[Vision2020] Ted's answer to Eric E.
Art Deco aka W. Fox
deco@moscow.com
Fri, 28 May 2004 13:16:21 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00D1_01C444B5.F8031F20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Eric, et al,
When searching for "the truth" it may be useful to understand that some
statements are neither true nor false. For example:
"The square root of blue recrystalizes sodomy."
Just because words can be strung together in an apparently syntactically correct
sentence doesn't meant the sentence has a comprehensible, literal, testable
meaning.
In your quest for "the truth" you might watch out for these kind of assertions.
Religion, philosophy, politics, etc. are rife with such statements. These
assertions are generally recognizable by the practical impossibility of being
neither unequivocally confirmable nor falsifiable. The latter is often
especially the case.
A parable derived from an example written by an apostate Catholic disciple of
Wittgenstein may be helpful as an illustration to you.
Neighbors A & B were having an over-the-back-fence discussion:
A: I heard you have a new kind of powerful watchdog or something.
B: Yes, it is called the Odg.
A: What does it do?
B: It watches over us continually and protects us and our property from harm.
A: I haven't seen anything. Where is it?
B: The Odg is invisible.
A: I have heard any barking or anything.
B: The Odg makes no sound.
A: You don't have a fence. How do you keep the Odg in?
B: The Odg stays with us always. It is the loving nature of the Odg to do
so.
A: Your lawn is immaculate. I don't see any Odg droppings at all.
B: The Odg never eats. Consequently, it makes no droppings. It doesn't
slobber or have bad breath either.
A: Tell me again what it does.
B: It watches over us and protects us from all harms. It requires only
unquestioning belief on our part in return.
A: But wasn't your home robbed of everything of value, weren't you badly
beaten up, and wasn't your wife taken for and enjoyed a month-long sexual romp
by a motorcycle gang a few months ago?
B: Yes, but it must of been good for us, else the Odg would not have let it
happen.
Eric, I hope you are a sincere person who wishes to better the world.
After understanding the above parable and its ramifications, perhaps you might
consider shifting the focus of your faith and the use of your talents from
proselytization to working directly, non-judgmentally, and non-theologically to
alleviate some of the obvious sufferings in the world -- hunger, disease,
illiteracy, war, religious strife, crime, social disorganization, etc.
When I lived in Africa as a Peace Corps Volunteer, I meet a number of
missionaries and other once very religious people of various faiths who came to
Africa originally to spread their religious beliefs.
The pursuit of the alleviation of suffering and the physical improvement of the
general conditions of life for many of these people soon became the meaning of
and center for their existence. Religious beliefs, if not abandoned for many of
these people, became a very less important part of their lives. Their faiths,
like Albert Schweitzer's were greatly altered. I know because I worked with and
enjoyed several of these people. They openly and unabashedly talked about their
spiritual transformation and their determination to help those less fortunate
than themselves in a multitude of non-spiritual ways.
Many formerly very religious persons believed that in the overall scheme of the
universe as they came to see it, preventing glaucoma or teaching Africans to
farm productively enriched humankind a great deal more than such self-serving
activities like building churches, making doubtful converts, or singing hymns.
Wayne
Art Deco (Wayne Fox)
deco@moscow.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Engerbretson
To: Art Deco aka W. Fox ; vision2020@moscow.com
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 10:19 AM
Subject: Re:Re:Re:Re: [Vision2020] Ted's answer to Eric E.
Thanks for taking the time to write such a clear and well-written bunch o'
thoughts, Wayne. Very cogent. And I mean that sincerely.
But, regardless of how well it can be proven that none of us can prove who is
right-- someone still IS closer to the Truth, and I'm going to keep trying to
find out who they are.
Eric E.
On May 28, 2004, at 9:21 AM, Art Deco aka W. Fox wrote:
All,
At the risk of sounding like a broken record and probably offending almost
everyone again, here are a few comments on the current Eric E. vs.. other V 2020
posters thread.
