Sunday, October 5, 2008

The Nature of Pride

"I love the evil man who knows that he is evil more than the righteous man that knows he is righteous. Of the evil people that consider themselves righteous, however, the following is said: "They do not even turn away at the threshold of the underworld." For they imagine that they are being led to hell in order to redeem the souls there.
-Tales of the Chassidim

"The biggest egomaniacs always see themselves as being modest, along with every other good thing. It's inconceivable to them that they're really shallow and self-centered. That's precisely why they are."
-St. Brian the Godless

The Nature of Pride

One of the things you won’t have any trouble finding Christians to agree with you on is the notion that excessive Pride is a bad thing. In the Christian religion Pride is in fact considered to be one of the “Seven Deadly Sins” along with Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, and Envy.

As well it should be.

And yet do most people, including most Christians, truly understand the nature of Pride, and why it was considered such a Deadly Sin? I would say from my observations of people in general and Christians in particular that they do not.


Here’s what the Bible has to say about it:

“The LORD despises pride; be assured that the proud will be punished.
Pride goes before destruction and haughtiness before a fall. It is better to live humbly with the poor than to share plunder with the proud.”
Proverbs 16:5, 18-19
-Here we can see that to be humble we must relate to the poor and downtrodden and not with the successful and wealthy. Humility and grace are acts of lowering oneself to the level of the least among us, not raising ourselves to the level of the most powerful and wealthy. That way lies pure egotism.

"Anyone who wants to be the first must take last place and be the servant of everyone else."
Mark 9:35
-This hardly seems to refer to Joel Osteen and the Gospel of Prosperity, does it?

Jesus told this story to some who had great self-confidence and scorned everyone else: "Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a dishonest tax collector. The proud Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer: `I thank you, God, that I am not a sinner like everyone else, especially like that tax collector over there! For I never cheat, I don't sin, I don't commit adultery, I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.'
But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, `O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.' I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For the proud will be humbled, but the humble will be honored."
Luke 18:9-14
-This would seem to indicate that the Pride that the Bible describes consists of the type of thoughts and behaviors that serve to put ourselves above others, any others, even the very least among us. Even, and perhaps especially, those that we think are utterly wrong.
Incidentally it should be noted that in this passage Jesus chose to represent the Proud man as a Pharisee. The Pharisees were known to be strictly adherent to the scriptures and laws. They were the "Biblical Literalists" of their day.

Am I a victim of Pride? Most certainly. How do I know that? Because I have looked within myself for it, and have found it. Do I strive to eliminate it? Absolutely, with all my heart and mind. Why? Because I see what it does to others, and I also see that the others involved are always blind to it, and I don’t wish to fall into that trap. Pride is the most deceptive of all sins, or if you prefer, of all negative behavior patterns. It is the proverbial thief in the night. It is stealthy and almost invisible. Oh, it’s easy enough to see in others, but due to our human nature almost impossible to see within ourselves.

Now, as someone that battles with Pride, as we all should, I can also see that many Christians not only do not do battle with it, but actually mistake it for righteousness. They know that Pride is a sin of course, but they mis-define Pride in their minds as merely being too stubborn to believe in God as they do, and not as a general inflation of one’s ego that can happen to anyone, and which can in fact actually be due to one’s belief in God or in anything else for that matter. The problem here is that excessive Pride can form around any worldview that sets one’s self above any other groups. If I am told by my parents and my peer group that I am a member of the Chosen Ones, the Holy People that follow Jesus Christ and that this makes me a good person, and I come to believe that utterly, such “knowledge” on my part will inevitably inflate my ego and lead to excessive Pride on my part. It is not that dissimilar to being told for your whole life that you’re smarter than everybody else. Eventually you’ll come to believe it, even if it’s not true. And because it feeds the ego and because that feels so good, so "right," it’s pretty hard to resist if you don’t know the danger.

So I have to ask a question:

Is the man that knows that he is righteous, truly righteous?

If Pride is a sin, then by definition, he is not.

What of the man that maintains in his mind the attitude that he is not righteous, believes that he is just another sinner as we all are regardless of what we believe, and yet is not even concerned with that but instead simply loves people, all people, and strives to help them to the best of his abilities, regardless of whether he approves of what they believe about God?

If both men happen to be Christians, then which kind of a Christian deserves the name Christian more? And if the first one happens to be a Christian and the second man an atheist, who is in reality closer to God?

147 comments:

  1. You always ask the tough questions, Brian....good, but tough.

    It's kind of like those people who think they know everything being annoying to those of us who do ;-)

    I see pride and narcissism as very closely related. And, of course those suffering from too much can't see it- that would equate to a fault and most narcissist can't admit fault.

    As to honesty; it is the atheist, or rather the agnostic, who is most honest. He is willing to reserve judgement until more evidence is presented, allowing a rational, honest decision...if only that darned stubborn pride would allow, most christians could admit they don't KNOW !

    ReplyDelete
  2. Agree 100%. Dealing with pride was one of major goals to better myself when I was younger (not so much anymore, because, well...other problems have become larger in comparison, honestly). It is a battle that cannot be won. You just have to do your best to float gently below the line of blinding haughtiness, debilitating overconfidence, and offputting arrogance, while simultaneously trying to not fall down into the depths of depression after stripping away too much of yourself in your own mind.

    As for how this pertains to religion: when you see the process of expunging pride as something that makes you better than anyone else, you are defeating the purpose. The same thing happens when you are allegedly humbling yourself before an unknown entity, while simultaneously claiming moral superiority of those who do not do the same. They give their religion a bad name (I believe, that name is "hypochrist" around here, correct?).

    ReplyDelete
  3. An interesting take on one of the characteristics of human nature that can be both survival positive and/or negative.
    Pride in one's accomplishments can be seen as a driving force that, in a sense, self-rewards one for "good" behavior. On the other hand, when one considers that any "moral" behavior requires "civilization" or emotional maturation that permits one to "put away" the childish urge to be selfish and demand immediate gratification of one's desires, even when this might occur at the expense of others in one's "tribe", excessive pride (which, like almost any other activity, can be overdone) becomes negative behavior. So, I think, it becomes a matter of degree. However, if one wishes to consider pride in light of Christian teachings, it is clearly a "sin", particularly when it is ill founded. This is, in my opinion, just one of many examples of organized religion teaching people to focus on observance and the man-made trappings of religion, rather than the wise ethical and interpersonal advice that all major religions offer the believer.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mac, I have to drop in a comment on something you just said. The part about the agnostic being the more honest. The agnostic and the atheist I see as both equally honest more or less, but the agnostic is the most open-minded and laterally-thinking position. I never really made it to atheist in the sense of "knowing" that there is no God. I always said that "I don't know. I can't KNOW. Noone can." And moreover I would add that to me it seemed that to say that you're absolutely sure that there is no God is equally myopic as saying that you know that there IS one. But I choose to define myself as an atheist since I cannot believe in a "theos" as in, an anthropomorphic deity. To me that's as funny as a bunch of ants worshipping the Holy Six-Legged Ant God as the pinnacle of creation.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As for how this pertains to religion: when you see the process of expunging pride as something that makes you better than anyone else, you are defeating the purpose. -Asylum Seeker
    ---------------------------
    That reminds me of how I felt as I wrote this post. That it must seem proud to think you're qualified to tell people what pride itself is.
    I know that I have pride, and a case can be made that some amount is good for you as pertains to getting ahead in the world, and also for your self-image, and while I agree to some extent, I still have to think that the optimal way to derive self-worth must be in acts of unselfish giving and the satisfaction derived from helping others with no desire for any credit for it, and not from pride in one's self at all. But that's the path of the Saint, and unfortunately I'm one in name only. I try, in my own inadequate way.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well spoken, Harvey. As to that last bit, it's a shame more people don't focus on the things that the major religions have in common, rather than on their differences. Christianity has a lot of good stuff, but add in say, some central Buddhist tenets and the openmindedness of the Bah'ai Faith, and throw in a few other religions for good measure including perhaps Vedanta and even some shamanistic animism or nature-worship and I'd bet you'd get something that produced a much more happy and balanced and loving group of believers on the average. Much more so than the present case, I'd venture to guess.

    ReplyDelete
  7. However, if one wishes to consider pride in light of Christian teachings, it is clearly a "sin", particularly when it is ill founded. -Harvey
    ------------------------------
    Agreed of course, but therein lies the rub. How to tell when it's ill-founded if you're the person involved here? If you're already proud, you won't listen to anyone so informing you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Socialism is the perfect political/economic system for Christianity. I'm not saying that as any kind of insult, Socialism just happens to be a loaded-word for an optimistic system that hasn't yet proven to be effective on a large scale. It was founded in the name of piety, but had weaknesses that allowed it to become a tool of tyranny --much like Christianity if you think about it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Brian:

    Of course, that IS the "rub". It seems to me that Christians, particularly the fundamentalist type, get so bound up in "witnessing" by proselytizing, rather than by life example (as I believe the New Testament says is the right way) that they forget that they should be trying to "save souls", rather than reassuring themselves that their particular brand of Christianity is the "right" one. Certainly, taking personal "pride" in the fact that you know God's will and can see that whoever you happen to be speaking to is a "lost soul" because God has not "come to him/her" as He has to you, is the sin of pride in spades!!
    It seems that only the occasional true believer (Botts comes to mind) truly understands Jesus' message and tries to live it with the humility He required of his followers.

    ReplyDelete
  10. your post reminds me of a funny story brian.

    shortly before i moved from wyoming a church that was only a few blocks away from my house on one of the busier roads in town put up a big banner in their lawn. the banner said something like "come see our new $200,000 renovation!!"

    the first time i drove past and saw it i did a double-take. i couldn't believe the church was boasting about spending $200,000 for superfincial cosmetic repairs. couldn't they have spent some of that money on any necessary repairs then donate the rest to a charity?!

    well, apparently i wasn't the only person wondering why the church would advertise this because less than a week later the banner was removed. they replaced it with a much less ballsy and less incriminating "come enjoy our new renovation" banner.

    now that i live in the south it's even more apparent how important it is for people to have the biggest, most elaborately decorated (not to mention $costly$) church in town. church has become a status symbol. a place of appearances and business networking.

    so much for christian humility...

