING. LYING to someone in need. LYING to
someone seeking your help.
Please address the point that what you are suggesting is LYING to people.
By contrast, what do you have to show for your attitude other than a
cynical outlook on life.
Hey, you're the one that has to lie to yourself to get through it.
Who said I am an advocate of any of this. Read that quote by Gilson I
just posted to get a better handle on my real state of mind.
Well, you seem to be defending the issue you have put before us, and that
would suggest you have a stake in it.
The issue is lying to people who trust you.
If anyone needs therapy it is you, not the
person who has faith in God.
I'm not the one deliberately fooling myself.
Yes you are if you think religious belief is less effective than witch
doctors who pawn themselves off as "therapists". The drugs they
administer are not even as effective as illegal drugs in alleviating
the pain of mental illness.
You have put forward the proposal that lying to people is good for them.
Please address this.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 07:13:05 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:01:29 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
You have put forward the proposal that lying to people is good for them.
Please address this.
You have put forward the proposition that lying to people is good for
them, as long as they are your lies.
What you call "therapy" is just another form of shamanism - a pack of
lies.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
12 Jan 2004 10:19:23 PM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:400345cb.41789720@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:01:29 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
You have put forward the proposal that lying to people is good for them.
Please address this.
You have put forward the proposition that lying to people is good for
them, as long as they are your lies.
What you call "therapy" is just another form of shamanism - a pack of
lies.
Fine, forget the therapy.
Now it's just you putting forward the proposal that lying to people is good
for them.
Please address this.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
13 Jan 2004 12:07:06 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:19:23 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
Now it's just you putting forward the proposal that lying to people is good
for them.
Please address this.
When you were a child, your parents lied to you about Santa Claus.
That made you happy. Now that you are an adult, why do you think you
have outgrown being lied to?
Unless you have a meaningful purpose to exist, everything in your
existence is a lie. You get up in the morning and stare in the mirror
and all you see is this absurd visage, this pathetic little pipsqueak
floating around in this absurd existence. The fact that you even exist
is an absurdity, a colossal lie.
Religion attempts to elevate the individual to a level above such an
absurd condition. It attempts to find meaningful purpose in individual
existence.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
13 Jan 2004 12:33:40 AM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:400388ca.58940792@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:19:23 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
Now it's just you putting forward the proposal that lying to people is
good
for them.
Please address this.
When you were a child, your parents lied to you about Santa Claus.
That made you happy. Now that you are an adult, why do you think you
have outgrown being lied to?
Ahh, so these poor people are children compared to you. I see.
Unless you have a meaningful purpose to exist, everything in your
existence is a lie. You get up in the morning and stare in the mirror
and all you see is this absurd visage, this pathetic little pipsqueak
floating around in this absurd existence. The fact that you even exist
is an absurdity, a colossal lie.
Wow! You have quite a bleak philosophy of life. Is this the thing you were
going to tell the depressed people, or was it something else?
Religion attempts to elevate the individual to a level above such an
absurd condition. It attempts to find meaningful purpose in individual
existence.
By living a lie? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
Well, no matter, your initial paragraph tells me all I need to know about
you.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Emi M Briet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
13 Jan 2004 04:14:19 AM |
|
|
In article <jdudnRSl5YDCDJ7dRVn-jg@io.com>, "First Maje" wrote:
Unless you have a meaningful purpose to exist, everything in your
existence is a lie. You get up in the morning and stare in the mirror
and all you see is this absurd visage, this pathetic little pipsqueak
floating around in this absurd existence. The fact that you even exist
is an absurdity, a colossal lie.
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and she
gets along just fine without religion...
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
13 Jan 2004 11:29:50 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:14:19 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and she
gets along just fine without religion...
To each his own. There are different paths to enlightenment. Religion
is one of them. The one thing religion has going for it is that it
touches more people than all other kinds of enlightenment combined,
even rational analysis.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
13 Jan 2004 12:10:04 PM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40042ab1.12654836@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:14:19 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and she
gets along just fine without religion...
To each his own. There are different paths to enlightenment. Religion
is one of them. The one thing religion has going for it is that it
touches more people than all other kinds of enlightenment combined,
even rational analysis.
