At 4:06 PM -0600 11/27/02, Mia McDavid wrote: >Lydia wrote, and I hereby forward: > >...the relative, irrational, and the invisible -- exactly the ground >that materialists don't believe in. > >Yeah, but it's still *there*, isn't it? No. Your argument is circular. There must be an Invisible world because we can't talk about it unless there is an Invisible world. >The differences in our feelings, perceptions and personalities >exist, whether they are material or explicable or quantifiable or >not. Granted. >DDB would probably argue that they are entirely the result of >neurochemical activity in our brains, and that if they difffer >sharply from the norm, we will someday be able to "correct" them. >He would then remove from my personality the flaw that makes me feel >supported by the love of God. I'm with DDB on the neurochemistry. Having the last half of my life on various psych drugs, I'm fully convinced of the chemistry of my existence. There have also been studies, some recent, which suggest that religious states, such as deep meditation or prayer or feeling like one is speaking directly to god are physical states, ones that some people's bodies are designed to accept. A genetic predisposition toward God, like I have a genetic predisposition to manic depression. In many ways, I think it's really really cool that we're finding out so much about how the world works, and being able to medicate people's brains in more and more precise ways. I don't worry about losing my humanity very often. Not yet. The danger will come when people stop having the right to choose their own medical care. In the mean time, Better Living Through Chemistry! > >Maybe, but he's speculating. He would say I'm speculating, too. >No, I can't pick God up in my hands and bring him to you. And, I >can't say; "At precisely 6:00 this evening, God will prove that he >exists by writing "peace on earth" in the sky." I have experience >of God that is entirely subjective, immaterial, and illogical, and I >find it quite convincing. Yep. Gnosis can't be shared. Those afflicted by gnosis can gather together seeking comfort and understanding. Some religious organizations design rituals and communities to help wayfarers achieve enlightenment. But your gnosis is of absolutely no value in trying to convince me that God exists. > >There's a famous quote that says "Faith is the substance of things >hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." DDB has his own >faith--similar to Asimov or Roddenberry, he seems to believe in the >future of humankind, ever evolving toward something wiser and more >rational. There's a difference between a faith and an extrapolation based on known facts. DDB believes that the future will be better than the past, that mankind is capable of learning and that it'll be fun to watch. >I find his faith quite as repellent as he finds mine. As to whose >hopes will be rewarded, we just don't know yet, do we? Why do you find what you perceive to be DDB's beliefs to be repellant? -- Lydy Nickerson lydy at demesne.com lydy at lydy.com Dulciculi Aliquorum