RoR: Forum

Regarding Objectivist "spirituality" and alternatives to religious rituals, I have offered these thoughts.

I also addressed the issue of what Objectivists must learn from religion.
(Edited by Robert Bidinotto
on 10/09, 6:38pm)

Post 21

Monday, October 9, 2006 - 7:48pm

Ted, I must say that you're one weird guy.

You suggest that atheist parents take a child to church every week to provide "an exercise in patience, a grounding in one's culture, and an opportunity to discuss moral issues"? I think there are a plethora of other ways for atheists to teach children patience and to provide for moral education than to take them to religious services, don't you?

Then you ask for an "Objectivist justification for not just letting the birds eat our dead". I'm speechless.

Post 22

Monday, October 9, 2006 - 9:29pm

One could also put the dead out like dried-up Christmas Trees...

Jon,

You would not be the first (or the thousandth) person who's called me weird, but I accept the compliment nonetheless.

I don't see what's so wrong with asking why purely rational egoists should waste their time going to funerals, using up fuel to run crematoria, or using up good parkland to store six foot long boxes filled with calcium deposits wrapped in proteinaceous husks. The Jainists of India leave their dead on the roof to be devoured by birds, a very cost-effective and environmentally friendly means of disposing of mere has-beens. Unless one finds that the items being disposed of are more than just mere has-beens. (And I am not speaking for the Jains here.) If you accept "Christian" burial without the Christianity as self-evident, then I would suggest you may need to look at your assumptions.

As for going to Mass, have you ever been? Much of the history, art, literature and culture of the last 3,500 years is difficult to understand for those not grounded in Judaism or Christianity. Children who grow up not knowing the difference between Jingle Bells and Venite Adoremus often fill that gap in other ways, as did j*hn w*lker lind*.

My profile is quite complete, I don't like people not to understand my context. I did not fall from a tree-limb yesterday, I have had a very full life which I would not trade for anyone else's. If the only things we need to know about life were found in Rand's books, we'd all have starved to death long ago.

Let us know a little about yourself.

Ted

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 10/09, 9:46pm)

Post 23

Monday, October 9, 2006 - 9:33pm

Bob,

I read your What Objectivists Must Learn from Religion when you wrote it, and remember agreeing, but do not have a hard copy. Are any of the works on that link available in printed form?

Ted
(Edited by Ted Keer
on 10/09, 9:44pm)

Post 24

Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 4:07am

Ted,
After reading Atlas Shrugged when I was 13, I became an atheist. However, I attended a methodist church with my parents regularly until I was 18. One of the things that I remember, is how Christianity viewed man as inherently evil (ie, selfish, proud, independent). Altruistic thought was everywhere. Most of the prayers focused on how unworthy of God's love us lowly sinners were. No, I would not take my child to church, any more than I would take him to a communist social gathering "as an exercise in patience, a grounding in one's culture, and an opportunity to discuss moral issues."

Post 25

Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 11:01am

Ted: "You [Jon] would not be the first (or the thousandth) person who's called me weird, but I accept the compliment nonetheless."

It wasn't intended as a compliment, but go ahead and take it however you wish.

Ted: "Let us know a little about yourself."

Ted, I'm not going to pretend that other people on site really care about my personal background. You shouldn't pretend that people care about yours, either. This site is for discussing Objectivism, its application to specific issues, and ideas for advancing the philosophy in the culture. That's how I'm going to treat it.

Post 26

Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 3:13pm

Ted,

Those items are only available on audio.

--Robert

Post 27

Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 5:09pm

This is a fascinating discussion with all kinds of ideas worth pursuing. But sticking just with Ayn Rand...

I think she was naive about religion. Also simply unschooled. Whenever I interact with religion -- currently and when young -- I find maliciousness and destruction almost everywhere. Maybe Rand never went to church, and was never intellectually curious about this stuff. If so, these are two big lacunas. Just off the top of my head, some of the most vicious, obscene, cold, bizarre people I ever met in my life I found in and around church. And many were absolute princes. No parallels anywhere.

Rand notes: "There are many historical and philosophical connections between altruism and religion..." This is the understatement of the year. Rand also, and contradictorily, accepted the conventional wisdom that Christianity advanced individualism. This is a dubious claim, to say the least.

I think religion and "god" are untouchable in the purity of their falsity and depravity. And this is even largely true in their idealistic senses.

I've discussed this interesting and badly undervalued subject before, so I guess I won't repeat my remarks here. But religion of any seriousness and intensity finds it easy to destroy mind and heart and soul. Don't underestimate it.