There are tens of thousands of different systemic religious beliefs, each
contradictory to each of the others. Unless you can present cogent evidence
that a contradiction is not always a false statement, this means that only one,
if any, of these different religious views is true. Compounding this problem is
the fact that many adherents of many of these religious beliefs are, like Eric,
absolutely convinced that their way is the only absolutely true way.
The tens of thousands of systemic religious beliefs is an understatement.
If we consider the nuances of individual belief, the are probably billions of
different religious beliefs.
The problem is that, so far, no method has been found that provides a clear,
acceptable, universal way to decide the truth of particular
statements/assertions referencing alleged supernatural beings and occurrences.
If there were such a method, this discussion would not be occurring -- not
only on V 2020, but in millions of other places. There is no argument about the
specific gravity and the conductibility of copper, the tensile strength of alloy
X2314, or other beliefs that are used to send humankind to the moon and
broadcast that event in real-time.
The existence of the above problem of knowledge should give rational persons
a great deal of pause before asserting with apodictic rigor the truth of any
particular set of superstitious/religious beliefs such as Christianity, Islam,
Judaism, God as Space Traveler, Gods who Live in a Volcano, Pan, etc. The
probability of any particular religious/superstitious system being true appears
miniscule. This pause should also limit attempting to control/limit other's
lives based solely on these superstitious/religious beliefs. [Other
considerations appear at the end for those that do not get bored/disgusted
before arriving there.]
With regard to ethical statements, a somewhat similar situation exists.
However, since all of us must act, there are various systems which attempt to
provide a practical answers to ethical questions. Some of these ethical systems
are, in great part, empirically based. In these systems, facts are considered
and ethical truths are subject to testing and to modification based on
experience.
Anthropological investigations of many different societies appear to
demonstrate that ethical beliefs generally arise out of practical
considerations. These ethical beliefs occur before the superstitious/religious
foundations which eventually are used to propagandize belief in and to buttress
obedience to such ethical beliefs.
Life is a constant, sometimes very difficult struggle. An observably
contingent universe provides many uncertainties and unpleasantries. All of us
have various means of coping with various parts of this struggle. Many of these
coping mechanisms involve fantasy. Psychologists call them defense mechanisms.
Those who have read modern psychology know there are a great number of these
mechanisms that have been identified, e.g., rationalization, projection,
reaction formation, etc.
For example, probably all of us had an imaginary friend and/or ascribed
to/fantasized about the actions/emotions of real friends. Defense mechanisms
allow us to cope with and to alleviate in the short term many unpleasant
feelings and to defend our personas against unpleasant truths. The use of these
coping mechanisms when not confused with reality in the long term are normal and
generally healthy.
The problems with the use of defense mechanisms begin to appear when the
person believes the fantasies driven or engendered by these defense mechanisms
correspond to reality. When the fantasies/delusions reach certain levels of
unreality, such as believing in contradictory statements, believing in
existential statements contrary to or not supported by evidence, or, in
particular, believing that a particular person controls the weather for a
region, then such defense mechanisms become pathological to various degrees.
Many non-believers such as myself do not find all superstitious/religious
beliefs to be "evil." Such beliefs provide solace in times of grief, provide
moral guidance for some, provide a sense of community/belonging for some,
provide comfort from the vicissitudes of life's struggle, etc. Although the
truth of such beliefs is highly doubtful, to the extent that
religious/superstitious beliefs provide relative peace, well-being, individual
growth, etc. non- believers are not upset by such matters.
The problem for non-believers and many believers alike arises when
religious/superstitious beliefs are use to proscribe the actions of others who
do not share the particular superstitions of the proscriber.
In plain terms, many see that solely using superstition/religion and
ignorance to limit the freedom, aspirations, individual growth opportunities,
non-criminal life styles, etc. of other people is little short of colossal
egotism and is an logically/epistemologically unwarranted intrusion on personal
liberty.
Eric and his fellow believes are clearly free to indulge in, use as coping
mechanisms, and to argue for their particular superstitious/religious beliefs.
