literature as religion
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/22/03 9:05:58 AM, RJHill241@... writes:
<< I really don't know if I planned to
share that his writings in this book are very similar to my beliefs, but it
is
one of those books that I like to read when I'm feeling far to bogged down
with
earthiness ;-). >>
Illusions is a good story, but it wasn't intended to be a religion.
There are people who get their religious urges out over Star Trek or Star
Wars. My husband is enamored of the philosophies in Babylon 5.
Should literature serve as someone's strongly held beliefs?
Should we treat the beliefs of a Trek-fan (trekker/trekkie/trekoid) who has
read the Bible in Klingon and drinks blood and prune juice as reverently as we
treat those of a hard-working, sincerely believing Catholic nun?
Sandra
<< I really don't know if I planned to
share that his writings in this book are very similar to my beliefs, but it
is
one of those books that I like to read when I'm feeling far to bogged down
with
earthiness ;-). >>
Illusions is a good story, but it wasn't intended to be a religion.
There are people who get their religious urges out over Star Trek or Star
Wars. My husband is enamored of the philosophies in Babylon 5.
Should literature serve as someone's strongly held beliefs?
Should we treat the beliefs of a Trek-fan (trekker/trekkie/trekoid) who has
read the Bible in Klingon and drinks blood and prune juice as reverently as we
treat those of a hard-working, sincerely believing Catholic nun?
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/22/03 10:51:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
I wrote:
<< I really don't know if I planned to >
book.
Sandra wrote:
Should literature serve as someone's strongly held beliefs?
***I can't say whether literature alone can lead one to religion, whatever
religion they may claim. Many people use the written words of the bible, the
quoran, the torah, to support their choices in religions. But for me they could
be considered literature with good stories, just like "Illusions". I don't
prescribe to any of the religions that people often base their faiths on those
books. Then again, I don't really claim to have a religion.
Just like many other things in life, people get stuck in labels. For many
years I said I was a Gnostic Christian. It is kind of like when you say you're a
homeschooler, even though you know you don't school at home or school at all.
It's a label that can sometimes eleviate any questions you aren't up to
answering. In a group of Christians, all they needed to hear was that word and
little was asked about my beliefs from that point on. It wasn't untrue, it just
wasn't as cut and dry as they may have preferred it to be. On the occasions that
someone would actually ask me what Gnostic meant, I'd cut that definition
short also, depending on how much I knew about their own belief system or
religion. If they seemed interested or asked for more detailed information, I would
happily share. Now, I don't really call myself anything when asked what religion
I am. I usually say I don't have a religion and somehow that always jumps the
asker to the conclusion that I am an Atheist. Back to labels we go. Sometimes
I'll explain, sometimes I'm not in the mood, sometimes I don't care, just
depends.
Overall, to each their own. If being a trekkie (and whatever that may
encompass) floats a persons boat, then cool by me. It's about them and not about me.
The twins asked the other day, when a friend of theirs was asking them about
being "saved", "Mom, is there a wrong way to believe? And how do you know when
you are right?" My explaination to them was, "Well, to me there is no wrong
about faith/philosophy/religion/beliefs. It's something personal, so personal
that I don't know any two people that agree on all of it. It's also something
earthly, so it's a concern of this plane. There are lots of groups of people
who see somethings similarly, enough to congregate, you know get together, and
they share many things based on having those things in common. As for knowing
who's right, I don't. But I don't think anyone else does. It's all about what
feels right to you, you have to choose. You may choose something totally
different than me, the way I have different beliefs than Grammy. All that I really
need you to always know, is that no matter what you choose, you will always be
my babies, I will always love you and I hope I never ask you to change those
beliefs for me. And if I ever do, remind me of this conversation and that it
has to be about you." I'm sure it won't be the last conversation we have about
it, but we have them all the time. A while back when my mom came over we
watched "Cholcolat" and Kass had me rollin though when she said, "What if it
doesn't matter what we think, if when we die we all meet up again and then a whole
bunch of people are walking around saying, 'Oh, I never thought you'd be here,
my bad!!!' " My mom smiled and said, "Yep, she's definately your kid!"
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
SandraDodd@... writes:
I wrote:
<< I really don't know if I planned to >
> share that his writings in this book are very similar to my beliefs, but itSandra wrote:
> is
> one of those books that I like to read when I'm feeling far to bogged down
> with
> earthiness ;-). >>
>
> Illusions is a good story, but it wasn't intended to be a religion.It is not my religion. My beliefs were in place long before I ever read the
>
book.
Sandra wrote:
Should literature serve as someone's strongly held beliefs?
***I can't say whether literature alone can lead one to religion, whatever
religion they may claim. Many people use the written words of the bible, the
quoran, the torah, to support their choices in religions. But for me they could
be considered literature with good stories, just like "Illusions". I don't
prescribe to any of the religions that people often base their faiths on those
books. Then again, I don't really claim to have a religion.
Just like many other things in life, people get stuck in labels. For many
years I said I was a Gnostic Christian. It is kind of like when you say you're a
homeschooler, even though you know you don't school at home or school at all.
It's a label that can sometimes eleviate any questions you aren't up to
answering. In a group of Christians, all they needed to hear was that word and
little was asked about my beliefs from that point on. It wasn't untrue, it just
wasn't as cut and dry as they may have preferred it to be. On the occasions that
someone would actually ask me what Gnostic meant, I'd cut that definition
short also, depending on how much I knew about their own belief system or
religion. If they seemed interested or asked for more detailed information, I would
happily share. Now, I don't really call myself anything when asked what religion
I am. I usually say I don't have a religion and somehow that always jumps the
asker to the conclusion that I am an Atheist. Back to labels we go. Sometimes
I'll explain, sometimes I'm not in the mood, sometimes I don't care, just
depends.
Overall, to each their own. If being a trekkie (and whatever that may
encompass) floats a persons boat, then cool by me. It's about them and not about me.
The twins asked the other day, when a friend of theirs was asking them about
being "saved", "Mom, is there a wrong way to believe? And how do you know when
you are right?" My explaination to them was, "Well, to me there is no wrong
about faith/philosophy/religion/beliefs. It's something personal, so personal
that I don't know any two people that agree on all of it. It's also something
earthly, so it's a concern of this plane. There are lots of groups of people
who see somethings similarly, enough to congregate, you know get together, and
they share many things based on having those things in common. As for knowing
who's right, I don't. But I don't think anyone else does. It's all about what
feels right to you, you have to choose. You may choose something totally
different than me, the way I have different beliefs than Grammy. All that I really
need you to always know, is that no matter what you choose, you will always be
my babies, I will always love you and I hope I never ask you to change those
beliefs for me. And if I ever do, remind me of this conversation and that it
has to be about you." I'm sure it won't be the last conversation we have about
it, but we have them all the time. A while back when my mom came over we
watched "Cholcolat" and Kass had me rollin though when she said, "What if it
doesn't matter what we think, if when we die we all meet up again and then a whole
bunch of people are walking around saying, 'Oh, I never thought you'd be here,
my bad!!!' " My mom smiled and said, "Yep, she's definately your kid!"
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fetteroll
on 9/22/03 2:41 PM, RJHill241@... at RJHill241@... wrote:
it more difficult for someone to get unschooling, then it's helpful to some
who are trying to get unschooling for the list to hold those beliefs up and
examine the ramifications. That's what the list is for.
Our beliefs, as Pam succinctly put it (but I can't find it now) and I took a
huge post saying ;-) are what we use to decide what are good and bad
choices. Part of the purpose of the list is to help people figure out how to
make the choices that will get them to unschooling and more joyful lives
with their families. And part of that process is examining the beliefs
people are using to filter their choices.
But even on a larger scale, do you really mean "whatever floats a person's
boat"? So if I hear voices from God that tell me to murder people, that's
"cool" by you? If my beliefs lead me to believe that it's a mandate from God
that I swat my children for sinful behavior with an appropriately sized
dowel chosen from a chart by age, then that's cool too?
your daughters in a moral atmosphere where murdering, stealing and generally
being hurtful are not good options. So, as long as their spirituality
doesn't cross those moral lines, then whatever they believe is cool with
you. Yes?
Some of people will look at what you said and what I said and think "Well,
*obviously* that's what she meant. And it's nitpicky to even question it."
On a list where the only tool we have to get our ideas across are the words
we use, those words are very important. If we were talking about things we
were all well familiar with, like how to nurse a baby, then we could rely on
people filling in the gaps of where our words weren't quite right. But the
list isn't about familiar things. It's very often about ideas that many
people have never contemplated before. So the words we use need to
accurately convey what we're thinking.
So, I definitely disagree and say there are wrong ways to believe -- wrong
for helping people get to unschooling, and wrong for a peaceful society of
differing beliefs. There are very definitely beliefs that won't help people
get where they want to go. There are ways that will turn people around from
where they want to go.
