Figuring Out Religion

[MachineGhost]

You don't think it's human nature to believe in supernatural beings?

Are you really stooping that low (trolling?) as to conflate religion with the supernatural?  You said you were once a hard-core Christian, but I don't know how much you've evolved beyond just a flat-out rejecting of the religion.  Are you now an athiest?  Anyway, one has nothing to do with the other.  What the heck do ghosts in a haunted location have to do with, say, the Roman Catholic concept of Immaculate Sin? <insert eyeroll here>

[MachineGhost]

i know very little abt the JWs...can u elaborate?

They have beliefs very similar to what you posted, that the soul rests in the grave after death waiting to be resurrected at Jesus' beck and call.  And if you sin in any number of endless ways during your lifetime, the resurrection will not happen for you.  The psychological tyranny is enforced by a Soviet Union-style snitching network, replete with even a KGB Watchtower, Inc..

If I had to guess, JW is probably exploiting an early, pre-Catholic tenant of Christian theology since Christians still believe in coffin burials, specifically to preserve the body.  So the concept lives on even if Christian do not remember exactly why.

I came across the below on Wikkipedia.  It's all a little more complex than I originally recalled:

Jehovah's Witnesses occasionally use the terms "afterlife" and "hereafter"[41] to refer to any hope for the dead, but they understand Ecclesiastes 9:5 to preclude common views of afterlife:

For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they any more have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that death is the price for sinning.[42][43] Individuals judged by God to be wicked, such as in the Great Flood or at Armageddon, are given no hope of an afterlife. After Armageddon there will be a resurrection in the flesh[44] of "both righteous and unrighteous" dead (but not the "wicked"), based on Acts 24:15. Survivors of Armageddon and those who are resurrected are then to gradually restore earth to a paradise.[45] After Armageddon, unrepentant sinners are punished with eternal death (non-existence).

41 http://www.watchtower.org/e/20001001/article_01.htm
42 Offline Watchtower, Inc. babble
43 http://www.watchtower.org/library/w/200 ... cle_02.htm
44 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... &version=9;
45 Offline Watchtower, Inc. babble

I'd strongly advise using NoScript and other privacy protections before spending any time at 41 or 43.  These people are about as batshit-crazy-paranoid-control-freakoidz as Scientologists are.

[MediumTex]

You don't think it's human nature to believe in supernatural beings?

Are you really stooping that low (trolling?) as to conflate religion with the supernatural?  You said you were once a hard-core Christian, but I don't know how much you've evolved beyond just a flat-out rejecting of the religion.  Are you now an athiest?  Anyway, one has nothing to do with the other.  What the heck do ghosts in a haunted location have to do with, say, the Roman Catholic concept of Immaculate Sin? <insert eyeroll here>

There are no trolls here, only the occasional confused person who seeks shelter under bridges.

[MediumTex]

Perhaps MG could start an athiest mission effort.

But I'm not an athiest, and I really dont want to take up the torch for yet another ultimately inflexible ideological zealotry (haven't we had enough of those already?).  I do think that the truth of the cosmos as revealed by reason is self-evident and people will gradually wake up to this truth over time (as the stats from PS seem to show).  Anthropomorphised religion is just not it, sorry.

There will always be plenty to wonder about.

Everything that is here got here somehow, and who knows exactly how it all happened?

Thomas Paine argued this point in The Age of Reason when he observed that the existence of creation implies a creator of some sort, but it doesn't follow from that basic observation that the narrative in the Bible is somehow the absolute truth regarding the nature of the creator.  It doesn't seem like a controversial point to me, but it's the main reason that he has been largely forgotten by history (there was a strong backlash against Paine's ideas in the mid-19th century and he never really came back into vogue after that, even though without him the United States almost certainly wouldn't exist today).

[MediumTex]

You don't think it's human nature to believe in supernatural beings?

No. I think it's human nature to be curious, and religion has satisfied that curiosity extremely well for the past several hundred thousand years. We want to know why. And for ancient peoples with no ability to sensibly answer most of these questions, it was perfect. But today, science is increasingly answering those questions. That science can probably never answer the ultimate questions such as "what is the meaning of life" will IMHO probably mean that religion will never fully die out, but because not everybody cares to ask such questions, for many it will be of no consequence. Similarly, most people with a certain amount of faith in the ability of science to explain things will actually have no idea how things actually work, the same way that your average believer has probably never read much of his faith's holy book and is mostly following social pressures or someone else's leadership.

That's not the point. The point is that I think  most humans want to believe that there's some kind of system out there that explains things, even if it can't explain everything, or they don't understand its explanations. It's comforting. Whether that thing you believe in is a big bearded dude in the sky or the laws of thermodynamics (quick, can you actually name them?) we like to know that they're simply there, passively explaining the workings of the universe.

At least, that's the way I see it.

The human mind is like a Formula One race car.  It can go faster than the physics of the track will permit and it's pretty easy to tear one completely to pieces if you're not careful.

For many people, religion is a way of tamping down some of the forces that have a tendency to tear the human mind (and human spirit) apart, not the least of which is fear and dread associated with mortality.

It's not surprising at all to me that highly intelligent and highly perceptive people seem to struggle with mental illness more than less reflective dimmer bulb types, who frequently move through life with enviable smoothness. 

IMHO, the smart and intensely curious people are experiencing mental illness in the same way that a Formula One driver starts to feel his whole car start to shake when he pushes it too hard.  The problem with some of these high strung brilliant people, though, is that they often don't know how to ease back on the throttle.  They don't have a feel for the "spiritual physics" that I'm talking about, and thus get themselves into bad situations within their minds that they simply can't get out of.

[doodle]

You don't think it's human nature to believe in supernatural beings?

No. I think it's human nature to be curious, and religion has satisfied that curiosity extremely well for the past several hundred thousand years. We want to know why. And for ancient peoples with no ability to sensibly answer most of these questions, it was perfect. But today, science is increasingly answering those questions. That science can probably never answer the ultimate questions such as "what is the meaning of life" will IMHO probably mean that religion will never fully die out, but because not everybody cares to ask such questions, for many it will be of no consequence. Similarly, most people with a certain amount of faith in the ability of science to explain things will actually have no idea how things actually work, the same way that your average believer has probably never read much of his faith's holy book and is mostly following social pressures or someone else's leadership.

That's not the point. The point is that I think  most humans want to believe that there's some kind of system out there that explains things, even if it can't explain everything, or they don't understand its explanations. It's comforting. Whether that thing you believe in is a big bearded dude in the sky or the laws of thermodynamics (quick, can you actually name them?) we like to know that they're simply there, passively explaining the workings of the universe.

At least, that's the way I see it.

The human mind is like a Formula One race car.  It can go faster than the physics of the track will permit and it's pretty easy to tear one completely to pieces if you're not careful.

For many people, religion is a way of tamping down some of the forces that have a tendency to tear the human mind (and human spirit) apart, not the least of which is fear and dread associated with mortality.

It's not surprising at all to me that highly intelligent and highly perceptive people seem to struggle with mental illness more than less reflective dimmer bulb types, who frequently move through life with enviable smoothness. 

IMHO, the smart and intensely curious people are experiencing mental illness in the same way that a Formula One driver starts to feel his whole car start to shake when he pushes it too hard.  The problem with some of these high strung brilliant people, though, is that they often don't know how to ease back on the throttle.  They don't have a feel for the "spiritual physics" that I'm talking about, and thus get themselves into bad situations within their minds that they simply can't get out of.

I wouldn't consider myself very smart, but I am intensely curious and I'm not afraid to toss aside my security blanket and to try to deal with reality. In a world with no inherent purpose or meaning I don't see why you seem to suggest that one life path is preferable to the other. Until you can answer me the question of "why am I here" then I figure going down in a blaze of glory is just as good a way to experience life as plugging along in a hum drum manner

[Mountaineer]

I wouldn't consider myself very smart, but I am intensely curious and I'm not afraid to toss aside my security blanket and to try to deal with reality. In a world with no inherent purpose or meaning I don't see why you seem to suggest that one life path is preferable to the other. Until you can answer me the question of "why am I here" then I figure going down in a blaze of glory is just as good a way to experience life as plugging along in a hum drum manner

I relate with your first sentence, but wow, what a depressing view of life for the remainder.  What keeps you from committing suicide?  There really is a better way my friend, far better.  "Why I am here" is a question I answered long ago; it keeps me focused and thankful for the gift of being able to get out of bed "new" every day.  I assume you did not intend "going down in a blaze" as a pun, or is the way you want to go out of this life. 

... Mountaineer

[doodle]

What keeps you from committing suicide?  There really is a better way my friend, far better.

Frankly, I often I wonder that. Being a nihilist can be a lonely and depressing place sometimes, and also very liberating at other times. Ultimately, I dont have much say in the matter as I cannot force myself to believe in the comforting stories that any religion tells us. They might end up being right, but I cant know that for sure and in the meantime I am unable to put aside my doubts and just go with it.

In order to maintain my sanity I tend to find purpose in challenging things that distract me from these types of questions. Intense exercise for one keeps me focused on the here and now as well as other tasks that require concentration and focus. I also enjoy humor and try to laugh a lot about the absurdity of all this commotion going on here.

[moda0306]

but wow, what a depressing view of life for the remainder. 

A couple things on the whole "we don't have a purpose" idea.

First off, I think it CAN be depressing if you let it envelope you, and that this is why religion and faith is so comfortable to people.  They allow our brains to avoid the abyss of uncertainty... or at least uncertainty of "what the hell do I do with my life?"

Secondly, though.... If we have no identifiable outside "purpose," what are we still left with? 

Consciousness.  And if we have this consciousness, and can appreciate happiness while do NOT enjoy pain/discomfort/fear, we can use the other aspect of consciousness (logic), to achieve the only remaining purpose we have left:

To maximize our happiness.

This doesn't mean partying every night in a world of debauchery and hedonism.  This certainly hasn't shown to produce happiness.  Hell, even developing a loos-ish framework on how to treat others can help.  But basically follow HB's advice, and focus on the only "purpose" we can identify as being real to us as individuals.  We've been given another useful tool within our consciousness.... Logic & reason... to help us with such a monumental task.

[Mountaineer]

but wow, what a depressing view of life for the remainder. 

A couple things on the whole "we don't have a purpose" idea.

First off, I think it CAN be depressing if you let it envelope you, and that this is why religion and faith is so comfortable to people.  They allow our brains to avoid the abyss of uncertainty... or at least uncertainty of "what the hell do I do with my life?"

Secondly, though.... If we have no identifiable outside "purpose," what are we still left with? 

Consciousness.  And if we have this consciousness, and can appreciate happiness while do NOT enjoy pain/discomfort/fear, we can use the other aspect of consciousness (logic), to achieve the only remaining purpose we have left:

To maximize our happiness.

This doesn't mean partying every night in a world of debauchery and hedonism.  This certainly hasn't shown to produce happiness.  Hell, even developing a loos-ish framework on how to treat others can help.  But basically follow HB's advice, and focus on the only "purpose" we can identify as being real to us as individuals.  We've been given another useful tool within our consciousness.... Logic & reason... to help us with such a monumental task.

I do agree with you on some of this, e.g. I think logic and reason are absolutely wonderful gifts, especially when used appropriately.  I'm much shakier on our ultimate purpose being to maximize happiness (assuming you mean of one's self).  That seems so self-centered and can be fleeting.  I can be "happy" one minute then get a phone call that a friend died and my happiness instantly turns to sorrow.  Pursuing happiness to me is like an addict pursuing the next temporary fix.  I personally prefer something that has stability, i.e. not depending on happiness but on the promises of Jesus to keep me going.  I have received the most joy when doing something that really helps out someone else that is in need of what I can provide, even as small as a smile to a harried mom at the checkout line that is 10 deep in customers with full buggies all in a hurry for their next Starbucks.  I'm not saying that I don't get any kicks from doing activities that please me, just that helping others, to me, is more rewarding than being always focused on myself.  That is being purposeful and using my gifts to benefit someone besides me (and is in line with my belief system but you already know that).  Also, I do enjoy consciousness (but an unconscious nap is great too).  Consciousness too is a wonderful gift that I recognize from whom it comes.

... Mountaineer

[Jan Van]

A couple things on the whole "we don't have a purpose" idea.

But why do we need a purpose at all? I sometimes look at animals, dogs, cats, and wonder, are you thinking about "what is the purpose of my cat-life?" Ok, so maybe they can't really think. But maybe you get my point. I don't see why I need a purpose.

[Mountaineer]

A couple things on the whole "we don't have a purpose" idea.

