Secular Intolerance

[Nick_A]

The mistake here is that conservatism and progressivism are wrongly assumed to be distilled in the two major parties, each of which are deeply conservative with various "progressive" aspects.

However, in the blinkered tribal world of internet bickering, claiming that black is white if you can find enough backup. Here the backwards claim is that the religious, which has keenly oppressed, and often killed, the non-religions - declared to be heathens, infidels and apostates. There is not oppression of theists - their foot remains firmly on the threat of the non-religious, clinging firmly to the levers of power in most western nations and all developing countries.

No matter what problems are caused the religious by the non religious, it is dwarfed by religious intolerance, with continued denigration and oppression of the non-religious, and in some cultures, killing. This thread is just a small example of how the religious reflexively insult and misrepresent the non-religious. So it goes.

All you are doing is describing arguments in Plato's cave and claiming right and wrong. Secular Intolerance refers to something far more insidious. It is intolerant of what is essential for a free society based on the United States Constitution.

Preamble to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

"We have no government armed in power capable of contending in human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." ~ John Adams
1798, Address to the militia of Massachusetts

Liberty is only possible in a society that recognizes itself under God. Left to its own devices it leads to statist slavery. I am an advocate of freedom and what is essential to sustain it which is why you are intolerant of those like me. You support what Obama and Hillary have said:

“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” Barack Obama

"God bless the America we are trying to create." Hillary Clinton

You support the devolution of America into the equality of statist slavery and are intolerant of the religious attitudes necessary to support freedom in America as envisioned by its founding fathers. Where you are intolerant of these attitudes, I support them since I support freedom and the potential for its citizens to pursue their search for truth. I am not intolerant of secularism which has the Great Beast as its god. I am for freedom and the source of grace which makes it possible.

"Humanism was not wrong in thinking that truth, beauty, liberty, and equality are of infinite value, but in thinking that man can get them for himself without grace." ~ Simone Weil

You are a progressive who views the help of grace as a myth and believes the Great Beast can supply all that is necessary to make freedom possible. I am a universalist who appreciates how a functioning free society is impossible without the light of grace to awaken us to feel the importance of higher values as opposed to living by hypocrisy and descending into statist slavery. That is what this thread is about.

[Walker]

However, a wise person will recognize summertime.

...when skin cancer is most common!

Q: What do you call the willful conflation of Christianity and Islam into the single label of, “religion?”
A: Shady.

[Greta]

All you are doing is describing arguments in Plato's cave and claiming right and wrong. Secular Intolerance refers to something far more insidious. It is intolerant of what is essential for a free society based on the United States Constitution.

Preamble to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Basically you are claiming that the US's founding fathers understood cosmology better than modern cosmologists, with their airy claim to innate knowledge of a creator being worth more to you than the countless hours of passionate research done by cosmologists.

You missed your time. Your steampunk philosophy would seemingly be better suited to the 18th or 19th centuries, and the ideas are about as up to date.

[Dubious]

However, a wise person will recognize summertime.

...when skin cancer is most common!

Q: What do you call the willful conflation of Christianity and Islam into the single label of, “religion?”
A: Shady.

...and how have I done that?

[Belinda]

Nick_A wrote:

Preamble to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
"We have no government armed in power capable of contending in human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." ~ John Adams
1798, Address to the militia of Massachusetts
Liberty is only possible in a society that recognizes itself under God. Left to its own devices it leads to statist slavery. I am an advocate of freedom and what is essential to sustain it which is why you are intolerant of those like me. You support what Obama and Hillary have said:

God the Creator is not the same as God the constant intervener in history.

[Walker]

God the Creator is not the same as God the constant intervener in history.

(Hear as a slow, Texas baritone)

Each moment is a new creation. Thus, continuity of infinite successive creation moments, woven into a perceptual reality, is necessary for the species.

To organize chaos, perception of the perpetual creation passes through an inherent survival filter. The filter is highly adaptable to changing situations. Highly adapatable, and yet, vulnerable to egocentric override.

Mundanely, the ego asserts primacy and will sacrifice most anything to preserve an arbitrary self-concept that gets mis-identified as permanent. However, when freed-up from petty ego-grasping and maneuvering, the filter allows the essentials to enter the construct of reality that gets woven from perception to create one’s own little patch of the elephant.

The essentials enter as the foundation of significant implications. For instance, a continuity woven into a perceptual reality can be shaped by a filter that allows the foundations of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to be the significant pillars, and they are significant. Forseen by divinely inspired rationality, they allow for the arising of inevitable effects that adjust unfolding reality to avoid repetition of past errors, at least on paper.

