|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Who is the real Santa Claus? |
| Klaus Kinski's ghost |
|
100% |
[ 2 ] |
| Klaus Kinski's corpse |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 2 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Kinto
Joined: 16 Feb 2011 Location: LANDAN
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:57 pm |
|
|
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Santa's fine. From reading the reservations in this thread, I'm pretty sure that 95% of the concerns about incorporating Santa into holiday rituals reflects adult angst with regard to cultural myth much more than it reflects what the kid's going to get out of it. |
Finding comfort in falsehoods is simply a terrifying prospect.
Why be good for Santa when you can be good for the people in your house who actually have feelings? Why turn behaviour into something so expressly focused on punishment and reward rather than empathy?
The Santa story itself is just shit and weird and dripping in religious metaphor.
This really shouldn't be considered any crazier than refusing to stock your fridge with soda.
Last edited by Kinto on Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Flylighter

Joined: 16 Nov 2008 Location: On sabbaddical
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:06 pm |
|
|
| Buzz Killington wrote: |
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Santa's fine. From reading the reservations in this thread, I'm pretty sure that 95% of the concerns about incorporating Santa into holiday rituals reflects adult angst with regard to cultural myth much more than it reflects what the kid's going to get out of it. |
Why be good for Santa when you can be good for the people in your house who actually have feelings? Why turn behaviour into something so expressly focused on punishment and reward rather than empathy?
|
Because you raise children (indeed, teach them) by means of reward and punishment early on; because children are native teleologists and have poor abstract reasoning skills and poor grasps of the intangible before about age 12. We're not talking about Santa coming for the teens here. We're not talking about eternal physical punishment for the naughty children, or tithing our allowances for the Elf Church of Santa's Word. _________________ I'm on Steam! ----- I'm on Youtube!
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:19 pm |
|
|
| Flylighter wrote: |
| Buzz Killington wrote: |
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Santa's fine. From reading the reservations in this thread, I'm pretty sure that 95% of the concerns about incorporating Santa into holiday rituals reflects adult angst with regard to cultural myth much more than it reflects what the kid's going to get out of it. |
Why be good for Santa when you can be good for the people in your house who actually have feelings? Why turn behaviour into something so expressly focused on punishment and reward rather than empathy?
|
Because you raise children (indeed, teach them) by means of reward and punishment early on; because children are native teleologists and have poor abstract reasoning skills and poor grasps of the intangible before about age 12. We're not talking about Santa coming for the teens here. We're not talking about eternal physical punishment for the naughty children, or tithing our allowances for the Elf Church of Santa's Word. |
Yep. IIRC, the actual development allowing for abstract thinking only completes during the late teenage years, and most of the abstract concepts that teenagers carry on their shoulders until their early 20s more resemble what mature adults would consider a concrete thought.
In other words, the metaphorically true will be more likely regarded as literally true, even if there's acknowledgement that the idea at hand is, in fact, metaphorical.
There's also the niggling matter of what kind of falsehood you're talking about. Methodological doubt, skeptical doubt, and what one might call existential doubt are very different and equally valid kinds of doubt, and it's fallacious to apply one (usually methodological) where another is appropriate.
Also also cultural practices and ideas serve a civilizing function that's pretty darn effective for teaching kids how to be moral people. Santa Claus is one of those ideas.
Also also also it's silly to be terrified of the fact that someone might become religious! (Almost always brought on by an incomplete notion of that religion and faith are.) But there are like 10000000 other threads on that subject so I'm not going to get too much into it here. _________________