This list is about getting to unschooling so signing onto the list is
implying where someone wants to get is unschooling. (Or to at least listen
in and absorb some of the process of those who are getting there for those
who want to pick and choose.)
This list tries to help people see the ways of viewing the world that *will*
help them get where they imply they'd like to go by joining an unschooling
discussion list.
Joyce
> Overall, to each their own. If being a trekkie (and whatever that mayWhen a belief is brought to an unschooling discussion list that would make
> encompass) floats a persons boat, then cool by me. It's about them and not
> about me.
it more difficult for someone to get unschooling, then it's helpful to some
who are trying to get unschooling for the list to hold those beliefs up and
examine the ramifications. That's what the list is for.
Our beliefs, as Pam succinctly put it (but I can't find it now) and I took a
huge post saying ;-) are what we use to decide what are good and bad
choices. Part of the purpose of the list is to help people figure out how to
make the choices that will get them to unschooling and more joyful lives
with their families. And part of that process is examining the beliefs
people are using to filter their choices.
But even on a larger scale, do you really mean "whatever floats a person's
boat"? So if I hear voices from God that tell me to murder people, that's
"cool" by you? If my beliefs lead me to believe that it's a mandate from God
that I swat my children for sinful behavior with an appropriately sized
dowel chosen from a chart by age, then that's cool too?
> "Mom, is there a wrong way to believe? And how do you know whenWhich sounds really pretty. What I assume you mean is that you are raising
> you are right?" My explaination to them was, "Well, to me there is no wrong
> about faith/philosophy/religion/beliefs.
your daughters in a moral atmosphere where murdering, stealing and generally
being hurtful are not good options. So, as long as their spirituality
doesn't cross those moral lines, then whatever they believe is cool with
you. Yes?
Some of people will look at what you said and what I said and think "Well,
*obviously* that's what she meant. And it's nitpicky to even question it."
On a list where the only tool we have to get our ideas across are the words
we use, those words are very important. If we were talking about things we
were all well familiar with, like how to nurse a baby, then we could rely on
people filling in the gaps of where our words weren't quite right. But the
list isn't about familiar things. It's very often about ideas that many
people have never contemplated before. So the words we use need to
accurately convey what we're thinking.
So, I definitely disagree and say there are wrong ways to believe -- wrong
for helping people get to unschooling, and wrong for a peaceful society of
differing beliefs. There are very definitely beliefs that won't help people
get where they want to go. There are ways that will turn people around from
where they want to go.
This list is about getting to unschooling so signing onto the list is
implying where someone wants to get is unschooling. (Or to at least listen
in and absorb some of the process of those who are getting there for those
who want to pick and choose.)
This list tries to help people see the ways of viewing the world that *will*
help them get where they imply they'd like to go by joining an unschooling
discussion list.
Joyce
Holly Shaltz
Sandra writes:
<<Illusions is a good story, but it wasn't intended to be a religion.>>
Indeed, in another book, Bach writes about the dangers of putting one's
thoughts down on paper and having that taken to be the basis of a
religion. Fortunately, Illusions wasn't mentioned with that in mind.
Merely, it's a reminder that we choose to agree to the physical
'reality' of this world.
<<There are people who get their religious urges out over Star Trek or
Star Wars. My husband is enamored of the philosophies in Babylon 5.>>
Religion--which really doesn't exist in Star Trek (with the possible
exception of Chakotay (sp?) in Voyager) or Star Wars (can't speak to
Babylon 5 as I never watched it)--is a very different thing from
philosophy or morality or just plain values. I guess I don't know what
you mean by 'get their religious urges'.
I am a Trekkie in the sense that I admire the shows as reborn in the 80s
(in fact, they are the only TV shows I watch). I admire the values,
issues, conflicts, etc they illustrate, but I don't go to conventions
and/or identify with characters beyond merely enjoying their
performances. One of the best books around is _The Metaphysics of Star
Trek_. I also greatly enjoy the Star Wars movies. And I love _The Lord
of the Rings_, though I think the movies are disappointing. I don't get
my religious urges from any of these, books or movies/TV shows, but they
do reflect many of my deeply-held values, which makes them more
enjoyable to me.
<<Should literature serve as someone's strongly held beliefs?>>
I'm not sure I know what you mean here, either, but surely the Bible and
Koran are examples of literature providing religious beliefs, or
underlying those beliefs? Going back to Bach's writing, his beliefs as
expressed in the books are not a religion. But they have helped me
challenge the more or less Christian cultural upbringing I had, and
think more deeply about matters philosophical/religious/spiritual than I
might have otherwise. His books don't 'serve as my beliefs'. His books
simply helped me clarify where I stand, what I believe about myself, my
existence after this life, etc. Another person might take the books
more literally, and build a 'religion' around them. That's not my
choice, but who am I to deny that person his/her choice?
<<Should we treat the beliefs of a Trek-fan trekker/trekkie/trekoid) who
has read the Bible in Klingon and drinks blood and prune juice as
reverently as we treat those of a hard-working, sincerely believing
Catholic nun?>>
I don't think anyone suggested treating another's beliefs with
'reverence'. The Holly I mentioned above once told me that if I didn't
go to HER church--not merely her sect, but her specific church building
with her particular minister--that I would go to hell. I don't regard
such a belief with reverence by any means--in fact, I laughed at the
time, and laugh every time I remember the incident :) Though at the
same time I feel slightly saddened that she's chosen such a narrow way
to view the world.
But I respect that she has a right to her beliefs, as long as she
doesn't act on them in a way that harms me (my physical self--no one can
harm my spiritual self) or others I am responsible for. If she does,
then I walk away. If she follows, I take whatever steps I need to, to
protect myself and my loved ones.
Perhaps the real issue here is an assumption that I, or anyone else,
would believe *all* beliefs are equally valid, equally worthy of respect
or 'reverence'. I can't speak for anyone else, but for myself, of
course I don't believe all beliefs are equally valid :) If I did, I'd
be in a right quandary, wondering whether the other Holly was right that
I was going to hell. Against that, I'd have to place another person's
beliefs--that person told me I was going to heaven whether I liked it or
not because at one point I was baptized. Talk about a rock and a hard
place, particularly since I believe neither in heaven nor hell :)
My personal point of view is that I have respect--even to those who harm
me--for the PERSON. I don't have to respect the motivations, beliefs,
or actions and yet be able to respect the person. By respect I mean
that I (do my best) to accept others where they are in their lives;
accept that they are doing the best they can in any given set of
circumstances; accept that their beliefs are different from my own;
accept that they, like me, in spite of appearances, are part of the Tao;
and accept the fact that sometimes the intersections of our lives will
be painful, while othertimes will be rewarding.
So I accept your hypothetical Trekkie exactly as I accept your
hypothetical nun exactly as I accept Judie exactly as I accept you. We
are all traveling in this physical life for a time, all struggling to
make sense of the inherent conflict between the 'reality' we see and the
Reality we sense or remember, each of us groping toward a deeper
understanding of what physical life is all about.
The question becomes, how judgmental do we need to be of each other on
this journey? Does it help us each along, or hinder us? Ultimately,
how much does it matter? My physical self believes it matters a lot, my
spiritual self knows we are all 'dust in the wind' and it matters not
one whit.
And so the see-saw of life keeps teetering <g>
Holly
<<Illusions is a good story, but it wasn't intended to be a religion.>>
Indeed, in another book, Bach writes about the dangers of putting one's
thoughts down on paper and having that taken to be the basis of a
religion. Fortunately, Illusions wasn't mentioned with that in mind.
Merely, it's a reminder that we choose to agree to the physical
'reality' of this world.
<<There are people who get their religious urges out over Star Trek or
Star Wars. My husband is enamored of the philosophies in Babylon 5.>>
Religion--which really doesn't exist in Star Trek (with the possible
exception of Chakotay (sp?) in Voyager) or Star Wars (can't speak to
Babylon 5 as I never watched it)--is a very different thing from
philosophy or morality or just plain values. I guess I don't know what
you mean by 'get their religious urges'.
I am a Trekkie in the sense that I admire the shows as reborn in the 80s
(in fact, they are the only TV shows I watch). I admire the values,
issues, conflicts, etc they illustrate, but I don't go to conventions
and/or identify with characters beyond merely enjoying their
performances. One of the best books around is _The Metaphysics of Star
Trek_. I also greatly enjoy the Star Wars movies. And I love _The Lord
of the Rings_, though I think the movies are disappointing. I don't get
my religious urges from any of these, books or movies/TV shows, but they
do reflect many of my deeply-held values, which makes them more
enjoyable to me.