[Walker]

...when skin cancer is most common!

Q: What do you call the willful conflation of Christianity and Islam into the single label of, “religion?”
A: Shady.

...and how have I done that?

You didn't do anything.

Shade protects from the sun.

Summertime, sunshine, skin, the c word ... Hawaiian shirts, cold drinks, music, those were the days my friend, we thought they'd never end.

[Belinda]

God the Creator is not the same as God the constant intervener in history.

(Hear as a slow, Texas baritone)

Each moment is a new creation. Thus, continuity of infinite successive creation moments, woven into a perceptual reality, is necessary for the species.

To organize chaos, perception of the perpetual creation passes through an inherent survival filter. The filter is highly adaptable to changing situations. Highly adapatable, and yet, vulnerable to egocentric override.

Mundanely, the ego asserts primacy and will sacrifice most anything to preserve an arbitrary self-concept that gets mis-identified as permanent. However, when freed-up from petty ego-grasping and maneuvering, the filter allows the essentials to enter the construct of reality that gets woven from perception to create one’s own little patch of the elephant.

The essentials enter as the foundation of significant implications. For instance, a continuity woven into a perceptual reality can be shaped by a filter that allows the foundations of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to be the significant pillars, and they are significant. Forseen by divinely inspired rationality, they allow for the arising of inevitable effects that adjust unfolding reality to avoid repetition of past errors, at least on paper.

"Each moment is a new creation" Right.
But why "for the species" ? Whether you mean species singular or plural is irrelevant. Why not simply "is necessary" ?

Why "a survival filter"? I'd prefer simply 'God is order not chaos.' Simple language is best.
Then I'd deconstruct the high faluting prose to say simply "Humans make up stories to suit ourselves. But nevertheless God's eternal truth gets through to us somehow. Reason is divine. Reason can stop us repeating old errors at least theoretically ".

I agree that those claims are wise. I'd say however beware of presuming that God is more interested in humans than He is in His creation as an entirety. The days of man's dominance over nature are past. The days of stewardship of nature for man's delectation are over. Nature will win and so we must harmonise with nature and bow to its imperatives.

[Greta]

God the Creator is not the same as God the constant intervener in history.

(Hear as a slow, Texas baritone)

Each moment is a new creation. Thus, continuity of infinite successive creation moments, woven into a perceptual reality, is necessary for the species.

To organize chaos, perception of the perpetual creation passes through an inherent survival filter. The filter is highly adaptable to changing situations. Highly adapatable, and yet, vulnerable to egocentric override.

Mundanely, the ego asserts primacy and will sacrifice most anything to preserve an arbitrary self-concept that gets mis-identified as permanent. However, when freed-up from petty ego-grasping and maneuvering, the filter allows the essentials to enter the construct of reality that gets woven from perception to create one’s own little patch of the elephant.

The essentials enter as the foundation of significant implications. For instance, a continuity woven into a perceptual reality can be shaped by a filter that allows the foundations of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to be the significant pillars, and they are significant. Forseen by divinely inspired rationality, they allow for the arising of inevitable effects that adjust unfolding reality to avoid repetition of past errors, at least on paper.

It is not egotistical or grasping to think that the universe might be self organising rather than created by God. It would seem more egotistical to believe that there is a God who is fixated on humans.

[Nick_A]

All you are doing is describing arguments in Plato's cave and claiming right and wrong. Secular Intolerance refers to something far more insidious. It is intolerant of what is essential for a free society based on the United States Constitution.

Preamble to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Basically you are claiming that the US's founding fathers understood cosmology better than modern cosmologists, with their airy claim to innate knowledge of a creator being worth more to you than the countless hours of passionate research done by cosmologists.

You missed your time. Your steampunk philosophy would seemingly be better suited to the 18th or 19th centuries, and the ideas are about as up to date.

Objective knowledge is perennial - it always was. People differ in their sensitivity to it. Most are caught up in the duality of cave life. Some are open to the conscious vertical direction of thought. These experts of yours are often just BS artists. Many of the founding fathers were free Masons. The lincoln Memeorial has a lot of interesting relationships within it that suggest higher understanding. Your secular intolerance makes it easy for you to name call but harder for you to open to real undertanding. You would be astonished as to wht was understood during pre-sand Egypt

[Greta]

All you are doing is describing arguments in Plato's cave and claiming right and wrong. Secular Intolerance refers to something far more insidious. It is intolerant of what is essential for a free society based on the United States Constitution.

