Author
|
Topic: A rather blunt question ... (Read 4087 times) |
|
SecondSpeaker
Adept
Gender: 
Posts: 9
Reputation: 7.90
Rate SecondSpeaker
Second to the First Speaker
|
 |
A rather blunt question ...
« on: 2008-12-04 17:11:00 » |
 |
But perhaps necessary.
The goal of the church of virus:
Virus was originally created to compete with the traditional (irrational) religions in the human ideosphere with the idea that it would introduce and propagate memes which would ensure the survival and evolution of our species. The main advantage conferred upon adherents is Virus provides a conceptual framework for leading a truly meaningful life and attaining immortality without resorting to mystical delusions.
I am not sure but I think this site exists for at least five years.
My question:
When does the competition start ?
In other words: it feels a kind of dead over here. And I still think it is a worthy idea. But you (we?) have to put a lot more effort in it. And it won't work at all if you just stick to the internet.
Somehow the word "originally" does not feel good in the statement.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.78
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
 
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #1 on: 2008-12-20 11:48:39 » |
|
Quote from: SecondSpeaker on 2008-12-04 17:11:00
In other words: it feels a kind of dead over here. And I still think it is a worthy idea. But you (we?) have to put a lot more effort in it. And it won't work at all if you just stick to the internet.
Somehow the word "originally" does not feel good in the statement.
|
If you want to avoid hypocrisy you had better start putting in some effort.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Anarch
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 3.91
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #2 on: 2008-12-20 22:15:15 » |
|
Re: & to: Second Speaker
hmmmmmm, first post and he/she/it is already talking about what losers we are. Why don't you try starting a real conversation about an important issue to you before you make such judgements? Perhaps we've all been just waiting for YOU to ask a good question (which you really haven't yet, but we're optimistic for you). You wouldn't want to bury all that good question potential you've got going by starting out on a pessimistic tone, would you?
Much love,
-Mo
PS -
Quote:| I am not sure but I think this site exists for at least five years. |
I've been here (in the Church of the Virus) for about ten years. Perhaps you should do more research before you start your deconstruction efforts.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Walter Watts
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1571
Reputation: 8.64
Rate Walter Watts
Just when I thought I was out-they pull me back in
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #3 on: 2008-12-21 00:21:07 » |
|
Quote from: SecondSpeaker on 2008-12-04 17:11:00
My question:
When does the competition start ?
|
The CoV HAS no competition!
Walter
|
Walter Watts
Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
No one gets to see the Wizard! Not nobody! Not no how!
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Anarch
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 3.91
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #4 on: 2008-12-21 01:17:52 » |
|
Quote from: Walter Watts on 2008-12-21 00:21:07
Walter makes the point well. I think we opted out of the competition and moved on to the next level. While the CoV may or may not be a religious organization depending on local context, conceptually we have become a meta-religious group in actuality. We may be a church in that many of us, like Lucifer, Walter, Myself, Mermaid, Hermit, and many others have all purposefully had real life meetings offline, and share many life concerns with each other. But as for religion, I think we now see ourselves in potential symbiosis with many more moderate relious folks, as well as atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers of many stripes. All we fundamentally (though never dogmatically) require is that people wishing to converse with us recognize and accept our ethical system of virtues and sins. For us its the starting point of any conversation worth having. And so far it hasn't disappointed me. So instead of asking us an existential question like that . . . let's move on to something that's actually important to you.
-Mo
PS - SecondSpeaker, if you really want to get taken seriously as something other than a simple troll, I'd recommend that you get involved our Meridion Reputation system. It's up to you, but if you don't want people to have to actually click on your posts to read them, it may be some incentive to you to get involved. Even some less popular participants get a lot more exposure than they would otherwise. Its a robust if otherwise merit/positive-feedback system. All-round a good faith system.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
SecondSpeaker
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 9
Reputation: 7.90
Rate SecondSpeaker
Second to the First Speaker
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #5 on: 2008-12-21 17:25:41 » |
|
I will try to respond
(1) I have done considerable reading trying to establish the current state of affairs here on CoV. My conclusion was that for the innocent passerby (I consider my efforts somewhat higher then that) it's not easy to establish what the recent activities are and how much, if any, progress is made in spreading and developing the word.
In this respect the word "originally" gives the feel that another direction is taken, some reactions give me the feeling that the state of affairs is that a group (some few hundred?) sticks together here, communicating on all kinds of subjects and that's about it. I don't see any "higher state" in this, but perhaps I have been looking at the wrong places.
