david@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) (05/06/85)
Reply to a reply ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >From: root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: reply to David Harwood replying to Bill Peter Message-ID: <903@trwatf.UUCP> Organization: TRW Advanced Technology Facility, Merrifield VA. > [David Harwood] > I would say that the inherent danger in technology, the fruit > of knowledge, is that its power is inherently corrupting, in the sense > that it makes existent, out of possibility, what is a grave temptation > for the evil in our nature. As Jesus said, it is better to cast away > those things which would tempt you to self-destruction. I think it inaccurate to say that technology is inherently corrupting. There is nothing in technology that biases it towards the destruction or corruption of man. Rather it is man who is capable of performing both good and evil works. Technology has been given this reputation as the harvenger of death because it is through technology that man most vividly asserts his needs for power. The proliferation of weaponry should be thought of more as a gauge of man's attitude. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As I've told you before, I wish you would not misconstrue what is already perfectly clear, for the sake of argument. Also, the previous reply, from which you have excerpted, makes it clear that I am talking throughout about the morality of the application of technology to warfare. I did not say that technology could not be beneficial, but that it is a grave temptation for evil. It is impossible to have a a world war if there are no weapons. Of course, more than half of all scientists and engineers employed by our government are employed on military projects. In addition, more than half of our federal budget goes to pay for past, present, and future military-related costs. Besides the temptation for international political abuse is the corruption of our national morality of employment. Your last statement is dangerously mistaken, in my opinion. The superpowers greatly profit, economically and politically, from the increasing militarization of the world. But you reap what you sow, an increasingly dangerous world, and the level of violence has sharply increased during this technological century. Even since World War II, one-fifth of all nations have been more or less continuously in some state of warfare. Guess who sells them these weapons. There should be a poster with the trumpet of cloud arising above the thermonuclear fireball, with the Lord's prayer, "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do you subscribe to the idea that absolute power corrupts absolutly? I don't. In the hands of some people, power becomes a corrupter. In the hands of others it becomes an important life-giving tool. That's why we must all recognize and understand the tools at our disposal and how to responsibly use them. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I believe that military power is absolutely corrupting of the human spirit. I am not talking about CAT machines. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The tone of your voice implies in some ways that we should throw our technology away entirely. This seems contradictory to your earlier view that technology can be used to ease the suffering of mankind. I think if one takes a closer look at what Jesus said you will find that he is telling us to cast off that which has already condemned us. In other words, pluck out the eye that has caused you to sin, as opposed to plucking out the eye which might potentially sin. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As you suggest, I am pretty obviously not talking about eliminating technology generally, I am talking about eliminating (outlawing) the technolgy of warfare ( or other technology which might destroy us physically or spiritually. (eg, industries which poison the enviroment, or completely programmed instruction)) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Giving up technology wholesale is not the asnwer ... that's like saying we should give up life altogether because it causes us to sin or suffer. No, like life itself we must learn what it means to use technology for the betterment of man. I think that what Jesus is saying here is that sin can grow to consume everything in life if you let it... just as a gangronous limb can spread corruption to the rest of the body. The moral is not simply that we must cast away evil.. that's obvious. The moral here is that we must sometimes endure a loss for our overall good. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jesus is talking about temptations to evil which lead to self-destruction: "It is better to lose part of your body than to be cast into hell." He is not talking about realized sin, but what causes temptation to sin. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I have said before that I can imagine... And, as I have said before... You seem to enjoy starting each paragraph with the phrase "as I have said before." This is a redundant and useless phrase that is becoming rather irritating to listen to. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You seem to enjoy misspelling words, for example "harvenger"(sic) above, for 'harbinger'; also your phrase just above, "redundant and useless phrase," is unintentionally ironic. But, ~~as I've said before~~, in other discussions about other topics, what is most annoying is your patent misconstrual of what is already perfectly clear, apparently for the sake of vain argument. Please, as I've said before, let us stop this petty stuff, and stick to the substance of our discussion. I'm really not difficult to get along with, and I wish you would stop this. The only reason I would introduce a passage with this clause is because it is true that I have stated similar opinions before, in two articles a few months ago when I first posted to the Net. One was about Christianity and warfare, the other about state religion. There was only one obliterated reply to the latter. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Just for grins I counted the number of times you used the word self-serving. Six times. Dave, for the sake of those reading your articles please try to be less verbose. It's as if you were trying to pound your ideas home by repeating them again and again and again and... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What can I say, since you've deleted everything except this word? A few other words and concepts were emphasized as well, but it is true that I feel that selfishness is ultimately both unjust and destructive, and contradiction of the teaching of Christ, who encouraged us to give up ourselves so to help others, therein saving ourselves as well. As in John I, "If a man has enough of this world's goods, but closes his heart to his brother who is in need, how can God's love be in him?" And, in the Gospel, "If a man possesses everything of this world, but loses his very soul, then how does he benefit from this?" I would say that it is by our charitableness to others that we save even ourselves. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I am sometimes partly employed under military contracts, at a > university research center where I have considerable freedom to choose > what I do, and I refuse to work on projects which have direct military > application. (I've been employed under the Defense Mapping Agency, also > National Bureau of Standards, NASA, etc; as an example of something I > don't work on -- the Army robot vehicle project.) Its called the ALV (Autonomous Land Vehicle). Unfortunately, when you live in the Washington area, many of the best computer-related jobs are to be found with defense contractors. Yes, an admirable statement, but there's no escaping the evil military industrial complex empire. If you pay taxes, then you support defense. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ We should escape as best we can. There are some very good people who refuse to pay taxes, although I do pay mine reluctantly. I will quite probably leave the U.S. within two years, if I can find employment overseas in a more peaceful nation. You bring up a very interesting point, though, one which has a startling precedent in the NT scriptures. As you probably know the book of Revelation is an anti-Imperialist apocalypse. The Empire persecuted Christians, also Jews; not only this, but it taxed all of the peoples in order to support its military/economic national interests. Consider the following passage, in light of the military/industrial complex of the two 'superpowers' of our age: First, there is the ever-warring Beast of many empires (7 heads, 10 horns, indicating many lands and powers) which comes out of the sea (human history). (By the way, the symbolic numbers 7 and 10 are not 'constants' but represent 'variables' -- we are dealing with formulae for symbolic eternal truths here -- after the fashion of the empires described in Daniel). Now we move from the variable 'sea', to the realized 'earth': "I saw another beast come up out of the earth; it had two horns like a sheep (ram) but it spoke like a dragon. (The traditional figure of the so-called pseudo-Christian ideologues: think Imperial Christianity, and revolutionary Marxism). It used the authority of the first Beast (the 'superpowers') to promote its interests by making the world and all its inhabitants worship the first Beast (the 'superpowers'), whose mortal wound had been healed (war). It (the false prophets) performed great prodigies; it could even make fire come down from heaven to earth as men looked on. (some technology) Because of the prodigies it was allowed to perform by authority of the first Beast (the superpowers), it led astray astray the earth's inhabitants, telling them to make an image in honor of the Beast that had been wounded by the sword and yet lived (the present surviving superpowers, with the 'image' being their idolatrous propaganda -- like the statues of the emporors, or posters or TV ads for 'Big Brother'). The second beast (the false prophets) was then permitted to give life to the Beast's image, so that the image had the power of speech (media), and to put to death anyone who refused to worship it (violent repression all over the world). (Now note this, re taxation and employemnt): It forced everyone, whether lowly or great, rich and poor, slave and free, to accept a stamp on their right hand or their forehead (stamping our action and our thought). Moreover, it did not allow a man to but or sell anything, unless he was stamped with the name(character) of the beast or with the number(sign) that stood for its name." (Rev. 13) Then we have the famous number of the beast, said to represent, by gematria (numerology), the revived Caesar Nero (that is, his character). As I recall, Nero is the anti-Christian, who may have fiddled, but was insanely determined to burn the city down, and finally destroyed himself. Of course, this is simply imaginary, and any resemblance to the real world is purely coincidental. But the point is, whatever the prophet may have had in mind, you have to be blind not to see the handwriting on the wall.