|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Protest Against Religious Bigotry!
#7552206 - 10/23/07 06:47 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I object to any and all individuals or groups of people who insult, belittle, demean or mock THAT which is Sacred to other human beings. It is a form of hatred that is on a par with racial hatred and sexual orientation hatred. Hatred always is based in fear - we hate what we fear. Both are irrational.
Religious bigotry doesn't strike at mere physical appearances or social differences, nor does it strike at the psychobiological mechanisms that determine just what sexually arouses a person. These petty hatreds are aimed at the surface differences and psychchosexual behaviors of people. Really it is a matter of personal aesthetics that have been inordinately offended be feelings of aversion. Ignorance, arrested intellectual, emotional, social and moral developmental aspects can be discerned.
Religious bigotry doesn't settle its gaze on mere surface structures and behaviors. No, it attacks human beings at a more essential level, their right to Be. However, the kinds of individuals who attack others on the basis of their Way of Being do not actually Know others at the level they are attacking. The bigot in this case is attacking the thinking minds of other human beings while 'believing' that they are perceiving the essential nature of those people. That is because the bigots are so entirely identified with the contents of their own thinking minds that they do not understand that thoughts and by corollary, language, are merely reflective representations of Reality. In concrete terms, the bigot somehow confuses his own ideas about God, for God Itself. This is the old example of the finger pointing at the moon in Zen. Only the fool looks at the finger instead of the moon. Only the fool believes that written words are the Word or Logos.
Christians, Jews and Muslims - Peoples of the Book - are the worst culprits in this, but Jews at least are not geared towards world domination no matter what the antisemitic conspiracy paranoids believe. Orthodox Muslims are even more idolatrous about the Qu'ran than fundamentalist Christians are about the Bible. Muslims believe the very printed book of the Qu'ran is the Word of God in the sense that Catholics believe in the Transubstantial Bread and Wine as being the very Body and Blood of Iesus the Christ. George Orwell must have taken his "doublethink" from this contradiction.
I posit an Ultimate Reality, conventionally called God in English, is the Eternal Substratum of existence. This is a philosophical way of saying that God creates, but in a continuous manner, with space-time being 'externalized' from its Transcendental Source from every point in the space-time continuum. It is more like photons which appear out of 'nothing' in any cubic foot of deep space, than it is of a Divine Watchmaker who created the universe and withdrew. In other words, there is Eternality and there is spacio-temporality. The Buddhist say Nirvana and Samsara, Hindus say Purusha and Prakriti. All I have stated here is the obvious. We intuit Eternity and we perceive spacio-temporality. Sometimes, if one is very fortunate, one has a radical experience of Eternality. Just how this experience is rendered into language is tricky and always imperfect, and it is always colored by the human being to whom the experience occurred. Each person is unique and is comprised of a various number of psychological, emotional, socio-cultural overlapping selves.
So, I posit a second self-evident point: certain individuals have experiences of Ultimate Reality. Moreover, as I said, the idiosyncrasies of any given human being to whom an experience of Ultimate Reality has occurred, will inevitably express that experience in very idiosyncratic ways. There will nevertheless be commonalities with others of the same constitution and/or culture with whom the mediating symbols of language will resonate.
The nomadic tribesman of Muhammed's time, exposed to Jews and Catholic Christians as well as to their own Arabic myths and culture, eventually produced the Qu'ran. Iesus and His friends who came to share something of His vision, similarly passed down accounts and many documents were produced. A Bible was finally evolved from this.
Lastly, I posit this: it is not the content of books, which is only the recorded content of thoughts that matters metaphysically. What matters is the extent to which any writings are capable of guiding human beings to Be as Compassionate as they can Be. Wisdom is measured by one's capacity to Be Compassionate. As every sura of the Qu'ran begins: "In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate." That's it, no more should be read or said. That is The Way to Be. Similarly, "Thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul and with all thy might." And in case one does not quite get Who or What "the LORD thy God is," we have this: "God is love." If we took these three points from the Qu'ran, the Torah and the New Testament, and forgot everything else, we would approach the utter simplicity that is also the Truth of Enlightened Mind in Buddhism. It is Really...that...simple.
