Looking for Feedback on Philosophy/Spirituality Articles

*rubs chin* Just an aside: I won't count this as spam because it doesn't break the spam rules. There is context (though self-created), you're a previous member (though only with a few posts), and you linked to your articles rather than paste them at us. Good show all around.

Why in the world are your articles images? It's not like you're using an exotic font (looks like Helvetica to me).

Your actual writing style is pretty concise, though you seem to use a few more words than you need. You might benefit from decluttering your sentences.

Thoughts on Distinguishing Between Spiritual Fantasy and Reality

Alright, your philosophies seem really out there for me. You seem to deny the existence of the soul and back that up with all this quantum metaphysics stuff. I find it hard to weigh a philosophy I can't even parse.

As for the general message of 'question what you hear', yes, I couldn't agree more. My own example: I believe that the Bible is the true, inspired Word of God, but not because I woke up one day and decided to believe so, or because someone told me and I took them on the validity of their word. No, I believe that because every time I test the Bible, it holds up. There is great internal consistency there.

When you get down to philosophies like the one you mentioned, though, it's quite a bit harder to test them for validity. "Humans do not make choices or perform actions." That's a very... I don't want to say 'complex', since it's actually very simple, but it is what I'll call 'head-in-the-clouds philosophical'. The way I see it, if it won't send me to Heaven, show me what to do in life, or even make me a sandwich, why bother? In other words, you can't apply it, which means you can't test it for internal consistency.

Maybe I'm wrong, though. How did it affect your life on the ground level? How did you think and act? And now that you're questioning that philosophy, how have your thoughts and actions changed?

Thoughts on No One Inside the Brain

Ever since seeing Expelled, I've been doing some thinking on evolution. I'm usually not against it per se, but it occurred to me during the documentary that since the theory claims that humans evolved chemically, there was no 'mystical moment' in which they suddenly started growing souls. There was a simple procedure from intelligence (which many animals exhibit) to sapience (which a few animals, such as dolphins, exhibit, if I understand the term correctly) to sentience (which only humans are known to exhibit, again, if I understand the term correctly).

I find that an incredibly scary proposition (and agree with your use of 'disturbing' to describe it). If we're all just animals with slightly more advanced brains, what separates us from them? Why should we act any differently than them? And, most importantly, what happens to those fleshy brains — and, therefore, our entire identities — when we die?

I refuse to believe such a thing, partly because it's so frightening, partly because it doesn't make sense to me (I know that I'm not just a bunch of synapses firing), partly because my religion (which, as I said above, is consistent in enough areas to be trustworthy) says otherwise, and partly because I've observed that people who embrace such a philosophy become almost sociopathic (detached, undisturbed by the emotions of others, and so on).

I wish I could spout some impressive-sounding philosophical argument, but I'm not at all versed in that sort of thing. I'll be sure to ask around and find out if anyone can trump your logic more soundly than I have by merely whining.

Why in the world are your articles images? It's not like you're using an exotic font (looks like Helvetica to me).

-"FekketCantenel"

I think he made them with Apple/Mac software, and it did that automatically to "preserve" his exact look. But yeah, it should be regular text (from a web design perspective).

Just wanted to shed a little light. :)

Edit by FekketCantenel: EVERYTHING BLUE IS OFF-TOPIC; IGNORE IT IF YOU LIKE.

[color=blue:48fa9607fe]Ever since seeing Expelled, I've been doing some thinking on evolution. I'm usually not against it per se, but it occurred to me during the documentary that since the theory claims that humans evolved chemically, there was no 'mystical moment' in which they suddenly started growing souls. There was a simple procedure from intelligence (which many animals exhibit) to sapience (which a few animals, such as dolphins, exhibit, if I understand the term correctly) to sentience (which only humans are known to exhibit, again, if I understand the term correctly).

I find that an incredibly scary proposition (and agree with your use of 'disturbing' to describe it). If we're all just animals with slightly more advanced brains, what separates us from them? Why should we act any differently than them? And, most importantly, what happens to those fleshy brains — and, therefore, our entire identities — when we die?

I refuse to believe such a thing, partly because it's so frightening, partly because it doesn't make sense to me (I know that I'm not just a bunch of synapses firing), partly because my religion (which, as I said above, is consistent in enough areas to be trustworthy) says otherwise, and partly because I've observed that people who embrace such a philosophy become almost sociopathic (detached, undisturbed by the emotions of others, and so on).[/color:48fa9607fe]

-"FekketCantenel"

[color=blue:48fa9607fe]This has nothing to do with this thread at all, but since you just felt free to proselytize, I feel this was open game.

