wrong knowledge

[miriam_e]

I have a lovely friend who phoned me up last night to tell me excitedly about a way to deal with my infection. She told me about medieval medical explanations of illness that have been disproven hundreds of years ago. Further she believed that bacteria, protozoa, viruses, fungi and prions could be banished from the body using what amounts to wishful thinking. I wonder why an intelligent person like her would believe such stuff.

One of the nicest people I have ever met enthusiastically believes all manner of nonsense about aliens and crop circles. When given the choice that the two guys who owned up to making the early crop circles for a bit of a drunken lark are telling the simple truth, or that aliens are among us and choosing to "communicate" with us by drawing stupid circles in fields, he unhesitatingly chooses the latter. Why?

Many people still believe in astrology. All claim to any validity has been demolished so many times it gets tiresome. Even Gauguelin, a professor of astrology, utterly disproved the field while attempting to give it scientific credibilty with a huge, careful study. But millions still opt to believe in the unbelievable. How can this be so?

I have many friends who believe in one or another religion. There is not one whit of evidence to support any religion. In fact, all of the thousands of religions clearly contradict the real world. What causes people to believe in something that runs absolutely counter to reality?

I have a number of otherwise intelligent friends who denounce all medical drugs (despite the fact that some actually are reliably useful substances) yet these same people will happily swallow "herbal" preparations based on nothing more than hearsay and containing ingredients they know nothing about. How can people be so skeptical of things that are known, yet be so uncritical of things unknown?

Why do people choose weird fantasy over the real world? Where is the sense in that?

What drives people to believe in myth, superstition, and flights of fancy instead of information right before their eyes?

Comments

[cranky--crocus.livejournal.com]

I read astrology. Not seriously. I know friends who wouldn't date certain people for being the Wrong Sign. Sometimes I read them just to laugh and freak myself out, but on this end I know it's not really true. I used to read them daily in the morning. If I read it and liked it, I would model my day that way. If I read it and didn't like it, I would model my day to avoid them. So I never took them seriously. They're just another Fun Thing for me sometimes.

But I fully acknowledge that I have to give myself some Fantasy Time sometimes. Just to live in a little untrue world in my head sometimes, with astrology and talking horses and insects who can teach me trig so I don't fail tests, and world peace and lots of things I haven't experienced.

I believe in Unitarian Universalism, which is a religion, but does not have a set of religious beliefs. UUs sometimes have religious beliefs. Others do not. Others don't know, don't care, whatever. The main thing about UU is community and acceptance, love and understanding and the democratic process and the interconnected web of life and the earth. It doesn't by nature focus on deities or sin or guilt or suffering or spirits.

Although, each congregation is different. And some UUs don't go to congregations.

But I think the thing about UUism is that it's a melding pot. The fact that it doesn't itself have a religious (ie belief-wise) creed makes it different. We have Seven Principles. No guilt or sin to those who don't follow them, we just acknowledge that they're generally Good Things to follow in life to heighten one's experience in life and community, and that the only real bad thing about not following them is the effect it will have on one's community and self. Not respecting others = others don't feel respected and some bitterness and bad feelings = don't get much respect in return, hmm?

But. I am strange. That is a fact I am aware of and quite adore.

The battle of reason....

[mfgreen.blogspot.com (from livejournal.com)]

I do hold some irrational beliefs, but I choose to hold them.

I can give them up anytime I want to - honest!

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/ (http://freethought.mbdojo.com/)

Cheers, MFG.

[patchworkkid.livejournal.com]

What drives people to believe in myth, superstition, and flights of fancy instead of information right before their eyes?

Nanites.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

I have nothing against people having fantasy time. I'm the biggest daydreamer ever. I'm a compulsive reader and I write and draw weird stuff, but I know the difference between my fantasies and reality. What puzzles me is why anybody would believe in something for which there is no basis in reality.

I think social groups are great. I'm a big fan. I help out with a lot of groups that do fun and good things. None of the groups I'm involved with spread falsehoods about the world and indoctrinate children with lies. Such falsehoods may feel harmless, but they have a way of snowballing. People can have social consciences without believing that a guy walked on water, or that people can be reanimated days after death, or that somebody started the universe, or that we have some immortal, intangible soul. Why would anybody choose to believe these things when they are so obviously wrong, and not related to being a good person.

Of course most people don't choose their religion. They are indoctrinated into it. The sneaky meme attaches itself to people's minds in ways that make it very difficult to budge. So I can kind of understand how religion maintains itself.

