Mod+ 263. ALBERT LACHANCE AND REBECCA GOODWIN ON THE THIRD COVENANT

#21
Are you certain that the sun is in the sky ? I never mentioned "God" and I don't remember threatening to be-head David if he didn't accept survival.
I dont know what you understood there, but im not saying that you are like a ISIS fighter and i never wrote that you threatened anyone. Just trying to point out what he meant when he linked being certain to ISIS fighters. Thats not an attack or anything like that; it just shows that being certain can also be dangerous.
 
#22
I dont know what you understood there, but im not saying that you are like a ISIS fighter and i never wrote that you threatened anyone. Just trying to point out what he meant when he linked being certain to ISIS fighters. Thats not an attack or anything like that; it just shows that being certain can also be dangerous.
I don't understand what someone who is persuaded that survival is true by the phenomemon of NDE has got to do with Isis fighters ? It's frankly a ridiculous analogy and I don't appreciate it. You're not certain of anything are you not ? You don't believe Australia is on the other side of the world ?
 
#23
I don't understand what someone who is persuaded that survival is true by the phenomemon of NDE has got to do with Isis fighters ? It's frankly a stupid analogy and I don't appreciate it. You're not certain of anything are you not ? You don't believe Australia is on the other side of the world ?
What i am or what im not doesnt matter at this point though.

I don't think I want to let myself move into a position of being certain. I feel that supposedly certain knowledge has such an awful history in this area. Think of the ISIS fighters who are certain God wants them to do what they are doing right now.
Original Quote. Just trying to help to understand his point here. Being certain can be dangerous. Religious fundamentals are also certain of their cause. You are also certain. Im not saying that this is a bad thing(and for gods sake, im not saying that you are like a religious fundamental. That just to be clear there). There are just dangers to that that need to be clear. Im not talking about running around killing people. I never made that comparison after all. The point there is still important though. If we accept something for being true we tend to ignore stuff that could contradict that. We just need to keep that in mind, thats all there is to that what im talking about.
 
#24
What i am or what im not doesnt matter at this point though.



Original Quote. Just trying to help to understand his point here. Being certain can be dangerous. Religious fundamentals are also certain of their cause. You are also certain. Im not saying that this is a bad thing(and for gods sake, im not saying that you are like a religious fundamental. That just to be clear there). There are just dangers to that that need to be clear. Im not talking about running around killing people. I never made that comparison after all. The point there is still important though. If we accept something for being true we tend to ignore stuff that could contradict that. We just need to keep that in mind, thats all there is to that what im talking about.
I don't need you to help me understand David's point. Being certain can be dangerous ? Being uncertain can be dangerous too. Just BEING is dangerous.

I'm persuaded by survival and that is not dangerous to me or to you because I don't mind what you believe or anyone else. I believe because I have looked at the evidence for nearly forty years. I could sit on the fence quite easily but that would be dishonest. May I suggest you stop digging now ?
 
#29
I was not able to get much out of this interview. For me they are too deeply rooted in biblical lore. It came across as a sort of progressive christian perspective that has not transcended (or escaped) its biblical and christian roots. I detest the bible; especially the old testament. It has anthropological interest no doubt, but no spiritual or philosophical value. Of course you can root about for short phrases here and there that seem wise or the like, but as a complete work it is a record of barbarism and barbaric religious beliefs and practices. The notion that the Jews have some special covenant with the one true god is absurd. Yahweh is a tribal god; and a psychopathic one at that.

I like and admire Teilhard de Chardin, especially for his discovery or recognition of the noosphere; but he too was a captive of biblical lore and christianity, which undermines his work for me.

I see no possible contradiction (in principle) between real science and real spirituality; and I do think that in time human knowing will move towards that understanding. But it is a long ways off. The vast majority of the human population today is nowhere near that level of understanding.

I cannot see any value or verity in this notion of a third covenant. Another deal with the tribal god of the Jews?
No way.
There is no such god who makes covenants and has special peoples. It is a fiction of priests and rulers to justify their power and keep the rabble in line.

Also this notion of experiential truth is very unsound. Alex pointed that out and made some good points about it. We cannot blindly trust our direct experiences, or rather our personal interpretations of them. This has to do with how human knowing functions. The scientific method is the best means we have yet devised to overcome this inherent epistemological limitation in human knowing.
Personal experiential certainty leads individuals to believe all kinds of nonsense.
Belief is ignorance and has no place in real science or spirituality.
 
#30
I don't need you to help me understand David's point. Being certain can be dangerous ? Being uncertain can be dangerous too. Just BEING is dangerous.

I'm persuaded by survival and that is not dangerous to me or to you because I don't mind what you believe or anyone else. I believe because I have looked at the evidence for nearly forty years. I could sit on the fence quite easily but that would be dishonest. May I suggest you stop digging now ?
Well I think that there can come a point where one's certainty in something is overwhelming, so it doesn't make much difference if you express it as certainty or not. However, there is also a psychological situation where people start to insist they are certain of something, and often to hate others for being less certain. They just seem to want to use intense emotion to make up for the doubt that they really feel. I think this is why so many religions have really bad phases.

There are several ideas that I would have said I was certain of - basically because I took the word of others - until fairly recently (say 5 years), and I am now pretty sure they are false. My main examples are:

1) The concept that extra CO2 in the atmosphere is in any way dangerous.

