Origin > Living Forever > Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
Permanent link to this article: http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0384.html

Printable Version
    Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
by   David Gelernter

Do modern intellectuals actually believe that religious believers are naively deluded? Or could they be missing something themselves? David Gelernter responds to Edge publisher/editor John Brockman's request to futurists to pose "hard-edge" questions that "render visible the deeper meanings of our lives, redefine who and what we are."


Originally published January 2002 at Edge. Published on KurzweilAI.net January 21, 2002. Read Ray Kurzweil's Edge question here.

Is it just a matter of IQ? (Though I thought intellectuals no longer believed in IQ...) But empirically it can't be an IQ issue, because so many of history's greatest minds based their lives on religion -- from Michaelangelo or Bach to Spinoza or Dante or Kant. Do modern intellectuals actually believe that all such people are naively deluded? Or could they be missing something themselves?

Copyright © 2002 by Edge Foundation, Inc.



www.edge.org

 Join the discussion about this article on Mind·X!  
 

   [Post New Comment]
   
Mind·X Discussion About This Article:

Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 01/22/2002 8:46 PM by maglio@prosysintl.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?

It is just as easy to ask why are you an intellectual? What makes you an intellectual?
It is all part of your personality. I am generalizing a bit to say that most intellectual fall
into a Myers-Briggs category of Intuitive - Thinkers. This category corresponds to about
10% of the population. It is from this same category of personality that most agnostics
and atheists come. Also about 10% of the population. Intuitive - Thinkers think and
believe (or not believe) outside the box, unlike traditionalists who will do and believe as
their fathers did.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 01/23/2002 1:07 AM by tubadecuba@aol.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Also consider that because most intellectuals refuse to accept traditional dogmas in favor of a personal quest of belief, they often spend their entire lives doing such, and only until it is when they grow old and recognize the nearness of death that a religious attachment suddenly appears, perhaps even the same that they were initially brought up to believe.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 01/25/2002 1:14 PM by bhansen@wdws.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

First, the question is biased. It simply hasn't been demonstrated that religion is less important to intellectuals.

Unless, of course, we define "intellectuals" along lines that pre-determine the outcome of this question. Certainly, since the 18th century, the most publicly-recognized "intellectuals" have tended to be irreligious. Rousseau, Marx, Shelley, Brecht, Ibsen, Russell, etc. all set a template for the modern press-garnering secular intellectual. In fact, this template has become so ingrained that the words "secular intellectual" suggest a redundancy. But that's a result of media fashion, not reality.

(Ironically, one need only look at the number of religious believers in different arenas of academia today to learn an important lesson. In the social sciences, you'll find virtually none. But stroll over to the buildings housing the hard sciences and engineering, and you're likely to run into a good deal more. The fact is, the more legitimate the "science", the more likely it is to be habited by the religious. This is not to say the hard sciences are exclusively theist, by any means -- but that the term "intellectual", by fashionable definition in the social sciences, has come to be applied only to those who don't believe in God.)

More interesting though, I think: The proposition that religion isn't *important*, even to non-believing public intellectuals, would be highly misleading. One can see religion -- even if manifested in anti-religious fervor -- animating the works of many of the publicly recognized intellectuals of the last two hundred years. In fact, it wouldn't be misleading to say that many of them were positively consumed with religion, judging merely by the force of their attempts to eradicate or mock it.

It's not just important to them, it permeates their lives' work.



Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/07/2002 6:44 AM by jayh@1st.net

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Actually, statistics tend to be the reverse. Religion is very common in social sciences, psychology etc. Physics, chemistry etc. have much lower rates of religion (and it has been this way for the past century at least). And among those scientists that have a religion, it tends to be a social function, not a core belief.

The core reason is likely due to the nature of science, the success of the past couple of centuries has come about because science holds ideas up to test (including scientific theories) and keeps weeding out those that don't hold up. Religion doesn't fare any better than other mythologies in this climate.

Interestingly, the difference in tech but non-science fields such as engineering, comp sci, etc seems to be accounted for by the nature of the discipline. You don't generally question or challenge ideas in engineering, engineers often have no real understanding of skepticism or scientific method. Engineers, unlike biologists or physicists, can stay far away from anything that actually challenges religious belief.

jay

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/07/2002 9:34 AM by tomaz@techemail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

If there is no god ... there is no god. What's the big deal?

I am glad, it's so.

- Thomas

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/08/2005 10:24 AM by Frames

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I like the "if"

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/07/2002 12:20 PM by bhansen@wdws.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

In the absence of the actual statistics, chronicling the religious views of scientists over the last hundred years, this answer would seem to be an example of the bias I'm referring to.
<br>

<br>
It's simply presumed intellectuals are irreligious by necessity, and it's presumed that skepticism and scientific inquiry necessarily lead to anti-religious conclusions.
<br>

<br>
Where is the skepticism and inquiry regarding claims about what scientists believed about God a hundred years ago?
<br>

<br>
Richard Dawkins himself allows that scientists need to make themselves ignore readily apparent evidences of a creator in order to preserve their needed non-religious outlook.
<br>

<br>
I'm a pro-science, pro-intellectual skeptic myself. But let's admit that what intellectuals believe, and the perception of what intellectuals believe, has more to do with fashion than the validity or non-validity of religious faith.
<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/11/2002 10:05 PM by darkstar100@mail.ru

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Because it's very hard to believe in something you don't really beleive.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/29/2002 10:36 AM by wordsmyth@btinternet.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Or spell.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 01/10/2003 3:06 AM by L

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Perhaps the evolutionary hormonal response ( idealistic view of love ) in highly exceptional individuals makes them conform to the average era of normalization in society. More so the chance being in pity or triggered compassion to enhance the survival rate of intelligence and to diminish lesser thinkers. Religion would play a major role in creating exceptionally intelligent people. Seeing how society clings to the hopes and dreams of becoming something they are not . . . in all likely they will breed more followers so in such evolutionary responses to highly exceptional individuals would increase. The chances of agnostic/atheist prone people would in return help to create religious followers and vice versa.

idiots
posted on 10/22/2005 9:57 PM by codesimian

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

traditionalists who will do and believe as their fathers did.


the intelligence of a PARROT
polly wanna cracker? aaaawk

polly wanna go to hell? aaaaaawk polly believe in heaven

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 01/23/2002 11:50 PM by seeker@hal-pc.org

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Which regime best meets your needs, Faith or Proof?

Let's draw a line in the sand. On one side we place those individuals with a bachelor degree or greater and label them intellectuals. On the other side we place all others and label them average. Let's acknowledge and disregard the exceptions that do exist on both sides of that line. What I have observed in all religions, whether it be Christianity, Islamic, Hindu or whatever; is that belief in a book of stories written centuries ago is required and the degree of faith drives the degree of commitment. Fundamentally, all religions say the same thing, be a good human and believe in the writings and you will evolve to a greater plane of existence after your death. Therefore, I believe it is this promise of a better life after death that drives the average person to a religion. I also believe that social pressures in a culture or community contributes to the reinforcement of a religion on the average person. The latent significance is that the average person is not likely to stand up against the masses and will simply conform to the rule. An average person may therefore find their identity and self-worth in this faith based regime.

The intellectual, on the other hand, may find it difficult to accept the promise of a better life after death and that the writings are exaggerations of events in history that may have been distorted over the years of story telling and transcription. No matter what the pretense, to believe requires faith and that cuts across the grain of the very substance of an intellectual. It is the nature and training of an intellectual to challenge their beliefs or the prevailing belief whether it be in quantum physics, genetics, astrophysics, mathematics or whatever their field of practice. Although the word faith may be used or felt when seeking project funding. The intellectual knows that they don't advance science or any technical field by preaching to their colleagues for them to have faith in their research results. Constructs of the physical world are always getting challenged and the intellectual expects as much and the advancement of science demands as much. There is no worth for the concept of faith in the intellectual world and this may be why all religions are considered trivial by the intellectual. Consequently, the intellectual may find their identity and self-worth in a proof based regime.

The distinction I draw between an agnostic individual and an atheist is that the agnostic person may ponder questions like what or who initiated the big bang that created the universe where the agnostic person may ponder how did nature cause the big bang to begin.

When an individual makes a determination as to whether they function in a faith based regime or a proof based regime is normally ascertained from normal day-to-day events. However, to truly test the proof based regime one has to experience an extreme and extended life or death situation. If, during your period of intense fear, you lend thoughts to a higher being to save you from your situation, then it would suggest that your core may function in a faith based regime even though you consciously believe you function in a proof based regime.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 01/24/2002 10:25 AM by carlislehenning@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Because 'most' academics only consider what is in front of them, and obvious. They get caught on the question of - how it works, and forget about the magic behind it all.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/11/2002 2:36 PM by paradigm_42@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

because bryan sandy sucks

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/13/2005 7:36 PM by bobmugge

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

That was a great analysis...


I think faith based people use their religion, whatever it may be, to focus.. An example would be an athelete that prays to win a sporting event. I can remember high school football coaches praying for victory. I remember thinking, "I hope god has something better to do than be concerned with our little football game. The boxer that thanks god after winning a bout. As if God would have time to be concerned about the outcome of a boxing match, therefore that is why that participant was the victor. In contrast the loser thinks he must have fallen because he was in disfavor with God.

Even more interesting to me is this.. If something happens that is tragic. A baby dies after an accident.. Then it was gods will.. That is the the way it is explained and coped with.. The people will pray diligently for a favorable outcome and then when the prayer does not come about they say, "it is Gods will".. If their faith was that strong and the will of God will always be done, then why pray? Gods will was going to be done in the first place so why insult God by asking him to reverse his decision.

Any way I am rambling. I am just always facinated by the way religion is approached and analyzed.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/08/2005 10:47 AM by Frames

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

"I hope god has something better to do than be concerned with our little football game."

This just goes to show how differently people work. I could not even imagine hoping that something important in my life was unimportant to Him. I am grateful for the way I have come to ponder life and "God's will" in a positve and optimistic way. I have not finished reading all the post to this one topic yet, but i hope to see a definition of the type of "intellectual" we are discussing so I can better grasp so many of the ideas here. I personally view an intellecual as an individual seeking knowledge and who can use the sought after information to create a personal deduction. Not to say that can not change with more information, but is an intellectual and a "believer" if you will, are they really so defferent? Both are believing, in ways that suit themselves,people are different is what it all seems to come down to in my mind.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 01/28/2002 2:14 PM by rayjw@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

On why God-Based Religion is important to Americans; look up Pascal's Wager.
On the trivialness of Religion; Religion IS important to intellectuals. Organized Religion is not. There are few more in awe of the universe and the way people relate than intellectuals(whatever that word means).
The difference is that organized religions state that you 'cannot' believe something. When early astronomers stated the sun is larger than the earth, orgainized religions condemned them for even suggesting such ideas. Same with Darwin. What will the Catholic church do when it is proven that Homosexuality is genetic?
Organized religion is a set of rules that 'cannot' be broken. Intellectuals are people that break those rules and eventually bring acceptance of those same rules. Religion eventually follows these people. Afterall, did God create Man, or did Man create God. (Am I being a heretic?)

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/02/2002 11:39 PM by Stevnargo@aol.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

It is because culter and bilief is passed down. Instinkt installs in us to learn and fit in to the social suroundings. "The pack" We must learn to hunt ah. And diffrent things goes through that process in a complicated animal like us.
Children of abusive parents are more likely to be abusive parents themselvs. But not all mind you.
Also morality is a survival instinkt geared aray from territorialism. As a species gets older and more advanced. It's means of taking the other packs land gets more efficient and dangerious. The next natural step i think is morality in the social system. To drive him away from war and into complacent survival. And to set up a code of survival to help overall numbers grow.
What do you think?

Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/31/2002 7:36 AM by jermainelo@yahoo.co.uk

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Aldous Huxley once said that an intellectual is the one who has found something more interesting than Sex!
Any kind of an overindulgent belief in esoteric ideals is bad for the human soul, be it religion, money or sex! it's all the same.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/31/2002 6:19 PM by citzenblue@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

>Aldous Huxley once said that an intellectual is the one who has found something more interesting than Sex!
Any kind of an overindulgent belief in esoteric ideals is bad for the human soul, be it religion, money or sex! it's all the same.<

germainelo, this is very wise; I enjoy the writing of Huxley.

Take Care

Nathan

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/31/2002 6:20 PM by citzenblue@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

jermainelo, sorry for spelling your name wrong!

Nathan C.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/07/2002 2:48 AM by rillian

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

The Catholic Church already acknowledges that homosexuality may very probably be genetic. They (the church) still consider homosexual sex _acts_ (not persuasions) to be disordered. But that's getting _way_ off topic, here.

The learned Christian as nerd
posted on 02/07/2002 1:34 PM by markplus@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I think religiosity in the U.S. is superficial. The anti-intellectualism of American culture tends to limit the spread of really retrograde religious memes, because studying the Bible and other theological writings is too much like school work to hold mass appeal. People who do display a deep knowledge of this literature might be respected, but they are also viewed as being akin to nerds.

Otherwise how can you explain why American secular intellectuals generally know the Bible better than most American Christians?

Re: The learned Christian as nerd
posted on 07/19/2002 11:34 AM by SAlanEd

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Why do intellectuals know the bible better than those that are religious?

Because the intellectuals (critics) want to analyze the written record. Its what they do.

I think that a few definitions would help this discussion:

What's the difference between an intellectual and an intelligent, educated person?

What's the difference between faith in God and belief in dogma?

Most religious, nominally Christian people don't know the bible that well because they know it doesn't matter that much. Faith in God abides, despite inconsistencies in the basic text. Intellectuals want to attack the text because they don't understand faith, don't feel it and can't quantify it.

Can a deaf man expect to understand Bach by looking at the written music?

Steve Edwards

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/08/2002 4:17 PM by erik@axiomresources.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Science is a form of religion too! A definition of religion is a "set of beliefs to live life according to". Well science is that, we live life accoeding to logic & scientific principle. I pose that Science is a competing belief system to Christianity, Muslim etc. More broadly put, it is the Western Value system that is a religion: science, technology, capitalism & free markets. Most of us put our "faith" in these beliefs. We are told by our parents & educators that these are the right beliefs & many of us never question it. Even in these trying times, many of us are looking to technology to save us. We get propaganda every day to reinforce these beliefs. The Super Bowl is our Holy Day. When we are all nanobot powered we will ascend to the stars.....

So intellectuals have unknowingly been converted to a different religion than we are used to. It seems people need to believe in something.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/08/2002 7:29 PM by treeboy70@go.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I'd challenge the assumption that religion isn't important to most American intellectuals. Show me a valid poll that backs up that statement and I'll believe it. Otherwise, I'd guess that a significant percentage of intellectuals think religion is important. As long as we can't answer the big questions with science (and that'll be forever I think), religion will have a place.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/08/2002 10:31 PM by grantc4@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

How are we going to decide who the intellectuals are and poll them?

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/13/2002 12:31 PM by darksoul123@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religion is important to everyone, intellectuals and retards alike. Religion has been passed on from genetation to gernaeration and we cannot escape it. in the end we will all return to it. because we will become afraid of eternity and will want the better life promised in the holy books. of course tall holy books are bull. they were just made as a moral code so societys won't become totally chaotic. they have worked because we are still here. most intelictuals dismiss relgion because it has kept us back for so llong.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/13/2002 1:41 PM by kwhrm@crosslink.net

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

The late Allan Bloom had an answer for this question in his book, "The Closing of the American Mind". I agree with him in that I have observed a cultural bias against religion or faith based belief systems. As he opined, this bias is institutionalised in academia and severly sanctions as well as censors those who break from the pack. I think that most of the few academics and intellectuals that dare to express religious belief, are in fact diest. The diest believes in a god by does not believe that this god intervenes in the natural world. True believers who believe in a god who intervenes are not given voice.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/13/2002 8:24 PM by grantc4@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

>True believers who believe in a god who intervenes are not given voice.

They're all over television, radio, print media and the Internet. Who is supposed to be shutting them up?

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 03/08/2002 5:42 PM by mastawok@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

It is my belief that at only one point in all of "time" has there been mysticism. The creation of the beginning. The all to obvious question of what started it all. What came from nothing that created something?

This question has tickled the minds of many of us since childhood. The easiest and simplest answer would be "God". Some sort of being higher then anything, that "just is" and "just does". This being is capable of doing unlogical feats and astounding the masses.

As science advances at its current exponentiel rate we begin to consider the logic that can bring light to "God's" exploits. With every exploit removed we believe less and less.

All things considered however will we reach a point where we no longer believe? Or is religion something that people can't release? I suppose that endlessly pondering whether religion is something to logically believe in is irrational. Religion is an integral part of our lives. From the holidays that we celebrate to the daily routines we take part in. Luck and superstition are certainly ranked with religion. Perhaps "personal religion" is the correct word.

Human beings, who are lucky enough to have a heightened sense of consciousness, have to have an answer to everything. The common American can relate to something that "is" but can't be explained... it "just is." But intellectuals need to be grounded by substance. To say that intellectuals don't believe in religion at all, is wrong. To quote the theme of this thread, perhaps greats such as Michelangelo at one time were deeply involved with religion but certainly were not grounded by it. Later in life they began to seek explainations.

Religion plays a part in the majority of our lives but it is that wonder of what really is out there that makes an intellectual who he/she is. It is that curiosity that allows us to persue our intellectual crusade (adventure perhaps is a better word... somehow cheesey sounding).

To answer the question in short form:

The delineation between the common American and "Intellectuals" regarding this theme can be the fact that "intellectuals" seek a higher reason for things and can not accept the "just is" factor.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 03/10/2002 10:16 AM by vettysun@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

this is my opinion (with experiences) that:
1. "Religous" is spritual-world-created behavior,
2. "Tehc" is human-mind-created things.
They are in harmony, nothing contradictive. Due to human is missing something and therefore questing it. For example, "ghost", it is a common thing in spiritual world, but can NOT be sensed using today physical-world-technologies. But it is funny that a lot of movies created based on true stories about ghost !

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/30/2002 8:13 AM by jungle_cat@hushmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

>They're all over television, radio, print media and the Internet. Who is supposed to be shutting them up?

funny... many religious people i know would say the same thing about secular intellectuals. the distinction meme is a powerful one...

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 06/09/2002 3:38 AM by thp@studiooctopussy.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

But is is simply not true. Look at the statistics and you will se that most people are religious.

Even the president uses concepts like "The axis of evil" and "May God be with you" to justify his thoughts (or lack of)

Freely he can sit there and tell ignorant lies, using ignorant concepts like "evil" not realising that he speaks in an absolute manner.

But aren't most of us who have studied some kind of science realising that there is not such thing as an absolute. The closest I have ever come to saying anything conclusive is by using the words "relative absolutes".

It should be clear to most semi intellectuals/scientist, that meaning is based on interpretation of observation. The object is not really existing in the form that I interpret it as.

Intellectuals seem to have a bias more towards spiritualism. The more science they learn the more that will fade to.



Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 06/09/2002 3:56 AM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I have seen President Bush on TV promoting his presidential campaign standing in a church acting as if he were religious; we all know or should know that he is full up; even my own mother believes the lie. He uses the the right wing Christian society to promote his agenda. He is all about war like his father. The whole Bush represents their own identity, and simply that.

Why should anyone be shutting anybody up?
posted on 06/04/2002 12:36 AM by joesixpack@gobills.net

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I know several *learned* people who are very devout, including my own parents. They believe because they choose to.

I choose not to, but I can hardly begrudge people who do. I think much of the problem stems from the demonizaion of religion by the mass media.

Americans, in my opinion, subconsciously chafe at the messages being sent to them from the media. It's this urge to assert independence of thought that pushes many Americans to religion.

Re: Why should anyone be shutting anybody up?
posted on 06/08/2002 7:23 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religion can be very Spencerian; Let us not be deceived by the wont of power of each organization. Foucault's philosophy had deep implications for this kind of thought. The moral agenda that religions enforce should not take away freedoms of others i.e. homosexuality, the right of abortion and the practice of others' religions freedoms such as Wicca etc; many people have been persecuted for the rights which never should have been violated. When there is tolerance that is when I will agree. This has not been fully done.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 03/10/2002 10:14 PM by quaesitorus@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Um..

Tao of Physics, Godel, Escher, Bach...De Chardin...

I think mainstream reliegious expressions are irrelevant, but intellectuals have found solace in other forms, from buddhism to hermetic ritual..

