Well, this implies that there are times when thought is better without
acuity. I am wondering what value might be increased with a loss of
acuity. There must be one.
Nick
*From:*friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com]
*On Behalf Of *Steve Smith
*Sent:* Monday, September 17, 2012 7:27 PM
*To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] just faith
Nick -
The point I was making was roughly that many if not most and most if
not all of the folks interested in "telling you how it is" are
categorically opposed to consuming alcohol and other such things.
They may or may not have a good reason for this...
The key, at least for me, and I suspect for others, is that alcohol
and similar substances have a way of lowering inhibitions which might
translate roughly into "not taking oneself and one's beliefs so
seriously", though I suppose all the bar fights I've been in suggest
just the opposite, so what do I know?
Drinking definitely changes the quality of my emotional state which in
turn seems to affect the quality of my thought. It is rare and
unlikely that drinking increases the *acuity* of my thought which.
Consuming alcohol in a group environment (in my case, small groups) is
also a social convention, it could as easily be say ... Coffee on a
Friday morning or Tea on any given afternoon.
- Steve
Steve,
I am happy to drink, but not because it improves the quality of my
thought.
There is an idea lurking in this discourse about Whiskey, roughly
*/In vino veritas/*
*//*
Do you think that you think better, in some respects, when you are
drinking?
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>
[mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steve Smith
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 11:24 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] just faith
I am closer in age/experience to Nick/Eric than the presumed youth
generation in question but am also, myself, more a "None" than an
"Athiest".
It is not (in my case) that I have too many other things going on
(though I do have plenty), it is rather, that I'm not a joiner.
Perhaps I "would not be a member of any club that would have me",
but more to the point, I have always found even the most
*inclusive* clubs to be
*exclusive* at the end of the day. I took a short run at
attending the Los Alamos "Universal Unitarians" only to find that
the binding feature was "more tolerant than though" and I frankly
could not tolerate that kind of intolerance! Ultimately clubs are
not defined by what you
believe in but defined by what you don't. Or in the case of
MonoTheistic religions, it may seem that belief in their "one true
GOD"
is the defining factor, it is really the complement... that you
are excluded by lack of belief in their God/Prophet/GravenImage/etc.
In the case of Athiesm... I was drawn to it the first time I heard
of it.. *I* wanted to belong to a club whose definition was the
*lack* of belief in "One True God" but it didn't take long for me
to discover that the existing "card carrying Athiests" also
defined their "club" in the exclusive... to wit, you had to firmly
(and vehemenently) *disbelieve* in any and all Gods to keep your
good standing. Card carrying Athiests, when confronted with the
likes of me had to force-fit me into the club of "Agnostics"
because if I wasn't as anti-God as they were then I must be a
wishy washy fence-sitter (e.g. Agnostic).
These distinctions may seem subtle, but they are very real for me.
I share what I understand to be Doug's position regarding Religion
only not so strongly... and occasionally (only when Doug writes
or speaks on the topic) suspect him of being a proselyte from the
Reformed Church of
Cynicism. As with the Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Sikhs,
Musims
and Adi Dharmists, I am much more inclined to let card-carrying
Cynics through my door to try to complete my conversion (as I do
have and express sympathies with all the above Religions from time
to time) if they are also carrying a nice bottle of Whiskey,
Bourbon, Gin or Tequila to lubricate the conversation.
Oddly, only a very few proselytes of any religion seem to allow or
the ingestion of strong spirits (poisoning the body, mind,
soul?). This is what draws me most perhaps to "the modern Cynics"
(as opposed to the classical version with which I think I have
even more affinity in their pursuit of "Virtue in alignment with
Nature"). If I were a true child of the sixties, I would perhaps
require them to be carrying some yet-more-toxic and
mystical-experience-inducing substances... but I'm not.
It all started perhaps when I refused a draft card, now it is
tamer as I refuse the AARP card I suppose, but the principle
holds. I only wish I'd had the temerity to refuse the Social
Security card.
- Steve
> Well atheism would only convey a negation of belief (in God) to
me. My
> religious model has no problem accommodating atheists, and
contrawise
> I have no problem with an atheist's belief model built around
no-God
> (or Gods or gods or GOD ...). As long as it functions its
irrelevant
> whether a car (or religion) runs on gasoline or horse-manure or hot
> air.