If Eric's beliefs provide comfort for him, fine. However, when Eric and his
fellow travelers use their particular beliefs to condemn, to attempt to impose
guilt upon, and/or to outlaw the non-criminal freedom of others, then because
there is little or no logical/epistemological support for Eric's beliefs,
conflict, often acrimonious and sometimes deadly, arises. If Eric were a
Christian living in Saudi Arabia, he would understand this position much more
clearly.
When gender based, race based, sexual orientation based, etc. roles are
limited not by a discussion of observable consequences but by superstition and
ignorance, we all lose not only our own freedom of choice, but the contributions
those who are limited can make to our lives as well as to their own.
If you have had the patience to struggle through the above, thank you.
In closing, here is one general problem of many that arises out of certain
kinds of religious/superstitious beliefs.
General Observation: If one expects others to act in a certain manner to
achieve certain goals in given situations, then clarity of purpose and procedure
is essential.
Specific Instance: When desiring employees to provide excellent customer
service, for example, a good manager carefully explains/re-explains to each
employee clearly and unequivocally which behaviors/attitudes/etc. (and the
purposes of such behaviors/attitudes/etc.) are required to reach the goal of
excellent customer service. The clearer, more careful, more detailed the
instruction, the greater the probability that the employees will perform
correctly. Moreover, the instructions given about good customer service are a
result of years of experimentation and observation -- the results of such
instructions are verifiable. Newer experiences can and frequently do
modify/expand the instructions.
If there is such a thing as eternal life, and if there is a way to achieve
such, then the importance of such an accomplishment greatly exceeds the
importance of giving good customer service.
If there is some being(s) in charge of deciding who is to be eternally
rewarded/punished, she/he/it/they appear to be very inept managers.
Given the undeniable reality of the plurality of many different religions,
the difference in their ethical pronouncements, the differences in their alleged
paths to eternity, the amount of death, heinous suffering, and displacement the
practice of these religions have historically (and in the present) bestowed upon
humankind, etc., it is undeniable that clear, verifiable instructions from some
alleged deity(s) to achieve eternal reward are obviously lacking. (If not, this
discussion would not be occurring.)
In reality, all things considered, alleged gods as a guides to eternal
rewards appear to be colossal bumblers -- certainly less effective than the
poorest of human managers.
Given the human needs that drive humankind towards the plurality of
religious beliefs, it is of very small probability that the words above will
influence anyone to any degree. However, I write them with hope that they may
encourage a few to examine more closely their sexist, homophobic, racist,
pro-slavery, anti-secular, anti-egalitarian, anti-innovation, and/or
anti-liberty points of view.
If you have read this far, thank you. Perhaps I can treat you to a banana
split at the Elk River Dairy Queen.
Wayne
Art Deco (Wayne Fox)
deco@moscow.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Tbertruss@aol.com
To: eric@eric-e.com ; vision2020@moscow.com
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 11:09 PM
Subject: [Vision2020] Ted's answer to Eric E.
Eric:
We can agree to disagree, amicably, but you backpedaled rather vigorously
from wording that did not seem to imply as much "between the lines"
interpretation as you now claim the words required. If a code book is needed to
decipher your true meaning, perhaps you could post it on the web?
Where the rubber meets the road, Eric, is that I will not deny your faith
may be the absolute truth, yet your faith demands that you assert my
spirituality, not based on Christ's divinity, is absolutely false!
Here we diverge in ways not trivial that impact the power vectors of
spirituality in how we seek to alter the world!
And you can make whatever you wish of that comment, which implies a tome or
two.
