Post New

... a quote from Gregory David Roberts' "The Mountain Shadow" might be interesting (Author of "Shantaram"):

And what if people don't believe in the Divine?'
'I tell them to fuck off. I can't waste my time with atheists. They don't have an intellectual elbow to lean on.'
'They don't?'
'Of course, not. The fact that light has both physical and metaphysical characteristics means that it is nonsense to refuse the metaphysical. And an absence of doubt is an intellectual flaw. Ask any scientist, or holy man. Doubt is the agnostics' parachute. That's why agnostics have a softer landing than atheists, when the Divine speaks to them.

Light is purely (so far as we know) physical. It exhibits both particle and wave behavior, but neither is metaphysical.

He doesn't know what he's talking about. But then most religious pundits don't.

Gregory David Roberts (born Gregory John Peter Smith; 1952) is an Australian author best known for his novel Shantaram...
He is a former heroin addict and convicted bank robber who escaped from Pentridge Prison in 1980 and fled to India, where he lived for ten years.
Very cool! I always enjoy reading quotes from recovering heroin addicted, Ex-cons. Do you have more?
TIA

And what if people don't believe in the Divine?'
'I tell them to fuck off. I can't waste my time with atheists. They don't have an intellectual elbow to lean on.'
'They don't?'
'Of course, not. The fact that light has both physical and metaphysical characteristics means that it is nonsense to refuse the metaphysical. And an absence of doubt is an intellectual flaw. Ask any scientist, or holy man. Doubt is the agnostics' parachute. That's why agnostics have a softer landing than atheists, when the Divine speaks to them.

Back in the day, religious people would drop by occasionally with a zinger to convert us heathens. However, the zingers always contained a logical fallacy. This one has two-ish.

First, light isn't evidence of the metaphysical. So you can't logically use it as proof of the existence of other metaphysical* objects. In fact, by definition you pretty much can't prove the existence of metaphysical things. Using capitalized "Divine" implies the narrator is talking about God or some power of God. I don't have the context, but that's what it seems like he's talking about. Now just for the sake of argument, let's say light is indeed proof of the metaphysical. That opens up a whole bunch of potential things to be believe in. Zeus, Odin, leprechauns, unicorns, the dragon in Kazim's garage, etc. In fact, in this instance an atheist only believes in one less God than the narrator. The argument is really just a restatement of Pascal's Wager. e.g. Belief gives you can escape hatch, just in case.

There is a passage in Moby Dick (going from memory so wildly paraphrasing) where the crew has gathered to discuss the meaning of some sign. Ahab says basically, "If God wants to send me a message, he needs to make it clear enough I can understand it." Same thing here. No need to believe in something if there is no evidence. Lack of evidence is God's fault, not mine.

*"metaphysical means different things to different people. I'm using it how it is commonly understood in typical use.

Very cool! I always enjoy reading quotes from recovering heroin addicted, Ex-cons. Do you have more?

Absolutely! Two whole novels, 1000 pages each, which were worldwide bestsellers, with the first one based on his fascinating life story.

Light is purely (so far as we know) physical. It exhibits both particle and wave behavior, but neither is metaphysical.
He doesn't know what he's talking about. But then most religious pundits don't.

Are you sure, taking into account that even - or rather especially - physicists are using not exactly mathematical terms like "more and more esoteric" for modern interpretations of quantum mechanics that came after the classical Copenhagen interpretation?

Two whole novels, 1000 pages each, which were worldwide bestsellers, with the first one based on his fascinating life story.

Perhaps it makes for a good story, maybe even a popular best-selling one. There's even a highly rated Apple TV+ series about it! (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0429087/) But, just like The Bible - another "world-wide best seller!" - that doesn't mean it holds any particularly valid insights into the nature of reality.

<Absolutely! Two whole novels, 1000 pages each, which were worldwide bestsellers, with the first one based on his fascinating life story.>

Sweet! Of course Curious George has 58 books, many based on his fascinating life story, which have combined sales of 27 million copies. (George sold way more copies. It pays to be curious?)

Also you failed to address the fact that the quote you furnished contained a logical fallacy or two...

All the best!

Now where did I leave my Hanlon's razor?

that doesn't mean it holds any particularly valid insights into the nature of reality.
Actually the interesting part for me is not about reality, but about psychology, is this:

"an absence of doubt is an intellectual flaw"

(Oh, and this: "Doubt is the agnostics' parachute .... why agnostics have a softer landing than atheists, if... " ---- just in case :)

Disclosure: I'm a physicist (by training/education).

Light is in no way metaphysical.

Disclosure: I'm a physicist (by training/education).
Disclosure: I studied physics in Heidelberg, Germany. My brother too and worked at the highly reputable Max Planck Institute there.