>
> My religion (loosely called "Adi Dharm") originally reduced the 330
> million "gods" of Hinduism down to one ("Brahma" the absolute
> reality). Having done that very successfully we were forced to go
> underground in the previous century, and a not insignificant
portion
> of our adherents became "godless" Communists. Today we don't have a
> conception of a God as a father / creator figure. Instead we
conceive
> God as "the" principle which regulates existence/ the uinivers/
> multiverse/ parallel worlds or whatever. Deus is the "mechanism
behind
> the clock" and not the "clock maker". The issue is whether atheists
> also acknowledge that there is a principle (or law . or set of
laws)
> which govern "their" universe.
>
> I agree with Eric, newer generations are not interested in
> philosophical systems any more or artificial religious categories.
> There are too many other things going on in their lives.
>
> On 9/17/12, Nicholas Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net
<mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>> wrote:
>> Sarbajit,
>>
>> Given your range of experiences with the religious, I am
curious for
>> your reflections on atheism as a religion. When push comes to
shove,
>> are we atheists any the less religious, in the very broadest
senses of that term?
>> In what ways?
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: friam-boun...@redfish.com
<mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>
[mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com]
<mailto:[mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com]> On
>> Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy
>> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 8:51 AM
>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] just faith
>>
>> Platinga's view is fairly well aligned with the beliefs of my own
>> faith even though our "God" may be different. We all develop
our own
>> models of reality, apparently the trick is to ensure that these
>> models are robust enough accommodate everybody else's gremlins,
>> devils, zombies, or maulvis and still continue to function.
>>
>>
>>
>> I probably know more Muslim's personally then half the members on
>> this list.
>> My neighbour is a Muslim and I also employ Muslims. India is a
>> secular country whose 13% Muslim population is free to migrate
>> anywhere in the world which will take them in - not many do.
India's
>> Muslims when asked (by foreigners such as the BBC or the NYT)
usually
>> volunteer they consider themselves to be better off in India
>> vis-a-vis their brethren in Muslim countries like Pakistan or Iran
>> (notwithstanding the occasional bouts of communal frenzy which
>> develop over pigs feet or beef entrails being thrown by the
butchers
>> of each community).
>>
>>
>>
>> India was ruled for over 200 years by Muslims as was China
(Yuan dynasty).
>> America probably needs to experience Muslim rule for some time to
>> develop a sustainable and robust reality model. The "Dune" SF
series
>> was heavily influenced by Islamic models.
>>
>>
>>
>> OT: Interestingly, "Islamic science fiction" is an emergent
>> discipline in the Arabic world to attract younger followers to the
>> world of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/17/12, Roger Critchlow < <mailto:r...@elf.org> r...@elf.org
<mailto:r...@elf.org>> wrote:
>>
>>> Reading
>>>
>>>
<http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/sep/27/philosopher-de
>>> fen>
>>
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/sep/27/philosopher-defe
>> n
>>
>>> ds-religion/
>>> was
>>> a rather odd experience this week, mixed in with Sam Bacile, the
>>> Salafists, the zombies, and whatever.
>>> The review is by a non-believer (Thomas Nagel) who finds the
book,
>>> written by a believer (Alvin Plantinga), very interesting, even
>>> though he doesn't believe it. Plantinga's day job is analytic
>>> philosophy, so he gets very precisely into what he thinks it
is that
>>> his faith and his beliefs do for him. Finally, the main
argument is
>>> sort a grand slam of creationism: we wouldn't be able to
correctly
>>> figure out how the world works if the deity, more specifically
the
>>> deity that Plantinga
>> believes in, wasn't helping us
>>
>>> along the way. Why would natural selection by itself care
anything
>>> about
>>> the truth?
>>> As the reviewer says: "The interest of this book, especially for
>>> secular readers, is its presentation from the inside of the
point of
>>> view of a philosophically subtle and scientifically informed
>>> theist-an outlook with which many of them will not be familiar."
>>> -- rec --
>>
>>
>> ============================================================
>>
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>
>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures,
>> archives, unsubscribe, maps at <http://www.friam.org>
>> http://www.friam.org
>>
>>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30
at cafe
> at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
> http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures,
archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps athttp://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