    ReplyDelete
  11. This topic reminds me of those lyrics..

    "I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free.."

    But it's a religious freedom, isn't it?

    It's freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion, isn't it?

    It's a freedom to believe that religion exactly equals Christianity unless some 'scuzzy' ATHEIST is talking about it!

    Who wouldn't be proud to imagine that GOD is 'for' the country?

    Who wouldn't be insanely proud to imagine that GOD is setting U.S. policy though?

    ReplyDelete
  12. pboyfloyd
    Thank you for reminding me of one of the most irritating songs of my lifetime (at least until Fergalicious).
    I can understand why people would want to have glorious and immaculate churches --to be a worthy tribute to their highest idyllic figures.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Have you ever known a man who declared his own righteousness?

    I know a great deal of christians who confess that we are nothing more than the dust of the earth.

    The only righteousness a christian can lay claim to is the righteousness that Christ imputed unto them in the hour that they first believed.

    The bible said that there is none good no not one.

    All of mankind is born with the nature of pride it is sin that dwells whitin us.

    The bible said ,If a man says he has no sin he is a liar and the truth is not in him.

    The people in the days of Christ, who were given to pride were self righteous in that they supposed that they kept the law of Moses to the jot and tittle, deceiving the themselves.

    Pride is the greatest sin that causes many people to not be able to believe in God, because they are faced with the fact that they are answerable to him.

    Love the post Brian.

    ReplyDelete
  14. that song is incredibly irritating.

    i remember for about 2 or 3 weeks after the 9/11 attacks the administrators at my high school thought it would be a super idea to play that song through the p.a. system during EVERY passing period between classes.

    it was horrible.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The people in the days of Christ, who were given to pride were self righteous in that they supposed that they kept the law of Moses to the jot and tittle, deceiving the themselves. -Observant
    ------------------------------
    And some people today follow the Bible, to every jot and tittle. They actually think it's the unadulterated word of God and that when you find a quote in it that deals with a real-life situation, it's the very last word on it because after all, it's "biblical truth."

    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Pride is the greatest sin that causes many people to not be able to believe in God, because they are faced with the fact that they are answerable to him.
    ------------------------
    I disagree of course. That is called, in my book, "common sense."

    And it's not that we don't like being "answerable" to him, it's that He's absolutely insane, if you believe the Bible. A completely immoral God that orders us to be moral on pain of eternal torture, and his son, who by the way is identical with Him somehow but nevertheless is completely different, a really nice guy, very liberal, very open-minded, and of course he had to die to prove his Father's point.... Completely silly. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Once I can tell that any particular God is less moral and loving of others than I am, that's when I can dismiss said God as a fantasy and as a creation of mere men. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  18. observant,

    i realize that there are atheists who are prideful, which can be witnessed by them shouting the superiority of their "knowledge" that there is no god (like william hayes). but not believing in a christian god does not automatically make someone more guilty of having pride than a christian.

    i would argue that christians who have professed to me that they know their beliefs are right and that i am wrong and am going to hell are just as much, if not more, guilty of committing the "sin" than i. i have never told anyone that i know what is going to happen to them when they die. i hardly see being absolutely honest with myself and with the people i talk to as being prideful.

    i respect that you have different ideas than i do, but for the sake of being fair let's not lump all atheists and all christians together and make generalizations that may not be accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Observant said: "I know a great deal of christians who confess that we are nothing more than the dust of the earth."

    Yes. I have heard many a Christian say something to that effect. And then they immediately turn around and start harping on how they are the best dust around, since they are promised an afterlife for having admitted their own insignificance (and purportedly winning the Great Divine Guessing Game). They admit that they are sinners, like every other human, but they still consider themselves better than non-Christians because they have a spot reserved in the celestial amphitheater. Pride may prevent people from admitting their faults, but just because you admit your faults doesn't mean that you are not proud. It may just mean that you trying to score yourself points by feigning humility and trying to be more honest than normal. It is just sacrificing pride pertaining to one aspect of yourself in exchange for being able to be proud of your lack of pride.

    Anyway, on an unrelated note, I love that "Proud to be an American" song. It is so senselessly jingoistic and ripe for parody that you just can't help chuckling whenever you hear it. It is like a joke song that was supposed to be serious, and is all the more ridiculous for that fact. But, that's just me...

    [Sorry about the deleted post before this one...the first version was too incoherent...]

    ReplyDelete
  20. Observant, you have to put yourself in my place. It's called empathy. To me, your version of God is silly and obviously false, created by men. And I have no doubts about this whatsoever. It's OBVIOUS.

    Why would I ever want to worship THAT?

    I'd follow the words of Jesus, since I agree with most of those, but as to the Bible and Yaweh and all that stuff, well to me it's Mother Goose meets Sauron. And equally fictional.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This paragraph I wrote in the main post:

    "Now, as someone that battles with Pride, as we all should, I can also see that many Christians not only do not do battle with it, but actually mistake it for righteousness. They know that Pride is a sin of course, but they define Pride as merely being too stubborn to believe in God as they do, and not as a general inflation of one’s ego that can happen to anyone, and which can in fact actually be due to one’s belief in God or in anything else for that matter."

    Compare with Observant's statement:

    "Pride is the greatest sin that causes many people to not be able to believe in God, because they are faced with the fact that they are answerable to him."

    Observant, love ya bro, but don't you hate it when I call it like that? I mean, dead-on! You should really think about this. I would if I were you.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Observant, in that paragraph when I say "mistake it for righteousness" I mean that they tend to THINK that Pride is what keeps the unbelievers not believing, and they also THINK that their attitude in thinking that is one of righteousness, when it's their OWN PRIDE and not their righteousness that causes them to misdefine Pride like that. To put it off onto others, those misguided atheists etc, when it's in their own hearts as well, and even more so.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Pride may prevent people from admitting their faults, but just because you admit your faults doesn't mean that you are not proud. It may just mean that you trying to score yourself points by feigning humility and trying to be more honest than normal. It is just sacrificing pride pertaining to one aspect of yourself in exchange for being able to be proud of your lack of pride.
    -Asylum Seeker
    ----------------------
    DEAD ON. Ansolutely correct, and a dismayingly common phenomena amongst the faithful. It's called "false pride" I believe. And the person involved of course is always completely unaware of how their ego is tricking them.

    ReplyDelete
  24. In fact I just edited the original post to better reflect what I meant. I now use the word "misdefine" instead of "define" to clarify the sentence.

    ReplyDelete
  25. A proud person can't stand the pain of ever being wrong, therefore will never admit that they are, not even to themselves. Especially not to themselves. And yet, in order to learn a new thing we must usually discard an old thing that was in it's place, so the attitude of not being able to accept when you're mistaken will prevent any progress in personal growth.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I believe that a lot of Christians and especially Muslims are committing a kind of pious fraud on themselves imagining themselves to be humble yet so quick to take offense at anything anyone says against their belief.

    Imagining that you are getting insulted on behalf of God(not accusing you Observant) MUST BE putting yourself in God's place in the worst way possible.

    I suppose the 'good' way to put yourself in God's place would be to drastically, almost miraculously affect another person's life for the better. i.e. feeding the starving, clothing the ragged etc.

    Seems to me that it would be so much better if there were no starving to feed and no ragged to clothe.

    Hey, we might imagine that given a couple of thousand years of Christianity and over 1400 years of Islam that we'd be a long way to ending needless suffering by now, yes?

    Typically though, the 'count' of Christians varies drastically depending on whether they are bragging about their numbers or whether they are 'damning' their lack of results.

    Surely bragging about the U.S.A. being a Christian Nation has quite a hollow ring to it since there are so many homeless and so many children with insufficient medical and such, yes, Observant?

    Simply trying to 'turn-tables' on this atrocity(sp?) and say that 'leftists' just want to spend 'your' money smacks of the worst sort of pride, yes, Observant?

    'On the other side of the coin', I for one would be SO proud of America if we could hold our heads up and say, "No-one starves in North America, no one is without a home, no one is without medical aid."

    ReplyDelete
  27. Off topic..

    Sarah (I got a cute way of talkin', as if I'm going to burst out laughin'!) Palin:-

    "We need less government,(wink) AND we need more regulation(wink)!"

    (brain-overload, brain-overloat)... oh, she WINKED!

    Well, now all I need is to be drunk 'til I die in my sleep.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I KNOW that you are going to disagree with this but I think that religion(Christianity) is like denying reality.

    It is like saying to yourself, my puppy pees on the floor and if I stop giving it water then it will stop peeing on the floor.

    What I'm saying is that you can be right(about morality and, hey, gays ARE odd) and wrong at the same time.

    If I could get you to imagine that Botts might be right...

    If I could get you to even imagine that there is only one GOD even, but you believe in, what 2, GOD/Jesus, three in one(are you kidding me), what about four-

    Father, Son, Holy Ghost, Satan.

    Tell me that raining frogs on a nation is not gratuituously evil!?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Good points as always Pboy.

    Hey, about Palin. I have this theory, from observing women like my mom and wife and others as regards Ms. Palin.

    My theory is, she's been relegated to hose beast status. And that means, IT'S OVER.

