People generally operate on principles of myth.  The original sin is
teaching our children what we have never really understood as though
we know which from witch.  There is a madness we don't recognise
amongst us and much more hostility than we dare reveal.  I despair of
this.  I can join academic sects that claim to understand, but
essentially life goes on in nasty, brutish ways.

On 14 Feb, 06:14, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> As with many myths, Original Sin deals with common human behavior and
> the consequences of defiance.  Perseus comes to mind.  I like it.  The
> misogynistic side I can ignore easily.  It's not so much Woman that is
> to blame but Man's willingness to defy God.  Adam wants to know what
> that apple tastes like just as much as Eve does.  You totally nail all
> the aspects of the story.  I see the same things you do.  God isn't
> fair.  Neither is life.   I see it more as a coming of age story with
> the unknown responsibilities that come with adulthood being thrust on
> naive children.  I see the dangers of experimentation and defiance and
> I see the rewards.  Apples are tasty.
>
> Beats the heck outta what happened to Job.  Now THAT's a cruel God.
>
> dj
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:58 AM, frantheman <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>
> > On 13 Feb., 08:01, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Too much knowledge is a burden.  We're all still paying for Eve's
> >> sin(what a wonderful allegory original sin is).
>
> > I have to disagree with you here, Don. I don't like the concept of
> > original sin, never did, even during the decade I spent as a member of
> > the Dominican Order of the Catholic Church (much of that time spent
> > studying theology).
>
> > While I have great respect for myths, and the manifold underlying
> > truths contained in many of them, the Eden myth has many negative
> > aspects. God creates humanity free, with curiosity and a thirst for
> > knowledge and then arbitrarily, without explanation, places a
> > "Verbot." In fact, the story has many parallels to the Pandora myth,
> > which pans out basically the same way. There is no way a human can
> > resist the challenge to taste the fruit (especially as it grows on the
> > tree of the knowledge of good and evil) and remain (or be) human. The
> > outcome is inevitable. The conclusion is to regard our freedom and
> > thirst for knowledge as a basic flaw - yet it is integral to our
> > nature. Thus original sin, our very nature leads to the destruction of
> > the golden age. Yet the alternative is to be less than human -
> > innocent lotus-eaters. No thanks.
>
> > Then, of course, there is the whole mysogenistic aspect. It is, of
> > course, the irresponsibly curious woman who allows herself to be
> > misled into tasting the fruit (the Pandora story follows the same
> > plot). The only redeeming aspect of the Yahwist/Genesis story is the
> > depiction of the typical male reaction, passing the buck onto everyone
> > else available; "It was the woman you put with me; she gave me the
> > fruit, and I ate it" (Gen 3:12).
>
> > All in all, the myth is the product of a settled, patriarchal,
> > conservative world-view, giving a warning against independence, free-
> > thinking, innovation and perfidious women. And that's even before Paul
> > and Augustine got hold of the story and perverted it even farther, to
> > the extent that Augustine even defined sexual pleasure (concupiscence)
> > as the mechanism by which this "original" sin is passed on. With all
> > the connotations of women continually tempting upright men to sin by
> > means of their sexual allure. The end result, in another Abrahamic
> > religion, leads through hajib to the burqa, among other things.
>
> > I can appreciate Justin's frustration. One might even describe it as a
> > satorial hangover (and I'm not referring to his dress style :-))! We
> > remain human, even after experiencing "spiritual(?)" states. This is
> > especially true, in my experience, of monastic communities. Despite
> > the (mostly) high ideals of their members, they are microcosms of life
> > in general - indeed, particular conflicts and feelings are often
> > reinforced by monastic structures. I suspect, Justin, that a possible
> > answer to your present mood might be; breathe in, breathe out.
>
> > Francis
>
> >> I have experienced many of the social problems you mention.  As you
> >> say, most could be due to lack of communication but probably more
> >> because they just don't feel like you do.  Which makes you unique;
> >> just like the rest of us.  You are not alone.
>
> >> Dude, you think too much.
>
> >> Take a night sail if weather permits and if not; get a massage and
> >> shut your cranium off for an hour.  Your starting to sound like one of
> >> those people in Hellraiser searching for........whatever.
>
> >> Stay away from Chinese puzzle boxes.
