--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@...> wrote: > > Hey Barry, > your post has got me thinking today, all day. I know what > you mean about Wonder and how having rigid beliefs can put > a lid on being open to other possibilities. But I also think > that many people need religious beliefs, or spiritual beliefs > of some sort to get thru life. Life can be really hard, and > it seems many humans must have some built-in need to have > Cause and Effect relationships in what they look at and think > about. We like seeing the order that cause/effect implies, > it makes us feel that we have some control of at least some > things, it makes us feel safer, and it keeps some anxiety at > bay. We need The Story of how things happened and what might > happen in the future. I don't think everyone needs this, but > some do.
I agree. > Your sense of Wonder and your comfort with the unknowableness > of it all is so brave, so free, and shared by most scientists > and inventors, I bet. But this is not necessarily what other > people would even benefit from. I speak here personally. Again, I agree, but not about the "brave" part. My approach to these things is just predilection. As Jessica Rabbit said, "I'm just drawn that way." :-) > For me, all this info about the brain is fascinating, I > gobble it up, science is great - but also has made me - > honestly - nostalgic for the days when I believed my > spiritual experiences to be proof of something more. Again with the "drawn that way." I almost never am. I *remember* the sense of certainty I felt in the past, and recognize it in people I know who still feel it, but I do not. Nor do I miss it. > I am in transition now and not sure where I belong or what > I believe. I know nothing has been proven, yet, but some > doubts and uncertainty are there for me. >From my point of view, that's a good sign. > It does not make me feel more Wonder. Now when I look at > the stars in the summer sky (I do this a lot and for long > periods of time) I feel wonder but also uneasy and, well, > alone. In fact, I have been thinking for some time now > that maybe it was easier for me before I began doubting. I don't doubt this. It was certainly easier for me before I started thinking for myself, too. But I wouldn't trade what I feel now for what I felt then. > I feel not sure and unanchored in a way or belief system > to see life. And then it turns out that Enlightenment is > not what I thought - that it too is not what I had thought. I suspect *nothing* is what we think it is. > I guess what I am saying is that different people get thru > life in different ways. My bet is that some brains need more > structure and external rules and beliefs and stories to feel > secure and happy. I do not disagree. > Others, like yours, thrive being entirely free of those > conceptions and constructs, and find them limiting. Predilection. When I first moved to Santa Fe and was looking for a place to live, I got used to real estate agents showing me a place but then saying, "I have to warn you...it's *very* windy out here." That always surprised me, because for me that would have been a plus, not a warning. For others, not so much. Not better or worse, just predilection. > While I know Dawkins and others are writing brilliant > books about there being no God, and about how destructive > religion has been - I also don't think they are doing a > favor to lots of people who really need these beliefs to > feel good during the few years of life they have here. I don't see how what Dawkins and those others say or do impacts those who believe in God one way or another. Does what they choose to believe depend on what he believes? Does what he believes affect them? > It really does take lots of approaches, and people scramble > and struggle to make sense of it all, even if believing in > something not actually a fact. > > However, here we are on Fairfield LIfe, which is where people > debate these issues. If you check in here, you have to be > prepared to loosen up and try on new ideas. And you have to > be honest about your POV, as yo have been. Some will be upset > by the back and forth. But I just wanted to add in my usual > wordy fashion that losing one's faith in something benign but > untrue is not always helpful, even if it is untrue. Predilection. I wouldn't trade the faith I had in my youth for any day I spend as a skeptic in the present, even if I could be young again to do it. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Lately I've been finding myself noticing what I perceive > > as the basic nature of Fairfield Life. For most partici- > > pants, it seems to be a forum on which they spout off > > about things that they "know," more often than not in > > an attempt to "prove" that someone they're arguing with > > *doesn't* "know," or doesn't "know" as much, or "knows" > > less perfectly and admirably than they do. > > > > I find it kinda boring, and suspect that my days here > > are numbered. I just don't fit in, in the sense that I > > don't "know" diddleysquat. Nada. Rien. Nichevo. Bupkus. > > I just have beliefs, and opinions. And my path through > > life and the experiences I've had -- both external and > > internal -- have convinced me that *none* of these > > beliefs or opinions have anything to do with "knowing." > > They're just what they are -- beliefs and opinions. So > > there is nothing for me to "prove" one way or another, > > or even to care to. > > > > What I *do* have, in the absence of "knowing" or faith > > or whatever those who are so certain about their...uh... > > certainty might want to call it, is a sense of Wonder > > about the universe I live in. It is as ever-surprising > > as it is ever-changing. > > > > And what I don't understand about those who claim to > > "know" is why they sought so diligently to *eradicate* > > that sense of Wonder in themselves. They seem to be so > > *proud* of "knowing" things, and of no longer exper- > > iencing Wonder when they interact with life. They have > > Experience A, and for them it fits neatly into the > > little box they have labeled "This is how we 'explain' > > things like Experience A," and they smile, because they > > "know" what's going on, and what made it go on. Some > > feel they even "know" WHY it's going on. > > > > All this certainty makes me feel kinda sad for them. > > How *boring* life must be for them, to never be sur- > > prised by events, and only to see them as "proof" of > > the things they already "know." How sad it must be to > > be reduced to debating others about the nitpicky details > > of the things they "know," versus the things that these > > other "knowers" "know." > > > > When I run into people more like myself, who "know" > > only that we don't know shit, there is never any need > > or desire to debate, or to argue. We wind up talking > > about the things we love and find Wonder in. We enjoy > > our time together, and then part even more full of > > our normal sense of Wonder, more often than not > > laughing as we go. > > > > What do those who "know" feel after debating someone > > who "knows" something different than they do? Do they > > exit from the discussion happy and uplifted at having > > "proved" how much they "know," or are they just look- > > ing compulsively for the next person on which to > > wield their "knowledge" like a battleaxe? I wonder. > > >