    As in, when women decide that another woman's a RAVING BITCH, it's all over. They start talking about it. A LOT. This doesn't happen with men. They don't relate to the men, so they don't demonize them to other women anywhere near as much. Sarah could have been a decent, intelligent, empathetic woman that happened to be pretty, but she turned out to be that girl in high school that all the women remember, the one that dissed them when they tried to talk to her, the one that only hung out with the most popular people, the one that did nasty things to people that they didn't like, the one that stole other girl's boyfriends. The holier-than-everyone, not-very-bright, vindictive girl with good hair. Like that blond bitch in Carrie with the bucket of blood kinda girl. And something I've only just realized: Once women decide that another woman's worthless and nasty, little else gives them as much pleasure as telling other women about it. My mom's a lifelong republican who practically spits on the ground when she hears the name "Palin" now, and I didn't have much to do with that. Oh, and she thinks less of McCain for picking her, too.

    So, if I'm right, it's all over but the funeral.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Tell me that raining frogs on a nation is not gratuituously evil!?
    ------------------------
    Unless it's France, where they're a delicacy, of course. They're prayin for a rain of frogs in France I hear...

    ReplyDelete
  31. Oh, and I count Father, Son, Holy Ghost, Satan, Mary, and hundreds of saints. Oh, and let's not forget the angels. I've even heard some Christians praying to their departed relatives. So it's polytheism allright, dressed up as mono.

    ReplyDelete
  32. And I'm not absolutely sure, but a frog travelling at terminal velocity doesn't usually live to croak about it. They're pretty hydrous. Like little water balloons. They go "splat" and not "bounce."

    ReplyDelete
  33. Back to the Palin-drone.

    Did anybody notice the people at her rallies? And McCains?

    They're HATEFUL and IGNERUNT. And even borderline homicidal! Yesterday one of them yelled out that Obama's a terrorist, and another one when confronted with the lie that Obama's a friend of William Ayers, yelled out "Kill Him!" (Which could have been directed at Ayers, but I think it was likely directed at Obama)

    And of course, all fundamentalist Christians.

    It sounded like a KKK rally.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Check out this article on Palin:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/06/AR2008100602935.html

    "Worse, Palin's routine attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness. In Clearwater, arriving reporters were greeted with shouts and taunts by the crowd of about 3,000. Palin then went on to blame Katie Couric's questions for her "less-than-successful interview with kinda mainstream media." At that, Palin supporters turned on reporters in the press area, waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse. Others hurled obscenities at a camera crew. One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, "Sit down, boy.""

    "The reception had been better in Clearwater, where Palin, speaking to a sea of "Palin Power" and "Sarahcuda" T-shirts, tried to link Obama to the 1960s Weather Underground. "One of his earliest supporters is a man named Bill Ayers," she said. ("Boooo!" said the crowd.) "And, according to the New York Times, he was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and our U.S. Capitol,' " she continued. ("Boooo!" the crowd repeated.)

    "Kill him!" proposed one man in the audience."

    I am ashamed that American politics has gotten so UGLY.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Sarah Palin stands as an excellent example of what can happen to a person when they allow Pride to dominate their lives at the expense of intellect and empathy.

    ReplyDelete
  36. All:
    I believe that there are Christians, other than Botts, who are honestly trying to interact with those of us who do not believe in the "right" way.
    I, for one, consider Observant, (who seems to be the only Theist I remember from previous blogs who has seen fit to continue the dialogue with Brian's blog)an "honest" believer. He clearly has been "saved" and seems quite firm in his beliefs. Nevertheless, even he cannot actually engage in questioning of those beliefs, having no recourse to answering questions about their validity or "truth", other than to quote Scripture. I find it noteworthy that the closest he comes to real dialogue is when he reminds us that he has had an INDIVIDUAL deep faith experience. Since no one can validly argue with that experience, whatever it has come to mean to him is certainly "valid"....FOR HIM!!!
    His willingness to continue these dialogues tells me that 1) he really is firm in his faith; He does not "need" us to validate it for him (as, I believe, most "Christians" do) and 2) that he follows Jesus' true teachings in that he tries to proselytize (convince) us by example and without calling down eternal damnation on our heads (at least very often.

    Observant:
    None of this should be taken either as a compliment (which you do not need) or a negative statement. I see your position as the only one a believer can take (if he happens to be a Christian ), especially if he recognizes that his arguments cannot "convert" anyone who does not first have a "faith" experience like yours. To stay somewhat "on topic", I do not read personal "pride" in your posts. I think the rest of us are fortunate that you see fit and have the "cojones" to continue to engage in dialogue with us.

    ReplyDelete
  37. brian,

    since you brought it up. i cannot stand sarah palin!! she gives women a bad name. every time she gets in front of a camera she sets women back another 10 years.

    "oh i'm a dipshit, we'll that's okay, i'll just wink atcha and be all cutesy and you'll forget all about it. teehehe ;)"

    it's like she thinks that being attractive is a free pass for being retarded. and by picking her as his running mate, mccain has demonstrated just how stupid he thinks all women are. sadly, there are obviously some women who are that stupid, but not THIS one. so mccain can go fuck himself and sarah palin can kiss my ass.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Observant:
    None of this should be taken either as a compliment (which you do not need) or a negative statement. I see your position as the only one a believer can take (if he happens to be a Christian ), especially if he recognizes that his arguments cannot "convert" anyone who does not first have a "faith" experience like yours. To stay somewhat "on topic", I do not read personal "pride" in your posts. I think the rest of us are fortunate that you see fit and have the "cojones" to continue to engage in dialogue with us.
    ---------------
    This goes for me as well, Observant.

    And oneblood posted a couple of times too, to give credit where credit is due.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Well put, Richelle.

    So do you agree with my little theory about the hose-beast status of Sarah Palin now? As in, that women relate to her not as McCain hoped, but as the snotty bitch from high school, or a similar negative archetype, and are at the point where they're starting to *enjoy* demonizing her? Which is of course the kiss of death to her candidacy... I want a woman's opinion. I'm not being sexist, am I?

    ReplyDelete
  40. haha! no you aren't being sexist. giving her a free pass because she is a woman would be sexist. being critical of her in the same ways we would be critical of any man as stupid as she is and in her position is completely fair.

    and yes i think the hose-beast theory is very accurate. i think intelligent women look at her and think "WTF?! it's that bitchy head cheerleader from high school all over again!!"

    in my book she's at the same level as paris hilton. they both think that by being ~*cute*~ they don't have to know anything but can still get whatever they want and everyone should love them. no accountability, no proving yourself, just unconditional love as a result of your bubble gum barbie doll persona.

    not to sound conceited, i know i am an attractive female. but i have never used that to try to get ahead. i would actually be insulted if i achieved something based on my looks and not on my skills. i think that is why women demonize her and that is what i was talking about when i said she puts women back.

    she is a symbol of that beauty pageant mentality that all you have to do is smile pretty, wave to the crowd, and regurgitate that line about ending world hunger that was spoon fed to you. it's especially easy for women to make that connection because, whaddayaknow, sarah palin was in a beauty pageant.

    some people would say "oh well women that hate sarah palin are just jealous." and some women possibly could be jealous of her.

    women who are attractive but not very intelligent don't like her because she is competition and being attractive is the only thing they've got going for them so they don't like any other woman outshining them.

    women who are intelligent but not very attractive don't like her because she perpetuates the "women are a sex symbol" mentality and downplays the importance of a woman's intellectual contributions to the world.

    and women who are attractive AND intelligent don't like her because they have had to work twice as hard all their life to prove that the things they have accomplished were a result of their hard work and intellect.

    bitches like sarah palin make it harder for all women to assert themselves as an intellectual force to be reckoned with, not just a pair of tits to be gawked at.

    ReplyDelete
  41. "What we found is that when people feel like there is a lack of control - that they are in a more volatile situation - they are more likely to form strong conclusions, even though there is no pattern between the data they see and the companies they evaluate," Whitson said.

    Although the participants were given the same ratio of positive to negative information about the different companies, those who lacked control chose to invest in companies that did not warrant it, she said.

    People often trick themselves into seeing and believing connections that simply don't exist to create order, she said.

    The less control people have over their lives, the most likely they are to try to regain control through mental gymnastics, Galinsky said."
    (From a study on superstitions)

    I agree with you guys 100% about the creepy feeling that Palin projects but I think that it is possible that that same creepy feeling can be mistaken by the magical thinkers to be a 'good thing', like when they voted for 'The Decider'.

    But, the magical thinkers believe that to be 'in control' of an insane situation(even if 'your guys' CAUSED the insane situation) is 'victory'.

    These devious fuckers 'magically' pulled Sarah Palin out of their asses to take everyone's mind off George Dubbya's abject failure, and it is working.

    We all get to bitch about it like a bunch of 'Cassandras' cursing their stupidity while the idiots who voted for Bush are 'dancing' us right back into the insane asylum for another four years!

    How,(oh! HOW?) could people sit and watch Palin saying two completely opposite things(less government AND more regulation) and imagine that she'd make good decisions?

    How(oh! HOW?) could people imagine that McCain is making any sense at all claiming that HE 'saved' America by supporting that bail-out(therefore you should vote for him) but at the same time saying that the bail-out is hardly enough to 'save' America(therefore you should vote for him)?

    It doesn't make sense, it's not SUPPOSED to make sense! It caters to compartmentalized thinkers, magical thinkers, who, as it turns out, are, at least half of the population.

    You know these people, the ones who have two maxxed-out credit cards and a couple of grand in the bank 'just in case'.

    In case 'what'? In case the card companies lose their addresses?

    No, I think they do that because they feel 'in control' that way, and everybody wants to feel 'in control'.

    ReplyDelete
  42. All of mankind is born with the nature of pride it is sin that dwells within us. - observant


    I'm not sure if the pride we may or may not be born with is a sin as observant put it.

    Do we not need some spark of pride to survive in life? For many out there, pride is not the problem. Having none at all is.

    Without pride we are tools, we are weak individuals who get walked over time and time again by those who prey on our weakness, our lack of self pride.

