Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (922)	3/3/2002 10:55:08 AM
From: Poet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

How very interesting, an article from a Christian (with a capital C) site called (of all things!)called Leadership U. Here is part of their "About Us" page: Our Purpose The purpose of Leadership U. is to equip students, faculty and other leaders to minister effectively in the modern world. We are building a growing community of Christians involved in reaching the world. We are helping Christians think and apply a biblical worldview to the issues in modern society. Since its inception in August 1995, Leadership U. has seen steady growth. Our database has grown to more than 6,600 outstanding resources. LU receives nearly three million hits per month representing 300,000 visitors. However, we need your help. And even more amazing is that the author, the venerable "Professor"(note the lack of degrees following his name) P. Vitz appears to have spent a great deal of research effort in "proving" Freud's attraction to Christianity. Here are a few other of the "Professor's" articles, all of which focus on the Jewish Sigmund Freud's "Christian unconscious". Despicable. It is unclear whether "Professor" Vitz ever studied Freudian theory (or graduated from high school, for that matter), but I can tell you his understanding of the function of the Oedipus complex is laughable. Vitz, P.C. (1983). Sigmund Freud's attraction to Christianity: Biographical evidence. Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, 6, 73-183. Vitz, P.C. (1986). Sigmund Freud's Christian unconscious. New York: Guilford, in press. Vitz, P.C. & Gartner, J. (1984a). Christianity and psychoanalysis, part 1: Jesus as the anti-Oedipus. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 12, 4-14. Vitz, P.C., & Gartner, J. (1984b). Christianity and psychoanalysis, part 2: Jesus the transformer of the super-ego. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 12, 82-89.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (922)	3/3/2002 11:08:15 AM
From: Poet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Wise words we should all ponder: I think somebody should come up with a way to breed a very large shrimp.That way, you could ride him, then, after you camped at night, you could eat him. How about it, science? Jack Handey

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (922)	3/3/2002 11:10:56 AM
From: Poet	Respond to of 21057

More penetrating insights into the universe, from the great theologian and philosopher, "Professor" Jack Handey: To me, truth is not some vague, foggy notion. Truth is real. And, at the same time, unreal. Fiction and fact and everything in between, plus some things I can't remember, all rolled into one big "thing." This is truth, to me.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (922)	3/3/2002 1:33:10 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

That is high-comedy psychobabble! I love it, and no less because its moronic author's humor was unintentional! I wish I didn't have to work today, I would do one for oh just so many fantastical, childish, wish-fulfilling religious beliefs! Part of the comedy is harnessing modern language to shore up primitive belief, of course. But the ironies inherent in diagnosing non-regression to childhood states of abject adoration of an omnipotent fatherfigure as "neurotic" are a scream. Jack Handey actually is the author of that Deep Thought, right? If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." Jack Handey

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (922)	3/3/2002 3:25:14 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Religion as a form of neurosis.... You guys believe in the Big Voodoo Guy In The Sky and we're neurotic? Religion is for people who can't live without a Big Daddy tell them what to do. Theoretically, when we reach adulthood, we become capable of thinking for ourselves and reaching our own conclusions. It does seem, though, that some people can't or won't. And in addition to the carrot, there's the stick: Do it my way or burn forever. Freud? You seriously cite Freud?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (922)	3/4/2002 8:41:16 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Well, let's start with this staggering quote you somehow missed. First, I assume that the major barriers to belief in God are not rational but-in a general sense- can be called psychological. Talk about begging the question... ROFL. yes, I'll concede that if you ignore all the rational arguments against accepting the existence of deity X (as transcribed by assorted primitive agents of superstition 2-4000 years ago), you're left with the ones involving the mind. I am quite convinced that for every person strongly swayed by rational argument there are many, many more affected by nonrational psychological factors. Yep... these are the ones who can be seen at worship every week. my reasons for becoming and for remaining an atheist-skeptic from about age 18 to 38 were superficial, irrational, and largely without intellectual or moral integrity. Furthermore, I am convinced that my motives were, and still are, commonplace today among intellectuals, especially social scientists. Paraphrased... I was a shallow fool but believe I have changed, so now those agreeing with my former stance must be wrong. Jeez. Because this guy lacks intellectual rigour, wisdom or insight he believes that no one else has them? Or is he just desperate for others to justify his choice, in the way that pyramid salespeople are desperate to find other suckers to justify their own gullibility? Then a succession of ad hominem 'deductions', with finally the bizarre and patronising conclusion: However easy it may be to state the hypothesis of the "defective father," we must not forget the difficulty, the pain, and complexity that lie behind each individual case. And for those whose atheism has been conditioned by a father who rejected, who denied, who hated, who manipulated, or who physically or sexually abused them, there must be understanding and compassion. Well, I suppose there probably are some atheists who have had an imperfect father. And as many Xtians who have suffered similarly. And some of the former may well blame an imaginary being, and go into denial. OTOH, what of the latter who invent an ideal father to replace the one they didn't have? Personally, I'd say this is a far better argument - which child has not dreamt and hoped for a perfect world? and we know how hard it can be to shed all childish wishes as we mature... Bu I suppose if you exclude the rational, this is what you get.