--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71" <wayback71@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > The bottom line of the study is in the first sentence: > > "A new study claims that religion may be on the way out > > in some parts of Europe, largely because it isn't as > > useful to adherents as it once was." I love this > > because it's exactly what I was trying to get at a > > few days ago when asking believers in the non-existence > > of free will to give me a pragmatic reason WHY they > > believe this. "What," I asked (although possibly in > > different words), "would be the benefit or utility of > > believing in this theory?" Revealingly, as far as I > > could tell, not a single non-free-willer proposed a > > single reason. My contention is that they can't think > > of one, and that the reason is that believing that free > > will does not exist has no relative utility. > > Yes, you are right - it has no relative utility. But > relative utility does not prove or disprove something:) > But let's not go there again......
While true, it's irrelevant to the pragmatic person. Free will or the lack thereof is a theory. And as the old saying goes, "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is." :-) I once worked (for a short time) with a real Yaqui shaman, one of the people whose teachings Carlos Castaneda ripped off without ever crediting him. I asked him once whether he believed in reincarnation. He said that he hadn't ever given it any thought, because a 'Yes' answer would be counter-productive to the way to live a happy and productive life. I asked him to explain, and he said that to believe in reincarnation implies to the believer that he or she has all the time in the world to get things right, or to do things impeccably. Believing that takes away the advantage of "death as an advisor," and realizing that one does *not* have all the time in the world. If you have the will to try to do things impeccably, Here And Now is the only place to do it. Believing that you have "another life" or "more lives" in which to do it becomes an excuse for never doing it Here And Now. I liked that, and the sheer pragmatic wisdom of it. He *could* have believed in reincarnation, but he saw no possible "up side" IN believing it. There was no utility in believing it. It was irrelevant, an exercise in mental masturbation that took one *out* of full participation in Here And Now, which in his view rendered it useless, a waste of time to even ponder. That's sorta the way I am about the issue of free will. It's irrelevant. My subjective experience synchs nicely with the teachings of people I respect, and leads me to believe in free will. It is productive and pragmatic for me to believe it, because I can take initiative at trying to do things that can change in a positive way my own life, and the lives of others. There is simply no "up side" or utility in believing otherwise. If it were to turn out to be true that there was no free will, have I lost anything by not believing in it? Nope. It's the same issue as not believing in reincarnation and finding oneself reincarnating. No harm, no foul. :-) > I am not sure that the idea of relative utility applies > to all aspects of religion or spiritual belief - altho > certainly to some aspects. I agree. There is the aspect of predilection. I know some people who adamantly *refuse* to run their own lives, or take responsibility for them. They don't even *pay* for their own lives; they've conned others into paying for them for several decades now, just because they're so spiritual and all. For them, what would be the utility of anything that allowed them or enabled them to better take care of themselves or others. Their whole world revolves around "God doing it all," and they'd actually consider it some form of sin or heresy to believe that they had a hand in doing *anything*. Not exactly my cuppa tea, but they get off on it, so it's none of my business how they choose to live. For them religion has utility because it continually reinforces the "not responsible" approach they take to living. > I think there is something about religious belief (which > may not mean you are a church member) that is part of > being human for many but not all people. There just > is a need or tendency to believe in something beyond > the obvious and in something that orders our seemingly > unfair and cutthroat world. I think the keyword there is "unfair." Some people need or would like to believe that life is fair. Others, like myself, don't have any such need. Therefore I have no need for "pat answers" or theories that suggests that it is fair. I'm perfectly content with "pretty random." :-) > Relative utility may apply to declining church membership. > But when it comes to personal beliefs or ideas that just > seem right I am not sure "utility" can be applied. In the > study, increasing numbers of people are not affiliated > with a church, but may continue to have a set of beliefs. > Believing in something has "utility" since it fends off > feeling of being alone and adrift on