Book Burning

[leo9]

And yes, there are accounts of people going the other way, going from atheism to (or back to) religion. Some of those accounts seemed sincere and credible to me, but most seemed disingenuous, as though written by someone trying to make it seem as though he was once an atheist. Regardless, I take all such accounts, as well as those accounts of deconversion, with a grain of salt.

Then you'll have to take mine with the appropriate seasoning.

I was raised humanist, by parents who had quietly rejected the faith of their parents and wanted their children to make their own choices. (AFAIK, my sisters are still atheists, and treat my religion as just another of my oddities.) As a child I was briefly attracted by the bible-stories books my grandparents gave me, but my father very wisely gave me a basic guide to all the world's faiths, and let me figure out for myself that just because someone once put it in a book doesn't make it true.

In college I resolved the conflict between that and my growing sense of the spiritual by trying out Buddhism. But though I retained a love of the Zen doctrines, it felt too abstract unless you ended up treating Siharta Gautama as a god - and if you're going to deify some historical figure, why choose one from a foreign culture? (Ironic, since I ended up worshipping the Goddess of Sumer, but since she got at least as far as Scandinavia, I feel a bit closer to her than to an Indian sage!)

Paganism appealed to me as an idea, but at that time there was nobody to teach me unless I wanted to get into the pseudo-Masonic structures of Wicca, which I'm too anarchic for; so I felt around blindly till I came across the translations of the scriptures of Inanna, and felt that this was what I'd been looking for. Eventually theoretical studies and prayers into the void brought me an answer, and I believed.

But of course you have only my word for this, and I might just be a paid shill for the deist conspiracy

But I have also examined other religious organizations and I found all of them lacking in any evidence to support their beliefs and dogma. And without evidence all they have is hearsay and wishful thinking.

And invisible friends. Some of us have nice supportive invisible friends. I'm very glad mine found me.

Personally, I find such beliefs no different from the belief in lucky numbers, astrology, four leaf clovers, lucky charms and any other superstition.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Thorne]

But of course you have only my word for this, and I might just be a paid shill for the deist conspiracy

No, I wouldn't go that far. At least with your account, you appear to have given it a lot of thought and "soul" searching. I will admit, I have difficulty understanding why you would go on such a search, or why anyone else would.

And invisible friends. Some of us have nice supportive invisible friends. I'm very glad mine found me.

Ahh, I see. You were lonely! Well, invisible friends are better than none, I suppose.

One question, though. How can one differentiate between invisible friends and mental illness? (see my sig.) I mean, YOU claim they are there, and I'm sure you BELIEVE they are there, but how can you prove to ME that they are there?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

If you try to run your life based on superstitions, then it IS a bad thing. People like to think that astrology, for example, works. But in reality we KNOW it doesn't work. There is no demonstrable basis for claiming that the planets can control our destinies. The claims of the astrologer cannot be tested, they cannot be demonstrated, they cannot even be agreed upon by other astrologers. Do you consider it a good thing to allow one's life to be ruled by such nonsense?

[leo9]

I will admit, I have difficulty understanding why you would go on such a search, or why anyone else would.

And I don't understand what manga fans or opera lovers or politicos get out of their particular interests, but it's variety that makes the human race so amazing. One just has to accept that there are a lot of people out there who feel intensely about things that leave us cold, and their concerns are as legitimate as ours. As we say back here in perveland, YKIOKIJNMK.

Ahh, I see. You were lonely! Well, invisible friends are better than none, I suppose.

I guess you could call spiritual searching loneliness for something that humans can't offer. And not better, different from the human kind.

One question, though. How can one differentiate between invisible friends and mental illness? (see my sig.)

Only pragmatically, the same way you differentiate between apps and viruses: do they do something useful? In the immortal words of the Prophet Bokonnon, "Live by the lies that make you healthy and happy."

It's been observed that love - the swept-away-infatuated kind - meets all the clinical tests of mental illness. The same can reasonably be said for religious devotion, which proves that psychology is still far from having a complete description of human nature.

. I mean, YOU claim they are there, and I'm sure you BELIEVE they are there, but how can you prove to ME that they are there?

As I've said many times, I have no interest in proving it to you, and I'm relaxed about the view that it's probably impossible. I don't ask you or anyone else to prove to me that your spiritual belief system is true in the physical sense that the law of gravity is true, because that is applying a test that is meaningless in the context: as if an accountant were to ask you to prove that your atheism is profitable, and refuse to accept it if you can't.

(Possibly not a good metaphor, now I think of it, because televangelism shows that some religions can be very profitable indeed. But that still doesn't prove they're true.)

If a person's religion makes them happy and useful, it's a good religion, but whether it's true or not is a null question for me: only they can decide that.

If you try to run your life based on superstitions, then it IS a bad thing. People like to think that astrology, for example, works. But in reality we KNOW it doesn't work. There is no demonstrable basis for claiming that the planets can control our destinies. The claims of the astrologer cannot be tested, they cannot be demonstrated, they cannot even be agreed upon by other astrologers. Do you consider it a good thing to allow one's life to be ruled by such nonsense?

That depends. If a person makes good decisions and feels secure in their life because they believe they are guided by the planets, I feel it's no worse than being guided by any of the other objectively absurd belief systems that people live by.

I think it's wise to have a solid grasp of the difference between a belief system and physically verifiable facts, but that's my only caveat.

[Thorne]

And I don't understand what manga fans or opera lovers or politicos get out of their particular interests, but it's variety that makes the human race so amazing.

The difference is that these are physical, measurable, tangible things, not ephemeral beliefs which cannot be distinguished from wishful thinking.

One just has to accept that there are a lot of people out there who feel intensely about things that leave us cold, and their concerns are as legitimate as ours.

I can accept that. It's the religious who want to force their beliefs onto everyone else who seem to have a problem with it.

In the immortal words of the Prophet Bokonnon, "Live by the lies that make you healthy and happy."

I prefer to live with the truth. There's generally far less disappointment that way.

It's been observed that love - the swept-away-infatuated kind - meets all the clinical tests of mental illness.

I can see that, especially for that kind of love, which is more akin to lust than real love. Having been married as long as I have, I can say that real love is much deeper, and far less intoxicating, than that. And more fulfilling.

The same can reasonably be said for religious devotion

Except that, once again, you are equating love, or devotion, of a tangible, physical person with the devotion of something, or someone, that is not provable.

which proves that psychology is still far from having a complete description of human nature.

Something else we can agree on!

as if an accountant were to ask you to prove that your atheism is profitable, and refuse to accept it if you can't.

Except that I CAN prove it. Look at all the money I save by not throwing it into some church!

If a person's religion makes them happy and useful, it's a good religion, but whether it's true or not is a null question for me: only they can decide that.

Then why does it seem so many of them want to force me to believe as they do?

That depends. If a person makes good decisions and feels secure in their life because they believe they are guided by the planets, I feel it's no worse than being guided by any of the other objectively absurd belief systems that people live by.

If they ONLY made good decisions I might be convinced that there were something to that. But it's been shown that they make just as many bad decisions as those who don't believe. And in some cases, they have failed to make ANY decisions because "the stars were not aligned."

I think it's wise to have a solid grasp of the difference between a belief system and physically verifiable facts, but that's my only caveat.

I agree.