Saint or Monster?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-07-2015, 10:26 AM
RE: Saint or Monster?
(13-07-2015 10:17 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Yes. Exactly so.

I'd say "to accommodate the masses" is a bit of a stretch, when using that phrase to describe "how to get people to not be repelled by the tone of your posts, and to actually engage with your otherwise brilliant ideas in the way that you desire".

If her goal is simply to come here and make "brilliant" statements that no one feels comfortable interacting with because they deem them "creepy" or otherwise off-putting, then there's no need to inform the poster of their social-interaction errors... or to listen to them, for that matter. But if her goal (as it seems is the case) is to share her brilliant thoughts with us and get us to bounce them around for refinement, counter-discussion, and/or edification, then yes, she needs to "accommodate the masses". That's how this works... along with every other human-interaction arena/forum.

But you are asking her to write in a way that is suitable to you (and to your view of what others would prefer). As such, I don't feel my "accommodating the masses" comment was such a stretch. Many other posters engaged with her just fine. I feel comfortable interacting with her. I am just saying--she is brand new--give her a chance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2015, 10:56 AM
Rainbow RE: Saint or Monster?
(13-07-2015 07:32 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Wow... that's borderline insane. I suppose I should beg your forgiveness in trying to offer a newbie (since I am also something of a newbie and have spent that time trying to learn some of the informal social rules that govern every site, including this one) some advice on how to fit in here, in order to better-engage with the "audience", as you clearly wish to do.

And in return, I get "intellectual dishonesty?"

That may be the single worst insult you could offer me. The others in your list are not far behind. If I had been any of those things, I would beg forgiveness, but I did not, nor was I trying to do so. I should not have to explain this! Clearly, many other board members saw the same traits in you, or they would not have said the same things I said about "bot-like". Take a quick moment to review the other responses you got, similar to my own, and then search the board for anyone else who got such a response. Clearly, the issue here is you.

I have some sympathy for your plight. My own Beloved, who is highly intelligent and charming to those who know her, has similar issues in trying to interact with new/strange people, as she does not have much skill for "naturally sniffing-out" underlying social constructs/rules in new groups (which most people do without thinking about it), and thus she will avoid the groups, and will come across as overly formal and cold when pressed to do so. So I do my best to help smooth the transition, when she must interact in that way. I am not disrespecting her when I do so, nor patronizing; it is only a recognition that some people lack "natural" social skills that most of us take for granted. Given the above interactions with people who were forced to ask if something was wrong with you (e.g. pretending to be a bot), I'd say it's clear that you encountered such a problem, and if you resent my attempts to befriend you and make sure you are more easily-welcomed here in this forum, it did not require a list of insults hidden behind the thin veil of "...but I'm not judging."

Obviously, you were. The only people who pull that passive-aggressive insult bullshit are Christians, when they say stuff like "Oh I don't hate the sinner, I hate the sins they commit." I cannot tell a difference, here.

I would venture to say that your decision to attack someone who was clearly trying to help you fit in more smoothly (or, as you chose to label it, "patronize" you) marks a major personality flaw that you should spend some time and some of that considerable intellect trying to analyze and correct. Because right now, it just makes you an asshole.

The only thing correct in your anaysis, is that I am passive aggressive. And, that is because you are not standing in front of me. The position that I hold in society is quite influential, and does require a fair amount of social skills, as well as conflict management skills. Considering the awards and promotions that I have received, it's hard to believe that no one has seen through my veil of social ineptness. I do admit that I do get nervous in a crowd, but that's probably due to all the attention I receive. I can certainly understand why your Beloved would have social and group interaction issues. But that is none of my business.

You are responsible for everything you say, and how what you say effects others. Hiding behind self-serving assertions, and the Big Brother persona, doesn't absolve you of that responsibility. You are also responsible for the effect you have on others, unless you are so conceited to believe, that you can say whatever you like as long as your motives are honourable. If I were to say to you that, there are people here that think you are a human pretending to be a robot and I just want to know if it is just cultural or a personality quirk; because your syntax is deeply off-putting to us regular humans, and I have checked with others on your list, and we all agree; but I would force myself to adjust if the problem was indeed cultural or psychological; Don't worry I do have SOME sympathy for your plight, because I have first hand experience; You could have just been programed to use the word, who's instead of whose; Finally, if you could relax (dumb-down), your posts a little, your transition (conformity) in the group will be a lot easier. I think that, even as laid-back as you claim to be, you might be slightly offended.

