[ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue 4

Danavictorston at aol.com Danavictorston at aol.com
Fri Jun 4 07:03:29 UTC 2010


 
After 4 years of dedication I've left the Universalist Unitarian  church . 
My view is the UU church is good to a point . We lost our  minister , the 
board elect is now republican and atheist and  the result is a 'fall in line' 
approach to a don't make waves agenda.  The spiritual empowerment i need 
from a church is trust in  it's people the UU church I left is based on faith 
in  it's policies and not its members. 
 Dana

 
 
In a message dated 6/3/2010 8:00:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org writes:

Send  extropy-chat mailing list submissions to
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the  World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
or, via email,  send a message with subject or body 'help' to
extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org

You can reach the person  managing the list at
extropy-chat-owner at lists.extropy.org

When replying, please edit your  Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of extropy-chat  digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: to install  (John Grigg)
2. Re: two observations (John  Grigg)
3. Jeanne Robinson, wife of Spider Robinson, has died  due to
cancer (John Grigg)
4. Re: to  install (Tom Nowell)
5. Re: to install  (samantha)
6. Re: to install (samantha)
7. Re:  to install  (samantha)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message:  1
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:54:36 -0700
From: John Grigg  <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>
To: ddraig at pobox.com, ExI chat list  <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] to  install
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimbNpSYqefHrnsfkkOCUvm_IF4jMfRuitukA-7c at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hold on here, for those of you who  reject conservative mainstream/old
school denominations & faiths, why  not attend a Unitarian Universalist
congregation?? LOL

I have  attended Unitarian services a few times, and they definitely teach  
ethics
(special classes for the children) & also have fun social  gatherings.  I am
very impressed with what I have heard about their  "OWL" training
program to teach kids about sex.

John

On  6/2/10, ddraig <ddraig at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3 June 2010 13:19,  Anna Taylor <femmechakra at yahoo.ca>  wrote:
>
>
>>  Why shouldn't there be a place that  people can go to feel loved?
>>
>
> What if you are gay,  or of some wildly different faith? What then? It 
seems
> to me that  pretty much all churches are places you can go to feel loved 
*as
> long  as you fit into their narrow definition of allowable  memesets*
>
>
> If I want to feel loved, I'll go to rave.  Ooooooodles of love, gushing 
out
> all over everyone  there.
>
>
> I don't buy into this concept that you need to  believe in some giant
> invisible sapce-wizard to lead a moral life. I  grew up reading a lot of
> greek and roman classics from an early age. I  am an extremely moral and
> upright person. Annoyingly so, according to  most of the people I know. My
> parents are *fiercely* anti-religion and  the only time I have *ever* 
been to
> a church is for a wedding. Or a  funeral.
>
> Sometimes I'll rock up to cathedral to ooh and aaah  at the architecture.
> It seems to me if you can't teach your children  morals and values without
> some external (and bullshit-based) structure  and support group, you're
> failing as a parent. I'd say you should not  have had kids at all, but 
that
> tends to get breeders all flippy-outy  and punchy-punchy.
>
>
> Dwayne
>  --
>   ddraig at pobox.com irc.deoxy.org  #chat
>    ...r.e.t.u.r.n....t.o....t.h.e....s.o.u.r.c.e...
>   http://www.barrelfullofmonkeys.org/Data/3-death.jpg
> our aim is  wakefulness,  our enemy is dreamless  sleep
>


------------------------------

Message:  2
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 00:09:28 -0700
From: John Grigg  <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>
To: ExI chat list  <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] two  observations
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimQ2hKnLgKGwOll684dnVDg0ppHJPbSmZPqIQxc at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

When I was new to Arizona I encountered  a large soft object bouncing
off my head.  I looked down and there was  a fairly large tarantula who
was obviously used to walking on the ceiling,  but it had gotten too
big for such an activity and so gravity took over!  lol

I remember another time when a large white spider (the size of a  large
tarantula, I assume it was one) came inside and ran around the  place
like a speed demon!  I'd never seen a tarantula move like this  (I
always thought they were fairly slow moving creatures) and I could  not
catch the lightning fast arachnid.  I opened up a door and  amazingly,
the spider ran right out and I never saw it again.  I  sometimes wonder
if there was a genetic engineering lab  nearby...