Please define enlightenment.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Makohin" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept (on enlightenment) |
13 Jan 2004 05:15:59 PM |
|
|
In article <F-CdneEFmbAHqZnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40042ab1.12654836@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:14:19 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and she
gets along just fine without religion...
To each his own. There are different paths to enlightenment. Religion
is one of them. The one thing religion has going for it is that it
touches more people than all other kinds of enlightenment combined,
even rational analysis.
Please define enlightenment.
I can best describe enlightenment with the following story:
An acolyte joined a monastery to become enlightened. He performed his
duties amicably, recited his prayers, and lived his life in the
prescribed manner. But at the end of three years, to his dismay, he
had not become enlightened, so the acolyte went to the Abbot and plead
to be released of his vows.
The Abbot said unto the acolyte "You have been with us for three
years. What would three more months be? Stay three more months, and if
you are not enlightened, then come speak with me."
The acolyte did as the Abbot told, but three months later, he found
himself before the Abbot, again asking to be released of his vow. The
Abbot spoke unto the acolyte "You have been a guest here for three
years and three months. Surely you can devote three more weeks of your
entire life to seek enlightenment?"
Once more, the acolyte did as he was told, and as his heart commanded
him, but sure as clockwork, three weeks later, he was before the
Abbot, unenlightened, and with the same request.
The Abbot thought for a moment, and spoke a final time to the acolyte:
"You have been a guest of this monastery for three years, three
months, and three weeks. I ask that you stay only three more days. If
you do not attain enlightenment by then, you should commit suicide."
By the end of the second day, the acolyte attained enlightenment.
-Steve Makohin | Reply to
| (hotmail acct is spam catcher)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept (on enlightenment) |
13 Jan 2004 09:29:47 PM |
|
|
"Steve Makohin" <smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:smakohin-BF555D.18155913012004@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <F-CdneEFmbAHqZnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40042ab1.12654836@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:14:19 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and
she
gets along just fine without religion...
To each his own. There are different paths to enlightenment. Religion
is one of them. The one thing religion has going for it is that it
touches more people than all other kinds of enlightenment combined,
even rational analysis.
Please define enlightenment.
I can best describe enlightenment with the following story:
An acolyte joined a monastery to become enlightened. He performed his
duties amicably, recited his prayers, and lived his life in the
prescribed manner. But at the end of three years, to his dismay, he
had not become enlightened, so the acolyte went to the Abbot and plead
to be released of his vows.
The Abbot said unto the acolyte "You have been with us for three
years. What would three more months be? Stay three more months, and if
you are not enlightened, then come speak with me."
The acolyte did as the Abbot told, but three months later, he found
himself before the Abbot, again asking to be released of his vow. The
Abbot spoke unto the acolyte "You have been a guest here for three
years and three months. Surely you can devote three more weeks of your
entire life to seek enlightenment?"
Once more, the acolyte did as he was told, and as his heart commanded
him, but sure as clockwork, three weeks later, he was before the
Abbot, unenlightened, and with the same request.
The Abbot thought for a moment, and spoke a final time to the acolyte:
"You have been a guest of this monastery for three years, three
months, and three weeks. I ask that you stay only three more days. If
you do not attain enlightenment by then, you should commit suicide."
By the end of the second day, the acolyte attained enlightenment.
That's got to be the longest winded non-answer I've ever received.
"No, sorry, I cannot define enlightenment." would have been shorter and more
succinct.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Makohin" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept (on enlightenment) |
14 Jan 2004 02:18:49 PM |
|
|
In article <9aCdnQ9RbJ4sKpnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"Steve Makohin" <smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:smakohin-BF555D.18155913012004@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <F-CdneEFmbAHqZnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40042ab1.12654836@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:14:19 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and
she
gets along just fine without religion...
To each his own. There are different paths to enlightenment. Religion
is one of them. The one thing religion has going for it is that it
touches more people than all other kinds of enlightenment combined,
even rational analysis.
Please define enlightenment.
I can best describe enlightenment with the following story:
An acolyte joined a monastery to become enlightened. He performed his
duties amicably, recited his prayers, and lived his life in the
prescribed manner. But at the end of three years, to his dismay, he
had not become enlightened, so the acolyte went to the Abbot and plead
to be released of his vows.
The Abbot said unto the acolyte "You have been with us for three
years. What would three more months be? Stay three more months, and if
you are not enlightened, then come speak with me."