Basically you are claiming that the US's founding fathers understood cosmology better than modern cosmologists, with their airy claim to innate knowledge of a creator being worth more to you than the countless hours of passionate research done by cosmologists.

You missed your time. Your steampunk philosophy would seemingly be better suited to the 18th or 19th centuries, and the ideas are about as up to date.

Objective knowledge is perennial - it always was. People differ in their sensitivity to it. Most are caught up in the duality of cave life. Some are open to the conscious vertical direction of thought. These experts of yours are often just BS artists. Many of the founding fathers were free Masons. The lincoln Memeorial has a lot of interesting relationships within it that suggest higher understanding. Your secular intolerance makes it easy for you to name call but harder for you to open to real undertanding. You would be astonished as to wht was understood during pre-sand Egypt

I agree that objective knowledge is perennial. Unfortunately, many ancients presented works of imagination as "objective knowledge" too. With dozens of competing claims to "objective knowledge", which is true? Which do you use?

Enter Aristotle. Enter science and the scientific method. Now people could work out who was telling the truth and who was not. Numerous theistic errors and misapprehensions were exposed. Many theists have been unhappy about this ever since about having their myths exposed as myths, hence this thread.

While you claim to be in touch with the deeper reality that I and others cannot, I don't see anything about your person and character that might suggest , "Hmm, maybe he's onto something". Your behaviour is a poor advertisement for your ideas when you posit yourself as being in touch with the true spirit of reality while others are, according to you, lost and floundering.

The image presented is one of Nick in touch with the deep, cool, still waters of God while the rest of us thrash about in the waves and shallows of superficial life. Yet you seem to thrash about more than most ...

[Nick_A]

Greta

I agree that objective knowledge is perennial. Unfortunately, many ancients presented works of imagination as "objective knowledge" too. With dozens of competing claims to "objective knowledge", which is true? Which do you use?

Quite true. It has been this way since the beginning. There is objective knowledge and there are opinions created by “experts.” The question becomes how to sense the difference.

Matthew 13

10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”
11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:
“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15 For this people’s heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’[a]
16 But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

If Jesus is right, we live in imagination and need a higher quality of seeing and hearing than our normal conditioned responses defined by imagination.

Enter Aristotle. Enter science and the scientific method. Now people could work out who was telling the truth and who was not. Numerous theistic errors and misapprehensions were exposed. Many theists have been unhappy about this ever since about having their myths exposed as myths, hence this thread.

Science is good for revealing and defining facts. However, it cannot answer the question of objective human meaning and purpose. If Jesus is right and Socrates is right to say that “I know nothing” people like me are willing to start from square one and admit we know nothing. This is offensive to you and other secularists since it questions the knowledge and values of the Great Beast.

While you claim to be in touch with the deeper reality that I and others cannot, I don't see anything about your person and character that might suggest , "Hmm, maybe he's onto something". Your behaviour is a poor advertisement for your ideas when you posit yourself as being in touch with the true spirit of reality while others are, according to you, lost and floundering.

There is nothing deep about admitting we know nothing. The greats of the past and some in the present have enabled us to get a glimpse of what new eyes and ears mean in relation to experiencing vertical universal structure for what it is and Man’s place and purpose within it. It isn’t a matter of arguing mystical imagination but of the need and willingness to make the necessary efforts towards detachment to experience what is real. The Great Beast struggles against this and is strengthened by secular intolerance in order to retain the status quo and our psychological slavery to imagination.

The image presented is one of Nick in touch with the deep, cool, still waters of God while the rest of us thrash about in the waves and shallows of superficial life. Yet you seem to thrash about more than most ...

What you call thrashing about is the simple willingness to consciously experience and admit the reality of the human condition. It is intolerable for secularists and why you must be offended by me. Both Jesus and Socrates were killed for revealing the slavery of the human condition.The teachings of how to awaken had to be taught in private to avoid them being prostituted. They had to be killed. What they spoke of was intolerable for the dominance of the great Beast.

As is said: “a stick has two ends.” Jesus had to die as he did. His conscious death opened a path for accelerated conscious human evolution with the help of the Holy Spirit. That was his mission. It is intolerable for conditioned secularism which has the Great Beast as its idol but is welcomed by the human essence.

[Greta]

I agree that objective knowledge is perennial. Unfortunately, many ancients presented works of imagination as "objective knowledge" too. With dozens of competing claims to "objective knowledge", which is true? Which do you use?

Quite true. It has been this way since the beginning. There is objective knowledge and there are opinions created by “experts.”