<<Should literature serve as someone's strongly held beliefs?>>
I'm not sure I know what you mean here, either, but surely the Bible and
Koran are examples of literature providing religious beliefs, or
underlying those beliefs? Going back to Bach's writing, his beliefs as
expressed in the books are not a religion. But they have helped me
challenge the more or less Christian cultural upbringing I had, and
think more deeply about matters philosophical/religious/spiritual than I
might have otherwise. His books don't 'serve as my beliefs'. His books
simply helped me clarify where I stand, what I believe about myself, my
existence after this life, etc. Another person might take the books
more literally, and build a 'religion' around them. That's not my
choice, but who am I to deny that person his/her choice?
<<Should we treat the beliefs of a Trek-fan trekker/trekkie/trekoid) who
has read the Bible in Klingon and drinks blood and prune juice as
reverently as we treat those of a hard-working, sincerely believing
Catholic nun?>>
I don't think anyone suggested treating another's beliefs with
'reverence'. The Holly I mentioned above once told me that if I didn't
go to HER church--not merely her sect, but her specific church building
with her particular minister--that I would go to hell. I don't regard
such a belief with reverence by any means--in fact, I laughed at the
time, and laugh every time I remember the incident :) Though at the
same time I feel slightly saddened that she's chosen such a narrow way
to view the world.
But I respect that she has a right to her beliefs, as long as she
doesn't act on them in a way that harms me (my physical self--no one can
harm my spiritual self) or others I am responsible for. If she does,
then I walk away. If she follows, I take whatever steps I need to, to
protect myself and my loved ones.
Perhaps the real issue here is an assumption that I, or anyone else,
would believe *all* beliefs are equally valid, equally worthy of respect
or 'reverence'. I can't speak for anyone else, but for myself, of
course I don't believe all beliefs are equally valid :) If I did, I'd
be in a right quandary, wondering whether the other Holly was right that
I was going to hell. Against that, I'd have to place another person's
beliefs--that person told me I was going to heaven whether I liked it or
not because at one point I was baptized. Talk about a rock and a hard
place, particularly since I believe neither in heaven nor hell :)
My personal point of view is that I have respect--even to those who harm
me--for the PERSON. I don't have to respect the motivations, beliefs,
or actions and yet be able to respect the person. By respect I mean
that I (do my best) to accept others where they are in their lives;
accept that they are doing the best they can in any given set of
circumstances; accept that their beliefs are different from my own;
accept that they, like me, in spite of appearances, are part of the Tao;
and accept the fact that sometimes the intersections of our lives will
be painful, while othertimes will be rewarding.
So I accept your hypothetical Trekkie exactly as I accept your
hypothetical nun exactly as I accept Judie exactly as I accept you. We
are all traveling in this physical life for a time, all struggling to
make sense of the inherent conflict between the 'reality' we see and the
Reality we sense or remember, each of us groping toward a deeper
understanding of what physical life is all about.
The question becomes, how judgmental do we need to be of each other on
this journey? Does it help us each along, or hinder us? Ultimately,
how much does it matter? My physical self believes it matters a lot, my
spiritual self knows we are all 'dust in the wind' and it matters not
one whit.
And so the see-saw of life keeps teetering <g>
Holly
[email protected]
Joyce wrote:
But even on a larger scale, do you really mean "whatever floats a person's
boat"? So if I hear voices from God that tell me to murder people, that's
"cool" by you? If my beliefs lead me to believe that it's a mandate from God
that I swat my children for sinful behavior with an appropriately sized
dowel chosen from a chart by age, then that's cool too?
***Actually, yes. Though the human part of me may not like it, the spiritual
part of my beliefs, would mandate that while on Earth, what you put out, you
get back, but even that is only at the human level. Therefore, my disdain for
something at the human level is not the same as my ability to accept even the
horrors of this life at my spirit level.
For me at soul level, there exist no good or bad, while at the human level
there is plenty of both. And while I understand that conceptually it may be
difficult to accept by those who don't believe that, for me, I strive to classify
which things in this life are my lessons and what they mean, even the most
horrifc events. I think there has to be a reason for everything. I don't claim to
"know" what that reason is, but I don't understand how there would be good if
there were no bad. So, in essence, experiencing both good and bad is
something my soul chose to do. For me, that would include the best of the best and
the worsed of the worsed. It goes back to the beliefs of lessons and desire to
have them while we are here. For me, everything beyond humanity belongs to a
greater existence. An existence that dosen't deal in good or bad. For I see
those as earth bound concepts.
Joyce wrote:
What I assume you mean is that you are raising
your daughters in a moral atmosphere where murdering, stealing and generally
being hurtful are not good options. So, as long as their spirituality
doesn't cross those moral lines, then whatever they believe is cool with
you. Yes?
*** No. I can only choose to share how important it is to put positive out so
that they receive positive back while they exist here. On the human level I
want their existence to be full of positive energy. I, like Judie, believe that
we contracted to experience specific events together on Earth. Therefore, the
events that we chose to experience, even the bad ones, were predetermined. I
don't say that in order to discount the tragedies we have in this life, nor to
be hurtful to those who have experienced tragedies. The humanity in me weeps
for the pain in this world, but the spiritual part of me knows that those
events happened for a reason. The outcomes and circumstances we experience in the
interim of those events, are where free-will is utilzed. So for my daughters,
while I cannot change the "events" they contracted to experience, I can give
them tools by which they can exercise their free will with positive energy
between those events.
Joyce wrote:
Some of people will look at what you said and what I said and think "Well,
*obviously* that's what she meant. And it's nitpicky to even question it."
*** I don't think asking for clarifcation is nitpicky at all. Because had you
not asked, you'd be under the wrong assumptions.
Lastly, I have a question to throw out there. Would those who both agree and
disagree with the concept that things happen for reason, be willing to share
why they think we experience tragedy/bad/evil. Not trying to bait anyone, just
trying to understand what others believe the purpose of those things to be.
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
But even on a larger scale, do you really mean "whatever floats a person's
boat"? So if I hear voices from God that tell me to murder people, that's
"cool" by you? If my beliefs lead me to believe that it's a mandate from God
that I swat my children for sinful behavior with an appropriately sized
dowel chosen from a chart by age, then that's cool too?
***Actually, yes. Though the human part of me may not like it, the spiritual
part of my beliefs, would mandate that while on Earth, what you put out, you
get back, but even that is only at the human level. Therefore, my disdain for
something at the human level is not the same as my ability to accept even the
horrors of this life at my spirit level.
For me at soul level, there exist no good or bad, while at the human level
there is plenty of both. And while I understand that conceptually it may be
difficult to accept by those who don't believe that, for me, I strive to classify
which things in this life are my lessons and what they mean, even the most
horrifc events. I think there has to be a reason for everything. I don't claim to
"know" what that reason is, but I don't understand how there would be good if
there were no bad. So, in essence, experiencing both good and bad is
something my soul chose to do. For me, that would include the best of the best and
the worsed of the worsed. It goes back to the beliefs of lessons and desire to
have them while we are here. For me, everything beyond humanity belongs to a
greater existence. An existence that dosen't deal in good or bad. For I see
those as earth bound concepts.
Joyce wrote:
What I assume you mean is that you are raising
your daughters in a moral atmosphere where murdering, stealing and generally
being hurtful are not good options. So, as long as their spirituality
doesn't cross those moral lines, then whatever they believe is cool with
you. Yes?
*** No. I can only choose to share how important it is to put positive out so
that they receive positive back while they exist here. On the human level I
want their existence to be full of positive energy. I, like Judie, believe that
we contracted to experience specific events together on Earth. Therefore, the
events that we chose to experience, even the bad ones, were predetermined. I
don't say that in order to discount the tragedies we have in this life, nor to
be hurtful to those who have experienced tragedies. The humanity in me weeps
for the pain in this world, but the spiritual part of me knows that those
events happened for a reason. The outcomes and circumstances we experience in the
interim of those events, are where free-will is utilzed. So for my daughters,
while I cannot change the "events" they contracted to experience, I can give
them tools by which they can exercise their free will with positive energy
between those events.
Joyce wrote:
Some of people will look at what you said and what I said and think "Well,
*obviously* that's what she meant. And it's nitpicky to even question it."
*** I don't think asking for clarifcation is nitpicky at all. Because had you
not asked, you'd be under the wrong assumptions.
Lastly, I have a question to throw out there. Would those who both agree and
disagree with the concept that things happen for reason, be willing to share
why they think we experience tragedy/bad/evil. Not trying to bait anyone, just
trying to understand what others believe the purpose of those things to be.
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/03 7:18:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
holly@... writes:
I enjoyed this entire post. A friend and I were discussing existence, and
while I know my wording will not be anywhere near as eloquent as the discussion
was, I have another anaolgy which is similar to the Tao concept.