John


On 6/2/10, spike <spike66 at att.net>  wrote:
>
>
> ...On Behalf Of Kevin  Freels
>   Subject: Re: [ExI] two  observations
>
>   >>I think it's interesting the  way spiders fly...
>   
>   >...As I turned  my head to follow I could see hundreds, or perhaps
> thousands of spider  silk strands shimmering in the sky. It was weird, but
>  beautiful...
>
>
> Spiders are an example of bugs with the  habit of doing something in 
unison,
> like your thousands of silk  strands example.  My own is when I went on a
> motorcycle ride in  the Mojave Desert on a hot spring morning in 1984, 
soon
> after having  moved there.  I had never seen a tarantula, but that day I 
saw
>  one, stopped, examined it.  Then another and another, as I headed out  
toward
> Death Valley.  Then dozens per mile, crossing the road,  from east to 
west,
> all of them walking walking walking, like something  out of a horror 
flick.
> Oy.  Good thing I like bugs,  jeeeeez.
>
> That was the only time I ever actually saw a  tarantula migration in
> progress, even though I went out there on that  same road dozens of times.
>
> spike
>
>  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSIGcWATJ3g
>    
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing  list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


------------------------------

Message:  3
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 00:19:55 -0700
From: John Grigg  <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>
To: ExI chat list  <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>, World
Transhumanist  Association Discussion List
<wta-talk at transhumanism.org>,   transfigurism
<transfigurism at googlegroups.com>
Subject: [ExI] Jeanne Robinson, wife  of Spider Robinson,    has died due
to  cancer
Message-ID:
<AANLkTin9vAgfy5MeBlkktMvCU723QQwbiEVFrmfXvYYk at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

One of my favorite science fiction  writers, Spider Robinson, has
shared this about the passing of his wife  from cancer.

If you have not read Robinson's the "Callahan's Saloon"  novels, you
should.  They are among the most humanistic and touching  sf/fantasy
stories I have ever read.

Subject: Buchi Eihei In  pacem
From: Spider

Jeanne Robinson left this life at about 4:45  Sunday afternoon, a gentle
smile on her face.

Her departure was  quite peaceful and she was in no pain at all.

(Buchi Eihei means  "dancing wisdom, eternal peace". It's the name Jeanne's
Soto  Zen
instructor bestowed on  her).

--Spider"


------------------------------

Message:  4
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:41:59 +0000 (GMT)
From: Tom Nowell  <nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk>
To:  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: Re: [ExI] to install
Message-ID:  <718218.72776.qm at web27003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=utf-8


Spike wrote:"  In my own case in  having to instill moral values in my own 
3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly  paradoxical position.  I can allow him 
to go with his mother to church,  but I am in a position of having to 
carefully explain that while the ethical  and moral values are OK, the entire 
theory behind them, the entire memetic  infrastructure in support of
it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at  all.

So what would go on in the mind of a child, given such  instruction?  I
haven't said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell  him anything I know
to be false.

spike"

Here we hit the big  question - how to install a filter against memetic 
infiltration that will last  until adult reasoning is sufficiently developed 
and will hopefully provide  backup when they're adults. 

A three year-old is still at the stage  where magical thinking comes 
naturally. You read the them a fairy tale and  read them a short story by a master 
of western literature, and they'll  probably think the fairy tale makes 
more sense than the literature. As  psychology is full of contradictory 
studies, I honestly couldn't say how long  a period of magical thinking is 
necessary for normal development.

The  traditional method of keeping your child free from the strange ideas 
of people  not like yourself is to ram their brains full of the traditions 
and ideas of  people like yourself so anything they're exposed to will bounce 
off your  pre-installed ideas. But you've dumped the traditions of your 
people in order  to embrace shiny and new philosophical ideas of the future.

So, do you  try and teach them sensibly and hope they don't pick up strange 
memes from the  people they meet at school? Or do you go radical 
transhumanist and make up  fairy stories about the future - teach Nick Bostrom's 
parable of the great  dragon as if it is prophecy, read Dr Broderick's tales for 
children each  night, and tell them that there's no such thing as a soul or 
how do you hope  to be uploaded? Admittedly, this may cause some dogmatic 
thinking on their  part when they're grown up, but looking at this list's 
arguments there's  plenty of Idees fixe amongst articulate and apparently 
rational  transhumanists.

