Mackjoy

Can someone recommend a comprehensive book that presents a sound case against religion in layman's terms?

I would recommend THE CHRIST CONSPIRACY (The greatest story ever sold) by author Acharya S.

Methodissed

Thanks Mack. I'll take a look.

Layman

What are the evolutionary reasons for the human tendancy toward evolutionary belief?

[ May 08, 2002: Message edited by: Layman ]</p>

Layman

Ahhh yesss, Acharya S. Hero to skeptics--reputed critical thinkers--the internet wide.

These skeptics claim to be critical persons. They claim to rest only on logic and science. They claim that we have to scrutinize our sources carefully and not be taken in by our preconceived notions and biases. No. These skeptics are the only truly objective people on the planet earth. We should thank God for these skeptics. But that would probably offend them.

But, about Acharya S.

Her website:

<a href="http://www.truthbeknown.com/" target="_blank">http://www.truthbeknown.com/</a>

She also maintains a discussion group styled, "From Sex to Superconsciousness"

She also wrote the classic: "The Aquarian Manifesto: A Handbook for Survival into and a Blueprint for the New Age."

I especially enjoyed her diatribe against the United States. Apparently--I did not realize--the Pledge of Allegiance is nothing more than a "cult oath." Oh yes, but she is impervious. She refuses to be recognized as "patriotic" or an "American." Afterall, "We are all members of the cosmos."
<a href="http://www.truthbeknown.com/national.htm" target="_blank">http://www.truthbeknown.com/national.htm</a>

For her diatribe against the family (it's exclusive you see), check out this link:
<a href="http://www.truthbeknown.com/family.htm" target="_blank">http://www.truthbeknown.com/family.htm</a>

She also, apparently, hates McDonalds. "In a sane society, the invasion of junkfood would be fought against tooth and nail, for it is major contributing factor in societal breakdown."
<a href="http://www.truthbeknown.com/junkfood.htm" target="_blank">http://www.truthbeknown.com/junkfood.htm</a>

Oh, and she has discovered that there is no such thing as AIDS. It's just a result of our culturally repressed fears of sexuality:
<a href="http://www.truthbeknown.com/aids.htm" target="_blank">http://www.truthbeknown.com/aids.htm</a>

For a review of her work, check this out:
<a href="http://www.tektonics.org/JPH_SFS.html" target="_blank">http://www.tektonics.org/JPH_SFS.html</a>

It quotes from a radio broadcast where Acharya talks about talking with aliens and being instructed by aliens to spread the word. The link to the audio file is apparently dead, but I listened to it myself a while back.

Kosh

Come back when you have some content...

Edited for spelingg...

[ May 08, 2002: Message edited by: Kosh ]</p>

Layman

Nah, it's called full disclosure. Acharya S is a moron. The poster had a right to know.

Skeptical

Hmmm, let's see...I believe the reasons would be that we have developed the capability for rational thought and created a systematic discipline called science that allows us to examine and even explain the universe in which we live. We use this discipline to develop theories which are then objectively tested to see if the theories and predictions hold water. Through this discipline we have increased average life expectancy nearly 3 fold in under 200 years (from 30ish to late 70ish/early 80ish), developed world-wide communication and travel and vastly increased our understanding of the universe we occupy. (course, we also developed ways to destroy all life on the planet, but nobody's perfect)

From an evolutionary standpoint, our rational minds are now even silly enough to believe that these results matter. That the ability to successfully predict natural phenomena like eclipses actually shows that "hey, I think we're on to something here with this science stuff!" (I know, seems kinda strange). We now actually _like_ having explanations that really work and allow us to comprehend and explain the phenomena of the universe instead of just believing "Goddidit" or demons, witches, elves, fairies, leprachauns or magical hedgehogs "did it". (I personally still think magical hedgehogs are responsible for the bald spots in my yard, so if your aware of a talisman to ward them off I'm all ears!)

Funny how evolution just keeps chugging right along, evolving our brains so that we actually _think_ about all that boring evidence and predictive experimentation and stuff like that. Man was it ever easier when thunder was caused by Zeus' flatulence and eclipses were caused when Aprodites' butt got between the earth and the sun! I sure wish we could go back to those days, only problem being almost all of us over 30ish would probably be dead already. (but man, you think David Blane can do magic, how bout dem demons and fairies!)

Course, some of us seem to be lagging slightly behind in the 'evolving brain' category.

Layman

So you believe that a completely reductive theory of human intellect allows for a 'free thinking" individual?

Skeptical

I don't quite see how this is directly relevant to your original question, but ok, I'll bite.

If by "reductive theory of human intellect" you mean the belief that human consciousness is exactly equivalent to brain processes and nothing more, I'd say yes. I don't see a reason to postulate that consciousness relies on something above and beyond what the brain can produce. I think it's a debatable question, and trying to get a firm definition of consciousness is a little like trying to look at the back of your own neck without a mirror. You know its there, but it's difficult to get a good look at it.

Was the "free thinking" part of your question just a reference to my profile or was that somehow a real part of your question? If it was a real portion, it seems it can only be a reference to animal instinct versus human free will and why are they different? If that's the question I think you need to give me your definition of "free will".

While there appears to obviously be portions of our lives that we freely control, many of us are still constrained in a lot of ways by environmental factors. I think many (perhaps all) humans psyches are like river channels, some are narrow and some are wide, but they're both constrained at the edges. So in a sense there are likely real limits in practice to what we "freely" choose although in theory the limits are only those of the laws of physics.

Vorkosigan

I quite agree.

Vorkosigan