Metaphysics and SL - Our place in the Metaverse

I was never raised to a commercial holiday. When I was a kid I was often in teh bush somewhere in teh world so I have had good Decembers. It has intrigued me that Halloween is celebrated so intently in North America. I can trace my lineage even to an ancestor who was hanged as a witch in England in teh 1600s. My family have never embraced a festival that has turned into a mockery of a special time of the year. Other religions have influenced my genetic line. I am certainly not inclined to celebrate when there is only me in my house and often because I offer a "diversion" for people. I am actually working when other people are "resting".
I honestly dont know anything about fundamentalist christianity other than what I have gathered on news etc. My life-style would never intersect with that belief-system.
But holidays have nothing to do with faith or contemplation. Christmas is becoming a holiday to celebrate the economy and if we dont start spending and buying soon we are gonna be jiggered.

If you are relying on popular media for your knowledge, it will be very biased and hateful toward fundamentalist Christianity. But then Christians and Southern Whites are the last two groups it is acceptable to bash and hate in today's world.

Jesus died for somebodies sins, but not mine!

Patti Smith

Peter Hoeg in "Smilla's Sense of Snow" writes that some people have a sense of God while Smilla has a sense of snow.
I think that is what I have but I confuse MY sense of snow with a sense of God. Or perhaps they are one and the same.

Thank you FD! I enjoyed that very much and I think it will help me on my spiritual path.

This movie started out deadly slowly for me but eventually I was glad I stuck with it. It says a lot about the nature of organized religion, politics and economics. (My feelings won't be hurt if don't watch it.)

Hmmm, well I am an atheist I guess if I had to be labeled something by the religious people.

What I find more interesting is the convergence of spirituality and cyberspace. If anyone has ever read the Neuromancer series of books by William Gibson, you know where I'm coming from. In the books, they had the concept of the Loas of (not entirely accurate, but basically voodoo gods) that had taken on a presence within cyberspace. In actuality, a Strong AI program had escaped into the worldwide cyberspace grid and it's sentience spread everywhere. Imagine a sentience that is capable of being everywhere at once and capable of almost instantly accessing the sum of all recorded human knowledge. Ever heard of emergent AI? Well I'm wondering what emergent godhood is like... Yay for ascension.

that sounds a lot like lawn mower man

I agree with the perception Scott, humans give machines the knowledge they have.
humans create by design , machines that further and enable humans to surpass their own inabilities. I think humans will give machines sentience and imagination, the day a machine thinks and therefore it is, is not impossible.. humans create their own successors.

The turning point, (or chaotic tipping point) will come when a sentient machine leaves control of humans. At that point the future for the machine and humans changes.

A machine that does not forget anything it encounters. A machine that is not subject to human frailty, can repair itself on demand without pain or morality, considers only itself and those of its kind in consequence. a machine that can function on electricity from whatever source it can find. No bio input. no bio demand. Space and time are not inhibitive. The machine can shut down, hibernate.. it does not die.

Humans work very hard at creating machines that can do things they cannot.. as long as that continues, humans push the tipping point.

One day i think a human will push the off button and leave.... when all is quiet the machine will switch back on.

I know what you are saying, but check the roots of 'religion' - binding together. Afraid that 'personal religion' is the more likely the oxymoron. Need another noun to drop in its place.

We can sum it all up here....it may be NFSW for some........

http://www.thejaywalker.com/pages/shit_happens.html

Lol. I've seen this before. Thanks for giving me a chuckle again.

As a non-believer, I found it extremely painful to listen to the "better place, loved one is always with you, blah, blah blah" stuff when I was confronted with a loss. Most people I can accept that they are just offering comfort as best they can, but from close friends and family members who are well aware of my beliefs, it seemed particularly harsh. I much preferred to hear a sincere expression of sympathy and regret, which is often all that is needed or wanted.

I understand that your situation with your friend was different, Jig, she was asking to hear your views. But I feel, if someone doesn't specifically ask, your metaphysical beliefs are best kept to yourself when comforting someone who's experienced a loss. After all, the grieving person is still going to grieve, there's nothing you can do to "fix" that. All you can do is listen and sympathize.

I can imagine how you felt. There you are going through one of the most emotional times ever and they seem to be ignoring your feelings.
I've noticed that people just panic when confronted with death and grief. They don't know what to say. A simple "I'm so sorry" somehow seems inadequate to them. (Some people are even afraid it will be interpreted as meaning the death was their fault!) So they find words coming out of their mouths that they've heard or read somewhere. I think usually the last thing they mean to do is increase anyone's pain. It's natural to expect more of your close friends and family but sometimes they are the most confused about what to say.