Peace.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
|
good post.
I find that when I have to defend Scientology face to face with some bigot, that I find myself very shaken up, primarily because I can no longer be myself. Even though I am not a Scientologist, my actions and words instantly become a representative of it once my affiliation is known. If they did not know how I felt about Scientology, they would see me goofing around and think "gee, there is some goofy douchebag over there", but after they know my stance on the subject, it becomes "hey look at that weirdo scientologist, those are some seriously fucked up people".
I do take solace in the fact that usually people who are bigots are so spiritually inept that they have to berrate others for their personal advancements in that field.
|
vaportrail
upandaway



Registered: 10/07/05
Posts: 121
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
|
|
Shit.. you're right. I hate those culprits. Fire ze missiles!!!
-------------------- and the hippos were boiled in their tanks
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
|
Quote:
Wisdom is measured by one's capacity to Be Compassionate.
The older I become the truthier this seems. I view rational self-interest, to use objectivist terminology, as the symptom of a psychologically under-developed person. It seems that many people are selfish merely because they're not strong enough to be compassionate.
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: SneezingPenis]
#7552784 - 10/23/07 09:05 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Regardless of my own evaluation of Scientology, I stand by our Constitutional right to practice whatever religion. Moreover, not every Scientologist is an ego-inflated primadonna actor any more than every would-be Kabbalist is some primadonna singer-songwriter. Disciplines and traditions are only as useful as the integrity of the beings in whose possession they are held. Thanks for responding.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
|
Is it strength, or is it simply the result of Vision? I mean, once one has 'seen' how it Really is, one doesn't even have a real choice NOT to Be as Compassionate as one is capable of. I don't want to sound like a spiritual mercenary, but in 'casting one's bread upon the waters,' one seems to receive back more than what one has given out. Careful about becoming a light to others though, most people prefer the comfort of darkness and do not like to feel self-conscious (naked) in the presence of someone who is into total awareness - especially of themselves.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said: The older I become the truthier this seems. I view rational self-interest, to use objectivist terminology, as the symptom of a psychologically under-developed person. It seems that many people are selfish merely because they're not strong enough to be compassionate.
Please elaborate. Self-interest is a sign that an individual is not strong enough to be compassionate?
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: fireworks_god]
#7554173 - 10/24/07 09:01 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I am not going to explain Objectivism to you.
|
EternalCowabunga
Being of Great Significance



Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 7,152
Loc: Time and Space
|
|
It's interesting that you say that Mushman, because I have recently come to the conclusion that I've been naive all this time trying to be compassionate (maybe it's just an eagerness to please?) while most people have been focusing on rational egoism. I have mixed feelings about rational egoism as it seems to be even less natural than schizophrenia or mystical states but that is my perspective, and although it may limit ourselves, it is the conditioning of most people so it is worth it to invest yourself in it I suppose.
Quote:
Careful about becoming a light to others though, most people prefer the comfort of darkness and do not like to feel self-conscious (naked) in the presence of someone who is into total awareness - especially of themselves.
So very true. I remember I just had two people come up to me at my University today and ask me if I wanted to learn about Jesus and come to their church to read the Bible.
I told them how I respected them for their beliefs, but my time knowing Jesus (Compassion) was much too difficult for me as I had to do it alone with no help, and I was not prepared for that kind of responsibility again.
I remember so clearly walking the streets in horror (not fear, just a feeling of tragedy) at the suffering in people's eyes and in their bodies, I remember seeing the pain in my family and trying to help them but there wounds were so deep, just getting near to them in spirit was too painful for them. I tried to smile and project my entire heart to everyone but most people were not open enough to it. I consciously chose to come back into the darkness because what I saw when the light turned on was too much to bear for one person.