Post 28

Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 5:56pm

To Hell with the Formalities. Let's Eat!

Robert, thanks.

Jonathan, thanks for the info. I remember visiting a Methodist Church which hosted our local scout troop. The scout meetings were held in the basement. I remember being surprised how drab the actual church itself was, plain white walls, everything earth-toned and drab, like a doctor's waiting room, without the magazines. (So far as viewing man as inherently evil, I believe this is a Lutheran and Calvinist view derived from Paul's teachings, not a universal Christian belief. I dealt with this here in my post on the "Pope vs Islam" thread.) My memories of Catholic church were beautiful architecture and stained glass windows, often beautiful songs, most especially at Christmas, (although many of the regular songs had hokey lyrics,) beautiful flowers around the altar. Very much a spirit of "to the glory of God" and His creation.

Catholic mass consisted of an opening hymn, a profession of faith, a greeting of friends where you exchanged greetings with all parties seated around you, a reading from the old, and a reading from the new testament, a sermon usually based upon the reading, and a current event and the Church's teachings. My father always asked us to explain what the priest had discussed after mass, and sometimes neither we nor he agreed with the priest, but he expected us to be able to understand what the priest had said. Finally there was communion and then the closing hymn.

Church was a a participation in the community, a chance to dress up and look one's best, to sit quietly and learn not to squirm, a place to enjoy the musical and visual art as far as possible, a place to learn about ancient history, and to think of the world as something more than just one century old, an exercise in philosophical detection (to quote Rand) and a place to celibrate births, and weddings and to pay tribute to the dead.

My intentions here are not to advise that atheists should pretend to adopt religion in order to scare their children into behaving well, but rather to argue that some sort of regular, formalized, voluntary, life affirming social meeting can serve a positive purpose. A congregational egoist church that provided a forum for the celebration of personal achievements, for readings from an egoist canon, for regular or guest speakers giving "sermons" on aesthetic, moral & political matters, for actions like pro-western demonstrations and such does not seem a bad thing to me.

In any case, Objectivists do already participate in clubs, conferences and local civic organizations. I will hazard a guess that many participate in baby showers, weddings, and funerals. Many celebrate Christian-coöpted pagan holidays like Halloween and Christmas. Many celebrate thanksgiving and sing God bless America at public events. At my Uncle's 50th wedding anniversary, he began the celebration with a pledge of allegiance and the recitation of the Lord's prayer, even though I doubt half the people there were believers and most of his side of the family are against the war and against the current president. These mere formalities gave the event a weight that it would not have had, should we simply have said "let's eat!"

Ted Keer, 10 October, 2006, NYC

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 10/11, 9:54am)

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 10/11, 1:57pm)

Post 29

Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 7:18pm

[Speak for Yourself, Brother!]

Dear Ms./Mr. Trager,

You have chosen to begin your "dialog" with me on this list by (apparently) meaning to insult me, ("Ted, I must say that you're one weird guy." "It wasn't intended as a compliment...") and then you ask me questions here, presumably with the expectation that I would take you as sincere and answer you in return. I would still be happy to do so. But I don't know enough about you to know how to answer you. Perhaps you are, like I once was, an arrogant and relatively parochial teenager who is still maturing and who will learn to value knowledge of other people and other outlooks than your own over time. Perhaps you are a hard-up, middle aged spinster who posts here to vent her frustration and insult people randomly. (But not quite well enough to be described as Randianly.) Perhaps you are a troll in disguise. Perhaps you are a bitter old codger worthy of nothing but pity. Or perhaps none of the above.

When you addressed me directly, I first checked your "User Page," where I found this cornucopia: Jon Trager No picture available Number of Posts: 81 Number of Galleries: 0 So, I read several of your recent posts, which neither entertained me nor enlightened me about you enough than to tell you to reread me. So rather than insult you back, I answered you in good faith, and asked you to tell me about yourself. Yet you chose to respond: "I'm not going to pretend that other people on site really care about my personal background. You shouldn't pretend that people care about yours, either..."

Well, speak for yourself, brother! (That's a Rand quote, BTW.) I assume that you have not recently read the "Edit Profile Page" on this site recently. [See all those questions at the end of this post.] I assume that some of the questions there are based on the assumptions that we are all humans and individuals here, besides just supposedly interested in Rand.