I'm okay with opinions of most "experts" since they have worked hard to know their subject. I have more problems with those without expertise who causally denigrate the work of those who are smarter and more productive and more diligent than themselves. This anti-expert attitude is understandable, although very much about the ignorant and lowbrow.

Basically, over decades, the time-stressed, impressionable, lazy and the stupid have been presented with constant misrepresentations by self interested capitalist media such as Fox/Murdoch, with constant misrepresentations of scientific information, inevitably skewed stats and charts, polemic presented as fact, bias in selection of interviews, bias in the questions asked, in the responses to answers, in the editing, and so on.

Now for many years one of News Ltd's main shareholders was an oil sheik. Murdoch's friends and investments are in fossil fuel or related areas and he's on the board of at least one oil and shale company in the US, and so on. So it was in his interest and of other fossil fuel affiliates and boosters to cast doubt on expert opinion, especially those of scientists.

Now we are terribly mixed up, with people more inclined to listen to Joe the Blogger than dedicated practitioners. All it does is weaken a society by making it less informed.

If Jesus is right, we live in imagination and need a higher quality of seeing and hearing than our normal conditioned responses defined by imagination.

Sure, and as a science and sci fi fan, amateur musician, cartoonist and digital artist, and keen, if psychonaut I love to create and use my imagination. I just don't like works of imagination presented as fact.

Enter Aristotle. Enter science and the scientific method. Now people could work out who was telling the truth and who was not. Numerous theistic errors and misapprehensions were exposed. Many theists have been unhappy about this ever since about having their myths exposed as myths, hence this thread.

Science is good for revealing and defining facts. However, it cannot answer the question of objective human meaning and purpose.

Nor can religion, just that it makes claims.

Objective human meaning is clear enough to me ATM. We are not only part of the Earth (and the Sun and galaxy) but agents of the Earth's current transformation and disseminators of the things it created on its surface so as to continue this remarkable story - from the molten geology through to today's Anthropocene period.

What is not meaningful about being part of all this? To be a human being living safely ensconced in a society, given all that we have learned (from experts!) about how we came about, is an incredibly privileged position existentially. In our societies we are safely partitioned from many of the dangers and torments that plague almost all other animals. How is it that we should be so lucky while trillions of others aren't?

There is meaning to be found everywhere in existence if one is fairly happy. However, when people are miserable, unable to accept the (admittedly often hard-to-accept) chaos, injustice, foolishness and perils of their lives, then meaning is harder to find. At that point we might look to either the profane or the metaphysical for meaning.

It isn’t a matter of arguing mystical imagination but of the need and willingness to make the necessary efforts towards detachment to experience what is real. The Great Beast struggles against this and is strengthened by secular intolerance in order to retain the status quo and our psychological slavery to imagination.

Nick, I'd like to see you try to post a comment without reference to the bloody Great Beast or (FFS!) "secular intolerance". These are fixations. Clichés soon loses their power anyway. I challenge you to refer to these concepts with different terms.

Note that whatever it is you focus on, positively or negatively, the more you become like it. Is that what you want?

The image presented is one of Nick in touch with the deep, cool, still waters of God while the rest of us thrash about in the waves and shallows of superficial life. Yet you seem to thrash about more than most ...

What you call thrashing about is the simple willingness to consciously experience and admit the reality of the human condition. It is intolerable for secularists and why you must be offended by me. Both Jesus and Socrates were killed for revealing the slavery of the human condition.The teachings of how to awaken had to be taught in private to avoid them being prostituted. They had to be killed. What they spoke of was intolerable for the dominance of the great Beast.

I'm old enough to tell passion from malcontent. You come across as anxious, depressed and deeply paranoid. Everything is a problem. Everything is a big deal.

Maybe you just need to retire? Getting off the treadmill and being more free is wonderful! I think that is where you can find the detachment you seek so badly. Save up enough dollars and you only have to deal with your beloved Great Beast at tax time and occasional dealings with council.

[Nick_A]

Greta

I'm okay with opinions of most "experts" since they have worked hard to know their subject. I have more problems with those without expertise who causally denigrate the work of those who are smarter and more productive and more diligent than themselves. This anti-expert attitude is understandable, although very much about the ignorant and lowbrow.

You aren’t attracted to knowledge which devolves into opinions you argue about. The world agrees with you and prefers to battle over opinions. However, there are some who are attracted to the knowledge representing the source of opinions and why this devolution and all the problems associated with it takes place. Authentic philosophy and religion stimulates the mind and heart into conscious contemplation of the source while the world remains totally absorbed in arguing opinions.

Sure, and as a science and sci fi fan, amateur musician, cartoonist and digital artist, and keen, if psychonaut I love to create and use my imagination. I just don't like works of imagination presented as fact.