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 03/11/2002 1:27 PM by johnpaulmains@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

As several posts here have stated, there is no real evidence that shows "intellectuals" feel that religion is trivial. If you classify religion as what is generally believed by the masses that there is a God but they can not explain why they believe so, then I believe you are correct in saying that this is trivial, and sad in my opinion.

I would classify myself as one of these intellectuals since early childhood. I have been in scientific circles (medical and engineering) for a long time and have met many others who would classify themselves as intellectuals as well. I have found that most of these people (I have met anyway) struggle with religion as the general populace believes. But they seem to have a deeper, more mature and stronger Christian faith than the general population. This has been through their own intense intellectual search into what they have found to be truth.

They do not find it to be a cop-out from science and technology, but that it creates a foundation for them in what they do which is basically exploring the intricate details of creation.

JP

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/15/2002 2:31 AM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

When men discovered that they could join groups to protect their superstitions they did. Still it is used as a form of self delusion, their opium. Let them eat cake!!! Let them be full of themselves; but in the end the truth will show, as every religion has a dark side. Do not say that religion is not mental illness. Americans are the worst when it comes to this self deception. Sure let capitalism rule communism will never work, but let us realize that we do not need religion. Humanism is all we really need. Once we realize that, and get past dogma, then we can proceed.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/15/2002 5:40 PM by surgewallace@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Truth, is a very absolute word to use in such a sweeping statement. Religion has a dark side because we have a dark side. To believe that a departure from religion will free us from our own darkness is as zealous a statement that religion, through it's practice, will free us from our sins.

Religion is so important to so many because for them, it is the truth. How many times do we as scientists, have to have our truth disproved before we realize we don't have a monopoly on its definition. I believe in a Blind Watchmaker but I also realize that I'm not the watchmaker either.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/22/2002 7:09 AM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Culture is mold; let the strongest one survive; no that is correct or anything; but, might is right; or shall I take the "circular", ontological reason that a god must exist, because everything exists. Let us be reasonable. Yes, I believe in humanism, because I know humans to exist. I believe in reason no matter how faiths tend to twist and distort them for their own purposes. Also, remember the 'Crusades', the 'Witch burnings', 'holywars', hate crimes perpetrated in the name of religion I think the philosopher Immanuel Kant stated appropriately when he stated that if a system is not universal, then it can be no good. And, do not tell me that the ends justify the means, that he moves in mysterious ways; this is vulgar mysticism; I might as well play with a deck of Tarot Cards, then at least the dark side of my subconscious, Jung's collective unconscious will be just as dark.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/15/2003 5:41 PM by mejecaj

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

"Religion has a dark side because we have a dark side. To believe that a departure from religion will free us from our own darkness is as zealous a statement as that religion, through its practice, will free us from our sins."

That has got to be one of the most beautiful two sentences I'd ever heard.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/23/2002 6:55 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

"Humanism is all we really need"? my, that sounds dogmatic in itself.:) are you imposing your own absolutes on others' own reality? you're sitting on both sides of the fence and you know it. Humanism is the worldview i rejected first because there are SO many inconsistancies involved. What moronic trash! Dogmatic humanists calling christians dogmatic. Play the game by the rules. Oh wait, there are no rules!(?) if humanism is all we need, then ideally we would all be humanists by now. unfortunately, you guys' mechanistic view of man can't comprehend the concept of free will and choice. But that's another post in itself haha

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/29/2002 11:08 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Give like for like; tolerate the ones that give toleration. Despise the ones that need despising. If something does not follow these rules, then there is something seriously wrong with the belief structure in hand. I cannot speak for all humanists, but most would agree. If a humanist attacks without warrant, then he is incorrect. If something claims to be a religious system and any part of that religious system fails, then the whole system must fail. The reason that humanism is far above this, is that it does not claim to be a perfect system, or have a perfect god. It's not dogmatic, it's reality.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/29/2002 11:10 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Also when I mean rules, I don't mean that they have to be followed; only that if they do not then there is something wrong.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/30/2002 6:35 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

try reading the Bible, it's prophecies have never and will never fail.

Also, what is reality? What is your basis for the statement, "It's not dogmatic, it's reality"? If you have no standard, than you have no reality. If all of your statements come from your head, than they are dogmatic and you are only as right as the man who pushes a grocery cart filled with trash downtown and screams at people that he is a poached egg. Without standards for truth, secular humanists have no truth other than the faulty human mind; which, according to noted humanists, is just a stimulus response organ. touche!

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/04/2002 12:53 AM by wildcat8542002@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

This is pure bull corn: "try reading the Bible, it's prophecies have never and will never fail." The exact reverse is true. The prophecies are so vauge that you can relate them to anything. Religion was born when man had no answers to any questions. It is the biggest lie in the world! Ask yourself if God has ever really talked to you. Do you really believe that he has talked to any man? I don't believe it at all. If no man has directly communicated with God, then every word written or spoken about God is wrong!!! It is all made up. I understand why so many want to make it true, its very hard to face reality. I started searching for god when I was 8 years old and I was 45 when I figured it out. I read the bible constantly and every book about religion I could get my hands on. I also read and learned about Science. Religion says we must have faith and believe in something we can't see, touch, smell, hear, show proof of or talk to! Science says, here is what we understand, what we don't understand, what needs to be understood and the logical path that has led us to what we understand. Religion is based on lies, Science is based on facts. How could anyone with a logical mind find any truth in religion? If you study the history of the Bible you can easilly see where the words in the bible have been twisted to suit whatever beliefs were popular at the time of it's publication. I feel sorry for all those that have waisted their whole lives praying and believing every day, only to have the machine that is the brain quit working the minute you die. The waste, all that time could have been used to find the truth and help in the quest to find a physical scientific way to stop death from being the end!!

Why is religion so important ... and so trivial ...
posted on 07/12/2002 7:32 PM by azb@llnl.gov

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

The post above, by "wildcat", demonstrates to me the amazing parity between the "religious/spiritual" motif and the "scientific/material" motif.

Details of their methods differ, but both have similar engagements.

Each feels very strongly in the "time-passes" concept, and that "now" is not nearly as important as "later", when it will all "really matter".

As such, getting safely to "later" is critically important.

The religious and the scientific do not mean each other harm, really. Each has a path-to-the-(wonderful)-later, and wants to "save" the other, so they will be able to enjoy this "later" too.

But each is somehow threatened by the other's version of method, and perhaps as well, the very form of "later". Clearly, there can be only one "later", so one side must be "right".

Some folks are of a non-technical persuasion, thus a "just believe in Him" path to the "later" is most appealing. The "later" need not be engineered, it will be eternal because the believe it to be so.

For techical-engineering types, the path must be constructed, and the "later" forged. This is a lot more technical work, and yet appeals to the technical, who enjoy that sort of thing.

Both "laters" have their problems, though.

In the spiritual "later", I might want to carry on endless conversations about X, with soul Y. Unfortunately, soul Y wants to spend eternity speaking with soul Z, and cannot abide the topic of X. Either I am eternally unhappy, or I change from a "me-awareness" into a foreign "non-me-awareness", where everything "jives" (but then, what is the point? Why not let someone else go in my place? I don't get it.)

And if I believe-wrong, I may spend eternity in some bad place, suffer forever, to teach me a lesson I won't forget.

In the techno-later, I will (ostensibly) simulate my environment, to make it whatever pleases me or makes me feel (happy, productive, challenged, fill-in-the-blank). I the people I want to share my time with do not want to share it with me, we can have conversations with simulated other, who always enjoy my company and laugh at my jokes. If I begin to spiral into madness, the "sysop" will rescue me, fix my head, and turn me into the real-me-not-me again.

But if the heat-death of the universe causes the techno-substrate to disintegrate (billions of years hence, but might feel a lot sooner), perhaps I will endure an endless torture worse than any envisioned by Dante, struggling and (who knows) unable to even effectively take my own life/non-life to end the suffering.

Such are the guarantees provided.

Later.

____tony____

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/26/2002 12:56 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

by science, what do you connotate? science has no say on things like origins. science is observation, repetition, and experimentation. You cant prove religion scientifically, nor can you prove many other things like evolution, for instance, because evolution is a religion. it's based on theory and sadly cannot be proven because its not repeatable, not experimentable, and not observable unless you live to be 5000000 years old.
so, you can't prove either. it's a faith thing. also, what is your basis for all these "miraculous" thruths you've stumbled upon. if your basis is your own experiences, then they are not valid. my experience is just as valid as yours if you have no basis for your "facts".
please tell me all your sources so that I might check them for science's sake.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/28/2002 7:22 AM by Neil H

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Who says that evolution is "not observable"??? Not all evolutionary processes require millions of years; if you consider short-lived organisms such as insects, whose lifetimes are measured in days or weeks, then it's possible for significant evolutionary changes to occur within a human lifetime, which corresponds to thousands of generations of those creatures.
This has indeed happened; during the Industrial Revolution in Britain, a certain species of moth changed its colour from white to black within a period of a few decades. This change was necessitated by industrial pollution darkening the trees which were the moths' habitat, so that their natural camouflage colour was no longer effective.
Also, have you heard of the story of the Heike crab? This is an example of evolution - driven by artificial, rather than natural, selection - occurring within human historical timescales, i.e. a few centuries.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 12/03/2002 11:22 AM by invincibleservant

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

sorry for not clarifying the difference between macro and micro evolution. you must have took that i meant that ALL evolutionary processes are not observable. yes, we can observe an organism change its shape, but change its species over time? repeatedly? that's my point

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/26/2002 1:02 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

also, if your brain is only a machine, responding to stimuli in a mechanical manner, how can you be sure it's working properly. for all your brain tells you, you could be saying that you are a poached egg on this message board, hmm? also, mechanical objects that are built the same should respond all the same. So, if humans are machines, what makes them so darned unpredictable?:)
again, tell me your wonderful sources. they are very entertaining

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/16/2002 9:28 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

First off, I don't like the word "religion" as it is used by most people. What I believe relates to no "system" of men who boss certain sections of the human race around. I believe that there is a God who orders the universe because of the law of entropy. According to proven scientific fact, things aren't getting better. If there is an "evolution" out there, it is from order to disorder. Beside the above point, I'd like to say that all worldviews depend on faith. I can't prove to you God's existence, despite what you've heard from other so-called "christians", nor can you prove to me your worldview is absolutely correct, either. If we try to prove our worldviews, we venture into the unstable area of emotional argument. I can say this, though. The popular view of the "big bang" and man's ascension into greater complexy of mind and body is so unproven that "religion" as you put it is a very much more valid alternative.
Simply put, it takes faith to believe anything. But I know even the the moronic statement, "There is no such thing as absolutes!" can be disproven with the simple quip, "Are you sure?" Think about that one, people.

signed, tyler(a 17 year old guy that looks at facts and takes a few leaps of faith like we all do)

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/22/2002 8:27 AM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Also when I mean religion, I refer to those pernicious ones of all Christian based and Moslem, which have been tyrannical since the middle ages, and continue to ravage the world.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/23/2002 6:49 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

so you mean the "organized" groups, then? those are merely a facade for greedy people. when I talk about religion, it is a personal thing. It does not have to do with a corporation-like entity. Their decisions merely give religions like christianity a bad rap. c'mon, get a better excuse, man.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/23/2002 7:04 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

If you say so; But I still say that religion, and myths play the same roles in bending the people; the same morality could be created by political action and technology will do a better job of keeping wrong actions at bay. Believe in god, but the separation of Church & State will continue to poison the waters of Democracy.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/23/2002 7:13 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religion is the atom-heart-mother of many good intentions that end in unfairness. But I guess might is right, and the majority should rule; it's one or the other. We should break up the religious organizations that create an imbalance of power. Sept 11, and Catholic molestation should be our cue and wake-up call. Thank you very much.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/23/2002 7:56 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

But then again the future will take care of itself, and what needs to be taken care of. I do realize that this is a moot arguement and I resign anymore of it. I am just one person who stated his beliefs. Just realize how destructive and to what extents religion can go. Have beliefs if you must, but realize that they are simply myths and nothing more.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/23/2002 7:58 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Do not mistake my beliefs with religious ideals.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/30/2002 6:38 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

who says beliefs are myths? You? what is your standard for that dogmatic statement? My opinion is just as good as yours, according to the "there is no absolute truth" rule, which you humanists hold firmly to.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/28/2002 8:50 AM by tyleroo_84@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

You're right on that, the big "organizations" SHOULD go down. Those catholic molesters were very wrong and catholocism should realize that they're failing. At least we agree on something. However, I believe in God, not organizations....

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 05/01/2002 8:51 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I thank God (or higher being, or providence, or the universe) for giving me a chance to live this life.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/28/2002 8:47 AM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

You're right about technology going great places, but technology cannot uphold morals and ethics. History proves that people will not follow a law just because Mr. Jones down the road (who puts his pants on the same way I do, one leg at a time) made it and has all the technology to uphold it. I beg to differ on that reason.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/12/2002 7:39 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Here I did not mean that the separation of church and
state, I meant the idea of integration of church and state, and the divisiveness that is created by such argumentative actions.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/15/2003 5:55 PM by mejecaj

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Why doesn't anyone ever seem to like the present, no matter what they believe?

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 05/05/2002 5:41 PM by diebenetleilax@atozasia.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

all the answers are already in your own mind, and it is within your potential to reach them. all the answers. all. you are merely a tool of energy. i hope to the god of all of everybody's beliefs that you are tools of the positive energy, and not the negative.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 05/16/2002 4:17 AM by ondrej.capka@email.cz

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religion means to believe to some sets of statements. If someone study fysics, nature sciences (or nothing) he/she is not likely to get results in conflict with what he/she believe in. A bit differend is it in social sciences. Socuial scientists study society and evaluate it`s rules. This IS in conflict with most common religions.

Best regards Ondrej

PS: Be aware that intellectual is very foggy term.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 05/16/2002 12:17 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Statistics is the The Calculus of sociology; I think that this could also be included in 'The String Theory'; time, space, energy, and matter being related in some fundamental way.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 06/03/2002 10:06 PM by hblasdel@transexport.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religion is a limited set of statements and practices related to a presumably transcendent phenomenon. Intellectuals can approach this body of material either by creating more, apologizing for what is there, or rejecting it as inconsistent and incomplete even without looking at the behavior of those who profess to practice it.

If on the other hand, one looks at religion as a perception of humanity, much repeated, of something beyond one's self and the admittedly inadequate effort to codify that (at apparently great compromise), then the underlying perception (which after all is all we have) is an emergent phenomena about which there is considerable agreement whether one finds more spirit in the preaching Sunday morning or the team play Sunday afternoon. This "more than the sum of the parts" is nothing new to science, its one thing life is about (more than big molecules, there is a certain dynamic).

We may not be able to tell whether it is an internal or external compass which ultimately guides humanity (one may suggest that it is collective rather than individual), the kind of compass which turned this nation against slavery and later towards civil rights. While one has trouble crediting mainstream religion with getting the ball rolling but religion was a big part and indeed most did, eventually, roll.

I am no fan of mainstream or offshoot religion, thinking that the Reformation should have rolled back to Easter and left the rest as commentary (but the research was not there then, nor the inclination), but to throw the sages out with the subsequent errors would have us eliminating all science because earlier paradigms were not correct (even if they are taught in high school).

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/09/2002 12:14 PM by thoughts@reflection-idea.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

The problem is the definition of religion.

I believe there is a core phenomenon which is the basis of religious/spiritual experiences, which everyone has, and which everyone explains in different ways--coincidence being one common explanation, God being another.

That core can be seen in the major religions, but is buried under layers of dogma and organizational politics.

That core can also be seen in the internal models of the World that "non-religious" people carry in their heads.

In my own searches I spent some time on atheist and religious news groups. To my mind, there was often more of a sense of the spiritual in the atheist groups than in the religious ones.

So, are intellectuals not religious? If you really mean the spiritual core of religious belief? I'm not so sure.

The obviously very smart guys wanting to build the giant cyclotron in Texas were quite clear on their motive. They were looking for God.

And the "so trivial" topic seems to often appear in this forum, more so, than say, discussions of Gilligan's Island.

There is something there, and we're all looking for it, intellectual and moron alike. It's just that the intellectual might not be so quick to accept some organized religion's dogma-laden answer.

Like the Hell's Angels and their motorcycles (great stories and insights from Kurzweil's review of Wolfram), Wolfram and his CA, I love my own ideas circling about that spiritual core. And hope that they can clarify some of the issues of the spiritual quest and why it so hard for us humans. www.reflection-idea.com

Religion and science will come back together. And the World will be better for it.

I welcome any and all comments by e-mail or here.

Dennis


Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/09/2002 3:31 PM by grantc4@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

What do we mean by "spiritual?"

Does it mean a belief in what we cannot see or touch? That would make most of quantum mechanics based on spiritual or religious acceptance. We send particles too small to see smashing into each other at near light speed and examine the fallout of residue in trails left in a cloud chamber. And by the paths left behind we infer that the things we sent smashing into each other broke up into smaller discrete particles that we also can't see.

By much the same process people believe in a soul they can't prove exists that was created by a God they can't prove exists and write thousands or hundreds of thousands of books about the relationship between the two. Then they use the existence of the books as proof the things they read about exist.

What makes one type of belief a scientific matter and the other spiritual?

Some say scientific beliefs allow us to predict what will happen when atoms collide while spiritual ones have to be taken entirely on faith. But there are times when beliefs are able to overcome a sickness that scientists have pronounced incurable. Were the scientists wrong in what they believed about the cause of the sickness or were they wrong about its incurability?

It seems to me there is still too much we don't know about where to draw the line between what is spiritual and what is factual. At times, science seems to be based as much on a belief system as religion. It's too bad we can't send souls crashing into each other at the speed of light and examine what falls out in telltale trails left in a cloud chamber.

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/09/2002 7:51 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Astute observation Grant. I often question what is the reality of spirituality vs science; I do not know if they will ever be squared logically. someday there may be a combination of reason and intuition in such a way that we will finally grasp what is reality; but then again the enigma of the ages may never be answered. Have you ever read 'The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra'? Some of his ideas make sense to me along this venue.
Knowledge may bring us to a point where we just accept reality as it is, and whatever is spiritual within us will be nurtured by Artificial Intelligence. The differences between being alive and not, would have no meaning in a universe where all there are is wave particle duality. Memory can be a very fleeting thing and can bring poignancy to us in our darkest moments. Who we are would seem to matter; but may prove to be an illusion. The most important question is are we our pattern? If so then life shouldn't be taken to seriously. If we are not our pattern then I believe it would be probable that the basic underlying principle could be our soul. I believe that it is only of importance that there is realization within the universe. Existence = Existence no matter what the pattern. But then again I was always a Buddhist, a relativist and an absolutist albeit a contradiction in terms. But I believe as Hegel believed that there is a super-logic that may be beyond any definition. So my feelings are that there is a spirituality within the amalgam of the universe; that most likely includes AI; for it could be a part of our evolution; or not.

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/09/2002 10:17 PM by americanfree44@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

To put in in the context of human consciencousness, perhaps it would clear the water if we define spiritual as meaning a person's sense of life combined with his or her assertiveness towards living. Personally, the reference to mystical or religous connotations seems silly. And what are the implications if we apply this definition to artificial intellegence?

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/10/2002 7:54 PM by dennis@amzi.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

My own definition of the spiritual revolves around those experiences in life that seem a little magical.

Small example - I was running out of money, looked like I was doomed to try to get a real job, and, out of the blue, a guy I knew from 10 years ago called me and offered me some free-lance writing work. The perfect opportunity just when I needed it.

No matter what your basic beliefs, an experience like that catches your attention. You tell people about it.

Now maybe you say its a lucky coincidence, or maybe you say God is looking after you, but in either case it raises your eyebrows.

It is these real-life experiences that cause people to care. The atheists angrily arguing my story is just lucky coincidence, the religious angrily saying it is God work.

These experiences are the ones Jung was exploring with his ideas on synchronicity.

These experiences are the core of Western religion. The early books of the Bible are all about a people wrestling with the question of whether they, or God was controlling their destiny. And they obviously had experiences that made them ask those questions.

Returning to some of the other threads and 'Tao of Physics' ideas, synchronicity which is one description of these human experiences, is not that far from Quantum physics, or a Wolframian cellular automata explanation of it all.

If you accept my synchronicity/mystical experience as the core of spirituality, then its not that far a leap to see that maybe science and religion might join paths again after a long messy separation.

These ideas are explored more at www.reflection-idea.com.

