Dragaera

Damiano's Lute

Lydia Nickerson Lydy at demesne.com
Wed Nov 27 21:52:02 PST 2002

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