If you are interested in the old debate, science versus religion, you might find very interesting this conversation between Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=6474278760369344626
It's worth watching and thinking about. It's just a pity that such an interesting interchange hasn't found space in any TV program yet. Perhaps the general public is more interested in the misrepresentation of religion nowadays than in a proper debate about these issues.
30/08/2007
29/08/2007
Of Birds
Abba Nicetas said of two brothers that they met with the intention of living together. The first thought within himself, 'If my brother wants something, I will do it', and the second thought the same, 'I will do the will of my brother'. So they lived many years in great charity. Seeing this, the enemy set out to separate them. He stood at the entrance to the cell, appearing to the one like a dove and to the other like a raven. The first said, 'Do you see that little dove?'. The other said, 'It is a raven'. They began to argue and to contradict one another, then they stood up and fought till they drew blood, to the great joy of the enemy; and they separated. After three days they returned and came to their senses and each asked the other's forgiveness. They recognized that each of them had believed the bird to be what he had seen and recognized that their conflict came from the enemy. So they lived to the end without being separated.
Benedicta Ward, The Sayings of the Dessert Fathers, p.157
Benedicta Ward, The Sayings of the Dessert Fathers, p.157
'All that glisters is not gold'
So I didn't pick up from the ground what lay there shining. It was gold, dear God. It was probably gold.
Clarice Lispector, The Foreign Legion, p.197
Clarice Lispector, The Foreign Legion, p.197
Forgetting
If you ever come to this cloud to live and work in it, this is what you must do: just as the 'cloud of unknowing' is above you, between you and God, so you must put a 'cloud of forgetting' below you, between you and all creation. Perhaps you think that you will be far away from God, with this cloud between you, but surely it follows that you are further away than ever if there is no cloud of forgetting between you and 'all creatures'? By 'all creatures' I mean not only the creatures themselves but everything connected with them, including physical and spiritual beings, irrespective of their state or of how good or evil they are. Everything, without exception, must be removed, hidden under the cloud of forgetting.
At other times it may well be valuable to think of certain people - who they are and what they do - but in this case it is of little value, if any. For calling to mind an individual affects the spirit. Your soul's eye focuses on him just as a marksman fixes his eyes on his target. I can tell you that everything you thus engage your mind in comes between you and God, with the result that you become further away from him. Nothing but God must fill your mind.
In fact, if I may say so with all due reverence, when we are doing this work it is of little value even to dwell on God's kindness or worthiness, or on Mary, the saints or angels, or on the joys of heaven itself. It is no use thinking that such meditation will strengthen your purpose. I can tell you that it will not help one whit. For although it may usually be good to think of God's kindness and to love him and praise him for it, it is far better to contemplate God as he is, and to love him and praise him for himself alone.
The Cloud of Unknowing, pp.28-29
Not sure if all this is true. I'm sure it sometimes helps to let go of some things that keep filling our minds and don't let us enjoy life. I can't help but think of Alexander Pope's poem (Eloisa to Abelard):
How happy is the blameless vestal's lot!
The world forgetting, by the world forgot.
Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind!
Each pray'r accepted, and each wish resign'd
But I also know that if it wasn't for being able to remember, I would probably make the same mistakes again and again. I wouldn't grow, my constant change would not imply growing and learning but rather random move without any purpose nor meaning. Remembering is part of my humanity; perhaps it's even what makes me human. And surely that's how God would want me to relate to him, as a human.
At other times it may well be valuable to think of certain people - who they are and what they do - but in this case it is of little value, if any. For calling to mind an individual affects the spirit. Your soul's eye focuses on him just as a marksman fixes his eyes on his target. I can tell you that everything you thus engage your mind in comes between you and God, with the result that you become further away from him. Nothing but God must fill your mind.
In fact, if I may say so with all due reverence, when we are doing this work it is of little value even to dwell on God's kindness or worthiness, or on Mary, the saints or angels, or on the joys of heaven itself. It is no use thinking that such meditation will strengthen your purpose. I can tell you that it will not help one whit. For although it may usually be good to think of God's kindness and to love him and praise him for it, it is far better to contemplate God as he is, and to love him and praise him for himself alone.
The Cloud of Unknowing, pp.28-29
Not sure if all this is true. I'm sure it sometimes helps to let go of some things that keep filling our minds and don't let us enjoy life. I can't help but think of Alexander Pope's poem (Eloisa to Abelard):
How happy is the blameless vestal's lot!
The world forgetting, by the world forgot.
Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind!
Each pray'r accepted, and each wish resign'd
But I also know that if it wasn't for being able to remember, I would probably make the same mistakes again and again. I wouldn't grow, my constant change would not imply growing and learning but rather random move without any purpose nor meaning. Remembering is part of my humanity; perhaps it's even what makes me human. And surely that's how God would want me to relate to him, as a human.