But why do we need a purpose at all? I sometimes look at animals, dogs, cats, and wonder, are you thinking about "what is the purpose of my cat-life?" Ok, so maybe they can't really think. But maybe you get my point. I don't see why I need a purpose.

Interesting comments.  But, the way I see it, almost every task that we undertake has an underlying purpose.  For example, in order to thoroughly and completely undertake some project/task, we should flesh out answers to "what, when, who, where, how" all centered around "why".  If we view life as a project or task to complete successfully (that word being open to definition), why would we not want several purposes all centered around one ultimate purpose?  I'm sure most of us have at least a mental list of the "what, when, who, where and how" items we would like to accomplish before checking out.  Surely we have the "why" (purpose) too, at least somewhat defined or we would likely end up climbing the ladder and find out we were on the wrong wall the whole time.

... Mountaineer

[MediumTex]

No. I think it's human nature to be curious, and religion has satisfied that curiosity extremely well for the past several hundred thousand years. We want to know why. And for ancient peoples with no ability to sensibly answer most of these questions, it was perfect. But today, science is increasingly answering those questions. That science can probably never answer the ultimate questions such as "what is the meaning of life" will IMHO probably mean that religion will never fully die out, but because not everybody cares to ask such questions, for many it will be of no consequence. Similarly, most people with a certain amount of faith in the ability of science to explain things will actually have no idea how things actually work, the same way that your average believer has probably never read much of his faith's holy book and is mostly following social pressures or someone else's leadership.

That's not the point. The point is that I think  most humans want to believe that there's some kind of system out there that explains things, even if it can't explain everything, or they don't understand its explanations. It's comforting. Whether that thing you believe in is a big bearded dude in the sky or the laws of thermodynamics (quick, can you actually name them?) we like to know that they're simply there, passively explaining the workings of the universe.

At least, that's the way I see it.

The human mind is like a Formula One race car.  It can go faster than the physics of the track will permit and it's pretty easy to tear one completely to pieces if you're not careful.

For many people, religion is a way of tamping down some of the forces that have a tendency to tear the human mind (and human spirit) apart, not the least of which is fear and dread associated with mortality.

It's not surprising at all to me that highly intelligent and highly perceptive people seem to struggle with mental illness more than less reflective dimmer bulb types, who frequently move through life with enviable smoothness. 

IMHO, the smart and intensely curious people are experiencing mental illness in the same way that a Formula One driver starts to feel his whole car start to shake when he pushes it too hard.  The problem with some of these high strung brilliant people, though, is that they often don't know how to ease back on the throttle.  They don't have a feel for the "spiritual physics" that I'm talking about, and thus get themselves into bad situations within their minds that they simply can't get out of.

I wouldn't consider myself very smart, but I am intensely curious and I'm not afraid to toss aside my security blanket and to try to deal with reality. In a world with no inherent purpose or meaning I don't see why you seem to suggest that one life path is preferable to the other. Until you can answer me the question of "why am I here" then I figure going down in a blaze of glory is just as good a way to experience life as plugging along in a hum drum manner

If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?

[Pointedstick]

One of your favorite quotes, I see. Every time you post it, I want to see that movie again.

[doodle]

If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?

Not sure I understand the question....Anyways, there is no "use" to anything as far as I can tell. Sure things have an immediate use....my eyebrow for example is cleverly designed to keep sweat out of my eye....but what if you keep digging that question? What is the use of all these vibrating energy fields that constitute life? And whats up with all these strange deterministic biological conglomerations of atoms that somehow evolved from protoplasmic slime? Sometimes I feel like Im stuck looking at life on another plane of reality. Somedays I have on my Subatomic glasses... other days I might be at the atomic level...on down the line - molecular - cellular - organism - ecosystem......

Then I come to the question of "Who am I?" and an existential crises ensues! :-) hahaha

Now that I think about it, maybe it wasn't philosophy that put me in this tailspin, but rather science. At any rate, while I might appear to be a fully functioning and well adjusted person on the exterior, I am hopelessly stuck in Nietzsche's Crisis of Modernity. I have caused irreparable harm to my ability to see the world as I once did because I dove too deep and asked too many questions. Now all my certainties have vanished and I just left with a gaping chasm of doubt and confusion regarding most everything.

Some days Im able to play along with things like its just a giant game of Monopoly, other days I just don't have the energy. 

[Mountaineer]

Not sure I understand the question....Anyways, there is no "use" to anything as far as I can tell. Sure things have an immediate use....my eyebrow for example is cleverly designed to keep sweat out of my eye....but what if you keep digging that question? What is the use of all these vibrating energy fields that constitute life? And whats up with all these strange deterministic biological conglomerations of atoms that somehow evolved from protoplasmic slime?

But don't you see you are making assumptions that have led you to your conundrum?  Why do you take it on faith you evolved from protoplasmic slime?  I do not think that has been proven, just a hypothesis.  Why do you latch on to that "in faith" versus any other explanation of where you came from?  At least my "faith" is based upon rather firm empirical evidence, that in my humble opinion is far more "factual" than yours.  I puzzle over how those of professed little faith, in reality display so much faith via their comments.

... Mountaineer

[MediumTex]

One of your favorite quotes, I see. Every time you post it, I want to see that movie again.

When I read the book, it hit me like an anvil.

It made me realize that it's not necessary to be unhappy simply because you feel trapped by dogmatic beliefs.

It also reminded me of how important it is to reverse engineer bad situations in life to help avoid getting into them in the first place.

[doodle]

Not sure I understand the question....Anyways, there is no "use" to anything as far as I can tell. Sure things have an immediate use....my eyebrow for example is cleverly designed to keep sweat out of my eye....but what if you keep digging that question? What is the use of all these vibrating energy fields that constitute life? And whats up with all these strange deterministic biological conglomerations of atoms that somehow evolved from protoplasmic slime?

But don't you see you are making assumptions that have led you to your conundrum?  Why do you take it on faith you evolved from protoplasmic slime?  I do not think that has been proven, just a hypothesis.  Why do you latch on to that "in faith" versus any other explanation of where you came from?  At least my "faith" is based upon rather firm empirical evidence, that in my humble opinion is far more "factual" than yours.  I puzzle over how those of professed little faith, in reality display so much faith via their comments.

... Mountaineer

Well....I don't "know" anything so I guess I have a total suspension of faith. Anyways, I find myself kind of unfulfilled by the things that give most people meaning and pleasure......maybe this is just a mid life crisis or something. I have had a successful career, am financially stable, have a loving family, have had caring relationships with other people, am involved in helping people in need through a variety of volunteer organizations,  etc. etc.....but yet I am still utterly confused and feel empty. Maybe it's depression but then why would I still be able to function effectively and have energy to do all the things I do? I honestly think my brain has been scrambled by asking questions about things that should be left alone.

For example, I have used the word "I" a dozen times in the above paragraph but I don't even know what "I" is....now most people will roll their eyes at such a silly idea, but think about it.....what the hell am "I"? I am not the same physical person that was born 30 some years ago. All of the cells in my body have died and been replaced many times over. I don't have the same ideas, beliefs, or feelings that I did last year, So in spirit and in body I am a completely different person, yet people still call me by the same name....as if I were a consistent entity.

Anyways, whereas most of my peers are content to drink beer and make babies, I'm stuck here completely baffled and mystified by this whole experience. Lately I wake up and just think how very, very odd all of this is.

[Pointedstick]

Doodle, I think you're having trouble with the concept of synecdoche. Don't worry, you're in good company: Kshartle does too!

Basically, I think once you start to examine something's components really deeply, it can become baffling to imagine how they actually come together into a whole, especially if the components are all interchangeable or replaceable. Like your example of all your cells: though the cells are indeed different, you're still "you." But what is it that makes you you? As you say, it can't be your cells, or your ideas, your beliefs, or any of your other components.

Rather, it's the combination of everything that makes up the idea of a person named doodle (Or Albert J. Pastaface, or whatever your real name is). It's not altogether unlike how a corporation can continue to exist even after changing leadership, firing all the employees and replacing them with different ones, moving to a new building, and changing industries. The corporation represents a shell holding all of its components, in the same way that you represent a shell holding your cells, ideas, beliefs, and memories. Even if all of those things change, the shell that holds them remains in existence until all of the components are destroyed all at once (i.e. death).

[MediumTex]

I used to feel a lot like I think that doodle feels now.

You feel like you have a strong (or even superior) understanding of what is supposed to create wholeness and meaning in life, but it somehow doesn't, or when it does bring illumination, it is intermittent, sort of like a North Korean light therapy clinic.

