So here's where all of this applies on the level of our larger discussion:
Religion is emotional. Being that emotion is more important than pure rationality, I see how religion provides emotional support and healing to people on a level that atheism (or non-religion) cannot match.
But you try to justify your position of atheism with pseudo-rationality disguising the passionate emotion underneath, all while attacking me with the claim that I am being irrational and emotional about a rational subject, when you are the one that is actually guilty of it (not saying that I am not, but I've never claimed it).
In other words, you reject any emotional evidence that I may bring to the table, while whole-heartedly embracing your own emotions as absolutely accurate and trust-worthy at the same time. Indeed, your emotions are proof that you are right and I am wrong, because they are your emotions.
So it relates first because you claim an untenable position, making all of your subsequent claims suspect. It relates second because trying to understand an emotional organization sans emotion (which is a lie in the first place, but hey) is like trying to understand the beauty of the Mona Lisa by closing your eyes and feeling across the surface of it.
"Hey, this is just a bunch of bumps! Why is everyone making such a big deal about it? Stupid people! They clearly have no idea what they are talking about since I have empirical evidence that it's just a bunch of stupid bumps on a canvas."
Note that the claim is technically accurate, but the person speaking is blind to the bigger picture because they refuse to accept that other sense.
You already are emotional about religion. Why is it so hard to see that someone else who does not have your range of emotions might be having a completely different experience?
People are irrational and say and do stupid things. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young are not immune to this. They were products of their time, and limited in their knowledge of many things. God cannot prevent people from being irrational and stupid, but He can still let an irrational person (since we are all irrational anyhow) speak as a prophet, and their irrational moments do not prevent them from still speaking as a prophet on the deeper matters of the human heart. They may get some of the facts wrong, but that's not really what religion is about, anyhow.
So here's where all of this applies on the level of our larger discussion:
Religion is emotional. Being that emotion is more important than pure rationality, I see how religion provides emotional support and healing to people on a level that atheism (or non-religion) cannot match.
But you try to justify your position of atheism with pseudo-rationality disguising the passionate emotion underneath, all while attacking me with the claim that I am being irrational and emotional about a rational subject, when you are the one that is actually guilty of it (not saying that I am not, but I've never claimed it).
In other words, you reject any emotional evidence that I may bring to the table, while whole-heartedly embracing your own emotions as absolutely accurate and trust-worthy at the same time. Indeed, your emotions are proof that you are right and I am wrong, because they are your emotions.
So it relates first because you claim an untenable position, making all of your subsequent claims suspect. It relates second because trying to understand an emotional organization sans emotion (which is a lie in the first place, but hey) is like trying to understand the beauty of the Mona Lisa by closing your eyes and feeling across the surface of it.
"Hey, this is just a bunch of bumps! Why is everyone making such a big deal about it? Stupid people! They clearly have no idea what they are talking about since I have empirical evidence that it's just a bunch of stupid bumps on a canvas."
Note that the claim is technically accurate, but the person speaking is blind to the bigger picture because they refuse to accept that other sense.
You already are emotional about religion. Why is it so hard to see that someone else who does not have your range of emotions might be having a completely different experience?
People are irrational and say and do stupid things. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young are not immune to this. They were products of their time, and limited in their knowledge of many things. God cannot prevent people from being irrational and stupid, but He can still let an irrational person (since we are all irrational anyhow) speak as a prophet, and their irrational moments do not prevent them from still speaking as a prophet on the deeper matters of the human heart. They may get some of the facts wrong, but that's not really what religion is about, anyhow.
Does this help?
Reply
Leave a comment