Ted Moffett
The Nuart Theatre
208-882-0459 (lobby, no message)
208-883-0997 (CCM, leave message)
516 S Main, Moscow ID 83843
eric@eric-e.com
http://www.ccmbooks.org
------=_NextPart_000_00D1_01C444B5.F8031F20
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4>Eric, et al,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4>When searching for "the truth" it may be useful to =
understand=20
that s</FONT><FONT size=3D4>ome statements are neither true nor =
false. For=20
example:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4>"The square root of blue recrystalizes =
sodomy."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4>Just because words can be strung together in an=20
apparently syntactically correct sentence doesn't meant the =
sentence has a=20
comprehensible, literal, testable meaning.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4>In your quest for "the truth" you might watch out=20
for these kind of assertions. Religion, philosophy, =
politics,=20
etc. are rife with such statements. These assertions are =
generally recognizable by the practical impossibility of being neither=20
unequivocally confirmable nor falsifiable. The latter is often =
especially=20
the case.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4>A parable derived from an example written by an =
apostate=20
Catholic disciple of Wittgenstein may be helpful as an illustration =
to=20
you. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>Neighbors A & B were =
having an=20
over-the-back-fence discussion:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: I =
heard you have a=20
new kind of powerful watchdog or something.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: Yes, =
it is called=20
the Odg.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: What =
does it=20
do?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: It =
watches over us=20
continually and protects us and our property from harm.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: I =
haven't seen=20
anything. Where is it?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: The =
Odg is=20
invisible.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: I have =
heard any=20
barking or anything.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: The =
Odg=20
makes no sound.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: You =
don't have a=20
fence. How do you keep the Odg in?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: The =
Odg stays with=20
us always. It is the loving nature of the Odg to do =
so.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: Your =
lawn is=20
immaculate. I don't see any Odg droppings at all.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: The =
Odg never=20
eats. Consequently, it makes no droppings. It doesn't =
slobber or=20
have bad breath either.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: Tell =
me again what=20
it does.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: It =
watches over us=20
and protects us from all harms. It requires only unquestioning =
belief on=20
our part in return.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>A: But =
wasn't your=20
home robbed of everything of value, weren't you badly beaten =
up, and wasn't=20
your wife taken for and enjoyed a month-long sexual romp by a =
motorcycle=20
gang a few months ago?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D4>B: Yes, =
but it must=20
of been good for us, else the Odg would not have let it =
happen.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV><FONT size=3D4>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Eric, I hope you are a sincere person who wishes to better the =
world. =20
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>After understanding the above parable and its ramifications, =
perhaps you=20
might consider shifting the focus of your faith and the use of your =
talents from=20
proselytization to working directly, non-judgmentally, and=20
non-theologically to alleviate some of the obvious sufferings in the =
world --=20
hunger, disease, illiteracy, war, religious strife, crime, social=20
disorganization, etc.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>When I lived in Africa as a Peace Corps Volunteer, I meet a number =
of=20
missionaries and other once very religious people of various faiths who =
came to=20
Africa originally to spread their religious beliefs. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The pursuit of the alleviation of suffering and the physical =
improvement=20
of the general conditions of life for many of these =
people soon=20
became the meaning of and center for their existence. Religious =
beliefs,=20
if not abandoned for many of these people, became a very less important =
part of=20
their lives. Their faiths, like Albert Schweitzer's were greatly=20
altered. I know because I worked with and enjoyed several of these =
people. They openly and unabashedly talked about their spiritual=20
transformation and their determination to help those less fortunate than =
themselves in a multitude of non-spiritual ways.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Many formerly very religious persons believed that in the overall =
scheme of=20
the universe as they came to see it, preventing glaucoma or=20
teaching Africans to farm productively enriched humankind a =
great deal=20