Finally, to play devil's advocate - what if your  children just aren't as 
rational and intelligent as you? Of course, your child  is special and will 
go on to do great things and live out your dreams by  proxy. But just suppose 
for a minute your cosy illusion is utterly wrong, and  there's nothing 
special about your child - they're firmly in the 95-105 IQ  range, no more given 
to logic or dreaming than any other kid in their class -  are you quite 
sure your methods for protecting them from harmful memes will  still work?

Tom






------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu,  03 Jun 2010 03:57:43 -0700
From: samantha <sjatkins at mac.com>
To:  ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] to  install
Message-ID: <4C078AA7.108 at mac.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Anna Taylor  wrote:
> Thank you Jef.  Yes I watched it when you posted it on  facebook.  Again, 
my... was exactly what you would call Catholic or  others would call 
synoguoges or place of worship.  My comment was not in  referal to a suggestive 
church or religion it was about "churches", which I  believe should be called: 
A place to help others at no cost.  
How is  that?  There are huge costs.  They instill mystical claptrap as  
the basis for everything they teach.  It becomes a sort of package  deal 
in the minds of many.  The claptrap is the reason why the  morality is so 
and the reason why every thing good in their lives is good  is because 
they are good.  Vicious circle.  This is not by  accident.  Religions are 
designed to install themselves in this  way.  Instead of learning ethics 
on the basis of reason and reality a  version of ethics is learned based 
on mysticism and acceptance on  faith.  This is incredibly costly.  It 
splits the mind that  takes it seriously.   Most minds don't take it that 
seriously  out of self-defense.  As a result ethics becomes this 
untrustworthy  realm one gives lip service to but really does not have 
integrated at  all.  Morality is split from reality.  The mind  
compartmentalizes after all and simply will no longer look at some  
things deeply.    Very costly.

On top of this churches  generally encourage heavy tithing and other 
volunteering of "time and  talents".  More costs. 

> Probably the wrong choice of  words.  How about "A place to be nice?".  
I actually agree with  part of that.  A place where you just let down the 
card and open your  heart right on up.  Seems to me we can do that and 
make places to do  with one another without all the rest though.


> When I replied  it was because someone mentioned, "well parents should 
just teach their  children".  My apology if that wasn't clear.  Not all adults 
have  been well taught, where can they go to get spiritual help?
What exactly is  this "spiritual" help?  You mean just life help and 
learning to be as  well as you can be and enjoy life and be a boon to 
self and others?   You don't need religion for that.  There is humanism, 
self-help  groups, therapy, trusted friends, support systems - all 
without church or  religion.

>  I still think churches should be a place of  spiritual growth but i'm 
aware that it's not that easy.  Just as it isn't  just that easy to ban 
churches and expect spiritual growth to simply appear  without any form of 
guidance.

Same question.  What is "spiritual  growth" as opposed to just plain 
growth as a human being (and  more)?   I am very curious about that.  I 
know from  experience that it can feel different, very different.  But I 
am not  at all sure why or that the why is something to be trusted.

-  samantha




------------------------------

Message:  6
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:07:44 -0700
From: samantha  <sjatkins at mac.com>
To: ddraig at pobox.com, ExI chat list  <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] to  install
Message-ID: <4C078D00.203 at mac.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"

ddraig wrote:
>  On 3 June 2010 13:19, Anna Taylor <femmechakra at yahoo.ca 
>  <mailto:femmechakra at yahoo.ca>> wrote:
>   
>
>      Why shouldn't there be a place that  people can go to feel loved? 
>
>
> What if you are gay, or  of some wildly different faith? What then? It 
> seems to me that pretty  much all churches are places you can go to 
> feel loved *as long as you  fit into their narrow definition of 
> allowable  memesets*

Depends on the church.  As the Mormons came up recently  I most 
definitely would not recommend being or attempting to become Mormon  if 
you are queer in gender and/or sexuality.  I had friends in both  camps 
that went through a great deal of pain and damage due to the Mormon  
stance on such things.  It was no accident that the Mormons were  
strongly involved in stopping gay marriage in California. 

