The Tree of Liberty

[tongodeon]

Popular political quotes often turn out to be fabricated, misattributed, or at very least taken out of context. But the people quoting Thomas Jefferson's famous "tree of liberty" seem to have his words and intent entirely correct. Thomas Jefferson's famous quote, originally written to William Stevens Smith on 13 November 1787, seems to be even more

Comments

[tongodeon]

The problem with religious arguments is that they fall back on the basic appeal to authority.

I'm not sure if you caught one of my older posts, but that was Nicholas Epley's conclusion. God is the ultimate argument from authority. People don't just attribute God to their own moral beliefs - God's "will" can be swayed with the same techniques that are used to sway human opinion, and the neurocognitive process of determining God's will is the same as the process of introspectively determining one's own opinion, distinct from evaluating someone else's opinion.

[ianvass]

I did read that. It was fascinating, albeit not surprising. I would LOVE to talk theology with some of the folk whose mind changed about what God thought. I've actually had the experience (more than once) where God pulled me up by the scruff of the neck and I had to change myself to match what He wanted rather than the other way around. Of course, any religious experience does not pass scientific muster, so you get to take my word on this. :)

I must admit that my ideas and thoughts as to what God thinks changes as I grow and become more mature. We only grasp as much of Him as we are able to grasp correctly the world around us, and as my understanding has deepened, so has my understanding of God. I once thought that God would NEVER put me through a divorce. I ended up being very dead wrong about that. :)

[tongodeon]

I've actually had the experience (more than once) where God pulled me up by the scruff of the neck and I had to change myself to match what He wanted rather than the other way around.

This paper would suggest an alternative interpretation; that you've had the experience of changing your mind. You realized that you've been mistaken and chose a new path.

I must admit that my ideas and thoughts as to what God thinks changes as I grow and become more mature. We only grasp as much of Him as we are able to grasp correctly the world around us

Special pleading. If an omnipotently powerful entity is capable of blessing a child prodigy with extraordinary talents he's certainly capable of blessing ordinary children with the basic guidelines for a successful life. Second, I don't accept that children are "unable to grasp" the reasons for morality, because our senses for perceiving the world matures a lot earlier than our moral senses. Cans of beer, packs of cigarettes, matches, and handguns look exactly the same to me today as they did when I

[ianvass]

To you, it doesn't seem necessary. To me, it does. I want to see a unifying whole among them all, woven together with love. (And yes, I read your post about the worm eating the boy's eyeball in Africa. God's love is not neutralized by that fact IMHO.)

We all see and believe what we want to see. And I know we've had this conversation already, too, but it does still come down to this. I *want* to see God, so I do. You do *not* want to see God - you see him as unnecessary and perhaps even evil - and so you don't.

you ought to be able to figure out protecting him without God telling you so.It gets much more subtle than that. The big obvious things tend to be fairly easy. It's when I am preparing to give a talk in church, and I struggle and struggle to find the inspiration to write it, but not until I suddenly realize that I have been treating my wife poorly in a way that directly contradicts my subject, and then in honest regret and desire to change I ask her forgiveness in tears, do I suddenly feel the light dawn inside of me and I am

"necessary"

[tongodeon]

To you, it doesn't seem necessary. To me, it does. I want to see a unifying whole among them all, woven together with love.

First, I have no trouble readily accepting "a unifying whole woven together with love". Affection, good will, and common experience are in perfect harmony with a nondirected universe. It's not necessary that things be unified or that love weave it together, and it could be otherwise, but it's awful nice that it's this way.

But second, when I say "necessary" I don't mean "wishful thinking". There's a difference between philosophical "necessity" and personal druthers. When I say "I want to know who shot Rep Giffords" I'm not just expressing a personal preference. I mean that she's in a hospital with a hole in her head, under circumstances which necessitate an assassin. On the other hand "I want to know who shot Kurt Cobain" expresses a preference, not a necessity. A Nirvana fan might prefer to believe that Cobain didn't shoot himself, but it is not necessary to assume the existence of a second shooter

Re: "necessary"

[ianvass]

Heh. If in 200 years from now where tongodeon has become a worldwide name, they did a study doing exactly the same thing, but your name was used as part of the study, and people responded as though YOU were God in this way, it wouldn't invalidate your existence. All it does is say that these people have NO CLUE who you really were/are.

Just because people make God into egocentric personal opinion doesn't invalidate His existence.

Re: "necessary"

[tongodeon]

I think you're misunderstanding the point of the study. Repeating it 200 years from now wouldn't "invalidate my existence" any more than it would invalidate my passport, but it *would* invalidate any claimed connection between those people and myself. It would demonstrate that, whether or not I exist, my true knowledge and opinion is not what they're accessing. It would prove they're making up their own opinions and attributing it to me. It would prove that when they say "Tongodeon thinks that ..." all they're really saying is "I think that..." Assuming that I was a widely respected authority 200 years from now, it would completely deflate their claimed authority from pretending to know what I thought. It would prove not that I don't exist, but that my everything that they imagine that I think is their own egocentric personal opinion.

