Holy Me...

[BobN]

Never been much of a churchgoer, me.

But, since Christmas was on a Thursday this past year, it follows that Christmas Eve was on a Wednesday, right?

(Don't worry, this'll get more challenging from there.)

You see, I take Wednesdays as a day off from my home hemodialysis routine.  I do five treatments per week and normally take Wednesdays and Saturdays off.

So, since I had Christmas Eve off, I couldn't use my usual excuse of feeling like something the cat dragged in as a reason not to attend Christmas Eve service.

My wife, who regularly attends church to pray for the souls of heathens like me, really wanted me to go, and picked right up on the fact that I didn't have a treatment that day and should be good to go.

"Well..." I said, stalling for time.  I'm normally pretty good at thinking on my feet, but this one had me stymied.  "I'm still feeling kinda down from yesterday...maybe we can go next year."

Pretty weak.

So, off we went.  And I should point out that given my tendency to misbehave in placid settings (like church), it was no small feat of courage on her part to goad me into going.  I think she might have considered this too late as right before we left the car, she turned to me and said, "Best behavior."

I said, "As God is my witness."

She just rolled her eyes, no doubt now wondering what on earth she could have been thinking.

Anyway, we got into the front room outside the chapel and I just went moseying on in even though we were a few minutes early.

I turned back and the wife was looking at me as if she expected me to burst into flames.

She was still in the front room, so I walked back.

"Afraid you're going to get hit by lightning if you walk in with me?"

"No," she said tensely.  "Well, okay a little.  But we stay out here and socialize before we go in."

"Ah," I said.  "Going to church and socializing.  How could this night get any better?"

She ignored that and went to greet one of her church buddies.

So, I did my best to keep from running out the door and tried to do my duty by being present as she kibitzed with others.

"So Bob," some guy who was a complete stranger said to me.  "You look pretty good for a dialysis patient."

Now it was my turn to send daggers my wife's way since she knows I don't like telling everybody and their brother that I'm on dialysis.

"Oh thanks," I said.  "The wife's slapping me upside the head to get me here tonight probably added some color to my cheeks."

"Ah ha ha ha..." my wife broke in.  "He's a great little kidder, isn't he?"

She then hustled me off while the guy still looked like he was trying to figure out whether I was serious.

I managed to get through the service without getting her banned from ever attending again.

But, in the future, I bet she thinks twice before using my dialysis day off as leverage.  Just sayin'.

[kristina]

Hello Bob, you certainly did it again and made my day !
I do look forward to read the stories in Bob's Blog's and I very much enjoy them ...
...and I admire your wonderful picturesque language !
Thanks again from Kristina. 

[obsidianom]

Bob , since I am a heathen , I belong only to the "Church of the, -- Holy Sh-t."

[Charlie B53]

I don't doubt that these are enough of 'us' heathens, that we could have our own meetings.  NOT.  I don't do so well in crowds.

But I am a bad influence.  Wife used to be a regular Church Goer, til she married me.  Every some number of years she will start going regular again,  without me.  Then for seemingly no reason, she doesn't go.

Women,  I don't even try to understand them!  You can't.  Just when you 'think' you got them figured out, they change up on ya, and you realize you can never tell just how they think.

Oh, and you can always tell a woman.  You just can't tell them much!

[BobN]

Thanks kristina, appreciate the kind words.

Ob, Charlie, Hang in there buddies.  We heathens have to stick together.

[kristina]

... I was debating with myself whether I should mention this or not ...
but then I thought, I better mention that I studied Literature (Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde and Ibsen ...  and they certainly had doubts about religion...)
and I also studied Philosophy (Plato, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche)... and as you can imagine, all Philosophy-Professors at University made absolutely certain, that we had not only a few doubts of any religion ... and these particular philosophers left the reader in no doubt,
that they also thought that believing in any religion was not appropriate for the serious student of philosophy ...
... in short, I don't go particularly with religion, but I don't disapprove of anyone who does believe in any religion,
because I can't be absolutely sure whether my opinion about it is right or wrong  ...