From the very little that I know about you from what you have communicated, I would ask whether being "weird" (which in this culture most definitely is a compliment so far as I can see, and is a very social-metaphysics type comment to be hearing from an "Objectivist") or being being rude, cynical, and incommunicative except in the most negative of ways is a good thing? Perhaps I am mistaking your intentions, you can prove me wrong if you like. I will be glad to give you the benefit of the doubt. I take much joy from posting on this list, and many people have expressed to me their appreciation for what I have said about myself, my understanding of Rand, and my understanding of life. And I a sitting here watching Brit Hume on my DVR, typing this post, and enjoying myself quite thoroughly.

Sincerely,
Ted

---Here are the contents of this site's: "Edit Profile Page"

Basic
Name:
NickName: List any nicknames you have, or any variations on your real name that you prefer.
Year of Birth: The year you were born in
Month of Birth: The month you were born in (use number 1-12)
Date of Birth: The day you were born on
Gender: Male Female Click one or the other.
Background
Occupation/Career: What is it that you do for a living?
Level of education: What college degrees did you earn?
College/University: What college or university did you attend, if any?
Foreign Languages: What foreign languages do you speak
Political Party: What Political Party are you associated with?
Location
Current City of Residence: The city that you live in.
Current State/Province of Residence: The state/province that you live in. Use 2 letter abreviation for US States.
Current Country of Residence:
City of Birth: City of birth.
State/Province of Birth: State/province of birth. Use 2 letter abreviation for US States.
Country of Birth:
Connections
Pets: Name and animal type.
Number of Children: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Way Too Many Just the number.
Names of Children: Name and gender.
Web Pages: List any and all of your websites. Separate with comma, and no http.ex. www.importanceofphilosophy.com, RebirthOfReason.com
Interests
Hobbies: List your hobbies and recreational activities
Passions/Interests: List the things that you're interested in or excited about
Favorite Movies: List your favorite movies
Favorite Books: List your favorite books
Favorite Music: List your favorite music
Favorite Food: List your favorite foods
Favorite Works of art: List your favorite works of art
Other Favorites: Anything you want to put down
Pet Peeves: What drives you crazy
Objectivism
Philosophy: Objectivist Non-Objectivist How would you classify yourself? Use Objectivist in the broadest sense, please.
Ayn Rand Fiction: Which books have you read?
Anthem
We The Living
The Fountainhead
Atlas Shrugged
Ayn Rand Non-Fiction: Which books have you read?
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology
Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal
Philosophy: Who Needs it?
Virtue of Selfishness
Romantic Manifesto
The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution
Personality
Sense of Humor: What kind of humor do you like?
Puns
Dark Humor
Insensitive Jokes
French Jokes
Dry Wit
Silly
Sarcasm
Communication Type: Listener Talker Are you normally the listener or the talker?
Myers-Briggs Personality Type: What is your 4-letter personality type? INTJ? ESFP?
Physical
Body Type: Slender Athletic Average Few extra pounds Heavy What is your body type?
Exercise routine: Couch Potato Occasionally Exercise Exercise Regularly Live at Gym How often do you exercise?
Height: English Feet: Inches: How tall are you?
Metric Centimeters:
Eye Color: What color are your eyes?
Hair Color: What color is your hair?
Picture:
Romance
Romantic Availability: Looking Not looking What's your romantic availability?
Sexual Preference: Straight Gay Bisexual Identify your sexual preference
Smoking: Yes No Do you smoke?
Do you drink: Frequently Only in social settings Almost Never Never How often do you drink?
Romantic Wish List: What's in your list of romantic must-haves

Post 30

Wednesday, October 11, 2006 - 6:55am

I’d have to agree with Ted on some points. I was born and raised Catholic but even now that I’m an atheist there are some things that just seem right to be done in the Catholic/religious way. Marriage is one example, I’ve been two secular weddings before and both times all I can think of is “God please don’t let me make this same mistake!” I’m sorry but they were that bad, maybe it’s just that religious weddings are too ingrained in me to like anything else but what can I say?

There is also Christmas. I’m sure only the most militant atheists don’t celebrate it but like most of you I love it. Especially the songs and the best ones are religious...so what? It’s traditional, part of my heritage, and in no way conflicts with my current beliefs. Most of the time I really don’t like going to mass but I do enjoy the Christmas service. Back in Louisiana, I know this lady at our church whose renditions of “Oh Holy Night” and “What Child is This” can bring tears to your eyes. For me, that’s Christmas...well that and enjoying the colorfully wrapped fruits of American capitalism the next morning. :)

Post 31

Wednesday, October 11, 2006 - 8:56am

Xmas was originally pagan celebration, which Christianity corrupted - and secularists corrupted back...... so go, celebrate, with relish.......:-)

As far as music - love the MUSIC, but not care for the words - which is fine, as the music is what really makes it.....

