Anita Graf (Staff) wrote:
> > From: "Ikerd, John E." <IkerdJ@missouri.edu>
> > Subject: Truth and Belief
> >
> > Sanet;
> >
> > It's all a matter of belief - the mental acceptance of and conviction in the
> > truth, actuality, or validity of something.
>
> This may often be true, especially when we are influenced by
> unexamined (or, for that matter, openly accepted) prejudices.
> However, most of us have also had the experience of nuetral and open
> mind whereupon we go about searching for an answer that is
> satisfactory, and, at least at the outset, the outcome is uncertain.
> After searching, questioning, and probing, we may all find different
> answers to what seemed like the same question originally. It will
> most likely illustrate that we are simply all a little off target --
> that the universal truth of the Universe and the Meaning of Life
> is a tricky thing to get ahold of. But having all done the work
> to get where we got, we could then sit down and have a really
> interesting discussion. I submit to you that the discussion is far
> less meaningful and interesting if had among people who decided the
> answer without ever even going looking for it.
>
> So, you might say, who am I to decide that Bargyla has not examined
> her beliefs? No one in particular, I suppose, I just haven't seen
> evidence of it. Just like she always says that 50% of the population
> will get cancer without showing us how she got there (and in fact
> when she was given contrary information, it didn't seem to make much
> of a difference).
>
> I know that many of you reacted strongly and negatively to my recent
> long post on religious dogma and spiritual beliefs (Misha was
> probably just the spokesperson for many). I heard that you thought I
> was the real judgemental and narrow minded protagonist of the story.
> I gotcha. I appologize for being less diplomatic than I might have
> been. I was feeling brave, and frank at that moment and not afraid
> to "stir it up." Just for the record, my intention was not to
> invalidate Bargyla as a person (or to "shut her up" -- I'm not a
> bully). Questioning the validity of a person's science (if you will
> permit me to use the idea of "spiritual science") is not the same as
> saying the person him/herself doesn't have worth. (Btw, the original
> meaning of "I'm ok, you're ok" is the recognition of the basic worth
> of one's self and others.) My intention was to point out that there
> are beliefs which are taken in unexamined and those which are
> thoroughly questioned and examined before they are allowed to
> permeate the believer. Put me on the side of Socrates who preferred
> hemlock to living the unexamined life. I don't think you should
> accept organic agriculture either based on blind faith -- or anything
> else for that matter. Here's my basic belief: the end does not
> justify the means. (If the means are blind and unexamined, then the
> end is of not much value.)
>
> Anita (having probably perched myself at the end of a limb again and
> considering the possibility that I will be misunderstood and will
> offend again, but taking that chance.)
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail