Why was it faith she relied on and not the emotional support of friends and family? I’m not saying science deals in emotions, but the human condition does and that’s where service begins. Not in some false belief system but in real human connection! That is the Force to me. The force does not exist “out there”, it’s inside us. I would rather believe we have the power to comfort and make feel better, not some ancient book or arcane belief system. Understanding the natural cycles of life and finding support in other real beings instead of inventing supernatural crap that is ultimately meaningless and serves only to waste our lives by replacing that real human connection we all require.
Dude, you are entirely on point. I think the problem is that we (humans in general terms) have looked to the stars (literally and figuratively) for answers and created the "God of the gaps". Normally, psuedo-science should be replaced by actual science/knowledge. But the problem is the emotional connection to these ideas once the alternate reality explanation is accepted. God isn't just "out there" to them. He's "in their hearts". He's their friend. And I really hope I don't ruffle feathers by saying this but typically children create imaginary friends for the same reason. Need. Now once the mind accepts a certain reality you're dealing with not one idea but rather a complicated matrix of ideas, each tied into the other and reinforcing each other. So even though what you're saying is correct it would be much easier for my children to understand the Force than trying to unplug my mother. Now... if I wanted to I could probably get her to "bend the spoon" slightly (geez... the references) by upgrading her Christian understanding, but I'd have to stay within the Christian context. It's part of her reality and identity and therefore anything that would make her not a Christian anymore her mind is going to naturally reject because the brain doesn't care whether the data it holds is true or false. That's up to our ego. From the brain's perspective its just data. And so it will protect the data from what it perceives to be a hacking attempt. If you're trying to change 1 idea... entirely possible. But trying to change the entire mental matrix at the same time when all of those connections, memories, experiences, are reinforcing each other... you would have to be some kind of genius level social hacker to pull that off. I'm definitely not smart enough to do it. And doing it you risk doing damage to the identity and all the associated memories you're trying to isolate from the religion. Because she's over 70 so what if someone told you that the last 70 years of your life (and you know you're creeping up on the end) was a lie? There is both an emotional and an ego/id connection to it.
I don’t believe fear leads to the dark side. I believe that superstition and faith lead to detrimentally destructive behaviors.
superstition is largely a reaction to fear of the unknown. People react to fear usually by fight or flight. Fight is destruction by nature. Flight can also be destructive depending on what you're fleeing from. The Yoda quote about fear also has to be seen through balance because a little bit of fear can be healthy, but too much fear produces WMDs, the dark ages, salem witch trials, Nazis, KKK, etc. Almost every horrific event can be traced to either fear or malice.
This is not my issue. He is responsible for his own thoughts, feelings and actions. I take no responsibility for them.
Then why the need to correct his beliefs? Those would be his responsibility as well.
Actually I sanction neither fictional realm. Star Wars is just a fantasy movie. What I do sanction is the relevant wisdom behind it. I don’t claim Star Wars as a belief system and I don’t think anyone should make up a revisionist spiritual history of our world and then claim that as a belief system. It does an incredible disservice to the real history of our planet and it cheapens those old world spiritualties by corrupting them into something they were never meant to be. Those ancient spiritualties are incredibly rich and full of wisdom. Why not explore them for what they were instead of trying to squeeze them into a fantastical realm of a specific science fiction construct? To treat them so badly seems like escapist ideology not a search for truth.
I understand where you're coming from but my study of ancient religions leads me to believe that the importance was placed on the understanding/wisdom/spirituality more than the symbols. Symbols change from language to language and so do words. Ideas; however, are universal. So we can all use different words for the same ideas. This is true of religion which is simply the vehicle to carry and reinforce spiritual understanding. This vehicle is often driven by a crazy person who drives off the road.... but it doesn't change the overall intent. Over time, westerners (mainly theologians) started judging ancient cultures and taking their belief in all the symbols literally in order to convince each other that they were savages who didn't know what they were talking about. This view helped support their own religion at the cost of many others. Many people had to hide their religions and gods under the mask of Christianity. The old world borrowed stories from each other and changed them all the time. The Epic of Gilgamesh became Noah's Deluge. So ironically, imho, what Lenny has done is far more historically appropriate than we're giving it credit for in this age of science and reason.
I don’t necessarily agree. Truth is not about compromise. If one position is wrong then that position must relinquish its position in favor of the other. It’s not about compromise in this instance. How we view our world can be about synthesis of course so I agree there. That is a place of cooperation and human experience, but facts are facts and to rewrite history to entertain a fantasy is just wrong. I don’t think this is too broad a spectrum to quantify into a coherent argument. I love a good fantasy as much as the next person. It’s why I was drawn to Star Wars and the exploration of this site. I just don’t want to see people confuse the fantasy with the reality and that happens all too often on this site.
That's understandable. But what I see consistently in religious history... which I think we might be conflating with actual history... is a blending of facts and fiction. When recounting a memory your brain isn't entirely accurate even if you think it is. Whatever gaps it doesn't remember it substitutes with your imagination. This happens in a way we don't realize. Point is... especially before computers and extensive and accurate record keeping (think about all the versions of biblical manuscripts... its a mess) humans didn't have a real way to keep all of our facts straight. And therefore I think there was always a certain level of imagination involved that was accepted. On top of that no one in the ancient world went to journalism school so accounts were biased. Of course this person or that person rose from the grave. Why wouldn't they? So all I'm proposing is that if something is pitched as "belief" it isn't treated as a set of facts that all have to add up, but rather a set of ideas that only need to add up for the person who believes it.
