From: Cliff Stabbert (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Aug 07 2002 - 16:16:14 MDT
Wednesday, August 7, 2002, 5:54:04 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote:
SA> Cliff Stabbert wrote:
>> I've highlighted the word "only" in the above to point out that I
>> disagree. To show that something is possible /only/ by method X
>> requires showing it is impossible by any other method, which cannot be
SA> A minor quibble in my paint point but change *only* to *best* or
SA> drop it entirely if it makes it easier for you.
In that case, indeed a minor quibble. Just that some people might not
want to give up belief in other methods.
SA> I suspect their relgions are driven in part by the desires to
SA> transcend the relatively dismal human lot that have been present
SA> in the species from the beginning.
This point raises another issue -- it can be argued that to a large
degree, western religion (more specifically, western /organized/
religion) is aimed at resigning people to the "relatively dismal human
lot" by promising it'll all be fine /after they die/. Whether that's
supported by the actual scriptures is a different question (e.g., the
Bible's "on earth as it is in Heaven").
SA> Show them how to do that and
SA> how to help themselves to social benefits and worldview cohesion
SA> type things they also get from religion without the relgious
SA> artifacts and I think you will get more than a few "converts".
I'm not sure I follow what you mean by "worldview cohesion type
things" -- that the idea of Singularity creates a more cohesive
worldview, and so can fulfill some of religion's function?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:40 MDT