Light is in no way metaphysical.
Good for you that you have no doubts :)

Disclosure: I'm a physicist (by training/education).
Light is in no way metaphysical.

Clearly you've never taken LSD. If you had, you'd understand everything can be seen as metaphysical....until the acid wears off. Then reality returns and you realize the neon cactus lights at Pancho's Tacos were not divine beacons, and the burrito was not created in His Image.
But it was still a damn good burrito.

Clearly you've never taken LSD. If you had, you'd understand everything can be seen as metaphysical....until the acid wears off. Then reality returns and you realize the neon cactus lights at Pancho's Tacos were not divine beacons, and the burrito was not created in His Image.
But it was still a damn good burrito.

I can't really eat when I'm tripping.

There is no evidence for anything metaphysical. Until that changes, there is no need to consider it.

In fact, it could be argued that there can never be evidence for the metaphysical (otherwise it would be physical), and so is not within the realm of physics at all. In terms of physics, we understand light (i.e. the EM spectrum) pretty well. Until someone introduces something we don't understand or is inconsistent, we proceed as if there are no doubts. We can only work with the best theories we have at the moment.

As you said, "back to reality". LSD is altered mental states that distorts cognition and perception.

No, I've never taken LSD. Heck, I don't even drink. Never got the attraction. But clearly it exists for the majority of the population, so I'm the odd one.

As you said, "back to reality". LSD is altered mental states that distorts cognition and perception.

No, I've never taken LSD. Heck, I don't even drink. Never got the attraction. But clearly it exists for the majority of the population, so I'm the odd one.

I'm not proselytizing to be very clear, but there is solid scientific evidence that LSD and other psychedelics can improve mental health in ways that other treatments can't. For exampling, lasting cures for alcoholism and PTSD with as little was one treatment. There is no other treatment that comes close to those success rates. Studies conducted by top flight institutions too. The Swiss chemist who originally synthesized it and ingested it, Albert Hoffman, continued to experiment with LSD and other psychelics throughout his life until he died at age 102. The hippies trying to find enlightenment at Grateful Dead concerts might have been onto something.

Michael Pollen wrote an interesting book about it, and talks a lot about the scientific theories as to why it works. To vastly oversimplify, in controlled settings it can allow your brain to move away from the trauma causing thoughts. For various reasons, many studies have been conducted on terminal cancer patients, who reported lessening or even losing the fear of death. Recommending the book just as an interesting read. Not suggesting anyone should drop.

https://www.amazon.com/Change-Your-Mind-Consciousn...

there is solid scientific evidence that LSD and other psychedelics can improve mental health in ways that other treatments can't. For exampling, lasting cures for alcoholism and PTSD with as little was one treatment.

You beat me to it. But it's ketamine that is typically used, it involves several treatments, not just one, and it is done under the careful supervision of a trained, experienced medical professional. Treatment-resistant depression and suicidality are mental health issues that are known to benefit enormously.....though not consistently. And it in no way is simply dropping acid to see if it helps.

=sheila

> Light is purely (so far as we know) physical. It exhibits both particle and wave behavior, but neither is metaphysical.

Atheist here with university level Physics education. I want to note that qualia & subjective experience are not well explained by any current scientific model, and certainly not any model in the realms of physics.

To a non-scientist, when they say 'light is metaphysical' they may mean something along the lines of 'the experience of 'light' is not just some physical quality'.

Arguably, they might also be referring to the 'concept' of 'light', again, concepts are not well explained as objects in any physics model. Think, Plato, Theory of Forms, a perfect circle, the concept of 'pi', etc.

To try and put yourself in the religious person's shoes, imagine a philosophical zombie.

Zombie: has a brain, acts and looks just like you, says what you say, claims to think, etc. But does not actually think or feel or have any consciousness at all. Does it "experience" 'light'? Or is just cells responding to electromagnetic stimulation?

You: looks and acts the same, but experiences the feeling and emotions tied to 'light' and 'darkness' in addition to being able to quantify them in terms of physics.

It's important when arguing, to boost your opponents argument to be as strong as you can, attribute the most generous interpretation, empathize with the most creditable version of what they're trying to say (rather than what they actually do say), if you want to argue well against it and if you find a better understanding of reality.

(This 'boost other people's bad arguments, empathise with the bad arguer' process is called "Steelmanning").

lux

I can't really eat when I'm tripping.

Bill Graham famously served buffet breakfast to entire auditoriums after all night Grateful Dead concerts. I'll never forget the sight of all those tripping hippies lined up at the buffet tables for scrambled eggs and sweet rolls while the Jefferson Airplane was blasting away.

Disclosure: I'm a physicist (by training/education).
-------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure: I studied physics in Heidelberg, Germany. My brother too and worked at the highly reputable Max Planck Institute there.

