cuchulain

Does the human soul exist?

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

What you call a hard skeptic is what I call a true believer.  Or a true disbeliever.   Same difference.  Yes.  They can be irritating.  Sometimes, they stink of piety.  

 

:D   

 

 

What's so bad about piety?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LeopardBoy said:

 

What's so bad about piety?

 

 

It was a context specific sarcasm.  The piety of the true disbeliever.  That is, the people who claim to be champions of reason and logic.  The people who clamp down on perceived "error" like a bulldog.   That piety.  

 

:mellow:

 

 

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

It was a context specific sarcasm.  The piety of the true disbeliever.  That is, the people who claim to be champions of reason and logic.  The people who clamp down on perceived "error" like a bulldog.   That piety.  

 

:mellow:

 

 

Ah, I see.  I'm used to piety in the context of the Greek term eusebia, the customary acts of worship given to the gods, or giving the gods what is due to them.  Sometimes what is due to them is nothing, depending on the situation.  Blind faith and self-righteousness doesn't really come into play, as eusebia in the Classical usage of the word is more about religious actions and behavior than faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LeopardBoy said:

 

Ah, I see.  I'm used to piety in the context of the Greek term eusebia, the customary acts of worship given to the gods, or giving the gods what is due to them.  Sometimes what is due to them is nothing, depending on the situation.  Blind faith and self-righteousness doesn't really come into play, as eusebia in the Classical usage of the word is more about religious actions and behavior than faith.

 

Self righteousness is about what I had in mind.  I make it a point to keep the same face where ever I go.  I left some Skeptic groups -- big S -- because I said Therapeutic Touch.  I left some Atheist groups because I said Agnostic.  You must encounter that kind of crap all the time.  The people who know the least about something, are the loudest in denouncing it. How smug in their ignorance.  This is what I had in mind when I said that they stink of piety.  Nothing at all the way you mean it.  It's not always the ignorant.   Sometimes, it's the intellectuals who really should know better.

 

In various videos, Sam Harris talks about how he used to use the Greek gods as examples.  He used to say that nobody takes Zeus and Poseidon seriously any more.  Then he started getting hate mail from the people who still follow the old gods.  He was shocked.  

 

It is amazing how such smart people can be so stupid about some things.  I feel a rant coming on.  I'll stop now.  

 

 

 

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Self righteousness is about what I had in mind.  I make it a point to keep the same face where ever I go.  I left some Skeptic groups -- big S -- because I said Therapeutic Touch.  I left some Atheist groups because I said Agnostic.  You must encounter that kind of crap all the time.  The people who know the least about something, are the loudest in denouncing it. How smug in their ignorance.  This is what I had in mind when I said that they stink of piety.  Nothing at all the way you mean it.  It's not always the ignorant.   Sometimes, it's the intellectuals who really should know better.

 

In various videos, Sam Harris talks about how he used to use the Greek gods as examples.  He used to say that nobody takes Zeus and Poseidon seriously any more.  Then he started getting hate mail from the people who still follow the old gods.  He was shocked.  

 

It is amazing how such smart people can be so stupid about some things.  I feel a rant coming on.  I'll stop now.  

 

 

Our common culture might not take Zeus and Poseidon seriously, but our language still uses colorful phrases alluding to the personification of ideals or natural phenomena.  Their influence is still alive, even if hidden behind terms like Lady Luck (Tykhe/Fortuna) or Mother Earth (Gaia).  In America particularly we speak of Liberty in almost religious terms, and even have a colossal cult statue of her image.  Modern sailors and seamen still give personification to the sea and storm, and we give hurricanes personal names.  Justice is spoken of as blind, and revered in our courts, complete with ritual actions in her honor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, LeopardBoy said:

 

Our common culture might not take Zeus and Poseidon seriously, but our language still uses colorful phrases alluding to the personification of ideals or natural phenomena.  Their influence is still alive, even if hidden behind terms like Lady Luck (Tykhe/Fortuna) or Mother Earth (Gaia).  In America particularly we speak of Liberty in almost religious terms, and even have a colossal cult statue of her image.  Modern sailors and seamen still give personification to the sea and storm, and we give hurricanes personal names.  Justice is spoken of as blind, and revered in our courts, complete with ritual actions in her honor.

 

 

Of course.  While we are at it:

 

 Old Man Winter -- even if that venerable deity is used to sell snow tires.  