I will enter the light again when my time is ready, I'm sure. I did tell the people who came up to me that I'd come and read some of the Bible with them just because I had never read it before and I'm interested in what it actually says.
--------------------
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
I object to any and all individuals or groups of people who insult, belittle, demean or mock THAT which is Sacred to other human beings.
Object all you want. It will still happen. As long as someone doesn't physically interfere with my beliefs it's my responsibility to not take offense at what ever they believe or say.
So, I posit a second self-evident point: certain individuals have experiences of Ultimate Reality.
Doubt it. Unless you have some proof of this then it's just a happy belief of yours kind of like the fundamentalist belief in hell.
I do agree that compassion is a good thing however one gets to it.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
EternalCowabunga
Being of Great Significance



Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 7,152
Loc: Time and Space
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7554743 - 10/24/07 12:20 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I'll say this, my experience tells me that there is some kind of source in which if you are connected to it, it compels you to act morally. This morality isn't based on any set of ethics, it is just intuitive compassion, you do whatever is in your power to help people the way they need to be helped.
--------------------
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said:
Quote:
Wisdom is measured by one's capacity to Be Compassionate.
The older I become the truthier this seems. I view rational self-interest, to use objectivist terminology, as the symptom of a psychologically under-developed person. It seems that many people are selfish merely because they're not strong enough to be compassionate.
I tell you this dude. Rational self interest is compassionate towards others. Irrational self interest is fear driven. It is certainly in my self interest to live in a compassionate world. To gain a bigger piece of the pie to protect myself at all costs is really not in my rational self interest as happiness is for sure a condition of my self interest.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
EternalCowabunga said: I'll say this, my experience tells me that there is some kind of source in which if you are connected to it, it compels you to act morally. This morality isn't based on any set of ethics, it is just intuitive compassion, you do whatever is in your power to help people the way they need to be helped.
Rational self interest.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
EternalCowabunga
Being of Great Significance



Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 7,152
Loc: Time and Space
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7554755 - 10/24/07 12:22 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Most philosophers agree that rational self interest is good for both yourself and society.
--------------------
|
EternalCowabunga
Being of Great Significance



Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 7,152
Loc: Time and Space
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7554760 - 10/24/07 12:24 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
EternalCowabunga said: I'll say this, my experience tells me that there is some kind of source in which if you are connected to it, it compels you to act morally. This morality isn't based on any set of ethics, it is just intuitive compassion, you do whatever is in your power to help people the way they need to be helped.
Rational self interest.
If that is the case, than most people are not practicing rational self interest. I guess it depends on how much fear you have inside of you that gets in the way.
--------------------
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Huge truth.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7555416 - 10/24/07 03:15 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Your obsession with the notion of proof in these matters is just sad. I cannot prove subjective states to you directly, but certain subjective states have radically changed my life, including my choice of academic study, my deep values, my choice of partner (finally), my aesthetics, my politics, virtually everything.
If you knew me prior to having certain experiences as well as after, you would see the difference, but you might attribute the change to maturation across time or some other variable. Some changes were fairly radical, others did ripen with age, but the nature of a few, and one experience in particular did manifest what the literature calls Asamprajnata Samadhi, a radical departure from the rigid Nirkikalpa Samadhi that I had experienced earlier in which the ego-sense remained. Regardless. I am a mystic inasmuch as mystical experience has been impressed on my memory. I use the word mysticism as defined by Evelyn Underhill, take it or leave it (I'm sure you'll leave it): (Italics hers)
"Mysticism is the art of union with Reality. The mystic is a person who has attained that union in greater or less degree; or who aims at and believes in such attainment."
My claim is to have "attained" such union which makes my claim one of gnosis rather than of belief. Doubt away. Nobody is obliged to have 'belief' in another's experience. Religious experience, according to Jung at least, only has authority over the experiencer. It certainly has had authority over my life since 1973.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
You sound here just like all the other religious folk.
And what is really sad is we are supposed to take your word as proof on this debate forum.
