--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Religion and spirituality are about practice. > > I just have been to India where there is a general > > religiosity pervading, and you can see it in the eyes > > of the people, you can see it even in the eyes of > > children. You don't see such liveliness here, people > > are dull materialists mostly. > > And that's an *objective* assessment on your > part? :-)
Nope, its totally subjective. > Isn't it possible that you see things this > way because you *value* "religiosity" more > than you value the lack of it? In this case, looking at people in India in general, and its not only my observation but the observation of friends i happen to agree with, I come up with this impression. Thinking that this has to do with religiosity is of course my interpretation based on my acquaintance with India, and seeing both Hindus and Muslims (in the town I was last 50/50) > It's just a question. Its answered > > > Now I can see you attempt to belittle or ridicule my > > beliefs by your little comparison, but it shows where > > you stand, doesn't it? > > And I think your statement above shows pretty > clearly where *you* stand. I was presenting > an objective assessment of your stance; you > are (as I read what you're saying) suggesting > that your subjective assessment of reality is > *superior* to any objective assessment. Nowhere in fact did I say its superior. Where do you get this from? I just distinguish two approaches and clearly take a stand (unlike other folks here) > The fact that one believes in God is *wonderful* > for those who believe it. The love that they > feel for God is *wonderful*, and may bring > *tremendous* value to their lives. I firmly > believe this. But these beliefs and this love > are *subjective*, man. Sure, thats what I have been saying. > What I think you are saying in these posts is > that your subjective experience "trumps" any > possible objective assessment. Right? I don't know what 'drums' means in this context. Must be an american expression i don't know. > > That is a *perfectly* acceptable point of > view in my opinion; it's been the way of > mystics for centuries. And I believe that > it can have *tremendous* value for those who > believe that their subjective experience > of reality is more valid and more important > than any possible objective assessment of > reality. To me, Barry, to me. > But please don't try to convince me that > your subjective experience *is* reality. It's > just a different point of view, that's all. What Barry IS reality? Do you think there is one TRUTH everyone has to agree too? That seems to be the implication of what you are saying. You seem to believe there is one objective Truth. > You believe in God, and I think that's just > wonderful. I don't, and I perceive a strong > undertone in most of your posts to this thread > that you *don't* think that's wonderful. As a non-belief isn't anything positive in and of itself, I cannot make such a statement of course. I have no objection to you not believing, its more how you react to people who do. Its like, whenever you get a chance, you will point out that every mass murderer in history was so because of his religious aberration. And its only your feeling. Basically I just state my own views. Recently when I said that I am out of the discussion, you strongly urged me to explain myself. You expressed the feeling that we would defend our faith by withdrawal, instead of trying to communicate. Now, when I communicate my own POV, and point out differences, you assume I want to proselytize. > The feeling that I get, and that I think Curtis > gets, is that you feel badly for us, as if we > are missing out on some great truth that you > are privy to and we are not. Barry, I don't know what feeling Curtis gets, but if it is ah you are saying, he should clearly express. What Curtis has expressed here several times though, is that he appreciates the dialoque a lot. This is really the only reason I continue. > In my opinion > that is fine for you to believe, if it makes > you happy. But when you try to express it as > if this feeling on your part were somehow true > and something more than *JUST* your belief or > feeling, some kind of "truth," then in my > opinion you have crossed a line. > > That line is believing that your subjective > experience *defines* reality, and is more > than just your subjective experience *of* > reality. I just can't buy that. It defines reality for ME, Barry. YOUR subjective truth defines reality for YOU of course.