My existence here and now is like that of a molocule of water, currently
separated from the vast sea. The molecule itself can exist without the sea, but
will someday return to the it. Ultimately, the water never disappears, it may
evaporate, but it just takes on new form of existence to become a cloud, which
in turn will one day rain. After the rain, the molecule may still not return to
the ocean, it may become part of a river, but ultimately that too will return
to the sea. For no matter what form the molecule may take, in the end it is
still water belonging to the vast sea. ;-)
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
holly@... writes:
> My personal point of view is that I have respect--even to those who harmHolly,
> me--for the PERSON. I don't have to respect the motivations, beliefs,
> or actions and yet be able to respect the person. By respect I mean
> that I (do my best) to accept others where they are in their lives;
> accept that they are doing the best they can in any given set of
> circumstances; accept that their beliefs are different from my own;
> accept that they, like me, in spite of appearances, are part of the Tao;
> and accept the fact that sometimes the intersections of our lives will
> be painful, while othertimes will be rewarding.
>
I enjoyed this entire post. A friend and I were discussing existence, and
while I know my wording will not be anywhere near as eloquent as the discussion
was, I have another anaolgy which is similar to the Tao concept.
My existence here and now is like that of a molocule of water, currently
separated from the vast sea. The molecule itself can exist without the sea, but
will someday return to the it. Ultimately, the water never disappears, it may
evaporate, but it just takes on new form of existence to become a cloud, which
in turn will one day rain. After the rain, the molecule may still not return to
the ocean, it may become part of a river, but ultimately that too will return
to the sea. For no matter what form the molecule may take, in the end it is
still water belonging to the vast sea. ;-)
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fetteroll
on 9/23/03 10:16 AM, RJHill241@... at RJHill241@... wrote:
I don't believe in evil. I think some people are subjected to more than
their particular bodies can cope with to create a healthy person and they
end up with a brain full of harmful beliefs. Some people are born with bad
chemistry.
I think that negative thinking can bring more tragedy into a person's life
because they're likely to make more negative choices or not see positive
ways out of something. That doesn't explain all bad things, of course.
I think it's comforting to think that good things will come from bad. But
I've also seen people use that line of thought to justify a stance that
everyone should be able to overcome adversity because a hard life builds
character.
I think good things can come out of bad. And that people can even actively
seek good from bad. But I don't think there's any cosmic reason for bad and
there's a greater good in eliminating as much bad as possible.
Joyce
> Would those who both agree andI think there's no meaning behind it. Bad events are merely chance.
> disagree with the concept that things happen for reason, be willing to share
> why they think we experience tragedy/bad/evil.
I don't believe in evil. I think some people are subjected to more than
their particular bodies can cope with to create a healthy person and they
end up with a brain full of harmful beliefs. Some people are born with bad
chemistry.
I think that negative thinking can bring more tragedy into a person's life
because they're likely to make more negative choices or not see positive
ways out of something. That doesn't explain all bad things, of course.
I think it's comforting to think that good things will come from bad. But
I've also seen people use that line of thought to justify a stance that
everyone should be able to overcome adversity because a hard life builds
character.
I think good things can come out of bad. And that people can even actively
seek good from bad. But I don't think there's any cosmic reason for bad and
there's a greater good in eliminating as much bad as possible.
Joyce
[email protected]
SandraDodd@... writes:
shows like Star Trek, books like Bach's, where people do find spiritual
aspects within the story that is important to them. It sounds very unschooly to
me, actually. Not limiting the learning and exploring of spirituality to
designated church/temple/holy book.
I am making a distinction between religion and spirituality, tho, to
be clear.
Altho, there does seem to be a Jedi religion forming, mostly in
Australia, and I *believe* it started out as a joke to screw up a census! I would
hazard a guess that there are some who take it quite seriously. I suppose if I
had a chance to talk with someone about it I would find it interesting, find
out more. There are plenty of cool ideas in the Star Wars universe. ;-)
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> hould literature serve as someone's strongly held beliefs?Your question got me thinking about movies like the Matrix, Star Wars,
> Should we treat the beliefs of a Trek-fan (trekker/trekkie/trekoid) who has
> read the Bible in Klingon and drinks blood and prune juice as reverently as
> we
> treat those of a hard-working, sincerely believing Catholic nun?
>
> Sandra
>
shows like Star Trek, books like Bach's, where people do find spiritual
aspects within the story that is important to them. It sounds very unschooly to
me, actually. Not limiting the learning and exploring of spirituality to
designated church/temple/holy book.
I am making a distinction between religion and spirituality, tho, to
be clear.
Altho, there does seem to be a Jedi religion forming, mostly in
Australia, and I *believe* it started out as a joke to screw up a census! I would
hazard a guess that there are some who take it quite seriously. I suppose if I
had a chance to talk with someone about it I would find it interesting, find
out more. There are plenty of cool ideas in the Star Wars universe. ;-)
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
I love this song, even with it being adapted from the bible, which I happen
to think of as a pretty interesting book. - Rhonda
Turn! Turn! Turn! (To Everything There Is a Season)
The Byrds
words adapted from the Book of Ecclesiastes by Pete Seeger
music by Pete Seeger
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time to be born, a time to die
A time to plant, a time to reap
A time to kill, a time to heal
A time to laugh, a time to weep
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time to build up, a time to break down
A time to dance, a time to mourn
A time to cast away stones
A time to gather stones together
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time of war, a time of peace
A time of love, a time of hate
A time you may embrace
A time to refrain from embracing
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time to gain, a time to lose
A time to rend, a time to sew
A time to love, a time to hate
A time of peace, I swear it's not too late!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
to think of as a pretty interesting book. - Rhonda
Turn! Turn! Turn! (To Everything There Is a Season)
The Byrds
words adapted from the Book of Ecclesiastes by Pete Seeger
music by Pete Seeger
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time to be born, a time to die
A time to plant, a time to reap
A time to kill, a time to heal
A time to laugh, a time to weep
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time to build up, a time to break down
A time to dance, a time to mourn
A time to cast away stones
A time to gather stones together
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time of war, a time of peace
A time of love, a time of hate
A time you may embrace
A time to refrain from embracing
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
And a time for every purpose under heaven
A time to gain, a time to lose
A time to rend, a time to sew
A time to love, a time to hate
A time of peace, I swear it's not too late!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/2003 10:18:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
holly@... writes:
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think you were very clear and it was
helpful to read. When I read or hear of someone who has committed a heinous
crime, I always wonder what brought them to that point. I hate the act that they
have done but I always without fail wonder what that person has experienced in
life that made them feel it was something they HAD to do.
Just like homeless people, lots of people cross the street, turn away or
ignore them. I feel drawn to them. Once I almost thought I got myself in trouble
in DC with a homeless man, but after I reacted kindly to him and offered him
my hand to shake, the man broke down and cried. I KNEW my daughters and I
were about to be victims and I don't know how I managed to even think of
extending my hand to him and pretending like I thought he wanted to greet us instead
of rob us.
I don't know what Karmic thing changed that moment for me and my girls but it
could have been a horrible time, instead we ended up hearing for half an hour
about how this man had no human contact for five years of being on the
streets and when I held out my hand to him, he felt like I was recognizing him as a
human being when so many just don't.
So when I read posts like yours it makes me think about things way deeper
than my Baptist upbringing usually takes me.
Thank you.
glena
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
holly@... writes:
> The question becomes, how judgmental do we need to be of each other onHolly,
> this journey? Does it help us each along, or hinder us? Ultimately,
> how much does it matter? My physical self believes it matters a lot, my
> spiritual self knows we are all 'dust in the wind' and it matters not
> one whit.
>
> And so the see-saw of life keeps teetering <g>
>
> Holly
>
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think you were very clear and it was
helpful to read. When I read or hear of someone who has committed a heinous
crime, I always wonder what brought them to that point. I hate the act that they
have done but I always without fail wonder what that person has experienced in
life that made them feel it was something they HAD to do.
Just like homeless people, lots of people cross the street, turn away or
ignore them. I feel drawn to them. Once I almost thought I got myself in trouble
in DC with a homeless man, but after I reacted kindly to him and offered him
my hand to shake, the man broke down and cried. I KNEW my daughters and I
were about to be victims and I don't know how I managed to even think of
extending my hand to him and pretending like I thought he wanted to greet us instead
of rob us.
I don't know what Karmic thing changed that moment for me and my girls but it
could have been a horrible time, instead we ended up hearing for half an hour
about how this man had no human contact for five years of being on the
streets and when I held out my hand to him, he felt like I was recognizing him as a
human being when so many just don't.
So when I read posts like yours it makes me think about things way deeper
than my Baptist upbringing usually takes me.
Thank you.
glena
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
pam sorooshian
On Tuesday, September 23, 2003, at 07:11 AM, Holly Shaltz wrote:
person, to question any and all beliefs that they bring up here.
All we can do is warn people with our list description and our posting
policies that beliefs and ideas will be challenged. For full posting
policies, see files area of this list, but here is a shortened version:
1. Read for a while before jumping in.
2. Expect your ideas to be challenged.
3. Discuss ideas, not how they're presented or who presented them.
4. Post only what you don't mind seeing discussed.
5. Contribute positively to other's understanding of unschooling.
6. Ask questions respectfully without loaded terminology.
7. Trust others to recognize who is being rude and don't try to fix
their
manners.