You said "self evident" and it isn't.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said: I am not going to explain Objectivism to you.
I didn't ask you to; I asked you to explain the notion that you proposed that rational self-interest is evidence that an individual is not "strong" enough to be compassionate. We aren't talking about "Objectivism" - we are discussing the specific idea that you proposed.
Of course, the statement you proposed, on its own, makes absolutely no sense - it doesn't convey any meaning. Who knows what you are talking about. Why waste your time by proposing meaningless statements if you are not going to demonstrate what you meant?
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
|
Perhaps it might be more accurate (and less open to debate) if you had said "some individuals have had life-altering experiences which they believe to be the result of contact with Ultimate Reality."
As it stands, your claim of this as fact IS subject to debate, and you follow up by saying that subjective experience cannot be proven. If you cannot prove it, then you cannot state it as objective fact. 
No one needs to prove their experiences to anyone else, UNLESS they assert that their experiences are absolutely reflective of particular facts. If I say that I have experienced flying without mechanical assistance, is this claim subject to verification? The same applies to your claim that "certain individuals" have contacted Ultimate Reality.
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7555739 - 10/24/07 04:25 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I am a proponent of 'subjective fact.' More like Jody Foster in her film 'Contact' than some solipcistic stance. The experience was profound and life-changing in ways that the accounts of mystics have described for millennia, around the globe. It is not all that rare, considering that I belong to a genre of 'psychedelic mystics,' but unlike Heinrich Zimmer who disagreed with the authenticity of psychedelic mysticism because of a mediating 'change agent,' there are those who do affirm authentic psychedelic mysticism. The authenticity of religious experience according to Jung is manifested by the life lived following the experience. If one is not mystically inclined or simply does not believe in the veracity of mystical experience, the discussion simply ends.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7555824 - 10/24/07 04:41 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I am like all the religious folk. I've had religious experiences.
I did have a profound experience and I have sought to describe it. Perhaps my error is in the attempt to define it, so I hesitate to do so except by analogy to those experiences described in certain religious systems.
You can feel secure in believing that I had some kind of experience since I'm pretty sure that you do not think I am simply fabricating that. That you 'doubt' the Ultimate Nature of 'my' experience is your prerogative. I have explored the duality of doubt-belief, but this duality ONLY refers to my mental definitions of the experience. MY doubt does not extend to the experience itself. If you are merely saying that I am lying and that I never had a life-changing experience, that is a different matter. That is on you, and your accusation constitutes a seriously biased opinion generated by your own mind. Here at least, you have 'evidence' of my words. Even if you doubt the interpretation of my claimed experience, you would at least take it on faith that I am not lying. You may think I'm deceived, deluded, hallucinated - which I can live with and continue to dialogue with you. If you were calling me a liar, no further dialogue would be possible.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
|
|
I think you are mistaken in believing selfishness, when defined correctly, and compassion are mutually exclusive.
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Redstorm]
#7558029 - 10/25/07 05:28 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said: I think you are mistaken in believing selfishness, when defined correctly, and compassion are mutually exclusive.
Being compassionate to oneself is not selfishness, it is treating oneself equally with others. Not being compassionate to oneself, but only to others is pathological, it is co-dependency. Compassion translates well into altruism which is selfless behavior, NOT selfish behavior. Self-ish indicates a bias in favor of one's own mind-body over another's mind-body as I understand it.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
I am a proponent of 'subjective fact.
So are other unnamed Christians here. But of course they are wrong and you are right? 
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
You can feel secure in believing that I had some kind of experience since I'm pretty sure that you do not think I am simply fabricating that.
True. I also believe that all the other Christians here had some kind of a conversion "mystical" experience. I only question their interpretation of the experience as I do yours.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Huehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly


Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,685
Loc: On the Border
|
|
Right on!!! No tolerance for those who are intolerant
-------------------- "A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda
|
adrug

Registered: 02/04/03
Posts: 15,800
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
#7560105 - 10/25/07 05:48 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Huehuecoyotl said: Right on!!! No tolerance for those who are intolerant
yoda Good point-maker, you are. /yoda
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7560111 - 10/25/07 05:49 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
That is a perfectly respectable cynicism!