    When we have that ounce of pride within ourselves that tells others "I will not be used." We insure our continued survival. Without it we are prey to abuse by all who come in contact with us. Without pride we can become bitter shadows our our natural selves, left to infect our weakness and pitiable condition on others. Without pride we are unable to protect those who are even weaker than ourselves - we become burdens to society.

    There is a self preservation within the supposed sin of pride. Like all things - balance must be achieved. Pride can be a switch that breaks the backs of those without it, and without pride we perish from existence.

    ReplyDelete
  43. concerning Sarah Palin:

    I am neither attractive or intelligent
    yet...
    I still don't like her.

    She is a prop and a very good one. Only McCain fans will appreciate her. The rest of America can see that she is all pretty and paste, no substance - no grace.

    I want a president and VP who gets it. That wouldn't be John or Sarah.

    ReplyDelete
  44. TJ said - There is a self preservation within the supposed sin of pride. Like all things - balance must be achieved. Pride can be a switch that breaks the backs of those without it, and without pride we perish from existence.
    ----------------------
    I think without selfrespect we could perish from existence.I believe Pride on the other hand has been the cheif motavation for crimes against humanity all over the world, and no doubt the smoking gun for wars.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Yeah, just what I said.

    Without pride you are destroyed
    With too much pride - you destroy.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I thought this was odd.

    What do you think Observant?

    "Jesus bobble head dolls are only $8.95 each and are shipped within hours!"

    http://www.bobbleheadstore.net/bobble/jesus.htm

    ReplyDelete
  47. I would say that pride has its place in the world. Without pride, we would not have a president, fighter pilots, football players, megalomaniac movie stars and what-have-you.

    The danger would then be that you think so highly of yourself, that you become incapable of seeing anyone else as equal. That is when the destroyer is born


    Besides, most overly prideful people are insecure inside and hide it by trying to be the best or thinking so.

    McCain is a idiot, Palin is a bitch. Neither one has a clue. They are using the Bush strategy to win, but they have two problems. One they dont have the same campaign team. Two they arent running against Kerry.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Even though I liked Obama from the beginning I've tried to be fair in my view of McCain. After Palin I could see he dealt a maverick [glug] hand, but for a game I really don't want to play. It's like watching a trainwreck and enjoying it. At the least I hope McCain had the integrity to report the wannabe-murderer ("Kill Him!") to the Secret Service. I believe in Obama's bold plans, but they won't work without the faith of people like us.

    Richelle,
    I graduated from school only a few months before the attacks, so if my school had plans to force that song onto us, I lucked out :)

    I take pride in my modesty. I just don't tell people about it. Except for now.

    ReplyDelete
  49. yeah picachu hitler (or is it hitler picachu? or possibly picadolphu hitler-san?) you were quite lucky.

    i, on the other hand, was a victim of the school administrators' domestic patriotic terrorism.

    it's a miracle i made it out without becoming a bible-thumping evangelical right-wing warmonger.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  50. At least you would've been a bible-thumping evangelical right-wing warmonger with PRIDE! Unless it is about a fiddling contest with the Devil, country music has little to nothing to offer to this world.

    ReplyDelete
  51. ah yes, i could have become one of those obnoxious religious rednecks that has a tattoo of a giant cross with a superimposed bald eagle clutching a tattered american flag in its talons. and i could rock out my wicked ink in my beat-to-shit '88 ford f250 blasting toby keith while driving aimlessy around some hick town.

    now THAT is classy.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Oh don't be so melodramatic, Richelle. Rockin' out to Toby Keith in a Ford F250? They just tried to indoctrinate you into being a good little patriot, not give you a full-frontal lobotomy.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Hi Brian (and everybody else, too)!

    This is the poster formerly known as Doofus. I finally got my computer issues straightened out and just came by to say hello.

    Here's a chuckle for ya: as of yesterday, there is a handwritten message on my husband's truck that says:

    Vote Irish! Vote O'bama!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Richelle,
    You forgot to have a skull in the center of the tat, with thorns and barb wire running around it, blood dripping from the thorns, and the WTC and fire in the background, right above a scar that used to be the name of an ex.

    ReplyDelete
  55. "I believe that a lot of Christians and especially Muslims are committing a kind of pious fraud on themselves imagining themselves to be humble yet so quick to take offense at anything anyone says against their belief."

    -----------------------------------

    That was me. That was how I used to roll in Christ's hood. When I converted, I was finding out some historical truth vs. religious truth, and following whatever group with the historical 'truth' (as accurate as we can get anyway). What's a practicing proto-atheist going to do? Just dive straight in?

    De todos modos, I was that jerk who got all red faced the moment someone didn't agree with me. I absolutely know you guys know the look I'm talking about.

    The only thing that saved me from myself was Jesus' teachings. And I was supposed to be a Christian. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Man I was an idiot. The only difference now, is that I know I'm an idiot, and am trying to run away from that self-righteousness as fast as I can.

    Thanks Brian, that was an extremely honest post. I like that soul baring stuff. I don't want to walk around (or blog around) with my walls up, machismo replacing logic, and conviction displacing sincerity so that I don't even know when I'm being a fraud: because I'm too busy being right.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Richelle,
    ...and curled up in the tattered flag is a white baby praying with its hands.

    OneBlood,
    That was a sincere post.

    ---

    "ピカチュウ アドルフ" is "Adolf Pikachu" (Pokémon is a slave trade, y'know).

    ReplyDelete
  57. Oneblood:

    "None of this should be taken either as a compliment (which you do not need) or a negative statement. I see your position as the only one a believer can take (if he happens to be a Christian ), especially if he recognizes that his arguments cannot "convert" anyone who does not first have a "faith" experience like yours. To stay somewhat "on topic", I do not read personal "pride" in your posts. I think the rest of us are fortunate that you see fit and have the "cojones" to continue "

    I should have remembered your previous posts fro DD's blog. Of course, my statement (above) applies to you as well. Good to hear from you on this blog!

    ReplyDelete
  58. At what point is one SO humble that one is proud to be humble though?

    Even is one is deadly serious about being humble, actually 'especially' is one is determined to be humble, if one, at the end of the day has deemed himself/herself to BE as humble as Socrates, well anyone judging your humility is practically forced to find you guilty of 'reverse humility' and sentence you to take the hemlock!

    (don't know how I started out with neutral 'one's' there and ended up with 'you's')

    Socrates, was so DAMNED humble that he forced everyone to judge him to 'to death'.

    Jesus seems to be way too similar a character to be co-incidental, don't you think?

    How does a person, trying to be pious and holy and such even emulate Jesus?

    Seems to me that Jesus and Socrates(according to their stories) crossed that line, from humility to like a 'negative' humility, forcing the authorities to act.

    Both stories seem to have this 'elephant-in-the-room' quality, where, if we 'see' that Socrates and Jesus were just throwing humility in people's faces 'til they'd had enough.

    Both these stories have a 'hidden paradox' quality that is never to be mentioned, always to remain a 'glint-in-the-eye', a 'smirk-on-the-lips' of 'humble scholars'.

    Can one be SO humble that authority will kill 'one'(LOL)?

    Can one be SO 'holy' that authority will kill 'one'?

    Seems so.(I have a head-ache now.)

    ReplyDelete
  59. At what point is one SO humble that one is proud to be humble though?
    -----------------
    That would be a problem, allright.

    See, pride is really hard to do battle with. It sneaks in even when you're trying to run from it.

    I think that humility can't be a goal, or you'll fall prey to pride. Humility has to be a side-effect of truly loving others. If the love is there for others, all others, then emathy and humility, genuine humility, follow. The focus must be on others, and not one's self.

    Hey, that's why Botts always calls it "the narrow path." It's not easy.

    ReplyDelete
  60. How does a person, trying to be pious and holy and such even emulate Jesus?
    ----------------------
    Yeah, one doesn't. If one trys to emulate Jesus in that respect they are doomed to pride. One (I think) must try to emulate Jesus' love for all others instead. Because Jesus didn't get to be so pious anf holy by trying to be pious and holy, he got there just by loving all others.

    That reminds me of an obscure quote that I found from Dion Fortune. It relates, I think:

    "It may be asked, how then is it that men make for themselves suffering and limitations which they could not desire? It is because they reap not the fruits of fantasy, but the fruits of actuality. They are given the results of that which they have permitted themselves to desire, not the thing they desire. To exemplify- the man who desired power would obtain vanity. To obtain power, he would have to desire the qualities which confer power, namely strength, foresight, and wisdom. The man who desires power builds for himself the consciousness of the vain egotist. The man who desires strength, foresight, and wisdom, builds for himself the consciousness of power."
    -Dion Fortune, "The Cosmic Doctrine"

    Substitute "pious and holy" for "power" and it's the same formula. If one desires the goal, one becomes proud and shallow. One must desire the qualities which confer the goal of piousness and holiness, which I would think involves learning to love all others.

    ReplyDelete
  61. It is impossible to achieve Nirvana for the sake of achieving Nirvana.

    ReplyDelete
  62. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Very true, Adolph Picachu.

    Hey, I don't suppost I could convince you to use english letters in your name, can I? I mean, it's not that I mind so much what you choose, but I'd like to be able to at least SEE it instead of a row of little boxes. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  64. Great quote Brian,

    Who is Dion Fortune? I'll look him/her up anyway, but would like your perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Well...um...didn't expect that. The sounded very eastern. Maybe I was hoping it was. Still would like your perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Since you've been so kind as to lead the way, I'll explain my subtext.

    But first, I would like to say that I am absolutely not making a value judgement when I state this. Because I have to entertain the idea of my opinion being completely personal, with no correlation to reality. Thems the brakes.

    Magic has always creeped me out. Not satanists (yes, somewhat paradoxical), not atheists, not any group that I can think of. I've talked with all sorts of people with genuinely varied beliefs and none of them give me the willies and make me want to run and hide, like those practitioners from the British Isles and Europe and their doctrine. It's like there is some "truth" to what they say about life's condition but don't take it to the same places that other religions/non-religious people do. They seem to take it to the 'self.' And say, "how can 'self' conquer this problem?"