So please instead of scorning at me for not studying hard enough thru a big mass of forum and other texts direct me to the ones I have missed and ask yourselves if you can attract the attention you want if a passers-by like me, with a positive attitude after some serious studying should come to such conclusions.
(2) As for me, I think the best way to combat traditional religions is to think up an alternative that goes into competition with it. The rational discussion approach (Dawkins) will not lead to success IMHO. The alternative godless religion (unbelievers) will have to offer a lot of things traditional religions have. So it's not an easy thing to think something up that can compete. Basically: just saying this idea in itself is a good meme and now go for it is not sufficient.
(3) In pursuing this purpose I am researching all kinds of sites, especially in the Netherlands, where these and similar ideas are proposed, as well as plain atheistic sites, often wondering why they cannot be a more cooperative.
As regarding your "Meridion Reputation System":
(1) I am a big fan of reputation systems
(2) I have looked for, but not found an introduction to the way your system works.
(3) I think it very odd that the reputation system works in such a way that a new member cannot post a normally visible contribution. Furthermore I would think that if a post is worthy of reaction that should be reflected in the reputation, I am still at 0.
(4) I used the "warn the moderator" button to ask him to make may post visible in the normal way. Got no reaction.
Second Speaker
|
|
|
|
|
Mermaid
Archon
Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.34
Rate Mermaid
Bite me!
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #6 on: 2008-12-22 01:41:13 » |
|
fine.
after replying to the schadenfreude thread( http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=42467;start=0;boardseen=1), i have a few thoughts.
i can actually see the sense in foundations like robert lappin's as community number is strength. i cant really fault jews who use loopholes in the tax system to build communities. it is perfectly legal and primitive socities do it all the time. for example, i have seen that happen many many times in india. small groups are strengthened by their dependence on each other. it helps to form and strengthen ties. e.g. the village headman can afford to perform his daughter's wedding in a grand fashion all by himself...its not like the potter's small gift makes a world of difference, but it matters. it says to him that the poor potter wants to be part of his community. the village headman remembers the gift and returns it for the potter's son's birthday. it is the care that is invested in building bonds.
its not like jews cannot afford to send their kids to israel to learn about their heritage, but something like robert lappin's foundation helps them to network to bond amongst their own. i applaud that. it is brilliant. its only an added bonus that its a non profit and they get the tax benefit.
the problem i see with atheists organisations of all stripes..from cov to whatever it is that richard dawkins is peddaling these days is tht there is no cohesion to form communities..to get like minded people together for a common cause. instead we fight against the faithful. our energies are directed towards those who we think deserve our contempt and ridicule instead of creating something out of our enlightenment.
on that note, i'd like to propose something. for this holiday season, do something. not as an atheist, but as a rationalist. who do you think deserves your charity? have a bakesale. buy sweaters, get a cov logo on it and donate it. buy books that conform to our beliefs, slap a cov sticker on the cover and give it away as a gift....to a school..to a library. lets have raffle and the gifts can be books that are in our cov approved list. form a cov award to specific authors for their books or articles(in newspapers/writtn media) or television(for other media). or blog awards.
on a larger scale..why not start a library. stock only books that is cov-approved. lets have a scholarship. i will contribute.
lets create a community without glancing at those whose beliefs we dont subscribe to..its not about NOT being a xian or a jew or a moslem or a hindu. its about being rational. let us cultivate a community like that.
thats all i have to say.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.78
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #7 on: 2008-12-28 17:34:23 » |
|
Quote from: SecondSpeaker on 2008-12-21 17:25:41
As regarding your "Meridion Reputation System":
(1) I am a big fan of reputation systems
(2) I have looked for, but not found an introduction to the way your system works.
(3) I think it very odd that the reputation system works in such a way that a new member cannot post a normally visible contribution. Furthermore I would think that if a post is worthy of reaction that should be reflected in the reputation, I am still at 0.
(4) I used the "warn the moderator" button to ask him to make may post visible in the normal way. Got no reaction.
|
We have a Meridion wiki page. I just noticed the link at the top of the voting page was broken. Should be fixed now.