more than such self-serving activities like building churches,=20
making doubtful converts, or singing hymns.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Wayne</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Art Deco (Wayne Fox)<BR><A=20
href=3D"mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Deric@eric-e.com href=3D"mailto:eric@eric-e.com">Eric =
Engerbretson</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=3Ddeco@moscow.com=20
href=3D"mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art Deco aka W. Fox</A> ; <A=20
title=3Dvision2020@moscow.com=20
href=3D"mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, May 28, 2004 =
10:19 AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re:Re:Re:Re: =
[Vision2020] Ted's=20
answer to Eric E.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Thanks for taking the time to write such a clear and=20
well-written bunch o' thoughts, Wayne. Very cogent. And I mean that=20
sincerely.<BR><BR>But, regardless of how well it can be proven that =
none of us=20
can prove who is right-- someone still IS closer to the Truth, and I'm =
going=20
to keep trying to find out who they are.<BR><BR>Eric E.<BR><BR><BR>On =
May 28,=20
2004, at 9:21 AM, Art Deco aka W. Fox wrote:<BR><BR>
=
<BLOCKQUOTE><?bigger><?bigger>All,<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?big=
ger><?bigger>At=20
the risk of sounding like a broken record and probably offending =
almost=20
everyone again, here are a few comments on the current Eric E. vs.. =
other V=20
2020 posters=20
thread.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>There are =
tens of=20
thousands of different systemic religious beliefs, each =
contradictory=20
to each of the others. Unless you can present =
cogent=20
evidence that a contradiction is not always a false statement, this =
means=20
that only one, if any, of these different religious views is =
true. =20
Compounding this problem is the fact that many adherents of many of =
these=20
religious beliefs are, like Eric, absolutely convinced that =
their way=20
is the only absolutely true =
way.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>The tens of=20
thousands of systemic religious beliefs is an understatement. =
If we=20
consider the nuances of individual belief, the are probably billions =
of=20
different religious =
beliefs.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><B><?bigger><?bigger>The =
problem=20
is that, so far, no method has been found that provides a clear, =
acceptable,=20
universal way to decide the truth of particular =
statements/assertions=20
referencing alleged supernatural beings and =
occurrences.<?/bigger><?/bigger></B><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>If =
there=20
were such a method, this discussion would not be occurring =
-- not only=20
on V 2020, but in millions of other places. There is no =
argument about=20
the specific gravity and the conductibility of copper, the =
tensile=20
strength of alloy X2314, or other beliefs that are used to send =
humankind to=20
the moon and broadcast that event in=20
real-time.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>The =
existence=20
of the above problem of knowledge should give rational =
persons a=20
great deal of pause before asserting with apodictic rigor the truth =
of any=20
particular set of superstitious/religious beliefs such as =
Christianity,=20
Islam, Judaism, God as Space Traveler, Gods who Live in a Volcano, =
Pan,=20
etc. The probability of any particular religious/superstitious =
system=20
being true appears miniscule. This pause should also limit=20
attempting to control/limit other's lives based solely on =
these=20
superstitious/religious beliefs. [Other considerations appear =
at the=20
end for those that do not get bored/disgusted before arriving =
there.]<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>With regard =
to=20
ethical statements, a somewhat similar situation exists. =
However,=20
since all of us must act, there are various systems which attempt to =
provide=20
a practical answers to ethical questions. Some of these =
ethical=20
systems are, in great part, empirically based. In these =
systems, facts=20
are considered and ethical truths are subject to testing and to =
modification=20
based on=20
=
experience.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>Anthropolo=
gical=20
investigations of many different societies appear =
to demonstrate=20
that ethical beliefs generally arise out of practical =
considerations. =20
These ethical beliefs occur before the superstitious/religious =
foundations=20
which eventually are used to propagandize belief in and to buttress=20
obedience to such ethical=20
=
beliefs.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>Lif=
e=20
is a constant, sometimes very difficult struggle. An =
observably=20
contingent universe provides many uncertainties and =
unpleasantries. =20
All of us have various means of coping with various parts of this=20
struggle. Many of these coping mechanisms involve =
fantasy. =20
Psychologists call them defense mechanisms. Those who have =
read modern=20
psychology know there are a great number of these mechanisms that =
have been=20
identified, e.g., rationalization, projection, reaction =
formation, =20
etc.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>For example,=20
probably all of us had an imaginary friend and/or ascribed =
to/fantasized=20