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
#7560124 - 10/25/07 05:52 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Tolerance yes, acceptability, no. Ghandi protested non-violently, but protest he did. So do I.
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7560186 - 10/25/07 06:14 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said:
Quote:
Wisdom is measured by one's capacity to Be Compassionate.
The older I become the truthier this seems. I view rational self-interest, to use objectivist terminology, as the symptom of a psychologically under-developed person. It seems that many people are selfish merely because they're not strong enough to be compassionate.
I tell you this dude. Rational self interest is compassionate towards others. Irrational self interest is fear driven. It is certainly in my self interest to live in a compassionate world. To gain a bigger piece of the pie to protect myself at all costs is really not in my rational self interest as happiness is for sure a condition of my self interest.
Rational self-interest cannot be compassionate towards others. To a person following Ayn Rand's ethics, compassionate behavior is merely a tool to use for your own selfish end. Doing something for the sake of another at the expense of yourself is considered ethically wrong.
If you want to try incorporating compassion into ethical egoism thats fine with me, but incorporating compassion into objectivist ethics ain't possible. (It's like trying to incorporate anhedonism into Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is already a well estabilished system of ethics, you can't just redefine it to suit your argument.)
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7560197 - 10/25/07 06:18 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: I am a proponent of 'subjective fact.'
So are other unnamed Christians here. But of course they are wrong and you are right? 
The experience which most effected me could not be deemed 'Christian.' It was a PCE ("Pure Consciousness Event") but if anything, after all these years, it was a living experience symbolized by the Great Mantra of Tibetan Buddhism, OM MANI PADME HUM. That would be a 'best fit' conceptualization of the experience.
I do not get what your comparison is to "other unnamed Christians." If these people had an experience that they then interpreted mentally and rationally along Christian doctrinal lines, then they made a choice to conceptualize their experience thereby affirming a 'belief.' As for me, I am interested in learning about other people's PCEs, but I can not evaluate their experience except insofar as it seems to form the transpersonal core of a renewed personality.
I find it next to impossible now to define (conceptualize) my truest identity to others. I am sipping red wine at this moment and so it would be difficult to convince a Buddhist that I am a Buddhist. I do not hold to any of the doctrinal formulations, orthodox or heterodox, of the nature of Christ, and it would be difficult to convince any type of Christian that I am a Christian. I do adhere to the notion that The Way (to Be) is illustrated by the New Testament's portrayal of Iesus, and I tell Jews that I aspire to be the kind of Jew that Iesus was, which again, makes it difficult to convince a Jew that I am a Jew (unless they define that as one having had a Jewish mother). 
None of this has anything to do with the polarity of who is right or wrong about anything - except by conventional conceptions, none of which truly manifests The-Thing-In-Itself. In the famous words of Popeye the Sailor Man, "I am what I am and I know who I am," I just can't put a label on it!
|
backfromthedead
Activated


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 3,592
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
Something about christ and gay sex. Gee.

--------------------
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: fireworks_god]
#7560216 - 10/25/07 06:24 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fireworks_god said:
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said: I am not going to explain Objectivism to you.
I didn't ask you to; I asked you to explain the notion that you proposed that rational self-interest is evidence that an individual is not "strong" enough to be compassionate. We aren't talking about "Objectivism" - we are discussing the specific idea that you proposed.
I was clearly talking about Objectivist ethics and I did not state that self-interest is a sign that an individual is not strong enough to be compassionate. Compassion and self-interest can be compatible, but rational self-interest and compassion are antonyms. I stated that I observed a correlation between people who act selfishly and psychological immaturity and weakness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
The thingys is markos that you made a statement that something was self evident and it's not. That's my only complaint.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
|
Incorrect. Rational self-interest and self-sacrifice are antonyms.