(Edited by robert malcom on 10/11, 8:58am)

I treat the words as Bruckner did to the words in Wagner's operas - voice obligato....

(Edited by robert malcom on 10/11, 9:00am)

Post 32

Wednesday, October 11, 2006 - 9:51am

Co-Opting the Co-Opters

Malcom, the effects of your argument would be to strengthen mine. There is something about cultural traditions that have a hold on the popular psyche which any new ideology has always found it necessary to either co-opt or end with force. I am not advising that people should pretend to stay believers. I brought up my friend's example as a choice made by an atheist to ground his child in a culture which will enrich the metaphors and images available to him in a way that P.C. winter holidays and "jingle bells" just won't do.

Clarence, you are expressing exactly that which I wish to do so. I have told my family (who are Rand's kind of reasonably rational religionists) that God is an Objectivist. They understand my philosophy to some extent, they just don't want to give up on the idea of a personal god or immortality.

On the right is a pagan artifact from Sweden. I'd like to know what modern icon it resembles to posters here, ignoring the erect phallus.

Post 33

Wednesday, October 11, 2006 - 9:53am

I'm not really interested in talking with you further, Ted, so this will be my last post on this thread.

Ted: "Dear Ms./Mr. Trager"

Um, do you know any women with the first name of Jon?

Ted: "...then you ask me questions here, presumably with the expectation that I would take you as sincere and answer you in return."

My questions were rhetorical, Ted. I agree with AR that religious people shouldn't be automatically condemned and that all religions teach some valuable moral lessons. But I think anybody who honestly suggests that Objectivist parents take their kids to church services every week, and who inquires about the Objectivist justification for not just letting birds eat dead people, no matter how he tries to justify those things, clearly doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. Sorry if that ruffles your feathers.

As for me as a person, I'll just say that I don't fall into any of the categories you described, so you can't pigeonhole me like that. And if you've read my past posts, then you should know that I try to address others with respect. But when a poster on an Objectivist site makes truly bizarre comments and self-indulgently goes on and on about his past, I'll make an exception.

Enjoy watching Brit Hume. Perhaps you and Nick Otani can go get a cup of coffee together in the near future.

Post 34

Wednesday, October 11, 2006 - 10:19am

Jon,

Please don't let me scare you away, if you actually have any arguments, rather than insults and questions you didn't mean to ask, bring them on.

I did not suggest that objectivist parents take their children to church. I asked if anyone might see why an objectivist might have such a desire. [I don't think you've actually attentively read or tried to understand any of my words on this list. I hadn't ever addressed you before, either rudely or with respect. If you find my integration of my life and my philosophy distasteful to you, you have always had the option to mark any thread with my name in it as read. I don't view my personal life as divorced from philosophy, with the latter being just some form of diversion or intellectual exercise.] I responded to you positively twice, and then, given your willingness to remain a cipher, explained in satirical terms why I could not answer you in a meaningful way. You were the one who started with an insult in your first ever statement to me on this list. You are the one who ignored all the many (multiply sanctioned) comments, observation & arguments I made on this list that put the issue originated by Bidinotto in a wider context. You are the one who claimed that no one on this list wants to hear about anything other than the impersonal - in direct contradiction to the comments of other posters and to the existence of a profile page on this site. You have not ruffled my feathers. If you can't be bothered to actually address anything said on this string other than making one insult and then backing away from your own words by saying that you really didn't mean them - they were "rhetorical" then I think that speaks for itself.

Ted

bracketed material added later
(Edited by Ted Keer
on 10/11, 2:11pm)

Post 35

Wednesday, October 11, 2006 - 10:05pm

Too much here to properly comment upon. But here's a bit:

When it comes to religion I think universal life/unitarianism is best. I always had the most fun at their churches when I was a kid. Deism also seems fine. Also Ted's pantheism. And let's not forget Spinal Taps' Druidism: "No one knew who they were -- or what they did." ;-) My kind of religious folk! Of course, whenever anyone asks me what my religion is I generally say "heathen" -- just to amuse myself (simple minds...) and throw them off their game. I always remember that famous biblical quote: "Why do the heathen rage?" Of course, I still don't know the answer to that. And yet I manage to rage on! ;-)

Robert M' correctly points out: "Xmas was originally a pagan celebration, which Christianity corrupted - and secularists corrupted back...... so go, celebrate, with relish.......:-) "

Rituals are important, but need to be at least partially based on reason, and then continually updated, subject to some respect for tradition. For example, I think playing America's national anthem before sporting events is hideous -- a degradation to the US, the song, the sport, and the fierce non-altruistic competition.