8. Be positive in your own posts. Don't critique the tone of the list.
9. Ignore what you don't like. It might be something others like a lot.
10. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Try to give full and
accurate information.
> But I respect that she has a right to her beliefs, as long as sheHowever, to be clear, on this list, it is NOT at all disrespectful to a
> doesn't act on them in a way that harms me (my physical self--no one
> can
> harm my spiritual self) or others I am responsible for. If she does,
> then I walk away. If she follows, I take whatever steps I need to, to
> protect myself and my loved ones.
person, to question any and all beliefs that they bring up here.
All we can do is warn people with our list description and our posting
policies that beliefs and ideas will be challenged. For full posting
policies, see files area of this list, but here is a shortened version:
1. Read for a while before jumping in.
2. Expect your ideas to be challenged.
3. Discuss ideas, not how they're presented or who presented them.
4. Post only what you don't mind seeing discussed.
5. Contribute positively to other's understanding of unschooling.
6. Ask questions respectfully without loaded terminology.
7. Trust others to recognize who is being rude and don't try to fix
their
manners.
8. Be positive in your own posts. Don't critique the tone of the list.
9. Ignore what you don't like. It might be something others like a lot.
10. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Try to give full and
accurate information.
pam sorooshian
On Tuesday, September 23, 2003, at 07:16 AM, RJHill241@... wrote:
reason" and that you "... believe that we contracted to experience
specific events together on Earth." And then others are equating these
to "there is something to be learned from every event."
I see these are 3 different beliefs - maybe they can overlap - but they
are NOT the same thing.
"Things happen for a reason" is the underlying "belief" of all
scientists.
-pam
> Lastly, I have a question to throw out there. Would those who bothRhonda -- you seem to keep switching between "things happen for a
> agree and
> disagree with the concept that things happen for reason,
reason" and that you "... believe that we contracted to experience
specific events together on Earth." And then others are equating these
to "there is something to be learned from every event."
I see these are 3 different beliefs - maybe they can overlap - but they
are NOT the same thing.
"Things happen for a reason" is the underlying "belief" of all
scientists.
-pam
[email protected]
Joyce,
Thank you for sharing. I find it very intriguing to hear how others see
things. I was hoping maybe you could expand on some of it :-).
Joyce wrote:
I think there's no meaning behind it. Bad events are merely chance.
I don't believe in evil.
*** So are the tragedies people experience merely circumstance? Wrong place
at wrong time? So if one chooses to perpetrate trauma on another, is that also
about chance? If we choose to not believe in evil, then (conceptually speaking
of course) would that then mean that those who commit heinous acts not really
required to be punished, because by chance they victimized someone?
Joyce wrote:
I think some people are subjected to more than
their particular bodies can cope with to create a healthy person and they
end up with a brain full of harmful beliefs. Some people are born with bad
chemistry.
*** Are these also by chance? If those people experience things that create a
brain full of of harmful beliefs or born of bad chemistry, are they just the
unfortunate people that were dealt a bad hand, and if so how can we hold them
accountable?
Joyce wrote:
I think that negative thinking can bring more tragedy into a person's life
because they're likely to make more negative choices or not see positive
ways out of something. That doesn't explain all bad things, of course.
*** While I realized you qualified that it may not explain all bad things,
what about people who are positive, in both thoughts and acts, and still they
are encounter bad, that is chance also?
TIA ;-),
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thank you for sharing. I find it very intriguing to hear how others see
things. I was hoping maybe you could expand on some of it :-).
Joyce wrote:
I think there's no meaning behind it. Bad events are merely chance.
I don't believe in evil.
*** So are the tragedies people experience merely circumstance? Wrong place
at wrong time? So if one chooses to perpetrate trauma on another, is that also
about chance? If we choose to not believe in evil, then (conceptually speaking
of course) would that then mean that those who commit heinous acts not really
required to be punished, because by chance they victimized someone?
Joyce wrote:
I think some people are subjected to more than
their particular bodies can cope with to create a healthy person and they
end up with a brain full of harmful beliefs. Some people are born with bad
chemistry.
*** Are these also by chance? If those people experience things that create a
brain full of of harmful beliefs or born of bad chemistry, are they just the
unfortunate people that were dealt a bad hand, and if so how can we hold them
accountable?
Joyce wrote:
I think that negative thinking can bring more tragedy into a person's life
because they're likely to make more negative choices or not see positive
ways out of something. That doesn't explain all bad things, of course.
*** While I realized you qualified that it may not explain all bad things,
what about people who are positive, in both thoughts and acts, and still they
are encounter bad, that is chance also?
TIA ;-),
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
RJHill241@... writes:
child in a Christian household, "Why would God let bad things happen?" and
never received a satisfactory answer. ;-) So I went looking for the answer in
other religions and philosophies.
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Would those who both agree andWell, one of the reasons I looked into these ideas is the question I had as a
> disagree with the concept that things happen for reason, be willing to share
>
> why they think we experience tragedy/bad/evil. Not trying to bait anyone,
> just
> trying to understand what others believe the purpose of those things to be.
>
> Rhonda
>
child in a Christian household, "Why would God let bad things happen?" and
never received a satisfactory answer. ;-) So I went looking for the answer in
other religions and philosophies.
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
rubyprincesstsg@... writes:
chose compassion, and it saved you AND him.
I had an experience in NYC with a homeless man who let me sit on his milk
crate while waiting for the train station to open. A friend and I were sitting
on the cold concrete literally freezing our asses off. We talked. When the
station opened, and I was about to go in and go home, and I said goodbye, and he
looked at me with such...gratitude, that I treated him like a human being and
not something "less than".
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> instead we ended up hearing for half an hourOh, that story is touching and sweet and wonderful. Instead of fear, you
> about how this man had no human contact for five years of being on the
> streets and when I held out my hand to him, he felt like I was recognizing
> him as a
> human being when so many just don't.
chose compassion, and it saved you AND him.
I had an experience in NYC with a homeless man who let me sit on his milk
crate while waiting for the train station to open. A friend and I were sitting
on the cold concrete literally freezing our asses off. We talked. When the
station opened, and I was about to go in and go home, and I said goodbye, and he
looked at me with such...gratitude, that I treated him like a human being and
not something "less than".
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/03 9:32:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
pamsoroosh@... writes:
You are correct that I use them all and I recognize them as all being
different, but I am not switching back and forth. For me they are all interconnected
and why I asked if anyone would share how they see it. I'm neither looking for
support, nor trying to change anyones mind. I am asking so that I might be
better able to understand how others operate. So for those who are willing to
share, I appreciate that openess and would more than likely have questions, if
something was unclear to me. So should anyone choose to, I would assume they
would be held to the same list guidelines, and my asking questions would be
looked at as my need to discuss those beliefs respectfully so that I might get a
better understanding of them.
Rhonda - who happens to love science too and sees that as connected also.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
pamsoroosh@... writes:
> Rhonda -- you seem to keep switching between "things happen for aPam,
> reason" and that you "... believe that we contracted to experience
> specific events together on Earth." And then others are equating these
> to "there is something to be learned from every event."
>
> I see these are 3 different beliefs - maybe they can overlap - but they
> are NOT the same thing.
>
> "Things happen for a reason" is the underlying "belief" of all
> scientists.
>
> -pam
>
>
You are correct that I use them all and I recognize them as all being
different, but I am not switching back and forth. For me they are all interconnected
and why I asked if anyone would share how they see it. I'm neither looking for
support, nor trying to change anyones mind. I am asking so that I might be
better able to understand how others operate. So for those who are willing to
share, I appreciate that openess and would more than likely have questions, if
something was unclear to me. So should anyone choose to, I would assume they
would be held to the same list guidelines, and my asking questions would be
looked at as my need to discuss those beliefs respectfully so that I might get a
better understanding of them.
Rhonda - who happens to love science too and sees that as connected also.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
holly@... writes:
that!
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> And so the see-saw of life keeps teetering <g>Said it better than I could, right now. Thanks Holly, I enjoyed reading
>
> Holly
that!
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/2003 12:11:35 PM Central Daylight Time,
AimeeL73@... writes:
who won perfect attendance awards for church:
If God is omniscient and has always known how everything will happen long
before it ever does, didn't he KNOW what would happen when he put that tree in
the garden of Eden and why should mankind be punished for it? That question
bothered me all through my childhood.
Amy Kagey
<A HREF="http://www.ubah.com/ecommerce/default.asp?sid=Z0939&gid=1684902">Free shipping on </A><A HREF="http://www.ubah.com/ecommerce/default.asp?sid=Z0939&gid=1684902">Usborne Books</A> !