Dennis

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/11/2002 5:18 AM by americanfree44@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Dennis

You just captured the essence of what I was trying to communicate. You were running out of money, and getting a "real job" was the last thing you wanted to to. Therein lies your sense of life. You seem to place a great value on being independent and creating values for yourself and others, of your own volition and by your own authority. This makes you happy, and is the purpose for living. Your disciplined efforts to accomplish your goals demonstrates your assertiveness toward living.

I would postulate that an old friend calling you "out of the blue" and the reference to magical, is mystical. In other words, you may simply be at a loss to the explain why this happened, so rather than integrating reality, you attribute the event to a magical event, out of ignorance.

At any rate, the events triggered an emothional reponse that we might call spiritual, or your sense of life combined with your assertiveness. Your diciplined efforts, small efforts performed on a daily basis, combined with persistence and patience, paid off. Don't be so quick to pass it off as the work of some magical or mystical power. Give yourself some credit man!

It is more likely that this individual called because he knew you, your sense of life, and your abilities became of value to him in solving his problems. It was probably just coincidence that he called when he did. But I think it is logical to attribute your success to your own individual efforts.

My question remains. Can artificial intellegence develop the same spirituality as human consciousness? Can a machine experience joy and happiness, of its own volition and productive efforts? Or would it simply act on the program instilled by its creator, as a tool to preserve human consciousness?

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/11/2002 8:56 PM by thoughts@reflection-idea.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Thanks for the response, and your interpretation of the events. I'll happily give myself some credit.

On the other side, there was a similar story, the guy really needed a writer, and had seen some of my work since we had known each other, and was really glad to find out I was available.

A real synchronicity sort of thing. He was the answer to my work needs, I the answer to his.

But, no matter what my explanation or yours is of the story, my clain is that these are the sorts of experiences that make one wonder. And that wonder is the basis of the spiritual quest.

To answer your last question, my own suspicions are that there is a connecting force between everything, of which our senses and limited mental power can only give us glimpses.

And the inanimate is as much involved as, giving ourselves some credit, the most evolved creatures on this planet. If the purpose of human life is to build computers, so be it. (Although I might want to recant some of the harsh words I've said about mine in a Kurzweilian future.)

Again, looking to stimulate some discussion on www.reflection-idea.com. Maybe its out in la-la land, maybe its something good?

Dennis


Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/12/2002 1:08 AM by americanfree44@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

OK, this is getting a little bizarre! :-) HUGE GRINS (-:

I read the first couple of pages at Reflections. Then I found your post titled The "Coming Merging of Mind and Machine" and the joke about computers.

Now keep in mind that I had not read Refelctions, nor the above mentioned post prior to my response to you. I then refelcted immediatly on my response you in this thread, and I am now sitting here wondering if perhaps I need to re-define my definition of "magical." LOL , makes me feel a little spiritual.

It's as if there is a growing body of individuals learning how to access a yet to be explained universal computer. And then there was the site someone else led me to yesterday:

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/

The possibilities are without limit, what a gas!

Ron Robinson

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/15/2002 11:07 PM by thoughts@reflection-idea.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Powers of 10 is a fun site. Thanks for taking a look at the book.

Dennis

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/19/2002 2:58 PM by uclawyer@aol.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

let's not jump to 'magical' conclusions... humans are creatures that rely on patterns... the reason we laugh for example are when patterns are broken... i.e. man trips as he walks down street

synchronicity... is it magic? or is it just a completion of preset patterns in our continuously scanning subconscious and conscious minds?

Max

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/19/2002 8:06 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Correct! There are irregularities, which cause us to laugh and or trigger the 'god spot' in our brains. When one's mind attempts to perceive a contradiction e.g. koans (paradoxes created for catalizing this mechanism);some poems such as the hiaku may do the same. If there is a greater reality then the one one's brain understands, then if it does not understand certain connection, then it could conceivably go mad; Is this a bad state of affairs? some call this the "opening of the third eye", thought to originate in the pineal gland. This suggestion is still conjecture, and is open to scientific speculation; and even though opinions very on the subject, I do not think AI would have any use for this mechanism; however if we are ever to be downloaded into a computational substrate we may choose to maintain this aspect of our humanity.

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/19/2002 8:20 PM by uclawyer@aol.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

very well put... for so many reasons, the primary one being that you've brought up the discussion of AI and the issue of whether or not it would even be necessary to carry over this aspect of ourselves into the substrate/teach this set of neurological machinerations to AI...

I suppose what I am trying to ultimately say is this...

As man accelerates evolution artificially by utilizing and expanding upon models of his own intelligence... will we find new beauties in the universe to keep us engaged? ... or will we be cold... logical... and find simply... honor in being beings that are supremely efficient i.e. no hunger pangs because of synthetic body... no need for love since all mechanisms for reproduction are now superceded by coding and AI... many laymen or as I like to term... the 'reasonable thinkers relative to their circumstances' folk seem to despise the idea of AI for this very reason... that we would sacrifice our current wants and needs that we oh so feel great about fulfilling now....

This to me is answered simply by stating that in evolution, no matter how 'wrong' or 'right' it may seem... the problem of sacrifice always arises... and I for 1.. am ready to sacrifice my body to the next electronic state... (read electronic society/nation)

ps. i don't want to hear any creationists or bible thumpers quoting revelations... as a matter of fact if you do... please note that my quick response will be that the prophets of old as far as I am concerned are merely those who knew the principles of higher technology but could just not put them into words... higher efficiency in all regards... i.e. keeping the temple pure for God...equates to keeping the body pure for your electrical functions to remain pristine.... as far as i am concerned also... if God truly exists in the state most religions claim 'Him' (Rather 'it'... let's stay away from personifying the 'force'... it shows how crude we are...) then 'It' must be so supremely efficient that it does not take up space nor matter and therefore does not even exist... hehe chips becoming smaller and smaller according to Moore's law till chips won't even have to exist... gotta see that one ;)

Max

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 06/20/2002 11:58 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Max, I can appreciate your open-mindedness and insight. Yes, sometimes we have to let go of old ways of thinking to make room for the new, even though they may have become part of our conscious and subconscious minds. There are many ideals and truths, in which religion and philosphy have positied, that should be contemplated for their worth and wisdom.
I believe one can be a skeptic and an optimist at the same time; I would never want anybody to feel as if he/she should throw the baby out with the bathwater. We know that new technologies technologies have always been added to our lives; such technologies have been added at such an exponential rate, and will continue to do so. I think many people get a sense of vertigo and tend to want to reject newness, sometimes because of established beliefs they may have; it can be a sense of stress to some people. Let us be strong in mind and body to be able to stand back and realize that whatever changes come to be, there will always be a reason for our adaptation. Again thank you for your insight.

Re: Are intellectuals missing something
posted on 07/26/2002 1:07 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

you're right, but who ever said they were seperated? they complement each other very much, even in this day and age, good stuff, dude!

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 06/27/2002 10:56 AM by byersjo@earlham.edu

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I think we have to remind ourselves that religious tendencies are part of our evolved psychology, some people learn this and some don't. And even those who learn this can still "truely" be religious, or just do it to satisfy their condition of being an evolved human. The fact is, is that even if intellectuals claim to be atheist or not, the question of supernatural things still pops up from time to time, whether they like it or not. Pygmies believe there world is created and supplied by the forest, in our novel environment of civilization, were is our forest? Well, we don't have one, so we invent one, and we call it our God. I think it pretty simple, and really does it matter if we flirt with our evolved psychology now and then? As long as it doesn't spoil our ability to make rational and moral decisions.
Joe

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/26/2002 1:11 PM by invincibleservant@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

what is your scientific basis for this "evolved psychology"? what's your source? your bias is showing and your post is, at best, confusing to anyone aquainted with science. is your theory observable, repeatable, and predictable? i think not

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/26/2002 7:06 PM by byersjo@earlham.edu

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

All one has to do is look around the world and see that most human phenotypes include 'male jealosy' as do they a desire to understand their world, I am not saying there is a gene for god, but if you read the literature for functioning of the limbic system and its association with meditation and prayer, coupled with the fact that basically every known historical society having placed some resposibility of the world to a 'deity', then you have some evidence for this idea. I think it would be dumb to exclude religion out of the normal human psychological condition, because it clearly is there, whether we scientific atheists like it or not. Now, it may be more of a 'technology' like music, in the way that our genotyped has had increased fitness as a consequence of increased knowledge of our environment, a big part our social environment, so the religous outcropping may be a technological extension of the 'feel-good-limbic', I know that area of the woods now, but in todays world we know much much more, and the unknown, and the responsiblities of the 'gods' has been pushed back in logical and read person's mind to that of simple existence, if even that.
Its hard for me to formulate this is such a small newletter forum, it would take at least a chapter to incorporate the right references and baises for this idea, but I am not lifting it with a sky hook.
Joe

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/02/2002 8:42 PM by millermcb@hotmail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I think it must be because both are products of the same, singular personality trait. Curiosity. A religion, any religion requires faith for true belief. Faith is blind by its own definition, and so people who believe in it must possess the ability to believe what they have been told by others, blindly. Intellectuals, be it a gift or a curse, cannot do this. It is not in them. They must question and discover and prove things to themselves (this at least applies to those who I consider to fit the general definition for "intellectual".)

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/02/2002 11:43 PM by Stevnargo@aol.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

It's the old follow the pack instnkt. Children w/ abusive parents are more likeley to be abusive themselfs. Do you start to act like your friends?
Apes are social animals.
Morality is anti-territorialism.
that simple.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/02/2002 11:48 PM by not this time look up

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

It is because culter and bilief is passed down. Instinkt installs in us to learn and fit in to the social suroundings. "The pack" We must learn to hunt ah. And diffrent things goes through that process in a complicated animal like us.
Children of abusive parents are more likely to be abusive parents themselvs. But not all mind you.
Also morality is a survival instinkt geared aray from territorialism. As a species gets older and more advanced. It's means of taking the other packs land gets more efficient and dangerious. The next natural step i think is morality in the social system. To drive him away from war and into complacent survival. And to set up a code of survival to help overall numbers grow.
What do you think?

Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/04/2002 12:39 PM by web@khurram.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

It has been proved by the scientific researches that by practicing certain exercises and personal efforts, man can arouse the supernatural abilities. Keeping in view the advancement in the fields of telepathy and hypnotism by the European countries and particularly by the former U.S.S.R; if the worshipping rituals and ascetic exercises are considered to be the only means of acquiring the Metaphysical Sciences, it amounts to belittling the subject because the nations which have altogether no faith and belief in religions have excelled considerably in their achievements regarding the Metaphysical Sciences


One thing which is frequently mentioned in Spiritualism is the Conducting 1nfluence, that is, the teacher; Shaikh, preceptor or the, 'Guru' inducts certain spiritual changes by focusing his attention in his pupil, disciple or the spiritual son. Today a scientist can also do the same. He can also influence the desired people telepathically and can force them to do a particular job, which he intends them to do. A term commonly used in Spiritualism is 'To See in the Inner' that is, to observe the outer space of this planet through the Inner Eye. This also has been done by the scientists successfully and they have their claim of walking in space to their credit.

Man possesses certain abilities which if activated enables him to disclose those informations which are not found in the books. Science has established its advancement in this regard as well and knowledges which were initially hard to believe and beyond the comprehension of the human intellect have been discovered and as a result those things have come into existence which has forced man to believe them. In such circumstances the terms of Spiritualism, like Attention, Influence, Opening of the Inner Eye, emancipation from Time and Space have become a perplexing puzzle. Till date it is believed that the paranormal abilities of foresightedness and clairvoyance etc. can only be activated through the recitation of certain verses and repetition of certain words. It has become very important to understand, in the present era of science, that if the people who do not have faith in any religion, can Conduct the Influence, can activate their Inner Eye to function, can lay the foundations of ever new sciences, can walk in Space, then what is this Spiritualism?

Religion is bound to come under discussion when we talk of Spiritualism. The principle on which the religions have been founded is that performance of the religions duties should enable man to bring a change in his own life or to enable him to Conduct Influence in the lives of other, the things hidden within the earth or in the outer sphere of the earth may appear before his Inner Eye. But when we study the lives of the followers of the religions we hardly find a single person, in the multitude of millions and billions of religious people who can exercise the power of Conductive Influence and his Inner Sight is operative. It is quite astonishing that the religious people are ignorant of the knowledges, which have been discovered by the people who have no faith in religions. Naturally, in such circumstances every serious minded person would be constrained to think, (What is this religion?) (Top)

Law

There are countless species in the universe. Each and every species and every individual of every species in their individual capacity is in constant and continuous contact with one another through the waves of thought, and the Same link is the cause of introduction and intimacy between them. These waves of thoughts, in fact, arc the individual and collective informations which are responsible for bringing the individuals of the universe close to life every moment and every second. In fact our whole life is associated with the thoughts and the effectiveness of the thoughts depends upon the certitude and dubiety, belief and disbelief. This is the main point upon which the edifice of religion is founded.

Man passes through the various stages of life in small intervals of time and utilizes the fractions of time to live his life by combining and connecting these fractions' together in his mind. We either advance from one fraction of time towards the next consecutive fraction or revert back to the previous one. In order to understand this, man thinks of taking food but due to an upset stomach the intention is relinquished, how long will he abstain from it? He has no idea in this regard. Likewise thoughts are the ingredients of his life which either makes him successful or unsuccessful. An intention is formed, then is relinquished or is postponed whether with in minutes of its formation or in hours, in months or in years, anyhow it is ultimately abandoned. This abandonment or the relinquishment is the chief constituent of man's life.

There are many things like hardships, difficulties, worries, diseases, anxiety, depression etc. etc. and to equalize all these there is one thing called 'peace'', in which man seeks all types of eases and comforts. Most of them are not real but hypothetical and for man they appear to be the easy ones. This creates the trend of inclination towards the easygoing. Actually, formation of the human brain is such that it makes him go for facilities and to avoid the difficulties. These are evidently, two directions and man spends his life between these two directions through his thoughts. Every activity is motivated in one of these two directions. When we decide a plan, we were organizing it. It was perfect and complete in all its aspects and its direction was also correct but it happens that after taking only a few steps, a change takes place in our mind, with the change the direction of our thoughts also undergoes a change resulting in a net change in the direction of our activity. And the target towards which we were heading goes into oblivion. What is left with us? Groping and taking steps grippingly, This is why only one out of millions of people takes a step which is in the right direction and is not withdrawn. It may please be kept in mind that all this is about the in-between states of doubts and beliefs. So far as the majority is concerned, the main force that controls' their minds is that whim and doubt, which is ceaselessly effecting the cells of their minds. The more the intensity of doubts, the more will be the deterioration of the brain cells. It will not be out of place to mention that all the nerves of the body work under the brain cells and the activities of the nerves are the life.

Believing something is equally difficult for man as coming out of the illusions, dubiety and disbelief, For example, man presents himself contrary to what he actually is. He always hides his weaknesses and boosts about those hypothetical virtues which actually are not possessed by him.(Top)

Society and our Belief

The society in which a person is educated and reared up becomes his belief and his mind fails to analyze this belief and thus the belief become his faith although it is not more than a deceptive illusion. The main cause for this, as already stated, is that he poses himself contrary to what be actually is. This type of life causes him to face many difficulties, the difficulties which he cannot resolve. It causes, at every step, fear in him that his action would prove to be futile and would yield no result. Sometimes this doubt becomes so intense that he begins to believe that his life is facing destruction and if not destroying it is in great danger. All this happens because of the rapid deterioration of brain cells, the eventual out come of dubiety.

When life is lived contrary to that which actually it or is posed differently than what one is in fact then actions and deeds based upon this sort of life do not yield positive results. When he wants to achieve the desired results from such deeds, accelerated alterations and deterioration of brain cells changes the tracks of his practical life and either it does not yield any result or proves to be harmful or produces such a doubt which hinders and obstructs him from taking any step at all. The mental structure or the construction of the mind in fact, is in man's own control. Here 'structure' means that the rate of deterioration of the brain cells is accelerated, balanced and moderate or the minimum. It is sheer luck if some one is saved from doubt, which is because of the minimum and the least deterioration of the brain cells. The scarcity of doubt and dearth of uncertainty in the mind is directly proportional to the successes of life whereas the intensity of doubts and uncertainty has its direct proportionality with the failures of life.(Top)

Deterioration of the Brain Cells

It is unfortunate on man's part that he evaluates the Knowledges granted to him by God, on the basis of self-made and false principles and refuses to acknowledge them as such. Light has been declared by God as the basis of each and every Knowledge. Man was required to explore the maximum types and kinds of lights and their functions but he never paid proper attention to this and this thing always remained in obscurity. Man didn't try to lift this veil because either such a veil never existed for him or he never paid any attention to it. He never attempted to explore rules and principles governing the composition of lights. If this approach had been adopted by him the deterioration of the brain cells would not have been the minimum and he would have advanced towards the belief and the doubts would not have bothered him as much as they are troubling him now. The hindrances and obstructions in his practical activities would have also been minimum but it didn't happen so, he didn't explore the types of lights nor did he try to discover the nature of the lights.


He even doesn't know that lights also have their specific structural formations, natures and they even have the trends and tendencies of particular characteristics. He also doesn't know that the very lights are his life and they protect him as well. He is only familiar with the effigy of the clay and dust which doesn't posses any life of its own. The effigy made from the rotten clay by God has no reality of its own. The reality is that which has been breathed in him by God in the form of the Soul. Ignorance from the actions of the lights causes aversion from the saying of God in this regard. The more the aversion the more increased will be the doubts and whims and faith and belief would also be shattered accordingly. The spiritualists define faith as a belief in which there is no doubt. Actual cause of weakness in determination or that of faith is this doubt As long as reluctance and hesitation in thoughts is there firmness of the faith is not possible. A thought after acquiring the lights of faith and firm belief becomes a manifestation or the phenomenon.(Top)

The Religion

Religion causes us to enter into that pattern of faith and belief where no doubt or whim exists and man observes the Unseen World and the angels actively participating in the affairs of the Unseen World through his Inner Eye. Observations of the Unseen World establishes such a relationship of man with his Lord which enables him to see that the Attributes of the Creator are encompassing him. If the Inner Sight of a person is not functional, then according to Spiritualism, he has yet to enter the circle of faith. When someone enters into the circle of faith the evilness and the destructiveness take their leave from his thoughts and faith; if the Unseen World is not revealed upon a person he will always remain suppressed by evilness and destructiveness. This is the reason that despite all the comforts and facilities at his disposal, the endless new inventions and discoveries, everybody is suffering from anxiety, worries, restlessness and feelings of insecurity. Since science believes in matter and the matter is only fiction and unstable therefore all the means and resources of comforts and luxuries, every invention and all the progress and advancement of science is also temporary and perishable. How can something based upon deterioration and perishability provide real pleasure. The basic and fundamental difference between Religion and Infidelity is that the latter causes whims, doubts and uncertainty whereas religion associates all the feelings, thoughts, concepts, deeds and activities of life with the only One, Endogenous and Permanent Being.(Top)


The Scientific Doctrine

The material doctrine, preached and advocated by the scientists is that nothing could be acknowledged unless it has not been practically demonstrated. They, despite all the knowledge, which is possessed by them, forget that by limiting themselves in a material shell they are negating their own theory. It is also said by them that anything which is unseen by the sight has no reality whereas the basis of all their progress and advancement are the invisible waves of light


The founder of the Qalander Conscious, proclaimer of the Reality, Hassan Ukhra Mohammed Azeem Burkhiya, Qalander Baba Auliya states.

"In all the sciences concerning the spiritual values considered so far, the universe which is a significant manifestation is of secondary importance. First the Hidden and the Unseen are considered and their understanding is attempted with a preference. If the Hidden and the Unseen are easily understood then gradually it becomes clear as to how these manifestations and phenomena come into being and what rules and laws are responsible to create and regulate them. Ali these things are ostensibly felt just like the many experiences which prior to maturity have a certain correlation and harmony in them. All those things which are related to the Unseen have been mentioned under various names in the Holy Quran by God and the prophets by mentioning those names, elucidated their characteristics, virtues and merits for the people. The Books and Scriptures before the Holy Quran also throw light on those things but only casual references are found there, more elaborate details in this regard are found in the Holy Quran only. When the details given by the Holy Quran are considered and deliberated upon, it would be concluded that the Unseen is more important than the manifestations and the phenomena. Comprehension and understanding of the Unseen is very important. That which is called religion is also based upon the Unseen. The manifestations are mentioned in the religions but they are always given secondary importance. No matter how much preference is ascribed to them by the material world it never had a primary significance in any era of any religion. Now the material world has also gradually begun to think in the same terms. For instance, the scientists of the present age have been forced to prefer the Unseen. First they suppose something and then they Strive to draw the conclusions and results. When they are concluding something they consider all their suppositions as real, indispensable and certain. For instance, the characteristics and behavior of the electron is under heated debates in this century, All the scientists unanimously agree that it behaves like a particle and as a wave simultaneously. It is interesting to note that a thing which is only hypothetical is behaving in two ways at the same time and its behavior is acknowledged as sure and certain. It is also said, besides this, that electron has not been seen till date nor there is any such hope even in the future. But despite all this the electron is acknowledged as one of the most concrete reality which has ever been perceived by the human mind, or would ever come to man's knowledge. It is only a supposition in their minds which has been followed and the result of their pursuit is such a conclusion which is of great significance for inventions and discoveries and is considered an important stage of success.