27/08/2007
Faith in faith
I believe in belief - or rather, I have faith in having faith. Yet I am an atheist... so, how can that be?
It is important to have faith, but not necessarily in God. Faith is important far beyond the realm of religion: having faith in oneself, in other people, in the existence of truth and justice. There is a continuum of faith, from the basic everyday trust in others to the grand devotion to divine entities.
Recent advances in behavioral sciences, such as experimental economics and game theory, demonstrate that having faith is a common human attitude toward the world. Faith is vital in human interactions; it is no coincidence that the anchoring of behaviour in risky trust is emphasized in systems of thought as diverse as Soren Kierkegaard's existentialist Christianity and modern theories of bargaining behaviour in economic interactions. Both stress the importance of inner, subjective conviction as the basis for action, the feeling of an inner glow.
Tor Norretranders, What We Believe but Cannot Prove, pp.46-47
It is important to have faith, but not necessarily in God. Faith is important far beyond the realm of religion: having faith in oneself, in other people, in the existence of truth and justice. There is a continuum of faith, from the basic everyday trust in others to the grand devotion to divine entities.
Recent advances in behavioral sciences, such as experimental economics and game theory, demonstrate that having faith is a common human attitude toward the world. Faith is vital in human interactions; it is no coincidence that the anchoring of behaviour in risky trust is emphasized in systems of thought as diverse as Soren Kierkegaard's existentialist Christianity and modern theories of bargaining behaviour in economic interactions. Both stress the importance of inner, subjective conviction as the basis for action, the feeling of an inner glow.
Tor Norretranders, What We Believe but Cannot Prove, pp.46-47
Photons
What are photons? A friend asked me this question yesterday. I don't know. But this is an interesting lecture by someone who might know, Richard Feynman:
http://www.vega.org.uk/video/programme/45
Tell me what you think...
http://www.vega.org.uk/video/programme/45
Tell me what you think...
Are you happy?
Evidence of our deluded brains begins with a seemingly innocuous question: Are you happy with your social life? Or, to put it another way, are you unhappy with your social life?
Your answer, you may be surprised to learn, is astonishingly sensitive to which way the question is phrased. People asked if they are happy, rather than unhappy, with their social lifes report greater satisfaction. Responsibility for this peculiar irrationality in our self-knowledge lies with what is known as 'positive test strategy'. As we contemplate that fascinating inner tangle of our attitudes, personality traits and skills, we ask our internal oracle questions to divine what we suppose to be the truth about ourselves. Am I happy with my social life? Do I want to stay married? Would I make a good parent? You then trawl through your store of self-knowledge searching for evidence that the hypothesis in question is correct. You remember that party that you enjoyed last weekend. The touching interest your spouse takes in the small potatoes of your life. Your remarkable talent for manipulating balloons into the shape of animals.
Phrase the question the other way around, however, and your memory throws up a very different pile of evidence. Am I unhappy with my social life? Now you remember what bores you find most of your friends. Do I want a divorce? You think of that dreadful silent meal on your anniversary. Would I make a bad parent? Suddenly your unfortunate tendency to leave valuable possessions behind on public transport comes to mind. That's why people asked if they're happy (rather than unhappy) with their social lives believe themselves to be happier on that front. (The positive test strategy is also the reason you should never ask someone 'Don't you live me any more?').
Cordelia Fine, A Mind of Its Own, pp.62-63
Your answer, you may be surprised to learn, is astonishingly sensitive to which way the question is phrased. People asked if they are happy, rather than unhappy, with their social lifes report greater satisfaction. Responsibility for this peculiar irrationality in our self-knowledge lies with what is known as 'positive test strategy'. As we contemplate that fascinating inner tangle of our attitudes, personality traits and skills, we ask our internal oracle questions to divine what we suppose to be the truth about ourselves. Am I happy with my social life? Do I want to stay married? Would I make a good parent? You then trawl through your store of self-knowledge searching for evidence that the hypothesis in question is correct. You remember that party that you enjoyed last weekend. The touching interest your spouse takes in the small potatoes of your life. Your remarkable talent for manipulating balloons into the shape of animals.
Phrase the question the other way around, however, and your memory throws up a very different pile of evidence. Am I unhappy with my social life? Now you remember what bores you find most of your friends. Do I want a divorce? You think of that dreadful silent meal on your anniversary. Would I make a bad parent? Suddenly your unfortunate tendency to leave valuable possessions behind on public transport comes to mind. That's why people asked if they're happy (rather than unhappy) with their social lives believe themselves to be happier on that front. (The positive test strategy is also the reason you should never ask someone 'Don't you live me any more?').
Cordelia Fine, A Mind of Its Own, pp.62-63
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)