If WHAT you have said, NOT WHY, has been misinterpreted or misrepresented by me, then I sincerely apologize. If not, I stand by EVERY WORD.

I am not here to conform to any groups' status quo. I'm only interested in the free exchange of ideas. So far we have talked about everything but my ideas. As I have stated before, you are NOT my target audience, so please MOVE ON. I will eventually be engaged in dialog with someone who is topic focused, and not personality focused. Oh! I thought the veil of insults was quite clever. Shell Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2015, 11:15 AM
RE: Saint or Monster?
I never, ever. Never. EVER! Never would I suggest to anyone that they "dumb down" their posts.

I did suggest that the formal and stilted tone of the posts might need some moderation, after I saw a number of people actively wondering if you were a bot, which was mostly a joke because you were clearly saying things that a bot would not, in reacting. But not a joke now.

So go fuck yourself. That's all I have to say to you.

Done with benefit of the doubt, you arrogant ass.

[Image: 10784802_394102507409532_324236241_a.jpg]

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2015, 11:49 AM
RE: Saint or Monster?
[Image: tumblr_mq216fSESP1swgo7bo1_500.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2015, 12:54 PM
RE: Saint or Monster?
(09-07-2015 11:14 PM)ShellShilo Wrote:  Hi, I'm Shelly. I've been an atheist since I stopped believing in Santa Clause. My problem with all religions is how do they make rational men/women behave like saints or a monsters? How could any serious rational human being spend the rest of his/her life worshipping a bearded white male in pious servitude? Can a club of over 2 billion people be wrong, or are they just attention seekers, weak willed, perverted, ego and megalomaniacs, or just plain delusional? There had to be some purpose or patterns that was common in all religions. There Are!!

Precepts or Doctrines are not intellectually challenging and written in story form.
There is a promise of everlasting bliss or enlightenment through atonement and servitude.
INTERPRETATION

Maybe I missed it--if "INTERPRETATION" was a link it did not work for me, and I am not sure how that word would work in your identification of a pattern--but it seems to me that what you seem to have identified are patterns, not purposes. The patterns are using stories to present the religion's ideas, those ideas being kind of stupid, and the promise of happiness or wisdom after jumping through hoops.

What purposes have you identified?

I can think of a number of (relatively) benign or useful purposes for religion, actually, even though religion's premises are not true. For example:

* Religion can take an accidental discovery that promotes health and make it universal for believers. Such as prohibiting pork, leading to less trichinosis, back when there wasn't much known about food-borne diseases.
* Religion is a form of tribalism and carries the benefits of it, such as group cooperation and protection, as well as the bad sides.
* Religion reinforces the idea that to make good, one has to work hard and be prepared for setbacks. In addition to making people resigned to their bad circumstances, it can make them persevere in the efforts to make changes.
* Religion, like other superstitions, and like more rational preparation rituals, can enhance performance in stressful situations.

I agree that religion's negatives far outweigh its positives, and each of my examples above has a counter that is much bigger and worse than the positive. For example, my first case of religion promoting a health practice does not allow god to take back the rule about pork once man has learned to cook it properly, and also for every health-promoting rule there are a bunch of useless ones, plus the penalties for breaking the rule are nonsense.

I also don't necessarily agree that the only purpose for religion has been to promote the interests of the powerful and keep down the peons. However: 1) some have used religion in this way, and 2) the religions that have thrived the most are the ones which reinforce a status quo with a few powerful people and a larger group of people who are kept in line with threats, such as hell, and dim promises, such as heaven.

I would be interested in knowing what purposes, for good and bad, you think that all religion serves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2015, 01:01 PM
RE: Saint or Monster?
[Image: jump_zpsd8u3u43v.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2015, 09:57 PM
Rainbow RE: Saint or Monster?
(13-07-2015 12:54 PM)julep Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 11:14 PM)ShellShilo Wrote:  Hi, I'm Shelly. I've been an atheist since I stopped believing in Santa Clause. My problem with all religions is how do they make rational men/women behave like saints or a monsters? How could any serious rational human being spend the rest of his/her life worshipping a bearded white male in pious servitude? Can a club of over 2 billion people be wrong, or are they just attention seekers, weak willed, perverted, ego and megalomaniacs, or just plain delusional? There had to be some purpose or patterns that was common in all religions. There Are!!

