Alice came to a fork in the road. "Which road do I take?" she asked."Where do you want to go?" responded the Cheshire cat."I don't know," Alice answered."Then," said the cat, "it doesn't matter."
"So long as I get somewhere," Alice added as an explanation. "Oh, you're sure to do that," said the Cat, "if you only walk long enough."
"All right," said the Cat; and this time it vanished quite slowly, beginning with the end of the tail, and ending with the grin, which remained some time after the rest of it had gone. "Well! I've often seen a cat without a grin," thought Alice; "but a grin without a cat! It's the most curious thing I ever saw in my life!"
- Name: beepbeepitsme
- Location: Australia
I am diagonally parked in a parallel universe. Like Arthur Dent from "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy", if you do not have a Babel Fish in your ear this blog will be completely unintelligible to you and will read something like this: "boggle, google, snoggle, slurp, slurp, dingleberry to the power of 10". Fortunately, those who have had the Babel Fish inserted in their ear, will understood this blog perfectly. If you are familiar with this technology, you will know that the Babel Fish lives on brainwave radiation. It excretes energy in the form of exactly the correct brainwaves needed by its host to understand what was just said; or in this case, what was read. The Babel Fish, thanks to scientific research, reverses the problem defined by its namesake in the Tower of Babel, where a deity was supposedly inspired to confuse the human race by making them unable to understand each other.
View my complete profile
"DIFFICILE EST SATURAM NON SCRIBERE"
Beepbeepitsme has been added to The Atheist Blogroll. You can see the blogroll in my sidebar. The Atheist blogroll is a community building service provided free of charge to Atheist bloggers from around the world. If you would like to join, visit Mojoey at Deep Thoughts.
Subscribe to BEEP! BEEP! IT'S ME
Lyrics by Robbie FulksA world filled with wonder, a cold, fathomless skyA man's life so meager, he can but wonder whyHe cries out to Heaven its truth to revealThe answer: only silence, for God isn't real.Go ask the starving millions under Stalin's cruel reignGo ask the child with cancer who eases her painThen go to your churches, if that's how you feelBut don't ask me to follow, for God isn't real.He forms in his image a weak and foolish manSpeaks to him in symbols that few understandFor a life of devotion, the death blow he dealsWe'd owe Him only hatred, but God isn't real.Go tell the executioner of the power he can't defyGo tell his shackled victim of the mercy on high...Then go to your churches, go beg, pray, and kneel,But don't ask me to follow, for God isn't real.No, no matter how He should be, God isn't real.
Link
11 Comments:
TOTALLY loved the poem.
there is more truth than not. but i cant negate SPIRITUALTY
. thats differnt than religion.
thanks for sharing.!!!!!!!!!!
love yer blog!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but with your presentation why you should MODEREATE your comments??????
tis unfair to those who would like to see a differnt poperspective.
. .your very eloquent, and your presentation should evoke commentary to every degree. so “ air the laundry”.
you say what YOU want . let others COMMENT. not everyone will agree. . but its not big deal.
can i PLEASE use your poem on my blog?? ..
its WONDERFUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! did you write it?? or is it from another source..???? please advise
thanks
sattvicwarrior
RE sattvic:
The poem is a song by Robbie Fulks.
I moderate comments only in case anyone wanted to post the same message 100's of times to my site.
I don't get many contrary opinions, but the ones I do, I post.
Disagreeing with my arguments or opinions is not going to mean I will not post your comments.
Having said that, I am unsure what people mean by "spirituality" and it appears to me, at least, that most people are unsure what they mean by it as well.
It has a sort of "vagueness" associated with trying to define it. This vagueness allows it to remain unexamined.
Unexamined claims for many people are synonymous with truth.
Like all claims concerning the supernatural, the soul, the spirit, trying to test their claims for veracity is impossible.
They appear to me to be emotional word association games.
Like someone hearing the word "chocolate". If they really enjoy chocolate, this can illicit an emotional response, which may lead to a biological response. The word is evocative of pleasure and hence produces a pleasurable sensation.
I think a similar thing happens with the word "spirit" and the word "god" and probably a whole stack of religious words with which large %s of the human population have an emotional investment.
People program themselves to respond emotionally to various abstract concepts.
We can do this as individuals with the concept of chocolate, or the concept of a lemon, or the cultures/societies we live in can enhance this process on a larger scale.
Then the emotional response a person has from the word becomes "evidence" of the existence of the subject.
Example: Put simply. >
I believe in god. Just thinking or saying the word "god" makes me feel happy and loved. Because I feel happy and loved, this is evidence of the existence of god.
(This is an example of the process that I think occurs.)
It also explains why if I change the word or concept, anyone who doesn't have the same emotional and positive psychological associations with the word, WILL NOT consider it as evidence of the existence of said subject.
Example:
I believe in allah. Just thinking or saying the word "allah" makes me feel happy and loved. Because I feel happy and loved, this is evidence of the existence of allah.