Neither Jesus or Socrates were overly concerned with earthly facts. They are just partial truths. Jesus enabled the apostles to experience the psychological truth of what he taught. Socrates through the Socratic dialogue enabled those participating to reach intellectual truth. Arguing earthly facts and their interpretations was left to the Pharisees or the government.

Nor can religion, just that it makes claims.

Exoteric religions or secularized religions make claims. Esoteric religions invite a person to experientially verify and offer the means to do so.

Objective human meaning is clear enough to me ATM. We are not only part of the Earth (and the Sun and galaxy) but agents of the Earth's current transformation and disseminators of the things it created on its surface so as to continue this remarkable story - from the molten geology through to today's Anthropocene period.

What is not meaningful about being part of all this? To be a human being living safely ensconced in a society, given all that we have learned (from experts!) about how we came about, is an incredibly privileged position existentially. In our societies we are safely partitioned from many of the dangers and torments that plague almost all other animals. How is it that we should be so lucky while trillions of others aren't?

There is meaning to be found everywhere in existence if one is fairly happy. However, when people are miserable, unable to accept the (admittedly often hard-to-accept) chaos, injustice, foolishness and perils of their lives, then meaning is harder to find. At that point we might look to either the profane or the metaphysical for meaning.

You’ve described animal meaning and purpose well often provided through idolatry of the Great Beast which determines what should be done. In contrast to meaning and purpose for the human animal which is provided by the world, conscious human meaning and purpose is actualized by consciously receiving awakening influences from above and giving to below. Animal purpose is on the ground. Human purpose unites levels of reality – above and below. It is the conscious potential for human being. The Beast struggles against it since it threatens its imagined self importance and dominance in the world or Plato’s cave.

Nick, I'd like to see you try to post a comment without reference to the bloody Great Beast or (FFS!) "secular intolerance". These are fixations. Clichés soon loses their power anyway. I challenge you to refer to these concepts with different terms.

The title of this thread is “Secular Intolerance.” It is an important subject because of its insidious effect on the human psyche of the young who are feeling the natural attraction to awakening. It is an ugly egoistic expression which unfortunately has become dominant in many schools. I see no reason to support it in order to appear intelligent to secularists.

Note that whatever it is you focus on, positively or negatively, the more you become like it. Is that what you want?

You only give yourself two choices and argue these choices. However, there is a third choice. One can open to the direction from which these choices appeared and reconcile duality on that basis.

I'm old enough to tell passion from malcontent. You come across as anxious, depressed and deeply paranoid. Everything is a problem. Everything is a big deal.

If this were true I couldn’t be good in bed or even have a sense of humor. The human condition is a big problem. It seems quite clear that technology is advancing while human understanding remains the same. If this continues, our species is doomed. Real philosophy and the essence of religion seeks to promote human understanding through providing what is necessary to acquire it. Has philosophy sunk so low that its main concern now is to argue politics? It is depressing to read of what takes place in the world but does no good to become depressed or paranoic over it. It is better to find those in the real world who share these concerns and unite in this common cause in support of human understanding.

Maybe you just need to retire? Getting off the treadmill and being more free is wonderful! I think that is where you can find the detachment you seek so badly. Save up enough dollars and you only have to deal with your beloved Great Beast at tax time and occasional dealings with council.

Maybe Jimmy Buffett has the right idea in his song Margaritaville. I’ll retire to Margaritaville, find some island girls, play island music, drink island rum while eating shrimp. If the people ask was there a woman to blame I’ll say yes. It was Greta’s secularizing that did it. How much can one take?

"Margaritaville"

Nibblin' on sponge cake,
Watchin' the sun bake;
All of those tourists covered with oil.
Strummin' my six string on my front porch swing.
Smell those shrimp-
They're beginnin' to boil.

Wasted away again in Margaritaville,
Searchin' for my lost shaker of salt.
Some people claim that there's a woman to blame,
But I know it's nobody's fault.

[Harbal]

When you take the trouble to actually read what Nick is saying, it doesn't seem to mean a damn thing. Nick obviously doesn't like the way things are, probably because he can't fit in, and he's glimpsed a shadow of something he's convinced is far preferable. The trouble seems to be that, because he can't see what's causing the shadow, his description of it necessarily has to be very vague. Even if it turns out that the shadow Nick is chasing is made by the Sun, rather than the fire in Plato's cave, it is still only a shadow and contains no more "truth" than any other shadow. Or, to put it another way, Nick doesn't know what he's talking about.