What I find so difficult to come to grips with is how people willingly believe in flying saucers, spoon-bending, ghosts, telepathy, astrology, homeopathy, and all the other loony things people embrace in the face of simple facts.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

heheheheh :D

Re: The battle of reason....

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Interesting site. I'll try to set aside some time to read more of it. Thanks Michael.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Perhaps people believe there *is* a basis in reality for these things.

Two drunk guys making some crop circles doesn't explain all of them.
What explains em, I don't know, but for me the question is still open.

"Aliens" have been experienced by many people, ufos as well.
Eyewitness reports are enough for the news, and for a court of law, why not for the existence of non human species who are as or more intelligent than humans?

As long as you dismiss it all as "loony" you're unlikely to ever understand.

[cranky--crocus.livejournal.com]

I agree on the social groups. Also on not indoctrinating children. We certainly don't--and if anyone included in "we" every did, he/she would be out of the "we" because that goes against everything we want. Free and responsible search for truth and meaning (most of the UUs I know find that entirely in science), general freedom, equality, etc. I'm thankful that we get to chose our religion as well as spiritual/religious beliefs, are not Drawn In and Chained in childhood, and are free to leave or join at any time. (And no, no walking on water, reanimation after death, person creating the universe, or--usually--soul for me.)

Though I don't agree with a lot of what people believe to be true in their realities--that chiropractors and therapists are useless, for example--I respect their right to have those opinions. But it, uh, doesn't stop me from rolling my eyes or raising an eyebrow from time to time.

I think the only time I get ANGRY is when it directly conflicts with what should be done or if I get it shoved in my face, i.e. I get ripped apart for going to therapy for anxiety, or someone won't take me to the chiro, or something like that.

I'm fascinated by all the stories of the things you mentioned. I don't think I could ever say I believe in them.

I'm unsure myself, though. On one level I know them all to be completely untrue and not supported by this reality. On another I acknowledge them to be...fun? At least fun-sounding. It's sort of my scientific mind vs. imagination thing. Sometimes I play around with them. Why? I don't know. Other times it's mind vs. 'heart.'

I've been thinking about it since I read your comment at work. My mind goes in circles. Basically, I've fallen (for the moment) on the thought that although I know them not to be true, sometimes my mind enjoys toying with them for fun and amusement. The way I might decide to scare myself and watch a horror movie even knowing that it's fictional.

However, I know this is not the case for most people. I also know that sometimes I "believe" heavier than others, which is also odd.

And sometimes I wonder if for the general public it's a mind over matter thing, subconsciously. The, "I believe it will work so it will work" like with sugar pills. But I haven't studied that sort of stuff at all, so I wonder.

Mainly I'm just fascinated by everything, true or no. Alas. At least I am never bored.

Thank you for stirring up such thought in me, though!

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

My respect for you grows at every turn. It is a rare individual that can put themself under the magnifying glass of their own critical appraisal.

Your "religion" sounds pleasantly unreligious. It sounds like it has excised most of the insanity from christianity and is mostly left with modern humanism. It is a good thing that many people are choosing to leave the primitive darkness of old religion, but it bothers me that they tend to leave the door open so that it takes but a step back. I can understand that embracing simple humanism without fables is probably a slow process and I guess I have to be content with that.

On the topic of indoctrination, does your church have Sunday Scool? Are kids taught bible stories? That is indoctrination. It sounds very forced, but the worst indoctrination is made into fun -- ask China's children of Mao's revolution. I went to Sunday School when I was a kid. My parents let us choose to go or not to go (they are not religious, though they revere nature). When I went to Sunday School the people were sweet and pleasant and taught us bible stories. I was very aware of the mind-numbing effect of using impossible stories. It makes questions impossible. I'm not saying that is the intent of the people doing it -- they're good-willed people who are only trying to help. But it is the mechanics of religion to make questions difficult or uncomfortable.

[cranky--crocus.livejournal.com]

My comment just disappeared. Sigh.

Thank you for the increased respect. I'm not sure it's deserved, but thank you.

