[net.religion] Problems

mwm@ea.UUCP (04/28/84)

#R:ssc-vax:-9100:ea:11300021:000:1257
ea!mwm    Apr 28 14:37:00 1984

/***** ea:net.religion / ssc-vax!david /  6:15 pm  Apr 25, 1984 */
A philosophy which denies miracles from the outset can never accept God.
(As an aside, I think it is sad that many of these same people are the first
to turn to the daily horoscope to discover how masses of burning hydrogen
located billions of miles away should affect their daily lives - but I'm not
accusing Bob of this).

	-- David Norris        :-)
	-- uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david
/* ---------- */

It's the aside I want to deal with here. My experience has been the exact
opposite: those who reject religion because it's irrational are the ones
who tend to reject astrology, psychics and etc. Those who've discovered
that neither religion nor rationality can "provide all the answers"
(without them doing any work) are the ones who often swallow such bogosity
in large doses. I don't have any hard figures on this - do you, david?

I will concede that, taken against the populace as a whole, Christians tend
to believe in irrational things less than average. I can even provide data
to back it up. (It would take a couple of weeks to chase the references
down. Please be patient if you ask for them.) But they've already got a
book with all the answers in it, so why look farther?

	<mike

emjej@uokvax.UUCP (04/29/84)

#R:ssc-vax:-9100:uokvax:8300055:000:554
uokvax!emjej    Apr 29 13:54:00 1984

For studies indicating that areas with larger density of Christians
have a lower density of believers in various things such as UFOs,
ESP, etc., you should check out *The Skeptical Inquirer* of a few
years back, I believe some time during 1980. Why is this so? I
occasionally think it's because Christianity on the whole has had
a few centuries to have its nose rubbed in the real world; other
times, I think it's precisely analogous to finding that where IBM
users abound, you are less likely to find users of other vendors'
products.

					James Jones

liberte@uiucdcs.UUCP (04/30/84)

#R:ssc-vax:-9100:uiucdcs:33000042:000:1430
uiucdcs!liberte    Apr 29 20:14:00 1984

/***** ea:net.religion / ssc-vax!david /  6:15 pm  Apr 25, 1984 */
A philosophy which denies miracles from the outset can never accept God.
/* ---------- */

Would the reinterpretation of "miracles" to be "phenomena that follow natural
law that we just don't know much about" be acceptable?  My personal
philosophy has room for God(s), but only if they follow the laws of nature.
God is the everything - including all the natural laws and love and hate.

The mention of astrology in a derogatory tone next to the mention of miracles
in an approving tone seems somewhat contradictory to me.  Although I admit
the daily horoscope is off base, my experience with astrology is that there
is a lot of evidence to back it up.  There is often very little "scientific"
evidence supporting once-in-an-eon miracles.

As to how astrology can follow natural law,
I am working on the hypothesis that astrology works because of a tradition
that has been established over the years such that a soul chooses to incarnate
at the right time and place so that their chart will have meaning
corresponding to an individual's characteristics.  Thus there is no physical
connection between planets and personality, only a traditional connection.
Once you get around to it, you can learn alot about yourself by looking at
your chart.

Daniel LaLiberte,  U of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Computer Science
{moderation in all things - including moderation}