It's like scaling a sheer face and starting to tire and wanting to find a crevice that will allow rest and reflection, but there isn't one there.

You want the people around you to understand your inner turmoil, but you wonder if anyone would ever be interested in getting to know you that well (or even care about that level of detail regarding your inner landscape).

What I found in my journey is that you have to overcome what you might call "faux humility" and find a way to really quiet down the inner dialogue and just take the world in without judgment.  Just "see" things, not in some Nirvana-like state of meditation, but just seeing things without an excessive number of mental and emotional filters narrowing your aperture.  Just "looking" and "seeing."

I found that when I reduced the need to project my own personality onto situations, they started to make more sense, and ironically this pulling back often resulted in me feeling more connected to situations because I would see more of everything else and less of me, which allowed me to understand the situation in a way that I never did before.  This level of understanding creates strong and durable connections to people and events, and ironically made me feel more involved and connected than ever before.

It's a process, though.  You aren't necessarily persuaded to stop beating your head against a wall after just a few hits.  It takes time.

doodle also seems to have mood swings.  Often he is perfectly lucid and has a reliable point of view, while other times he seems like one of those Occupy Wall Street people after a few peyote buttons.  This is the internet, though, so acting wild here and there isn't a sin, and I like doodle very much.

[Mountaineer]

MT,
Insightful, deep, introspective.  Thanks for sharing.

PS,
To me, your body and corporation description illustrates the sustainability of a well nourished physicalness and soul. 

doodle,
Hang in there buddy!  If you are anything at all like me, it is hard to come to grips with the fact some questions have no provable answers.  I hope you find a true friend with whom you can share your deepest thoughts and feelings without fear of judgement, i.e. a relationship built on mutual trust.

... Mountaineer

[doodle]

Were I to have posted on Facebook what I wrote here, Im pretty sure I would have awoken this morning to a friend list that had magically shrunk in half. Thanks for the thoughtful responses guys. I used to think that anonymity made us into uncaring beasts....now Im wondering whether maybe the opposite isn't true.

Doodle, I think you're having trouble with the concept of synecdoche. Don't worry, you're in good company: Kshartle does too!

Basically, I think once you start to examine something's components really deeply, it can become baffling to imagine how they actually come together into a whole, especially if the components are all interchangeable or replaceable. Like your example of all your cells: though the cells are indeed different, you're still "you." But what is it that makes you you? As you say, it can't be your cells, or your ideas, your beliefs, or any of your other components.

Kind of like when you take apart some gadget as a kid into a million pieces only to realize that you forgot to write down instructions along the way and there isn't a snowballs chance in hell of you ever getting them back together again?

Rather, it's the combination of everything that makes up the idea of a person named doodle (Or Albert J. Pastaface, or whatever your real name is). It's not altogether unlike how a corporation can continue to exist even after changing leadership, firing all the employees and replacing them with different ones, moving to a new building, and changing industries. The corporation represents a shell holding all of its components, in the same way that you represent a shell holding your cells, ideas, beliefs, and memories. Even if all of those things change, the shell that holds them remains in existence until all of the components are destroyed all at once (i.e. death).

I agree...I am a concept or idea. That gets confusing though....whose concept am I? I am my own concept? So I am a concept inside of a concept?

Anyways, I feel that the distinction that separates me from my environment is an arbitrary one anymore than my heart could decide that it was an independent entity and leap out of my body. This vaguely reminds me of Buckminster Fuller when he said: "I live on Earth at present, and I don't know what I am. I know that I am not a category. I am not a thing—a noun. I seem to be a verb, an evolutionary process—an integral function of the universe."

What I found in my journey is that you have to overcome what you might call "faux humility" and find a way to really quiet down the inner dialogue and just take the world in without judgment.  Judge "see" things, not in some Nirvana-like state of meditation, but just seeing things without an excessive number of mental and emotional filters narrowing your aperture.  Just "looking" and "seeing."

I found that when I reduced the need to project my own personality onto situations, they started to make more sense, and ironically this pulling back often resulted in me feeling more connected to situations because I would see more of everything else and less of me, which allowed me to understand the situation in a way that I never did before.  This level of understanding creates strong and durable connections to people and events, and ironically made me feel more involved and connected than ever before.