My religion is pleasantly unreligious. We had bases in Christianity--we started off as Unitarians and Universalists, the prior believing in One God and not three parts (deep thinkers) and the latter believing in universal salvation and not damnation for heathens (deep feelers). They joined together in the 1960s for political reasons--they were always side by side screaming for equal rights and other liberal things. Liberal politics always brought them together. We have really moved away from Christianity to the point that most of the UUs I know don't consider themselves Christian at all--although I know Buudhist UUs, atheist UUs, agnostic UUs, Pagan UUs, Jewish UUs, etc. I don't know if we're still listed under Christianity but I think if we are people are fighting it.

The thing is each congregation is different. There are some more Christian places, some that barely seem UU at all (they're usually on the Unitarian side) and there are those more like mine (more on the Universalist side) that's mainly just about community and exploration and thought and discussion and love. We are a lot closer to humanist.

We have weekly "Religious Education." The children are sometimes taught bible stories, but with the background that they are fictional stories. We are told that a lot of our peers are learning them. We learn them often more like one might at school--"What are the lessons this character learned? Do you agree with them? What would you have done? Do you agree with this character?" But we also learn about other religions. One of my favorite programs was Neighboring Faiths, in which we went and experienced different religions in the area to try to gain understanding of others and the world we are currently living in--we went to an Indian temple, we have Native American speakers come in, we learned about earth-based religions, the more Christian-sided religions, had a Zen speaker come in, learned about some Eastern religions, etc. I also enjoyed the Coming of Age program, which we studied UU history and what UUism is. We explored it more academically. Then we had to write Credos talking about our beliefs in any way we wished. Many people admitted to not believing in God, to preferences of science, to not feeling spiritual at all, to having Firm Belief in Baseball and little else, etc. Actually, as a whole, I think my congregation was most uncomfortable with the girl who told us she believed in Jesus as a savior who died for our sins--but we accepted her too, although I don't remember anyone agreeing. Most of us tend to think he was a cool guy who once walked the earth and had some good lessons, but we're skeptic about a lot of it and don't believe in the divine parts.

I really don't mind the load of it. I think that, although I really wish we didn't have religion around (and that my UU religion could just become another type of community, and not have had to come about from the intolerance and guilt of other religions), I appreciate the knowledge I have been given about different religions out there. I think it's imperative to at least know about different religions to get a more solid idea of the world and people. Even if I don't like religion, it is a very prominent (sadly) force with humans.

I'm also fascinated with the lot of it. Usually read it as fictional stuff, or just interesting ways to view myself and think about the world for a few minutes. Really interesting literature.

Although I admit I have not looked much into the Bible at all. That's less interesting to me than the others. Although I wish to read it just to have a deeper understanding of what all these loonies are talking about, almost like the way I read Twilight to snark it and just know what the crazy fandom was talking about.

I've also heard it has SOME beautiful stories when taken in a fictional light (the only light I can use). I've heard others will disgust me. I won't know until I read it, I suppose.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

Two guys making the early crop circles explains those ones. Many other people making further ones explains the rest. We live in a vast sea of humanity. There are countless hooligans, vandals, pranksters out there. Extraordinary claims of aliens require extraordinary evidence.

The idea that a superior alien culture would choose to communicate via circles in fields is just absurd. Turning up at a meeting of the UN, or making a broadcast across the radio spectrum, or leaving a message for SETI -- those would be so much more effective.

I could say I have a purple, flying elephant but you wouldn't believe me unless I produced something more than my say-so. On the other hand if I said I have a bruise on my right knee you'd probably accept it, without needing to actually believe it. And you'd be perfectly happy to discard it if I later said that it was really on my left knee.

I've had people challenge me that I believe in science. They never seem to understand when I tell them that I don't. I'll accept some evidence as probably true, but it is all marked with a question. Anything can be replaced any time if more evidence changes things. I'm not attached to any of it. In fact some of my greatest thrills have come from finding that some of the most basic tenets are wrong and need to be rebuilt differently.

What worries me is that people so desire to believe in weird and crazy things without any more than the say-so of other people who want to believe in those things. Even worse, those outrageous beliefs tend to be held more strongly the less evidence there is for them. What causes this in smart, good, pleasant, otherwise normal people? It really, really puzzles me.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

You are very lucky. Sounds like you have grown in a wonderful, nurturing environment.

I thought I was lucky growing up way out in the bush and being able to spend so much time immersed in books and wandering by myself, out where there were no traces of civilisation. I often wondered what it would have been like to to have grown inside a supportive web of community.

[cranky--crocus.livejournal.com]

I am. I am so thankful to have had my congregation growing up. They're my family. A few of them have adopted me as Honorary Family, smiles. They were so helpful as I went through my hip stuff and hip replacement. I got visits, food, gift, candles of love. (Even if I don't usually believe in sending healing waves and white light and that, I think being told about it is positive--to know that others are thinking of me and wishing me well.)

When I wasn't with that community or in schooling I was spending time in books and wandering around. Quite an imagination I had.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Actually I don't know that aliens are doing the crop circles, what I'm saying is I don't know. It could be humans, in which case we've got some superior crop circle artists out there, it may not be. I don't know.

Extraordinary claims of aliens might just be people's extraordinary experiences. It's really not their fault if the aliens didn't happen to provide them with something they can prove it to their neighbors with.

Think of it this way, can you prove that say your mother said a certain thing to you? It's no less real for you if you can't, your memory still says she did, but you really can't prove details of the relationship.

Turning up at the UN for the others/aliens might not be on their agenda. They might have another agenda that looks very unlike what you imagine might be most effective for them.
Beyond that, it seems to me there is a lot of evidence. Maybe it's not enough to convince you, and that's fine. I don't need you convinced.

What I do feel is that it's extraordinarily unkind to assume those who say they've encountered "aliens" or ufos, ghosts, spirits, gods, energies you don't understand are crazy, loony, naive, deluded, insane, idiotic, ect.

By discounting these people out of hand you shut yourself off from a lot of information. I personally cannot explain to someone so ready to believe that I'm a fool, what I experience. I just don't hate myself that much.

As for people's "desire to believe", well I do understand that. They might have experiences that make it easier for them to believe than you have. Moreover they might simply get more comfort from the thought. People want to feel good, and there is nothing wrong with that.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

I wrestled with softening my description for believing without evidence. I genuinely feel that those beliefs are loony and crazy. If people simply said that we should keep an open mind on astrology I'd suggest they look up the hundreds of simple, independent studies of it that have never found anything in it. If they still thought the same thing, I'd start to wonder why. If they believed that astrology was genuine then I don't care how good, smart, pleasant they are (and do I have some smart, lovely friends who believe in astrology) I'm not be ashamed to tell them their beliefs are crazy. I feel I owe it to them. So far most have realised that I still enjoy their company and are not upset by that.

I do discount those things, but I don't close myself off from that information. I continue to follow up on information on all sorts of things that I dismiss as untrue. I've been wrong heaps of times. I love finding out when I'm wrong and fixing it.

I stand against a lot of mainstream science in dismissing the whole "Big Bang" hypothesis. It fails one of the most important tenets of good science: falsifiabilty. If there is no way to disprove something then it isn't science. That sounds counter-intuitive. Karl Popper was probably the first to really explain it. If you can design an experiment where gravity doesn't do what is expected of it then you can potentially disprove the theory of gravity. So far nobody has given any way to falsify the Big Bang. It has a lot of data that lend credence to something big happening, but universe creation from a single point is a bit much to swallow largely on faith. Some of the data pointing to a Big Bang can be explained other ways too. But if someone comes up with some watertight evidence then I will happily go along with it. For me that means the question mark gets much smaller. It never entirely vanishes.

Back to strongly held beliefs in things that have no evidence beyond second- or third-hand anecdotes: I don't really expect much to come of them. I've seen the pattern too often. If aliens landed tomorrow, or clear evidence of a soul was found I'd be very interested. I seriously doubt it will happen, but I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

People want to feel good, and there is nothing wrong with that.

I forgot to answer that point. It really get to the heart of the matter. I do think feeling good can be a big mistake if done some ways.

Here, let me illustrate with a few examples:

If you had been injured and wanted some aspirin to ease the pain it could kill you be preventing your blood clotting -- you bleed to death... in comfort.

Some horrid researchers have done experiments on rats where they implant electrodes into the pleasure region of rats' brains and let them self-stimulate. The rats happily starve to death.

Goebbles, Hitler's propaganda minister said that you could make people believe anything by repeating it often enough. We all know how harmlessly that worked out.

I'm sure you can come up with many more.

Ignoring reality by believing something simply to feel good is a dangerous thing to do.

Even "harmless" things like belief in UFOs can have dangerous run-on effects. It was the planetary scientists like Carl Sagan who went on to start SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) who became concerned about the greenhouse effect and global warming of our Earth. I've heard UFO-conspiracist friends discount NASA as covering up aliens. Discarding what those scientists' research endangers the whole planet.

