[FRIAM] A longer response to Dave's question
Sarbajit Roy
sroy.mb at gmail.com
Fri Feb 21 23:47:49 EST 2020
Marcus,
Thanks for your info.
As a non-American, I ask - what happened to the USA's "One nation under
God ?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance
Sarbajit
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:07 AM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
wrote:
> A Worldwide Independent Network/Gallup International Association poll in
> 2017 [1] found that 39% of Americans are irreligious, and another study
> [2] estimates 26% are actually atheists. Yes, the US does have long way to
> go to catch up with Sweden (73%) or the UK (69%) or Israel (58%). The
> targets of U.S. bombing are not in that category.
>
>
>
> Yugoslavia 1999 (21% irreligious)
>
> Yemen 2002, 2009, 2011 (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_Yemen -- death penalty)
>
> Iraq 1991-2003, 2003-2015 (US/UK on regular basis) (34% irreligious)
>
> Afghanistan 2001-2015 (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_Afghanistan – death penalty)
>
> Pakistan 2007-2015 (6%)
>
> Somalia 2007-8, 2011 (2%)
>
> Libya 2011, 2015 (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists -- death
> penalty)
>
> Syria 2014-2015 (1%) https://areyouforsyria.weebly.com/
>
>
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_irreligion
>
> [2]
> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1948550617707015?journalCode=sppa
>
> *From: *Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Sarbajit Roy <
> sroy.mb at gmail.com>
> *Reply-To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Date: *Friday, February 21, 2020 at 7:20 PM
> *To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] A longer response to Dave's question
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
> 1. Since Christ has never been proved to have existed, it seems to me (as
> a non-psychologist) those consuming his 'blood' religiously appear as
> victims/participants of group mass delusions reinforced by their regular
> shared consumption of a narcotic in a controlled environment replete with
> symbols to reinforce their delusion.
>
>
>
> 2. Now to your more important question for us outside the USA. "*Is
> Trump a proto-dictator? What are the consequences in experience of
> believing that he is? What does that belief cause us to expect in him. *"
>
> In my view, and in the *view of many non-Americans*
> <https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/opinion/taliban-afghanistan-war-haqqani.html>,
> it is the nation of USA collectively which is the tyrannical dictatorship,
> and it is quite irrelevant who heads it (symbolically), because all US
> Presidents carry on the same acts of raining bombs from the sky on those
> who disagree with US policies or the US' aforesaid mass delusion called
> Christianity.
>
>
>
> Sarbajit Roy
>
> Brahma University
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:31 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Geez, Dave,
>
> There's an awful lot here. Do you mean to take the hardest case? A
> person? And particularly a person who has been so much in all our faces
> that it's hard for most of us to think of him rationally, if at all?
>
> Let's take a simpler example. An example that Peirce takes is
> transubstantiation, the idea that in ritual of the mass the communion wine
> becomes the blood of Christ. Once consecrated, is the communion "beverage"
> wine or blood? Let's say we disagree on that point. We both see that it's
> a red liquid in a chalice, on which basis we jump to different
> conclusions. From the properties or redness and liquidness that the
> substance in the chalice shares with both blood and wine, you abduce that
> it is wine, I abduce that it is blood. So far, we stand equal. But now the
> chalice is brought to our lips. For me, (forgive me, Catholics, for I know
> not what I say) I feel momentarily cleansed of my sins, uplifted. Since
> part of my conception of Christ's blood is that if I drank some of it I
> would feel cleansed and uplifted, I conclude that it is indeed, Christs'
> blood. You, on the other hand, experience the flat, sour taste of
> inexpensive wine, feel no uplift whatsoever, and conclude that the chalice
> contains wine. We are still on equal footing.
>
> But now the science begins. We whisk away the stuff in the chalice to
> the laboratory. As a preliminary, each of us is asked to list in their
> entirety all the effects of our conception. We are being asked to
> *deduce* from the categories to which we have *abduced*, the consequences
> of our abductions They are numerous, but to simply the discussion, lets
> say each of us lists five. I say, if it is Christ's blood, then I should
> feel transformed when drinking it, and then I pause. The scientists also
> pause, pencils in hand, and I have to go on. Well, in addition to its
> red-liquidity, I say, it should be slightly salty-sweet to taste, be thick
> on the tongue, curdle when heated, sustain life of somebody in need of a
> transfusion, etc. So we do the tests, and the results are yes, no, no,
> no, no. The scientists now turn to you and you say, it should, as well as
> red and liquid, be sour, thin on the tongue, intoxicating in large amounts,
> produce a dark residue when heated, etc.. So, the tests come out yes, yes,
> yes, yes, yes.
>
> So, is it really blood or really wine? Well, that of course depends on
> one’s priorities. If the sole criterion for a red fluid being Christ’s
> blood is that it produces in one person, Nick Thompson, a sense of
> cleansing, then the fact that it doesn’t pass any of the other tests for
> blood will make no difference. I can assert that that Christ’s blood is a
> very special sort of blood that cleanses the spirit of Nick Thompson, but
> does none of the other things that blood does. Indeed, I might assert that
> anything the priest handed me in the chalice, once duly consecrated, would
> be Christ’s blood. The idea that it “works for me” makes it “Christ’s
> blood for me and that’s all that matters. And if I could bring a regiment
> of Spanish soldiers with spears to friam, and have them insist that you
> drink from the chalice and feel cleansed, many of you might begin to agree
> with me.
>
> This is the view of pragmatism that James has been accused of, but it is
> definitely NOT the view that Peirce held. If the position is, “whatever
> the officiant says is christs blood is christ’s blood by definition”, then,
> Piece would say the position is either
>
> Meaningless or false. It might be meaningless, because there is no
> possible world in which it could be false. Or it might be false, because
> our best guess as scientists is that in the very long run, in the
> asymptote of scientific inquiry, our best scientific guess is that the
> contents of the chalice will be agreed upon to be wine.
>
> Again, let me apologize for my ignorant rendition of Catholic ritual. It
> IS the example that Peirce takes, but I now see that that is probably a
> poor excuse. Peirce was, after all, a protestant, and one with many
> prejudices, so it would not surprise me if he was anti-catholic and himself
> chose the example in a mean-spirited way. So, be a little careful in how
> you respond.
>
> Is Trump a proto-dictator? What are the consequences in experience of
> believing that he is? What does that belief cause us to expect in him.
> Tim Snyder, in his little book ON TYRANNY, does a very good job of laying
> out the parallels between what is going on in our politics right now and
> what goes on in the early stages of the establishment o a dictatorship.
> Trump is fulfilling many of Snyder’s expectations. Whether Trump succeeds
> in establishing a dictatorship or not, I think the long run of history will
> conclude that he is making a stab at it.
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
> Nicholas Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>
>
>
> Clark University
>
> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200222/2c73d243/attachment.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list