 

Jack Frost, a minor weather deity.  

 

At Valentine's day, Cupid is Cupid.  Not even thinly disguised.  Of course, we forget about the lead tipped arrows.  

 

Father Time.  Always a man.  Never a woman.  

 

At New Year's Eve, we have all seen the old year as an old man, being replaced by Baby New Year.

 

Death rides a pale horse and carries a syth.  

 

Then again, what do people say when shooting craps?  "C'mon Seven.  Daddy needs a new pair of shoes!"  After all, nobody understands the need for new footwear, like Hermes, Messenger of the gods.  We know about his winged sandals.  Messengers have sore feet.  

 

The Fates.  Even Nat King Cole sang -- "if the Fates allow" -- at Christmas time.  

 

Perry White -- Clark Kent's editor at the Daily Planet, was famous for yelling -- By Jove!

 

I could almost suspect that Monotheism had not won out.     :D 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2017 at 8:39 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

I could almost suspect that Monotheism had not won out.     :D 

 

 

In some ways, such as in those examples, polytheism does still have an influence over our culture.  But monotheism's grasp on the word "god" itself, even in the context of polytheistic deities, would make most people hesitant to even consider using the term for these myriad personifications that continue to exist in our language.

 

When I use the word Zeus, most people would think of a bearded man in the sky hurling lightning, an artistic expression that did indeed exist in ancient times.  But they think that image is the beginning and the end of the ancient understanding of Zeus.  A superhuman figure, to use the dictionary definition of the gods of polytheism.  That is the influence of monotheism, trapping our view of polytheistic gods in literal interpetations of myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LeopardBoy said:

 

In some ways, such as in those examples, polytheism does still have an influence over our culture.  But monotheism's grasp on the word "god" itself, even in the context of polytheistic deities, would make most people hesitant to even consider using the term for these myriad personifications that continue to exist in our language.

 

When I use the word Zeus, most people would think of a bearded man in the sky hurling lightning, an artistic expression that did indeed exist in ancient times.  But they think that image is the beginning and the end of the ancient understanding of Zeus.  A superhuman figure, to use the dictionary definition of the gods of polytheism.  That is the influence of monotheism, trapping our view of polytheistic gods in literal interpretations of myth.

 

In large measure, this is the image that comes to mind when people say God.  This is not the triumph of Monotheism, so much as the dumbing down of the general population.

 

Say "Mother Nature".  What comes to mind?  A woman with long hair, walking through a woodland or meadow.  Sometimes, there are stars in her long, flowing hair.  People know well enough, that this is nothing more than poetic imagery.  Somehow, the same people expect God to be real.   As you say.  Literalism.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Hee hee* Being a baby creature of the 70's-80's, when I think of Mother Nature, I don't think of some longhaired lady....I think of the Mother in "Year Without A Santa Claus", from 1974 (which played on the TV every winter that I was growing up, during the holiday season). She was ready to kick BOTH of her Sons' butts. She appeared to want nothing more than to attend to her garden. Was this the first pseudo-explanation of El Nino and La Nina, or was it insight into the weirdness that would come in the later years?

I can soooo relate, to all of the above.

But I concur, about the dumbing down of our people, in general.

Contact me, Jonathan H.B. Lobl. I want to know who you are.

 

BTW- who says Jack Frost is a minor weather deity??? Ever live with the bastard?!  Or at his mercy?

;) He's not minor, if you live at his whim. Just sayin'.

Edited by the Hearthwitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, the Hearthwitch said:

*Hee hee* Being a baby creature of the 70's-80's, when I think of Mother Nature, I don't think of some longhaired lady....I think of the Mother in "Year Without A Santa Claus", from 1974 (which played on the TV every winter that I was growing up, during the holiday season). She was ready to kick BOTH of her Sons' butts. She appeared to want nothing more than to attend to her garden. Was this the first pseudo-explanation of El Nino and La Nina, or was it insight into the weirdness that would come in the later years?

I can soooo relate, to all of the above.

But I concur, about the dumbing down of our people, in general.

Contact me, Jonathan H.B. Lobl. I want to know who you are.

 

BTW- who says Jack Frost is a minor weather deity??? Ever live with the bastard?!  Or at his mercy?

;) He's not minor, if you live at his whim. Just sayin'.

 

 

Just so.  Western State Winters can be harsh.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2017 at 6:55 AM, AmberLF said:

Skeptic denotes doubt. That isn't the problem.  The problem is in realizing if the person in question is a hard skeptic or a soft one. 