They are striving hard to introduce this important stage to the people, Many times it happens that things once believed to be factual and real are rejected and replaced by new facts, discoveries and formulae. And these new substituted facts and formulae are considered worthy of the same importance which was once reserved for the rejected ones. Obviously the unseen world is also of primary importance for them even though they call themselves materialists and the ardent fans of matter. They are not ready to acknowledge even for a moment, that there is anything like God or the Unseen World or it has any meanings or significance or it is inadequate to ignore it. They remain surrounded by the concepts which can only be termed as the materialistic once. When anything like Unseen is mentioned, their demand is always the same, that is, they cannot be conducted to any thing like the Unseen unless it is not Supplemented by a demonstration nor they are ready to believe in the Unseen or that it could be of any use or they have got any intention of granting any place to the theory of the Unseen in the world of science. No matter whatsoever they say it is only a style of their speech and an approach of their thinking. But practically they are at par with a believer of the Unseen, who presents God after acknowledging all the agencies mandatory for the faith, mentioned in the Holy Quran by God, the Most High, and have influence over any such person who believes in God. And he believes in all those agencies and entities to be a living reality and a concrete fact just as materialists acknowledge a stone or a mineral object which is present before them, which they comprehend and feel through their senses of touch, taste and sight, and about which they tell us so many things. Such as there is variation in it, there is combination in it, it is balance and moderate, it has effect, there is energy in it. And they talk in the same manner about the things present in the world of matter and they believe in them in a particular manner. In other words, Just as a fan worshipper of God believes and has faith in the Unseen similarly the lover of materialism believes in the world of matter. Neither a theist can live without believing the World of Unseen nor can a materialist live without believing the matter. Both have their own approaches and the only thing which they have in common, is their faith in their respective approaches. This faith and conviction is termed as 'life' by them. In fact, no life is possible without faith and conviction whether it is the life of an Atheist or that of a Materialist

Re: Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/10/2002 10:15 PM by wildcat8542002@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

You are so full of bull; the last thing you should do is post your delusions on the net for all to see. There is nothing that you say in this post that has any truth to it at all. How could you write that many lines without one little bit of insight to the truth? Let the scales from the past fall from your eyes for a moment. Imagine that everything you ever read about religion or spiritualism is wrong. Open your eyes with these truths instilled in you: There has never been direct contact with God. The stories in the bible for instance, where God is talking to someone comes from time when man did not have any answers to life's mysteries and mental illness. What if Abraham was a madman? His story was not written down for many years. What if they got it wrong? Then there is Moses. He was thought to be the son of a Pharaoh before the truth came out. I am sure his supposed father loved him very much and felt sympathy for him when he came to free his people. That is more like the true story. He let them go because he loved Moses. This story was told for many years before it was written down. I am sure the magic was embellished. Then Moses went up in the mountains to talk to God. He was gone for a long time. I can just see him saying to himself: What do I tell these people whom are waiting for me to tell them the word of God. If I do not go back with something, they will lose all direction and faith. Therefore, he did what man has done in every situation where he had pressure on him. He made something up and carved out the 10 commandments. He never thought about anyone believing this for 4 thousand years and basing all religion on it. He just did what he had to do. This is what all men who were the elders in their tribes sitting around a campfire did when they were asked were we come from. They told what they had learned from their elders, only they embellished a little bit. So, the story has got bigger and better. The bottom line is no one has communicated with God. That means every word written about God or spoken about God is made up by a human. I am sure even the most God fearing, praying, sinless, and do good person will tell a little lie for the Lord. It helps those with less faith believe and helps the church so it cannot hurt. These lies have pilled on top of one another until we cannot even face life without believing in unseen things. Then there are the Psychic abilities that are talked about in your post. The magicians understand this kind of thing better than anyone else does. That is why a trickster had many a bad night on the Johnny Carson show because he started out as a magician. Uri Geller's trick was bending spoons and metal objects. He would have a straight one and a bent one in his hand and do a real convincing job of smoothly transitioning the two. Johnny brought out a tray of his own silverware so that Geller could not have a bent one like it. Geller said that his powers were weak and would not work. There is also the night he caught the preacher with a miniature microphone in his ear receiving information from God. The people in the audience were asked to fill out a form when they came in about what needed healing. One of the people in the back was feeding info to the preacher with RADIO waves. I am sure the preacher thought a few lies were fine when you are bringing people to the lord. What if all of it is lies? Even the gospels were not written down for 20 years. I am sure Jesus was a very charismatic man and the disciples loved him very much. I know they were only trying to help their young church and stretching the story would not hurt. Look inside yourself and think about how you would react if under pressure. They had told stories and embellished them for twenty years and now were being asked to let someone write them down. They can tell the truth and face ridicule and a public stoning or tell some lies and be heroes, clergy and loved by all they meet. There is not much of a choice. Do I know this is what happened? No, but I think we can not know the circumstances for sure and must assume that most of it is far from the truth. I am sure the followers of Jesus were shocked and horrified when the Romans crucified him. It is such a beautiful story that I long for it to be true. It has been made that way by many years of embellishment. This is the most polished story in the history of man. There has been countless people work on the stories of the New Testament and probably a million man-hours. I have done tests to see how much a story changes. I once made up a story about a local cemetery that I said was haunted. I told several people the story and then waited. Someone else told me the story a few months later and I barely recognized it. Nearly every line was changed. How can we believe a story from 2000 years ago when a few months are enough to destroy any hint of originality?
Then there is the Amazing Randy. He has had a MILLION dollars in trust for years he will give to anyone who will come and prove they are psychic under scrutiny. Not one person has even attempted this. Why? Because everybody knows inside that they are a fake. When you bring a lie out of the darkness to the light of day, it is the end of the lie. Many believers cannot take the truth. If you think about the lies that you tell every day you will realize that the whole world is built on lies. What is the truth? I will not lie; I do not know what is the truth. I think it has a lot to do with what we are learning now in Science. In addition, the vast size of the universe of which the human mind cannot comprehend how huge. I am 99% sure there are other intelligent creatures in the universe. Notice I did not say it was a fact as the previous poster did! Then there is the ultimate question of God: Why is there something (existence) instead of nothing? I Believe (made up bull, so do not start a religion based on this) that at the end of the universe, when all the energy of all the stars is used up, and we are headed for the big crunch. There are a few civilizations that have reached ultimate knowledge. They realize that the beginning of time and the end of time are the same and they must start the universe. It is all a big circle of time created 85 billion years in the future. I am sure it is so complicated we will not understand it for millions of years. That is if some religious fanatic does not destroy the world in the name of a god that does not exist except in the minds of those who believe in all the lies from the past. The way that we hug up to and hang on to lies, I do not give the human race much of a chance to be among those civilizations left in 85 billion years. If you really want a life after death, the only way is to start supporting reasearch which will extend your life and make you uploadable to a machine someday. Stop supporting those silly churches and mystic bullshit religions. Stop going to those silly Devil movies and the ones based on revelations or prophecy. We should strive to let some real light into the world and end the iron clad grip that lies have on the world.

Re: Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/10/2002 11:12 PM by azb0@earthlink.net

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

(sigh)

Science is about making predictive claims, based upon hypotheses that CAN BE DISPROVEN.

Science does NOT claim to be anything more than this, and anyone who uses it otherwise is engaging in a form of religious activity.

Claims about the supernatural are scientific only to the degree that they are independently testable and provable/disprovable. Otherwise, they are expressions of subjective personal experience.

If there are experiments that show there is another "realm" that behaves consistently and can be accessed consistently, that is perfectly fine. But then, why call it "supernatural"?

Does the title "supernatural" add anything?

Nothing in science says that "we have found all the relevent fields of physics". If we find another, wonderful.

Why would we want to call it supernatural?

What, exactly, is the point?

____tony____

Re: Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/12/2002 7:06 PM by wildcat8542002@yahoo.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

(sigh)

(sigh again)

Is this supposed to be in regards to my above post? I do not see how it relates to it in any hint of an inference. I am the most science minded person you will ever meet and I do not need your narrow interpretive comments on something you obviously did not read at all. I was trying to show the previous poster who was spouting all that religious bullshit, how there were different ways that the obvious lies making up 100% of today's religion were created and propagated. I guess I did not do a very good job. I will not meet you in the afterlife because there is not any!!

Re: Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/12/2002 10:56 PM by azb0@earthlink.net

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Wildcat,

(sigh III)

My original "sigh" was not in reference to your post in particular. It was about the nature of the thread in general.

Then, (your sigh II got in just before my "later" post, so it looks like I was addressing sigh II, but I was not. In fact, my "later" post was in refernce to what your long reply to the previous post by "web".

Sorry for the confusion about that.

I just recognized how each "side" is trying to save the other.

You might get more votes by not labeling as LIES things that other people honestly believe, however silly they may appear. To lie is to knowingly try to deceive by presenting as true that which you KNOW to be false.

Most believers in "God" are not lying.

Falwell and his ilk are another story ...

Cheers! ____tony____


Re: Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/13/2002 5:12 AM by tomaz@techemail.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

wildcat!

I also find this religious anti-lie obsession on one hand, and that the lies are in the center of each religion on the other hand - quite symptomatic and amusing.

The amusement is not very good, however. Too bitter. But it could be a weak point of all those systems.

Especially this building small lies for the sake of God, may be fatal for a religion.

People should ask themselves - what if that building up legends and nontruths is everything what's in the Bible or Koran?

We both know, it is.

Where the love for the truth is? Doesn't go to church at all!

- Thomas

Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/04/2002 12:39 PM by web@khurram.com

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

It has been proved by the scientific researches that by practicing certain exercises and personal efforts, man can arouse the supernatural abilities. Keeping in view the advancement in the fields of telepathy and hypnotism by the European countries and particularly by the former U.S.S.R; if the worshipping rituals and ascetic exercises are considered to be the only means of acquiring the Metaphysical Sciences, it amounts to belittling the subject because the nations which have altogether no faith and belief in religions have excelled considerably in their achievements regarding the Metaphysical Sciences


One thing which is frequently mentioned in Spiritualism is the Conducting 1nfluence, that is, the teacher; Shaikh, preceptor or the, 'Guru' inducts certain spiritual changes by focusing his attention in his pupil, disciple or the spiritual son. Today a scientist can also do the same. He can also influence the desired people telepathically and can force them to do a particular job, which he intends them to do. A term commonly used in Spiritualism is 'To See in the Inner' that is, to observe the outer space of this planet through the Inner Eye. This also has been done by the scientists successfully and they have their claim of walking in space to their credit.

Man possesses certain abilities which if activated enables him to disclose those informations which are not found in the books. Science has established its advancement in this regard as well and knowledges which were initially hard to believe and beyond the comprehension of the human intellect have been discovered and as a result those things have come into existence which has forced man to believe them. In such circumstances the terms of Spiritualism, like Attention, Influence, Opening of the Inner Eye, emancipation from Time and Space have become a perplexing puzzle. Till date it is believed that the paranormal abilities of foresightedness and clairvoyance etc. can only be activated through the recitation of certain verses and repetition of certain words. It has become very important to understand, in the present era of science, that if the people who do not have faith in any religion, can Conduct the Influence, can activate their Inner Eye to function, can lay the foundations of ever new sciences, can walk in Space, then what is this Spiritualism?

Religion is bound to come under discussion when we talk of Spiritualism. The principle on which the religions have been founded is that performance of the religions duties should enable man to bring a change in his own life or to enable him to Conduct Influence in the lives of other, the things hidden within the earth or in the outer sphere of the earth may appear before his Inner Eye. But when we study the lives of the followers of the religions we hardly find a single person, in the multitude of millions and billions of religious people who can exercise the power of Conductive Influence and his Inner Sight is operative. It is quite astonishing that the religious people are ignorant of the knowledges, which have been discovered by the people who have no faith in religions. Naturally, in such circumstances every serious minded person would be constrained to think, (What is this religion?) (Top)

Law

There are countless species in the universe. Each and every species and every individual of every species in their individual capacity is in constant and continuous contact with one another through the waves of thought, and the Same link is the cause of introduction and intimacy between them. These waves of thoughts, in fact, arc the individual and collective informations which are responsible for bringing the individuals of the universe close to life every moment and every second. In fact our whole life is associated with the thoughts and the effectiveness of the thoughts depends upon the certitude and dubiety, belief and disbelief. This is the main point upon which the edifice of religion is founded.

Man passes through the various stages of life in small intervals of time and utilizes the fractions of time to live his life by combining and connecting these fractions' together in his mind. We either advance from one fraction of time towards the next consecutive fraction or revert back to the previous one. In order to understand this, man thinks of taking food but due to an upset stomach the intention is relinquished, how long will he abstain from it? He has no idea in this regard. Likewise thoughts are the ingredients of his life which either makes him successful or unsuccessful. An intention is formed, then is relinquished or is postponed whether with in minutes of its formation or in hours, in months or in years, anyhow it is ultimately abandoned. This abandonment or the relinquishment is the chief constituent of man's life.

There are many things like hardships, difficulties, worries, diseases, anxiety, depression etc. etc. and to equalize all these there is one thing called 'peace'', in which man seeks all types of eases and comforts. Most of them are not real but hypothetical and for man they appear to be the easy ones. This creates the trend of inclination towards the easygoing. Actually, formation of the human brain is such that it makes him go for facilities and to avoid the difficulties. These are evidently, two directions and man spends his life between these two directions through his thoughts. Every activity is motivated in one of these two directions. When we decide a plan, we were organizing it. It was perfect and complete in all its aspects and its direction was also correct but it happens that after taking only a few steps, a change takes place in our mind, with the change the direction of our thoughts also undergoes a change resulting in a net change in the direction of our activity. And the target towards which we were heading goes into oblivion. What is left with us? Groping and taking steps grippingly, This is why only one out of millions of people takes a step which is in the right direction and is not withdrawn. It may please be kept in mind that all this is about the in-between states of doubts and beliefs. So far as the majority is concerned, the main force that controls' their minds is that whim and doubt, which is ceaselessly effecting the cells of their minds. The more the intensity of doubts, the more will be the deterioration of the brain cells. It will not be out of place to mention that all the nerves of the body work under the brain cells and the activities of the nerves are the life.

Believing something is equally difficult for man as coming out of the illusions, dubiety and disbelief, For example, man presents himself contrary to what he actually is. He always hides his weaknesses and boosts about those hypothetical virtues which actually are not possessed by him.(Top)

Society and our Belief

The society in which a person is educated and reared up becomes his belief and his mind fails to analyze this belief and thus the belief become his faith although it is not more than a deceptive illusion. The main cause for this, as already stated, is that he poses himself contrary to what be actually is. This type of life causes him to face many difficulties, the difficulties which he cannot resolve. It causes, at every step, fear in him that his action would prove to be futile and would yield no result. Sometimes this doubt becomes so intense that he begins to believe that his life is facing destruction and if not destroying it is in great danger. All this happens because of the rapid deterioration of brain cells, the eventual out come of dubiety.

When life is lived contrary to that which actually it or is posed differently than what one is in fact then actions and deeds based upon this sort of life do not yield positive results. When he wants to achieve the desired results from such deeds, accelerated alterations and deterioration of brain cells changes the tracks of his practical life and either it does not yield any result or proves to be harmful or produces such a doubt which hinders and obstructs him from taking any step at all. The mental structure or the construction of the mind in fact, is in man's own control. Here 'structure' means that the rate of deterioration of the brain cells is accelerated, balanced and moderate or the minimum. It is sheer luck if some one is saved from doubt, which is because of the minimum and the least deterioration of the brain cells. The scarcity of doubt and dearth of uncertainty in the mind is directly proportional to the successes of life whereas the intensity of doubts and uncertainty has its direct proportionality with the failures of life.(Top)

Deterioration of the Brain Cells

It is unfortunate on man's part that he evaluates the Knowledges granted to him by God, on the basis of self-made and false principles and refuses to acknowledge them as such. Light has been declared by God as the basis of each and every Knowledge. Man was required to explore the maximum types and kinds of lights and their functions but he never paid proper attention to this and this thing always remained in obscurity. Man didn't try to lift this veil because either such a veil never existed for him or he never paid any attention to it. He never attempted to explore rules and principles governing the composition of lights. If this approach had been adopted by him the deterioration of the brain cells would not have been the minimum and he would have advanced towards the belief and the doubts would not have bothered him as much as they are troubling him now. The hindrances and obstructions in his practical activities would have also been minimum but it didn't happen so, he didn't explore the types of lights nor did he try to discover the nature of the lights.


He even doesn't know that lights also have their specific structural formations, natures and they even have the trends and tendencies of particular characteristics. He also doesn't know that the very lights are his life and they protect him as well. He is only familiar with the effigy of the clay and dust which doesn't posses any life of its own. The effigy made from the rotten clay by God has no reality of its own. The reality is that which has been breathed in him by God in the form of the Soul. Ignorance from the actions of the lights causes aversion from the saying of God in this regard. The more the aversion the more increased will be the doubts and whims and faith and belief would also be shattered accordingly. The spiritualists define faith as a belief in which there is no doubt. Actual cause of weakness in determination or that of faith is this doubt As long as reluctance and hesitation in thoughts is there firmness of the faith is not possible. A thought after acquiring the lights of faith and firm belief becomes a manifestation or the phenomenon.(Top)

The Religion

Religion causes us to enter into that pattern of faith and belief where no doubt or whim exists and man observes the Unseen World and the angels actively participating in the affairs of the Unseen World through his Inner Eye. Observations of the Unseen World establishes such a relationship of man with his Lord which enables him to see that the Attributes of the Creator are encompassing him. If the Inner Sight of a person is not functional, then according to Spiritualism, he has yet to enter the circle of faith. When someone enters into the circle of faith the evilness and the destructiveness take their leave from his thoughts and faith; if the Unseen World is not revealed upon a person he will always remain suppressed by evilness and destructiveness. This is the reason that despite all the comforts and facilities at his disposal, the endless new inventions and discoveries, everybody is suffering from anxiety, worries, restlessness and feelings of insecurity. Since science believes in matter and the matter is only fiction and unstable therefore all the means and resources of comforts and luxuries, every invention and all the progress and advancement of science is also temporary and perishable. How can something based upon deterioration and perishability provide real pleasure. The basic and fundamental difference between Religion and Infidelity is that the latter causes whims, doubts and uncertainty whereas religion associates all the feelings, thoughts, concepts, deeds and activities of life with the only One, Endogenous and Permanent Being.(Top)


The Scientific Doctrine

The material doctrine, preached and advocated by the scientists is that nothing could be acknowledged unless it has not been practically demonstrated. They, despite all the knowledge, which is possessed by them, forget that by limiting themselves in a material shell they are negating their own theory. It is also said by them that anything which is unseen by the sight has no reality whereas the basis of all their progress and advancement are the invisible waves of light


The founder of the Qalander Conscious, proclaimer of the Reality, Hassan Ukhra Mohammed Azeem Burkhiya, Qalander Baba Auliya states.