Join Usborne for only $29.95 in Sept!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
AimeeL73@... writes:
>Here is my question as a child raised in a conservative Baptist household and
> Well, one of the reasons I looked into these ideas is the question I had as
> a
> child in a Christian household, "Why would God let bad things happen?" and
> never received a satisfactory answer. ;-)
who won perfect attendance awards for church:
If God is omniscient and has always known how everything will happen long
before it ever does, didn't he KNOW what would happen when he put that tree in
the garden of Eden and why should mankind be punished for it? That question
bothered me all through my childhood.
Amy Kagey
<A HREF="http://www.ubah.com/ecommerce/default.asp?sid=Z0939&gid=1684902">Free shipping on </A><A HREF="http://www.ubah.com/ecommerce/default.asp?sid=Z0939&gid=1684902">Usborne Books</A> !
Join Usborne for only $29.95 in Sept!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/03 11:10:35 AM, RJHill241@... writes:
<< So are the tragedies people experience merely circumstance? Wrong place
at wrong time? So if one chooses to perpetrate trauma on another, is that
also
about chance? >>
I make decisions in my life. It's not chance that I didn't make dinner
tonight and we're having sandwiches, it's that the kids are scattered hither and
yon and I made brownies instead. My cooking urge is done. Maybe not a GREAT
decision, but neither is it just chance, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't God
acting through me, nor was it decided between me and Keith before either of us
was born.
Freud and God and Worf all would probably agree that sometimes brownies are
just brownies.
<<Some people are born with bad
chemistry.
<<Are these also by chance?>>
If an unstable person marries an unstable person (or just has babies, forget
the marriage part), the liklihood of those children being unstable is fairly
high, whether it's nurture or nature or combo both.
Not many people have sex by chance.
Not many people decide not to use birth control by chance.
Most babies nowadays are not born by chance.
People make decisions.
<<are they just the
unfortunate people that were dealt a bad hand, and if so how can we hold them
accountable?>>>
Accountable for bad beliefs?
Accountable for actions, maybe.
And "accountability" in these instances is cultural. A woman driving a car
or committing adultry isn't going to be stoned to death in Wyoming. A dinner
guest eating with his left hand or showing the heels of his shoes isn't likely
to be sent home right then and there in Texas.
Some people don't have the social sense God gave a donut (if donuts fall
under God's dominion; they're not named in the Bible), and Howard Gardner says
that's how it goes with brains sometimes. Do we hold them accountable for bad
social decisions?
Yes.
It's harder for bad musicians to get jobs as musicians. Sometimes
impossible. Usually impossible. That's okay. Maybe they can be mechanics or lawyers
or football players or will look damned good in a UPS uniform.
People are born somewhere. The place has rules and laws and social
expectations. Some do better than others.
<<*** While I realized you qualified that it may not explain all bad things,
what about people who are positive, in both thoughts and acts, and still they
are encounter bad, that is chance also? >>
Could you rephrase that?
I think you edited and something was lost.
Do you mean to ask whether it's chance that a positive thinking person would
encounter some badness?
Have you ever rolled dice? Can anyone think positively enough to roll all
6's?
Where, on earth, would one live where nothing bad could happen?
Sandra
<< So are the tragedies people experience merely circumstance? Wrong place
at wrong time? So if one chooses to perpetrate trauma on another, is that
also
about chance? >>
I make decisions in my life. It's not chance that I didn't make dinner
tonight and we're having sandwiches, it's that the kids are scattered hither and
yon and I made brownies instead. My cooking urge is done. Maybe not a GREAT
decision, but neither is it just chance, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't God
acting through me, nor was it decided between me and Keith before either of us
was born.
Freud and God and Worf all would probably agree that sometimes brownies are
just brownies.
<<Some people are born with bad
chemistry.
<<Are these also by chance?>>
If an unstable person marries an unstable person (or just has babies, forget
the marriage part), the liklihood of those children being unstable is fairly
high, whether it's nurture or nature or combo both.
Not many people have sex by chance.
Not many people decide not to use birth control by chance.
Most babies nowadays are not born by chance.
People make decisions.
<<are they just the
unfortunate people that were dealt a bad hand, and if so how can we hold them
accountable?>>>
Accountable for bad beliefs?
Accountable for actions, maybe.
And "accountability" in these instances is cultural. A woman driving a car
or committing adultry isn't going to be stoned to death in Wyoming. A dinner
guest eating with his left hand or showing the heels of his shoes isn't likely
to be sent home right then and there in Texas.
Some people don't have the social sense God gave a donut (if donuts fall
under God's dominion; they're not named in the Bible), and Howard Gardner says
that's how it goes with brains sometimes. Do we hold them accountable for bad
social decisions?
Yes.
It's harder for bad musicians to get jobs as musicians. Sometimes
impossible. Usually impossible. That's okay. Maybe they can be mechanics or lawyers
or football players or will look damned good in a UPS uniform.
People are born somewhere. The place has rules and laws and social
expectations. Some do better than others.
<<*** While I realized you qualified that it may not explain all bad things,
what about people who are positive, in both thoughts and acts, and still they
are encounter bad, that is chance also? >>
Could you rephrase that?
I think you edited and something was lost.
Do you mean to ask whether it's chance that a positive thinking person would
encounter some badness?
Have you ever rolled dice? Can anyone think positively enough to roll all
6's?
Where, on earth, would one live where nothing bad could happen?
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/03 3:26:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
I was asking Joyce to elaborate on her response about her beliefs.
No worries though, I asked you to elaborate on yours too. Perhaps you and
Joyce have such parallel beliefs that I will see and understand those beliefs.
Then I can decide if you honestly believe such things.
Rhonda
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
SandraDodd@... writes:
> Could you rephrase that?No, I didn't edit anything, perhaps you should re-read the entire post, since
> I think you edited and something was lost.
>
I was asking Joyce to elaborate on her response about her beliefs.
No worries though, I asked you to elaborate on yours too. Perhaps you and
Joyce have such parallel beliefs that I will see and understand those beliefs.
Then I can decide if you honestly believe such things.
Rhonda
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/03 05:58:40 PM Central Daylight Time,
RJHill241@... writes:
No worries though, I asked you to elaborate on yours too. Perhaps you and
Joyce have such parallel beliefs that I will see and understand those
beliefs.
Then I can decide if you honestly believe such things.
Rhonda
########################################
Who are you to decide if someone honestly believes something or not?
Questions from us to you or to Judie or to anyone else to clarify or explain a belief
is not deciding if the belief is true, it is asking for more definition. Here
you have attacked making known your want of the power to decide some truth for
someone. How does this help countless people who read here to get
unschooling? I really think you have gone past the point of honest questioning and
seeking knowledge to attacking and belittling. But then I am not a list moderator,
and I am sure you would say that the same thing has been happening to you.
~Nancy
Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.
Elbert Hubbard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RJHill241@... writes:
No worries though, I asked you to elaborate on yours too. Perhaps you and
Joyce have such parallel beliefs that I will see and understand those
beliefs.
Then I can decide if you honestly believe such things.
Rhonda
########################################
Who are you to decide if someone honestly believes something or not?
Questions from us to you or to Judie or to anyone else to clarify or explain a belief
is not deciding if the belief is true, it is asking for more definition. Here
you have attacked making known your want of the power to decide some truth for
someone. How does this help countless people who read here to get
unschooling? I really think you have gone past the point of honest questioning and
seeking knowledge to attacking and belittling. But then I am not a list moderator,
and I am sure you would say that the same thing has been happening to you.
~Nancy
Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.
Elbert Hubbard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/03 4:27:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Dnowens@...
writes:
understand them. I also asked the entire list if anyone would be willing to
share their views so that I might understand them better. Joyce and Sandra
responded and I asked them to elaborate, so that I would be clear. So the question
for me is, who is anybody to decide if somebody honestly believes something?
And I think several times Sandra has mentioned not believeing people truly
believe certain things, I don't recall ever saying anything like that. If I did,
please point me to where I said such a thing. I would hate to be misunderstood.
Here > you have attacked making known your want of the power to decide some
rather I am wanting to understand. Maybe you have my posts and Sandra posts
mixed up.
How does this help countless people who read here to get
several posts came through about the purpose of the list being to discuss
beliefs and that unless you were willing to stand by your beliefs you shouldn't
post them. Since I posted mine, here I stand by them, hoping to get to a mutual
understanding.
I really think you have gone past the point of honest questioning and
begin this post by asking me who was I to decide about honesty? I'd also like
to know who I have attacked or belittled, or if I was merely defending my
beliefs, exactly as the list guidelines say you should if you put your beliefs out
there for the list to see.
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
writes:
> Who are you to decide if someone honestly believes something or not?I haven't decided anything yet, I asked that they elaborate so that I could
understand them. I also asked the entire list if anyone would be willing to
share their views so that I might understand them better. Joyce and Sandra
responded and I asked them to elaborate, so that I would be clear. So the question
for me is, who is anybody to decide if somebody honestly believes something?