[noahvale]

^

[Simon Dog]

because I can't be absolutely sure whether my opinion about it is right or wrong  ...

I don't have any direct evidence suggestion that the core of Charon is not made of green cheese, therefore, I cannot be absolutely sure that  if my opinion on that topic is right or wrong.  But, I have  a suspicion that my belief on this matter is probably the correct one.

The funny thing about religions - each is willing to dismiss previous religions as man made artifacts, but assert that theirs is correct.   The pyramid era Egyptians were probably just as sincere in their belief system as devout Catholics are today.  Who is to say a new religion won't be invented in a few millenia that dismisses Christianity as hooey?   Who will then be right?

[kristina]

...that they also thought that believing in any religion was not appropriate for the serious student of philosophy ...

Please explain this rationale.

Hello Noahvale,
.. if I would try to explain this, it would become extremely involved and would take many pages, if not a whole book ...
Suffice to say that these philosophers were questioning religion and what it did to people
and Schopenhauer particularly was intrigued and dismayed about the huge impact of religion on people and society ...
... And the claim that "religion is the opium for the people" has always been attributed to Karl Marx,
but in fact it was Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche who really thought it all through...
(... and they both paid a very heavy price for their thoughts as well because society was not particularly grateful ...)

I agree with you Simon,
.. Many "religious zealots" dismiss every other religion as wrong - except their own of course ...
... and as long as there are people around, new religions are being invented in an efford... to become and do ... what?
Mind you, I have no problem with people who believe in their religion, whatever their religion is, as long as they don't harm others ...
... and as long as they don't try to push me into their direction... whatever that direction may be...

[noahvale]

^

[Simon Dog]

new religions are being invented in an efford... to become and do ... what?

Several purposes:

- Encourage people to behave in a certain way
- Consolidate power (economic and social) in the hands of the religious institutions
- Provide answers to the unanswerable
- Help individuals deny the finality of their death

I probably missed a few.

[PaulBC]

There are numerous theologians who just happen to be very well versed on secular and as well as nonsecular philosophies

I have spent a fair amount of time thinking about this (though it is far afield of kidney function) and I think the conflict exists as kristina presents it, though it is not absolute.

First off, let's take what you could call the weak form of kristina's claim: it is impossible to apply any kind of critical thinking (not just philosophy) if your dogmatism makes you constitutionally incapable of giving a fair hearing to opposing views. You can say that I am using a strawman argument, but it is really not hard to find people exhibiting that degree of dogmatism, and most of them will never be able to pursue philosophy seriously, or science for that matter.

There may even be exceptions to the above, such as when confined within a limited technical scope. E.g., belief in the divinity of Haile Selassie (and a visceral dislike for anyone who disagree) wouldn't necessarily stop you from making significant observations about first order logic and counting yourself as a serious student of philosophy, but it might hinder the application of philosophy outside a narrow domain.

But I'm only in half agreement with noahvale's point. While it is true that the best theologians are also well-versed in critical thinking, the questioning always has to stop at matters of faith. Of course, you can entertain opposing arguments, but the trump card of core principles is always there. E.g., any counterargument to the Nicene creed is by definition false to a Catholic theologian, whose only task is to somehow rationalize the conflict, not resolve it counter to faith.

I personally believe that it is possible to be religious and also be a critical thinker. But for me, this creates so much cognitive dissonance and palpable discomfort that I often stand in wonder of those who manage to accomplish it.

[noahvale]

*

[kristina]

I personally believe that it is possible to be religious and also be a critical thinker. But for me, this creates so much cognitive dissonance and palpable discomfort that I often stand in wonder of those who manage to accomplish it.

Most interesting because I have still to meet a person who is really able to convince me that they are religious and a critical thinker
at the same time without "running into serious conflict with their own conscience"...