"In all the sciences concerning the spiritual values considered so far, the universe which is a significant manifestation is of secondary importance. First the Hidden and the Unseen are considered and their understanding is attempted with a preference. If the Hidden and the Unseen are easily understood then gradually it becomes clear as to how these manifestations and phenomena come into being and what rules and laws are responsible to create and regulate them. Ali these things are ostensibly felt just like the many experiences which prior to maturity have a certain correlation and harmony in them. All those things which are related to the Unseen have been mentioned under various names in the Holy Quran by God and the prophets by mentioning those names, elucidated their characteristics, virtues and merits for the people. The Books and Scriptures before the Holy Quran also throw light on those things but only casual references are found there, more elaborate details in this regard are found in the Holy Quran only. When the details given by the Holy Quran are considered and deliberated upon, it would be concluded that the Unseen is more important than the manifestations and the phenomena. Comprehension and understanding of the Unseen is very important. That which is called religion is also based upon the Unseen. The manifestations are mentioned in the religions but they are always given secondary importance. No matter how much preference is ascribed to them by the material world it never had a primary significance in any era of any religion. Now the material world has also gradually begun to think in the same terms. For instance, the scientists of the present age have been forced to prefer the Unseen. First they suppose something and then they Strive to draw the conclusions and results. When they are concluding something they consider all their suppositions as real, indispensable and certain. For instance, the characteristics and behavior of the electron is under heated debates in this century, All the scientists unanimously agree that it behaves like a particle and as a wave simultaneously. It is interesting to note that a thing which is only hypothetical is behaving in two ways at the same time and its behavior is acknowledged as sure and certain. It is also said, besides this, that electron has not been seen till date nor there is any such hope even in the future. But despite all this the electron is acknowledged as one of the most concrete reality which has ever been perceived by the human mind, or would ever come to man's knowledge. It is only a supposition in their minds which has been followed and the result of their pursuit is such a conclusion which is of great significance for inventions and discoveries and is considered an important stage of success.

They are striving hard to introduce this important stage to the people, Many times it happens that things once believed to be factual and real are rejected and replaced by new facts, discoveries and formulae. And these new substituted facts and formulae are considered worthy of the same importance which was once reserved for the rejected ones. Obviously the unseen world is also of primary importance for them even though they call themselves materialists and the ardent fans of matter. They are not ready to acknowledge even for a moment, that there is anything like God or the Unseen World or it has any meanings or significance or it is inadequate to ignore it. They remain surrounded by the concepts which can only be termed as the materialistic once. When anything like Unseen is mentioned, their demand is always the same, that is, they cannot be conducted to any thing like the Unseen unless it is not Supplemented by a demonstration nor they are ready to believe in the Unseen or that it could be of any use or they have got any intention of granting any place to the theory of the Unseen in the world of science. No matter whatsoever they say it is only a style of their speech and an approach of their thinking. But practically they are at par with a believer of the Unseen, who presents God after acknowledging all the agencies mandatory for the faith, mentioned in the Holy Quran by God, the Most High, and have influence over any such person who believes in God. And he believes in all those agencies and entities to be a living reality and a concrete fact just as materialists acknowledge a stone or a mineral object which is present before them, which they comprehend and feel through their senses of touch, taste and sight, and about which they tell us so many things. Such as there is variation in it, there is combination in it, it is balance and moderate, it has effect, there is energy in it. And they talk in the same manner about the things present in the world of matter and they believe in them in a particular manner. In other words, Just as a fan worshipper of God believes and has faith in the Unseen similarly the lover of materialism believes in the world of matter. Neither a theist can live without believing the World of Unseen nor can a materialist live without believing the matter. Both have their own approaches and the only thing which they have in common, is their faith in their respective approaches. This faith and conviction is termed as 'life' by them. In fact, no life is possible without faith and conviction whether it is the life of an Atheist or that of a Materialist

Re: Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/12/2002 7:59 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]



Let each have his belief, yet not encroach upon the other; once one makes major decisions in the name of religion, he has done an egregious error.

Most Bureaucratized religions have led to a kind of evil in one sense or another; may we not name the offenders for they know who they are.

Re: Science and Supernatural
posted on 07/12/2002 8:01 PM by Citizen Blue

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

post script: When I meant major decisions, I meant ones that take away the rights of others to decide for themselves.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 07/26/2002 7:48 PM by bobee@austarnet.com.au

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religeous Zeal is inversely proportional to intelligence times education level. Rz = IQxEL. As Americas education system wanes, Religeousness waxes.

Religious people exist because they were raised religious.
posted on 10/23/2002 10:32 PM by a n other

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

there's no other significant reason

Re: Religious people exist because they were raised religious.
posted on 10/23/2002 11:10 PM by tony_b

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

That suggests religion is a meme, of course.

The fact that so many people are religious (we are led to believe) indicates that this meme has great persistence utility.

In this sense, religious prople are successfully "selected for" by the sociological environment.

Thus, the success of religious people (that they still exist, and are not "extinct") is an instance of Darwin's "natural selection", ironically.

Cheers! ____tony b____

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/25/2002 4:45 PM by S

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Nonsense.

Schopenhauer, "The World as Will and Representation"; Nietzsche, "Beyond Good and Evil"

-S



Re: Intellectual <> intelligence
posted on 01/19/2003 11:30 PM by Duff

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I don't really like the word intellectual for scientists. Intellectual sounds as french vague communist philosophers.

It is used the word intellectual as a synonym of intelligence, but it is not the same.

For example (is metaphorical, i do not wish to enter into a religious area)

You could say that the devil is intelligent, but not an intellectual!!!!

Re: Intellectual <> intelligence
posted on 01/20/2003 10:18 AM by Grant

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

>You could say that the devil is intelligent, but not an intellectual!!!!

This reminds me of that ad on TV featuring two guys in the front seat of a car arguing about who would win a foot race, the six-million-dollar man or his enhanced girlfriend. After listing their reasons for their point of view, a girl riding in the back seat says, "Guys -- it's a TV show!"

I feel the same way about discussions concerning the Devil. A fictional character can have any characteristic you want to give him. The Devil is a composit of characteristics given to him by a wide range of authors over a long period of time. But he's no more real than the six-million-dollar man.

Grant

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/23/2002 11:53 PM by Robert Hartsock

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I am reminded of the story of the magician that died and went to heaven. He was met by God at the gate and he asked God, "What makes you so powerful that you should decide who will and who will not get into heaven?"
God answered with, " Can you do this?" He stooped down picked up a handfull of dust flung it in the air and "Poof" a man stood there!
The magician said, "Sure, I can do that," and stooped to pick up some dust but God stopped him with, "No! No! You have to use your own dust!"

When the universe was created it was created as a great sea of enery. The energy is in quantum or particle form. These particles of energy we call "The Least Particles." The Least Particles are governed by ten principles. 1. LP's are disticnt. 2. LP's are exclusive. 3. LP's vibrate at cetrain frequencies. 4. LP's are indestructible. 5. LP's are attracted by vibrations of other LP's. 6. LP's are autokinetic. 7. LP's bond with other LP's of harmonious vibraios. 8 LP's flee from other LP"s of disharmonious vibrations. 9. LP's transmit and receive vibration signals. 10. LP"s are tractable.
Everything and every function of everything is related to the Least Particles and their ten governing principles.
At the moment of creation the LP's began to move about and sort themselves out in accordance with their frequencies of vibration. By the process of quantum mechanics they form the patterns of the subparticles, the atoms, the cosmos. They overlay and interface and interlace
and interplay and form such entanglements as the human body with its billions and billions of processes going on all at once and struggling to maintain balance and harmony all the while.
The human brain may have a limited number cells in which there are patterns or "bits" of intelligence but it has the power within itself to shift or transport the patterns about and to filter and sort them out to produce ideas
and conclusions without number. Its like the PowerBall game where there are 50 numbers from which to choose an order of five with one of another 10 for the PowerBall. The total number of possible arrangements of 5 numbers and one powerball is 4 or 5 million.
Each Least Particle is alive - it has a zest for life. That is, it strives to abide in a harmonious enviornment. It is a particular bit of dust.

Robert Hartsock

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/30/2002 5:15 AM by Ron

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

For me, something I can't prove doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The glass isn't necessarily half empty. I think some intellectuals approach the question of God's existence opposite my philosophy because they associate him with religion. And religion or lack of it causes natural biases. If religion is removed and and a person really thought about it; God could just possibly be a real entity. Look at the universe around us and its infinite complexity; we chalk it up to chemistry and physics - Nature. When we look at a red corvette, we chalk it up to man... and that is nothing more than the manipulation of chemistry and physics. Besides, the really smart ones enjoy the comfort of believing in something greater than self... the world is a lonely place when you think you are its beginning and its end.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/03/2002 6:05 PM by r3

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Ron;

> For me, something I can't prove doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

It doesn't mean it _does_ exist, either.. and Occam's razor dictates that 'god' is a needless assumption

> think some intellectuals approach the question of God's existence opposite my philosophy because they associate him with religion.

Religious faith of some sort is needed if one is to believe in a creator.

> Look at the universe around us and its infinite complexity;

'Infinite'? That's a pretty ambitious word.

> we chalk it up to chemistry and physics - Nature. When we look at a red corvette, we chalk it up to man... and that is nothing more than the manipulation of chemistry and physics.

The argument from design has been long debunked.

> Besides, the really smart ones enjoy the comfort of believing in something greater than self... the world is a lonely place when you think you are its beginning and its end.

I'm not sure how you define 'self' (be it in terms of the species or the individual), but a desire for comfort alone never logically justifies a belief.


*r3 likes to pick on creationists*

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 8:00 AM by Ron

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Christian religion is a set of rules for believing in the Judeo-Christian God. These rules differ from religion to religion. Belief in God doesn't equal belief in religion. My premise stands; modern day intellectuals often overlook the possibility of God's existence because he is associated with religious dogma. It is possible that something exists even though it can't be empirically proven at this time. Carl Sagan also defined the universe as infinite...ambitious was he? I am not a Creationist, but refuse to rule out a possibility simply because it doesn't fit the "Big Bang" theory of the universe. The Big Bang is also running into problems at its premise. One problem among several: Why is the universe speeding up when the bang occured 12 billion years ago?

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 3:22 PM by tony_b

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Ron,

I've written this several times, but I think it is worth repeating.

1. I seriously doubt that any amount of scientific investigation will EVER decide the "superior intelligence behind the observable universe" question. If there is an omnipotent omniscience that was reponsible for everything, or pulls all the strings "at will", and decides to remain hidden, then hidden they will remain.

2. Science has, as its core endeavor, to explain the universe in ways that DO NOT require or suppose the existence of any "willful actor" that causes events to occur, or is responsible for the "rules" in any ongoing way. The reason for this is quite pragmatic. If things "behave as they do" because of their "unthinking and intrinsic nature", then rules formulated based upon observations can be relied upon to be as predictive tomorrow as they are today.

If (instead) we were to suppose that (say) gravity is effected by the "will of God", then there is no sense in trying to formulate rules for gravity ... they could all change drastically the moment God takes a coffee break.

None of this rules out the possibility of God, but science has AS ITS JOB to develop the best explanations it can that require no "willful actor or designer" having been present.

If one likes, one can take science as a game like chess. To invoke God as an element of scientific discourse is akin to invoking the rules of checkers during a game of chess. Its a different game.

Cheers! ____tony b____

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 3:42 PM by Ron

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Tony,

I didn't say that God created the universe. Indians think Coyote created earth. I simply would not rule out a theory because someone attached God to it. God could be immutable and the rules by which he may have set the universe in motion could be immutable as well. And I do believe that God can exist regardless of what we, mankind attribute to him... or don't attribute to him. The basic premise still stands. Intellectuals rule out his existence because of an inherent bias towards organized Christian religion and the creationist theory they espouse.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 4:48 PM by S

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

And Occam's Razor (though I tend to agree with you; most intellectuals do not recognize the implciations of adopting an exclusively materialist outlook on 'reality').

-S

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/07/2002 8:34 AM by Ron

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Yes, I agree that there are far reaching social impacts to a people not believing in God.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 8:32 PM by tony_b

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Ron,

If you point is simply that "some intellectuals have knee-jerk reactions to 'God' concepts", then I agree, but many God-Believers have similar reactions to materialist, humanist, or naturalist concepts, depending upon their flavor of God.

Of course, "something" can exist, regardless of the attributions anyone makes.

In an attempt to separate this discussion from a mere play on words, suppose I told you:

--- "I simply would not rule out a theory because someone attached Bleem to it."

I would think you might ask me, "Tony, What on earth do you mean by 'Bleem'?"

If God were immutable (unchanging, static) then God could not "create anything" nor be responsible for anything, since such an act defies the term "stasis". The term "God" either intends to imply a "conscious willful, all-(fill-in-the-blank) being", or it might as well be called "the universe". Then one would be saying "the universe might be immutable", or "the universe set the universe in motion", and "I simply would not rule out a theory because someone attached 'universe' to it."

But, in all honesty, how often do those who employ the term "God" ever intend it to be simply synonymous with "the universe"? They generally intend "something more that you cannot find with science", which is quite fine. But is not an issue for scientific investigation, by its very premise.

I doubt there are many "honest" scientists who can offer any explanation as to "why anything exists at all". Taken to that extreme, most will say "call it God if you like, what difference would it make."

And indeed, that is the ESSENTIAL point regarding scientific investigation. Irrespective of the "prime cause" (if such exists) behind light, energy, electrons, the universe, all else is treated as following entirely from intrinsic properties under no deliberated influence. For science, a "God" so removed from relevance is no "God" with which to be concerned.

A hallmark of any "reasonable theory" is that it presents itself in a manner that is refutable. Had the apparent position of stars not been observed to be deflected around the limb of the sun during the solar eclipse of 1915, the scientific community would have said to Einstein, "Nice try, but back to the drawing board for you."

Those who would inject an inscrutable God-presence into a "theory" abuse the term "theory", for (to my knowledge) there is no "refutation test" possible.

If there is any validity to "the intellectual's rejection of theories with God", it is founded there.

Cheers! ____tony b____


I didn't say that God created the universe. Indians think Coyote created earth. I simply would not
rule out a theory because someone attached God to it. God could be immutable and the rules by
which he may have set the universe in motion could be immutable as well. And I do believe that God
can exist regardless of what we, mankind attribute to him... or don't attribute to him. The basic
premise still stands. Intellectuals rule out his existence because of an inherent bias towards
organized Christian religion and the creationist theory they espouse.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/06/2002 1:56 AM by S

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

"A hallmark of any "reasonable theory" is that it presents itself in a manner that is refutable."

Falsificationism was determined to be logically incoherent by Popper over 3 decades ago.

Proferring tidbits of knowledge,
-S

:)

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/06/2002 4:38 AM by tony_b

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

S,

I am not as familiar with Popper as you seem to be. Did Popper offer a superior methodology for separating "useful theories" from unsubstatiable conjectures, or did his work serve to point out the limitations of logically constructed systems in general?

I suppose science has both its "functional side" (trying to construct stuff that works as expected) as well as its "philosophical side" (an attempt to explicate "reality".)

Those who employ it toward the former purpose can expect to meet with a measure of success.

Those who employ it for the latter purpose are really engaging in a "religion of science", and I won't offer prospects for success in that endeavor.

Cheers! ____tony b____

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/06/2002 6:18 PM by BC

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

>>I suppose science has both its "functional side" (trying to construct stuff that works as expected) as well as its "philosophical side" (an attempt to explicate "reality".)

Those who employ it toward the former purpose can expect to meet with a measure of success.

Those who employ it for the latter purpose are really engaging in a "religion of science", and I won't offer prospects for success in that endeavor.<<

Bingo. I think you've hit the nail on the head. I think where some theists get into "intellectual trouble" is when they attempt to use the metaphorical language of myth incorrectly. In my experience, This seems to be largely a fixation of Western religion. Quicha storytellers sometimes start reciting their people's creation myth with the ritual introduction, "I don't know if this story is factual, but it is true." (It's not actually that bald sounding...factual is the most exact short translation I can pull out of my head just sitting here remembering...the actual word I give as "factual" would be closer to "true in terms of facts", and the word I translate as "true" would be "true in terms of wisdom.")

Similarly, I think many "science-ists" (a terrible neologism to be sure)would be well served to ponder the last 25 centuries of debate in Western philosophy in ontology and epistemology. The scientist's endeavor to explain the "nature of reality" reminds me of Xeno's paradox--one gets closer and closer to the goal, but it is actually impossible to get there, in my opinion, using the formal structure of science...although, of course, science is extremely useful in explaining certain aspects of reality.

BC


Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/07/2002 8:26 AM by Ron

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Yes, Intellectual "knee jerk" reaction is my point entirely. Not what or who or where or if there is a God as described in the Bible. Simply that any merit that the argument may have is dismissed out of hand just as religious adherents dismissed the round earth theory. Both sets of intellectuals are deserving of criticism for untempered reaction and failure to even entertain the idea with an open mind.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 9:39 PM by r3

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

> My premise stands; modern day intellectuals often overlook the possibility of God's existence because he is associated with religious dogma.

A logical atheist would not rule out any chance that some deity may be responsible for the 'creation' our universe, but lack of evidence dictates that it cannot be seriously considered. On what premise would it be?

> It is possible that something exists even though it can't be empirically proven at this time.

That essentially means nothing. It's also technically possible, I suppose, that there are diamond-rich caves sitting somewhere on Mars. I doubt there are any Martian expeditions being planned around such an unlikelihood.

> Carl Sagan also defined the universe as infinite...ambitious was he?

I suppose that would depend on how literally he intended his statement to be taken. I've heard an estimate placing the number of atomic particles in the universe at 10^80, which is obviously a guess, but still far from infinite'which is what it would remain even if raised to it's own power a few billion times.

> I am not a Creationist, but refuse to rule out a possibility simply because it doesn't fit the "Big Bang" theory of the universe. The Big Bang is also running into problems at its premise. One problem among several: Why is the universe speeding up when the bang occurred 12 billion years ago?

Who knows. Maybe we'll find out. If there is a god who's responsible for a few of the unknowns, I strongly suspect that explaining his existence would be far greater a headache then trying to figure out the acceleration of universal expansion.

-
On another note, Tony b made a comment regarding the mystery of existence. I find existence no harder (or easier) to contemplate then the notion of non-existence; which would obviously include the total absence of matter, time, and space. Why fuss over origins beyond what science can reveal? ..Especially by introducing the idea of an entity which is necessarily in concept even more complex the universe itself, and would still be subject to the question of an origin.

Ok, so I'm done now.

-r3

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/07/2002 8:14 AM by Ron

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Actually the statement that something exists or doesn't exist has everything to do with the argument: Intellectuals refuse to entertain God's existence even though they will entertain or entertained the notion of time travel, dark matter, and intelligent life elsewhere in the universe (without empirical evidence). Why? Because they have an inherent bias towards organized christian religion which transfers to the idea of God. For example, why don't they say, "OK, if God isn't an intelligent being who created the Universe then who or what is he?" "And, why is he so pervasive a force in the human condition?" "Is he really just an opiate of the masses or is there something else to this?" The orginal question is: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals? The answer is still because intellectuals have an inherent bias towards God because of organized christian religion. In other words, God or the idea is dismissed out of hand as not worthy of scientific study.

Ron

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/01/2002 5:30 AM by pilgrim

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I think it's a variation on peer pressure.

In our society, we're taught to shut down at the mention of God, especially since the values inherent in religious faith run counter to the way our society functions, and the values inherent within it.

Strictly speaking of religion, organised religion, on the other hand, I'd say that most "intellectuals" can see that the organized churches are filled with hypocrisy and contradiction, whose teachings, actions, and restrictions run counter to the underlying message of religious faith - of love, peace, acceptance, tolerance, and sacrifice.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/01/2002 2:24 PM by zero_is_one

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Science can be considered a form of religion. Why is science so important to intellectuals? It provides a framework for understanding the world around us.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 10:19 PM by Jewish influence

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?

As usual, there is at least one huge blind spot here among the discussants. One cannot bring up the subject of "intellectuals" (at least those afforded prominence in American culture) without mentioning Jews. "Intellectuals" have largely been Leftist/Liberal for the past few decades, until fairly recently when a trend is spilling to the right. (The so-called "neo-cons," many who are afforded the most prominence, are of course also Jewish). The question that leads this thread therefore stretches into the question: "Why have Jews been so influential in Marxist movements (emphatically anti-religious -- Marx too, of course, was from a Jewish family), an ideology that, on one hand, sanctified the proletariat, and, on the other, killed them?"

A related question should also be: "Why have "intellectuals" (led by a Jewish vanguard) pathologized religious faith? And the answer will have something to do with the importance for Jewry of devaluing the DOMINANT religion in America (the one they are convinced that oppresses them), and that is Christianity. (We may also speculate upon the influence of Talmudic materialism and "this-life" orientation to explain the historical influence of Marxist secular Jewry). Again, the premise of the question of this thread notes that "most Americans" (subtext: non-Jews) take religion more seriously than "most intellectuals" (subtext: Jews).

Organized Jewry (American Jewish Congress, American Jewish Committe, the ACLU -- largely Jewish, et al) have been extremely influential in "separation of church and state issues in recent decades. The reason is the fear that Jewish tribal identity -- not necessarily religious -- will be subsumed by dominant Christian mores if the mainstream religious culture is not repelled. The American mass media (largely led by a Judeo-centric influence in Hollywood, television, etc.) has been an important part of the devaluing of religious faith.