about the actions/emotions of real friends. Defense =
mechanisms=20
allow us to cope with and to alleviate in the short term many=20
unpleasant feelings and to defend our personas against unpleasant=20
truths. The use of these coping mechanisms when not confused =
with=20
reality in the long term are normal and generally =
healthy.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>The problems =
with the use of defense mechanisms begin to appear when the =
person=20
believes the fantasies driven or engendered by these defense =
mechanisms=20
correspond to reality. When the fantasies/delusions reach =
certain=20
levels of unreality, such as believing in contradictory=20
statements, believing in existential statements contrary =
to or not=20
supported by evidence, or, in particular, believing that a =
particular=20
person controls the weather for a region, then such defense =
mechanisms=20
become pathological to various=20
degrees.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>Many=20
non-believers such as myself do not find all superstitious/religious =
beliefs=20
to be "evil." Such beliefs provide solace in times of grief, =
provide=20
moral guidance for some, provide a sense of community/belonging for =
some,=20
provide comfort from the vicissitudes of life's struggle, etc. =
Although the truth of such beliefs is highly doubtful, to the =
extent=20
that religious/superstitious beliefs provide relative peace, =
well-being,=20
individual growth, etc. non- believers are not upset by such =
matters.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>The problem =
for=20
non-believers and many believers alike arises when =
religious/superstitious=20
beliefs are use to proscribe the actions of others who do not share =
the=20
particular superstitions of the=20
proscriber.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>In =
plain=20
terms, many see that solely using superstition/religion and=20
ignorance to limit the freedom, aspirations, individual growth=20
opportunities, non-criminal life styles, etc. of other =
people is=20
little short of colossal egotism and is an =
logically/epistemologically=20
unwarranted intrusion on personal =
liberty.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>Eric and his =
fellow believes are clearly free to indulge in, use as coping=20
mechanisms, and to argue for their particular =
superstitious/religious=20
beliefs. If Eric's beliefs provide comfort for him, =
fine. =20
However, when Eric and his fellow travelers use their particular =
beliefs to=20
condemn, to attempt to impose guilt upon, and/or to outlaw the =
non-criminal=20
freedom of others, then because there is little or no=20
logical/epistemological support for Eric's beliefs, conflict, often=20
acrimonious and sometimes deadly, arises. If Eric were a =
Christian=20
living in Saudi Arabia, he would understand this position much more =
clearly.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>When gender=20
based, race based, sexual orientation based, etc. roles are limited =
not by a=20
discussion of observable consequences but by superstition and =
ignorance, we=20
all lose not only our own freedom of choice, but the contributions =
those who=20
are limited can make to our lives as well as to their =
own.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>If you have had =
the=20
patience to struggle through the above, thank=20
you.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>In closing, =
here=20
is one general problem of many that arises out of certain kinds =
of=20
religious/superstitious =
beliefs.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>General=20
Observation: If one expects others to act in a certain manner =
to=20
achieve certain goals in given situations, then clarity of =
purpose and=20
procedure is=20
=
essential.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>Specific=20
Instance: When desiring employees to provide excellent =
customer=20
service, for example, a good manager carefully explains/re-explains =
to each=20
employee clearly and unequivocally which behaviors/attitudes/etc. =
(and the=20
purposes of such behaviors/attitudes/etc.) are required to reach the =
goal of=20
excellent customer service. The clearer, more careful, =
more=20
detailed the instruction, the greater the probability that the=20
employees will perform correctly. Moreover, the instructions =
given=20
about good customer service are a result of years of experimentation =
and=20
observation -- the results of such instructions are =
verifiable. Newer=20
experiences can and frequently do modify/expand the =
instructions.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>If =
there is=20
such a thing as eternal life, and if there is a way to achieve such, =
then=20
the importance of such an accomplishment greatly exceeds the =
importance of=20
giving good customer =
service.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>If there is =
some=20
being(s) in charge of deciding who is to be eternally =
rewarded/punished,=20
she/he/it/they appear to be very inept=20
managers.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>Given =
the=20
undeniable reality of the plurality of many different religions, the =
difference in their ethical pronouncements, the differences in their =
alleged=20
paths to eternity, the amount of death, heinous suffering, and =
displacement=20