[kristina]

Hello Noahvale,
.. if I would try to explain this, it would become extremely involved and would take many pages, if not a whole book ...
Suffice to say that these philosophers were questioning religion and what it did to people
and Schopenhauer particularly was intrigued and dismayed about the huge impact of religion on people and society ...
... And the claim that "religion is the opium for the people" has always been attributed to Karl Marx,
but in fact it was Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche who really thought it all through...
(... and they both paid a very heavy price for their thoughts as well because society was not particularly grateful ...)

Once again, Kristina, you give a long-winded, nebulous reply without answering a very simple and direct question. 

There are numerous theologians who just happen to be very well versed on secular and as well as nonsecular philosophies - most notably Pope Francis...."In 1960, Bergoglio (Pope Francis' given name) obtained a licentiate in philosophy from the Colegio Máximo de San José in San Miguel, Buenos Aires Province. He taught literature and psychology at the Colegio de la Inmaculada Concepción, a high school in Santa Fe, from 1964 to 1965. In 1966 he taught the same courses at the Colegio del Salvador in Buenos Aires."

Actually, it is a quite bigotted and intolerant view that students are incapable of balancing their religious beliefs with an exploration of secular philosophies.

Sorry noahvale, but in philosophy there are no simple answers to simple and direct questions...
... the beauty about studying philosophy is that it really teaches us the process of training our mind ...
....and it is not practical either in order to earn a living... but studying philosophy provides us with a great training
and I feel very priviledged that I was given the opportunity to study philosophy, because I enjoyed every minute of it ...

[kristina]

new religions are being invented in an efford... to become and do ... what?

Several purposes:

- Encourage people to behave in a certain way
- Consolidate power (economic and social) in the hands of the religious institutions
- Provide answers to the unanswerable
- Help individuals deny the finality of their death

I probably missed a few.

Hello Simon,
... what you mention sounds extremely kind and humanitarian,
but unfortunately the reality of many religions is that they are not very humanitarian, but they rule through fear... and fear again...
...It is also disappointing when one observes what some religions "demand" of "their" females...
... one particular religion for example excells in mutilating the private parts of "their" females ... it comes as part of their religion....
... and they could not care less about the trauma caused by such inhumanitarian action ... everything they do is excused by their religion...
... another particular religion excells in demanding a (married) female to shave her head, just to make absolutely sure that she remains faithful...
... Now I have only mentioned two examples of religious demands on females...but as you can imagine, being a female myself, I am not impressed ...
... and I would run a mile if anyone would suggest religion to me...
...I'd rather "stick" to my philosophies, they are much more rewarding and less harmful ...

[Simon Dog]

... what you mention sounds extremely kind and humanitarian,

Re-read the second item in my list 

[kristina]

... I can detect what you mean, Simon ...
... but ... at the same time we should not forget that there are many other "institutions" with an interest
to consolidate economic and social powers ...

... Leaving the above aside for a moment, the next question in this matter should really go to noahvale:
... noahvale, you appear to just "put your questions and you also seem to relentlessly "dig" for answers"  ...
but at the same time one can detect, that you hardly ever put any of your own thoughts into these discussions...
How come? It seems very strange ... Please tell us: Is there a particular purpose for your questioning so relentlessly ?
... Or are you putting your questions, because you don't really have any answers yourself about this ...
... and as a result you feel an irresistable urge to start learning from us right now ... ? 

Best wishes from Kristina.

[noahvale]

*

[kristina]

... My... my... my... what have we here now?
noahvale, are you now adding an insult,
in an effort to cover-up for not answering my question?
Why don't you just "come clean" about it all?

[noahvale]

*

[kristina]

... My... my... my... what have we here now?
noahvale, are you now adding an insult,
in an effort to cover-up for not answering my question?
Why don't you just "come clean" about it all?

I have nothing to "come clean" about, Kristina!  I have made my views perfectly clear  in  my response to PaulBC  on: February 27, 2015, 02:46:45 PM

and

To YOU on: February 27, 2015, 09:23:43 AM.

Maybe my responses were not "nebulous" enough for you to understand.

I am sorry to say noahvale, but PaulBC did already answer that
and I saw no point in repeating what PaulBC has already expressed so adequately....