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: Lane3 who wrote (4169)	3/22/2002 10:29:59 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

If you honestly cannot get any further in your analysis, perhaps it is acceptable to characterize belief in those terms. I would, though, question the use of such loaded terms. For example, using the term "superstitious" is practically meaningless if all it means is that one believes in the operation of spiritual powers. It has no explanatory power, but is merely circular, albeit with a negative connotation. They are superstitious because they believe in the operation of spiritual powers? Not a serious analysis. Similarly, with neediness--- Absent constraint, one believes what one finds congenial. That is true of everyone. As a particular analysis of religious belief, it is pretty useless. Again, the sole intent seems to be to supply a negative connotation. Finally, with blind acceptance: Acceptance can only be "blind" if it is obvious to the "sighted" that the proposition is incredible. I consider it rare that one is in a position to make that assertion, and generally arrogant, even if one is sure of one's position. Thus, again, it seems to me to add little, if anything, to a discussion.

To: Lane3 who wrote (4169)	3/22/2002 12:55:29 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

" I was still left with only three potential explanations for belief: superstition, neediness, or blind acceptance." This statement lacks a perceptual balance. Without going to an opposite extreme I would like to offer three comparable terms. superstition vs an explanation of phenomena that is not completely founded in applied physics. neediness vs motivation blind acceptance vs faith based acceptance based on moral promise rather than material evidence. As I mentioned previously one does not conclude from the fact that communication can go badly that communication is bad. Lazy or dependant people can opt for superstition rather than explore a deeper understanding of phenomena. People are need based. We seek food to satisfy hunger. Why would we not seek understanding of our creation to satisfy the need know purpose in life. People can accept authority without question and run the risk of being bound to a corrupt authority. However, acceptance that there is a higher order is far from blind, which is why believing involves responsibility and commitment to principle.