Quote:
...he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself; he must work for his rational self-interest, with the achievement of his own happiness as the highest moral purpose of his life. Ayn Rand
Quote:
Compassion sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it
A sincere desire to alleviate the distress of another would not involve self-sacrifice. In fact, if achieving one's own happiness was jeopardized by this sympathetic consciousness of others' distress, then rational self-interest would require the exercise of compassion.
However, if one acted out of obligation, with no personal desire to alleviate suffering, one would not be exercising compassion at all, but rather performing one's duty.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7560287 - 10/25/07 06:45 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
You said doody.:D
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Icelander]
#7560289 - 10/25/07 06:46 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I meant it, too, thus the:
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7560293 - 10/25/07 06:47 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
In fact, if achieving one's own happiness was jeopardized by this sympathetic consciousness of others' distress, then rational self-interest would require the exercise of compassion.
Well shit... I guess you got me there.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said:
Quote:
In fact, if achieving one's own happiness was jeopardized by this sympathetic consciousness of others' distress, then rational self-interest would require the exercise of compassion.
Well shit... I guess you got me there.
I respect a man that can admit he's wrong.
And a loser.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
|
Actually, no...! You didn't get me, because Objectivism views sympathy, compassion, altruism, etc as a sign of psychologal weakness. Sympathy itself is seen as irrational and immoral. Your argument would be solid if we were talking about ethical egoism in general, but we are talking specifically about Ayn Rand's ethics.
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
|
Objectivism views altruism as wrong because altruism views self-sacrifice as a moral action.
When did Rand object to sympathy and compassion, so long as they did not obligate one to sacrifice one's own happiness?
Quote:
Ethics: Egoism Egoism means "self"-ism, just as altruism means "other"-ism. Egoism means that a rational man acts in his self interest. That this is the moral choice. Altruism means that one acts, first and foremost, to further the interest of others. Objectivism views altruism as inherently evil. This is because man, as a matter of fact, like all living creatures, acts to further his own life. Altruism teaches man that his most basic imperative is evil, and thereby engenders in man an irredeemable guilt.
Objectivism views benevolence as a major virtue. It does not value self-interest, per se, but rational self-interest. Do you give a person money out of guilt? Objectivism sees this as a vice, and finds it reprehensible. Do you give a person money because that person represents a value of yours, and by giving him money, you are furthering that value? Objectivism sees this as benevolent and virtuous. http://www.starways.net/lisa/essays/objectivism.html
Quote:
Rand's repudiation of altruism seems to be due to the unusual way that she defines the term. Her idea of altruism is that man must selflessly place the welfare of others above his own. A more common idea, however, is that altruism is a man's concern for or dedication to others' interests in addition to his own. Charity, compassion, and the desire to give pleasure to others can have their place in human relationships as long as they do not play a principal, determining role or are accomplished through the involuntary redistribution of individuals' wealth. http://www.quebecoislibre.org/011124-15.htm
I would be interested in reading any links you might have to statements by Rand in which she condemns compassion and sympathy, as opposed to altruism and self-sacrifice.
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7561493 - 10/26/07 12:38 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
From Atlas Shrugged:
Quote:
Do you ask if it's ever proper to help another man? No - if he claims it as his right or as a moral duty that you owe him. Yes - if such is your own desire based on you own selfish pleasure in the value of his person and his struggle. Suffering as such is not a value; only man's fight against suffering, is. If you choose to help a man who suffers, do it only on the grounds of his virtue, of his fight to recover, of his rational record, or of the fact that he suffers unjustly; then your action is still a trade, and his virtue is the payment for your help. But to help a man who has no virtues, to help him on the ground of his suffering as such, to accept his faults, his need, as a claim - is to accept the mortgage of a zero on your values.