    But please, bandy back, that's what we're here for.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Dion Fortune was a woman occultist, as you've no doubt realized by now. I've done extensive reading on the occult. It's not satanic at all. Oh, there are satanists, but real occultists look down on them as much as you do. Satanists are angry at Christianity so much that they name themselves after Satan, without even really believing in Satan... I've looked through Anton LaVey's Satanic Bible and it says that right up front. I have zero respect for satanists. Not that I know any. I wouldn't want to. Then again, they're no worse than a "Fred Phelps" and probably not even as bad.

    But Fortune and Regardie and a few others are worth reading. Not all of it makes sense, but when I started to get my weird coincidences I looked and looked for people that knew what they were, and as it turned out many occultists were familiar with them. As to practicing magic, it's the identical mechanism as fervent prayer. It's just a way to convince yourself that something is out there listening to you, so you come to believe that your "prayers" or in the case of the occultist, your rituals, have force in the world. And once you BELIEVE that, they do! It's really most like self-hypnosis, in order for one to believe in themselves as a force in the universe. With prayer, you give God the credist when it's really you doing the answering. With magic you may for instance invoke the name of God (YHVH) in a ritual, but you think of Him differently, more like a part of yourself. At least that's what I got out of it. I'm hardly a magician. Just an interested party. Magic(k) fits well into my aforementioned "Big Brain" speculations. Oh, and I've tried it, and had results. Same with meditation, though. It's all just the mind. Not evil at all, unless you are evil already when you get into it.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I do have to say though that many occultists are really WEIRD, and as such I can see why they might put one off. To my mind most of what they do is sheer tripe, but of course that's also my opinion of religion. In fact it does seem that some occult authors are truly intelligent and are worth listening to, but you have to get by the lingo. I suppose that it's like anything else. You get the really serious ones that BELIEVE that they're talking to angels and demons and whatever, and then you get the people that I can relate to, those that are just explorers of the psyche. Fortune would fit that latter category. And you have to admit that she's eloquent and intelligent. That quote was pretty profound.

    ReplyDelete
  69. I will state categorically however that like many extreme forms of religion, the practice of magic can lead to psychosis. Maybe even more so than religion. In advanced practice one attempts to self-hypnotize to the point where you take on the characteristics of a god or angel or elemental force. If you buy into it enough, there is danger in getting back to your regular personality. So it requires a lot of safegyuards against that. I don't recommend it for casual experimentation. Better to stick to prayer. The books are all filled with such cautions, and I can see the need for them. Playing around with your own mind is dangerous if you're not a really balanced person. Not that I am either. Which is probably why I'm not a magician. Among other reasons of course.

    Incidentally, this is also true of advanced forms of yoga. Go figure. Any tampering with the mind needs to be done with extreme caution and a clear head. I guess that's the gist of it.

    ReplyDelete
  70. With magic you may for instance invoke the name of God (YHVH) in a ritual, but you think of Him differently, more like a part of yourself.
    ------------------------
    I should clarify this part, as I can see how it would horrify a Christian.

    It's not really thinking of God as a part of yourself. It's thinking of yourself as a facet of God. As in, you are ONE with God. One-ness. As in what buddhists talk about. That's the concept, and not self-deification. That would be egotism again.

    ReplyDelete
  71. And as long as I'm no the subject of God as He is thought of by the occultist, I want to mention the tetragrammaton. It's very important in the occult. Much of ceremonial magic is derived form the kaballah, so that's no surprise. But the name of God itself as delineated in the Bible is YHVH (yod-heh-vav-heh) and its pronunciation is approximately "Yaveh" or something like that. Jehova was a mistranslation of that, by early german translators.

    The occultists thinks of this four-letter name as a process. The process of manifestation.

    The Yod signifies divine inspiration if you will. That first seed of an idea that you get from out of basically nowhere. It's the "Yang" in yin-yang. The primal male spark. In elemental terms, it is Fire.

    The first Heh signifies the Yin, the feminine energy which provides limitation and containment of that first primal spark, so as to nurture it to fruition. Elementally this is Water.

    The Vav signifies the intellectual planning of the idea, the refinement, the blueprints as conceived in the mind. This is elemental Air.

    The final Heh signifies the "earthing" of the idea, producing a material result. The final product, visible in the world of forms. You thought if it, planned it, and now you've MADE it. Elemental earth.

    They sure think of God differently, don't they?

    ReplyDelete
  72. Incidentally, while I'm no magician, I liked the symbolism of the tetragrammaton so much that I have incorporated it as my symbol here on my blog. That stick-figure thing you see is the four Hebrew letters Yod, Heh, Vav, and Heh, stacked up so as to form a stick figure of a man, this symbolizing the god-as-man idea, or the concept of God indwelling in Man. To me it also signifies how we mere humans invent God in our own image and likeness.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I'm proud of one thing....

    I've not lost a penny from my 401(k) (nothing from nothing leaves nothing).

    My retirement plan consists of a massive coronary while cutting line on some farmer's back 40, half a mile from the nearest road.

    LOL :o)

    ReplyDelete
  74. "Catholic texts view humility as annexed to the cardinal virtue of temperance."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humility

    Speaking of paradoxes, how paradoxical is it that when being collectively humble to God in church, if a child disrespects the proceedings, the parents are 'instantaneously' irate!?

    I guess in practice it follows the logic of, "HEY!!! We're all trying to be humble here! You BETTER start being humble right now, or I(being humble and all((LMAO))) am going to sit here and stew until I can get you to a private place and whip your ass!!!"

    I don't suppose a person with such a "'tude" would imagine themselves prideful, but the child or other disturber of the supposed humbleness would be 'affronting' the sensibilities of the parents and the congregation, wouldn't they?

    ReplyDelete
  75. Hey Observant and Oneblood, since I'm on a tear here, I may as well say yet another thing relating to the occult.

    I'm not talking about wiccans here, although many of them do this too.

    Most occult practices use protective rituals to open and close a "spell" if you will. In order to be "protected from the forces of evil" which to my mind means in order to not go psychotic or develop any schisms from reality.

    The main, most often used protective ritual relates to the pentagram. The pentagram, when upright, is a symbol (to the occultist) of man's dominion over nature. The four lower points symbolize the four elements of nature, and the fifth point, pointing upwards of course, symbolizes man him or herself. As in, having dominion over the lesser forces. (This would also explain why an inverted pentagram is a symbol of evil, since it's evil to think that nature has dominion over man, and that would be what it symbolizes when inverted)

    Now the interesting part to me is, while they use the pentagram in the ritual, the main forces called upon for protection are the "four archangels" of the elements. That would be Michael (fire), Gabriel (water), Raphael (air), and Uriel (earth). So they use the judeochristian angels in their protection rituals. Why? Because the angels have been established in our collective western psyches as forces ONLY FOR GOOD. Therefore, what better forces to call upon for protection?

    Just something that interested me when I found it out. It seems to make the occultist sound a lot less evil, no?

    ReplyDelete
  76. I guess I couldn't think of anthing else relevant to say..

    ReplyDelete
  77. Bri,
    Have you read the 'Deryni' books by Katherine Kurtz?
    The main characters use exactly those occult protections in a medieval/religious fantasy setting.

    ReplyDelete
  78. And for those who might be curious as to how exactly this protective ritual is performed, here's a link to a version.
    http://www.kheper.net/topics/Hermeticism/LBR.htm

    The Lesser Banishing Ritual of the Pentagram. Complete with archangels and god-names, all from the Bible.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Like Deryni Rising? I've seen the books but never picked one up. Interesting. Maybe I should look into them.

    Terry Pratchett does a lot with this stuff, too.

    ReplyDelete
  80. If you look at that ritual it must sound strange.

    But it comes to mind how strange a Christian mass would look to someone that had never heard of nor seen one before.

    Both are of course, magic(k)al rituals.

    ReplyDelete
  81. So getting away from spells and rituals, the Dow took another plunge today. This is looking grim. At this rate we'll have NO economy by like next tuesday.

    And McCain is fgalling fast. No wonder. He's trying to go personal in a time when people have no patience for that. And yet, it's all he's got, really.

    ReplyDelete
  82. It's scary, since my own retirement plan is the same as Ed's, minus the back forty...

    I'll be keeling over whilst in mid-climax, if I have anything to say about it. I want to come and go, simulataneously.

    Reminds me of an old joke. It consisted of three people talking about how they'd like to die. I can't remember the first two, but the last one said "I want to be shot to death at the age of 97 by a jealous husband..."

    ReplyDelete
  83. "fgalling"

    Is that a precious stone appraiser's term like 'fugazi'?

    ReplyDelete
  84. When someone issues a doctrine of faith that you must believe in or face their disdain and a fiery afterlife - i find their position prideful.

    When anyone says that they "know" what you should or should not believe - that is prideful.

    I love it when my sister uses her condescending tone to tell me how much she pities me because I'm a non-believer. Especially when she tells me that she will always love me but will continue to pray for me, so that one day I will return to "the lord".

    It is prideful for her to insist that I believe in her religious philosophy.

    It is also my own pride that I continue to maintain my own non-belief in the face of such overwhelming conviction that religious faith is RIGHT and I am so utterly wrong.

    I guess the true question is: Do I really care? Do I have to be right in my own convictions?
    I don't think that within myself I can even say for sure that I am right. I just know that I can no longer pretend to believe. That much I must be true to myself.

    As much as my family may take it as just another step I wish to move away from them, that couldn't be father from the truth.

    I've no need to distance myself from them. I'm far too old to be that young ever again.

    There was a time in my life when I would have done anything to have others see me as a separate being. Not to associate all that was me - through my family. Maybe it comes from being a twin and never being considered someone separate - just part of a pair.