Last edited by Adilegian on Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:25 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:25 pm |
|
|
In a way, the Santa Claus story could be compared to an intro course to any deep discipline.
Most people who are fully vested in a give discipline, if enrolled in an intro course for that discipline, will see all sorts of ways in which the subject matter has been simplified to the point of caricature and falsehood. However, these simplifications are necessary in order for one to pass from a lack of knowledge to proficiency to mastery.
Learning often happens like that. You start with an oversimplified model, comprehend it, and then you discard that model in favor of a more complex and nuanced model. For the reasons that flylighter listed, kids aren't going to be able to enter into the moral sphere on the grounds of abstract empathy. They're taught that being nice can feel good, even if that initial good feeling is selfish, and then they outgrow that carrot-and-stick approach, usually to the point of experimenting with deliberately violating that model during teenage years (experimental cruelty).
They need a basic model to violate, though, and they also need something comforting to return to when they become dissatisfied with select experiments. That requires a concrete memory, and, if done well, the Santa Claus tradition can serve quite effectively. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Kinto
Joined: 16 Feb 2011 Location: LANDAN
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:32 pm |
|
|
Children have a sense of empathy, if an undeveloped one (one might say untrained). It's not abstract. It's innate, evolved into the structure of our brains, feelable. It's a sense one develops proficiency in, like a sense of balance. Why not reward this rather than the kid's desire for a reward?
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Also also also it's silly to be terrified of the fact that someone might become religious! (Almost always brought on by an incomplete notion of that religion and faith are.) But there are like 10000000 other threads on that subject so I'm not going to get too much into it here. |
This is some patronising no true scotsman shit. I know what is meant by religion and faith to a fairly accurate degree and I know they are bad ideas. Blend your definitions with concepts like "spirituality", "awe", "morality" and "self-transcendence" if you want, but don't assume everyone else does or should. Words work better when they're clearly-defined.
Last edited by Kinto on Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:55 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
This Machine Kills Fascis Unfinite Indiscovery

Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Location: Inside Thomas the Tank Engine, screaming
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:46 pm |
|
|
| Shiren the Launderer wrote: |
| Remember when Harry Potter was just a book series and not some craven money machine? |
No? _________________ "Godzilla could be anyone."
| MrSkeleton wrote: |
| i dont know how to give a thing made of blood but id do it |
| evnvnv wrote: |
| If you die in the axe, you die in real life |
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Loki Laufeyson fps fragmaster

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Beneath the Mushroom Kingdom
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:46 pm |
|
|
| Kinto wrote: |
| Words work better when they're clearly-defined. |
And it would be easier to take what you're writing seriously if you didn't use hyper-loaded terms like "religion" and "faith" as though they had some obvious meaning when in fact they're nebulous almost to the point of uselessness, making your disregard of whatever you feel fits under their heading completely disposable.
Which is probably why I came across as patronizing.
EDIT: To prevent this post from being completely what it already is, Tillich's The Dynamics of Faith is a great primer on a functional definition of faith that doesn't come immediately from its detractors, which is where I suspect you're getting your definitions -- which are, as a consequence of that, incomplete. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
diplo

Joined: 18 Dec 2006 Location: Brandy Brendo's bungalow
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 12:04 am |
|
|
| Taking this opportunity to say, Santa Lucia Day >>>>>>>>>> Christmas (imhotep) |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
CubaLibre the road lawyer

Joined: 02 Mar 2007 Location: Balmer
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 12:24 am |
|
|
| diplo wrote: |
| Taking this opportunity to say, Santa Lucia Day >>>>>>>>>> Christmas (imhotep) |
not in my house
do parents make fucking killer gingerbread men and caramels on santa lucia day? hell no _________________ Let's Play, starring me. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Apol king of zembla

Joined: 04 Dec 2006 Location: a curiously familiar pit
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 1:14 am |
|
|
| CubaLibre wrote: |
| diplo wrote: |
| Taking this opportunity to say, Santa Lucia Day >>>>>>>>>> Christmas (imhotep) |
not in my house
do parents make fucking killer gingerbread men and caramels on santa lucia day? hell no |
my mom always made divinity. it rules:
 _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 2:14 am |
|
|
I was out shopping today and saw pre-Christmas Santa merchandise for sale. One of them was a Dude Santa on a bike with sunglasses.
It contrasts with the image of Santa that I had growing up, which was much more of the traditional St. Nicholas variety. Because I grew up in Germany, I also had a variation of Krampus in my holiday tradition, so it was kind of a good-cop/bad-cop setup.
That witch was terrifying. It was awesome. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Apol king of zembla

Joined: 04 Dec 2006 Location: a curiously familiar pit
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
This Machine Kills Fascis Unfinite Indiscovery

Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Location: Inside Thomas the Tank Engine, screaming
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 3:12 am |
|
|
In my house we had a Belsnickel doll. Belsnickel's basically a watered-down Krampus, but my parents never bothered trying to convince me that he was a real dude. _________________ "Godzilla could be anyone."
| MrSkeleton wrote: |
| i dont know how to give a thing made of blood but id do it |
| evnvnv wrote: |
| If you die in the axe, you die in real life |
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Toto

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:01 am |
|
|
| Kinto wrote: |
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Santa's fine. From reading the reservations in this thread, I'm pretty sure that 95% of the concerns about incorporating Santa into holiday rituals reflects adult angst with regard to cultural myth much more than it reflects what the kid's going to get out of it. |
Finding comfort in falsehoods is simply a terrifying prospect. |
Depends on the nature and application of the falsehood.
My parents were always reading. I wanted to read too. I picked it up pretty quickly. I always had a knack and an affinity for fiction. I've found transitioning into non-fiction and philosophy difficult (although I have always found the idea of philosophy interesting). |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Oh God Spiders No

Joined: 16 Aug 2011
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:15 am |
|
|
| Toto wrote: |
| Kinto wrote: |
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Santa's fine. From reading the reservations in this thread, I'm pretty sure that 95% of the concerns about incorporating Santa into holiday rituals reflects adult angst with regard to cultural myth much more than it reflects what the kid's going to get out of it. |
Finding comfort in falsehoods is simply a terrifying prospect. |
Depends on the nature and application of the falsehood.
My parents were always reading. I wanted to read too. I picked it up pretty quickly. I always had a knack and an affinity for fiction. I've found transitioning into non-fiction and philosophy difficult (although I have always found the idea of philosophy interesting). |
This is my experience, too, and I find it a little disappointing, really. I wish the idea of retreating from reality weren't such a seductive and pleasant idea. I eventually grew out of it (for the most part), but I think the fantasy stuff probably kept me from making a lot of friends that I might have otherwise, or enjoying real world activities that I would have tangibly benefited from.
I think it would be nice to be one of those people who is wholly satisfied by just what the real world has to offer. I met a guy once who was a business owner, loved all of the day-to-day management stuff. He liked sports, and hated movies. He was the complete opposite of me and I had absolutely nothing in common with him and we couldn't keep a conversation. But I couldn't help thinking that maybe this guy was on to something.
I think that perhaps one of the most destructive reoccurring themes in children's literature is the idea that the transition into adulthood and the abandonment of make-believe is somehow a bad or tragic thing, or that children's wild imaginations let them see hidden truths or magic things that hide themselves from adults. I must have spent so much time mired in self-delusions and magical thinking.
But, uh, maybe that stuff was appealing to me for other reasons. I don't know. I'm still going to keep reading Game of Thrones and I'm still going to love it. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Toto

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:22 am |
|
|
No I do fine in the real world (I love sports and movies). All I meant was that the actual act of reading difficult non-fiction/conceptual work is difficult for me.
A lot of it is the language, which I find infuriating. I understand that complex ideas need a complex language to describe them, but I am plagued by the feeling that there is an elitist narrative running underneath a lot of things I had to read. There's nothing overly wrong with his; it just makes it difficult for me to sustain interest. Also, the practical fact of the matter is I don't know what many of the words actually mean, and lots of dictionary time is needed, which makes reading more time consuming. This is has probably exposed my lack of sophistication :(
Thank you for sharing though! I have always found, in regard to difficulty gelling with others, that it was about myself, rather than about them. They were willing to engage with me sincerely, whether or not I shared the same interests etc. But I created an unbridgeable gulf for myself by assuming they must find me wholly dull. Once I started pumping myself up with false bravado, it became easy. Socialising is like a video game; it's pretty easy once you get the tricks down. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
allensmithee polyglamorous

Joined: 21 Apr 2011 Location: wherever it is, im dying to get out
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:23 am |
|
|
Honestly, reading philosophy isn't hard at all, at least for a reader like me. I read slowly, but with great comprehension and with the stuff Adilegian is teaching me about annotation and such, I'm getting even better. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Oh God Spiders No