Those fleshy brains? Die. End of story. The only reason this bothers us is because humans have some notion of their own self-importance. You got any evidence otherwise? Doesn't count if it's over 2,000 years old and recounted by unreliable witnesses. Oh, right, those evil sociopathic evolutionists have highjacked every single peer-reviewed journal. That's mighty convenient for your case.

Your religion is consistent in enough areas to be trustworthy? So you don't eat pork? Shrimp? Think you should stone adulterers? Don't wear polyester? I suppose you've given all your money up, because it's easier for camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to pass through the gates of Heaven?

I see you bought into the heavy-handed Nazi symbolism and Ben Stein's crocodile tears in Expelled. You should probably know that the scientists who appeared in that film (PZ Myers, Dawkins) were tricked into thinking it was a film about the coexistence of science and religion. Guess your Christian god's all for tricking people, so long as it furthers his believers' causes? Oh, and when PZ Myers went to see the movie in which he so graciously appeared, the producer kicked him out.

Oh, right, you just believe it because it's scary to think otherwise. Gotcha. Forgot how religion worked for a moment.

Nice to know you think I'm a sociopath. Me, and, yanno, most of the educated world. Here I've been paying my taxes, not murdering people, giving to charity, working a job, loving my parents. But I'm a sociopath, because of that evil, evil evolution.

But yanno. Religion. Obviously it does so much good in the world, like, oh, the Crusades. The Inquisition. Arab women being burned alive because firefighters wouldn't rescue un-burqa'ed women from a fire. Women who have been raped being punished for the rapist's crime. Burning of abortion clinics and the murder of doctors. The spread of AIDs in Africa. All kinds of good, that.[/color:48fa9607fe]

EVERYTHING BLUE IS OFF-TOPIC; IGNORE IT IF YOU LIKE.

[color=blue:fc2ec4fef0]Lise, my post had everything to do with this thread. If you actually read Ben's 'No One Inside the Brain' post (as he requested you do), you would see that. I read it and gave my thoughts on it. You, however, hijacked this thread to blast my religion. That is not appreciated.

Your reply was rude and full of offensive generalizations. To name just one: You flame Christianity in order to prove your point about the soul not existing. However, Christians aren't the only ones who believe in the soul, but I doubt you would be as willing to walk up to a Muslim** (or a Hindu or Buddhist*, who are revered on this board) and tell them, to their face, any of what you just told me (the bit with burqas doesn't count because, so far, no Muslims have posted on this board that I know of). This leaves me with two possible impressions:

1) You're trying to use my candid thoughts above as an excuse to insult my beliefs, which makes you a troll, OR
2) You really have determined through your own spiritual (or antispiritual, what with the 'no soul' thing) journey that people who believe in the soul are impotent, bigotted, frightened, slow-witted morons, but
a) you're too shallow to consider that people besides Christians have this belief, or
b) you're too 'scared' (thanks to the very unfortunate stereotype of the 'angry Muslim', and to the fact that this board is populated mostly by Buddhists and Hindus) to call them on it the way you did me. You make it about Christianity, the minority on this board, rather than about the original topic, because that's an easy target.

7

7

Ben did right by trying to explore this concept in an intelligent, detailed way. I believe he's arrived at the wrong conclusions so far, but I definitely respect him for going about it properly rather than angrily. Your post, however, is all over the board (no pun intended). You jump from religion to me to another religion without making any concrete point except 'HOT **** AM I ANGRY ABOUT FEKKET BEING RELIGIOUS'.

I could go on, slapping down each of the falsehoods, misconceptions, and crudities in your post, but I don't think you would even pay attention to me. Furthermore, it would be irrelevant to this thread. I already regret rebutting your above assertion since it prolonged your hijacking, but I know when to quit. I will in two paragraphs.

Your post is so offensive that I'm tempted to delete it out of spite. That, however, would violate my beliefs about acting in anger — as your post was written. Yes, you made me angry, but I know better than to lash out as you did. I'm trying my hardest to be a better person than that, and, as I hinted at above, my religion has helped. Maybe it can help you, too.

I'll leave your post as a testament to your personality. I think that anyone who reads it will lose much respect for you. However, don't do it again. If you want to continue this discussion, send me a PM.[/color:fc2ec4fef0]

Jon, yes, it occurred to me that he's going for that authentic Mac look, but isn't Helvetica one of the standard fonts most Windows computer have installed from-the-box?

Where is Ben, anyway? It's been almost two days, and you and I have left some feedback. Must be a busy guy.

About the fonts...
I purposely made the text an image because most web browsers only recognize a handful of fonts, none of which I like. It is not Helvetica but Nadeem (which is pretty similar to Lucida Sans Unicode). Just personal preference. I do use Mac software (iWeb), though. There is an interesting Wikipedia article on web-safe fonts here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web-safe_fonts

Thank you Fek for your intelligent and insightful comments. I appreciate you taking the time to visit my site and read my two short essays and respond.

