Sheldon Solomon - Teach These Souls to Fly (Part 9 (of 9))

[leconfidant]

Absolutely amazing all the way. I really liked this whole thing.

[opptynox]

I enjoy Solomon, but do take some exception to his "due disrespect" to Sam Harris. There is the matter of intellectual honesty with regard to faith, and I think comparing its value to the sex drive and the sugar nutrition drive is misleading. The desire for death anxiety relief is overwhelming, but surely we can develop a better method than deluding ourselves.

[Wyldwulf]

@opptynox I present to you the same question I do to all Dawkinsists. If we evolved the so called God Delusion, it would likely follow suit that any creature further down the evolutionary chain would eventually evolve that same delusion. Would you slap the hand of the first evolved ape to create a totem or pray to the heavens? We assume that our consciousness grants us the ability to turn from delusion. His point is that science can not undo what it cannot address.

[Wyldwulf]

@opptynox

Moreover, as we know it, we are the only species to ponder these matters. While I certainly do not consider myself theist, it is not the remarkable advances in technology and science we have made that has always baffled me about our place in the universe. It is the mere fact that we ponder it. Where did we evolve this, and why? The questions we ask are evolutionarily needless. While Sagen would say we are the means for the cosmos to know itself, the cosmos becomes sentient.

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf What place in the universe? Immediately I sense imagined self importance. More delusion. So we can ponder. Why is that astounding? We have no idea what goes on in the rest of our universe, much less in other universes. You give us way to much credit. The questions we ask are byproducts of our evolution. The fear of death predicates wish thinking.

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf I think science can address these questions and we are fortunate to live in a time when so many questions are being answered. Meaning? Does their need to be? We evolved to the totem... I imagine we will evolve beyond it.

[Wyldwulf]

@opptynox

Ultimately, though, if we adhere to the core principles of Becker's theories, it is not your place, or Harris' place, or the missionary's place, or the terrorist's place, or my place to harm or attempt to bolster my own worldview through the undermining of another, whether through violence or the verbal attacks that might eventually lead to it. The Atheistic worldview crosses that line as just as readily as the theist, and disposal of religion is an evolutionary assumption itself.

[Wyldwulf]

@opptynox

To truly pass beyond the inevitable problems here is that we all, polytheist, monotheist, agnostic and atheist have to cross beyond the fears that lead to this undermining. To accept that we do not know the answers to what., if anything, lies beyond this perceived life, moreover, that we may not yet have but may yet develop the required theory and method to systematically determine it.

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf We agree here.... with the notation that atheists and agnostics are closer to crossing that fear barrier than the others who cling to delusion (atheists may cling to other delusions, just not so much those that third graders can see through).

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf You seem to indicate that non-belief is as tragic an error as belief. That non-cancer is a pathology just like cancer. The atheistic worldview is simply absent delusion. Moreover, I have a responsibility to protect my children from the abusive concept of hellfire and to protect my buildings from fanatics flying airplanes, My woldview is to live and let live - while striving to reduce DANGEROUS bad ideas. Expand on disposal of religion as an "evolutionary assumption".

[Wyldwulf]

@opptynox

You would conclude, because you inherently consider yourself, along with those with whom you form your own cultural grouping, to be "bright", that religion would dissolve as a natural progression of human evolution. Do you have a precedent for that assumption? I neither eschew nor embrace religion. Dawkins and his ilk err in the undermining. While the atheist may argue no ill, no war waged in the name of atheism, consider that words are the first weapon of war.

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf I would interpret not having religious beliefs as letting go of culture -and not forming one. I don't give our species the credit to be able to evolve out of religious belief, but I hope that it will. You protest the new atheist movement to eliminate god belief as an act of aggression, and I consider it to be refusal to subjugation (and thereby an act of peace). At what point do you stand up? Do you always prostrate as an act of peace? Why not eschew bad ideas?

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf Further, in a world where resources are contested, even the most peaceful and kind must make judgments. To stand against the wall and refuse to decide, is to decide.

[Wyldwulf]

@opptynox Attempt to undermine and reroute a culture via removal of religion is another display of the hero exhibition that Becker talks about. We generally scoff when someone converts a culture, so long as it is not our own. Rather one sided, think you not? When you compare religion to cancer you create a black and white scenario that religion is not. Ultimately, the new atheist movement merely lacks a martyr to bolster its mission and solidify its religiosity. That may be its undefined goal.

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf You choose to say undermine. That is your perspective; not ulike the emotional perspective held by multicultural apologists who view any assault on a culture from a cowering position. It is not one sided to argue that the earth is not made from a coconut - is it? Is it one sided to suggest that the guy next door not tell my eight year old that he may go to hell for all of eternity? Answer please. Your speculations on the atheist movement's goals ring hollow.

[Wyldwulf]

@opptynox This will be my last response to the same droning I encounter with all fundamentalists. As an agnostic, I consider these discussions a means not to change minds, but to encourage others to open theirs (and mine). The problem with Dawkins' argument that there is a far <50% possibility/potential of a god/sentient creator makes the assumption we know half of the truths of the universe or means to see them. For some, religion is their death denial, and others the denial of religion.

[opptynox]

@Wyldwulf I am open to having my culture converted to one more sensible and rational. Indeed, if someone can provide ample reason to believe anything, I will then believe it... until something more well reasoned comes along. As Becker includes the reduction of death anxiety in his definition of culture, I'm unsure how you call my position "cultural" at all??

[slinkyskunk]

Thank you very much for uploading this, it was great to watch.

[sadunkal]

Thanks for the upload. Quite useful stuff..

[cryofan]

he took over an hour to say what he could have said in 5 minutes

[shakanunu]

This was wonderful. THANK YOU for posting it.

[shakanunu]

Justice has finally arrived :). Despite being in America, I recognize that as good. No more government sanctioned stealing of land or killing and enslaving to get ahead of others. What a relief. I'd rather be poor than live in a society like that.