That  said, there are open and accepting congregations in various faith  
traditions.
>
> If I want to feel loved, I'll go to rave.  Ooooooodles of love, gushing 
> out all over everyone  there.
>
Oh yeah.  Very powerful too.  And for that group  "psychic bond" thing I  
recommend a good wiccan ritual.  Don't  buy into the bizarre mysticism 
but way more of that energy than I ever  felt in church. 

>
> I don't buy into this concept that you  need to believe in some giant 
> invisible sapce-wizard to lead a moral  life. I grew up reading a lot 
> of greek and roman classics from an  early age. I am an extremely moral 
> and upright person. Annoyingly so,  according to most of the people I 
> know. My parents are *fiercely*  anti-religion and the only time I have 
> *ever* been to a church is for  a wedding. Or a funeral.
>
> Sometimes I'll rock up to cathedral  to ooh and aaah at the architecture.
> It seems to me if you can't teach  your children morals and values 
> without some external (and  bullshit-based) structure and support 
> group, you're failing as a  parent. I'd say you should not have had 
> kids at all, but that tends  to get breeders all flippy-outy and 
> punchy-punchy.

Yes.   I would go further and say that you can't really teach morals and 
values  without screwing up their minds unless you teach it devoid of 
mystical  nonsense.

- samantha

-------------- next part  --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:  
<http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100603/07979659/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message:  7
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:21:51 -0700
From: samantha  <sjatkins at mac.com>
To: ExI chat list  <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] to  install
Message-ID: <4C07904F.7020304 at mac.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"

spike  wrote:
>  
>
>   
>> ...On Behalf Of  Anna Taylor
>> Subject: [ExI] to install
>>
>> The  conversation went, "Well if you are going to go to 
>> church, you  might well as be..." 
>>
>> I agree.  I think churches  are a really good place to learn 
>> moral and valued skills...   Does eveyone agree?
>>
>> Just curious
>>  Anna
>>     
>
> Hi Anna, goooood  question.  In my own case in having to instill moral 
values
> in my  own 3 yr old son, I am stuck in a wildly paradoxical position.
At that age  the basic lesson, which may not take for a few years, is 
that other people  are just like him inside and their feelings and needs 
matter to them the  same way his do to him.  I remember very distinctly 
the moment in my  childhood when I really got that all the way through.   
Much of  the rest of interpersonal ethics grows out of that.  The other 
part  of morality is learning to not attempt to bullshit reality in any 
way  whatsoever.    It is learning to be rational and seeks to "make it  
real", to actually achieve, gain and maintain what you actually value  
including the wellbeing of others you value.    That honest to  reality 
thing will not make life easy with respect to so many he will  interact 
with who are nearly explicitly taught to be dishonest or that  their is 
something more important than reality.  But it is very very  important.

>   I can
> allow him to go with his  mother to church, but I am in a position of 
having
> to carefully  explain that while the ethical and moral values are OK,
I don't think the  ethical and moral values taught their are ok.  They 
are based on a  non-reality set of premises and thus are ungrounded  
pronouncements.   They teach that anything done for yourself,  because 
you value it (however rationally) is probably problematic and at  the 
least not nearly so good as doing things for "others" - any old  others, 
preferably for complete strangers one has no rational interest in  
whatsoever.  This is a near complete perversion of honest sane  ethical 
and moral values.   
>  the
> entire  theory behind them, the entire memetic infrastructure in support 
of
>  it, is *completely* wrong, no truth there at all.
>    

If they basis is wrong then in effect saying the ethics is ok is  saying 
that ungrounded ethical commandments that cannot be understood to  the 
root are "ok".  Do you really think so? 
> So what would go  on in the mind of a child, given such instruction?  I
> haven't  said anything yet, but I flatly refuse to tell him anything I 
know
> to  be false.
>   
That is good.  Careful of sins of  omission though.  :)

- samantha

-------------- next part  --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:  
<http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100603/5efcb263/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat  mailing  list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


End  of extropy-chat Digest, Vol 81, Issue  4
*******************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100604/2097fc68/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list