There's a difference between being a physicist and "studying Physics" (which sounds a bit similar to "I did my research").

Either way, one's past experience does not guarantee present or future performance (appeal to authority fallacy?.

Linus Pauling was a brilliant scientist who went off the rails, duping a lot of folks into believing high dose Vitamin C could cure cancer, among other nonsense.

There is no evidence for anything metaphysical. Until that changes, there is no need to consider it.

Exactly. And as soon as there IS evidence for something "metaphysical", that thing becomes physical, not metaphysical.

I was only commenting on the implied recreational use.

I saw a program on PBS that went into the benefits of LSD, especially as it pertained to PTSD. It's still considered "fringe", but the evidence for the efficacy is strong.

I said my brother "studied" physics too, and that he even worked at famous Max Planck Institute. You think that's possible for non-Physicists? If he had had a job there as a cleaner, yes --- but that was not the case :)

Anyway, the humor free responses taught me a few things about Atheists and about this being the wrong forum for me.

Anyway, the humor free responses taught me a few things about Atheists and about this being the wrong forum for me.

Was it the burrito?

the humor free responses taught me a few things about Atheists and about this being the wrong forum for me.


I think humor is particularly important here. But the intent has to be clear. In speaking, tone of voice imparts humor to a seemingly serious statement. But when we have to rely on written words, sometimes a little :-) after a comment is needed to make the humor apparent.

And you also have to keep in mind that some posters here seem unable to leaven their views with humor regardless of how clearly it's expressed. So you have to take them with a grain of salt.....and a chuckle.

Actually, there are several institutes within the Max Planck Institute. [googling] Over 80. And not all of them are related to physics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Max_Planck_I...

So, yes...it is possible for non-physicists. Even if he wasn't a janitor (I assumed he wasn't).

Whether this is the right forum for you is up to you. However, for a bit of context, whenever an atheist pokes his head out of the ground, invariably someone tries to convert him/her, or claim that whatever woo they believe is "scientific". Perhaps less so in Germany, but in the USA it's inevitable. So if it sounds like woo, we roll our eyes and mutter "not again".

... whenever an atheist pokes his head out of the ground, invariably someone tries to convert him/her, or claim that whatever woo they believe is "scientific".

I am not an Atheist and hard-core Atheism without any doubts (Dawkins etc.) for me as Agnostic/sceptic/doubter in the end even is seen as a religion as any other. As such statements probably won't be well received here I rather stay with my usual Berkshire forum before I start to convince anybody about that :)

<Anyway, the humor free responses taught me a few things about Atheists and about this being the wrong forum for me.>

Same...
Your humorless original post and subsequent humor-free responses taught me something about "religious folk" and their brothers who work as janitors at The Max Planck Institute.

If you enjoy humor, might I suggest Sauls Investment Board, where it is suggested that earnings and valuations have no place in investing and the sheep blindly accept it as gospel.
So whimsical...and yet familiar...

All the best!

Anyway, the humor free responses taught me a few things about Atheists and about this being the wrong forum for me.

"We're here to amuse you?"


https://youtu.be/Pfcy15ZUE2c

hard-core Atheism without any doubts (Dawkins etc.) for me as Agnostic/sceptic/doubter in the end even is seen as a religion as any other.

Do you believe in fairies? Do you have any doubt that they don't exist? Would you call the belief that they don't exist a religion?

How about elves? Mermaids? Ra, the Sun God? How about Frankenstein? Maybe talking animals in fairy tales, like the Three Little Pigs or the Big Bad Wolf? Does totally not believing they exist count as a religion?

Of course not. Not believing in mystical magical things for which there is no evidence does not constitute 'a religion', it constitutes a will of reason over superstition. If evidence ever should be provided, then people who think such things don't exist would change their minds, or join 'the religion that doesn't believe such things.' You know, kind of like Amish and electricity. Or Christian Scientists and medicine.

>> hard-core Atheism without any doubts (Dawkins etc.) for me as Agnostic/sceptic/doubter in the end even is seen as a religion as any other.

Let's consider the Greek god of the harvest and of wine, Dionysus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysus

Do you believe Dionysus exists, as a 'real' god entity that has an impact on this universe?

If the answer is no: are you certain? Do you live your life according to certainty or uncertainty on this topic?

I am completely certain that it does not exist. "Anything's possible" has limits and they end at utter stupidity.

Also, I could not participate in the 1000 religions that would be seem to be necessary for my confident non-beliefs in Dionysus, Odin, etc.

It would take too much time away from my two main hobbies of not-stamp-collecting and not-train-spotting.

lux

"It would take too much time away from my two main hobbies of not-stamp-collecting and not-train-spotting."

Yep. Saying Atheism is a religion is like saying Off is a TV channel.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.