[lit-ideas] Re: One fewer god
- From: Jack Spratt <dosflounder@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 09:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
MG
>>We believe what we need to believe to get through life, at least that's
what I believe. Whether that belief is what we were taught as children -- our
acculturation
Religions depend upon believing in belief. Obscure rituals and quotations
form the backbone of belief in belief, not much thinking involved here. One
doesn't need to deal with all the hairy problems of god.
Abraham's or Zoroaster did not arrive at their teachings about god entirely
from their tribal experience, they were original thinkers. God(s) come out of
man's head like Venus coming out of Zeus' but what they look like and how they
are accepted by those nearby becomes part of the culture.
MG
>>Truth is what gets you through the day.
Zoroaster taught life is a struggle between Truth and Lies. Abraham when he
hears a voice telling him to kill his son cannot be sure (as Sartre says) that
it is the true voice of god, just his own mind or someone hiding behind a
nearby rock. Both show Truth as a slippery concept.
MG
>>We have the upper hand in all this. It's time we started making God
believe what we believe.
This had my mind revisit this excerpt from a work by R.A. Zimmerman:
God said to Abraham kill me a son.
Abe said; God you must be putting me on.
God said you do what you want to do but the next time you see me coming you
better run
Abe said where you want this killing done
God said on Highway 61
J.S.
The one thing we lack is a handy utopia.
Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
JS:
>>But if I am reading you correctly you are making Pascal's wager and
investing in the heavenly hedge fund.<<
Well, no, not really. Pascal was a wussy. But Pascal's dictum about the
heart having reasons that reason doesn't know rings my bell. We believe what
we need to believe to get through life, at least that's what I believe.
Whether that belief is what we were taught as children -- our acculturation
(don't you just love technical terminology?! -- I'm not even sure that
'acculturation' is technical, but it should be. I love the sound of it -- so
learned sounding) -- or some later adaptation of said acculturation -- it
doesn't matter. What matters is that if belief in God gets us through the day,
then by gum, there is a god. If not, then there isn't. I think William James
said something akin to that or along those lines or maybe he didn't. Truth is
what gets you through the day. I believe what I believe with all my heart and
soul, but tomorrow might bring some dramatic tergiversation, but what of that?
If said tergiversation gets me through that day, then yea! Then
hurray! I believe in God when I need to, I don't when I don't need to. I
think the same holds true for God, he only believes in me when I believe in
him. I don't know why no one wonders what God believes in. That seems to me
to be much more important than what we believe. After all, God depends on us
believing in him, far more than we depend on Him believing in us -- hence the
fear of atheists. We keep God going. But what we believe God believes
determines our lives. See now, God has to believe in us just to be. We effect
Him, He merely affects us. Why then don't we call His hand on this? Why don't
we just start believing that God believes what we want God to believe rather
than trying to figure out what God wants us to believe? We have the upper hand
in all this. It's time we started making God believe what we believe. Unless,
of course, that's what we've been doing all along.
Mike Geary
Memphis
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Spratt
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 7:44 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: One fewer god
Thank you for the response.
In answer to your question; Karl and George, whose ideas and examples are the
seeds that have helped create the world of today. Both had good intentions,
like Jesus, but they launched thoughts and created power hungry followers that
commit death in their names. They in the final analysis are the reason you cry
out to god for 'justice' and blame culture for terrible acts. But Karl, George
were the First Cause and also men and men followed them, perverted them and
created the cultures we own.
I am not sure we should depend on any god to right any wrongs that we have
been caught up in. Call it the choices we make, fate or devine misguidance, as
you said we are alone. Good luck with the vengeance thing.
J.S.
The one thing we lack is a handy utopia
Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
JS:
>>"If you examine all the alternative possibilities to gods (including Marx,
Mao, Hitler and Washington) you will see why gods are difficult to dismiss."<<
Is that Marx as in Brothers or Karl? And is that Washington the Washington
of George or DC? With Mao and Hitler there's no ambiguity. Their names are
eponymous for crimes against humanity. The very names cry out for a God more
than anything else I know of -- a cry for supernatural retributive justice.
Ah, yes -- but, so what? Justice? What does that mean? It means we're the
good guys, each and everyone of us, we all know that. Arab, Jew and Mexican
too, USA and Germany and (God love 'em) even Norway. We've all got God on our
side (though, due to his mysterious ways, He sure does take his own goddamn
time wreaking vengeance. Praise for a man's ashes is rather late, Lord -- as
Cicero or Cataline or Castro, whoever, once said. So too is vengeance. Do you
hear me, God? De profundis clamavi ad te, Domine. I personally want to see
the bastards who offended me suffer -- and gruesomely). Please don't take my
irritation with God's seeming lack of urgency in coming
to my defense as dismissive of religious belief. I don't believe in God at
all, but I do have enormous religious belief. Culture is religion after all.
Culture is the most horrendous religion of them all because culture defines
religion. Defines God! Yikes! You can be an atheist, if raised in the right
culture, but it's not possible to be an aculturalist. And so, as our culture
tell us, Gods are difficult to dismiss because the alternative is OUR SELVES
alone in an infinitely indifferent universe -- our lives amounting to no more
than an effervescent moment of organismic self-consciousness. We all want our
precious loves and elations and sorrows and sufferings to have everlasting
meaning. And we want vindication. For that we need a God. I have no problem
with that. God will, I trust, right the wrongs done to me -- eventually. And
they are many.
Mike Geary
20 years later
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Spratt
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 3:22 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: One fewer god
"If you examine all the alternative possibilities to gods (including Marx,
Mao, Hitler and Washington) you will see why gods are difficult to dismiss."
J.S.
The one thing we lack is a handy utopia.
Andreas Ramos <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you
understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why
I dismiss
yours."
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
Other related posts:
