Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> > Sigh. Why not say it a bit more clearly? Some see the conflict
> > as between materialism/rationalism/scientism/humanism and all
> > spirituality - not just fundamentalism. In my opinion this is a
> > huge and splintering mistake. Does the division leave room for
> > those, like me, who are both profoundly spiritual and utterly
> > dedicated to human progress and transformation? Or are the
> > "good guys" only those who firmly eschew any/all spirituality as
> > "supernaturalism"?
> What good is having shared goals if your beliefs and actions
> actually prevent us from getting there? There is certainly room
> for those who choose to believe irrational things personally but
> who generally stay out of the way of those who are building the
> future; but irrational people do have a tendency to spread their
> irrationality or use it to interfere. That they are well-meaning
> is no excuse.
What could are put-downs of those with active spirituality if
they tend to turn away highly talented people dedicated to
creating the future you desire? What you call irrational I
might call (in some cases) supra-rational. I believe that many
supra-rational viewpoints and concerns are actually critical to
building a future that is viable personally. Meaning well is
no excuse for anyone.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:20 MDT