Precepts or Doctrines are not intellectually challenging and written in story form.
There is a promise of everlasting bliss or enlightenment through atonement and servitude.
INTERPRETATION

Maybe I missed it--if "INTERPRETATION" was a link it did not work for me, and I am not sure how that word would work in your identification of a pattern--but it seems to me that what you seem to have identified are patterns, not purposes. The patterns are using stories to present the religion's ideas, those ideas being kind of stupid, and the promise of happiness or wisdom after jumping through hoops.

What purposes have you identified?

I can think of a number of (relatively) benign or useful purposes for religion, actually, even though religion's premises are not true. For example:

* Religion can take an accidental discovery that promotes health and make it universal for believers. Such as prohibiting pork, leading to less trichinosis, back when there wasn't much known about food-borne diseases.
* Religion is a form of tribalism and carries the benefits of it, such as group cooperation and protection, as well as the bad sides.
* Religion reinforces the idea that to make good, one has to work hard and be prepared for setbacks. In addition to making people resigned to their bad circumstances, it can make them persevere in the efforts to make changes.
* Religion, like other superstitions, and like more rational preparation rituals, can enhance performance in stressful situations.

I agree that religion's negatives far outweigh its positives, and each of my examples above has a counter that is much bigger and worse than the positive. For example, my first case of religion promoting a health practice does not allow god to take back the rule about pork once man has learned to cook it properly, and also for every health-promoting rule there are a bunch of useless ones, plus the penalties for breaking the rule are nonsense.

I also don't necessarily agree that the only purpose for religion has been to promote the interests of the powerful and keep down the peons. However: 1) some have used religion in this way, and 2) the religions that have thrived the most are the ones which reinforce a status quo with a few powerful people and a larger group of people who are kept in line with threats, such as hell, and dim promises, such as heaven.

I would be interested in knowing what purposes, for good and bad, you think that all religion serves.

Hi julep, this is the entire post. Your are missing some of the thread. Hi, I'm Shelly. I've been an atheist since I stopped believing in Santa Clause. My problem with all religions is how do they make rational men/women behave like saints or monsters? How could any serious rational human being spend the rest of his/her life worshipping a bearded white male in pious servitude? Can a club of over 2 billion people be wrong, or are they just attention seeking, weak willed, perverted, ego and megalomaniacs, or just plain delusional? There had to be some purpose or patterns that is common in all religions. There Is!!

[list]
[*]Precepts or Doctrines are not intellectually challenging and written in story form.
[*]There is a promise of everlasting bliss or enlightenment through atonement and servitude.
[*]INTERPRETATION is just another word for truth in religious rhetoric.
[*]Being unable to prove that another dimension exist only means that it must really exist, e.g., a person on the TV screen is unaware that an audience exist.
[*]No religious elder will offer any scientific evidence for peer review, or successfully defend that evidence at any scientific convention of any discipline.
[*]Even if you are not rich or powerful, be docile and obedient. It is only when you are dead that you will be rewarded.

I suppose that if the numbers agree that SHIT is good enough to eat, there will be a new addition to the menu.: drool: It would be great if people would just come together to celebrate how incredibly lucky we are to experience life through our senses, considering all the events that could have gone wrong.:

Our society has the potential to improve so much suffering in the world, and lead the way in new research and developments, and also provide opportunities for all to reach a minimum standard of happiness and security. What we don't need is imaginary solutions to real problems. Please, don't let religion dumb us all down. I look forward to your comments Shell Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2015, 03:00 AM
Rainbow RE: Saint or Monster?
(13-07-2015 12:54 PM)julep Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 11:14 PM)ShellShilo Wrote:  Hi, I'm Shelly. I've been an atheist since I stopped believing in Santa Clause. My problem with all religions is how do they make rational men/women behave like saints or a monsters? How could any serious rational human being spend the rest of his/her life worshipping a bearded white male in pious servitude? Can a club of over 2 billion people be wrong, or are they just attention seekers, weak willed, perverted, ego and megalomaniacs, or just plain delusional? There had to be some purpose or patterns that was common in all religions. There Are!!