    I was expected to think and act and be just like my sister, and she in turn like me. And we just like our mother and father. There were no outside thoughts allowed, our thoughts and feelings had to match those of the parental units, there was no consideration of them otherwise.

    In some ways I am like my mother and father - obviously I have traits that were genetically passed down. But unlike my parents, when my children wanted to tell me how they felt about something. I listened. I never asked them to change their feelings so they were more appropriate to what I thought they should be. I tried never to minimize them in that way.

    I have two wonderful adult/kids that know their worth and will settle for nothing less than having their feelings, beliefs and thoughts heard and respected as they have been shown.

    They as I, are still learning to communicate effectively, our feelings and thoughts. It is a never ending experience that will inevitably humble us and give us rise to some self understanding.

    It is cautionary, this want to express my thoughts with others. I open myself to ridicule and mockery when ever I attempt to convey what swirls within my mind. But along with that there is the occasional rainbow - those who understand, and listen and refuse to judge.

    It is the sad state of family ties when the ones who should accept you and understand you despite your idiosyncrasies and uniqueness can only find fault with you instead.

    Pride builds the walls between us. Empathy and understanding- the bridge.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Since I'd never seen Donny Brasco I had to google "fugazi."

    Uh, no.

    :-)

    Just a stupid typo, and the only option that they give me is to delete the post and do it over but then it would be shown as a deleted post and the new post would be in the "newest post" position at the bottom of the page.

    So I left it as-is.

    Leave it to YOU to call me on it, pboy!

    ReplyDelete
  86. It is also my own pride that I continue to maintain my own non-belief in the face of such overwhelming conviction that religious faith is RIGHT and I am so utterly wrong. -TJ
    -------------------------
    I do not see that as pride, but confidence in your intellect and convictions in the face of dissenting opinion with insufficient evidence to back it up. If you can point to logical, real-world (concensual reality and not religious) reasons why you think that way and they cannot, I see no pride in maintaining your position. Conviction is not pride when you're only convinced because you can point to actual evidence and your opponent cannot, and you'd be willing to CHANGE YOUR MIND if such evidence came up.

    Or so it seems to me. I'm hardly omniscient, so I'd be willing to hear whay I'm wrong in this.

    ReplyDelete
  87. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  88. It is the sad state of family ties when the ones who should accept you and understand you despite your idiosyncrasies and uniqueness can only find fault with you instead.
    -TJ
    --------------------------
    And yet I find it to be the most common scenario out there.

    Hell, I was ADOPTED into an Italian family. Wanna talk abot differences?

    And I won't even get into what my wife experienced at the hands of her Christian family.

    I guess my point is, I feel your pain, TJ.

    ReplyDelete
  89. "Fuggedabawdit!"

    You KNOW that I was just ribbin' ya!

    (Watch Donny Brasco, it's good!)

    ReplyDelete
  90. I'll have to rent it, Pboy. And of course I knew that you were just funnin'.

    Hell, I'm not that much of a moe-ron. Close, but not quite.

    ReplyDelete
  91. "Conviction is not pride when you're only convinced because you can point to actual evidence and your opponent cannot, and you'd be willing to CHANGE YOUR MIND if such evidence came up."

    You make a valid point and I am reassured that it may not be pride, but the conviction of my conclusions. They are based on logic, and as much as I enjoy the frivolity of fantasy as entertainment, I can not fathom it as intellectual fact.

    Brian -
    Thank you for your continued support and understanding while I rant. You tend to bring my thoughts to a more succinct point of clarity than I ever could.

    You are much appreciated.


    PS. The dow is down below 9000, break out the suds - the ride is getting bumpy, and me without a seatbelt.

    ReplyDelete
  92. PS. The dow is down below 9000, break out the suds - the ride is getting bumpy, and me without a seatbelt.
    -------------------------
    My suds is hundred-proof vodka and weed, but I take your point. :-)

    Hey, it gets the job DONE. (Financial crisis? What financial crisis? Everything's just fffffiiiiiinnnnnneeee.....)

    ReplyDelete
  93. Brian -
    Thank you for your continued support and understanding while I rant. You tend to bring my thoughts to a more succinct point of clarity than I ever could.
    ----------------
    Well, you're welcome, but it's not like it's an effort to understand you. You sound perfectly sane to me. I think it's a matter of you being immersed for so long in a situation where you were the sole dissenting voice (of reason, IMHO) and it's very hard to see that you're not the crazy one in that scenerio.

    It's not you; it's them. Get used to it.

    ReplyDelete
  94. I have pride. Which is why I am so stubborn all the time. However, like TJ I have no problem changing my viewpoint. ONLY if you can give me enough evidence to show me otherwise.

    The problem with most people is that no matter how much evidence you present them with, they will never change their minds.

    I used to point out contradictions in the bible to my dad. No matter what, they were wrong. There is no arguing with the righteous.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I never noticed the tetragrammatal man until now. Kind of gives new meaning to the notion of Man being made in the image of God (or in the name (Hashem) of God).

    ReplyDelete
  96. Yeah, I like the tetragrammaton man. It's not mine of course. Fairly old. I forget who thought of it.

    Hashem, yes, as in ba'al hashem I think. Masters of the name.

    Have you ever heard of the pentagrammaton? A christian kabbalist thought of it. Pico de Mirandola I think. The letter Shin (spirit) is placed in the center of the tetragrammaton; placing "spirit" in the center of the name of "god" and it's then pronounced "Jeheshua." You might have heard of that guy too. Jesus. So Yaveh plus shin equals Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
  97. There is no arguing with the righteous.
    ----------------
    None whatsoever.

    Beliefs are written in stone. No editing allowed. Thats why I prefer thoughts.

    Beliefs are bad for ya.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Of course I totally, completely and absolutely disagree with you on the point, your 'big mind' theory.

    Convince me!

    Convince me in terms of the fact that the human brain it built to recognise patterns really really well.

    Imagine what a spider is thinking in it's tiny pin-point of a brain. I think that we could all agree that it's probably not very concious, it's brain still recognizes patterns extremely well though.

    If you break it's web it doesn't run out and try to eat you, and I think that we can agree that it is not thinking, "Brian is too big to eat!"

    It seems that you and I disagree on the point that our HUGE SQUARED(compared to the size of a bug's)brain could try to 'jam patterns down our throats'(as it were) in it's 'spare time'.

    Astrology books, witchcraft books etc. will tell you that, after all the mumbo-jumbo, hocus pocus it is really up to the 'practitioner' to find patterns that match his/her expectations.

    Religion does the exact same thing. You pray(mumbo-jumbo), you go to church(ritual = hocus pocus) then you try to find the pattern.

    It seems to me that you have, with the 'big mind' skipped the mumbo jumbo(although you kind of acknowledge that it works for some here in these comments), skipped the hocus pocus(same thing) and go straight to pattern recognition.

    I am not trying to say something like, "You're just as bad as them!", here.

    I'm just asking you if you can recognise THAT pattern that I see.

    I just come to a different conclusion, that's all. :0)

    ReplyDelete
  99. Pboy, I agree that it could be just that. That's why I tend to call it "my speculation" as opposed to "my theory." I've had so many synchronicities, as I've said, that to me it seems to be too significant to just be a random bell curve and I'm spotting the patterns. But I'm willing to consider that. Seriously. I'm "on hold" with my speculations until science does more work that sheds light on them. I mean, I still do my "thought exeriments" of course, but in my head I know that it could all be me, just seeingmore than I used to. So I can't tell you you're wrong, Pboy. You may well be correct in this. It's just that I've seen too many weird things to dismiss it all as mere councidences. Like the parrot thing. That was incredibly weird. I've had too many like that one. Huge councidences. And never happened before I was about 35. It all started then, with a lucid dream. So why should the dream cause me to see more coincidences? No, it's too strange for that. Or so I think. (Not believe)

    ReplyDelete
  100. I'm just asking you if you can recognise THAT pattern that I see.
    -----------------------
    I do, but I also see another one that might be true, and right now there's no real way to tell. I'm as cynical as you are about my coincidences and the rest. It's just that, even so, I can't eliminate the possibility that they mean something. Do I want them to? Of course. But I don't let that get in the way of analysing them, since I'm guarding against just that. The "finagle factor" I believe it's called, when an experimenter imposes their expectations on an experiment and unconsciously skews it. I like to think I'm pretty sane as I investigate this insane matter.

    ReplyDelete
  101. I dreamt the numbers for the 6/49 lottery a long time ago.

    Three of the numbers came up!

    ReplyDelete
  102. My coincidences all revolve around events that I was thinking about with emotion. Joking loudly, laughing, that sort of thing. I've had so many that I can look back and see the pattern of the coincidences. They are ALWAYS relating to something that I was recently emotional about. Perhaps it's emotion that causes the conscious mind to bridge the gap, or perhaps I'm completely bonkers. I'm willing to wait and see rather than calling myself bonkers right now. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  103. Pboy, you've dreamt the lottery incorrectly, but have you ever had synchronicities like say my parrot thing or the Candace Pert/Smithsonian one? Or the tiramisu, or the skunk on TV or my aikido licence plate one? I mean, these are really crazy!

    ReplyDelete
  104. I've noticed the co-incidences that stop and make you think, "Wow!"

    Used to get them all the time. I'd be talking away, and say an unusual word, let's say, "Prestidigitation" and the voice on the T.V. in the background would say, what else, "Prestidigitation".

    ReplyDelete
  105. I told that one about my walking in the driving rain after arguing with my wife.

    In the middle of town I stopped under the awning of 'The Smokestack'(cigarette store), natural thing to do.

    Looked in the window and I laughed when I saw the two books on display..

    Steven King's "Misery" and his book "It".

    My initials are I.T.

    ReplyDelete
  106. So if you look for meaning you'll find it? It could be that simple.