I am not going to say anything about Lise's post except that it was offensive and inappropriate and does not justify a response.

Fek and Jon- are you familiar with the book The Mind and the Brain: The Power of Mental Force by Jeffrey M. Schwarz? It is an interesting read on the topic of neuroplasticity, but there is a review on the Amazon page for the book that is kind of cool. The review highlights something I have struggled with, which is how to live out a worthwhile, volitional life while at the same time feeling deeply that the universe must be completely deterministic. Its something similar to Orwellian doublethink, where you hold two conflicting beliefs in your mind simultaneously without suffering mental breakdown. The review is titled Consciousness Addressed by Science (its the first one on the page). Anyway, here is the link:
http://www.amazon.com/Mind-Brain-Neuroplasticity-Power-Mental/dp/0060988479/ref=cm_cr_pr_sims_t


Ben

Woooooooooooooow this stuff is so cerebral. I'm very intimidated by philosophies that seem to require a college course to understand.

One thing pricked my ears up (emphasis mine):

Schwartz (A Return to Innocence), a UCLA psychiatrist and expert on treating patients with obsessive compulsive disorder

-"Summary"

It goes on to say that they had much luck in counselling such patients. As a sufferer, maybe I should give the book a look-see. Ben, do you think I would understand it? And don't flatter me. Does the book require a lot of complex philosophizing?

Fek,

I have been reading over as many of your posts as I can find on Zen Habits. Just from looking at your writings it is crystal clear that you are highly intelligent and would have no trouble understanding just about anything at all. As a college student and zoology/philosophy major (Auburn University), I can assure you that you are way ahead of most of the college crowd in general mental ability, even though you may think otherwise.

You really should get a hold of Schwartz's book--I'm sure you would like it and find it useful. You may also enjoy a book which has had a major influence on me--Jed McKenna's Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing. The Amazon reviewers are split down the middle on the merits of this book, but I for one love it. I definitely recommend both as they are incredibly life-transforming (in a good way).

Ben

Protip: When you want to put a link, highlight some relevant text and click the URL button above the posting field. When you hover over that button, some instructions show up below it. Vely vely handy.

I added the first book to my Amazon wishlist (which is more of a shopping list for me) and checked out the second. This review amused me:

[quote:d670b63c4b="John S. Ryan, Amazon.com reviewer"]In spite of all of the sell-it-to-the-seekers tub-thumping, it's actually a pretty good book. (And you have to wonder why so many of these folks have so heartily endorsed a book that heaps so much well-deserved scorn on the spiritual-fashion industry. Maybe they don't think he meant _them_.)

Reminds me of a great youth sermon I downloaded. The preacher went on and on for five minutes about how teenagers in America today don't really try to follow a correct lifestyle, but just try to be cool and fit in. He made his big point and stood back, sort of gasping for breath. The audience of teenagers went wild, applauding and cheering his wisdom. He stepped up again and said, 'I don't know why you're clapping, I'm talking about you.' The place went quiet as a grave. It was hilarious.

Anyway, enough funny memories. As tempting as that book sounds (I have a lot of respect for books that say 'cut the crap, already'), I find it hard to get into the whole 'enlightenment' thing. The idea of trying to 'figure out' the universe when I can't even figure out how to move out of my parents' house would amuse me if it wasn't so sad. Plus, for all my posturing, I'm still a dumb teenager (unless almost-twenty counts as an adult), and I doubt I can make a really well-thought-out decision of that magnitude yet. Heck, I already leave most of the cerebral stuff about my own religion to the experts.

I'll definitely check out that first book once I have $10 sitting around. I wish I had one to recommend to you, but I'm afraid my tastes as of late include Jim Butcher's Dresden Files series and The Power of Simple Prayer by Joyce Meyer. In other words, nothing relevant.

I just noticed that we've begun to neglect the other article you posted (the bit about discerning new religious/spiritual/philosophical concepts). Should we leave off the soul stuff and focus on that for a while?

And finally: I've been contemplating creating a new board here for discussions such as this one. They've been cropping up quite a bit lately, so I think it's high time they get a home. What do you think? Edit: Alright, I'm going to go ahead and make one, and move all relevant threads there. Let's see if it becomes a free-for-all.

Hi guys ... just wanted to jump in here and put in my 2 cents regarding the heated discussion above.

First, I never get involved in religious arguments. I've rarely ever been involved in one that has changed anyone's mind or resolved any question. I've had some civil discussions on religious philosophy that went well, but once you start insulting someone's religion (or lack thereof), nothing good will come of it other than people being very angry at each other. So, while you guys are free to do as you wish, I suggest staying away from attacking another person's religion.

Second, I wanted to applaud Fekket for not deleting the post above, even if it offended her. She does a great job on these forums of stopping all the inevitable spam, and I want to thank her for that. I would never be able to do it, and without that job this forum would be useless. But in this case she held back on her first instinct to delete, because she believes in free discussions, as I do.

While I urge you guys not to attack each other, and to keep things civil, I hold most sacred your right to have a discussion, however heated. That doesn't mean you can just cuss at each other or flood this place with spam, but if you get angry at each other, or want to be rude, you should have that right.

Keep up the great work, Fekket!

I fully agree with Leo and also with Antonin Scalia, who believed that you have a right to swing your fist as you please, but your right ends where my nose begins.

Fek- You may like this advice of Thoreau (I'm paraphrasing): "Read the best books first, or you may never have a chance to read them at all."

Over the past 3 or so years I have been trying to get past the nihilistic philosophy presented here: http://faculty.virginia.edu/consciousness. Take a look around this site and you'll see what I mean. It can be difficult, to say the least, to oppose scientifically sound evidence from quantum theory, etc. which points to the seemingly undeniable conclusion that whatever is meant to happen will happen, and that there is no choice or volition of any kind--only total determinism. It is definitely a bit frustrating. Your thoughts?

Well shucks. My face is red here. Thanks, Our Leader. (Yeah, I don't take compliments well, or gratitude).

Now that he's dropped in his two cents, let's please forget the whole thing. . . . Seriously, if anyone mentions it again, I'll edit it out of your posts! I'm in an editing frenzy! (quick edit: Lise tried to post again on the same topic. That post, I deleted, since I gave fair warning earlier. Lise, if you want to say something irrelevant to this thread, either start a new one or PM me.)

Back on topic. Ben, what's your response to my most recent post? And can somebody else besides me and Jon please take part? I'm starting to feel like all this thread is good for is my chatter and Ben's answers.

Edit: Posted and then saw Ben's post.

HAHAHAHAHA I love the Scalia quote. Even if it goes against 'turn the other cheek', it rocks.

Okay, determinism. Very high-brain stuff there, and I usually don't delve into it, but when I do, I like to use what I call my 'Si experiments'. To sum: A few years back, as I was working on my biggest novel project yet, I had a brain fart and decided to experiment by thinking of myself as the God of that universe, which I named 'Si' (pronounced 'sai'). After all, I had created it, and I controlled it. Ever since, I've opened up many many fascinating eggshells with regard to philosophy and the nature of God and the universe. Of course, they're probably all crap, but I still enjoy them.

A disclaimer: I am not God, and my creations and control are extremely scaled-down and rudimentary compared to His. It's like comparing a three-year-old's pencil scribbles to the entire production of a Pixar movie, including music, promotion, and DVD sales. No, even those two things aren't disparate enough. You get the idea, though.

Now, on determinism: I've found that Si swings toward that, but is far from all the way there. The numbers vary, but I'd say that between 5-10% of all actions that take place in this world of mine are actions thought up by the characters. I know that it's just my subconscious shoving ideas onto my plate, but when, say, Anan abruptly decides to take over the universe, I sit up and go, "Wait, that isn't in the 'script'." That, to me, has the same effect as someone with true free will. It makes me adapt and come up with counterideas.

I have a very limited brain. It's limited in the general 'we are only puny hoo-mans and cannot comprehend big thingies' way and, I think, even limited when averaged with the rest of mankind. Therefore, I don't have the brain capacity to have a huge subconcious running on two processors, spurting out constant free will actions for these characters. In that sense, they only have partial free will.

God, however, supposedly has infinite power. I think it follows that He would have the power to say 'I'm going to create these people and make them completely separate from My mind so that they can do what they want based on their own choices'. That is total free will. I could then go on to explain how, despite that, we still fulfill His plans, but that's unrelated to your question and would be pure religion-wanking.

I guess my definition of 'actions that surprise God' wouldn't apply in this universe, where we've got an annoyingly omniscient One, but I like to use that as my frame of reference.

Just realized that the two links I provided in my first post don't work. That is because I have remodeled my site and the URLs for those articles have changed. Here are the updated (correct) links:

http://www.discountenlightenment.com/DE/Blog/Entries/2008/6/10_Distinguishing_Between_Spiritual_Fantasy_and_Reality..html
http://www.discountenlightenment.com/DE/Blog/Entries/2008/6/10_No_One_Inside_the_Brain..html

Sorry about that.

I like the new layout, except for the huge pictures on the sides. Sort of distracting, and limits the text area. Good job on turning the articles into text, though.