The acolyte did as the Abbot told, but three months later, he found
himself before the Abbot, again asking to be released of his vow. The
Abbot spoke unto the acolyte "You have been a guest here for three
years and three months. Surely you can devote three more weeks of your
entire life to seek enlightenment?"
Once more, the acolyte did as he was told, and as his heart commanded
him, but sure as clockwork, three weeks later, he was before the
Abbot, unenlightened, and with the same request.
The Abbot thought for a moment, and spoke a final time to the acolyte:
"You have been a guest of this monastery for three years, three
months, and three weeks. I ask that you stay only three more days. If
you do not attain enlightenment by then, you should commit suicide."
By the end of the second day, the acolyte attained enlightenment.
That's got to be the longest winded non-answer I've ever received.
"No, sorry, I cannot define enlightenment." would have been shorter and more
succinct.
You must have missed a number of my other postings :-D Still, it's a
good story on enlightenment. If you don't like my cute story, try a
dictionary definition (www.m-w.com) on for size:
Main Entry: en·light·en·ment
Function: noun
Date: 1669
1 : the act or means of enlightening : the state of being
enlightened
2 capitalized : a philosophic movement of the 18th century
marked by a rejection of traditional social, religious,
and political ideas and an emphasis on rationalism --
used with *the*
3 Buddhism : a final blessed state marked by the absence of
desire or suffering
Knock yourself out!
-Steve Makohin | Reply to
| (hotmail acct is spam catcher)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept (on enlightenment) |
14 Jan 2004 02:57:22 PM |
|
|
"Steve Makohin" <smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:smakohin-FDCD09.15184914012004@news.newsguy.com...
In article <9aCdnQ9RbJ4sKpnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"Steve Makohin" <smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:smakohin-BF555D.18155913012004@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <F-CdneEFmbAHqZnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40042ab1.12654836@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:14:19 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and
she
gets along just fine without religion...
To each his own. There are different paths to enlightenment.
Religion
is one of them. The one thing religion has going for it is that it
touches more people than all other kinds of enlightenment combined,
even rational analysis.
Please define enlightenment.
I can best describe enlightenment with the following story:
An acolyte joined a monastery to become enlightened. He performed his
duties amicably, recited his prayers, and lived his life in the
prescribed manner. But at the end of three years, to his dismay, he
had not become enlightened, so the acolyte went to the Abbot and plead
to be released of his vows.
The Abbot said unto the acolyte "You have been with us for three
years. What would three more months be? Stay three more months, and if
you are not enlightened, then come speak with me."
The acolyte did as the Abbot told, but three months later, he found
himself before the Abbot, again asking to be released of his vow. The
Abbot spoke unto the acolyte "You have been a guest here for three
years and three months. Surely you can devote three more weeks of your
entire life to seek enlightenment?"
Once more, the acolyte did as he was told, and as his heart commanded
him, but sure as clockwork, three weeks later, he was before the
Abbot, unenlightened, and with the same request.
The Abbot thought for a moment, and spoke a final time to the acolyte:
"You have been a guest of this monastery for three years, three
months, and three weeks. I ask that you stay only three more days. If
you do not attain enlightenment by then, you should commit suicide."
By the end of the second day, the acolyte attained enlightenment.
That's got to be the longest winded non-answer I've ever received.
"No, sorry, I cannot define enlightenment." would have been shorter and
more
succinct.
You must have missed a number of my other postings :-D
DOH! That'll teach me not to examine the author field.
I do apologise!
Still, it's a
good story on enlightenment. If you don't like my cute story, try a
dictionary definition (www.m-w.com) on for size:
Main Entry: en·light·en·ment
Function: noun
Date: 1669
1 : the act or means of enlightening : the state of being
enlightened
2 capitalized : a philosophic movement of the 18th century
marked by a rejection of traditional social, religious,
and political ideas and an emphasis on rationalism --
used with *the*
3 Buddhism : a final blessed state marked by the absence of
desire or suffering
Knock yourself out!
Looks like number 3 is the only definition that tries to explain what
enlightenment is. But I'm still confused.
Buddhists all want to be catatonic? ;-)
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Makohin" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept (on enlightenment) |
14 Jan 2004 05:14:47 PM |
|
|
In article <Sf6dnSV_bJerMJjd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"Steve Makohin" <smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:smakohin-FDCD09.15184914012004@news.newsguy.com...