Precepts or Doctrines are not intellectually challenging and written in story form.
There is a promise of everlasting bliss or enlightenment through atonement and servitude.
INTERPRETATION

Maybe I missed it--if "INTERPRETATION" was a link it did not work for me, and I am not sure how that word would work in your identification of a pattern--but it seems to me that what you seem to have identified are patterns, not purposes. The patterns are using stories to present the religion's ideas, those ideas being kind of stupid, and the promise of happiness or wisdom after jumping through hoops.

What purposes have you identified?

I can think of a number of (relatively) benign or useful purposes for religion, actually, even though religion's premises are not true. For example:

* Religion can take an accidental discovery that promotes health and make it universal for believers. Such as prohibiting pork, leading to less trichinosis, back when there wasn't much known about food-borne diseases.
* Religion is a form of tribalism and carries the benefits of it, such as group cooperation and protection, as well as the bad sides.
* Religion reinforces the idea that to make good, one has to work hard and be prepared for setbacks. In addition to making people resigned to their bad circumstances, it can make them persevere in the efforts to make changes.
* Religion, like other superstitions, and like more rational preparation rituals, can enhance performance in stressful situations.

I agree that religion's negatives far outweigh its positives, and each of my examples above has a counter that is much bigger and worse than the positive. For example, my first case of religion promoting a health practice does not allow god to take back the rule about pork once man has learned to cook it properly, and also for every health-promoting rule there are a bunch of useless ones, plus the penalties for breaking the rule are nonsense.

I also don't necessarily agree that the only purpose for religion has been to promote the interests of the powerful and keep down the peons. However: 1) some have used religion in this way, and 2) the religions that have thrived the most are the ones which reinforce a status quo with a few powerful people and a larger group of people who are kept in line with threats, such as hell, and dim promises, such as heaven.

I would be interested in knowing what purposes, for good and bad, you think that all religion serves.

Hi Julep, I hope you have the entire post I've sent you. The Jews were not allowed to eat pork because pigs were Non-Kosher ( animals without split hooves or a ruminant). They also couldn't eat fish without scales, llamas, camels, and alpacas. The Quran also stated, "that if a person is driven by necessity to eat pork, he would be forgiven". So, I think it was more incidental than accidental, regarding the health discoveries you mentioned. The other 3 premises can certainly be viewed as valid.

Here are my feelings about religion;

Religion is a natural human innate property, therefore we as humans, are naturally religious. We all possess a complex set of innate features, capacities, powers and tendencies. These give us all the capacity to think, perceive, feel, imagine, desire and act religiously. Our natural tendencies include;

We tend to believe more than we can prove. If we didn't, we would live in a cognitive desert, and be unable to furnish the mind with enough perception or ideas to begin thinking.
We tend to recognize problems and have a desire to solve them. So when we encounter a problem we are powerless to control, such as death or a terminal illness, we are powerless to just ignore it. So, when a superhuman power comes along that exist in the mind, it is natural for us to appeal to this power to resolve the problem.
We tend to be meaning-making and significant-seeking animals. Obviously, trying to answer existential questions like, the meaning of life, what is my purpose for living, what is morality, or what happens after death, leads us to the limits of our rational understanding.
All attempts to destroy or terminate religion, have all failed. No government has ever successfully eradicated religion.
When one traditional religion fails another one will take its place. The presence of these religious alternative show how religion is natural to human beings.

Since we were all born predisposed towards religion, the question becomes what factors triggered its expression in each individual? I am not sure if religion serves any positive purpose that does not exist in a secular society as well. The negative side of religion is all too obvious. I also feel that, even though there are many secular groups and societies around the world, our natural tendencies towards religion makes it impossible for it to completely go away. Thank you Shell Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ShellShilo's post
17-07-2015, 05:45 AM
Rainbow RE: Saint or Monster?
(13-07-2015 11:15 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  I never, ever. Never. EVER! Never would I suggest to anyone that they "dumb down" their posts.

I did suggest that the formal and stilted tone of the posts might need some moderation, after I saw a number of people actively wondering if you were a bot, which was mostly a joke because you were clearly saying things that a bot would not, in reacting. But not a joke now.

So go fuck yourself. That's all I have to say to you.

Done with benefit of the doubt, you arrogant ass.

[Image: 10784802_394102507409532_324236241_a.jpg]

You are absolutely right, I do need to tone it down a bit. My sincerest apologies. Shell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ShellShilo's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: