Purpose of "The Skeptical Druid" (was: Otherworld...)

[DJ Droood]

DJ...I wasn't share where to put it...So I put it here. My bad.

No Ainevar...our bad for making the thread about everything but what you wanted to discuss...I mostly blame the mods, then Bartholomew and Hawthorn Ent, then finally Nico....but I suppose I share a small degree of blame as well.

[Bartholomew]

Calm down, calm down. Personally I think that DJ Drood should carry the blame for everything. I think he was just plain bored and wanted to start some trouble as there was not much going on in Sacred Skeptics corner. He saw newcomers, unsuspecting newcomers hovering around the perimeters and he struck, knowing full well what he was doing. Me, being the good soul, the good samaritan was just trying to help a person in need.
I would say, seriously I don't know how it got onto christainity because during that discussion I did not mention Jesus, God or the Bible or demonic possession, Hawthorn-Ent did. I was discussing souls, spirit world and reincarnation so the Lion t-Shirt is not really called for DJ.
As for getting into a Christian versus Pagan, new age , skeptic anything debate I will at this point in time decline. For why I will tell you is that I have had it up to the bleedin back teeth. If I circulate in Christian Circles I get called evil and Druid or witch or someone trying to get power over good family Christians. If I come here I get all the defensive Pagans who get the same response from the Christians as I do and react to me accordingly. Six long years of crap. So I came here for some peace. I would like to have more discussions here regarding other subjects other than religion and may well buy some science magazines. I have been known to read them in the past and contribute something else. I am sick of personal attacks, but you know if it makes you feel good go for it! So If anybody has felt insulted by my beliefs I can only apologise to you, they are my beliefs, that is all. I did not come here to convert or to preach anything to anybody ok?!!!!! AND FOR THE LAST TIME.I DID NOT START THE THREAD AND WAS NOT LOOKING FOR A DEBATE IN THIS PARTICUALR FORUM. So rest easy go back to whatever it is that you like doing. I'm going to look at the pictures of peoples pets where it's all calm and normal.

[skh]

...I mostly blame the mods

Ah well, that's what we're there for

Honestly, we (admins and global mod) do not monitor every thread. If you want a thread moved, please do send a PM, or use the report function of the board (the button with the '!' in it in every post).

peace /|\
Sonja

[DJ Droood]

Honestly, we (admins and global mod) do not monitor every thread. If you want a thread moved, please do send a PM, or use the report function of the board (the button with the '!' in it in every post).

This way is more fun.

Honestly though, the thread isn't the problem, it is the "attitudes" of the respondents, which is hard to police. If every time someone posted something in, say, Druid Craft & The Old Ways subforum, and some skeptical twerp would respond with "magic is irrational", "spells are shite", they would be violating the spirit of the subforum and simply be acting rude. Allowances can be made for innocent incursions, but deliberate obtuseness is hard to "!" away.

[Explorer]

I would say, seriously I don't know how it got onto christainity because during that discussion I did not mention Jesus, God or the Bible or demonic possession, Hawthorn-Ent did. I was discussing souls, spirit world and reincarnation so the Lion t-Shirt is not really called for DJ.

I have no problem with christians, most are decent folk with harmless delusions, like myself (not christian, but I have my own harmless delusions).

But your statements that your "direct spiritual transmission" with your "all-knowing, omnipresent, onmipotent" spirit/god/whatever outweights everything that others do in their quest for truth is .. well... 'wrong' is an understatement. I don't care what religion or delusion that comes from, but in here you can expect some tar and feathers if you say things like that.

And ofcourse, you are right about DJ Droood. He is always to blame. But he is also Canadian, and Canadians are like Hobbits, untouchable.

Have fun with the pets!

[DJ Droood]

But he is also Canadian, and Canadians are like Hobbits, untouchable.

You misread us...we are sad and irritable *because* nobody touches us...hold me, Nico.

[Explorer]

But he is also Canadian, and Canadians are like Hobbits, untouchable.

You misread us...we are sad and irritable *because* nobody touches us...hold me, Nico.

Only if you promise to shave first.

[DJ Droood]

But he is also Canadian, and Canadians are like Hobbits, untouchable.

You misread us...we are sad and irritable *because* nobody touches us...hold me, Nico.

Only if you promise to shave first.

which parts?

[Explorer]

which parts?

Just your face on our first date, I'm not that kind of druid.

[eilis]

"Souls do not exist" ... ? Depends on how you define it. There is that oft quoted answer by Einstein - he believed in a soul because energy never dies, it just changes form. So when we die - the energy that was us and our body transforms and goes back into the earth. I'm OK with that - I think what freaks people out is that thousands of worms and insects take a piece of us and head in different directions and the "wholeness" that was us disappears.

The whole notion of a ghost is that there is some "wholeness" that is kept together with our earthly identity still attached - that is problematic. That is insecurity on our part. We are given the opportunity to return to the "WHOLE" or the "SOURCE" - to be a part of the soil again and we freak. Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust ...

That energy is again "reborn" - new life is born of the soil that we have become! So what is so disturbing about this picture? So that is a long winded way of saying Soul and Spirit is energy for me but I have let go of the "ghost" aspect of that concept that needs to have a replica of myself in this life attached.

[skh]

The original question is now at:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=37690

Please continue all on-topic discussion there.

(By copying and splitting and merging and moving I managed to mess up the view count. If I put a post in the wrong thread, just let me know. Or write it again.)

peace /|\
Sonja

[DJ Droood]

I've changed my mind...I miss the to and fro....the comradery...the edginess...of the old thread....I would like to request that the threads be rejoined. Where is the button for that?

[Explorer]

I've changed my mind...I miss the to and fro....the comradery...the edginess...of the old thread....I would like to request that the threads be rejoined. Where is the button for that?

hahahaha, I love the way this thread now starts... with you requesting a subforum for Ouiia Boards *grin*.

(*pssssh*, Sonja, you know what I would do? Just accidentally hit the delete button for this entire thread... and 'oooops', wrong button, and we'll pretend it never happened ;-).).

[Bartholomew]

Not unknown hey Nico, entire threads disappearing. It's kinda cute watching two little boys being so supportive of each other whilst wearing a joke very very thin. Looks like i've ruffled some feathers, that's quite interesting. A poor old uneducated Christian causing a bit of stir. It's quite nice being the centre of attention. Carry on. I have not seen so much activity on a forum for a while. Very entertaining.

[Jake]

"Souls do not exist" ... ? Depends on how you define it. There is that oft quoted answer by Einstein - he believed in a soul because energy never dies, it just changes form.

Could you cite a source for that quote from Einstein? In other places he rather clearly states he held no such belief:

On 17 July 1953 a woman who was a licensed Baptist pastor sent Einstein in Princeton a warmly appreciative evangelical letter. Quoting several passages from the scriptures, she asked him whether he had considered the relationship of his immortal soul to its Creator, and asked whether he felt assurance of everlasting life with God after death. It is not known whether a reply was sent, but the letter is in the Einstein Archives, and on it, in Einstein's handwriting, is the following sentence, written in English:

I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.

In Berlin in February 1921 Einstein received from a woman in Vienna a letter imploring him to tell her if he had formed an opinion as to whether the soul exists and with it personal, individual development after death. There were other questions of a similar sort. On 5 February 1921 Einstein answered at some length. Here in part is what he said:

The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.

http://einsteinandreligion.com/soul.html

[Zylah]

Having been away for a while, I have decided to shove my nose into this discussion because it's the first one that popped up under 'active topics'.

I am in total agreement with Nico. I simply wanted to add a note or two: Bartholomew, one thing about sarcasm and tone etc.; it is very difficult to be certain about subjective aspects of discussion over the internet. Sarcasm is practically a ritual in our family, for instance; we use it to make a point, but we don't intend to be cruel when we do so. I realize some people can be very cruel with their sarcasm, but I honestly don't believe that to be the case here. DJ is making a point, and yes, he wields sarcasm Mightily, but try to give the benefit of the doubt as far as motivation or intent.

Also, the statement that caused the most offense (at least for me, and judging by responses I'd say for the others as well) was the assertion that experiential evidence 'outweighs' objective scientific proof. This is in essence a way of saying, 'my stuff/way/faith/whatever is better than yours!' or at least that's how it sounds. It also gives a lot of offense in the context because this is the Skeptical Druid forum, as has been pointed out.

In my opinion the breakdown occurs largely because of a misunderstanding about evidence: there are different types, and applying the same expectations and rules to all types is counter-productive (the old comparing apples & oranges thing).

Scientific evidence is like language; it has to have universal rules and interpretation, or there is no ability for universal application, which makes discovery and experimentation largely pointless. When discussing something objective, within the physical realm, it is legitimate to expect that scientific rules can and will be respected. When they're ignored or minimized in favor of ethereal, experiential anecdotes and so forth, it will bring impatience and probably ridicule from the scientifically minded. We know that science has a concrete basis that is no respecter of persons; there is a very objective, streamlined process within science to determine the results of research/experiment/etc. It can be depended on.

Experiential evidence is highly subjective; it is accepted in court with certain limitations. Confirmatory evidence is important, of course - but when we are discussing spirituality, it can only be shared to a very limited extent. Spirituality is essentially private; no one person has the same experience. Sharing with others, comparing experiences, can be enlightening, encouraging, and helpful - I would not deny that. However, it remains something that cannot really be proven, shared, or even totally communicated to another person. That's how it should be; but don't expect to bring that kind of thing into a scientific discussion forum and be taken seriously. Science demands consistency; spirituality is quite opposite.

Nothing is necessarily wrong with either, in its place. But mutual respect is certainly called for.

[eilis]

For Jake:
On the topic of Einstein's "quote" -
yeah that is why I wrote it the way I do - it is sort of a gloss of what Einstein said. and aan Interpretation of what he said. Both dangerous - so let me just take credit for the concept - energy never dies only changes form - and then there is nothing to argue about except that I am plagiarize. But you notice he has the same problem I have with the concept - the maintenance of the "individuality" after death. In that sense I agree with you ... no soul as a individual with some of our identity preserved ... but energy never dies therefore some energy (which some people like to call spirit) does continue in the world. I had the experience - my husband died when my daughter was 2 years old - I realized that some of his DNA lives on in my daughter in a very concrete and physical fashion.

For Zylah:

Scientific evidence is like language; it has to have universal rules and interpretation, or there is no ability for universal application, which makes discovery and experimentation largely pointless. When discussing something objective, within the physical realm, it is legitimate to expect that scientific rules can and will be respected. When they're ignored or minimized in favor of ethereal, experiential anecdotes and so forth, it will bring impatience and probably ridicule from the scientifically minded. We know that science has a concrete basis that is no respecter of persons; there is a very objective, streamlined process within science to determine the results of research/experiment/etc. It can be depended on.

Experiential evidence is highly subjective; it is accepted in court with certain limitations. for.

Scientific and Experiential evidence are both highly subjective - really scientific (and by this I mean "positivist" "scientific method" ) is experiential. Try on for size: Phenomenology by Husserl, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, and The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), by Thomas Kuhn.

Science is just as much "a story we tell ourselves" = it is just loaded with many more "factoids" not necessarily more truth or meaning. I am trying to find my way through this domain myself - I call myself a recovering positivist. I have spent some enjoyable hours lately reading Sartre on Imagination. That is another one you could give a go.

The point of what I'm saying is let's not dismiss the experiential since it is all we have. The distinction is then reduced to shared experiences (which are negotiated through some means - like an agreed upon series of rules like the scientific method and are never truly shared since no one can occupy the same EXACT "space and time" with any one else - even 2 inches away give different perspective) vs. personal or private and unshared experiences.

Carry on ... I enjoy the "negotiation" ,i.e. discussion

[Huathe]

Calm down, calm down. Personally I think that DJ Drood should carry the blame for everything. I think he was just plain bored and wanted to start some trouble as there was not much going on in Sacred Skeptics corner. He saw newcomers, unsuspecting newcomers hovering around the perimeters and he struck, knowing full well what he was doing. Me, being the good soul, the good samaritan was just trying to help a person in need.
I would say, seriously I don't know how it got onto christainity because during that discussion I did not mention Jesus, God or the Bible or demonic possession, Hawthorn-Ent did. I was discussing souls, spirit world and reincarnation so the Lion t-Shirt is not really called for DJ.
As for getting into a Christian versus Pagan, new age , skeptic anything debate I will at this point in time decline. For why I will tell you is that I have had it up to the bleedin back teeth. If I circulate in Christian Circles I get called evil and Druid or witch or someone trying to get power over good family Christians. If I come here I get all the defensive Pagans who get the same response from the Christians as I do and react to me accordingly. Six long years of crap. So I came here for some peace. I would like to have more discussions here regarding other subjects other than religion and may well buy some science magazines. I have been known to read them in the past and contribute something else. I am sick of personal attacks, but you know if it makes you feel good go for it! So If anybody has felt insulted by my beliefs I can only apologise to you, they are my beliefs, that is all. I did not come here to convert or to preach anything to anybody ok?!!!!! AND FOR THE LAST TIME.I DID NOT START THE THREAD AND WAS NOT LOOKING FOR A DEBATE IN THIS PARTICUALR FORUM. So rest easy go back to whatever it is that you like doing. I'm going to look at the pictures of peoples pets where it's all calm and normal.

Bartholomew,

I am sorry for the heat you have been taking. On my part on the original thread my reply concerning " The Bible, etc " it was only a suggestion based on my belief. Christianity is part of my druidic self and I ( we ) should be able to express that without fear of ridicule. I read other stuff and beliefs on here all the time that I do not agree with but I have the decent courtesy to be polite and not critisize others. It is simple respect. I defend you here and agree with what you say. But I do feel bad that I may have offended you and/or caused you more " heat ". After all, you have brought up my " Bible/Possession " reference twice. No insult to you was intended.

As far as the " Skeptical Druid " or any other forum is concerned, there is nothing wrong with a debateful conversation as long as politeness is exercized at all times. Without finger-pointing and critisizing someone else, for their faith or otherwize. They should call the " Skeptical Druid " forum the " Sarcastic Druid " forum. If you are a Christian Druid here, you are screwed!

And I do think this forum needs closer moderation. When someone gets aggressive with someone else or rude their entry should be DELETED!! And if the offender does it repeatedly he/her should be banned. I gotta give Ed Frank and Bob Leverett on the ENTS forum good credit. It politeness gets outta hand they get the offender quickly and if it is repeated much they will ban them. There should be " Rules of Conduct "!

Sonja,

I am glad you did see what was going on here and intervened a little.

Hawthorn Ent.

[DJ Droood]

If you re-read my posts, and I am confident that you will, I think you will discover that I am employing "satire" rather than "sarcasm".

Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

This is a venerable druid tradition, and I'm sure one of our reconstructionists can tell us which "Book of the Dumb Cow" a reference can be found in...blisters on the face and all that....

Sarcasm is “a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter jibe or taunt.” [1] Though irony is usually the immediate context[2] most authorities sharply distinguish sarcasm from irony,[3] however others argue that sarcasm may or often does involve irony[4] or employs ambivalence.[5] Sarcasm has been identified as a possible bullying action.[6]

I can see how one might mistake satire for sarcasm.

I was saving this Dilbert, but I will share it now:

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2011-01-09/

[Bartholomew]

Hawthorn-Ent thank you so much for your kind words of support but please don't worry on my behalf. As I said I find it quite entertaining all the little birds of a feather stickin together against one poor defenceless unassuming Christian who did not want a debate. I guess everybody else does. And you know if it keeps people happy and talking and is generating a community spirit and comaradie and they all feel like they belong and are accepted here and are validating each other. No worries. I am used to it. I am just glad that I haven't paid anymore money out for the distance learning course. I think I have seen all I need to. I just hope that any other sincere spiritual seekers who come across this forum are not put off by what they see.