2) The idea that saturated fat is a dangerous thing to eat.

Interestingly, both these propositions seem to whip some people into almost religious zealotry, and both are almost certainly wrong!

David
 
#31
Well I think that there can come a point where one's certainty in something is overwhelming, so it doesn't make much difference if you express it as certainty or not. However, there is also a psychological situation where people start to insist they are certain of something, and often to hate others for being less certain. They just seem to want to use intense emotion to make up for the doubt that they really feel. I think this is why so many religions have really bad phases.

There are several ideas that I would have said I was certain of - basically because I took the word of others - until fairly recently (say 5 years), and I am now pretty sure they are false. My main examples are:

1) The concept that extra CO2 in the atmosphere is in any way dangerous.

2) The idea that saturated fat is a dangerous thing to eat.

Interestingly, both these propositions seem to whip some people into almost religious zealotry, and both are almost certainly wrong!

David
"However, there is also a psychological situation where people start to insist they are certain of something, and often to hate others for being less certain."

Can you give me an example of where I have expressed hatred of others specifically because they don't accept survival ? Also are you suggesting that I've got some sort of psychological problem because I accept NDE's as evidence of survival ?

My only form on anything like that is a dislike of Linda because I don't think she's honest and she doesn't deal with the evidence fairly in my opinion
 
#32
"However, there is also a psychological situation where people start to insist they are certain of something, and often to hate others for being less certain."

Can you give me an example of where I have expressed hatred of others specifically because they don't accept survival ? Also are you suggesting that I've got some sort of psychological problem because I accept NDE's as evidence of survival ?
Tim, I am not, nor ever have been getting at you! You asked about my comment about ISIS fighters, and I think they get motivated that way. Despite your suggestion that you would behead me, I don't think you are an ISIS fighter! Please chill out!

And we agree about Linda too!

David
 
#33
....
Tim, I am not, nor ever have been getting at you! You asked about my comment about ISIS fighters, and I think they get motivated that way. Despite your suggestion that you would behead me, I don't think you are an ISIS fighter! Please chill out!

And we agree about Linda too!

David
David, a suggestion ! Re -read your previous posts and you will see that I am perfectly justified in responding the way I did.

Your ISIS comment was totally out of context. You think "they" get motivated THAT WAY ? What way ? The way I think ? Or the way people who accept NDE's as evidence of survival think or both ?

I don't need to chill out, David it's you that needs to perhaps think a bit more carefully when posting, at least in this case. Usually you are very thoughtful.

Added


I never said I wanted to be-head you ...LOL.... I said this >>>

".......and I don't remember threatening to be-head David if he didn't accept survival."

And this is how you understood it ....

David said >> Despite your suggestion that you would behead me,

? ? Bemused, Incredible , ludicrous
 
Last edited:
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#34
Em, not to cause a thread derail, but isn't one of the argument against Skeptiko by the folks at RationalWiki and the like that Alex edits the interviews to either make the interviewee look bad or look as though they were on the same side? Far be it from me to listen to the tantrums of angry, spoiled children, but I certainly wouldn't give them a firecracker...
I get that time/money may not allow for transcripts to be made but probably a good idea to note the "Read It" section is really just an excerpt as I assume I'm reading the whole transcript of the podcast.

If time/money isn''t a problem I'm not sure that only posting excerpts is a good idea. It's easier to quote sections for discussion if there's a transcript.
 
#35
....

David, a suggestion ! Re -read your previous posts and you will see that I am perfectly justified in responding the way I did.

Your ISIS comment was totally out of context. You think "they" get motivated THAT WAY ? What way ? The way I think ? Or the way people who accept NDE's as evidence of survival think or both ?
It wasn't, and DasMurmeltier seemed to understand it. I was referring to the fact that some people (not you) seem to drive the doubt out of their minds by become extreme! This was not even remotely a dig at you, it was an explanation of why I feel naturally cautious to commit absolutely 100% to another reality and an afterlife.
I don't need to chill out, David it's you that needs to perhaps think a bit more carefully when posting, at least in this case. Usually you are very thoughtful.
Well you seem to be upset about a remark I made that was not in any way directed at you!

I suggest we drop it!

David
 
#36
Em, not to cause a thread derail, but isn't one of the argument against Skeptiko by the folks at RationalWiki and the like that Alex edits the interviews to either make the interviewee look bad or look as though they were on the same side? Far be it from me to listen to the tantrums of angry, spoiled children, but I certainly wouldn't give them a firecracker...
Do they actually quote any Skeptiko guests as claiming that? I'd bet those who perform worst - such as Patricia Churchland - are happy just to forget the experience.

David
 
#37
I'm happy to drop it, David but I'm still somewhat perplexed by the comparison of a peace loving believer in survival with ISIS. And I don't see why
people who don't have any doubts about the afterlife are likely to become extreme. My mother is 91 and has always believed in "heaven" and she is about as extreme as sooty.
 
#39
Alex's questions at the end of the interview:

What are we to make of experience (especially in the spiritual sense)? What to make of it in the light of the materialist scientific paradigm? How to reconcile them? How to integrate them in life so that they influence our decisions in the right way?


--That's my best effort at paraphrasing them: apologies to Alex if I've missed any of his points.
 
Top