Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
On 4 Jan 2007, at 03:56, Robert G. Seeberger wrote: John C Wright was once an athiest. He became a christian just a few years ago. I've read all his books and his religious views do not show through as far as I recall. But I find him to be a brilliant writer and the story of his religious epiphany is very interesting. He's certifiably bonkers, but that didn't stop Philip K Dick writing some brilliant SF novels either. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. - Richard Dawkins ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
I, who did not until that moment even believe the word 'spirit' had any meaning In fact, 'spirit' has several meanings: - breath - courage - vigor - thought - ghost - the B2 stealth bomber - an airline - the MER-A mars rover - the asteroid 37452 - an F1 racing team (from the 80s) - a music band - an album by the band Spirit, also an album by Jewel, another one by Eluveitie - a song by Faith No More - a comic - a film - a character from G.I.Joe, another character from She-Ra, another on from Öban Star Racers - a nightclub in Dublin - a TV series - a character from the Wing Commander computer game series - a political party in Belgium - alcohol, or beverages with substantial amounts of alcohol, or an alcoholic solution of a (medical) drug - enthusiasm - intent, purpose - meaning - the fifth of the four elemnts Yup, and also 'soul'. Plus a part of the Holy Trinity. Almost forgot this one :-) Best regards, Klaus _ This mail sent using V-webmail - http://www.v-webmail.orgg ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: The Conversion of John C Wright
Robert G. Seeberger forwarded: The Christian world-view is not only NOT incompatible with the scientific and logical one, they reinforce each other. You must imagine my befuddlement when I see science presented as somehow being the enemy of religion. Science is the enemy of Taoism or Buddhism, perhaps, but not the enemy of a religion that combines the rationalism of Athens with the mysticism of Jerusalem. We invented the University, for God's sake. *koff koff* Shangyang anyone? Or Takshila? Or Nalanda? Or Plato's decidedly non-christian Academy? OR Ratnagiri? Or Al-Azhar? I mean, come *on*... The Taste Of Sincerety Maru To me it read like the unbalanced fervour of a new convert. Especially in view of the eagerness to trash other belief systems, and ignore documented facts. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: The Conversion of John C Wright
Ritu wrote: We invented the University, for God's sake. *koff koff* Shangyang anyone? Or Takshila? Or Nalanda? Or Plato's decidedly non-christian Academy? OR Ratnagiri? Or Al-Azhar? eurocentric, ignorant, but shameful of it I never heard about almost any of those: Shangyang, Takshila, Nalanda, Ratnagiri and Al-Azhar. /eurocentric, ignorand, but shameful of it Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: The Conversion of John C Wright
Alberto Monteiro wrote: I never heard about almost any of those: Shangyang, Takshila, Nalanda, Ratnagiri and Al-Azhar. Shangyang was a legendary Chinese university, the rough estimate of the date is approx 21st century BC. Takshila, Nalanda, and Ratnagiri were some of the most famous ancient Indian universities [some of them were established centuries before Christ was born], Al Azhar was an Islamic university, established sometime in the 9th century AD and predated the first Chritian-Era European university by almost 2 centuries. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
Ritu said: Shangyang was a legendary Chinese university, the rough estimate of the date is approx 21st century BC. Takshila, Nalanda, and Ratnagiri were some of the most famous ancient Indian universities [some of them were established centuries before Christ was born], Al Azhar was an Islamic university, established sometime in the 9th century AD and predated the first Chritian-Era European university by almost 2 centuries. Let's also not forget the great Hellenistic centre of learning at Alexandria, which included the famous library. Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
At 01:53 PM Thursday 1/4/2007, Richard Baker wrote: Ritu said: Shangyang was a legendary Chinese university, the rough estimate of the date is approx 21st century BC. Takshila, Nalanda, and Ratnagiri were some of the most famous ancient Indian universities [some of them were established centuries before Christ was born], Al Azhar was an Islamic university, established sometime in the 9th century AD and predated the first Chritian-Era European university by almost 2 centuries. Let's also not forget the great Hellenistic centre of learning at Alexandria, which included the famous library. Which was attacked by . . . Dermis On The Half Shell Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