The apparently harmless belief in an eternal soul was the rationale for the Inquisition torturing people to death in the Dark Ages. The idea was that our time here is fleeting compared to an eternity in heaven or hell, thus a confession elicited by any means helps the soul avoid torture for infinity. However there is plenty of concrete evidence to show that the soul does not exist. Those people died in harrowing pain for nothing but a fervently held mistake.

Generally speaking I'm all for people feeling good and being happy. It is my main motivator in life. But I understand that it is dangerous to feel good for the wrong reasons. Understanding what are the wrong reasons is the hard part and probably the subject of an even longer, more waffly post. (Sorry about rattling on so much.)
:)

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

What would constitute evidence for a soul?
See in things such as this, it seems to me they don't lend themselves to normal routes of proving and disproving.

Truth is I'm never entirely comfortable with the word "belief" as it applies to me.
I do tend to think certain things are true, but belief, I don't know, that seems to imply a whole dedication to a concept. Even if I act as if some things are true, I could certainly revise my view of reality tomorrow.
Even so, I think I have a soul. I wonder if you think that thinking is loony or if I'm loony for thinking it. Or both perhaps.

When I say you could be closing yourself off from information, I'm not saying your not open to it, what I'm saying is with your belief that certain beliefs are loony, few people would want to share with you information about their own knowledge of such things, knowing how you would judge them.
I wouldn't. In fact I can't begin to figure how I would explain why some things make sense to me, seem true to me. Without something you could put under a microscope I doubt you'd hear anything but more loonyness.
Truth is that kinda makes me sad.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

Ok, what I was saying was that there's nothing wrong with people *wanting* to feel good.
I didn't comment on how they go about trying to feel good.

"However there is plenty of concrete evidence to show that the soul does not exist. "
Where would that be?
So far I haven't seen anything convincing myself.

"Those people died in harrowing pain for nothing but a fervently held mistake."
Seems to me they died in pain cause some sadistic persons did that to em. It doesn't take believing in a soul to rationalize something vicious. The mind is infinitely creative, one could just as easily say because there is no soul that it doesn't matter one way or the other what they do.
I tend to think I have a soul and that others do too but I don't think it's okay to hurt people cause of it.

Certainly if holding certain beliefs is causing suffering I think that might be a good indicator that the belief ought to be examined. I'm not gonna argue with you there.

I know people have rationalized all kinds of unkindnesses with one belief after another.
The whole "Manifest Destiny" thing in the US was the rationalization for genocide of the native population. And that belief was just made up on the spot. Very handy made to order new belief.
Its what humans do. Not all the time but a lot of the time.

Some beliefs come about by experience though. No, not by scientific testing or out of a desire to rationalize some lack of compassion, but by experience. Certainly people will interpret their experiences in whatever way makes the most sense for them.

It may be you believe that some people are just experiencing hallucinations, delusions, psychosis, or that they're just compulsive liars.
I certainly won't blame people if they believe their own experiences though.

I don't mind you rattling on.
I mind people thinking I'm dumb or loony.
That's my problem though I guess. I'll have to process that.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

What would constitute evidence for a soul?

Good question. This is one of those falsifiability problems. The concept of a soul is usually framed in such a way that it can't be proved or disproved. But it is pretty easy to whittle away the likelihood of its existence to pretty-much zero by reframing the question. Is the soul the conscious "me" that observes the world and makes moral judgements and feels happy or sad. If that is the case then the soul definitely dies when my body does. I can go into more detail on this if you wish.

Yes. I agree with you about the word "belief". The language is part of the problem. We don't really have properly agreed upon words to distinguish between accepting something with reservations or basing your entire outlook upon something.

Another part of the problem is that people sometimes think that when I'm criticising their beliefs that I'm criticising them. I have a lot of friends with nutty beliefs, but I count myself very lucky to have them as friends. I don't think they are crazy. I think their beliefs are. It is difficult to distinguish between the two in casual conversation, but a few minutes chatting usually shows people how I really feel.

There is also a big difference between someone not discounting UFOs, and someone who passionately believes in a worldwide conspiracy to keep evidence of aliens hushed up. There is no evidence for either stance. The big difference is in intensity to believe without evidence and passionate commitment to dismiss any opposing evidence.

A person who reserves judgement in the case of UFOs, but says that considering the number of sightings there probably is something in it we should look at it more is, in my opinion, simply mistaken. That's OK. We all make mistakes. I'd suggest they look more at all the work that has been done by unbiased researchers.