Doubt my premise of here? Bear in mind that Jews represent about 2.5% of American culture. In a 1974 book, The American Intellectual Elite, Charles Kadushin produced the results of his studies. He had tabulated lists of contributors to leading American "intellectual" publications, narrowed the names down to 200, and in a series of queries or interviews asked his subjects who were the most influential intellectuals around. Of the top 21 most highly rated (by others in this publishing circle), 15 were Jewish, including Hannah Arendt, Daniel Bell, Saul Bellow, Noam Chomsky, Paul Goodman,
Richard Hofstadter, Irving Howe, Irving Kristol, Norman Mailer, Herbert Marcuse, Norman Podhoretz, David Riesman, Robert Silvers, Susan Sontag, and Lionel Trilling. [KADUSHIN, p. 30] Half of
the total 200 were also reputed to be Jewish. As Kadushin notes, "Jews are indeed much more strongly represented among leading intellectuals than the population at large. They compose about half of the American intellectual elite. Catholics are vastly underrepresented, but Protestants, who are one-third of the group, are also relatively underrepresented ... [KADUSHIN, p. 23] ... Even in comparison with elite American professors (those who published more than 20 articles in academic journals and who teach in high-quality colleges and universities) of the same age and in the same fields, there are between two and five times as many Jews in the
intellectual elite."[KADUSHIN, p. 24] In the world of academia (professorships) at-large, 60% of the "intellectual elite" were found to be Jewish. [KADUSHIN, p. 24] The "intellectual elite" also had a geographical flavor -- half of the academic elite held positions at four East Coast universities -- Columbia, New York University, Harvard, and Yale. [KADUSHIN, p. 23]

And how does one become a "prominent" intellectual; how does one crash the circle of elite? Publication, of course, in Jewish-founded journals like the New York Review of Books, Dissent, and so forth). Here, at this very forum, we are all guests, of course, of Mr. Kurzweil's contributions to (Jewish) "intellectualism."

It is a subject worth further investigation.


EVERYTHING YOU WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT JEWS AND ISRAEL BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK:

http://www.jewishtribalreview.org

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 10:44 PM by tony_b

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Jewish influence,

> "EVERYTHING YOU WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT JEWS AND ISRAEL BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK:"

Wow. I guess Jews are the veritable font of human intellectualism, and so influential despite their small numbers. I owe them a great debt of gratitude for supplying me with a rational basis for understanding the world, without which I would likely be mired in superstitions and hocus-pocus. Fortunately, my inferior genetic background is not so retrograde that I am incapable of benefiting from this intellectual foundation.

I suppose we should follow their lead, then. There is no substitute for success.

Cheers! ;) ____tony b____

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/05/2002 11:00 PM by Jewish influence

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]


YOU SAY: "Wow. I guess Jews are the veritable font of human intellectualism, and so influential despite their small numbers. I owe them a great debt of gratitude for supplying me with a rational basis for understanding the world, without which I would likely be mired in superstitions and hocus-pocus. Fortunately, my inferior genetic background is not so retrograde that I am incapable of benefiting from this intellectual foundation."

I SAY: Your sarcasm and trivialism makes no point. It argues nothing, save for your clinging to sarcasm. Behind that, your "intellectual" comment here is completely vaccuous. Rendering all that you don't believe in as "hocus pocus" is inane.

YOU SAID: "I suppose we should follow their lead, then. There is no substitute for success."

I SAY: There is indeed a substitute for "success." You don't seem to grasp the irony of what you are saying, per the subject at hand. Say, a traditional Christian, Hindu, or Buddhist conception of value? What are the social processes, one might wonder, that inform your comments that are such a drastic antithesis to so many expressions of traditional religious faith?

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/06/2002 4:23 AM by tony_b

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Jewish influence,

> "What are the social processes, one might wonder, that inform your comments that are such a drastic antithesis to so many expressions of traditional religious faith?"

A drastic antithesis? That is "ultimate" is likely unknowable (certainly be "scientific methods")?

Rather than beat about the bush with allusions to the import of Jewish intellectual influence, why not simply offer your position on the matter?

I happen to have a strong appreciation for the fruits of intellectual endeavors and the scientific method, despite my belief that they cannot ascertain "fundamental truth", but merely a basis for function. And I would thank the devil for providing me such tools, (if I believed in the devil.)

For all your passion about Jewish influence, you must have a thesis, and can suggest a plan of action, presentable (if not defensible) in a few short statements. Why not take a definitive stand? Give us your vision of a "solution" to the serious truth that has been revealed to you.

Or do you prefer tossing gasoline on fires?

Cheers! ____tony b____

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/06/2002 6:01 PM by stzzb

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

YOU SAY: "Rather than beat about the bush with allusions to the import of Jewish intellectual influence, why not simply offer your position on the matter? I happen to have a strong appreciation for the fruits of intellectual endeavors and the scientific method, despite my belief that they cannot ascertain "fundamental truth", but merely a basis for function. And I would thank the devil for providing me such tools, (if I believed in the devil.) For all your passion about Jewish influence, you must have a thesis, and can suggest a plan of action, presentable (if not defensible) in a few short statements. Why not take a definitive stand? Give us your vision of a "solution" to the serious truth that has been revealed to you. Or do you prefer tossing gasoline on fires?"

I SAY: The reason Jewish Tribal Review and When Victims Rule. A Critique of Jewish Pre-eminence in America exists is to answer -- with extensive documentation -- your questions. Since we are a "sound bite" culture, and you want all of Jewish identity and history condensed into two or three sentences, I'll pull this out of the vastness of it all, just to whet your appetite:

1) "Being Jewish" is a distinct identity.
2) It is forbidden in modern society to critically investigate this identity. 3) Modern Jewish identity, whether secular or religious, remains a tribal allegiance. 4) International Jewry is a very powerful entity (economically, culturally, etc.) 5) Israel is a brutal, racist state and is dragging us into world war. 6) The Jewish hegemony we currently have in so many fields is good for no one (ultimately not even Jews); it subverts a reasonable, "multicultural" sharing of power.

That's merely a start.

Goals? Public discussion. Education. (As you know, investigating Jewish power and influence is, thanks to vast Jewish lobbying efforts that have went on for decades now, pathologized (i.e., irrational "antisemitism.") How to change things? Probably based upon the well-worn Jewish model (loud complaining, appeals to justice, legal action, socialize people to demand a true democracy in the business world, etc.) which has been centrally active in the weakening of the WASP power structure (which existed/exists in some spheres, but in areas like the mass media, modern art, pornography, etc., these have always been JEWISH territories.

The "definitive stand" is the web site, jewishtribalreview.org, and you may peruse it at your leisure. All the evidence for my complaints you will find there.

I welcome your challenge to anything I have stated here.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/07/2002 1:55 AM by tony_b

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

stzzb,

I do not differ with the "substance" of (most) of the points you have listed, which I address individually below. My issue is one of implications, and moreover, of "technique" in seeing injustices be identified and corrected.

> 1) "Being Jewish" is a distinct identity.

As an ethnicity, yes. And as a cultural/religious phenomenon, perhaps these coincide "more closely" than, say, one might find a Japanese to be Buddhist, an Irish to be Catholic (or Protestant) etc. However, being Irish or Japanese is quite a distinct identity, in general.

> 2) It is forbidden in modern society to critically investigate this identity.

Please reword.

It is forbidden in modern society to molest children. Those who do are subject to arrest by police (if neighbors do not beat them to death first), and upon conviction, can expect long prison sentences. Clearly you do not intend "forbidden" in the same manner.

Few groups that enjoy a degree of power will happily promote the publication of their negative aspects. The "forbidden" quality you ascribe seems to overlap to a large degree with a more general political correctness.

If a black person, or a chinese gang commits a crime, it is no violation of political correctness to identify those perpetrators as black or chinese. But it is defamation of "an identity" to offer, therefore, that blacks (as a group) are criminals, need to be "investigated more carefully" etc. To do so is a pre-emptive strike that treats people as guilty until discovered innocent.

> 3) Modern Jewish identity, whether secular or religious, remains a tribal allegiance.

OK. So religiously, culturally, and perhaps even ethnically, Jews tend to "hang together". Is the implication, thus, that they pass secret messages with each handshake? That they await, and obey the orders passed down from the Jewish High Command? Take a tour of any major metropolitan area, and you will see "enclaves" were folks of a particular ethnicity/culture keep themselves in a tight-knit ball. I don't happen to think its very healthy, in the long run, but it is certainly not a pretext for mounting covert surveillance.

> 4) International Jewry is a very powerful entity (economically, culturally, etc.)

Undeniably. Again, not a crime in and of itself. It does make "large coordinated actions" possible, of course, and this is a "perk" generally enjoyed by any powerful international group or coalition. In thirty years, if they play their cards right, the chinese may be the dominant pan-global cultural phenomenon.

> 5) Israel is a brutal, racist state and is dragging us into world war.

I am no particular fan of "Israel - the Government", do not excuse brutality, nor racism. I do not find it surprising, given their situation, that they would act (globally) to encourage the destruction or subjugation of what they percieve to be their enemies. But if you were to ask the average Israeli citizen, "Would you risk a global war to subjugate your enemies, given the risk that such a broad war might leave ALL areas in the vicinity completely devastated", I think you would find they support no such "path to salvation". Thus, to characterize "Israel" as a brutal, racist, imperialist entity, and by extension, to argue via "Jews, worldwide, hang together" in order to implicate every (sucessful) Jew in my neighborhood as a virtual co-conspirator to a brutal global domination is the height of injustice. They become "guilty for being successful".

If it were up to me, I would force Israel to abide by UN Resolution 242 and withdraw forthwith from the territories secured through the 1967 war, under threat of withholding billions in annual aid. And I would offer substantial assistence to rebuilding those areas in support of a strong Palestinian state.

> 6) The Jewish hegemony we currently have in so many fields is good for no one (ultimately not even Jews); it subverts a reasonable, "multicultural" sharing of power.

Yes, I am personally dismayed at the "consolidations" of the media (fewer independent news services), and of the "content provider's" efforts to "copyright for perpetuity" that which should revert to public domain. There are "sound principles" for opposing such efforts in the interest of the public good, and they should be organized as such with rhetoric focused upon these unhealthy manifestations.

These trends would be just as disconcerting if any group, cultural, ethnic, or just "rich folk in general" were to succeed at them. My concern is that, by labeling them as "Jewish" manifestations or agenda, no matter that they may be the dominant players, acts to suggest that "Jewery itself" must be attacked, and that these unhealthy monopolies might be somehow less of a concern if it were some other group with such power.

Most of all, my objection was targeted at the characterization of dispassionate "intellectualism" as evidence of one having fallen under a spell crafted specifically by Jews as part of their world domination agenda.

An old friend of mine lives in Arizona. He is a blond-haired, blue-eyed Bakersfield boy, his wife is Jewish, and they raise their kids with observations of Jewish traditional holiday activities. They are both industrious and resourceful people. If his wife were to get an advanced degree, start a successful business, and become "prominent" in the community, I cannot see that she should be penalized, investigated, or otherwise tarred with the brush of being yet another example of conspiratorial Jewish powerhood.

We should not equate, nor punish "justifiable success" as a substitute for addressing "unjustifiable excess".

Focus the investigations upon "bad acts, unhealthy and unjust behaviors", as opposed to focusing upon a religious/ethnic/tribal identity as a default "perpetrator class", and let the chips fall where they may. I'd be happy to see changes made, believe me.

Cheers! ____tony b____

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/07/2002 10:40 AM by stzzb

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Tony B, Thank you for your intelligent, and reasoned, reply.

YOU SAY: "I do not differ with the "substance" of (most) of the points you have listed, which I address individually below. My issue is one of implications, and moreover, of "technique" in seeing injustices be identified and corrected."

I SAY: OK.

YOU SAY: [responding to "'Being Jewish' is a distinct identity"] As an ethnicity, yes. And as a cultural/religious phenomenon, perhaps these coincide "more closely" than, say, one might find a Japanese to be Buddhist, an Irish to be Catholic (or Protestant) etc. However, being Irish or Japanese is quite a distinct identity, in general.

I SAY: Jewish identity is complex; it is not a singular essence (i.e., ethnic, religious, racial, whatever). It entails, for various Jews different things, but the question always remains: What is the common denominator? Comparing a Buddhist to a Jew, or a Japanese to a Jew, is never a fair comparison, because Jewry's intense TRIBAL allegiance is the weave that threads throughout any definition(s) of the Jewish people. There is no direct comparison, say, between an "Irish-American" or a Methodist with "being Jewish." Being Jewish entails a great deal more than just ethnicity, including, crucially, a "victimhood" root of self-perception.
This sense of chronic persecution (which is religious in origin) is believed even by the secular). Another key to Jewish identity is the notion of an omnipresent, transcendant, also mystical evil ("antisemitism) that haunts Jewry (as so self-defined) virtually everywhere, sooner or later. No other ethnic identity can compare, in gravity, to this ideology of victimhood.

YOU SAY: [Responding to "It is forbidden in modern society to critically investigate this identity"] Please reword.

I SAY: This is the discussion I have been having with "Pilgrim" on another thread. We live in an era when it is forbidden (pathologized) to criticize ethnic, religious, or racial communities (a product of, in very large extent) American Jewry's political activism in creating a comfortable nest (of Judeo-centrism and Zionism) in our new "multicultural" society (which used to be a "melting pot.") There is a dual standard implicit in this, for the prior power elite (define it as you like, as "white" or "Protestant," or whatever) has been subject to all manner of criticism towards diluting its power. Fine. But, meanwhile, Jewry plugs in as a "religious" group, or an "ethnic" group, or even a "racial" one. At the same time, Jewry acts, collectively, in a profoundly POLITICAL way to attain its ethnocentric, tribal interests (at cost of all others). By virtue of Jewry's various claims on immunity from criticism, its intensely POLITICAL essence ALSO is afforded a blanket screening from criticism. Herein lies a profoundly disturbing point.

An xample of the implicit censorship in all this (not necessarily political): Say, the Russian mafia. It is fundamentally a Jewish-directed syndicate. It has important links to Israel, and, in the drug trade world, it has links to the Chassidic community in New York City. Are ALL Jews part of this? Of course not. But this is not the point. The point is that ONE OF THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE CRIME NETWORK IS ITS INTER-TRIBAL TIES WITHIN ITS "JEWISH" NETWORK, and to publicly point this out is forbidden. ("Bigot! Racist! Antisemite!) One is not permitted to say the "J" word in a critical context, even if it is crucial in understanding how, say in this crime case, the crime syndicate is ordered. AND FUNCTIONS.

YOU SAY: "It is forbidden in modern society to molest children. Those who do are subject to arrest by police (if neighbors do not beat them to death first), and upon conviction, can expect long prison sentences. Clearly you do not intend "forbidden" in the same manner."

I SAY: You are really nitpicking the semantics of words. Criticizing Jews is not molesting children. Example: We live in a world where it is a crime (punishable by fines and prison sentences) in the "free" world (Australia, Germany, Switzlerland, Canada, etc.) to argue that the "Holocaust" did not occur on the scale claimed. I do not debate the conventions of that mass murder. I do think, however, it is profoundly disturbing that an "ethnic" group (Jews) have the lobbying power to forbid free speech on this subject in democratic countries. (Have you noticed anyone making laws to ban free speech about other historical issues lately?) You don't think it is "forbidden" to criticize Jews in popular culture? Look around you. If you'd like to pursue this more, I'll address it further with more examples.

YOU SAY: "Few groups that enjoy a degree of power will happily promote the publication of their negative aspects. The "forbidden" quality you ascribe seems to overlap to a large degree with a more general political correctness."

I SAY: There is a key exception to your first statement. The "Protestant" elite, or "white" elite, or European elite, or however you'd like to phrase them, have willingly "promoted the publication of their negative aspects." This is EVERYWHERE expressed around you as "white" racism. (When was the last time you read in a newspaper about "Jewish" examples of the same thing?) I point out to you also that Jews have been in the vanguard of the agitation for "political correctness" from the start, whether it's the "separation of Church and state," the championing of homosexuality, Jewish dominance of the African-American civil rights movement (including a Jewish potentate in the NAACP and other "Black" groups).

YOU SAY: "If a black person, or a chinese gang commits a crime, it is no violation of political correctness to identify those perpetrators as black or chinese.:"

I SAY: Please see my comments above about the "Rusian" mafia. (If you doubt my research about the Jewish complexion of this, read Robert Friedman's THE RUSSIAN MAFIYA.) More correctly, the term should be "Jewish mafia," not "Russian." And I ask you, how many times have you seen the "Russian" mafia addressed for the ethnicity it truly is. Bear in mind, it is LEGITIMATE to smear "Russians" in this term, but the Jewish component is SYSTEMATICALLY veiled, because saying the "J" word in a negative context is "forbidden" and condemned.

I also would point out to you that, in politically correct society, there journalistic conventions that decree that one DOES NOT mention the "ethnicity" of criminals. I believe it is nicknamed the "Cohen code" or something like that, but I'd have to look it up again.

YOU SAY: "But it is defamation of "an identity" to offer, therefore, that blacks (as a group) are criminals, need to be "investigated more carefully" etc. To do so is a pre-emptive strike that treats people as guilty until discovered innocent."

I SAY: Given the fact that Jews dominate the "Russian" mafia, and given the fact that Meyer Lansky and fellow Jews were the pistons of the "Syndicate" (America's greates crime network), and given that Jews verifiably dominate today's pornography and smut trades (trades that were once criminal but now, in politically correct culture, have become "kosher"), that Las Vegas is MAINLY a Jewish fiefdom (with some Italian mafia help), that Jews largely ran the turn of the century "white slavery trade" (prostitutiton) (See Edward Bristow's book PROSTITUTION AND PREJUDICE), that Israelis dominate the current "ecstacy" drug trade, that Jews are profoundly disproportionately represented in "white collar crime" (from Michael Milken to Enron's Andrew Fastow, on down, I think the reasoned, rational, moral historian will sit down and say: "OK. I know that ALL Jews are not part of this. BUT what is it about this tribal network that encourages such stuff?"

You say you are a devotee of the scientific method. In order to truly understand any phenomenon, you have to be open to see what's before your face. You may qualify your investigations any way you like, but to categorically dismiss one element in your investigation (say, Jews) of a problem is "bad science."

YOU SAY: "OK. So religiously, culturally, and perhaps even ethnically, Jews tend to "hang together". Is the implication, thus, that they pass secret messages with each handshake? That they await, and obey the orders passed down from the Jewish High Command? Take a tour of any major metropolitan area, and you will see "enclaves" were folks of a particular ethnicity/culture keep themselves in a tight-knit ball. I don't happen to think its very healthy, in the long run, but it is certainly not a pretext for mounting covert surveillance."

I SAY: The "implication" is that those who "hang together," whoever they are, have collective ideologies, prejudices, and networks. The Amish fit your bill too. But the Amish are not a factor in the mass media, international finance, the rise in "terrorism," the "Russian" mafia, and on and on and on and on. If Jews all went into enclaves and farmed turnips, I think they could believe whatever they wished and no one would care. This issue is the tribal allegiance and the vast POWER to assert this allegiance, with harm to all others.

"Orders from the High Command?" As I have repeatedly stated. There is indeed a very political "High Command" -- and that is allegiance to the modern racist state of Israel. I have already posted facts and figures about this at the Antisemitism thread. Are ALL Jews part of it? No. (OVERWHELMINGLY, most are). But that does not justify turning a blind eye to that WHICH DOES EXIST. Again, you proclaim yourself a devotee of the scientific method. In order to understand phenomena, do you focus on the ANOMALY to know the NORM?

YOU SAY: "Undeniably. Again, [Jewish power is] not a crime in and of itself."

I SAY: IT IS a problem, if not a crime.

YOU SAY: "It does make "large coordinated actions" possible, of course, and this is a "perk" generally enjoyed by any powerful international group or coalition. In thirty years, if they play their cards right, the chinese may be the dominant pan-global cultural phenomenon."

I SAY: Again, upon what verifiable facts to you compare the Chinese across the world and the Jews in our midst, as if the two are comparable in influencing American policy and identity?

YOU SAY: "I am no particular fan of "Israel - the Government", do not excuse brutality, nor racism. I do not find it surprising, given their situation, that they would act (globally) to encourage the destruction or subjugation of what they percieve to be their enemies. But if you were to ask the average Israeli citizen, "Would you risk a global war to subjugate your enemies, given the risk that such a broad war might leave ALL areas in the vicinity completely devastated", I think you would find they support no such "path to salvation". Thus, to characterize "Israel" as a brutal, racist, imperialist entity, and by extension, to argue via "Jews, worldwide, hang together" in order to implicate every (sucessful) Jew in my neighborhood as a virtual co-conspirator to a brutal global domination is the height of injustice. They become "guilty for being successful"."

