| | Msr. Setzer,
you brace in vain; we have no quarrel here. I would actually prefer 'reason' to God' here myself, but the quote was too beautiful and eloquent to bar on that account. Rand herself did the same; 'the frown is the first touch of God upon man's forehead' (the Fountainhead).
Perhaps given I am a Pagan this surprises you, but the term 'god' (or even 'the God') in Paganism does not mean the same as the 'God' of monotheism, and I would not use the same word or implied concept were it not that 'tis the Christians who misused the elder Pagan usage. And I don't ask anything more from Objectivists here than courtesy; if I had not had unusual experiences, mine own reason would conclude for atheism, as it did for the first 25 years of my life, and I would never ask others to alter their views from conclusions justified from their standpoint.
For myself, I don't think spirituality can or should defend or determine ethical or political truths, and favor a completely secular polity and philosophical foundations for ethics. I do think spiritual experience can help make one more aware of aspects of true value than one might be otherwise, but so can art or scientific inquiry. Spirituality, for me, is either an artistic deepening of life, a practical means to an end, or a type of conversation. As for the values one finds in it, I shall argue in reason and passion (and phenomenology) for an aesthetic and organic approach to life; that is all I can or should do here.
But, anyway, you need no worries from me on the spiritual front; there is no sense in a Pagan's proselytizing save by showing the best of her spirit and the experience of that spirit's excellence. Only when (for lack of a better term) a Pagan spirituality is already latent does it make send to speak, approach, and act... and even then... even I prefer to be careful. That said... give me room to move, by which I mean the political freedom and moderate tolerance to practice my beliefs openly (no, I won't elaborate)... and this cultist might make even an Objectivist sit up and take notice.
Besides, when it comes to religion, this girl is strictly left-handed... if we must make divine references, I strongly prefer my deities as women.
my regards,
Jeanine Ring )(*)(
P.S. Incidentally, I was looking at your web page awhile back, and I noticed that you're into Neuro-Linguistic Programming; in fact you rhetorically elevate the practice to a philosophical place in your life co-equal with Objectivism. You might be curioused to know that I came across Marianne Williamson's quote in the context of a sex seminar at Good Vibrations (on flirting); this quote introduction the third and final class, titled 'power flirting'.
Anyway, when I asked the instructors what approaches had influenced their premises, Neuro-Linguistic Programming was prominent among them. May I ask what you think of this? I'm not personally familiar with NLP, tho' its essential approach and method is quite resonant to me... but I find it interesting that some of the members of our pro-sex feminist subculture out here find inspiration in practices developed in the context of business psychology.
|
|
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It is not just in some of us; it is in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.
