Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA01001 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:53:31 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745A43@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: mysticism etc Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:50:58 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Fair enough Robin.
I nearly put something to the same effect on my last post.
We'll call it a draw, eh? :-)
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Robin Faichney
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 1:44 pm
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: mysticism etc
>
> You should probably read the last paragraph of this message before
> replying to it.
>
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 11:02:52AM +0100, Vincent Campbell wrote:
> > >I already told you, there's no "secret knowledge", but that
> > particular
> > >dig is just too tempting, isn't it? Not that giving in to such
> > temptation
> > >is particularly rational, but there you go.
> >
> > It is 'secret' because according to the position it can only be revealed
> > through the practice and can't be articulated in a verbal manner. The
> line
> > then becomes 'I can't tell you- you must just do'. When the skeptical
> > student asks 'why?', the answer is 'you'll find out when you do it'.
> When
> > the student does it but doesn't get any noticeable response, the mystic
> then
> > says 'Oh, well you're probably not doing it right'. The student then
> says
> > 'well please tell me how to do it right', and the mystic 'I cannot tell
> you
> > how to do it correctly, you just must practice until you get it'.
>
> OK, so how to ride a bike is "secret knowledge" too.
>
> > Like I said, I'm not Mr Spock :-) I do think there's a difference
> though
> > between doing something for its physiological benefits, and then turning
> > that into The Answer.
>
> How about an approach that says most of our troubles are, at root,
> psychological, and then offers a practice with psychological benefits?
>
> > Why does it all fall away if it's metaphorical? To take up your point
> below
> > about even the idea of Jesus being the son of God being a metaphor; well
> if
> > that's the case, then God can be a metaphor, and if God is metaphorical
> then
> > God is simply an idea. Why give it all the weight of your entire life
> when
> > it's simply an idea, a theory, without actually thinking about the
> evidence
> > for it?
>
> The question is: what's it a metaphor for? All ideas are "just" ideas,
> and that includes rationality, objectivity, reality, etc. But some
> ideas are more important than others because of what they stand for.
> I mentioned in passing that I didn't believe in God unless maybe that
> meant Reality or even Us -- I'm actually quite serious about that.
> I think much God-talk makes sense if that word is taken to mean reality
> as a whole. I believe that some religions, properly practiced and
> understood, do help us relate to reality -- although I know that will
> upset the typical atheist! So it's not a matter of putting such emphasis
> on a mere idea, but on the idea of Reality -- or whatever it is that
> "God" means for you. And even for those who literally "believe in
> God", what's actually important about that for them is, of course, its
> psychological significance, not its ontological status. Psychology is
> what it's ALL about. It's just a pity neither the fundamentalists nor
> the atheists can appreciate that. Both take it all too literally.
>
> <big snip>
>
> I appreciate the time you've spent on this and previous replies,
> but my own time just now (as always, it seems) is very limited.
> I'll continue to read messages on this list, but I won't be sending
> many for the foreseeable future. This argument has been interesting,
> though frustrating (as always, again). Thank you for your input! :-)
> (And Wade, too.)
>
> --
> Robin Faichney
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 22 2000 - 14:54:50 BST