Atlas Shrugged is a tome of attacks against sympathy and compassion. No emotion is seen as an acceptable reason to behave in a certain way, especially not sympathy or compassion. The only moral action is an action taken purely to advance ones self-interest. As Nathaniel Branden said:
Quote:
If, in page after page of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, you show someone being heroic by ruthlessly setting feelings aside, and if you show someone being rotten and depraved by, in effect, diving headlong into his feelings and emotions, and if that is one of your dominant methods of characterization, repeated again and again, then it doesn't matter what you profess, in abstract philosophy, about the relationship of reason and emotion. You have taught people: repress, repress, repress.
And this is a particularly revealing quote:
Quote:
Would you believe that sometimes in therapy clients speak to me with guilt of their desire to be helpful and kind to others? I am not talking about manipulative do-gooders. I am talking about persons genuinely motivated by benevolence and good will, but who wonder whether they are "good objectivists."
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
|
Quote:
No - if he claims it as his right or as a moral duty that you owe him. Yes - if such is your own desire based on you own selfish pleasure
This is exactly my point, and I disagree with your conclusions based upon this quote. If one experiences true compassion, then the efforts to resolve this feeling would be, by definition, motivated by rational self-interest. If one is motivated by guilt and obligation, by a sense that one will not be a "good person" if one rejects anothers' claim on your assistance based upon his needs, then you are NOT compassionate and NOT sympathetic.
As I already posted: "Objectivism views benevolence as a major virtue."
Edited by Veritas (10/26/07 09:56 AM)
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7563114 - 10/26/07 12:21 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Have you ever read anything by Ayn Rand? Objectivists are supposed to live exclusively by reason. If one experiences compassion, one is being irrational. (Because, according to Objectivism, emotions proceed from value judgements. If you feel compassion then you must be an evil altruist.) Acting on this irrational impulse would make you immoral.
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
|
I think that you have misunderstood Rand's ideas entirely. How would benevolence be a virtue if compassion was immoral and irrational? This simply does not follow. What she argued against was self-sacrifice, not the act of helping others. Look again.
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger


Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7563853 - 10/26/07 04:23 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Have you ever read anything by Ayn Rand?
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
|
Yes, I have. Are you going to back up your claims regarding compassion and sympathy being regarded as "immoral" by Rand? I think that I have already provided adequate quotations regarding her POV on the matter.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7564205 - 10/26/07 06:07 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I hereby protest against thread hijacking.
--------------------
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Silversoul]
#7564221 - 10/26/07 06:11 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Look what the cat drug in.
And there is no thread hijacking going on. Discussions naturally take on a broader scope, nothing is preventing the original topic from being discussed as well.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Silversoul]
#7564234 - 10/26/07 06:14 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I'm just going with the flow, baby!
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger


Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Veritas]
#7564490 - 10/26/07 07:44 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I'm sorry, but Objectivism cannot be explained with a few quotes from the internet... Which books did you read by Ayn Rand?
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
|
Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead & her address to the graduating class of West Point "Philosophy: Who needs it?"
I'll ask again, do you have some support for your assertions that compassion and sympathy were regarded as immoral by Rand, or will you concede that you have invented this based upon her opinion on self-sacrificial, moralistic "altruism"?
It is not up to me to disprove your assertions, as you well know. But just FYI:
Quote:
Roark's kindness to Mallory, marked by "understanding and respect" rather than any "secret pleasure" at the latter's agony, is portrayed as a genuine virtue. It is a moving scene of benevolence between human beings, one of many that occur in Rand's novels.
"Benevolence" means good will toward others. It is a positive attitude toward people in general, a desire for their well-being and for peaceful, cooperative relationships with them. It is contrasted with hostility, malice, envy, or other forms of malevolence. It includes such traits as kindness, generosity, sympathy, charity, and tolerance as elements. (In moral philosophy, these latter are sometimes called the "virtues of benevolence.")