I SAY: First, there are indeed Jews who are interested in a kind of world immolation/apocalypse, thereby forcing the return of the Messiah. They, of course, are not the majority of Israelis, but they DO exist, they are NOT insignificant and we have citations about them at our web site. On more than one occasion such Jewish "terrorists" have been caught planning to blow up the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, thereby instigating, hopefully to them, the apocalpyse.

Per, "guilt by success." Sir. Forgive me, but I tire from having to reinvent the wheel with every exchange at forums. The facts and figures about Jewish American support for Israel we have at our web site, and it is indicting. Jewish scholar upon scholar notes that the central current in Jewish identity today is Israel. It is one of the fundamental "pillars" of Jewish identity, by both secular and religious. Again, you're a scientist? Is the exception to the rule (a neighbor who condemns the Jewish state) the key to understanding?

YOU SAY: "If it were up to me, I would force Israel to abide by UN Resolution 242 and withdraw forthwith from the territories secured through the 1967 war, under threat of withholding billions in annual aid. And I would offer substantial assistence to rebuilding those areas in support of a strong Palestinian state."

I SAY: Good.

YOU SAY: "Yes, I am personally dismayed at the "consolidations" of the media (fewer independent news services), and of the "content provider's" efforts to "copyright for perpetuity" that which should revert to public domain. There are "sound principles" for opposing such efforts in the interest of the public good, and they should be organized as such with rhetoric focused upon these unhealthy manifestations."

I SAY: I agree. I note to you that the Jewish dimensions of the consolidation of the media is profound (one of the worst case examples is Canada's Zionist activist media mogul, Izzy Asper). There are MANY MORE Jewish media moguls on the Israel bandwagon, and we document some of them at Jewish Tribal Review.

YOU SAY:"These trends would be just as disconcerting if any group, cultural, ethnic, or just "rich folk in general" were to succeed at them."

I SAY: Agreed.

YOU SAY: "My concern is that, by labeling them as "Jewish" manifestations or agenda, no matter that they may be the dominant players, acts to suggest that "Jewery itself" must be attacked, and that these unhealthy monopolies might be somehow less of a concern if it were some other group with such power."

I SAY: Again. You herald the scientific method. When underscoring some investigation, do you categorically expunge some element of your inquiry for fear of where it might lead? The good scientist goes in the other direction. He/she investigates everything at length, puts it all out on the table, and THEN decides its meaning. A good scientist does not reject anything until the investigation is complete. My sense is that you, like virtually all others, know virtually nothing about the details of Jewish influence in America. Because it is a pathologized, "forbidden" topic of investigation. You, like us all, are programmed to self-censor, to excuse Jewish dominance away.

Per Jews. We have in this country a Jewish hegemony in the American cultural and political world. We have researched this at length, and our web site documents it. This is NOT a healthy situation, for anyone. Including Jews. Want to do them a favor? Get THEM talking about their hegemony. Get them talking about sharing power.

YOU SAY: "Most of all, my objection was targeted at the characterization of dispassionate "intellectualism" as evidence of one having fallen under a spell crafted specifically by Jews as part of their world domination agenda."

I SAY: There IS a Jewish agenda. It is ethnocenthric. It is chauvinist. My God, look at the irrational road America is taking in defense of Israel today? There's no oil in Israel. Why do we cherish Israeli/Jewish racism so much? And this Judeocentrism permeates our entire culture, as championed by tons of Judeo-centrists, including many in the "intelligentsia" realm. The "neo-cons" of the right (bomb Iraq into the ground) are spearheaded by folks like Irving Kristol. Perle, as I call, has been a university professor).

I don't think my position is that hard to grasp. Turn EVERYTHING upside down. Put a Palestinian into every Jewish power slot, where Palestinians dominate the mass media, pornography, U.S. foreign policy, modern art, the intelligentsia, the publishing world, etc. I think JEWS would be the FIRST in line to champion my sort of criticism: "My God! There are too many Palestinians in power!" Do you think Jews would be running around saying, "No, no. It's not fair to say the "Palestinain" word, because not all Palestinians think the same." NO WAY. Think about it. Search your soul. We have been suckered/socialized. You -- like us all -- will bend over backwards to defend the Jews, orotect them from unfair "generalizations," yet put "Palestinians" or "Muslims" in the equivilant Jewish power slots, and you're going to get very, very uncomfortable with what you've been saying to me.

YOU SAY: "An old friend of mine lives in Arizona. He is a blond-haired, blue-eyed Bakersfield boy, his wife is Jewish, and they raise their kids with observations of Jewish traditional holiday activities. They are both industrious and resourceful people. If his wife were to get an advanced degree, start a successful business, and become "prominent" in the community, I cannot see that she should be penalized, investigated, or otherwise tarred with the brush of being yet another example of conspiratorial Jewish powerhood."

I SAY: To the degree that this couple herald the usual Jewish conventions, I think it fair to criticize them. Why not? But again, you keep shielding Jewry from "investigation," as if Big Brother is on their case. Big Brother is looking in the other direction, at anyone who dares to criticize the racist, ethnocentrism of the Jewish power elite. Why are you so interested in protecting this couple' hypothetical rights when there are rights to be protected in the REAL world: those right that hold any individual or community responbile for its beliefs and actions.

YOU SAY: "We should not equate, nor punish "justifiable success" as a substitute for addressing "unjustifiable excess"."

I SAY: "Justifiable success"? Would you deny that the road to "success" is intricately entwined with "networks," which is to rephrase the old adage: "It's not what you know but who you know?"
Therein lies the road to power. And therein lies the door that the good scientist must open in the investigation of social, political, and cultural influence. When was the last time you heard of a Arab pundit taking an anchor seat on CNN, or an Arab getting a major exhibition at the Judeo-centric Museum of Modern Art, or SOMEONE WHO CRITICIZES ISRAEL getting ANYTHING, ANYWHERE? In contradistinction, when Wolf Blitzer (a Jewish anchor at CNN and a former editor for the house organ at AIPAC -- the pro-Israel lobbying organization) tells you what happened today, is it totally irrelevant that he is Jewish?

YOU SAY: "Focus the investigations upon "bad acts, unhealthy and unjust behaviors", as opposed to focusing upon a religious/ethnic/tribal identity as a default "perpetrator class", and let the chips fall where they may. I'd be happy to see changes made, believe me. "

I SAY: Leaving an ethnic power elite to its own devices, and "letting the chips fall where they may," is a recipe for disaster. Is this your attitude about the "white" slavery system over African-Americans? (Let nature take its course). Do you not realize that Jewish (spelled J-E-W-I-S-H) political activism was central in the overthrowal of the "WASP establishment?" There is our model for the disestablishment of Jewish hegemony, racism, and war.


stzzb u rastist
posted on 11/07/2002 11:01 AM by pootank

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

why r u constantly filling this forum with ur rastist jibes at the jews, noboby cares so just go elsewhere

Re: stzzb u rastist
posted on 11/07/2002 3:55 PM by stzzb

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

YOU SAY: "why r u constantly filling this forum with ur rastist jibes at the jews, noboby cares so just go elsewhere"

I SAY: This forum is supposed to have something to do with "intelligence." What are you doing here?

Re: ill get my coat
posted on 11/07/2002 6:39 PM by pootank

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

damn my ablity to spell lol

this my last comment...
can u tell me in about a screens worth of text why u dislike the jewish people so much and wot should be do to stop wot "they" r doing?

*without* any links to ur website plz?

Pootank


(i retract my comment about u being a *rastist/racist* as well my apologies it was a bit rash)

Re: ill get my coat
posted on 11/07/2002 8:04 PM by stzzb

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Pootank, YOU SAID: "damn my ablity to spell lol this my last comment... can u tell me in about a screens worth of text why u dislike the jewish people so much and wot should be do to stop wot "they" r doing? *without* any links to ur website plz? (i retract my comment about u being a *rastist/racist* as well my apologies it was a bit rash)

I SAY: Can you distill your philosophy about something you've studied for years to a "screen's worth," and do justice to it? Is it necessary that profoundly complex information be condensed into a single noodle on a 5X5 inch plate, for one swallow? Do lawyers, in arguing their cases, get three sentences?

It is infinitely easier for you to dismiss three sentences, denuded of all historical evidence, than it is to engage me in in-depth debate about one of the most important socio-political currents in our time.

Nonetheless (not to totally drive you away in a funk), in a nutshell: Jews control too much. This power is not an expression of a true multiethnic democracy or a fair "multiculturalism." ANY power elite is subject to critical scrutiny: this is just and natural, throughout HISTORY it has always been so, sooner or later. To forbid critical inqury into ANY power elite is -- however it is configured -- in fact censorship. Jews are leading us to endless war and world catastrophe with their omnipresent lobbying for the belligerent Israeli state. We need to retool the course of our socio-political system to a fair balance of power among contesting ethnicities; the current Judeocentric climate is democratic fraud. And, very importantly, people like you are quick to condemn these just, moral goals as "racism" and/or "antisemitism." You, like most people, are the result of a socialization process (whether you are Jewish or not) which demands that the Jewish community, as a tribal collective, is beyond criticism. Jews are America's "sacred cows," completely beyond reproach (even as they scurry everywhere about in political activism towards ethnocentric goals), and more and more people are getting sick of this.

So what doesn't make sense to you?

Re: ill get my coat
posted on 11/07/2002 8:20 PM by pootank

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

thank u very much for u reply

i now see ur arguement
i will read ur comments on any matter with more closely in future, and will try not to "jump" to any conclusions before get the hole picture.


thx pootank

Re: ill get my coat
posted on 11/10/2002 11:26 PM by stzzb

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

"[There is] a Jewish Mafia in American letters ..., "said popular writer Truman Capote, risking censure and the inevitable charge of anti-Semitism in 1973, "There is a clique of New York-oriented writers and critics who control much of the literary scene through the influence of the quarterlies and intellectual magazines ... All
these publications are Jewish-dominated and this particular coterie employs them to make or break writers by advancing or withholding attention ... Bernard Malamud, Saul Bellow, and Philip Roth, and Isaac Bashevis Singer are all fine writers, but they are not the only writers in the country as the Jewish Mafia would have us believe."[FORSTER, p. 109]

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/28/2002 6:23 PM by /:setAI

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

"Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?"

because no one really outgrows cliques

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/24/2003 2:31 AM by ironvee

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Because science will never answer the greatest question of all time:

Why are we here?

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/26/2003 12:24 AM by kulu42

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Yes it has. The human species the result of causal chains linking back to the begining of time on this planet (and beyond). Technically, that is why we are here.

Of course, you want to know what the purpose of life is. I ask you, do you really think there is an answer? If I told you today what the purpose of this planet was, would you believe it? Would you sleep soundly knowing that everything else in the universe hinged on the outcome of this solitary island in space? Ha! Purpose is a product of society, not nature. Methinks there no logical answer to a question as flawed as this.

***

So back on the topic subject: Amercian society is a peculiar thing. People would rather live behind an illusion before coming to grips with their mortality..."Are eggs healthy again? Do I need the latest ab-flex? Should I wear spf 30? 45? What do I eat to prevent cancer? rickets? the flu? Which celebs are dating who this week? Who has the best value meal? Should I buy deodorant WITH or WITHOUT anti-persprant? What is my horoscope? If I am forgiven my sins, what motivation is their for me not to sin again??"

Americans are just sitting around waiting to be told what to do and what not to do.

Fitter, Happier, More Productive...

cp

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/26/2003 2:10 PM by Ribald

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

So what started your chains of causality? Where did the environment in which they occur come from?

Why did the Big Bang happen? If your answer is that the circumstances were such that it occurred, why did those circumstances exist?

As to the American bashing... We ARE the most powerful nation on the planet, so we must not be all that terribly incompetent.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/26/2003 2:34 PM by kulu42

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Oh, so you are asking for the meaning of the universe, not the meaning of life. If I'm not mistaken, I believe someone is working on that one too...

As for the "American-bashing", as you put it: I am merely stating that the reason RELIGION is so important to most Americans is because they are "sitting around waiting to be told what to do." The reason why "intellectuals" are seemingly unconcerned may be that they process cause and effect relationships with greater accuracy. Maybe they have oversized egos, preventing their submission to ancient doctrines. Maybe they dont believe in the Easter Bunny, Paul Bunyon, Lucifer or Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer because modern logic prevents them.

Intellectuals are a subculture as well. You are not independant.

Fitter, Happier and More Productive...

cp

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/26/2003 3:02 PM by SkinnyDevil

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Hmmmmmmm.....

Purpose is a product of society, not nature. Methinks there no logical answer to a question as flawed as this.


Well said. The rest was a bit hostile, but I agree with the gist of it.

As for the "American-bashing", as you put it: I am merely stating that the reason RELIGION is so important to most Americans is because they are "sitting around waiting to be told what to do."


Not that it matters, but I suspect Ribald wonders if you are American or not, Kulu...and I must admit the question crossed my mind for a moment, too.

It does come off as bashing America, whether it was intended or not. At least to me (yes, I'm American). I don't know that I'd completely disagree, but then I would say the statement holds true for most people regardless of nationality or ethnicity or even religion.

One must grant, of course, that the topic is "Why is religion so important to most Americans...", so maybe we're just being testy and defensive.

May we all be fitter, happier, and more productive. Even those intellectuals hiding in ivory towers (at least they aren't fooled by religion, though, huh?).

--
David M. McLean
Skinny Devil Music Lab

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/26/2003 3:52 PM by Ribald

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

"Intellectuals are a subculture as well. You are not independant. "

And what do you consider yourself to be?

You assert that the majority of Americans do not think for themselves. I think that is purely your own ego speaking. There is the same distribution of intelligence and ambition that you would find in any culture. Americans may spend more time thinking about what model of treadmill to buy than Mongolians for example, but that is because of a completely different environment. Were the same person to live in Mongolia they would be thinking about milking the horses or moving the camp, etc.

You seem to imply that eastern mysticism is superior. On what grounds do you make that claim? Ultimately everyone chooses to believe that which provides them the psychological comfort they require. For some it is religion, for some it is atheism, for some it is mysticism, etc.

And based upon you post, I would guess that for some it is a superiority based belief system.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/27/2003 8:58 PM by kulu42

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

We ARE the most powerful nation on the planet, so we must not be all that terribly incompetent.


Competence has no relevance on the matter.

"sitting around waiting to be told what to do."


I realize that I am making a gross generalization with this comment.

***

If we can get a good working definition of intellectual religion, I think they can not only co-exist, but carry on a symbiotic relationship:

Pre-logic, humankind invents religion to explain the mysteries of the known universe. This involves the basics: sun, moon, wind, fire, etc. Man has no other resource for explaining these other than himself. He explains the movements of the known universe on super-human actions by super-human gods (In other words: Man creates gods in his image and the images of the nature around him).

Fast-forward 4,000-5,000 years...enter modern man. Using science & logic, he can calculate, predict and manipulate his known universe. He knows that there still exist super-human actions (gravity, electromagnetics, etc.) but no longer attributesd them to gods.

Thusly, if humankind can relieve itself of a personified god for one of science and logic, could science and religion become one in the same? Could scientist and clergy assimilate just as Mendel did? Why not intellectual religion?

Fitter, Happier and More Productive...

cp

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 08/28/2003 2:58 PM by Ribald

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I don't think that "religious" belief and science are mutually exclusive at all.

The problem as I see it is when people attribute physical phenomena or local causal origination of physical phenomena to a metaphysical entity.

If someone chooses to believe that a deity created the universe I don't see that as holding science back, unless that try to attribute quantum mechanics to said deities ongoing actions, for example.

I see no significant impact in scientific ability between someone that believes the big bang was the action of a deity, versus someone that believes that it occurred for unknown scientific reasons. Both are an expression of faith that do not impact performance.

When faith (of ANY kind, religious or atheistic) DOES impact performance by commission or ommission of analysis, THEN that is a problem.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 09/18/2003 4:15 PM by jimrobertsonmd

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I just completed a new addition to the "Fatal Flaw of AI" regarding how religion is creeping into scientific endeavors. I subsequently found this relevant notice written by you a month ago.

Both computer scientist and neuroscientist tackle the microscopic (eg. synaptic plasticity).
Our knowledge of synaptic function and its relation to behavior is abysmal. However, the big picture is displayed in what is referred to as human nature, or, more appropriately, human nature's (Ehrlich).

Belief of a "higher power" must be hardwired in the human brain because every society that presently exist, as well as those that we know of that are extinct, exhibit such behavior.

Wilson, in "Conscilience", suggest that this is a result of 60 million years of primate evolution that led to homo sapiens. Such extinct primates, and homo sapiens as well, evolved in a hierchical social structure ruled by one dominant male. It is not a far leap from this situation to the abstract notion of a metaphysical counterpart. Freud elaborated on this topic in "Moses and Monotheism."

Evolutionary psychologist have shown the benefits of consciousness in social groups allowing the implimentation of sophisticated social stratagies, including advanced planning, flattery and deceit.

The great benefit of extended consciousness and its relation to such metaphysical concepts is obvious. The belief in a superior being is perfect for displacing ones concerns related to "the meaning of life" and "why bad things happen to good people" and "why we are here and where are we going" etc.

Therefore, religion is consolidated into the brain (ie. human nature) as the ultimate in simplicity and efficiency in dealing with life. No effort is expended on these unanswerable questions, so the individual can go about solving the "real questions". These are "where do I get my next meal, avoid danger, find shelter as well as someone to mate with".

I think Darwin would agree since it avoids detractions from these evolutionary goals.

There has been an increase in scientist who hold religious beliefs lately, largely because of the failure to find a scientific basis of consciousness and the mistaken dualism associated with "emergence" in contemporary scientific thoughts of consciousness.

Reductionism was king and etiology (assigning a conscious reason for all biological functions) the devil when I was in training thirty decades ago. Now the reverse is true. Reductionist are very rare, and they often put stipulations on it's definition. Etiology is in vogue, implying an exterior causitive agent, because "the most brilliant minds" have not succeded in defining mechanisms related to consciousness, memory and higher cognition.

Recent comments generated in Kurzweil AI.net indicate this dogmatic view is alive and thriving among computer scientist as well.

OK - let's just determine the physical nature of consciousness and then go about our business.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 09/18/2003 4:38 PM by blue_is_not_a_number

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Etiology is in vogue, implying an exterior causitive agent, because "the most brilliant minds" have not succeded in defining mechanisms related to consciousness, memory and higher cognition.


David Chalmers, for example, and most others in this area, atill believe in the "causal-closed' - ness of mathematically described physical reality. I'm not quite sure which view you find to be "en vogue". If you are interested to discuss a view which goe further than Chalmer's, you might like to comment on my homepage http://www.occean.com .

Concerning labratory work, I think the question is what you want to study exactly. If you are interested mostly in the processes of information processing, you might be fine with classical materialism as a metaphysical background, at least for the near future of a few decades. If you are interested in consciouss experience, qualia, seeing colors as a conscious experience, you might have difficutly even formulating the goal of your study in mathematical-physical or mathematical-biological terms.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 09/18/2003 5:19 PM by subtillioN

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

If you are interested mostly in the processes of information processing, you might be fine with classical materialism as a metaphysical background, at least for the near future of a few decades.


Classical materialism is pure physics--the art of quantifying nature. It is entirely devoid of metaphysics--the understanding of the causal unity/reality beneath the equations.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 09/23/2003 8:25 AM by phrenzy

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Though an Atheist myself, Iwould point out that many "outside the box" intelectuals remained religous, people like Darwin or newton.

I think that the answer is much simpler, people in many matters are a product of thier surroundings, a child who is brought up in a religous family in a religous community is far more likly to become a religous person regardless of their mental capacity.

I also think (comclusion drawn from personal experiance which is rather limited) that one group of thinkers geeks with whom i socialise with have a mindset that seeks to quantify thier surrounding's, concepts of , "no one entity could create and manage all that stuff" and if god is compassion where is he when x, y, z happens trying to apply reason to an entity that is according to most organised religion beyond human reasoning. Though I don;t think that this comes from a presumption that they (geek's) are in some way as smart as god (or god's), I can see how comments like god couldent have made that shot or I am god. Athough made out of jest do trivialise religion.