I'm guessing that, uh, impressive icon is similar to Father Christmas... ;-)

Post 36

Friday, October 13, 2006 - 3:15am

Ted,

In Post 9, you asked:

What have you read about Jesus, and what is your religious background, if I might ask?

Sorry to be so late in responding. I have read many things in the Bible, of course. I did not read the works you mentioned. I used to be a Southern Baptist as a child, but I became an atheist in my teens.

I have found the work of Earl Doherty to be extremely useful in understanding why a historical Jesus is so hard to document and is probably a myth.

On the Bible itself, there is an amazing book called Dare To Think For Yourself: A Journey from Faith to Reason by Betty J. Brogaard, which recounts her journey from Christianity to atheism. You can find it at PublishAmerica. There (and in Mr. Doherty's work), you will find discussions of how the Bible was written and copied, prophesies, faith, doublets (evidencing multiple authors of the same books in the Bible) and a host of other points that are obvious, but we usually miss. It was very useful to me in understanding the Bible from a rational view.

Another source was a friend I once had who was a Jehovah’s Witness. I learned a whole new dimension about how to take Biblical study seriously from him. (It’s a shame that organization is such a cult.) Rather than be contentious, I dodged the attempts at conversion. I asked a lot of questions and received a mini-education. (For example, what were the criteria for including the books of the Old Testament, etc.) Those people may have some issues in life, but they don’t mess around when it comes to study-time,

I would like to say I have not joined in religion bashing typical of Objectivist forum life, but I have been very much guilty of that. It really went nowhere. It wasn’t funny and it didn’t convince anybody of anything. So I stopped.

I recovered my original attitude: I find there is much of value in contemplating the intellectual wealth of mankind. Agreeing with it all is not a prerequisite to being enriched by it. That goes for religious people, too. I no longer miss out on some really nice people out there and some wonderful insights.

Incidentally, I am finding more and more evidence of attention Ayn Rand gave to Christianity. Her favorite painting, for example, was Dali's Corpus Hypercubus of the crucifixion of Jesus. According to Jeff Britting's biography, she spent hours contemplating it. There are many other references and one day it might be fun to make a list of them.

Michael

Post 37

Friday, October 13, 2006 - 5:28pm

Thanks, Mike.

Where I grew up, about 60% of people were Catholic, there were very few fundamentalists, the one Jehovah's Witness stood out, he always wore dress clothes, shirt & tie, and carried a bible. I had to tell him I was a Satanist to get him to stop pestering me, thank God we only shared lunch periods! Religion was never a source of contention and always very much a background issue.

When I became an explicit atheist it was very liberating, especially realizing that one could have an objective ethics without having a jealous and petty god whose happiness or anger was the source of morality. When it hit me that there was little difference between God & the Easter bunny, it made me laugh for a week every time I thought about it.

Religion bashing, aimed at individuals, when the religious person does not accept or advocate the use of violence (or the legal impostion of their beliefs, which is a derivative of the same) is simply juvenile and shows a lack of respect for values as such. If someone is a passionate valuer, that is something that should be respected, so far as possible. To do otherwise is like booing the national anthem of another country at a sports match. If the booing is justified then the sports match itself is not.

I think it is important to point out that Rand's acceptance of certain religious symbols as having artistic merit, and so forth, was, as far as I know, addressed only toward Catholicism and Judaism. I can't think of any instance where she said anything in praise of puritanical Protestantism, and of course not fundamentalism.

I am not familiar with the books that you have mentioned. Being an atheist, I would probably be bored by the memoir of a non-objectivst ex-religionist. But Britting's book is quite a gem, I heartily recommend it. See here for Amazon review. The book is very pleasing visually, it is a shame the cover is not pictured.

Andre - you're correct, its both Santa Claus and the Norse God Freyr, more on that later.

Ted Keer, 13 October, 2006, NYC

Post 38

Friday, October 13, 2006 - 5:47pm

Ted,

I only mentioned one book. The Earl Doherty link is to a website that is replete with online literature.

Michael

Post 39

Sunday, October 15, 2006 - 1:51pm