Skepticism is about doubt, as you say, which is about uncertainty. Many people will say that they are skeptical, when they have no doubt or uncertainty. They do not doubt the claim, they are certain the claim is not true. I use the term "pseudo-skeptic" to describe them. I have no animosity towards them, however I do find that how they operate tends to be inherently dishonest. It is important to be upfront about relevant personal bias when conducting an investigation. When you are trying to prove or disprove a claim, there is no constructive reason to obscure that fact by insisting you are just trying to determine the truth. I allow for the fact that "I don't believe you" is a more socially acceptable statement than "I believe you are lying" but a white lie is still a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, mererdog said:

Skepticism is about doubt, as you say, which is about uncertainty. Many people will say that they are skeptical, when they have no doubt or uncertainty. They do not doubt the claim, they are certain the claim is not true. I use the term "pseudo-skeptic" to describe them. I have no animosity towards them, however I do find that how they operate tends to be inherently dishonest. It is important to be upfront about relevant personal bias when conducting an investigation. When you are trying to prove or disprove a claim, there is no constructive reason to obscure that fact by insisting you are just trying to determine the truth. I allow for the fact that "I don't believe you" is a more socially acceptable statement than "I believe you are lying" but a white lie is still a lie.

That is why I keep saying it isn't a problem word. The problem comes with people claiming it when they are not skeptics at all but flat out non-believers. Don't blame the word when it is people who misunderstand or misuse it. I do think it may get used that way because most people like to think they are reasonable in their beliefs and thinking. To call themselves a skeptic can give them a little bit of satisfaction in that way, even if a hard wall is well placed against even acknowledging possibilities.

Edited by AmberLF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AmberLF said:

Don't blame the word when it is people who misunderstand or misuse it.

I get where you're coming from. I don't think the intent is to blame the word, but simply to highlight the fact that using the word is problematic, due to a history of use by others that has produced a set of negative connotations and associations. I don't believe there are bad words, but I believe there are words that will get you punched, if you get my meaning...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AmberLF said:

That is why I keep saying it isn't a problem word. The problem comes with people claiming it when they are not skeptics at all but flat out non-believers. Don't blame the word when it is people who misunderstand or misuse it. I do think it may get used that way because most people like to think they are reasonable in their beliefs and thinking. To call themselves a skeptic can give them a little bit of satisfaction in that way, even if a hard wall is well placed against even acknowledging possibilities.

 

I think the non-believers would be the soft skeptics.  The hard skeptics would be dis-believers.  It's a nuance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think even trying to suggest a way a word is used creates a diversion from its original conception. People place meaning even where there is not what they think is intended.

Example: An old English professor I had in college had told his class of a story where he and another professor and good friend would seek to converse with each other while in the faculty lounge. One would simply say aloud to the other, "Come, let us have intercourse!" Of course this was humorous because different meanings could be thought of, but only one was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Key said:

I think even trying to suggest a way a word is used creates a diversion from its original conception. People place meaning even where there is not what they think is intended.

Example: An old English professor I had in college had told his class of a story where he and another professor and good friend would seek to converse with each other while in the faculty lounge. One would simply say aloud to the other, "Come, let us have intercourse!" Of course this was humorous because different meanings could be thought of, but only one was right.

 

 

To me, your story suggests a need to pick the right word.       :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

To me, your story suggests a need to pick the right word.       :mellow:

No, the story suggest that the right word may be used, but the definition may differ to other's understanding. Just as "gay" used to only mean happy, now means much more.

So, too, is "God", or "soul", so difficult to define.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Key said:

No, the story suggest that the right word may be used, but the definition may differ to other's understanding. Just as "gay" used to only mean happy, now means much more.

So, too, is "God", or "soul", so difficult to define.

 

 

Things that can't be defined also can't be rationally discussed.

 

You must have noticed.  People who strongly believe in God -- and people who strongly disbelieve in God -- often mean different things by God.

 

Without common terms, we are talking past each other, without communicating.  This is not useful.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

Things that can't be defined also can't be rationally discussed.

 

You must have noticed.  People who strongly believe in God -- and people who strongly disbelieve in God -- often mean different things by God.

 

Without common terms, we are talking past each other, without communicating.  This is not useful.  

 

 

Depends on one's terms of what rational is. It's a never ending cycle isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now