- Original Message - From: Ritu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:53 AM Subject: RE: The Conversion of John C Wright Robert G. Seeberger forwarded: The Christian world-view is not only NOT incompatible with the scientific and logical one, they reinforce each other. You must imagine my befuddlement when I see science presented as somehow being the enemy of religion. Science is the enemy of Taoism or Buddhism, perhaps, but not the enemy of a religion that combines the rationalism of Athens with the mysticism of Jerusalem. We invented the University, for God's sake. *koff koff* Shangyang anyone? Or Takshila? Or Nalanda? Or Plato's decidedly non-christian Academy? OR Ratnagiri? Or Al-Azhar? I mean, come *on*... In this case I don't think he refers to Christianity specifically, but to westerners. Almost as if he thinks they are universally interchangeable terms. The Taste Of Sincerety Maru To me it read like the unbalanced fervour of a new convert. Especially in view of the eagerness to trash other belief systems, and ignore documented facts. What struck me about this and other articles by Wright on this subject, was how completely convinced he seems to be. No doubts. A conversion by a highly educated and very decided athiest just seems to be an unusual occurance to me. I recommend that people visit the blog and read about his visitation by The Virgin Mary. (Also strange because Wright was not born into a Marian tradition) It doesn't seem to affect his writing a whit. I just finished Fugitives Of Chaos a few days agoand enjoyed it immensely. (Though I generally recommend his sci-fi over his fantasy) xponent Zelazny-Like Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
On 05/01/2007, at 8:53 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote: A conversion by a highly educated and very decided athiest just seems to be an unusual occurance to me. I'd be ordering an MRI... I'm also cynical - people who have dramatic conversions all too often do very well writing a book and talking about them. At the Christian Union I attended, and through scripture groups and bible camps, I met many people who had dramatic conversions. The one thing they all had in common was that they were being paid well to talk to young Christians about it... Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
On 5 Jan 2007, at 01:10, Charlie Bell wrote: On 05/01/2007, at 8:53 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote: A conversion by a highly educated and very decided athiest just seems to be an unusual occurance to me. I'd be ordering an MRI... Yes, it sounds like PKD's blue light. I'm also cynical - people who have dramatic conversions all too often do very well writing a book and talking about them. At the Christian Union I attended, and through scripture groups and bible camps, I met many people who had dramatic conversions. The one thing they all had in common was that they were being paid well to talk to young Christians about it... Con men thrive like maggots in the filth of religion. Not to mention the abusers, addicts, bullies and other low-lifes it attracts. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. - Richard Dawkins ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
- Original Message - From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:10 PM Subject: Re: The Conversion of John C Wright On 05/01/2007, at 8:53 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote: A conversion by a highly educated and very decided athiest just seems to be an unusual occurance to me. I'd be ordering an MRI... I'm also cynical - people who have dramatic conversions all too often do very well writing a book and talking about them. At the Christian Union I attended, and through scripture groups and bible camps, I met many people who had dramatic conversions. The one thing they all had in common was that they were being paid well to talk to young Christians about it... Quoting his blog eh?(Or is it that there is an almost identical passage on the blog IIRC) I think it is a healthy sign that he recognizes how crazy it sounds. I don't find a lot to agree with though (in the religious themed sections of his blog). He gets a bit worked up when someone challanges the actuality of his religious visions. And an affinity for extreme right wing politics shows up too. Frex: The much maligned faith of the faithful is not merely the gullibility Voltaire and his epigones would have you take on faith he says it is. My experience is that secularists are more gullible, in general, than religious folkperhaps I have met too many Marxists to believe in the skepticism of the skeptics, or people who think some quota will stop race hatred, or that the next election will usher in the utopia. I cannot tell you how many people take their newspapers on faith, when they know newspapermen are mortal, men who tell lies for pay, but scoff that I take the Bible on faith, when I have firm reason to believe the authors thereof were inspired men, serious enough in what they believed, some of them, to die for it. The guy is obviously very smart but at the same time full of crap. xponent Mystics Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