this planet. I agree completely with that last sentence. But I also remind that some feel no aversion to that feeling of being alone and adrift on this planet. We kinda get off on surfing the aloneness and adrifitude. :-) > But I also look at belief in something as a tendency to > that as partially due to the brain structure of people > and I doubt a sense of utility comes in to play. > Certainly nurture will have an effect, but some things > over ride nurture and this might be one of them if it > is brain-based. You're suggesting that "fear of being alone" is brain- based? :-) > Did you ever see the HBO special called Sunset LImited, > starring Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel Jackson (not out > on Netflix yet)? It is based on a play written by > Cormac McCarthy and is a conversation between an > intellectual, brilliant and suicidal college professor > and a black evangelical Christian who is convinced that > God exists and cares deeply about him and each and every > human. You might like it. I downloaded it, started watching it, and realized that I had seen it before, in another version of the same play or script. Call me crazy, but I didn't find the acting of either Tommy Lee Jones or Samuel L. Jackson (often fave actors of mine) compelling enough to sit through it again. My bad. > One of the ideas I took away from it is that belief can be > important to some people's well being. And I think that > is good - even if it is not an accurate belief system - if > the belief system encourages things like compassion, > spending time helping others, etc etc. I can go with this, too, IF the belief system in ques- tion actually produces those things. My experience on this planet is that those who profess a belief in determinism and a lack of belief in free will is that compassion and spending time helping others are...uh... not exactly the qualities that these people believe or live. Often it's the exact opposite. So for me, again pragmatism wins out. The walk is more important than the talk. What they *do* with the beliefs is far more important than the beliefs themselves. > There is a fine line between convincing others of your > Truth and of pulling the rug out from under them. And > it works both ways. I'm not quite sure what this means, or what it refers to. I try my damnedest to NOT try to "convince others of my Truth." I don't even believe that Truth exists. On another forum, folks were talking about "-isms." As in "What is the worst -ism, the one that has done the most damage to planet Earth and its people in the past, and continues to in the present." Some diehards who grew up during the Cold War still trotted out Communism. Some diehard Tea Baggers dissed Liberalism. One person finally said that for him, the worst and most destructive -ism on the planet was clearly Fundamentalism, and I almost agree with him. But then I thought about it a little more, and came up with my own. I think that the worst is Evangelism. There is something deeply offensive to me about people who feel that they can or should "convince others of their Truth." It completely lacking in both humility and a sense of appropriateness. I've met no one on this planet who I believe knows the "Truth," and do not expect to. I certainly do not. If someday I do, I would hope that I'll have the good sense to never try to convince anyone else of it. They're on their own. > > I currently live in a country that has the second-highest > > population declaring "no religious affiliation," and I > > completely understand why. The Dutch are probably the most > > pragmatic people I've ever met. They would instantly get > > the term "relative utility." They adopt lifestyles and > > practices because they have some utility; they provide > > some kind of pragmatic, real-world payoff. They reject > > practices that have no utility. 40% of them feel that > > religion has no relative utility. > > Therefore why bother with it? > > Sounds clean and clear-headed for daily life. But a part of > me really likes dark vaulted rooms with candles lit, a puja > or chant going on, some incense burning, and a feeling of > something somewhere being sacred and smarter than I am. I > like the quiet and hushed feeling, the drop into no thought. I like that "drop into no thought," too. But for me where I am and how it's decorated and what is going on around me (like ceremonies or pujas) has nothing to do with it. I am as likely to "drop into no thought" in a busy train station or while walking through the red light district of Amsterdam as I am to do so in a church or a puja room. Different strokes for differ- ent folks. Predilection. > It might be childish, but I think it is fairly normal. > MIght even be something we humans need to feel rested > and refreshed. Apparently the Dutch do fine without it. > What fills that role in their lives, if anything? Give the TBs here a few moments. Surely one of them is going to suggest marijuana. :-) Even though only a tiny fraction of the Dutch have ever bothered to try it, and in "religious America" over 60% have tried it.
