[ExI] Rick Warren on religion

[William Flynn Wallace]

What we’re saying is that your concept of “self” that is, how you define
yourself as a person distinct from others, breaks down if you are the only
person.

I agree with everything that Dave said.  I am acutely aware that, as a
social psychologist, a lot of what you say is true: that we define
ourselves in part by how we compare to others in personality, intelligence,
etc., whether we view others as hostile or friendly, and so on.

But as Dave said, that's just not all we are.  We can look at the physical
world and know certain things about how to do things in it, how to
accomplish eating and drinking.  We can identify ourselves in part by our
likes and dislikes:  food, music, colors, landscapes.  Take religion:  my
views on that do not depend on comparing myself to others's views.  Mine
are just mine.  I can compare with words like agnostic, which separates me
from many believers, but if there are no others, I still have what I
believe.

In short, if I were to be left alone on this planet, I would certainly miss
others dreadfully, but there would still be a 'me' and I would not lack for
things to love, to do, to accomplish and a lot more

bill w

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 3:16 PM Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 3:01 PM SR Ballard <sen.otaku at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> If your identity requires people, and you remove the people, how can the
>> identity continue?
>>
>
> My identity doesn't require other people. Without other people my identity
> will change, but it'll still be mine.
>
> The USA is a nation. It’s boundaries rely on treaty, and those treaties
>> rely on governments. With no people, there are no government, thus no
>> nations.
>>
>
> If I'm the last person on Earth, and I think I'm in the US, then I'm in
> the US. I don't need governments to validate my beliefs.
>
> You cannot maintain citizenship to a country which does not exist.
>>
>
> I can make a country exist.
>
> How could you possibly maintain a meaningful “job” as we currently
>> understand one in a capitalist society, if there is no money, no goods or
>> services to exchange, and no one to consume the product you create. There
>> is no possible financial end, as there are no people.
>>
>
> I would redefine "job" to apply to a non-capitalist world.
>
> If a Church is a religious organization, then it ceases to exist when
>> there is no one to organize it.
>>
>
> If I'm the only member of the Church, it ceases to exist when I say it
> does.
>
>
>> If it is a body of believers it ends when there are no believers.
>>
>
> OK, so if I believe then it doesn't end.
>
> If there are no people, how would you know if you were still a misanthrope.
>>
>
> I would ask myself "do you wish there were other people?" and if the
> answer was "no" then I'd know I'm still a misanthrope.
>
> There is no way to check.
>>
>
> See above.
>
>
>> Similarly you cannot be anxious of social interactions if their are none,
>>
>
> Sure you can; you can be anxious of potential social interactions. There
> don't have to be monsters for one to be afraid of monsters.
>
> and you can’t be confident in them either because they fail to exist.
>> Similarly, you are now neither smart nor dumb, because your responses to
>> events are precisely the definition of average.
>>
>
> You can make wise or unwise decisions, whether there are other people or
> not.
>
>
>> Your attitudes and reactions literally become the only possible ones. If
>> you took an IQ a thousand times, your score would average to 100 because
>> you are the only person who could be used to average the score.
>>
>
> IQ becomes meaningless but intelligence doesn't cease to exist.
>
> The concept of “self” is created in relation to that which is not the self
>> (the other). No one is arguing that your physical body would dissolve and
>> that you would ascend to an enlightened non-material self.
>>
>
> So what's your point? Without other people I cease to be a person? That's
> ludicrous.
>
> What we’re saying is that your concept of “self” that is, how you define
>> yourself as a person distinct from others, breaks down if you are the only
>> person.
>>
>
> No it doesn't, it just changes.
>
> Let’s take a for example here: how would you describe yourself? What type
>> of person are you? How would that sense of self be impacted by no longer
>> having other people?
>>
>
> I'd be different, but I wouldn't cease to exist.
>
> -Dave
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20181214/ddd30cef/attachment.html>