Joined: 16 Aug 2011
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:37 am |
|
|
@Toto
Well, I feel like I've probably painted myself in a worse light than I deserve, so don't fret about sophistication.
I should really clarify and say that I'm doing pretty great nowadays. I have a good job (that is like 90% human interaction and solid, academic, real skills) and I don't feel uncomfortable making friends or talking to people or anything. I also have good relationships with my family and girlfriend.
It's just... man, my early teens were really fucking rocky. I wonder if it might have played out differently if I had been reading histories instead of fantasies.
This is all speculation, of course. And either way I hear from a lot of people that the first chunk of adulthood is usually about cleaning up all the debris from your childhood. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
internisus shafer sephiroth
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:16 am |
|
|
| Toto wrote: |
| Kinto wrote: |
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Santa's fine. From reading the reservations in this thread, I'm pretty sure that 95% of the concerns about incorporating Santa into holiday rituals reflects adult angst with regard to cultural myth much more than it reflects what the kid's going to get out of it. |
Finding comfort in falsehoods is simply a terrifying prospect. |
Depends on the nature and application of the falsehood.
My parents were always reading. I wanted to read too. I picked it up pretty quickly. I always had a knack and an affinity for fiction. I've found transitioning into non-fiction and philosophy difficult (although I have always found the idea of philosophy interesting). |
Fiction is not falsehood. You would almost never read a work of imaginative literature and make the error of thinking it is a true account. You would recognize that children understand that the stories read to them are make believe, yes? But parents present Santa Claus as a truth although it is not. Religious teachings do the same thing. Kinto is acknowledging that (enormous numbers of) people comfort themselves by believing things that they have no reason to think are true—that they choose to believe things just because they make them feel good and that there are certain ideas that easily propagate in this manner as people spread "good news" without caring whether or not it's true. These people are at odds with other people who have found comfort in a similar yet different idea. This is dangerous. This is faith. This is religion. Don't say "depends upon the nature and application of the falsehood" and start talking about retreating into literature. One has nothing to do with the other. What does it say on the back of the book? "An incredible story of friendship and perseverance in a magical land inspired by Norse and Finnish mythology, Tolkien's classic tale has indisputably left a deep mark of influence on the Western fantasy novel. This lovingly presented gift set belongs on any collector's shelf." or "The absolutely true gospel of the Lord your God: Read this to find out how you should live your life in order to avoid eternal damnation!"
| Adilegian wrote: |
Also also cultural practices and ideas serve a civilizing function that's pretty darn effective for teaching kids how to be moral people. Santa Claus is one of those ideas.
Also also also it's silly to be terrified of the fact that someone might become religious! (Almost always brought on by an incomplete notion of that religion and faith are.) |
Adilegian, when someone says "Finding comfort in falsehoods is simply a terrifying prospect" in reference to religion, s/he is talking about the seductive, viral nature of these ideas. It is not silly to be afraid that someone coping with pain or uncertainty of some kind (and who isn't?) might fall prey to the fast-food philosophy and easy, comforting answers of religion. People who think this way are not ignorant with respect to the meaning of faith or religion and are not coming to their conclusions based on "incomplete notions of what religion and faith are." We are simply against it. It is insulting and disrespectful to presume that people's ideas are half-formed because they disagree with you; this is what it looks like you are doing. Religion and faith are not difficult concepts. Faith is belief without evidence. Some of us think that's a terrible idea. That's all there is to it.
The Santa Claus myth and ritual is like a gateway drug into nonsense. Think about it. You fabricate for your children false evidence in the form of presents, an empty plate with cookie crumbs, and maybe some sleigh bells or even a costume. You tell them this lie, which you intend one day to admit is just make believe while excusing yourself on the grounds that it is cultural tradition, never admitting that you are using the deceit to blackmail them into being good and hooking them on rewards for their good behavior. If your post-Santa kids call you on your bullshit you say, "And now I've taught you a valuable lesson: Don't believe everything grown-ups tell you!" Does this really sound like a moral thing to do?
And don't give me that guff about this being necessary to teach young people not to act like monsters. The vast majority of children's stories are imbued with some notion of karmic what-goes-around-comes-around. If you explain that people are inclined to treat you as you treat them, you've already established a basis for empathy as well as provided an intrinsic reward for good behavior.
But you may not want to listen to me. I'm a troll; an arrantly ignorant cretinous creep. I am literally the dumbest motherfucker. Literally.
| AllenSmithee wrote: |
| I read slowly, but with great comprehension and with the stuff Adilegian is teaching me about annotation and such, I'm getting even better. |
I'm a bit curious about this; I never learned that stuff (and would be loath to ever mark a book) and sometimes worry that I am a shallow reader. I don't mean to intrude, but I wonder whether you guys doing something private—or has this been going on visibly somewhere? |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
The King