It's a process, though.  You aren't necessarily persuaded to stop beating your head against a wall after just a few hits.  It takes time.

Ive been trying to observe life without running it through all sorts of categorization, judgment, analysis, etc. filters. However, at the moment this just makes everything seem completely alien to me. When I do this non-judgmental observation its almost like I forget that I am human. People just look like squirmy semi-gelatinous creatures with tentacles and teeth making all sorts of gibberish type noises. Maybe I need to adjust my settings when conducting this exercise....

doodle also seems to have mood swings.  Often he is perfectly lucid and has a reliable point of view, while other times he seems like one of those Occupy Wall Street people after a few peyote buttons.  This is the internet, though, so acting wild here and there isn't a sin, and I like doodle very much.

Im consistent like nature...one minute Im a placid park with deer munching on clover and the next Im liquid magma spewing a mile high. :-)

doodle,
Hang in there buddy!  If you are anything at all like me, it is hard to come to grips with the fact some questions have no provable answers.  I hope you find a true friend with whom you can share your deepest thoughts and feelings without fear of judgement, i.e. a relationship built on mutual trust.

... Mountaineer

I think if I brought up this topic with most of my "friends" they would quickly cease to consider themselves as that anymore :-)

One interesting idea that I came across recently that really strikes a chord with me is the Theory of Positive Disintegration (TPD) by Kazimierz D?browski which describes a theory of personality development.

Unlike mainstream psychology, D?browski's theoretical framework views psychological tension and anxiety as necessary for growth. These "disintegrative" processes are therefore seen as "positive," whereas people who fail to go through positive disintegration may remain for their entire lives in a state of "primary integration." Advancing into disintegration and into the higher levels of development is predicated on having developmental potential, including overexcitabilities and above-average reactions to stimuli.

D?browski observed that most people live their lives in a state of "primary or primitive integration" largely guided by biological impulses ("first factor") and/or by uncritical endorsement and adherence to social convention ("second factor"). He called this initial integration Level I. D?browski observed that at this level there is no true individual expression of the autonomous human self. Individual expression at Level I is influenced and constrained by the first two factors.

The first factor channels energy and talents toward accomplishing self-serving goals that reflect the lower instincts and biological ego — its primary focus is on survival and self-advancement. Often talents are used in antisocial or asocial ways. For example, at the lowest edge of Level I many criminals display this type of selfish behavior. They advance their own goals at the expense of others.

The second factor, the social environment (milieu) and peer pressure, constrains individual expression and creativity by encouraging a group view of life and discouraging unique thought and expression. The second factor externalizes values and mores, thereby externalizing conscience. Social forces shape expectations. Behavior and one's talents and creativity are funneled into forms that follow and support the existing social milieu. "My mom says we should always be aware of what our lawn looks like because we want other people to think well of us when they drive by." Because conscience is derived from an external social context, so long as society holds ethical standards, people influenced by the second factor will behave ethically. However if a society, church, or government becomes corrupt, as in Nazi Germany, people strongly influenced by second factor will not dissent. Socialization without individual examination leads to a rote and robotic existence (the "robopath" described by Ludwig von Bertalanffy). Individual reactions are not unique, they are based upon social contexts ("I cry at funerals and laugh at weddings — everyone does"). According to D?browski, people primarily motivated by second factor represent a significant majority of the general population.

D?browski felt that our society was largely influenced by these lower two factors and could be characterized as operating at Level I. For example, our emphasis on corporate success ("a dog eat dog mentality") means that many CEOs operate on the basis of first factor — they will quickly sacrifice another to enhance their own advancement. As well, our educational, political, corporate, and media systems are self-promoting and discourage real examination or individual autonomy — the second factor. Alternatively, social justifications are often used: "of course I break the speed limit, everyone does." Or a soldier may explain that he or she was simply "following orders." Thus, this external value system absolves the individual of any individual responsibility.