In article <9aCdnQ9RbJ4sKpnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"Steve Makohin" <smakohin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:smakohin-BF555D.18155913012004@enews.newsguy.com...
In article <F-CdneEFmbAHqZnd4p2dnA@io.com>,
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40042ab1.12654836@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:14:19 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
I'm a Christian and even I don't buy religion being fundamentally
necessary to one's quality of life....my best friend is atheist and
she
gets along just fine without religion...
To each his own. There are different paths to enlightenment.
Religion
is one of them. The one thing religion has going for it is that it
touches more people than all other kinds of enlightenment combined,
even rational analysis.
Please define enlightenment.
I can best describe enlightenment with the following story:
An acolyte joined a monastery to become enlightened. He performed his
duties amicably, recited his prayers, and lived his life in the
prescribed manner. But at the end of three years, to his dismay, he
had not become enlightened, so the acolyte went to the Abbot and plead
to be released of his vows.
The Abbot said unto the acolyte "You have been with us for three
years. What would three more months be? Stay three more months, and if
you are not enlightened, then come speak with me."
The acolyte did as the Abbot told, but three months later, he found
himself before the Abbot, again asking to be released of his vow. The
Abbot spoke unto the acolyte "You have been a guest here for three
years and three months. Surely you can devote three more weeks of your
entire life to seek enlightenment?"
Once more, the acolyte did as he was told, and as his heart commanded
him, but sure as clockwork, three weeks later, he was before the
Abbot, unenlightened, and with the same request.
The Abbot thought for a moment, and spoke a final time to the acolyte:
"You have been a guest of this monastery for three years, three
months, and three weeks. I ask that you stay only three more days. If
you do not attain enlightenment by then, you should commit suicide."
By the end of the second day, the acolyte attained enlightenment.
That's got to be the longest winded non-answer I've ever received.
"No, sorry, I cannot define enlightenment." would have been shorter and
more
succinct.
You must have missed a number of my other postings :-D
DOH! That'll teach me not to examine the author field.
I do apologise!
Still, it's a
good story on enlightenment. If you don't like my cute story, try a
dictionary definition (www.m-w.com) on for size:
Main Entry: en·light·en·ment
Function: noun
Date: 1669
1 : the act or means of enlightening : the state of being
enlightened
2 capitalized : a philosophic movement of the 18th century
marked by a rejection of traditional social, religious,
and political ideas and an emphasis on rationalism --
used with *the*
3 Buddhism : a final blessed state marked by the absence of
desire or suffering
Knock yourself out!
Looks like number 3 is the only definition that tries to explain what
enlightenment is. But I'm still confused.
Buddhists all want to be catatonic? ;-)
Oh, I don't know. Using defintion #2, that being the "rejection of
traditional social, religious, and political ideas and an emphasis on
rationalism" would make at least _some_ atheists "enlightened" beings.
No?
-Steve Makohin | Reply to
| (hotmail acct is spam catcher)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
14 Jan 2004 10:44:37 AM |
|
|
On 12 Jan 2004, (First Maje) screwed up his face, groaned,
pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:400345cb.41789720@news-server.houston.rr.com:
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:01:29 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
You have put forward the proposal that lying to people is good for
them.
Please address this.
You have put forward the proposition that lying to people is good for
them, as long as they are your lies.
What you call "therapy" is just another form of shamanism - a pack of
lies.
Putting aside psychiatry, which may or may not be "lies", why do you
suggest that lying to someone is good for them?
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
14 Jan 2004 11:34:34 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:44:37 GMT, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
Putting aside psychiatry, which may or may not be "lies", why do you
suggest that lying to someone is good for them?
Here's the dichotomy:
a) You attempt to tell them the "truth" but they are too dull or
skeptical or whatever to accept the "truth" presented in that manner.
The are therefore unable to find meaning and purpose in their lives,
their self esteem suffers and they become disfunctional to some
degree.
b) You realize that most people are too dull to understand the "truth"
for whatever reasons. Maybe the "truth" is too abstract, maybe to
understand it requires critical thinking which most people have not
mastered (cf. Milgram Experiments). You therefore decide to present to
them a set of myths which they can grasp intuitively, much like a
parent tells a little child a fairy tale which has some kind of
"truth" embedded in it (cf. Aesop's Fables, Christ's Parables, etc.).
