Why I'm A Humanist And Not A Catholic

[Miss Simon]

All emotion has a base chemical beginning and ending that can be measured and observed. Im not sure how one goes about quantifying divinity in order to give you an answer tbh. How do you go about separating divinity from pleasurable auditory signals vibrating through the air, or the the comfort of familiar space in which a person prays? Meditation is a very beneficial action that brings on feelings peace and euphoria none of which have been linked to divinity and have absolutely been linked to chemical changes in the brain. Im not even sure how one defines divinity in this sense in order to study its impact on the human psyche. 

Also I have read harry potter and yes it is real as a physical book that is sitting on my shelf. Harry potter however is not a real person just because I read about him in said book. 

 

Also ps I didnt post my impressions of the article for the sake of an argument, just offering my thoughts/experiences as anecdotal testimony from my younger years. 

Edited December 19, 2018 by Miss Simon

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Miss Simon said:

He explains that he couldnt rationalize some of the stories because during his studies at the university he was unable to reconcile or support their historical existence elsewhere. And I think its fair to look at it from the flip side and say maybe its "bad/stupid" to believe in something without understanding why, would you agree? 

Yes I definitely agree it's bad/stupid to believe without understanding why. I've definitely pushed the limits on my doubts of Christianity and the Bible. The whole slavery thing caused a lot of doubt for me. But that brings me back to why I'm glad I'm Catholic. I was just listening to Relevant Radio and a good Priest was on there defending Pope Francis's new remarks about the death penalty. A lady called in saying she disagrees with the Pope and used the old Testament to justify the death penalty. The Priest then explained how the Bible could be read to endorse slavery in the old and new testament. And how that doctrine has developed. Same with torture. If I was Protestant I just have to accept God is cool with slavery. And if I have to accept that as fact about God well I'm out. I don't believe in that God. So I understand where this guy in the article is coming from. But God is also spirit. He will communicate to you through the Bible but he will also make himself known through other ways. Real tangible ways if you seek him out. So in my opinion to write the existence of God/Jesus/Holy Spirit completely off just becuase of some texts in the Bible is unwise. But I can see how a person might end up doing that.

Btw are you agnostic? 

[Lilllabettt]

9 minutes ago, Miss Simon said:

All emotion has a base chemical beginning and ending that can be measured and observed. Im not sure how one goes about quantifying divinity in order to give you an answer tbh. How do you go about separating divinity from pleasurable auditory signals vibrating through the air, or the the comfort of familiar space in which a person prays? Meditation is a very beneficial action that brings on feelings peace and euphoria none of which have been linked to divinity and have absolutely been linked to chemical changes in the brain. Im not even sure how one defines divinity in this sense in order to study its impact on the human psyche. 

Also I have read harry potter and yes it is real as a physical book that is sitting on my shelf. Harry potter however is not a real person just because I read about him in said book. 

 

Also ps I didnt post my impressions of the article for the sake of an argument, just offering my thoughts/experiences as anecdotal testimony from my younger years. 

 

Well, you made the assertion that you dont believe, for example, that chemical changes in the brain have a divine actor behind them. What is the rationale for that assertion?

That meditation is associated with chemical changes in the brain, which induces good feelings, does not exclude the possibility that God is an actor in the process.

The fact that meditation is correlated with brain changes and good feelings from those changes could be seen as pretty good evidence that God created both the human brain and meditation as a means of communicating with him. 

So what is your rationale for dismissing that possibility?

[Guest]

I just listened to an amazing lecture the other day from Jordan Peterson talking about the mind and psychedelics. And the spiritual reality/implications. Interesting stuff. Not sure if I should post it here. I might.

[Miss Simon]

The idea of divinity in itself as an invisible, unmeasurable phenomenon is not rational so I am unable to comment on it as it pertains to objective biological realities.

If an individual chooses to believe that an immaterial divinity impacts biochemical processes then that is a personal choice rooted in something other than psychical observation or empirical proof.

[Lilllabettt]

4 minutes ago, Josh said:

I just listened to an amazing lecture the other day from Jordan Peterson talking about the mind and psychedelics. And the spiritual reality/implications. Interesting stuff. Not sure if I should post it here. I might.

