jilek@ihuxp.UUCP (06/09/83)
I have been reading net.religion with interest over the past few weeks.
To stimulate discussion, I would like to pose a very short series of
questions to whoever is interested in replying. The topic of interest
is how an individual may come to hold a particular religious, or
cosmological, or epistemological, (or whatever) belief. Or perhaps,
to state it another way, what is the nature of the milieu from which
we, as individuals, must deduce our conclusions. I do not limit
this process to the mental/logical abilities of man; all human capa-
bilities can be considered as input: emotions, intuition, dreams, etc.
are just as real as the intellect. The question, then ...
1. Does an individual have the ability to reach some true
understanding of the ultimate 'religious' issues (i.e.
life after death, the nature of reality beyond the
physical world, our role or duty in life, etc.) or is
this inherently impossible?
If you feel the answer to question (1) is yes, then:
1a. Does such an understanding depend on historical events
or is the possibility of achieving such an understanding
independent of the time or location that an individual
is living in?
If you feel the answer to question (1) is no, then:
1b. What does this imply regarding the existence or nature
of religions, of a system of ethics or law, or whatever?
These questions are not meant to be devious or as bait to later ridicule
any responder's beliefs. They are meant to encourage discussion and
thus the questions are somewhat imprecise. Please feel free
to define the terms as suits your argument. Please do not post replies
to me; comments should be sent to net.religion so all of us may share
your thoughts.
--
Ed Jilek
ihuxp!jilek
Naperville, Ilmam@rabbit.UUCP (06/15/83)
What a question! My answer is yes to the first question.I don't know if true understanding is the right term. Maybe a better
one, at least in my experience, is true acceptance.I don't know if we can ever not be afraid of death, but we can accept
what will occur after death. In fact, a big part of religion is
helping people to accept and to fear death less.However, this brings me to a contradiction, beacause while I am a
Christian, I have not figured out what life after death will be like.
I am also terrified of dieing(?). Angels and harps is not what I
envision. I agree with whoever said that we can determine what our life
after death will be like. I think this is so because no one including
us can describe to those we leave behind what is happening to us. Also,
do we "really" experience life after death? (This would be another good
topic for debate on this net group.) I am inclined to think that we do
not experience life after death in the physical sense. (That seems
rather obvious, but I know people who would disagree with this.)
Asto what conditions this, I can't say. For me, it is not anything
tangible. I believe what makes sense to me, what is logical, and
somewhat what doctrine dictates, but not much.dae@psupdp1.UUCP (06/15/83)
1. Does an individual have the ability to reach some true
understanding of the ultimate 'religious' issues (i.e.
life after death, the nature of reality beyond the
physical world, our role or duty in life, etc.) or is
this inherently impossible?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>First of all, what is a 'true' understanding? Can anyone 'truly' understand
anyone else, let alone their beliefs? Can men understand women? In my opinion,
any understanding beyond a basic knowledge of the tenets of another religion is
beyond at least the average reader of net.religion. For that matter, look at
all the different branches of Judaism and Christianity (assuming that the latter
is not merely a branch of the former...). Can a Reconstructionist Jew truly
understand an Orthodox Jew? In my opinion, religion is a very personal thing,
and the only person who can ever gain a 'true' understanding of a person's
religion is that person, *maybe*--does a person live totally in the conscious?
Is it possible that there are unconscious influences on belief?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you feel the answer to question (1) is yes, then:
1a. Does such an understanding depend on historical events
or is the possibility of achieving such an understanding
independent of the time or location that an individual
is living in?
If you feel the answer to question (1) is no, then:
1b. What does this imply regarding the existence or nature
of religions, of a system of ethics or law, or whatever?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>I think I'll answer both of these together. I think *all* opinions/under-
standings (except 'intuitive/instinctive' ones like hand-eye coordination)
are at least heavily influenced, if not almost totally defined, by experiences
postnatal (how about we leave Rock Music and the Unborn out of this for now?):
ie, culture, upbringing, family life, reading material, possibly 'mystical'
experiences, &c. As the dieticians say, 'you are what you eat'.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good questions!
Dave Eckhardt
{allegra,burdvax}!psuvax!psupdp1!dae
(814)-237-1901
736 West Hamilton
State College, PA 16801tim@unc.UUCP (06/15/83)
A reminder to those of all beliefs: When posting a reply to an article, please include enough of the original so that we can tell what it is that you are talking about. The "readnews" interface does not keep discussions together, and it is so much trouble to find predecessors that it is usually not worth the trouble. In addition, some articles never make it to some sites, and sometimes replies occur before originals. To do this, you can save the article to a temporary file, then read the article into your editor when replying. If, like me, you are using "readnews" and "vi", the sequence of commands is: s- /tmp/reply f- [vi starts] :r /tmp/reply :!rm /tmp/reply Sorry for posting this meta-flame to this group, but there have been a lot of cases of insufficient context in replies lately, and it's been seriously impairing readability. Tim Maroney
wex@ittvax.UUCP (06/16/83)
One of the finest 'holy books' ever written, and an excellent stimulus to intellectual/religious/philosophical thinking is "Illusions" by Richard Bach (who wrote Jonathan Livingston Seagull). A friend gave me a copy of this, and it is probably the best gift I have ever gotten. It deals with what would happen if 'the Messiah' reappeared in middle America today. The book pulls no punches, and favors no side. I recommend it very highly to all of you taking part in this debate. --Alan Wexelblat ittvax!wex or decvax!ucbvax!ittvax!wex@BERKELY