Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA15913 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:51:58 GMT Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:45:17 +0000 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: RE: Re: Wade's last week's phrase of the day... Message-ID: <20011112204517.B2248@ii01.org> References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3102A6D103@inchna.stir.ac.uk> <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAMEOACHAA.email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAMEOACHAA.firstname.lastname@example.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22i From: Robin Faichney <email@example.com> Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:59:24PM -0500, Lawrence DeBivort wrote:
> Loved the anecdote. I know all too sadly what you mean about killer debate
> lines, conceived post partum.
> I once had a Moonie (in the early 80s) in a discussion with me suddenly turn
> his back on me and proclaim over his shoulder "Get thee gone, Satan", and
> another time a Scientologist snarled at me, after I had just helpfully
> informed him that Scientology was only a spiritual Ponzi scheme, "Oh, yeah?"
> before stomping off. These were in the days when I was trying out various
> linguistic belief-changer patterns. We no longer seem to have
> Scientologoists and Moonies on our sidewalks, ready to chat. I miss them.
> Every now and then someone will knock at my door and explain that the proof
> that God exists is that daisies are beautiful. I can't disagree about the
> daisies. I do ask why if God exists and created all this nifty stuff, we
> don't have eyes in the back of our heads, too, so that we can back up
Time for a personal statement, I feel. My previous insistence that I
adhere to the "religion" of Buddhism was largely motivated by a desire to
wind-up the anti-religious. In fact, I don't believe in any religion,
as that term is normally used. I do "believe in" the *philosophy*
of Buddhism, where that does not imply survival of any individual
beyond death -- nor anything else that would generally be considered
If beautiful daisies is proof God exists, Sept 11 is proof he doesn't.
I don't, myself, believe there could ever actually be proof either way,
but of course it depends what you mean by "God". As well as Buddhism,
I like Spinoza: God, or Nature, which is another word for the same
thing, is the totality of reality. We are part and parcel of Him/It.
In fact, given the infinity of connections between all the particles
in the universe, including those of our brains, each of us personalises
the totality of reality -- each of us is God.
But that's not to be taken *too* seriously. It's all just mind-games.
One of my closest friends in my teens, who was more cynical than me back
then (though not quite as badly behaved), subsequently joined Jehova's
Witnesses. The brother of one of my closest current friends has been a
Scientologist for over 20 years. Both, to me, like the people in the WTC
on Sept 11 and the Taliban too, victims of mind-games taken too seriously.
John Lennon had the right idea (sometimes).
-- Robin Faichney "One person's mess is another's complexity" inside information -- http://www.ii01.org/
=============================================================== 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 : Mon Nov 12 2001 - 20:57:41 GMT