Yeah why not. I'm interested. I'm not a super fan of his but hes interesting.  I personally couldnt do like LSD. One of my moms friends did it once. One single time. and ended up in the loony bin for the rest of his life. This was back when they were teenagers in the 60s. Too scary.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Yeah why not. I'm interested. I'm not a super fan of his but hes interesting.  I personally couldnt do like LSD. One of my moms friends did it once. One single time. and ended up in the loony bin for the rest of his life. This was back when they were teenagers in the 60s. Too scary.

Yeah I've never done lsd. To scared. Same with Dmt. To scared to feel myself leave my body and shot out into space and enter different dimensions. Plus I think it's probably very dangerous spiritually. But I do love listening to podcast with Joe Rogan talking about it.

[Lilllabettt]

2 minutes ago, Miss Simon said:

The idea of divinity in itself as an invisible, unmeasurable phenomenon is not rational so I am unable to comment on it as it pertains to objective biological realities.

If an individual chooses to believe that an immaterial divinity impacts biochemical processes then that is a personal choice rooted in something other than psychical observation or empirical 

Well I might question why you privilege empiricism as a form of epistemology. 

X billion number of years from now, assuming intelligent life in the universe survives, there will be no empirical proof that the stars exist in our galaxy. I had a professor at Harvard who would wig out about this. Eventually no telescope possible would be powerful enough to detect the wave patterns. So, because we wont be able to see them, will they cease to exist? Does the furniture in a darkened room rush into existence only when you turn on a light? What about the trees in darkest Peru that spring up and, grow  with no human eyes ever setting on them- do they not really exist until a single Engine flies over and observes them fully grown?

One could say the reasonable response is "no. Of course not. Duh." So clearly reality exists independent of our ability to observe  it. You don't agree?

 

[Aloysius]

On 12/19/2018 at 10:04 PM, Miss Simon said:

All emotion has a base chemical beginning and ending that can be measured and observed. Im not sure how one goes about quantifying divinity in order to give you an answer tbh. How do you go about separating divinity from pleasurable auditory signals vibrating through the air, or the the comfort of familiar space in which a person prays? Meditation is a very beneficial action that brings on feelings peace and euphoria none of which have been linked to divinity and have absolutely been linked to chemical changes in the brain. Im not even sure how one defines divinity in this sense in order to study its impact on the human psyche. 

Also I have read harry potter and yes it is real as a physical book that is sitting on my shelf. Harry potter however is not a real person just because I read about him in said book. 

 

Also ps I didnt post my impressions of the article for the sake of an argument, just offering my thoughts/experiences as anecdotal testimony from my younger years. 

This kind of rationalizing away religious experiences is a bit of a fallacious one, as others have pointed out.  It's certainly interesting to actually look at the biochemical processes involved, but that does not say anything one way or another about the truth claims.  Reminds me of this quote by William Gassie:

 

“To fully naturalize religion implies first that we can also fully naturalize human consciousness. What is good for the religious goose is also good for the scientific gander, so we will also need to naturalize science.  So let’s do a little thought experiment. Let’s examine physicists as a particular “tribe” of humans. Let’s examine their brains when they do their physics with the use of Positron Emission Tomography (PET Scans) and the other tools of contemporary neuroscience.  We will no doubt find that certain parts of their brain “light up”. This in itself is interesting data, but it tells us nothing about whether the physics is true. Similarly, we might investigate whether the activity of doing physics has evolutionary fitness value, by seeing whether physicists as a group are more successful in passing on their genes.  We might wonder whether physicists exhibit more in-group altruism and social cohesion than chemists or classicists. All of these approaches would be an absurd way to judge the truth claims of physics.”

 

it's certainly interesting to discuss the empirical realities surrounding biochemical processes during prayer or meditation or any other religious ritual... but one should always be clear that this really would have nothing to say one way or the other about whether there was a divine actor involved, or whether there was any truth behind the beliefs being experienced.  Any more than understanding the biochemical process of learning physics says anything about the truth of the laws of physics.

anyway, Miss Simon, it's an interesting discussion either way.  I have always been quite interested in the intersection of cognitive sciences and religious practices, and think there are interesting philosophical implications, especially in the way of curing some theists of their tendency to be platonic dualists when Christian theology would indicate more unity between body and soul--what we see with modern neuroscience should remind us to not be manichaeans or dualists, the body and the soul are good and the body reflects and is deeply connected with the soul.  the soul is not just some ghost-in-the-machine, but the immaterial principle of the  material body, something with profound implications.