On 05/01/2007, at 1:25 PM, Robert Seeberger wrote: A conversion by a highly educated and very decided athiest just seems to be an unusual occurance to me. I'd be ordering an MRI... I'm also cynical - people who have dramatic conversions all too often do very well writing a book and talking about them. At the Christian Union I attended, and through scripture groups and bible camps, I met many people who had dramatic conversions. The one thing they all had in common was that they were being paid well to talk to young Christians about it... Quoting his blog eh?(Or is it that there is an almost identical passage on the blog IIRC) I didn't read it all, it's so similar to others I've read. My experience is that secularists are more gullible, in general, than religious folk—perhaps I have met too many Marxists to believe in the skepticism of the skeptics, or people who think some quota will stop race hatred, or that the next election will usher in the utopia. LOL. Straw man tastic. Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
Robert G. Seeberger wrote, quoting John C Wright: An aside: For those of you interested in such questions, I am in the same school as Bishop Berkeley (Esse est percipi) and Boethius (Consolatio Philosophiae). While mind and matter cannot be of the same substance, surely mind and perception can and must be: for reason is thought is about thought and perception is thought about objects. Perceived objects (whose existance we know only by induction) follow the laws of consistency for the same reason a syllogism follows the laws of logic. When we see perceptions that do not flow from one to another consistently, not shared in common with other men, we call it dreaming. Bishop Berkeley? The one with a proof of the existence of God with a glaring problem (glaring if you're sufficiently trained in logic, anyway!)? Hm. Allow me to quote from that eminent Christian theologian, Puddleglum: OK, quoting Puddleglum is a bit better than hitching one's wagon with Berkeley's, IMO. Pagan philosophy, like that of Aristotle and Plato, urge men to live and die like great-souled men, like Stoics, and to live honestly and honorably, without fear: but their world is one where even Achilles is a shade in Hades, their universe is one where fear is rational, for the Unmoved Mover will not move itself to save you. Stoicism, the doctrine of Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, Seneca and Cicero, shows logically why it is better to live a life in accordance with Nature, but it does not arm the soul with the tools needed to do so. I've met plenty of pagans who had it together, for some reasonable human-being-ness value of together; somewhat disorganized (and Pagan Standard Time is not a joke, but an explanation of Why Things Are Always A Little Late when pagans are involved), but less judgemental than a lot of people I've run into who call themselves Christians. Christianity seems to fit better with the way human life actually is than other religions, at least in my humble estimation. There is a concern and a love for children I have not noticed in other religions, a sanctity toward marriage, a concern for human life, a concern for monogamy, for individual worth, more central to Christian tradition than to the traditions of other faiths. Christendom wiped out slavery world wide; Christendom invented science. If Christianity were the foe of science, the West would be the most backward of technological powers, and the Chinese, following the pragmatic and this-worldly Confucius, would be the leader. Um. I know a number of people who suffered abuse as children in the name of Christianity (and they're atheists or pagans now, most of them), the divorce rate in some Christian denominations is higher than among atheists, wars and their subsequent deaths have been waged in the name of Christianity, the Christian Bible was used to justify slavery less than 200 years ago, and the Church suppressed science at various times. Something about that paragraph reminds me of this: http://www.gracedbychrist.com/narrowgate/?p=14 only the bit I just gave the URL for is much narrower in focus and much better argued. (Linux geeks should read it and form their own opinions of it. And if any of them want to share those opinions with me, I'd be glad to read what they have to say.) The Christian world-view is not only NOT incompatible with the scientific and logical one, they reinforce each other. You must imagine my befuddlement when I see science presented as somehow being the enemy of religion. Science is the enemy of Taoism or Buddhism, perhaps, but not the enemy of a religion that combines the rationalism of Athens with the mysticism of Jerusalem. We invented the University, for God's sake. Um. Enemy of Taoism? Buddhism? I've seen popularizations of science (some of them bad ones, to be sure) that used Buddhism or pieces of it to help explain things! [This was where I just wanted to throw my hands up. If I hadn't needed one of them for scrolling further down, I would have.] Science and Christianity are not incompatible, but science and extreme bibliolatry are. That's as much of a fisking job as I'm going to do on this right now. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