The author of The Fountainhead and of Atlas Shrugged clearly regarded benevolence as a positive trait, an element in the proper relationships among men. http://www.objectivistcenter.org/showcontent.aspx?ct=38&h=51
Edited by Veritas (10/26/07 08:33 PM)
|
Middleman

Registered: 07/11/99
Posts: 8,399
|
|
"He who knows not that the Prince of Darkness is the other face of the King of Light knows not me."
I'm starting the Luciferian Church of Christ. Who wants to join?
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said:
Quote:
Wisdom is measured by one's capacity to Be Compassionate.
The older I become the truthier this seems. I view rational self-interest, to use objectivist terminology, as the symptom of a psychologically under-developed person. It seems that many people are selfish merely because they're not strong enough to be compassionate.
I tell you this dude. Rational self interest is compassionate towards others. Irrational self interest is fear driven. It is certainly in my self interest to live in a compassionate world. To gain a bigger piece of the pie to protect myself at all costs is really not in my rational self interest as happiness is for sure a condition of my self interest.
Rational self-interest cannot be compassionate towards others. To a person following Ayn Rand's ethics, compassionate behavior is merely a tool to use for your own selfish end. Doing something for the sake of another at the expense of yourself is considered ethically wrong.
The bolded is not necessarily true. Rand uses the example of a drowning woman. If this is just a stranger, you probably should not risk your life if you are not a strong swimmer to save her b/c you gain nothing and more than likely will never see her again.
If it is your wife or someone you hold dearly, she believes it is acceptable to risk one's life if you would find it impossible to live without that person.
There are times when you can commit actions at the expense of one's self and still be in the realm of Objectivism. What she believes is that one should never sacrifice something held dearly for a triviality.
|
Veritas


Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Protest Against Religious Bigotry! [Re: Redstorm]
#7566841 - 10/27/07 01:44 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
What she believes is that one should never sacrifice something held dearly for a triviality.
Or a sense of obligation which was not matched by your values. The person one saved need not be held dearly in terms of their future relationship with you, but only valued for their own merits. IOW, one might save a stranger whom one had assessed as being full of merit, even if the effort of saving them involved personal risk.
One might also act in rational self-interest by performing benevolent acts which one sees as important or valuable, and worth personal risk, as this would increase your enjoyment of life. These intrinsically-rewarding behaviors are often falsely described as "altruistic," because the rewards are not seen by others, while extrinsically-rewarding behaviors tend to be described as "selfish."
In Objectivist terms, "altruism" is motivated by obligation & guilt, and involves the moral judgment that sacrificing yourself is the greatest good. Clearly, intrinsically-rewarding behaviors do not fit this description.
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
|
|
You may be goofing, but there was a letter found by theologian Morton Smith a few decades ago, secreted away in a monastery. The letter was written by the ancient theologian Clement of Alexandria and it referred to another version of The Gospel of Mark. In the secret Gospel, there was reference to a toung initiate being led at light to a place where Iesus was, wearing only a sheet. There was allusion in the letter to some kind of rite, and a sexual suggestion comes of it. I reject the possibility of homosexual sexual ritual on the grounds that it doesn't fit with Jewish practices or even Greek Mystery Religion. There were sex-magick type Gnostics, but they came way after Iesus walked the Earth.
If Iesus was sexual, I believe it was with Miriam called Magdalene. Men were not permitted to speak openly in the Temple unless they were married and the New Testament says that Iesus spoke in the Temple. His marriage to Miriam would've been repressed by the Christian patriarchal myth-makers. Iesus was also a Bar Mitzvah, but the New Testament doesn't specifically mention this rite of passage, only His visit to the Temple when He was 12, which is not the age of 13 at which Bar Mitzvahs take place. Iesus would also have received a B'ris - ritual circumcision on the 8th day after His birth to celebrate His inclusion as a Jew under the Abrahamic Covenant. There is no mention of Iesus' B'ris in the New Testament. We only have writings which say that He was buried before sundown on what is now called Friday, the eve of the Jewish Sabbath (Shabbat). So one must extrapolate Jesus' B'ris, His Bar Mitzvah and His marriage as well.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
|