D?browski also described a group of people who display a different course: an individualized developmental pathway. These people break away from an automatic, rote, socialized view of life (which D?browski called negative adjustment) and move into and through a series of personal disintegrations. D?browski saw these disintegrations as a key element in the overall developmental process. Crises challenge our status quo and cause us to review our self, ideas, values, thoughts, ideals, etc. If development continues, one goes on to develop an individualized, conscious and critically evaluated hierarchical value structure (called positive adjustment). This hierarchy of values acts as a benchmark by which all things are now seen, and the higher values in our internal hierarchy come to direct our behavior (no longer based on external social mores). These higher, individual values characterize an eventual second integration reflecting individual autonomy and for D?browski, mark the arrival of true human personality. At this level, each person develops his or her own vision of how life ought to be and lives it. This higher level is associated with strong individual approaches to problem solving and creativity. One's talents and creativity are applied in the service of these higher individual values and visions of how life could be - how the world ought to be. The person expresses his or her "new" autonomous personality energetically through action, art, social change and so on.

The first and fifth levels are characterized by psychological integration, harmony, and little inner conflict. There is little internal conflict at Level I because just about every behavior is justified — it is either good for the individual and is therefore "right," or the individual's society endorses it and it is therefore "right." In either case, with a high level of confidence the individual acts as he or she perceives anyone else would, and does what anyone is "supposed to do." At Level V there is no internal conflict because what a person does is always in accord with their own internal sense of values. Of course, there is often external conflict at both Levels I and V.

Levels II, III and IV describe various degrees and types of dis-integration and literal dis-ease.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Disintegration

[Mountaineer]

Great lyrics:

"What a Friend We Have in Jesus"
by Joseph Scriven, 1820-1886

1. What a Friend we have in Jesus,
All our sins and griefs to bear!
What a privilege to carry
Ev'rything to God in prayer!
Oh, what peace we often forfeit,
Oh, what needless pain we bear,
All because we do not carry
Ev'rything to God in prayer!

2. Have we trials and temptations?
Is there trouble anywhere?
We should never be discouraged,
Take it to the Lord in prayer.
Can we find a Friend so faithful
Who will all our sorrows share?
Jesus knows our ev'ry weakness--
Take it to the Lord in prayer.

3. Are we weak and heavy laden,
Cumbered with a load of care?
Precious Savior, still our Refuge--
Take it to the Lord in prayer.
Do thy friends despise, forsake thee?
Take it to the Lord in prayer;
In His arms He'll take and shield thee,
Thou wilt find a solace there.

... Mountaineer

[Kshartle]

what is it that makes you you? As you say, it can't be your cells, or your ideas, your beliefs, or any of your other components.

Your unique human consciousness is you. Your body is how it interacts with the physical world. It's the property of your consciousness. That's why your conscious mind gets upset at others when they treat your body like it belongs to them. You know, and we all know (even if we don't admit it) that we are something other than our bodies but "our" bodies, by definition are ours. Everyone admits that when they use the words "my" body or "your" body. It's a self-detonating statement to say to someone "their" body belongs to you.

We also automatically get mad at people that treat others like their bodies belong to them. We call them murderers, thieves, rapists, slavers etc. 

Anyway....this is giving me interest in re-engaging the morality discussion.

Long story longer.......You are your unique human consciousness. When that is extinguished you're gone (at least from the physical part of reality that we're aware of)....even if your former body remains. Since you're gone it's no longer yours since you can't own anything!

[Tortoise]

When I read the book, it hit me like an anvil.

It made me realize that it's not necessary to be unhappy simply because you feel trapped by dogmatic beliefs.

It also reminded me of how important it is to reverse engineer bad situations in life to help avoid getting into them in the first place.

What about the bad situations we are unable to reverse engineer? What about the really, really bad stuff that just happens to some people through absolutely no fault of their own?

How does a person who believes that religion is just a pragmatic self-help program--a warm, fuzzy bedtime story with no objective reality--come to terms with that?

The only meaningful (i.e., not nihilistic) explanation I've seen regarding bad things often happening to good people is that God in His sovereignty uses all things--both good and bad, including the effects of sin and human free will--to somehow work together to accomplish His ultimate plan. And in that view, everything that happens in our lives--good and bad--can be seen as a type of divine trial by fire that either consumes us or purifies us like gold, depending on how we spiritually receive it:

In the whole land, declares the Lord,
    two thirds shall be cut off and perish,
    and one third shall be left alive.
And I will put this third into the fire,
    and refine them as one refines silver,
    and test them as gold is tested.
They will call upon my name,
    and I will answer them.
I will say, ‘They are my people’;
    and they will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’(Zechariah 13:8-9, ESV)