>
> >> dj
>
> >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Justintruth <[email protected]> 
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > Hi Chris,
>
> >> > I guess ultimately what I mean by viable is "is true". I am concerned
> >> > about some issues that have to due with questioning and answers and
> >> > the effect of answers on questioning. Often "the alternative to
> >> > fundamentalism" is expressed as an answer. I think that its not so
> >> > simple. Why is it that one who experiences real enlightenment does not
> >> > stay in that blessed state, or stay aware of it in the same way
> >> > (because in fact we are always "in" it in a sense), even though the
> >> > memory of it remains and determines ones world view? Yes I know that
> >> > only recognition separates me from the truth... perhaps the answer is
> >> > the foundation of ethics and what is needed most is courage. But
> >> > intellectually I have trouble reconciling the notion of a truth that
> >> > takes more than just knowing in a purely intellectual sense to
> >> > realize. I have questions about the meaning of knowing in relation to
> >> > these matters and more importantly I am afraid that I see that the
> >> > process of asking and answering questions which is the foundation of
> >> > philosophy itself, may be inadequate to the task. I am concerned that
> >> > "Just In Truth" may be a distortion... that the "Just" is an unwelcome
> >> > limitation or rather a limitation that prevents the "In Truth".
> >> > Perhaps I need to change my name to "Hello" or something like that.
> >> > The debates of Greece lack something.
>
> >> > I recently attempted to set up a kind of secular monastery. A place
> >> > for Being. I had visions of those around me working together and being
> >> > able to be alone when they felt the need to withdraw. Not a somber
> >> > place but one full of art and culture. I envisioned beautiful private
> >> > spaces where you could withdraw to be completely alone and public
> >> > communal spaces that you could go to to be with those you love. Lots
> >> > of gardens. I even bought a sizable piece of land to begin on. It was
> >> > not a public thing. I wanted my friends to all be able to live
> >> > together. What happened was the whole thing became a kind of clash of
> >> > limitations. The finite aspects of everyone ... it was as if when
> >> > confronted with each other we find we can't stand each other. Love is
> >> > not transitive nor is it reflexive. Each wants to determine the other
> >> > in order to determine his or her own self and their ideas conflict. I
> >> > could not communicate well enough or maybe the whole thing was just my
> >> > idea and not what others wanted. Why is it that we separate everyone
> >> > into those with whom we wish to associate and those with whom we will
> >> > refuse to have anything to do with? Why is this pecking order thing so
> >> > big? Our finite beings can be either "pretty" or "pretty ugly" and
> >> > when we get into a room there is such an arranging of everyone into
> >> > those that are "in" and those that are "out". I have been so attracted
> >> > lately to the ugly, old and infirm and so turned off by the beautiful
> >> > lately. Where does that come from? God I sound like a whining
> >> > teenager! Communal living can be successful but only certain forms
> >> > have worked and even those, even in the monasteries there is trouble.
> >> > Some day maybe we will understand better. I actually think that
> >> > neurology may in the end help us understand although the path is so
> >> > dangerous.
>
> >> > It seems that one of the things we do a lot of here is to "exchange
> >> > opinions" - not just in this news group but in our whole culture. I
> >> > wish I had a culture in which I could do more that that with people.
> >> > We are all such porcupines but this pursuit of the truth in the
> >> > philosophical sense ultimately needs to be.... augmented? is that the
> >> > word? I read my own words and have a problem with them: "We have so
> >> > little of the truth out now. How can you ask for less?"
>
> >> > The problem is that being and meaning and action and knowing all are
> >> > beginning to loose their boundaries for me. I am tired of being
> >> > Justintruth. I guess for me I see a kind of limitation to pure
> >> > knowing. A lack of finitude and too much infinitude as Kierkegaard
> >> > calls it. I bet I could find my form of despair in his book!
>
> >> > Oh well! As the Brits say... "Chin up!"... and as Galileo is reported
> >> > to have said: "Yes!...but the world still whirls!" Form me the cure
> >> > will almost certainly be agriculture.
>
> >> > Anyway...that's roughly what I meant by viability.
>
> >> > I am glad that you "... see no problem whatsoever with throwing out
> >> > all fundamentalist interpretations with a healthy exhalation, and
> >> > living (your) life completely free of them." It seems like the right
> >> > thing to me.
>
> >> > Good Luck,
>
> >> > Justintruth
>
> >> > On Feb 11, 6:10 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> Wow!
> >> >> Nice to see you again, Justin.
>
> >> >> This is a particularly interesting point:
>
> >> >> "The real issue is not which fundamentalist interpretation is correct
> >> >> but whether the alternative to them is viable."
>
> >> >> What do you mean by viable? I'm wondering, because I see no problem
> >> >> whatsoever with throwing out all fundamentalist interpretations with a
> >> >> healthy exhalation, and living my life completely free of them. This 
> >> >> seems
> >> >> perfectly viable to me.
>
> >> >> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Justintruth
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to