Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!edison!jso
From: jso@edison.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: more on atheism
Message-ID: <297@edison.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Jul-84 22:31:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: edison.297
Posted: Wed Jul 18 22:31:27 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Jul-84 04:17:31 EDT
References: <359@kpnoa.UUCP>
Lines: 61

> [kpnoa!parks]
> The idea seems to be "if you will first believe in it, then it
> will work".  The thing that I find disturbing is that this is exactly the
> claim of most psychics!  I pointed out in my previous letter that I do
> not believe in *any* psychic phenomena.  The practitioner always seem
> to require a "willing suspension of disbelief" (an old science-fiction
> term).  If something psychic doesn't occur, it is because you are
> skeptical or don't believe hard enough.  I think you are just being
> fooled (unintentionally or deliberately).  To see this same method being
> echoed in religion is something which cases me to immediately question,
> "Why does it only work for those who believe?"

The thing to remember is that both psychic phenomena and religious experience
are subjective, and therefore belief and disbelief make a definite difference.
Since this type of thing doesn't fit very well with scientific provability,
it is easy to ridicule, but it makes sense psychologically.  There is plenty
of evidence with weight-lifting and other physical activity that if you don't
believe that you can do something, you have less chance of doing it.  Why
shouldn't this apply even more for something that is totally subjective?

>     From the above three points, we all need proof of religion, the only
>     proof I can accept is some form of objective proof, and the only
>     truly objective observations are those performed by material
>     instrumentation.  This is why I require some form of material proof
>     before I can accept any religion as the truth.

It seems somewhat inside-out to me to base your spiritual (inner) life on
objective (sensory) evidence, especially since you can only experience the
outer world subjectively, through your perceptions of sensory input.
There is no way to "prove" that the physical world exists.  (As pointed out
by Descartes, the Buddha, and many others.)  See _The Tao of Physics_ for
an interesting explanation from the point of view of modern physics
(quantum mechanics) of the relationship of objectivity and subjectivity.
The newest theories (as interpreted by the author) seem to indicate that
there is *no* objective physical world...

>      Perhaps I have missed the point entirely.  My universe has shown
> itself to be consistent and examinable.  The only reason I can see for
> an afterlife is that I want one.  The truth I have found from the world's
> religions is a common thread:  security, denial of death, and rules to guide
> your life by.  In my search for truth, I found that religion takes the form
> that is the most comforting to us.  I see it as a security blanket, which
> I cannot believe in any longer.

My inner universe has shown itself to be consistent and examinable also,
and an afterlife, reincarnation, and other ideas you reject for lack of
proof fit perfectly based on my experiences.  As you learn to be in touch
with your "inner self", (skeptics could say "as you brainwash yourself...")
you find this "resonance" with truth.  As far as comfort goes, this may
apply to organized (pre-digested) religion, but my own search for truth
has been far from comforting, except in some of the results.  To many people
religion is a security blanket, and fulfills that part of human nature that
wants to be told what to do, but this is not the nature of religion,
and certainly not a necessary part of religious experience.  (From some
of your objections to religion, and your need for proof, it seems to me
that occultism might be what you are looking for. (Though not much
that is called occult really is: there seems almost to be an "occult dogma"
forming recently, which is a logical contradiction...))

John Owens
...!{ {duke mcnc}!ncsu!uvacs houxm brl-bmd scgvaxd }!edison!jso