On 5 Jan 2007 at 1:47, William T Goodall wrote: Con men thrive like maggots in the filth of religion. Not to mention the abusers, addicts, bullies and other low-lifes it attracts. As they do in new age cults, UFO cults, anti-hate groupd, or even your own faith. You're certainly a bully and abuser. The issue is not ideology, it is people. Trying to blame the front people use for their excesses rather than the people themselves is the typical tactic of the scaremonger and the demagogue. Andrew Crystall Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Conversion of John C Wright
On 05/01/2007, at 2:08 PM, Andrew Crystall wrote: On 5 Jan 2007 at 1:47, William T Goodall wrote: Con men thrive like maggots in the filth of religion. Not to mention the abusers, addicts, bullies and other low-lifes it attracts. As they do in new age cults, UFO cults, anti-hate groupd, or even your own faith. Which have similarities in the way they operate. Apart from the latter, which is a non-sequiter. You're certainly a bully and abuser. He certainly isn't. Strident, forceful and rude, vicious in parody and a baiter who goes far too far in getting his rise out of people. You fall for it repeatedly and rise to it every time. The issue is not ideology, it is people. Trying to blame the front people use for their excesses rather than the people themselves is the typical tactic of the scaremonger and the demagogue. It's both. When organisations protect those among their number (as with the recent and ongoing Catholic Church abuse revelations), the organisation and mind-set behind it is just as fair game as the individual perpetrators. Individuals are wholly responsible for their own actions, but any organisation or movement that protects the guilty from justice and responsibility is just as guilty. Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: The Conversion of John C Wright
Rich said: Let's also not forget the great Hellenistic centre of learning at Alexandria, which included the famous library. I sometimes wish I can forget it...thinking of what happened still makes me feel like crying... Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: The Conversion of John C Wright
Robert Seeberger wrote: Robert G. Seeberger forwarded: The Christian world-view is not only NOT incompatible with the scientific and logical one, they reinforce each other. You must imagine my befuddlement when I see science presented as somehow being the enemy of religion. Science is the enemy of Taoism or Buddhism, perhaps, but not the enemy of a religion that combines the rationalism of Athens with the mysticism of Jerusalem. We invented the University, for God's sake. *koff koff* Shangyang anyone? Or Takshila? Or Nalanda? Or Plato's decidedly non-christian Academy? OR Ratnagiri? Or Al-Azhar? I mean, come *on*... In this case I don't think he refers to Christianity specifically, but to westerners. Almost as if he thinks they are universally interchangeable terms. Yeah well, that makes him both sloppy *and* inaccurate. In terms of the claim he makes, and in terms of the spread of Christianity. The Taste Of Sincerety Maru To me it read like the unbalanced fervour of a new convert. Especially in view of the eagerness to trash other belief systems, and ignore documented facts. What struck me about this and other articles by Wright on this subject, was how completely convinced he seems to be. No doubts. A conversion by a highly educated and very decided athiest just seems to be an unusual occurance to me. Umm no, not really. I have seen many highly educated atheists suddenly 'find' religion, and they are as certain of their new-found belief as they were once certain of their disbelief. Which maks perfect sense because a] individual traits don't change that fast, and b] the emotional and psychological reasons behind such a volte-face usually make blind faith a necessity. I recommend that people visit the blog and read about his visitation by The Virgin Mary. (Also strange because Wright was not born into a Marian tradition) Umm, no thanks. I usually have a high tolerance for religious babble but not when accompanied by patronising 'West/Christians are the best' propaganda. I'd end up driving myself nuts trying to inject some sort of historical realism into his delusions, and there is no point to it as he could research the history himself if he is interested in facts. Zelazny-Like Maru Now that is high praise indeed. Ritu, who is still impressed by Zelazny's research for _Lord of Light_ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