    Or perhaps you looked at that bookstore window with something on your emotional mind and the window responded to it... As long as nobody else notices, as long as it's obscure enough to be beneath general notice, it's within the rules you know. :-) And it's not as if the window had your whole name and social security number displayed in it. That would have been too obvious to others, so it's "against the rules." Same for winning the lottery. In order to do that by positive thinking alone you have to (theoretically) overcome the expectations of all the people that know about the lottery and how slender the chances of winning are. You have to be capable of expecting to win and believing it in the face of all that, as well. Almost impossible. And yet, some wiccan won the lottery last year by doing a spell, you know... It made all the news. Again, not that I'm BUYING this... But I duly note it in my calculations. :-)

    Ahh, who knows? It's ALL speculation if you really look at it. Hell, I could be a Brain in Vat, no? (Some days I sure feel like one...)

    ReplyDelete
  107. I think one of the main "draws" of my Big Brain speculations to me is how neatly it explains everything. And I mean, everything. It's all so tidy and neat. And in beauty there is truth, no? Is the universe infinite? It's a mind, so it's as infinite as thought... Is time finite or is there no end to it? It's a mind, so it's whatever we think it is. Is an electron a particle or a wave? It's both and that's fine, in a mind. Entanglement of partices? Sure, makes total sense, in a mind. Even paranormal things are allowed, as long as others can't prove them, since that would destroy the main paradigm of a scientific universe. Against the rules of the mind. So if a paranormal event occurs, as soon as someone tries to prove it false, they WILL. Even if it did occur. Since the force behind the second person is "with the flow" and the first person that noticed the paranormal event is going "against the flow" of the mind's main narrative.

    And if it's all a mind, then there's really no difference between ME and YOU, except for us THINKING that we're different individuals, and being wrong about that.

    Hey, even if it's false I like where it leads.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Can you imagine how often these things happened when our ancestors were living the 'simple life'!

    A few hunters sitting around the fire and someone mentions a bear, is telling a story about a bear, and "Yikes!", a fuckin' bear shows up!

    Or at the time of the Bible being written, some scholar, studying away, copying away, gets a midlife crisis and goes into the desert.

    He perhaps eats whatever GOD provides, some questionable mushrooms, some tainted meat, maybe he is down to that last piece of ergot infested bread.

    Wow! He gets a 'vision' of why the world is sucking for everyone(the world is ALWAYS sucking for everyone), goes back and screams at everyone, "I had a vision from GOD!"

    ReplyDelete
  109. " Since the force behind the second person is "with the flow" and the first person that noticed the paranormal event is going "against the flow" of the mind's main narrative."

    AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

    "We're older now and still running.. against the wind!"

    ReplyDelete
  110. See, if it's all belief, and we're all ONE, as necessarily we have to be in a mind, then if you are determined to win the lottery, you have to remember that you're not just you, you're also all the other people that "know" that you just can't win the lottery that way. You ARE the mind, in a very real way. So their doubt, is your doubt, at the deep subconscious level of course. But if you flash on the idea that you might see something familiar in a window, and then you do, and it's pretty vague but you get it, then you're not going against all the doubt in the world, since it's not significant to the majority of people. Small changes below the level of general notice, are permissable. Larger changes are possible, but only with an incredible level of conviction, and then never certainly. It more skews the odds in your favor, which is still no guarantee that the change will manifest. (Again, this is not my firm belief, but I do see it as possible where most people do not)

    ReplyDelete
  111. "But if you flash on the idea that you might see something familiar in a window..."

    But that's not how that worked.

    It was about 3 or 4 in the morning, I was soaking wet, I was on my way to camp out in my parent's basement.

    I wasn't thinking that I was going to see 'something' in the window of that store, in fact only I took a break from the driving rain.

    Hey, I remember another time I spent out in the rain, I was walking aimlessly having spent the night walking around.

    Lack of sleep makes these things happen!

    I saw a rainbow which seemed to end at the local 'breakfast club'(a bar which opens in the morning)...

    .. I went there and my wife was there.

    LMAO, you probably think that I'm just making this up.

    ReplyDelete
  112. Can you imagine how often these things happened when our ancestors were living the 'simple life'!
    -------------------
    Well, I see your real point, but it does raise the point, if my speculations are true, of many more things being possible in the distant past since we hadn't devised rules that prohibited them from happening yet. People didn't "know" that they were impossible yet. So they might not have been. It would have meant that magic worked a lot more often and with more predictability of result, I think. A confusing world. Perhapps we "evolved" the ability to shut it all out somehow so as to fix reality into a more predictable and hence more survivable mode. By "not seeing" the paranormal anymore perhaps, by willing it away out of dread perhaps. Except for a very few atavisms among us who are still "psychic." The rise of the rational mind might have been merely to cope with a shifting and undefinable reality. Being able to "fix" an unpredictable reality into predictability would be a huge survival plus factor, no?

    Hey, if it's all a mind, then we made it. By our expectations of it. And when I say "we" I do NOT mean man. I mean ALL LIFE made this place. When it was all unicellular, the universe didn't have to be infinite or even have texture beyond what the protocaryotes could discern about their environment with their practically nonexistent senses. As life sensed more, more was created out of nothing for us to sense. And as we developed our rational minds, we needed the universe to make sense, so it started to. And still does, mostly, except when we're not looking. :-)

    Just mentally stringing thoughts together here... Free-asociating. It's fun, but not necessarily right or anything.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Oh, when I said "floashed" I really meant it. Not as you took it, the common interpretation. I meant, that AS YOU LOOKED, before you FOCUSED ON IT, your emotional impressions caused you to FLASH on the thought that you were about to see SOMETHING. As in, a microsecond impression that was too short for you to remember it. A feeling. A very brief one is all that's necessary for reality to accomodate you.

    Again, it's all speculation of course. I'm guessing. Playing devil's advocate for my own admittedly untenable position.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Ah, yes and what about the parallel between this ancient age of magic, of all things being possible and the 'ancient age' of your childhood, when all things might have been possible?

    ReplyDelete
  115. Hey, I see the parallel, but that's not what I was really talking about. That's popular lore stuff. Merlin.

    I know that it sounds risible. I just apparently have a really open mind about this, due to my own experiences, admittedly very subjective. After all, I didn't come to this view and then start having synchronicities. I started having synchronicities and then that led me eventually to this view. It took a long time.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Yes, I see, you took a long time to get where you're at.

    You are seeing 'long term' patterns in your pattern finder(brain).

    Interesting, go on..

    ReplyDelete
  117. .. or .. or..

    .. could it be that you somehow 'knew' that I disagreed, "Somehow!" (ominous music)

    ReplyDelete
  118. I'm seeing patterns that shouldn't be there with my pattern finder. Maybe they're always there, but they don't conform to statistics or the bell curve, so if I'm only seeing them because my pattern recognition is wider and more lateral than it used to be, so what? They're still too improbable to be mere coincidence. At least they are to me. (Of course, I had to add that)
    And my synchronicities are real, and visible to others. And they tend to freak people out because they're so strange. The coincidences themselves require no special perceptual ability to see. They're in your face, as it were.

    ReplyDelete
  119. I thought that the 'rainbow' incident, where it 'pointed' to the bar where my wife was sitting.

    Talk about a story to tell my wife, who was sitting at the bar, that a freeking RAINBOW brought me there!!!

    ReplyDelete
  120. "They're still too improbable to be mere coincidence."

    Sure, they are, in fact,(drum-roll) fantastic co-incidences!!!

    ReplyDelete
  121. Try to imagine the number of fantastic co-incidences that a dedicated soap-opera watcher goes through!

    It MUST simply boggle their minds!

    ReplyDelete
  122. Pboy, perhaps you're right. I'm willing to consider it. No way to really tell though.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Picture the tossing of a coin. There are two possibilities.

    Heads.

    Tails.

    If a billion people tossed coins and reported their findings, in real life though, with a standard issue quarter, it is possible that some would report that their quarter landed on it's edge!

    More likely some quarters would fall down cracks and be stuck on their edge for 'eternity'.

    It is possible to imagine many different options for a tossed coin.

    Dog caught it in mid-air and swallowed it.

    Lightning vaporized it in mid-air.

    These synchronicities of yours are your observations that the odds of them happening are staggeringly small.

    Religion and anti-religion use this exact same thing to try to make their points.

    "What are the odds of life on Earth?"

    Well, it's one to one, we KNOW that, but it is easy to imagine that, "Hey! We're asking you to imagine how many possible ways the universe could exist with NO life!"

    Something that jogs your attention into thinking that there is a 'mystery' pattern is bound to happen if you think about it.

    ReplyDelete
  124. I take your point, pboy. I honestly do.

    Still, it's not as if I had one coincidence. In some case i have two and they even relate to each other. And some are triple coincidences. But I do get your point, and I consider that I am completely misleading myself. That's why I try not to go off the end of the earth with it, and just talk about it to people to see what they say. Your input has been of value. I trust your ability to see the world, so I can hardly ignore what you say to me.

    Still, it's fun to talk about and theorize and free-associate ideas like this.

    Hey, I always go back to the Candace Pert one. I saw her in a movie, What the Bleep, which is about this very type of reality. Then I see her in a randomly selected magazine in the hospital next day, only the magazine is sixteen years old. So it's a coincidence that I saw her twice like that, more of one in that the magazine was so old, and the topper is that the first one was in a movie about this very sort of thing. Pretty hard to just toss away as a coincidence with no meaning whatsoever. Hell, I wouldn't have been watching that movie if I wasn't curious due to my coincidences in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  125. And it was the first magazine that I picked up among at least twenty, and one of several Smithsomians that I could have chosen.

