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 Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: briskit who wrote (5287)	3/8/2003 7:19:07 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7720

It reminds me of the old "God is a crutch" argument, i.e. for the weak and needy. When I answered your question, I went beyond a simple "yes" response to try to obviate your making that inference. I understand that there is some sensitivity on that point. I pointed out how my premise applied to those who were religious but not "weak and needy" because I recognize how my premise might be perceived as an generic put-down. It isn't. I recognize that there are many people who aren't "weak and needy" who "feel the constant presence of God in their lives, who...fill their days with rituals and prayers and garments that bring them into contact with the divine, and who...believe that God's will should shape their public lives," which was the exact language used in the article. I explain them in terms of acculturation to feel that presence. I do not think that competent nonbelievers would turn to religion as adults simply because, having gotten along fine without it, they have no "need" to go looking for what religion offers. Simple inertia. If they go looking for it, they have, by definition, a need, which is not the same thing as being "needy" or, to use my word, a "wretch," but does indicate something missing from their innards for which they have a "need." The competents who are acculturated to religion at an early age have simply had that imprinted on their world view and they're comfortable with that. Likewise, they have no need to change and inertia rules. That they continue on the course set for them does not make them "needy," merely habituated. Many competents, having been raised with religion, reject it during the maturation process. That does not mean, however, that those who continue in their comfort zones are any less competent. Religious and non-religious world views can each be efficacious. For competents, it's a question of what one is used to, what resonates. Religious and non-religious world views can each be efficacious for competents. I don't make negative judgments about competents who are religious or non-religious as long as they are tolerant of the other camp. And, of course, not obsessive about their rituals, which is a symptom of mental illness, not competence. I admit to thinking less of wretches than of competents regardless of religious stripe. And I am aghast at those who have the dehumanizing notion that there is glory in being a wretch.

To: briskit who wrote (5287)	3/8/2003 6:16:28 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7720

Self-sufficient (and as the article suggests, therefore modern, internally superior individuals) would never arrive at theistic conclusions because they have no interior weakness driving them with a need of theism. Yep. Non-self sufficient and inferior individuals are the believers, like Einstein, Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt, weak, inferior individuals like that. Me, I don't mind being in that company. But I can see how others would.