That was my point bringing it up here about the appeal to "God's" authority, or here in response to your observation that we see whatever God we feel like seeing. Whether or not God exists (different

Re: "necessary"

[ianvass]

I should note that as I was not one of the people in the study, you are over-generalizing. You cannot say that my personal connection with God is illusory. That may be your (unprovable) opinion, but for all you know, I've seen Him, talked with Him, walked with Him, and He's shown me stuff that would blow your mind, but I'm just not talking.

Perhaps if I was in that study, they would have come back with different results on this one guy who recognizes that his opinion and God's opinion just might be very very different from each other.

I'm just sayin' for purposes of accuracy. :)

Re: "necessary"

[tongodeon]

I should note that as I was not one of the people in the study, you are over-generalizing.

I just wrote a long explanation for why this is utter poppycock. The entire point of studies - the reason why they exist, and why they are useful - is that you *can* apply results of a study to members of a population not included in the survey.

for all you know, I've seen Him, talked with Him, walked with Him,

No, "for all I know" these stories are sincere and well-meaning delusion. Literally for all I know - for everything that I am aware of, for anything that anyone is able to point me to - "stuff that would blow your mind but I'm just not talking" sounds like exactly what I'd say if I was making up a story that would be unverifiableI could just as easily say "I've got a suicide note signed by God, declaring that he eliminated himself 10,000 years ago". For all you know is this true? Of course not. For all you know - for everything that you know about the crazy ways that humans try to persuade each other - it's far more likely that I'm

Re: "necessary"

[ianvass]

And I responded to your post with my response. :)

[tongodeon]

It's when I am preparing to give a talk in church, and I struggle and struggle to find the inspiration to write it, but not until I suddenly realize that I have been treating my wife poorly in a way that directly contradicts my subject, and then in honest regret and desire to change I ask her forgiveness in tears, do I suddenly feel the light dawn inside of me and I am able to give a passionate talk on service towards others that I only spent about 10 minutes actually writing, but was given to me as if I had spent hours putting it together.
…
But again, you will take this experience and come up with some rationale as to how it had nothing to do with God, and that's fine.I don't see what this has to do with God in the first place. That's regular personal introspection. Ordinary people like me do that all the time

[ianvass]

You missed the last part, the part where AFTER I apologized sincerely to my wife, in a matter of 10 minutes (the 10 minutes up on the stand RIGHT before I had to give my talk, BTW), my entire talk flowed into me as if it was being handed to me. I've written LOTS of talks and lessons. I know exactly the kind of process I go through to accomplish this, and there aren't really any shortcuts. It takes a certain amount of time (unless the subject is one that I have already spoken on previously) to prepare, and to have this occur within such a short amount of time simply doesn't HAPPEN

[tongodeon]

You missed the last part, the part where AFTER I apologized sincerely to my wife, in a matter of 10 minutes (the 10 minutes up on the stand RIGHT before I had to give my talk, BTW), my entire talk flowed into me as if it was being handed to me.

I didn't miss that part, I just didn't realize you thought that part was the remarkable part.

Have you ever done any secular extemporaneous public speaking? Gotten "into the groove" during a public musical performance? Gotten into "the zone" playing sports or writing code? Unexpectedly "killed" at improv comedy? What you're describing - what psychologists call creative flow - is a welcome and joyful yet fairly common experience that most people attribute to the creative process itself. I'm particularly distractible, so I most often experience it "in the last ten minutes" when the mounting deadline pressure finally brushes aside enough distractions to give me the focus necessary to get things done. If you wanted a broad study with hard numbers I could give you finaled shot counts charted

[ianvass]

It's always interesting how the commonality of an experience is used as a reason to cheapen it or "prove" that God doesn't exist. These experiences are marvelous each and every time they occur. The fact that lots of people go through regularly does not mean that God is not involved, but see to His Hand in it requires the eye of faith. It's very easy to dismiss these small miracles when you are dead set on maintaining there is no God behind it.

And like I said before, that's totally fine. I see God, you don't, and we still like each other and believe that treating others well is the best way to live life. :)

[tongodeon]

It's always interesting how the commonality of an experience is used as a reason to cheapen it or "prove" that God doesn't exist.It seems like you're still not understanding what I'm trying to say. I said that I understand the experience, I've experienced it myself, and it's a really great experience. It's just not a supernatural experience

[ianvass]

And YOU are not understanding what I'm saying