    I love the parrot one too. I'm talking about that very breed of parrot, and it appears on the shoulder of like the secretary of energy on cable news, msnbc, on the television behind me where I couldn't see it but my wife and son could, because someone put it on his shoulder as an inside joke. Not as severe as the Candace Pert one, but really flashy. This type happens to me a lot. A TV coincidence. Like when I was talking on the DD blog with someone and Adam naming the animals came up. I remember thinking "Gee, I remember that from Sunday school, but you hardly ever hear about it" and later on that night I'm watching Robot Chicken and they have a sketch on Adam naming the animals. Or the time a few years back when I'm talking about someone and I called them a skunk and at that precise moment a skunk appears on the TV behind me where she could see it but again I could not. TV related ones happen with the most frequency. Often it's as minor (and I admit dismissable) as me saying an unusual word and the person on the TV says it simultaneously. Not words like "The" but words like "Virgin." I get these all the time. Nightly at least.

    Oh, and of course I've told you about the aikido one, where I'm talking about sikido to a woman because it happened to be on TV (with emotion since I like sikido) and twenty minutes later I'm driving home, still in massachusetts, and I see a RI plcence plate in front of me that reads "aikido."

    So I guess when I look at these things, they just seem to have meaning. Maybe it's me. Hell, it could well be.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Well well. Today was a big day in politics. McCain had to tell his crowd that Obama is a good family man and that as a president he wouldn't be someone to be afraid of. (pinch me)

    And when he did it, his own crowd booed him. Booed him for the first honorable thing he's done in months.

    Oh, and the news is just breaking. Sarah Palin ABUSED her authority as a governor.

    I mean, is it Christmas or something? I'm stunned here. Wow.

    ReplyDelete
  127. p-boy

    "I dreamt the numbers for the 6/49 lottery a long time ago.

    Three of the numbers came up!"

    ...................

    My uncle won $50,00o on the lottery. I asked him what was his secret. He told me " well, mac, I dreamed about the number 8 for three nights in a row....SO I figured three times eight is 26< SO I played 326...threee for the number of nights and 26 for 3x8 ."

    I said "You idiot 3x8 is 24, !"


    He said well 26 won !

    ReplyDelete
  128. Distinguishing coincidence from causality is not a human strong suit. Cognitive biases such as confirmation and hindsight biasing often result in people assigning unwarranted values to simple coincidence in retrospect. As time goes on and direct memories fade, greater emphasis is placed on constructed heuristics based upon a person's filtered recollections which seem very real to the individual. These constructs also tend to affect future perceptions further perpetuating the original bias.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Sounds good Pliny, but have you read my coincidences? How about the Candace Pert one? Even ONE like that is sobering, no?

    ReplyDelete
  130. I think that 'cold reading' mediums base the truth of their experiences on the 'odd's' of co-incidences.

    Their entire 'currency' is the percieved odds that the medium couldn't possibly just 'make up a story that fits' over and over.

    But the medium, denying cold reading to himself, uses the exact same method of an admitted cold reader, moves from the vague to the particular with the particulars added BY THE ViCTIM him/herself.

    In a church in the heart of England there is BOUND to be someone who knows a person who has a name beginning with the letter 'C', perhaps Charles.

    The entire 'setting' negates the 'totally co-incidental' because after all the medium is there purposefully, the audience are expecting him to 'guess' at names or letters.

    I was explaing this to my niece(who thinks that she's a witch) and I was astounded by how easily I freaked her out.

    I spun the wheel of the alphabet in my head and settled on "K". Did she have a friend or aquaintance?

    Shit yea!

    Was there something strange going on?

    Shit yea!

    My niece hung up on me, imagining that I am a better witch than her.

    I'm left sitting there with a dead phone in my hand thinking, "But I was trying to show you how 'bullshit' it all was!"

    ReplyDelete
  131. (Parody of a commercial I'm fed up hearing)

    "Psychic putty, get phychic putty!

    I'm Milly Dayz and I use Psychic putty all the time!

    Look, stick some to a wall and squeeze a couple of brackets on to make a shelf!

    Psychic putty can take the weight of all the books you want.

    When you want to move just lever the brackets to the side and they'll pop right off.

    Psychic putty, it can read your mind!

    ReplyDelete
  132. Brian, Pboy,

    Good exchange. The fly in the ointment to all speculation about coincidence, is that you're discussing something that would be a characteristic of x. I think that, to put it into philosophical categories, x would be a primary characteristic and coincidence would be a secondary. More to the point, a secondary characteristic only pertaining to x.

    The fundamental "scientific" view of this is not complete. It looks at whatever is investigated only from the discipline that the phenomena is ascribed to. This practice makes sense only to a point. If we don't support interdisciplinary communication this poly-headed hydra will, and has, hinder the search for answers to foundational questions.

    Because we can go so far without interdisciplinary communication and hypothesizing we feel we can leave it unattended. The search for a universal theory of everything is logical and I believe, correct, but it starts with the mundane.

    I assert that coincidence does exist as a secondary characteristic of x but I subscribe to it no purpose. Regardless, it would be a lot easier to explain it if the different disciplines were integrated.

    Science as a community is going to have to go absurd in order for us to really move 'forward.' Example: A physicists take on bowel movements. I don't mean this should be the focus, but using that kind of mindset as an impetus. What seems relevant to only one discipline needs to be seen in the light of the others if possible.

    Since our world is integrated, why aren't we?

    ReplyDelete
  133. THIS JUST IN:

    "DAVENPORT, Iowa (CNN) – A minister delivering the invocation at John McCain’s rally in Davenport, Iowa Saturday told the crowd non-Christian religions around the world were praying for Barack Obama to win the U.S. presidential election.

    “There are millions of people around this world praying to their god—whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah—that his opponent wins, for a variety of reasons. And Lord, I pray that you will guard your own reputation, because they’re going to think that their God is bigger than you, if that happens,” said Arnold Conrad, the former pastor of Grace Evangelical Free Church in Davenport."
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/11/speaker-at-mccain-rally-says-non-christians-want-an-obama-win/

    Nice. First pastors telling their flocks how to vote and now this. They don't even know HOW to be unpolitical. It's impossible for them not to try to meddle. After all, they see it as "We're the good guys, so we have to win, at all costs..."

    And this "Our God's bigger than your God" crap is so infantile and repulsive.

    ReplyDelete
  134. I said "You idiot 3x8 is 24, !"

    It's interesting that the thing that makes it so memorable is that your uncle couldn't multiply by three! LOL

    oneblood...

    I guess, as we travel through 'the journey' of our individual lives, we read or write something like this...

    "..that you're discussing something that would be a characteristic of x. I think that, to put it into philosophical categories, x would be a primary characteristic and coincidence would be a secondary. More to the point, a secondary characteristic only pertaining to x."..

    ... and wonder about it.

    Hmmmm.

    Okay, that's enough wondering for now.

    I think that if there were any science or philosophy to this we'd have noticed it already.

    Storytellers, writers, movie-makers have been usining co-incidence, synchronicity etc. as plot devices forever.

    "Our hero" has no weapons, it's a fist fight, suddenly and sometimes for no apparent reason, it turns into a gunfight!

    Things like this usually happen in 'fast-action' where no-one is analyzing, "Hey, suddenly everyone has guns?? That's not very likely!"

    Or 'deus-ex-machina', the appropriate, and only weapon that can 'save the day' is 'just there', WOW!(usually provided by the 'bad guys')

    Common one:- Bad guy has the good guy 'cold', then talks long enough for the 'cavalry' to show up.

    The 'everything working out' type of co-incidence surely must happen to everyone at some times in their lives.

    Then I noticed that some of mine were more 'ironic' co-incidences.

    But it is just a co-incidence that we're all on this planet at this time! Oops, somebody died!

    ReplyDelete
  135. Yea, Brian..

    I guess they can't come right out and say that Obama is Satanic or even that Americans voting for Obama is Satanic, but they CAN say that foreigners with their foreign gods are SATANIC!

    You are left 'joining the dots' if you wish, with, of course complete deniablity.

    'Join the dots' logic like that is kind of 'adversarial' though isn't it?

    And 'who' is the great spiritual 'adversary'?

    Satan!

    He(the pastor or whatever)said it in such a way that the, "I leave it to you to join the dots if you wish!"

    Well, lets join the dots and boil it down to it essence.

    The pastor is saying that he HATES Obama and you should too!

    ReplyDelete
  136. The Discovery Channel 'Boom-de-ya-da' song...

    "I love the mountains -I love the clear blue sky -I love big bridges -I love when great whites fly -I love the whole world -and all its sights and sounds -boomdiada(x4) -I love the oceans -I love real dirty things -I love to go fast -I love egyptian kings -I love the whole world -and all its craziness -boomdiada(x4) -I love tornadoes -I love arachnids -I love hot magma -I love the giant squids -I love the whole world -it's such a brilliant place! -boomdiada(to the end)

    ... except Christo-republicans.

    ReplyDelete
  137. "... and wonder about it.

    Hmmmm.

    Okay, that's enough wondering for now."

    -----------------------------------

    Npboy,

    Whenever you insult an idea of mine, I laugh. Stinker. :-)

    -Oneblood

    ReplyDelete
  138. "I love when great whites fly"

    ????????

    You love good drugs, apparently.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Good one, oneblood, LOL..

    I really wasn't trying to insult you.

    Actually that stuff about movie plots with synchronicities, co-incidences and deux-ex-machina was my best attempt to answer you.

    Brian.. guess you have to see the video to 'get' that one.

    it is a great white shark jumping out of the ocean to eat an albatross or like that.

    Hey, I just copy/pasted the lyrics.

    ReplyDelete
  140. I bet teh albatross didn't love it when great whites fly...

    ReplyDelete
  141. I think that that is called natural selection.

    ReplyDelete
  142. Whenever I used to drop acid, I always could see with absolute clarity the Solution To Everything. But inevitably, the drugs wore off and I was back on the ground again...

    ReplyDelete
  143. If I could remember what it was when I wasn't tripping, I would've wrote it down, don'tcha think?

    ReplyDelete