A person who enthusiastically believes in UFOs and dismisses any opposing evidence with fantastical conspiracies is holding desperately to a crazy belief. They may be completely sane, well balanced, and normal (I'm thinking of one of the nicest guys I know here) but that doesn't change the fact that their belief is crazy.

I've considered adopting a less confrontational description of such beliefs, but there seems to be mounting evidence that tolerance of loopy thinking makes it worse. So I try to call it what it is.

It is risky because people can become so attached to their beliefs they can't see where their self stops and the belief starts and they get offended. I try to avoid that, but I won't say that something that is clearly wrong is OK... ummm... unless other evidence comes to hand to show me that I'm handling it wrongly... which I may be, of course... :)

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

I definitely don't think you are dumb or loony. I have a lot of respect for you. Over the period I've chatted with you on LJ you've consistently shown youself to be compassionate and thoughtful. I don't really know what your beliefs are or how strongly you hold them.

I have little energy these days because of the medication, so my postings to LJ have dropped off and I'm always too tired to read friends' LJs anymore. I should not really post when I become exhausted because I start to make stupid mistakes and sound brusque, even rude, and I hate the thought of that. My posting a little while ago was full of typos so I'm clearly getting exhausted. I should really log off and continue later. I hope I haven't unintentionally offended you. I'm a dope if I have. Sorry.

More later when I can think more clearly and stand up without falling over. :)

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

"I don't think they are crazy. I think their beliefs are."
Well okey, that helps me feel a bit better.
Personally I think you're very nice, and while I really don't agree with you in your assessment and conclusion round some subjects, I don't think you're crazy or dumb, I think you're understanding these things to the best of your ability from your particular perspective.
I'm guessing our experiences may be very very different.
And our perspectives too.
See I think it's valid to consider the stories that humanity has told since we've been telling stories. Considering doesn't mean they're all true of course but I'm just not okay with discounting them all either. Rather I hope to learn from them.
And beyond that I have my own experiences that lend to me thinking certain things are likely. And the experiences and stories of those who I've been very close to as well. I consider those.

I figure I'll know for sure if I have a soul when I die. In the meantime I feel that I do, and I won't deny myself a soul just cause I can't be certain yet.

"It is risky because people can become so attached to their beliefs they can't see where their self stops and the belief starts and they get offended. I try to avoid that, but I won't say that something that is clearly wrong is OK... ummm... unless other evidence comes to hand to show me that I'm handling it wrongly... which I may be, of course... :)"

Yah, I know, of course we are, we're people, we get attached to things.
I understand that you're trying to be honest with yourself. And that's cool by me. :)

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

"I definitely don't think you are dumb or loony. I have a lot of respect for you. Over the period I've chatted with you on LJ you've consistently shown youself to be compassionate and thoughtful. I don't really know what your beliefs are or how strongly you hold them."

Thank you. :)
Honestly it's rather hard to explain what I think is likely to be true, cause there's no one template (that I'm aware of) that completely explains. Which, well, I like it that way. I'm an exploring being, not a decided being. But it's true I could draw language from a variety of traditions to explain. But generally I'll share my understandings with people I'm close to if they want to hear it but otherwise I don't. I'm not out to proselytize. I just want people to be as happy as they know how to be and I really don't think my understandings are necessary for them to do that.

Yes, please do take care of yourself. No need to be falling over to provide me with more words.
I'm really not offended, you've made your understanding clearer to me and that helps.
Presently I've another friend who is speaking rather offensively about his desire to wipe organized religion off the face of the earth. That, that kinda offends me. So the subject is just a tad sensitive right now, but that's certainly not your fault.
I've learned a lot from the various traditions that are carried within various religions and I want to honor peoples right to choose what they do as regards their religion, beliefs, understandings, philosophy. The idea of some of us deciding for others of us what we have a right to believe, that's an ugly thought in my opinion. Certainly it's where some religions and philosophy have begun to harm others. I'm not okay with that inside or out of religions.

Anyhoo, yes, do take care of yourself. Please no falling over on my account. :)

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

ps, You know I'm not sure that I see the soul the way you describe it. Those seem to me to be functions of the body.
Even so I can't quite explain how I see it. Sorry bout that. :)
But if you want, you can explain to me *when you're up to it and feel like it* why the soul as you describe it can be disproved. I'd like to hear it if and when you feel like explaining.

Take care you. :)