Nah, it's ALL the fundamentalists that are dangerous.... NT

Posted by Primer Gray (208.251.7.66) on May 24, 2002 at 14:41:13:

In Reply to: It's the Rationalist Fundamentalists who are dangerous! nt posted by Tiggy (205.188.193.176) on May 23, 2002 at 17:48:54:

: : : Isaacs reasoning is sound but sometimes you can make a god of reasoning itself.

: : and what's wrong with making a god of reason itself? i admit that that is EXACTLY what i strive to do. i am struck with profound awe and love for rationality, purpose, and pride. i DO worship the best in mankind, and it is a more satisfying and tremendous emotion than anything i've ever imagined, than anything i could believe possible of the "supernatural". the process of worship and spirituality is important to humans. my god really exists (though some try hard to destroy his manifestation in their mind, at great cost to themselves!), and actually benefits me directly. to quote one of the greatest humanist philosophers of our time:

: :
: : religion's monopoly in the field of ethics has made it extremely difficult to communicate the emotional meaning and connotations of a rational view of life. just as religion has preempted the field of ethics, turning morality AGAINST man, so it has usurped the highest moral concepts of our language, placing them outside the earth and beyond man's reach. "exaltation" is usually taken to mean an emotional state evoked by contemplation of the supernatural. "worship" means the emotional experience of loyalty and dedication to something higher than man. "reverence" means the emotion of a sacred respect, to be experienced on one's knees. "sacred" means superior to and not-to-be-touched-by any concerns of man or of this earth. etc.

: : but such concepts do name actual emotions, even though no supernatural dimension exists; and these emotions are experienced as uplifting or ennobling, without the self-abasement required by religious definitions. what, then, is their source or referent in reality? it is the entire emotional realm of man's dedication to a moral ideal. yet apart from the man-degradition aspects introduced by religion, that emotional realm that is left unidentified, without concepts, words or recognition.

: : it is this highest level of man's emotions that has to be redeemed from the murk of mysticism and redirected at its proper object: man.

: : ...the man-worshippers, in my sense of the term, are those who see man's highest potential and strive to actualize it. the man-haters are those who regard man as a helpless, depraved, contemptible creature--and struggle never to let him discover otherwise. it is important here to remember that the only direct, introspective knowledge of man anyone possesses is of himself.

: : more specifically, the essential division between these two camps is: those dedicated to the EXALTATION of man's self-esteem and the SACREDNESS of life on earth--and those determined not to allow either to become possible. the majority of mankind spend their lives and psychological energy in the middle, swinging between the these two, struggling not to allow the issue to be named. this does not change the nature of the issue.

: : --ayn rand, forward to the 25th anniversary edition of _the fountainhead_, 1968

: :
: : to quote friedrich nietzsche, in _beyond good and evil_:
: : it is not the works, but the BELIEF which is here decisive and determines the order of rank--to employ once more an old religiou sformula with new and deeper meaning,--it is som efundamental certainty which a noble soul has about itself, something which is not to be sought, is not to be found, and perhaps, also, is not to be lost.
: : --the noble soul has reverrence for itself.--

: :
: : : Isaac if you talk to someone who has had a complete NDE experience they will say what Jung said. I don't beieve, I KNOW.

: : paul, if they say that, then they are simply betraying their reasoning ability, and that is unforgivable. i've eaten lsd before, but i wouldn't say that i KNOW that the walls melt from time to time. in a severely altered brain state such as a nde, how can you say that your experience is a valid representation of reality? there is a much simpler explaination, that it is just the effect of losing control fo the senses and body for a while, and that the "light" is simply the effect of neurons firing as things turn back on. there is no need to appeal to mysticism.

: :
: : : PS usual forgive my mispellings. Too lazy to reread and correct

: : ahh, you know i don't care a whit about that silly stuff, paul :)

: : isaac

Follow Ups:

• EVERYONE'S DANGEROUS Bartholomew (63.214.72.252) 23:11:18 05/24/02 (0)

Post a Followup