Or the converse:
I don't believe in allah. Just thinking or saying the word "allah" makes me feel unloved and sad. Because I feel unloved and sad, this is evidence of the non-existence of allah.
If you have negative emotional associations with that word, it is unlikely that you consider your emotional response to be evidecne of the existence of allah. It is more likely to be interpreted as evidence for the non-existence of allah.
These processes might be examples of how psychologically vulnerable we are to suggestion, and how consciously uninvolved we are with the processes that determine our mental states and our beliefs.
It is almost like a sophistocated game of pavlov's dogs which we play unknowingly with ourselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov
I’m not convinced the lyrics or the video get us very far in a discussion about the reality or otherwise of 'God'.
To me, they only point up the fact that God cannot really be the kind of (personal, perfect, all-knowing, interventionist) God that so many people believe in.
But, many other people reached this conclusion already.
The song doesn’t say to me ‘God isn’t real’, only: ‘that kind of God isn’t real' or maybe 'God isn't real in the way you probably mean real’ (= real like the daisies).
But it doesn’t offer any cogent argument against the assertion that God is real (as in: real like ‘I love you’).
Thanks, though.
RE mombacho:
It offers an argument if your god definition includes that of an "all loving creator".
I think he was trying to say in his song that the world makes more sense without a belief in god/gods.
As a secular humanist, who is also an atheist, I find that the world makes much more sense to me if I am not trying to rationalise " a god's part" in it.
If for example, everything that happens is the will of god, why did god save Billy from cancer and not Bobby Sue?
Why did god allow the mass slaughter of millions of jews?
Why did god with ultimate power supposedly, decide to harden Pharoah's heart so he wouldn't let the people of Israel go?
Of course there are millions of questions like this which believers ask on a daily basis.
The answer to those questions from believers which I have received the most is>> "God made us he can do whatever he wants."
Well, I certainly wouldn't worship something that had the morality of a sewer rat, but apparently that doesn't put a lot of people off from worship. ( I extend my apology to sewer rats.)
My answer to these questions is ~
God didn't choose to save my child over yours because god doesn't exist. ( I probably have a better health plan.)
God didn't allow the killing of millions of jews, because god doesn't exist. (People kill each other for thousands of reasons, god didn't stop it because god isn't there.)
God didn't harden the heart of pharoah, because god doesn't exist.
Once we get down to the supposition that god doesn't exist, things start to make sense.
Who is to blame for the torture, rape, genocide, murder on the planet?
HUMAN BEINGS.
Human beings who sometimes believe that they are doing the will of god.
Even thought the eloquence of your argue, I will say the same as sattvicwarrior & mombacho (also about the comments moderation)
There is a lot of no-evidence about god/gods existance. But the space left between what we know by evidence and with what we don't have even a remote clue, is enought for many possibilities. For example, and refering to your own words, the spirit is a self-creation, but product of our intelligent condition that somehow has auto-conciousness. If you don't want to name this spirit, or soul,it's ok, but it is something more than solid & concrete matter.
Of course I don't believe in that kind of literal -book God- but as it has been said here, there is an abstract dimension of our being still undeniable
RE: sincronia
"But the space left between what we know by evidence and with what we don't have even a remote clue, is enough for many possibilities."
I have noticed that when people discuss their beliefs they are not referring to POSSIBILITIES. They are asserting that their beliefs are true or that their gods exist.
RE:
"For example, and refering to your own words, the spirit is a self-creation, but product of our intelligent condition that somehow has auto-conciousness."
There is no evidence of a "spirit" that survives physical death. Though I agree that the idea of one is pleasant and perhaps comforting, I need more than that to agree that one exists.
I think that the human mind is what the ancients refered to as "the spirit".
The human mind requires the physical brain to exist. Once the brain no longer functions, neither does the mind/spirit/soul.
Lights out.
By the way, I post all comments.
I agree. I was looking for a way to say it in english.
The -no evidence- of an extra-bodied and extra-timelife existance of the human mind is hard enought almost to deny it, and reveal the several scriptures mistakes. This reinforces the idea for optimize our time life, both, practical & spiritual, althought, this spirituality last only a life time.
Yes, many people that discuss their beliefs are not referring to POSSIBILITIES, but not everyone. There, we, are others that since a scientific point of view,(I think) consider a good permission to -possibilities-
Well, you know, it's always more exciting to participate in a more inmediate comunicate. As wikis, that you feel your are building the site. But, it's you blog, and it's very nice and deep. Sincerely.
beep: "The human mind requires the physical brain to exist. Once the brain no longer functions, neither does the mind/spirit/soul.
Lights out."
You have no evidence of this, either, same as in the contrary.
RE sincronia:
If the human mind requires the human brain to exist, then it truly is "brain death = mind death." ALL known medical evidence supports this claim.
If the human mind is what the ancients called "the soul or the spirit" then once the physical brain is dead, so is the soul/ spirit.
What I cannot prove is that the soul/spirit IS the human mind.
But I think it is.
Post a Comment
<< Home