the practice of these religions have historically (and in the =
present)=20
bestowed upon humankind, etc., it is undeniable that clear, =
verifiable=20
instructions from some alleged deity(s) to achieve eternal reward=20
are obviously lacking. (If not, this discussion would not =
be=20
occurring.)<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>In =
reality,=20
all things considered, alleged gods as a guides to eternal rewards =
appear to=20
be colossal bumblers -- certainly less effective than the =
poorest of=20
human =
managers.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>Given the=20
human needs that drive humankind towards the plurality of religious =
beliefs,=20
it is of very small probability that the words above will influence =
anyone=20
to any degree. However, I write them with hope that they may =
encourage=20
a few to examine more closely their sexist, homophobic, racist, =
pro-slavery,=20
anti-secular, anti-egalitarian, anti-innovation, and/or=20
anti-liberty points of =
view.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR> <BR><?bigger><?bigger>If you have =
read=20
this far, thank you. Perhaps I can treat you to a banana =
split at=20
the Elk River Dairy=20
=
Queen.<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR><BR><BR><?bigger><?bigger>Wayne<?/bigger><?=
/bigger><BR><?bigger><?bigger> <?/bigger><?/bigger><BR><?bigger><?bi=
gger>Art=20
Deco (Wayne Fox)<?/bigger><?/bigger><BR><?color><?param =
0000,0000,EEEE><?bigger><?bigger>deco@moscow.com<?/bigger><?/bigger><?/co=
lor><BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> =
;<BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>-----=20
Original Message=20
=
-----<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller><?/smaller><?/fontfamily></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller><?/x-tad-smaller><B><?x-tad-sma=
ller>From:<?/x-tad-smaller></B><?x-tad-smaller>=20
<?/x-tad-smaller><?color><?param =
0000,0000,EEEE><?x-tad-smaller>Tbertruss@aol.com<?/x-tad-smaller><?/color=
><?x-tad-smaller>=20
<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller><?/smaller><?/fontfamily></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><B><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>To:<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller>=
<?/smaller><?/fontfamily></B><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>=20
<?/x-tad-smaller><?color><?param =
0000,0000,EEEE><?x-tad-smaller>eric@eric-e.com<?/x-tad-smaller><?/color><=
?x-tad-smaller>=20
;=20
<?/x-tad-smaller><?color><?param =
0000,0000,EEEE><?x-tad-smaller>vision2020@moscow.com<?/x-tad-smaller><?/c=
olor><?x-tad-smaller>=20
<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller><?/smaller><?/fontfamily></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><B><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>Sent:<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smalle=
r><?/smaller><?/fontfamily></B><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>=20
Thursday, May 27, 2004 11:09 =
PM<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller><?/smaller><?/fontfamily></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><B><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>Subject:<?/x-tad-smaller><?/sma=
ller><?/smaller><?/fontfamily></B><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>=20
[Vision2020] Ted's answer to Eric =
E.<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller><?/smaller><?/fontfamily></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Eric:<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?para=
m Arial><?smaller>We=20
can agree to disagree, amicably, but you backpedaled rather =
vigorously from=20
wording that did not seem to imply as much "between the lines"=20
interpretation as you now claim the words required. If a code =
book is=20
needed to decipher your true meaning, perhaps you could post it on =
the web?<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Where=20
the rubber meets the road, Eric, is that I will not deny your faith =
may be=20
the absolute truth, yet your faith demands that you assert my =
spirituality,=20
not based on Christ's divinity, is absolutely =
false!<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Here=20
we diverge in ways not trivial that impact the power vectors of =
spirituality=20
in how we seek to alter the =
world!<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>And=20
you can make whatever you wish of that comment, which implies a tome =
or two.<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR><?fontfamily><?param =
Arial><?smaller>Ted=20
=
Moffett<?/smaller><?/fontfamily><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><B><I><?fontfamily><=
?param Arial><?color><?param =
8080,0000,0000><?bigger><?x-tad-bigger><BR><BR>The=20
Nuart =
Theatre<?/x-tad-bigger><?/bigger><?/color><?/fontfamily></I></B><B><I><?f=
ontfamily><?param Arial><?color><?param =
9999,9999,9999><BR><?smaller><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>208-882-0459=20
(lobby, no message)<BR>208-883-0997 (CCM, leave message)<BR>516 S =
Main, Moscow=20
ID =
83843<BR>eric@eric-e.com<BR>http://www.ccmbooks.org<BR><BR><?/x-tad-small=
er><?/smaller><?/smaller><?/color><?/fontfamily></I></B><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>=
</BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00D1_01C444B5.F8031F20--