I guess when you take the idea of all powerfull god / god's out of the picture by not believing them people of faith do look rather on the surface of the matter, to be doing as told and not questioning the fact's.

still that is only my small opinion.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 09/23/2003 10:55 AM by griffman

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

God gave me the ability to question so I will ask him all of them.

to not use such a gift would be rude.

griffman

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/13/2005 8:26 PM by wolfox

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

In fact I don't think this question to be true...entirely. Albert Einstein believed strongly in GOD and in science, and look at all the distressed nations in the world. There are many intellectuals and non-intelectuals that belive and disbelieve proportionately. I only make this claim from years of experience. The truth is that many individuals aren't really sure what they belive. The flip side is when there is a group of religiously unsure people, they somehow profess their faith with conviction. Not long after the group disperses they become unsure as individuals. As a person gets older they may increase their faith for one reason...fear of the unknown, and purpose. As in most religious faiths there is a nirvana or flame after death. Where they go is all dependant on how their life is lived while mortal, against certain "rules and regulations" set forth by the religion from God. As an intellectual myself I cannot belive in such things. What I believe to be "percieved" religion is in fact something else entirely. Religious faith is dwindling in the US because of the increase in knowlege. The more people know the more they cannot be decieved. Knowlege is power. To most people religion is hope, and without it, to them, there is no hope and pupose for life. When in fact the primary purpose in life is to reproduce. Species specific survival is one of the strongest drives next to the reproductive drive. In some cases in nature, the reproductive drive overrides all other drives, such as the black widow spider. Religion and the existence of God and the ideology behind it may never be proven or disproven. Finally I ask myself this question... If it is said that God's love is infinite then why a hell?? to me there is a limit even for God. There are many loopholes in all faiths and the answer I've always gotten when researched is the need for faith. No real answer just faith. How can someone have faith with nothing to base it on but words? To me it is foolosh. I have faith in the brakes on my car that they will stop the car when needed. It was only after several uses and I could physically see that it became a faith.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 02/13/2005 11:32 PM by Maddhatter

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I think the important message here is not whether one should believe or disbelieve, but to make that decision for yourself. Essentially, I know plenty of intellecutals who lack perspective and dont believe in religion because that is what people who "think" do. Unfortunately, these people are just as bad as the die-hard evangalist's. Personally, I'm not interested in trying to save or covert anyone; however, if I can make someone think and use his/her brain, I will be satisfied.

As far as those who don't think religion is important, I look at the recent election. Right or wrong I think one of the Democrats downfalls was their in ability to associate with religious people (or at least the Evangalists who made sure people voted Bush). Needless to say, so long as a portion of the population believes in religion than it is important, if for no other reason, because they can sway the vote one way or another.

Maddhatter

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/07/2005 6:18 AM by strategist

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

It's simple IMHO: human nature searches and needs infinite but it's not infinite. Therefore, while it tries a way to overcome its limitedness, there's no way it can understand everything, there is something it has to take for granted. Religion has answers to questions that science cannot argue at all.
But we are so used to explain everything (an outcome of scientist mentality) that the mere idea of a natural mistery gets us angry. Please someone explain me WHY planets rotate around their stars, and WHY electrons rotate around the nucleus; not HOW but WHY is there such a force. What if all electrons suddenly stopped from spinning?

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/07/2005 1:35 PM by w1ndfall

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Accepting the bias of this question as a flawed generalization, I will respond with an equally flawed, but hopefully useful generalization. This is, after all, how we model reality.

I suspect that the real issue here is the nature and definition of egos. "Intellectuals" tend to have very strong, well developed senses of self as individuals. To them, it matters very little what their "tribe" thinks. They deem themselves to be smarter than the tribe. Such strongly defined individuals naturally tend to reject God because God competes with them regarding the nature and independence of their thinking.

"Americans" consider God to be important. For the sake of this response, I will define "Americans" as average individuals in the middle of the bell curve for intellectual and emotional cognition. The people in this group tend to base much more of their identities on membership in one or more "tribes". They identify strongly with their nationality, and often their church. When their "nation tribe" starts being perceived as less than righteous, as happened with the United States during and after Vietnam, a need to wash one's self and become righteous exerts more pressure on these individuals. The American government can't be fixed and made righteous because these "Americans" only have the illusion that they can make changes. Real power lies elsewhere. The only viable alternitive is for the members of the "American Tribe" to join another tribe, namely a religious organization. Say that you give yourself to Jesus and your sins are forgiven. This is magical. You now have divorced yourself from the guilt associated with being a citizen of an unrighteous country while maintaining your identity as a member of that "tribe".

If you get the people in the "religious tribe" to exert pressure regarding a couple of socially trivial issues such as stopping overt homosexuality and banning legal abortions, you can energize this "tribe" to be the cause of repentance and even salvation of their unrighteous nation tribe.


I have noticed that the higher the individual intellect, the less the likelihood that the individual will tie his identity to that of a group. However, if significant increases to human intelligence are to happen, these changes must occur at the tribal area rather than on just an individual level. After the tribes or nations become more intelligent in their collective behaviors, then mankind can finally evolve to an intelligence higher than that of an amoeba.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/18/2005 1:58 PM by lanceprior

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I do not find religion to be trivial, I find it to be offensive.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/18/2005 3:42 PM by w1ndfall

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Why?

A blanket statement of feeling without justification adds nothing to the conversation.

It ia about as useful as saying "I hate peas".

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/20/2005 8:01 PM by eldras

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Hi windy,

There's no constant state of faith/ aetheism anyhow.

Such profoundness in man is subject to shifts often violent shofts in the psyche.

Live & Let live

the question at the start of the thread juxtaposes
Religion and intellectuals, which is nuts, eg some poeple are both.


It's whatever lights ur fire

Cheers

Elrdas



Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/20/2005 10:07 PM by w1ndfall

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Hi Eldras:

I do not object to this individual's beliefs! In fact, I think that if we are to grow as individuals, and societally, we need to explore and hash out our differences. Often this means that we agree to disagree, and that is okay.

My objection is that blanket statements made without something to back them up, or even talk about, shed no light. At that point, the thread is in danger of breaking down into the trading of epithets and ad hominem arguments. We had that when political posts were rampant. I just don't want to see MINDX degenerate back into that kind of forum.

Best regards,
Dan

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/21/2005 8:33 AM by lanceprior

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

For the record, I like peas!

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/21/2005 12:45 PM by w1ndfall

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

AHHH! But WHY do you like peas? :-)

some call it faith in weird math, some call it theft
posted on 10/22/2005 9:45 PM by codesimian

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I do not find religion to be trivial, I find it to be offensive.


I'm offended that others of my species are dumb enough to believe something just because it makes them feel good to think its true. Do you feel like 3 quarters are correct change for a dollar today? Believe it all you want, but that wont stop me from taking an extra quarter from you by force.

Re: some call it faith in weird math, some call it theft
posted on 10/23/2005 12:40 PM by w1ndfall

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I challenge your statement that people with religious convictions, of necessity, engage in their beleif systems because it makes them feel good. I know that most people in my congregation suffer large amount of mental anguish because of their faith, and more than a few are persecuted by others as well.

I agree that many of my co-religionists believe blindly. They can be sold (almost) anything. They also should not be allowed to eat in public restaurants without close supervision. I don't think that you have to worry about getting short changed by them though. They will give you the goods that you seek to purchase and your money back as well.

I will not waste time in this space by discussing the various hucksters and televangelists that use such people. They are vile and beneath contempt.

There are some of us there because we use the idea that God exists as an operating premise in order to find out more about ourselves individually and societally. Personally, I would not have been able to see and understand many psychological principles that work in groups engaged in a belief structure without becoming part of that structure. Also, I maintain contact and friendships with people that I otherwise would lose track of. I can also checkmate some of the more abberant behavior and politics practiced by many blind followers. It is worth the trip.

Getting back to your point about adopting a belief simply because it makes me feel good, I want to address the following:
A. Afterlife- if it happens, great (and a whole new set of problems to deal with), but I'm not basing my belief and related actions on this concept. The promise of Heaven is "wait and see" and the concept of hell is too easily used to manipulate people for me to be intimidated by it to the point that I base my actions on that fear.
B. Behavior Modification- regardless of what the glossy tracts telling you to "just surrender to Jesus" say, belief in a religion does require a substantial amount of change in the way most of us relate to one another. From a male perspective, women cease to be mere objects to conquer sexually and either dominated or disposed of. We relate to them as complete human beings. We treat one another fairly and respectfully in our personal and business dealings. Ad-hominem arguments and casual use of epithets (basically , marking your territory)just does'nt hack it.
C. Change of mindset. We no longer look at things from a purely selfish point of view. Putting on the "Mind of God" (not becoming god) forces us to look at the needs of the people that we encounter, and to make those needs a high priority. Do we sacrifice everything for them? Not necessarily, but we include them in our personal equation raether than just brushing them aside per the teachings of Thomas Malthus.
An example of this involves an aircraft losing pressurization at altitude. The oxygen masks come down from the overhead rack. If a mother, holding her baby, gives oxygen to the baby, she passes out, the mask falls from the baby, and they both die. If she takes oxygen first, and then shares it with the baby, both live.

Cheers

Re: some call it faith in weird math, some call it theft
posted on 11/14/2005 1:06 PM by codesimian

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

I challenge your statement that people with religious convictions, of necessity, engage in their beleif systems because it makes them feel good.


I didnt say all religious people do that. I said people who do that offend me. I'll add that (proportional to size of each group) more religious people do it than nonreligious.

I know that most people in my congregation suffer large amount of mental anguish because of their faith, and more than a few are persecuted by others as well.

I agree that many of my co-religionists believe blindly. They can be sold (almost) anything. They also should not be allowed to eat in public restaurants without close supervision.


Do you expect everyone else to pay for this supervision? I demand people who use blind-faith pay a stupidity tax to offset this cost.

There are some of us there because we use the idea that God exists as an operating premise in order to find out more about ourselves individually and societally.


Problem is, it might help them feel something beyond physical, but not "god", but since that was their theory, they take that weird feeling as evidence "god" exists. It doesnt matter what their theory is, blind faith always leads to thinking its true.

Personally, I would not have been able to see and understand many psychological principles that work in groups engaged in a belief structure without becoming part of that structure.


Like some zoologists live with monkeys to learn their ways.

B. Behavior Modification- regardless of what the glossy tracts telling you to "just surrender to Jesus" say, belief in a religion does require a substantial amount of change in the way most of us relate to one another.
From a male perspective, women cease to be mere objects to conquer sexually and either dominated or disposed of.


We are still animals, and religion wont change that. Regardless of how much you respect a woman, pussy ass and tits attract just as strongly. People like to pretend they're not animals by wearing clothes, but everybody knows whats under them and can think about anybody naked at any time.

We relate to them as complete human beings. We treat one another fairly and respectfully in our personal and business dealings.


Fairly... like churches paying no tax while I pay higher tax? If you dont agree with the church's beliefs (which include church is better than you so it should pay less tax) the church will try to rip you off, and will of course say its in the name of god.

C. Change of mindset. We no longer look at things from a purely selfish point of view. Putting on the "Mind of God" (not becoming god) forces us to look at the needs of the people that we encounter, and to make those needs a high priority.


Most religions are selfish. What can I do to get ME to heaven? All I have to do is convert some people who dont want to hear my crap? I'll do it!

Do we sacrifice everything for them? Not necessarily, but we include them in our personal equation raether than just brushing them aside per the teachings of Thomas Malthus.

An example of this involves an aircraft losing pressurization at altitude. The oxygen masks come down from the overhead rack. If a mother, holding her baby, gives oxygen to the baby, she passes out, the mask falls from the baby, and they both die. If she takes oxygen first, and then shares it with the baby, both live.


I'd like to see if their religion holds up if theres not enough parachutes and the plane is falling. Some say females first, but that implies females are better than males. But we all know who is certain to get a parachute, the PILOT, the guy who causes the plane to crash.

Re: some call it faith in weird math, some call it theft
posted on 11/15/2005 3:23 PM by w1ndfall

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

>>I challenge your statement that people with religious convictions, of necessity, engage in their beleif systems because it makes them feel good.

>I didnt say all religious people do that. I said people who do that offend me. I'll add that (proportional to size of each group) more religious people do it than nonreligious.

You are probably right about this, but I have seen many individuals who regard science as a religion. In many cases, Their responses are just as emotional and irrational as those of people who hold to more conventional religions.

>.I know that most people in my congregation suffer large amount of mental anguish because of their faith, and more than a few are persecuted by others as well.


>>I agree that many of my co-religionists believe blindly. They can be sold (almost) anything. They also should not be allowed to eat in public restaurants without close supervision.

>Do you expect everyone else to pay for this supervision? I demand people who use blind-faith pay a stupidity tax to offset this cost.

No. I expect the more mature members of the congregatiion to handle these supervisory tasks. Unfortunately, the leadership of many congregations is corrupt and in bed with those who would use religious faith to political ends. The problem is to get the leadrership to become accountable to the original teaching.

Incidentally, how would you administer a "stupidity tax"? Who qualifies? Who determines the criteria for stupidity?


>>There are some of us there because we use the idea that God exists as an operating premise in order to find out more about ourselves individually and societally.

>Problem is, it might help them feel something beyond physical, but not "god", but since that was their theory, they take that weird feeling as evidence "god" exists. It doesnt matter what their theory is, blind faith always leads to thinking its true.

Here you are answering an issue that I did not address. I said that I use the idea that God exists as an operating premise. I made do mention of epiphanies or other religious based emotional experiences. My personal experience suggests that such experiences are usually contraproductive for just about anything but entertainment.


>>Personally, I would not have been able to see and understand many psychological principles that work in groups engaged in a belief structure without becoming part of that structure.

>Like some zoologists live with monkeys to learn their ways.

Or like some sociologists and anthropologists that live with various types of human groups in order to understand how the societies work. Besides, I am a human, not a monkey (no tail!!)


>>B. Behavior Modification- regardless of what the glossy tracts telling you to "just surrender to Jesus" say, belief in a religion does require a substantial amount of change in the way most of us relate to one another.
From a male perspective, women cease to be mere objects to conquer sexually and either dominated or disposed of.

>We are still animals, and religion wont change that. Regardless of how much you respect a woman, pussy ass and tits attract just as strongly. People like to pretend they're not animals by wearing clothes, but everybody knows whats under them and can think about anybody naked at any time.

Still single aren't you? There is a real person behind those tits and clit. If you are interested, she deserves your full attention, not just your hormones.


>>We relate to them as complete human beings. We treat one another fairly and respectfully in our personal and business dealings.

>Fairly... like churches paying no tax while I pay higher tax? If you dont agree with the church's beliefs (which include church is better than you so it should pay less tax) the church will try to rip you off, and will of course say its in the name of god.

I agree that the churches tax exempt status needs to be changed. However, certain church activities involving service such as operating soup kitchens and disaster relief deserve the same tax free status that their secular counterparts enjoy. Incidentally, pastors and church employees still pay income tax and Social Security.


>>C. Change of mindset. We no longer look at things from a purely selfish point of view. Putting on the "Mind of God" (not becoming god) forces us to look at the needs of the people that we encounter, and to make those needs a high priority.

>Most religions are selfish. What can I do to get ME to heaven? All I have to do is convert some people who dont want to hear my crap? I'll do it!

Because of the way your mind is wired, you are the center of your own universe. The trick is learning that you are not the center of THE universe. Understand what God asks of us (a close reading of Matthew will suffice). Decide if you want to sign on to living out those principles. If yes, you have accepted Him. Evangelism is not a requirement for salvation.

>>Do we sacrifice everything for them? Not necessarily, but we include them in our personal equation rather than just brushing them aside per the teachings of Thomas Malthus.


>>An example of this involves an aircraft losing pressurization at altitude. The oxygen masks come down from the overhead rack. If a mother, holding her baby, gives oxygen to the baby, she passes out, the mask falls from the baby, and they both die. If she takes oxygen first, and then shares it with the baby, both live.

>I'd like to see if their religion holds up if theres not enough parachutes and the plane is falling. Some say females first, but that implies females are better than males. But we all know who is certain to get a parachute, the PILOT, the guy who causes the plane to crash.

Gee! I was talking about a loss of pressurization at altitude and you are all set to have everyone hit the silk. Sounds like a bit of an overreaction to me! Incidentally, all plane crashes are not caused by pilot error. Maintenance and engineering concerns, weather, and air traffic control can all contribute.

The point that I was trying to make is that you cannot help another if you are in as bad a shape or worse that the individual that you want to assist.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 10/26/2005 7:45 PM by frummel

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

That's easy! Most Americans aren't intellectuals and if you do think about it, like intellectuals do, it is trivial.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/08/2005 12:43 AM by mrb2222

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religion I believe has always existed only to console us in death, tragedy, and moments of fear. It gives people hope.

When all is lost and we face the finality of death we will grasp at anything that offers hope. When a lion was stalking us (ah, the old days) we asked God, the sun, Zeus or whoever to help us. When the crops were failing and we faced starvation....you get the idea.

So now we are at the point in evolution and intellectual growth, when we know with some certainty that God does not exist but we have no way of living forever. Oh God, what will we do?

Some day we will discover how to make the body live forever. Our medicines will be great. Our technology will be incredibly complex and accepted. It is at that point that death will be by accident. Our challenge then will be to ferret out all of the possible accident scenarios and eliminate them. Will I really have to give up my jet ski?

The hardest thing in all of this is acceptance. In the end, even if it is the end of time, we will cease to exist. The terror of this thought will provoke us to extreme actions at self-preservation (perhaps I'll have my head frozen or worse still, go on the Atkins Diet) but it doesn't matter. The best we can hope for is to die so quickly that we suffer only the shock of change without the shock of realization.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 11/15/2005 3:31 PM by w1ndfall

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Religious faith is not pie in the sky, although many of its adherents do believe this. It is not about an appeal to a higher being when we are stalked by lions, the crops fail, or when the shit hits the fan in general. It is about how we relate to Him, and as a consequence, how we relate to each other.

If my faith did not provide an afterlife, and I just ceased to exist after this life, it would change nothing regarding how I live my life.

"If I knew that this was the last day of the world, I would plant a tree." Martin Luther

A quantum inventor Believes!
posted on 11/20/2005 2:54 PM by Patrick

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

The religious book "Code Name God" was written by a Beverly Hills inventor of some sort of superduper laser.

I didn't understand a word of it (or "What the [Bleep] Do We Know?") but it's comforting to know that a Smart Guy is thinking about the Father in Heaven.

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/16/2006 11:28 PM by lonepanther

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

To contribute a constructive thought about this very important topic, that does not get lost in definitions about nationalities and professions I would rephrase the question: Why is a religious faith so important to most humans?

I belief, but cannot prove, that religious faith represents the unknown. What lies beyond the religious individual's current comprehension: Death, Chance, Conciousness, the Edge of their reality..
It derives from a practical need for a theory of everything and a sense of belonging, purpose and direction, which a religious faith can easily and relatively effortlessly provide.

Looking at its long history and the fact that even in our age with the amount of available information religious faith still exists as widely as it does speaks for itself, but does not justify it.
The fact that there are unknowns in our lives does not automatically make the answer a superior power. In fact, based on history and current knowledge, it is a very unlikely explanation at best.
Throughout history previously incomprehensible issues have become dissociated from religious faith as soon as the majority clearly understood them. ie. the Elements, Solar System, Evolution...
But the memory of all those events, even though they are well documented, did not really change the bottom line because there are still vast unknowns and no other equally accessible substitute theories. (except other religious faiths).

Re: Why is religion so important to most Americans and so trivial to most intellectuals?
posted on 04/17/2006 12:10 AM by B-Punk

[Top]
[Mind·X]
[Reply to this post]

Because simple minds when bored start asking questions like, what I'm I doing here, what's the meaning of life, why shouldn't I kill my neighbour and steal his food, then I don't have to work and can entertain the preacher who makes me feel good about myself.

A lonely poet once wrote:

Evolution and Devolution: Two men in the 21st Century.


This is the story of when man outpaced nature,
this is the story when machine became his bodily feature.
That day, this man was no ordinary creature,
that day, this man needed no preacher.
Having eaten he was left to think,
so he thought and thought until needing a stiff drink.
At the edge his need was not to quench a thirst,
for having outpaced nature he wanted to quicken the black heist.


But what of the man having neither machine nor teacher,
that day, this man had to feed the hungry preacher,
that day, this man was like every other creature,
where to find food was his minds only feature.
Tired and hungry,
he wept and then slept.
Dreaming his want was a life of ease,
so that he could entertain the preacher who he so wished to please.