This dull individual grasps the embedded "truths" of your myths and
discovered for himself/herself some kind of meaning and purpose to
their existence, and therefrom develops a healthy form of self esteem.
Which scenario above would you choose if you were sincerely concerned
about the well-being of someone?
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
16 Jan 2004 01:08:43 AM |
|
|
"First Maje" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:40057c4e.15979687@news-server.houston.rr.com...
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:44:37 GMT, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
Putting aside psychiatry, which may or may not be "lies", why do you
suggest that lying to someone is good for them?
Here's the dichotomy:
a) You attempt to tell them the "truth" but they are too dull or
skeptical or whatever to accept the "truth" presented in that manner.
The are therefore unable to find meaning and purpose in their lives,
their self esteem suffers and they become disfunctional to some
degree.
b) You realize that most people are too dull to understand the "truth"
for whatever reasons. Maybe the "truth" is too abstract, maybe to
understand it requires critical thinking which most people have not
mastered (cf. Milgram Experiments). You therefore decide to present to
them a set of myths which they can grasp intuitively, much like a
parent tells a little child a fairy tale which has some kind of
"truth" embedded in it (cf. Aesop's Fables, Christ's Parables, etc.).
This dull individual grasps the embedded "truths" of your myths and
discovered for himself/herself some kind of meaning and purpose to
their existence, and therefrom develops a healthy form of self esteem.
Which scenario above would you choose if you were sincerely concerned
about the well-being of someone?
The first one, as the lesser of two evils.
Both scenarios hold the people in contempt, but the second one goes further
and actually treats them with contempt.
So the first one is better.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "First Maje" |
|
| Title: Re: God as a beneficial concept |
16 Jan 2004 06:17:21 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:08:43 -0600, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
a) You attempt to tell them the "truth" but they are too dull or
skeptical or whatever to accept the "truth" presented in that manner.
The are therefore unable to find meaning and purpose in their lives,
their self esteem suffers and they become disfunctional to some
degree.
b) You realize that most people are too dull to understand the "truth"
for whatever reasons. Maybe the "truth" is too abstract, maybe to
understand it requires critical thinking which most people have not
mastered (cf. Milgram Experiments). You therefore decide to present to
them a set of myths which they can grasp intuitively, much like a
parent tells a little child a fairy tale which has some kind of
"truth" embedded in it (cf. Aesop's Fables, Christ's Parables, etc.).
This dull individual grasps the embedded "truths" of your myths and
discovered for himself/herself some kind of meaning and purpose to
their existence, and therefrom develops a healthy form of self esteem.
Which scenario above would you choose if you were sincerely concerned
about the well-being of someone?
The first one, as the lesser of two evils.
Both scenarios hold the people in contempt, but the second one goes further
and actually treats them with contempt.
So the first one is better.
It might be better for you, but what if it is not better for the
person you are trying to convince? What if they completely reject your
attempts to "educate" them. Now what are you going to do? Ignore them?
Did you tell your children that there was a Santa? If so, why did you
do that? Is it because it made them feel better? If so, then why not
tell people about God, if it makes them feel better - in particular
when trying to tell them the "truth" will just make them feel worse?
I have tried to reason with people who reject philosophy. They want
their religion. Without it they are a fish out of water.
Are you going to be so presumptious that the only way to get oxygen to
the blood cells is to breath with lungs? What about all those fish
that breathe thru gills? It is indeed the case that they do not know
the "truth" about lungs, but so what. As long as they have their
gills, they can exist in their way.
--
Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy:
http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/
"What is the State? The State is people - people who believe
they have a right to rule others. These people are the thieving,
murdering brutes responsible for war, conscription, taxation,
massacres, slave camps, gas chambers, killing fields, nuclear
missles, and endless death stretching back ten thousand years.
Luckily for all, the State is only people. And, generally, the
least competent of people. They are the ones who cannot innovate,
only steal. They cannot reason, only kill. They are brutes who
see the greatest efforts of mankind as loot to seize and control.
Yet when they seize the creations of greater minds, the works
crumble in their hands, for they cannot control what they are
incapable of understanding."
-- "Kings of the High Frontier"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