> Questions from us to you or to Judie or to anyone else to clarify orSo then someone can ask me to clarify or define, but I can't ask the same?
> explain a belief
> is not deciding if the belief is true, it is asking for more definition.
And I think several times Sandra has mentioned not believeing people truly
believe certain things, I don't recall ever saying anything like that. If I did,
please point me to where I said such a thing. I would hate to be misunderstood.
Here > you have attacked making known your want of the power to decide some
> truth forWho have I attacked? I haven't ever needed the power you are speaking of, but
> someone.
rather I am wanting to understand. Maybe you have my posts and Sandra posts
mixed up.
How does this help countless people who read here to get
>*** Well quite a while back when Judie had just left, I asked that too. But
> unschooling?
several posts came through about the purpose of the list being to discuss
beliefs and that unless you were willing to stand by your beliefs you shouldn't
post them. Since I posted mine, here I stand by them, hoping to get to a mutual
understanding.
I really think you have gone past the point of honest questioning and
> seeking knowledge to attacking and belittling. But then I am not a listPerhaps you could point me to the post where I wasn't honest. And didn't you
> moderator,
> and I am sure you would say that the same thing has been happening to you.
>
> ~Nancy
>
begin this post by asking me who was I to decide about honesty? I'd also like
to know who I have attacked or belittled, or if I was merely defending my
beliefs, exactly as the list guidelines say you should if you put your beliefs out
there for the list to see.
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fetteroll
on 9/23/03 12:56 PM, RJHill241@... at RJHill241@... wrote:
Sorry, missed the earlier one directed at me:
choice may be chance, but the person hurting decided to engage in the
hurtful behavior.
choices are responsible for the hurt those decisions cause.
think people need to be held responsible for their actions, even actions
caused by bad chemistry.
I do feel compassion for the people who are being hurtful. They may have the
chemistry they do because of circumstances they had no control over. They
may have been born that way. A doesn't choose to be molested. A child
doesn't choose to grow up in a drug infested home with parents whose values
are warped by drugs and immaturity. Those environments will often create
someone who is a hurtful person.
I don't think they need punished since punishment by life circumstances is
often what created them. But they need to stop hurting others which
generally means putting them in prison. We need better tools to help them
but there's a big gap between what we need and what we have.
But everyone is still responsible for the hurt they cause because
responsibility is a necessary social and psychological factor in learning to
make better choices. Making better choices and choosing a better point of
view will change brain chemistry. But some people won't be able to
internalize that feeling of responsibility and won't choose to or won't be
able to make choices that aren't hurtful, because of bad chemistry or
because we lack the tools to help them or because they choose to remain
stuck. So they need to be kept away from the rest of society. It's certainly
going to feel like punishment to them, but it's a better choice than
"punishing" the rest of society by setting them free.
happens has a reason behind it. To create elaborate stories for why chance
has brought two things together is to add layers of complication that then
need more explanations.
There's a tool in science called Ockham's Razor which basically says the
simplest explanation is generally the one that's right. That there is no
plan behind why we're here or what happens to us is as simple as it comes.
Some people need there to be a plan so have no problems adding in some
higher power. Some people need there to be a reason for everything and add
in all sorts of complicated explanations.
Joyce
Sorry, missed the earlier one directed at me:
> So are the tragedies people experience merely circumstance? Wrong placeHow can a choice be chance? The person who gets hurt because of another's
> at wrong time? So if one chooses to perpetrate trauma on another, is that also
> about chance?
choice may be chance, but the person hurting decided to engage in the
hurtful behavior.
> If we choose to not believe in evil, then (conceptually speakingPeople aren't puppets controlled by some dice role. People who make hurtful
> of course) would that then mean that those who commit heinous acts not really
> required to be punished, because by chance they victimized someone?
choices are responsible for the hurt those decisions cause.
> *** Are these also by chance? If those people experience things that create aAccountable suggests that they need to pay back for what they've done. I
> brain full of of harmful beliefs or born of bad chemistry, are they just the
> unfortunate people that were dealt a bad hand, and if so how can we hold them
> accountable?
think people need to be held responsible for their actions, even actions
caused by bad chemistry.
I do feel compassion for the people who are being hurtful. They may have the
chemistry they do because of circumstances they had no control over. They
may have been born that way. A doesn't choose to be molested. A child
doesn't choose to grow up in a drug infested home with parents whose values
are warped by drugs and immaturity. Those environments will often create
someone who is a hurtful person.
I don't think they need punished since punishment by life circumstances is
often what created them. But they need to stop hurting others which
generally means putting them in prison. We need better tools to help them
but there's a big gap between what we need and what we have.
But everyone is still responsible for the hurt they cause because
responsibility is a necessary social and psychological factor in learning to
make better choices. Making better choices and choosing a better point of
view will change brain chemistry. But some people won't be able to
internalize that feeling of responsibility and won't choose to or won't be
able to make choices that aren't hurtful, because of bad chemistry or
because we lack the tools to help them or because they choose to remain
stuck. So they need to be kept away from the rest of society. It's certainly
going to feel like punishment to them, but it's a better choice than
"punishing" the rest of society by setting them free.
> *** While I realized you qualified that it may not explain all bad things,Of course. And good things happen to bad people. Not everything in life that
> what about people who are positive, in both thoughts and acts, and still they
> are encounter bad, that is chance also?
happens has a reason behind it. To create elaborate stories for why chance
has brought two things together is to add layers of complication that then
need more explanations.
There's a tool in science called Ockham's Razor which basically says the
simplest explanation is generally the one that's right. That there is no
plan behind why we're here or what happens to us is as simple as it comes.
Some people need there to be a plan so have no problems adding in some
higher power. Some people need there to be a reason for everything and add
in all sorts of complicated explanations.
Joyce
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/24/2003 5:44:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
fetteroll@... writes:
what happens to us", I just can't wrap my mind around that.
There just HAS to be more to life/death/existence then the simplest of
reasons of mere existence. I think there is overwhelming evidence that suggests
there are reasons for living other than simple existence due to no "higher" power
or "plan".
That's almost the same to me as taking literally the idea that EVERYTHING was
already decided so why bother. This is all there is, nothing more, so what
does it matter in the grand scheme of life who we impact in this world or what
we do really? Put out all the negative energy you want, doesn't affect
life... I don't buy that idea either.
glena
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
fetteroll@... writes:
> There's a tool in science called Ockham's Razor which basically says theI keep reading that one line, "That there is no plan behind why we're here or
> simplest explanation is generally the one that's right. That there is no
> plan behind why we're here or what happens to us is as simple as it comes.
> Some people need there to be a plan so have no problems adding in some
> higher power. Some people need there to be a reason for everything and add
> in all sorts of complicated explanations.
>
> Joyce
>
what happens to us", I just can't wrap my mind around that.
There just HAS to be more to life/death/existence then the simplest of
reasons of mere existence. I think there is overwhelming evidence that suggests
there are reasons for living other than simple existence due to no "higher" power
or "plan".
That's almost the same to me as taking literally the idea that EVERYTHING was
already decided so why bother. This is all there is, nothing more, so what
does it matter in the grand scheme of life who we impact in this world or what
we do really? Put out all the negative energy you want, doesn't affect
life... I don't buy that idea either.
glena
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Deborah Lewis
***...so what
does it matter in the grand scheme of life who we impact in this world or
what
we do really? Put out all the negative energy you want, doesn't affect
life... I don't buy that idea either.***
Being kind and helpful to others helps ourselves.
If you are kind to your neighbor, take her cookies when she moves in,
offer to watch her kids (if you like them) let her borrow stuff and have
her in for coffee, you are much more likely to get the same kind of
treatment from her.
If you're mean and grumpy and complaining about her weeds, she might not
be so willing to overlook the fact that your dog barks at six AM and your
kids play noisily right outside her window when she's trying to watch her
favorite show and the old clunker you drive is an eyesore.
Being kind benefits us right now and makes life easier. You are much
more likely to get help when you need it if you are known as someone who
offers help to others.
*** Put out all the negative energy you want, doesn't affect
life... ***
Harming others affects their lives. And it affects the life of the
person who did the hurting. If it was criminal he goes to jail. It it
was just nasty others will know him for his actions and won't be as
willing to offer their friendship, help, or courtesy to him.
It's not even a reward or punishment you have to wait until you're dead
for. It's a right now kind of thing.
Deb L
does it matter in the grand scheme of life who we impact in this world or
what
we do really? Put out all the negative energy you want, doesn't affect
life... I don't buy that idea either.***
Being kind and helpful to others helps ourselves.
If you are kind to your neighbor, take her cookies when she moves in,
offer to watch her kids (if you like them) let her borrow stuff and have
her in for coffee, you are much more likely to get the same kind of
treatment from her.
If you're mean and grumpy and complaining about her weeds, she might not
be so willing to overlook the fact that your dog barks at six AM and your
kids play noisily right outside her window when she's trying to watch her
favorite show and the old clunker you drive is an eyesore.