Joined: 14 Dec 2010 Location: Japan
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:33 am |
|
|
internisus, how do you feel about sticky noting a book? It might be a good alternative for you.
Keep a stack of sticky notes, write the note on the top sticky note, take it off the stack and stick it to the margin of the page you're reading.
If you stick them outwards from the page they can pull double duty as a customizable fast index. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
allensmithee polyglamorous

Joined: 21 Apr 2011 Location: wherever it is, im dying to get out
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:53 am |
|
|
Internisus, this is mostly going on in the IRC, and it hasn't been much of an ongoing thing: he linked a scanning of one of his books with the annotation intact, and I'm going to start trying it out on my next non-fiction reading. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
internisus shafer sephiroth
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 8:29 am |
|
|
Ah, okay! Well, I hope it works for you. I don't think I could ever use in-book annotations because changing the book, especially by writing in my reactions, means that I can't open it again in the future and see it new.
Majesty, stickies are a good idea, but I'll probably stay with what I do because for the most part it's actually the same strategy. I keep an active journal like a moleskine or a homebound thing and just fill it up with any reactions to what I read, referencing the book and page number. Often I actually copy a quote so that I can have it more readily at hand and so that I stumble across it if I review one of these journals. It's certainly slower than using stickies or otherwise working directly within the physical book I'm reading, but I like the separateness; the notes from different books that may or may not speak to each other accumulate to create something that reflects my mind at that time.
What I do worry about sometimes is my capacity to read deeply, you know? Most of my notes tend to be variations on "This is interesting," or basically "Oh, what a well-phrased passage!" rather than a specific thought in response to the 'highlight' or related touchstones and so on. Probably if I felt the need to comment upon a text as thoroughly as Adilegian does, a separate notebook would seem annoyingly inefficient; what really concerns me is that I do not feel such an extensive need. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 1:13 pm |
|
|
Real quick because it's morning and I just woke up:
| internisus wrote: |
| Faith is belief without evidence. |
This is a definition of a certain grade of belief rather than faith. Conflating faith and belief is a common semantic error. It lets you get around the details of the philosophical problems with greater convenience, but it doesn't actually address the problem.
The result is that it dismisses the problems of faith (relevant to the religious and irreligious alike) with the misapplication of methodological doubt. I'm not being condescending to point out that there's crucially more to know about a subject that you've drawn strident conclusions about; it's simply a matter of being widely and seriously read on the subject and pointing out that your picture's incomplete. Simple mistakes like conflating faith with belief indicate as much.
I've made the same errors in presumption on topics that I know less about than the grumpiness of my opinions would suggest, and I've appreciated when someone's had the candor to point it out. I'm just passing it forward. My reading and thinking about the matter is still exploratory, as it has been since my late teens, so I'm less defending a specific position on it than I am pursuing different nuances on the matter. Discussing belief can become simply comparative and at times even encyclopedic, which right now interests me less than talking about faith.
Also re: condescension, sometimes I am irritable. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Toto

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 1:58 pm |
|
|
| AllenSmithee wrote: |
| Honestly, reading philosophy isn't hard at all, at least for a reader like me. I read slowly, but with great comprehension and with the stuff Adilegian is teaching me about annotation and such, I'm getting even better. |
Well that's great but what does this post achieve other than to rub it in? |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Predator Goose
Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Location: Oversensitive Pedantic Ninny
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 2:26 pm |
|
|
On the other end I've tried picking up Kant and Nietzsche and it's all dense drivel to me for all that I can understand it. _________________ I can no longer shop happily. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
cassievania cassie-no night zone

Joined: 16 Feb 2010 Location: Master, the batteries in your Wii Remote are depleted
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 2:30 pm |
|
|
books are banned in this household young lady until you recognize that games are art _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
cassievania cassie-no night zone

Joined: 16 Feb 2010 Location: Master, the batteries in your Wii Remote are depleted
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 2:44 pm |
|
|
if i ever have kids i will hire somebody to pretend to be santa and then train my kids to find out if santa is real, scooby-doo style
"gasp! why it's our kind neighbor old man richard!"
"yes, your mothers hired me to trick you kids into believing santa is real, and i played along so that i could sneak into your house and, every christmas eve, steal away enough comics from your parents' priceless collection so that nobody would notice! i did it for years, hoping to sell them all once i had a sizable collection of my own! and i would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!" _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:49 pm |
|
|
Tell them that there is Santa and then there's the impostor Sandy Claws, who every time he touches you feels like shaking hands with a used litter box.
EDIT: Also if they are bad then they still get presents but Sandy Claws touches them all over and grossssssss. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
BenoitRen I bought RAM

Joined: 05 Jan 2007
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 5:09 pm |
|
|
My school's forced reading of books made me adverse to reading books. There's also the fact that my mind leans towards thinking in images, so books full of characters aren't appealing. _________________ Get Xenoblade Chronicles!
| udoschuermann wrote: |
| Whenever I read things like "id like to by a new car," I cringe inside, imagine some grunting ape who happened across a keyboard, and move on without thinking about the attempted message. |
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
This Machine Kills Fascis Unfinite Indiscovery

Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Location: Inside Thomas the Tank Engine, screaming
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:02 pm |
|
|
| Predator Goose wrote: |
| On the other end I've tried picking up Kant and Nietzsche and it's all dense drivel to me for all that I can understand it. |
Hey man, Nietzsche's pretty fun and entertaining; why do you think so many sixteen-year-old loners are so into him? _________________ "Godzilla could be anyone."
| MrSkeleton wrote: |
| i dont know how to give a thing made of blood but id do it |
| evnvnv wrote: |
| If you die in the axe, you die in real life |
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Iacus

Joined: 04 Dec 2006 Location: Stockholm
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:10 pm |
|
|
| BenoitRen wrote: |
| My school's forced reading of books made me adverse to reading books. |
This is a common situation, yes. Nothing kills interest in books quicker than being forced to read poorly chosen (read: awful) books as homework. Fortunately, I've rediscovered reading for pleasure on my own, but I guess many people would end soured on reading from those experiences. _________________ Guayaba 2600 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Sniper Honeyviper
Joined: 30 Aug 2009
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:12 pm |
|
|
| The Santa story completely disfavors kids in poor families. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
This Machine Kills Fascis Unfinite Indiscovery

Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Location: Inside Thomas the Tank Engine, screaming
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:17 pm |
|
|
| Sniper Honeyviper wrote: |
The Santa story world completely disfavors kids in poor families. |
_________________ "Godzilla could be anyone."
| MrSkeleton wrote: |
| i dont know how to give a thing made of blood but id do it |
| evnvnv wrote: |
| If you die in the axe, you die in real life |
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
evnvnv hapax legomenon

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: the los angeles
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:04 pm |
|
|
| internisus wrote: |
| ...believing things that they have no reason to think are true—that they choose to believe things just because they make them feel good and that there are certain ideas that easily propagate in this manner as people spread "good news" without caring whether or not it's true. These people are at odds with other people who have found comfort in a similar yet different idea. This is dangerous. This is faith. This is religion. |
Regardless of the validity of your first conclusion (whether or not it is dangerous), the conclusions of your last two sentences are incorrect. I'm not nearly as interested or equipped to deal with the definition of "faith" as Adilegian is, but the definition of "religion" is a little easier to unpack and can be illuminating. Perhaps the usage of the word nowadays strays far from its earlier connotations, but consider a few things about the etymology:
| OED wrote: |
| ...so that the supposed original sense of ‘religion’ would have been ‘painstaking observance of rites’, but by later authors (especially by early Christian writers) with religāre religate v., ‘religion’ being taken as ‘that which ties believers to God’. Each view finds supporters among modern scholars. |
Though the true 'originality' of the original sense of the word can of course be questioned (especially with the very early claims to define the word as "that which ties believers to God," which I suppose would be closer to the modern sense and the way you are using it), I think it is effective to consider the term's connotation of 'painstaking observance of rites.' The first thing this does is negate the concept that religion is something practiced simply because it "makes you feel good." Perhaps today it is advantageous to certain religious sects to downplay the seemingly masochistic side of painstaking devotion, but it is an important aspect of religion nonetheless. But the real point I want to make here is about rites and observances, regardless of how painstakingly they are followed.
While faith or belief may serve to motivate one towards correct practice, a number of religious traditions throughout the world hold that practice (whether we are talking about rites and ritual activity, prayer/meditation, celebration/observation of holy days, observance of dietary restrictions and other taboos) is something that is meaningful and important completely independently of the existence any potential 'supernatural' entity either observing or responding to the practice. Confucius is one most often cited for this tendency, and the passage most often given in support of this is Analects 3:12:
| The Analects wrote: |
| He sacrificed to the dead, as if they were present. He sacrificed to the spirits, as if the spirits were present. The Master said, "I consider my not being present at the sacrifice, as if I did not sacrifice." |
People usually pay most attention to the "as if" parts of the first clause, and use it to suggest that Confucius, in fact, did not believe that they were present at all, and yet still behaved in accordance with all the regulations that they supposedly demand. Interpreted this way, perhaps the statement could be conceived of as flippant or in some traditions even heretical, but here I'm interested in simply raising the question: If you disregard the existence of everything immaterial or supernatural, what would an individual or a society possibly gain from strict adherence to religious practice?
Moving on, what about the second half of the passage? "I consider my not being present at the sacrifice, as if I did not sacrifice." Here the original text is more nuanced then the translation. The translations suggests a parity between the "presence" of the spirits and ghosts and the "presence" of the person doing the sacrifice, but in the original different characters are used: the spirits/ghosts may or may not be 'present' 在, but Confucius 'attends to‘ the sacrifice, 'conducts,' or 'participates' in the sacrifice (與). I might be making a bit of a stretch here, but to me the use of 與 recalls something of that original sense of 'religion' discussed above--the emphasis is on personal devotion, involvement, and engagement rather than mere physical presence.
Looking at things from another perspective can clarify what I mean about the potential 'un-supernatural' benefits of adherence to religious principles. There are three sanskrit terms used for discussing aspects of Buddhist religion, known as the "Three Jewels:" The Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha. The Buddha probably requires the least definition: on one level it is of course the historical, religion-founding Buddha, but also refers to an individual's Buddha-nature and potential to reach enlightenment. The Dharma also has a multi-layered definition--the first being simply the natural order of the world, and by extension the material world itself (which of course in Buddhist thought are merely elements of consciousness, but anyway...). Finally it also connotes the teachings of the Buddha and all of the principles of practice and abstinence (and here I mean all kinds of restrictions and taboos, not just sexual abstience of course) that follow from it (though purportedly coming straight from the teachings of the historical Buddha, as with all religious sects there is a lot of variety depending on who you ask about what these are!). Finally there is the concept of the Sangha, or the community. This can refer either to the 'pantheon' of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, who have attained enlightenment or come close enough to help others do the same, but also more generally to everyone else in the community.
So here you have a type of religious identification that can be defined by these three principles, which I will paraphrase as 'deity,' 'practice,' and 'community.' To me, the discussions that we get into about religion on this board are too often only focused on the first aspect. When it comes to the other two, we are too quick to jump to actions taken by religious organizations that attain political and military might--something that is mandated by scripture only for those who desire it. When judging the 'value' of religion, it has been important for me not to overlook how it works on a community level as a 'binding agent,' creating a sense of cultural coherence and shared identity among a group of people, and acting as an 'extended family' of sympathetic individuals. Among other things, shared participation in religious practice provides common ground and a shared language of behavior and ideals that can unite people.
I also want to point out that what I've tried to do here is draw from a variety of sources to illustrate how a term like 'religion' can have any kind of coherence across the many different types of religion out there. I know this has taken a bit of stretching, and that there is a vast catalogue of evidence suggesting incompatibility and disparity between these different religions. So that is my concluding point--I guess I get a little hot and bothered around here when people talk about 'religion' as an all-encompassing term, and then provide only examples and concepts from a very limited set of sources. When pressed, some will even say that they aren't talking about "that" type of religion, or that limited knowledge prevents one from taking 'other' religions into account in an argument, or that what you are really concerned with is the irrational superstitious side of religion. On some level, this is as unfair as talking only about animal testing, corporate-funded research, and bizarre ideologies derived from theories (phrenology, lysenkoism, whathaveyou) and claiming that you are talking about "science."
I know I have made a lot of similar posts about this in the past, but I feel they have too often been marred by sarcasm, aloofness and vagaries. Today is saturday, and I have had far too much coffee, so I have attempted to be a little more specific about what it is, exactly, that ticks me off when I read these religion discussions. I'm afraid there is too much more that has gone unsaid, but to write any more would only bore everyone. If you have actually been diligently reading and comprehending my posts in the past, and simply deeming them too 'off-topic' to be relevant to anything, then I'm sorry for continuing to waste your time. Otherwise, I hope this has clarified some of my previous points about this sort of thing. _________________ The text will not live forever. The cup are small |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
wourme

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Building World
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:11 pm |
|
|
Unfortunately, having to read a novel for school can hurt the experience of reading that book and even reading in general. I read constantly, but even with some books I really want to read I don't get to them right away--they sit on my shelf until the day that I feel like reading them. Some of my very favorite books are ones that some people have to read for school. I wonder whether my experience with them would have been different had I been assigned to read them.
I like fantasy literature, but I certainly don't read it to escape--I think real life is a lot of fun. Game of Thrones was mentioned in this thread--that's one that I'm always in the mood for when the next book comes out. I don't know that I'd say I'm addicted, as I've read the whole series pretty gradually (having to wait years between books), but I certainly find it compelling. I second HarveyQ's criticism of the series, though. George R.R. Martin has some other things that are also excellent, such as the stand-alone novel Fevre Dream and the short stories Sandkings and House of the Worm.
Kant and Nietzsche might not be the best place to start with philosophy. Kant especially is quite difficult to read when you're not used to that sort of thing. I'd recommend this book as an introduction to philosophy:
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Philosophy-Classical-Contemporary-Readings/dp/0195112040/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1316286585&sr=8-1
Any edition is probably fine, but this is the one I have and it's very cheap used.
Last edited by wourme on Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:12 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:11 pm |
|
|
Dammit evnvnv this is the post of yours I've been wanting to read for probably 6 months now. Thanks. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
Adilegian Rogue Scholar

Joined: 05 Dec 2006 Location: Q*Bert Killscreen Nightmare
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:15 pm |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Kant and Nietzsche might not be the best place to start with philosophy. Kant especially is quite difficult to read when you're not used to that sort of thing. |
The worst part about reading Kant is reading Kant. A buddy of mine with a PhD in German language studies told me that he tried reading Kant in German for a higher level course, and Kant's original writing is 4254p093845293084230-9482329084 times more inscrutable than anything of him in translation.
Kant's foundational enough to a lot of modern philosophy that you can probably get by just by reading good summaries. _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
This Machine Kills Fascis Unfinite Indiscovery

Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Location: Inside Thomas the Tank Engine, screaming
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:16 pm |
|
|
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Dammit evnvnv this is the post of yours I've been wanting to read for probably 6 months now. Thanks. |
Do you want me to poll this or something? _________________ "Godzilla could be anyone."
| MrSkeleton wrote: |
| i dont know how to give a thing made of blood but id do it |
| evnvnv wrote: |
| If you die in the axe, you die in real life |
|
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
shrugtheironteacup man of tomorrow

Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Location: a meat
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:37 pm |
|
|
select button
a gateway drug into nonsense _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
ChoAnikiFan1994 tony hawk's pro messageboarding

Joined: 27 Aug 2007 Location: burger fortress
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:43 pm |
|
|
| This Machine Kills Fascis wrote: |
| Adilegian wrote: |
| Dammit evnvnv this is the post of yours I've been wanting to read for probably 6 months now. Thanks. |
Do you want me to poll this or something? |
please do
i'd like to read evnvnv's post but am currently too unfocused to comprehend it _________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|