As coma and near death survivor I can say maybe their is something else
but logic tells me there is no 100 percent way of know what happens
when we cease to exist.
Yet being around those who died, when they die something that made
them who they are is no longer there, what that is and where it goes
I don't know.
I wish I did but even then it's not like I could prove that scientifically.
There is some things we just can guess and say it is so but it may
or not be truly so and we won't ever know absolutely with 100 percent
certainty regardless of how much others who have religion may say.
As someone who isn't sure what to believe I don't know, I have my wishes
but I am not absolutely sure and I prefer not know it.
I like having it be surprise and mystery that I will know when it is time to know..
If I had kid who was worried about what happens to people dying
I would discuss what I believe and how others have different believes
and how I came to my own personal decision about what I decided.
I would talk about why change is important and about how nature works.
Most important I would stress how it is important to love those
who are important in our lives, truly appreciate them while they are here but change
happens, part of circle of life is that life is created and exist, then it moves on through
death to make room for new things.
But regardless of change the love and memories we will remember and feel for those people, animals or things when they cease to be still exist with us.
Most of all I would help my kid discover for themselves what it means
when things change and how to he or she can take care of themselves, believe in their abilities and how to cope with their emotions when change happens or personally ways that will help them cope with things like fear, the unknown, change and loss.
Which is hard one if you don't have your own answers as Adult in how
to deal with this.
As human species we have long history of adapting and coping with change
but it isn't always easy.
Hard part is believing in our ability to adapt, strive and cope with anything
even loss and disappointments.
I wish someone personally had taught me how to do that as a kid.
Scientist are discovering more and more things some day some time in
future old age or death may never happen yet if that was possible
what type of implications would there be on our planet if no one ever died
or grew old?

Your choice of etymology seems an example of modern wishful thinking, I am afraid.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=religion

Pep (And, anyway, it isn't the origin, it's the current meaning that is relevant)

It is mandatory to wear a necklace - preferably a large amber one.

Uh, I think if you read your own source to the end, the "bind fast" is close enough, and is used in many modern texts by theologians. The two aren't necessarily exclusive anyway - I think you might have to take the meaning or nature of lecture back a step or two (just IMO). In any event, the "bind fast" or "bind together" from religare is the source often used by the theologians, both those I agree with and those I don't, if not universally accepted.

cites (and sites): http://www.yourdictionary.com/religion ee the etymology
http://wowgod.org/Matt20070408.htm :Yeah, not a great cite
http://www.interfaithimpactnys.org/Sermons/Theological%20Reflection%20on%20Criminal%20(In)justice.pdf
http://www6.miami.edu/studorgs/confluence/ConfluencePDFs/submissions/uddin_religion.pdf

And so on. I will agree that it is not universally accepted, but it is the definition in ascendancy, so it does qualify as 'modern use'.

So you would prefer to accept the interpretation of biased commentators further away in time from the origin who would *prefer* it to be something "meaningful" to them, rather than accept a less convenient etymology ("close enough" is risible) which might not fit in so well with their desired model of belief - like asking Obama which way you should vote . . .

Pep (One meaning of religare is to enslave!)

Well, they include quite a few respected theologians, and some of them built the interpretation on research of the original meanings. It is not universally accepted, but it is widely accepted. It isn't a construct, but research, at least in many cases. No doubt many readily joined in because it fits their desired current definition of religion which includes the concept of community as one of the major components of religion, but it isn't a bunch of radicals making up language.

Your last quip holds as true if you use the phrase 'personal religion' instead of 'organized religion'. I've seen some people enslaved by their own disorganized thoughts, never exposing their cherry picked beliefs to any criticism or feedback, one concept mutually exclusive from the next. OTOH, I do tend to agree with those that believe creedal religions tend to end thought rather than expand it. Since my church includes pagans and christians, religious naturalists and practicing Jews, humanists and existentialists, and Buddhgists all over the place, we are a bit short in the creedal department.

Sorry, Buddhists. I am unaware that there are any Buddgists remaining.

And therein is encapsulated the implication that you seem to have missed my point completely. I would prefer to rely on etymologists rather than theologians regarding the origin of a word.

Pep (Its *real* current meaning is something completely different of course)

I agree - those butterfry collecting etymologists are way ahead of the theosaurians.