Being kind benefits us right now and makes life easier. You are much
more likely to get help when you need it if you are known as someone who
offers help to others.
*** Put out all the negative energy you want, doesn't affect
life... ***
Harming others affects their lives. And it affects the life of the
person who did the hurting. If it was criminal he goes to jail. It it
was just nasty others will know him for his actions and won't be as
willing to offer their friendship, help, or courtesy to him.
It's not even a reward or punishment you have to wait until you're dead
for. It's a right now kind of thing.
Deb L
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/24/03 08:33:07 AM Central Daylight Time,
ddzimlew@... writes:
It's not even a reward or punishment you have to wait until you're dead
for. It's a right now kind of thing.
Deb L
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I really, REALLY like that. I think you nailed it on the head.
~Nancy
People always call it luck when you've acted more sensibly than they have.
Anne Tyler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
ddzimlew@... writes:
It's not even a reward or punishment you have to wait until you're dead
for. It's a right now kind of thing.
Deb L
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I really, REALLY like that. I think you nailed it on the head.
~Nancy
People always call it luck when you've acted more sensibly than they have.
Anne Tyler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/23/03 5:11:50 PM Central Daylight Time, amycats2@...
writes:
bit, and I have some theories.....Blasphemous theories! *evil grin*
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
writes:
> >Well, one of the reasons I looked into these ideas is the question I hadDoes it still bother you? Because I've looked into that question quite a
> as
> >a
> >child in a Christian household, "Why would God let bad things happen?" and
>
> >never received a satisfactory answer. ;-)
>
> Here is my question as a child raised in a conservative Baptist household
> and
> who won perfect attendance awards for church:
>
> If God is omniscient and has always known how everything will happen long
> before it ever does, didn't he KNOW what would happen when he put that tree
> in
> the garden of Eden and why should mankind be punished for it? That question
>
> bothered me all through my childhood.
> Amy Kagey
bit, and I have some theories.....Blasphemous theories! *evil grin*
~Aimee
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/24/2003 10:00:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
There just HAS to be more to life/death/existence then the simplest of
reasons of mere existence.<<<
Survival and reproduction. TWO things! <g>
~Kelly
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected] writes:
There just HAS to be more to life/death/existence then the simplest of
reasons of mere existence.<<<
Survival and reproduction. TWO things! <g>
~Kelly
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/24/03 12:14:19 PM, kbcdlovejo@... writes:
<< Survival and reproduction. TWO things! <g> >>
Some people add "to serve God" but if God's so powerful, why does he need
servants like people?
None of the systems ultimately explain everything, and since nobody knows for
sure, and since unschooling works the same (IF it will work) regardless of
what people believe, we can still discuss unschooling.
For a family which has as a priority the idea that children much be obedient
and the father must be the head of the family and the mother does the father's
bidding and the children follow the mother's commands, unschooling isn't
likely to for them work because of their religion.
If someone believes people all choose every detail beforehand, that's not
going to be a good match for helping other people learn to unschool. If we're
not making choices now, e-mail lists like this are worthless.
For those who ARE making choices now, and who are willing to see their
children as full people with minds and wills of their own, it can work fantastically
well.
Example (and somewhat a subjectchange)
I don't think any children chose to be born and get spanked, for example. I
think any parent who wants to build a nest in which natural learning can
thrive needs to not spank.
Reminder about a page that hasn't been mentioned lately:
http://sandradodd.com/spanking
Sandra
<< Survival and reproduction. TWO things! <g> >>
Some people add "to serve God" but if God's so powerful, why does he need
servants like people?
None of the systems ultimately explain everything, and since nobody knows for
sure, and since unschooling works the same (IF it will work) regardless of
what people believe, we can still discuss unschooling.
For a family which has as a priority the idea that children much be obedient
and the father must be the head of the family and the mother does the father's
bidding and the children follow the mother's commands, unschooling isn't
likely to for them work because of their religion.
If someone believes people all choose every detail beforehand, that's not
going to be a good match for helping other people learn to unschool. If we're
not making choices now, e-mail lists like this are worthless.
For those who ARE making choices now, and who are willing to see their
children as full people with minds and wills of their own, it can work fantastically
well.
Example (and somewhat a subjectchange)
I don't think any children chose to be born and get spanked, for example. I
think any parent who wants to build a nest in which natural learning can
thrive needs to not spank.
Reminder about a page that hasn't been mentioned lately:
http://sandradodd.com/spanking
Sandra
Fetteroll
on 9/24/03 9:07 AM, rubyprincesstsg@... at rubyprincesstsg@...
wrote:
I'm living as though there were nothing else and I'm happy and helpful and
people seem to like me. It's absence doesn't effect what I want and expect
from life. So it's certainly not a universal "HAS to".
Maybe what you mean is you really want there to be more because you find the
thought that there isn't more disturbing.
Here in the US it seems more people *do* believe in some greater power or
plan than don't. It's easy to extrapolte from the fact that most people
believe there is something more to the conclusion that there must therefore
be something more. All that belief must mean there's *something*. There was
Newsweek article "Religion and the Brain" Newsweek May 7, 2001 which I wish
I'd read but I suspect from what I've read about it that it discusses that
very thing: that the answers we come up with for The Reason For It All speak
more to a universal need in our brains for answers rather than to there
actually being something there.
We're pattern loving creatures. We seek pattern in chaos. We can't help it.
And we *do* find plenty of patterns in nature and that's why we have science
and literature and art and so on. But it also causes us to be unsettled when
chaos is just chaos. We keep striving to find the pattern in it, and that, I
think, leads to a belief in higher powers and higher plans.
don't care what we want spiritually ;-)
be responded to selfishly.
Being negative and unkind makes a difference to us, to those around us and
to the environment we create around us. The kinder and more thoughtful and
joyful we are, the nicer people are to us and the nicer our little pocket of
society is.
We get back what we give but we shouldn't give with that expectation. We
should help because the reward comes from the doing and the helping not
because we need some return.
The words are pretty inadequate!
If we're giving and no one wants the gift, then we're wasting our time. If
we're giving and *expecting* appreciation then we're likely to be
disappointed. (Though there's nothing wrong with reminding people if it
feels like they're taking what's given to them for granted.) If we're doing
what we want to do and feel good about doing it and we know it's something
that's needed, then we'll feel good about what we've done and others will
appreciate it and that's it's own reward.
Joyce
wrote:
> There just HAS to be more to life/death/existence then the simplest ofWhy?
> reasons of mere existence.
I'm living as though there were nothing else and I'm happy and helpful and
people seem to like me. It's absence doesn't effect what I want and expect
from life. So it's certainly not a universal "HAS to".
Maybe what you mean is you really want there to be more because you find the
thought that there isn't more disturbing.
> I think there is overwhelming evidence thatIf the evidence were overwhelming then it would be as accepted as gravity.
> suggests
> there are reasons for living other than simple existence due to no "higher"
> power or "plan".
Here in the US it seems more people *do* believe in some greater power or
plan than don't. It's easy to extrapolte from the fact that most people
believe there is something more to the conclusion that there must therefore
be something more. All that belief must mean there's *something*. There was
Newsweek article "Religion and the Brain" Newsweek May 7, 2001 which I wish
I'd read but I suspect from what I've read about it that it discusses that
very thing: that the answers we come up with for The Reason For It All speak
more to a universal need in our brains for answers rather than to there
actually being something there.
We're pattern loving creatures. We seek pattern in chaos. We can't help it.
And we *do* find plenty of patterns in nature and that's why we have science
and literature and art and so on. But it also causes us to be unsettled when
chaos is just chaos. We keep striving to find the pattern in it, and that, I
think, leads to a belief in higher powers and higher plans.
> This is all there is, nothing more, so whatJust wanting and needing something doesn't make it so. The laws of physics
> does it matter in the grand scheme of life who we impact in this world or what
> we do really?
don't care what we want spiritually ;-)
> Put out all the negative energy you want, doesn't affectBut negative energy does effect life. If we act selfishly, we're likely to
> life... I don't buy that idea either.
be responded to selfishly.
Being negative and unkind makes a difference to us, to those around us and
to the environment we create around us. The kinder and more thoughtful and
joyful we are, the nicer people are to us and the nicer our little pocket of
society is.
We get back what we give but we shouldn't give with that expectation. We
should help because the reward comes from the doing and the helping not
because we need some return.
The words are pretty inadequate!
If we're giving and no one wants the gift, then we're wasting our time. If
we're giving and *expecting* appreciation then we're likely to be
disappointed. (Though there's nothing wrong with reminding people if it
feels like they're taking what's given to them for granted.) If we're doing
what we want to do and feel good about doing it and we know it's something
that's needed, then we'll feel good about what we've done and others will
appreciate it and that's it's own reward.
Joyce