On Jan 2, 4:19 am, "Chris Jenkins" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree 100%. Pure deconstructionism leads to nihilism. Pure materialism
> removes all wonder, imagination, and leaves us with a sense of the utter
> pointlessness of life.
No, no, no there is nothing more awe inspiring to look at the stars
with the knowledge of astronomy and to accept how meaningless and
insignificant are we little humans. Such a thought is a wonder, such
distances and wonders of the universe provide far more for the
imagination that the mundane rantings of the religious.
>
> On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 8:33 PM, ornamentalmind
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>
>
> > As valuable as skepticism can be, as Neil has said elsewhere,
> > deconstruction can be used to the point of nihilism. And, the
> > selection of such a methodology along with using it as an ontological
> > foundation in this context results in ignorance.
>
> > It may appear to be a preferable way of approaching reality. Then
> > again, to many, common hedonism is seen as a virtue.
>
> > On Jan 1, 1:08 pm, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Harking back to what I said in another thread about choice and
> > > interest in the selection of "appropriate evidence" I would imagine
> > > that much of this stuff is likely to be highly biased in selection.
> > > One wonders how he defines non-religious for his comparisons.
> > > One wonders if the study tends to define a religious person as one who
> > > is s regular church goer, or dedicated observer of his/her religion,
> > > in which case the study would be choosing people with self-control: a
> > > self fulfilling prediction.
> > > Did the study acknowledge the fact that there is a higher percentage
> > > of the religious in prisons than in the general population? Are cons
> > > achievers who exhibit self-control?
> > > 8 decades of selection. Probably not worth the paper it is printed on.
>
> > > On Jan 1, 8:36 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I found the following (I've cut it down) and think it may be of
> > > > interest.
> > > > Self-control is critical for success in life. University of Miami
> > > > professor of Psychology Michael McCullough finds that religious people
> > > > have more self-control than do their less religious counterparts.
> > > > These findings imply that religious people may be better at pursuing
> > > > and achieving long-term goals that are important to them and their
> > > > religious groups. This, in turn, might help explain why religious
> > > > people tend to have lower rates of substance abuse, better school
> > > > achievement, less delinquency, better health behaviours, less
> > > > depression, and longer lives.
> > > > McCullough evaluated 8 decades worth of research on religion, which
> > > > has been conducted in diverse samples of people from around the world.
> > > > He found persuasive evidence from a variety of domains within the
> > > > social sciences, including neuroscience, economics, psychology, and
> > > > sociology, that religious beliefs and religious behaviours are capable
> > > > of encouraging people to exercise self-control and to more effectively
> > > > regulate their emotions and behaviours, so that they can pursue valued
> > > > goals. The research paper will be published in the January 2009 issue
> > > > of Psychological Bulletin.
> > > > The importance of self-control and self-regulation for understanding
> > > > human behaviour are well known to social scientists, but the
> > > > possibility that the links of religiosity to self-control might
> > > > explain the links of religiosity to health and behaviour has not
> > > > received much explicit attention. Among the most interesting
> > > > conclusions that the research team drew were the following:
> > > > • Religious rituals such as prayer and meditation affect the parts
> > of
> > > > the human brain that are most important for self-regulation and self-
> > > > control;
> > > > • When people view their goals as "sacred," they put more energy
> > and
> > > > effort into pursuing those goals, and therefore, are probably more
> > > > effective at attaining them;
> > > > • Religious lifestyles may contribute to self-control by providing
> > > > people with clear standards for their behaviour, by causing people to
> > > > monitor their own behaviour more closely, and by giving people the
> > > > sense that God is watching their behaviour;
> > > > • The fact that religious people tend to be higher in self-control
> > > > helps explain why religious people are less likely to misuse drugs and
> > > > alcohol and experience problems with crime and delinquency.
> > > > The question is essentially how the same social force that motivates
> > > > acts of charity and generosity can also motivate people to strap bomb
> > > > belts around their waists and then blow themselves up in crowded city
> > > > buses. By thinking of religion as a social force that provides people
> > > > with resources for controlling their impulses (including the impulse
> > > > for self-preservation, in some cases) in the service of higher goals,
> > > > religion can motivate people to do just about anything.
>
> > > > There are some obvious critiques, yet I feel something important lies
> > > > in this.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
