John said: Lately, the dialogue has been less emotional and rancorous. After the initial challenge of his worldview, he seems more comfortable with my thinking. Where we are really hung up is on the general area of "does a dog have a buddha nature". Only we are taking this at his pace and from his world view - which is biblical. Where I've challenged him is in the idea that "nature is fallen". The christian doctrine of original sin. I say this concept is unbiblical and patently false. "Sin" can only occur in the intellect - the flesh is just the flesh. He tells me that he can prove I'm wrong from the bible. I don't think he can so we're waiting for monday.
dmb says:Last weekend I had the chance to talk to a bunch of different guys at length. We were all camping together and so there were many fire-side chats, coffee and philosophy for breakfast and the like. It's not much of a trick to notice that there are two main categories of conversationalist. The first kind is driven by curiosity and real interest in the subject matter under discussion. The other kind defends his thoughts and beliefs as if the whole thing was some kind of knife fight. The first guy can talk at length and listen at length, can explore tangents even while they stay focused on the topic. The other kind will hardly let you get through a sentence and feels the need to shout and point and maybe even stand up to get in your face. Regardless of the content of one's belief, the second type of conversationalist is very unlikely to be a good philosopher, not even if he happens to be "right" about certain things. The second type can't tolerate criticism or disagreement and it's usually because his beliefs are held for emotional reasons, not intellectual reasons. Not that a good philosopher should be devoid of emotions or purely rational. But anyone who can't discuss ideas without getting upset is probably a fanatic. It's not exactly fair to psychoanalyze some sheetrocker I've never met, but it sure looks like your Rigel is one of the second kind. A secure man probably wouldn't flaunt his law degree at construction workers to feel superior. A secure man probably would NOT thump the bible or "oppress any point you're making" or go ballistic on you. Just based on your brief descriptions, I feel like I know this guy. There are millions of guys just like him, although they're usually far less educated. He loves the bible, thinks socialism is evil and exhibits an emotional attachment to stiff Victorian morality. Sounds like the average Republican to me. There should be a book about this mindset called, "Men Who Love Certainty Too Much: An inquiry into the reasons that asshole is on his feet shouting at you". It's a psychological phenomenon. Have you noticed that many of the most vocal moralizers go down in some sex scandal? You know, the rabidly anti-gay preacher who gets caught doing crack with a male prostitute. The ultra-conservative Senator from Idaho is busted for soliciting sex and an airport bathroom. The latest episode being the Governor of South Carolina. It's like those studies that show homo-erotic arousal among the most fanatically homophobic types. This goes deeper than mere hypocrisy. This is people dealing with there demons by over-compensating in public. These people are fanatically opposed to the very thing they don't quite want to see in themselves. They don't know themselves, can't accept themselves, are filled with self-loathing. This is why the idea of original sin makes so much sense to them, why they cling to those moral codes that are directed at their particular demon. I mean, many of today's conservatives don't have an ideological position so much as a mental disorder. They find criticism of their ideas and beliefs intolerable because they aren't really ideas so much as coping mechanism. When a guy's coping mechanism is questioned, it feels like a personal threat, a dangerous and frightening assault upon something they need. When that's the case, there is no real chance for a philosophical discussion. On top of the insecurity that motivates such people, the values they're clinging to are usually social level values and so there is often an anti-intellectual attitude as well. _________________________________________________________________ Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail®. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_QuickAdd_062009 Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