New members start off with a zero reputation so they have a fairly strong incentive to join Meridion. The cost to join is almost zero, you just have to rate one person which could be yourself. I'm open to other suggestions.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.78
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #8 on: 2008-12-28 17:40:19 » |
|
Quote from: SecondSpeaker on 2008-12-21 17:25:41
(2) As for me, I think the best way to combat traditional religions is to think up an alternative that goes into competition with it. The rational discussion approach (Dawkins) will not lead to success IMHO. The alternative godless religion (unbelievers) will have to offer a lot of things traditional religions have. So it's not an easy thing to think something up that can compete. Basically: just saying this idea in itself is a good meme and now go for it is not sufficient. |
I agree. One of the issues we are wrestling with is how to compete with a religion that seems to offer infinite benefit (the heaven meme). You know and I know the benefit they offer is fictional at best, but pointing that out doesn't seem to matter.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.78
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #9 on: 2008-12-28 17:47:05 » |
|
Quote from: SecondSpeaker on 2008-12-21 17:25:41 | (1) I have done considerable reading trying to establish the current state of affairs here on CoV. My conclusion was that for the innocent passerby (I consider my efforts somewhat higher then that) it's not easy to establish what the recent activities are and how much, if any, progress is made in spreading and developing the word. |
Would you like to see a new forum on the front page of the BBS or a wiki page listing the active VirianProjects?
Quote:| In this respect the word "originally" gives the feel that another direction is taken, some reactions give me the feeling that the state of affairs is that a group (some few hundred?) sticks together here, communicating on all kinds of subjects and that's about it. I don't see any "higher state" in this, but perhaps I have been looking at the wrong places. |
I added the "originally" qualifier to point out that the religion is intended to be essentially adaptive and the members may take it in a new direction. We can put the mission statement to a Meridion vote if you like.
Quote:| So please instead of scorning at me for not studying hard enough thru a big mass of forum and other texts direct me to the ones I have missed and ask yourselves if you can attract the attention you want if a passers-by like me, with a positive attitude after some serious studying should come to such conclusions. |
We welcome everyone with a positive attitude and constructive criticism. I'm sorry your first message was interpreted otherwise, we were probably just reacting to you calling our community "dead". I now think you have a lot to contribute. When you join Meridion I will give you a positive rating.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Anarch
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 3.91
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #10 on: 2008-12-28 18:50:28 » |
|
Quote from: Mermaid on 2008-12-22 01:41:13 fine.
after replying to the schadenfreude thread( http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=42467;start=0;boardseen=1), i have a few thoughts.
i can actually see the sense in foundations like robert lappin's as community number is strength. i cant really fault jews who use loopholes in the tax system to build communities. it is perfectly legal and primitive socities do it all the time. for example, i have seen that happen many many times in india. small groups are strengthened by their dependence on each other. it helps to form and strengthen ties. e.g. the village headman can afford to perform his daughter's wedding in a grand fashion all by himself...its not like the potter's small gift makes a world of difference, but it matters. it says to him that the poor potter wants to be part of his community. the village headman remembers the gift and returns it for the potter's son's birthday. it is the care that is invested in building bonds.
its not like jews cannot afford to send their kids to israel to learn about their heritage, but something like robert lappin's foundation helps them to network to bond amongst their own. i applaud that. it is brilliant. its only an added bonus that its a non profit and they get the tax benefit.
the problem i see with atheists organisations of all stripes..from cov to whatever it is that richard dawkins is peddaling these days is tht there is no cohesion to form communities..to get like minded people together for a common cause. instead we fight against the faithful. our energies are directed towards those who we think deserve our contempt and ridicule instead of creating something out of our enlightenment.
on that note, i'd like to propose something. for this holiday season, do something. not as an atheist, but as a rationalist. who do you think deserves your charity? have a bakesale. buy sweaters, get a cov logo on it and donate it. buy books that conform to our beliefs, slap a cov sticker on the cover and give it away as a gift....to a school..to a library. lets have raffle and the gifts can be books that are in our cov approved list. form a cov award to specific authors for their books or articles(in newspapers/writtn media) or television(for other media). or blog awards.
on a larger scale..why not start a library. stock only books that is cov-approved. lets have a scholarship. i will contribute.
lets create a community without glancing at those whose beliefs we dont subscribe to..its not about NOT being a xian or a jew or a moslem or a hindu. its about being rational. let us cultivate a community like that.
thats all i have to say.
|
I couldn't agree more. Of course many people arrive at CoV as atheists, perhaps they had some religion in their upbringing and no longer practice, possibly even openly rejecting in some measure. Perhaps they were always atheists, with or without some involvement in church. Perhaps they just live in a country where a significant percentage or even a majority simply have no religious beliefs depended on how the question is asked, and so most people they know are atheists. Perhaps they are atheists, not out of any clearly articulated reason, but simply because they are mad at their parents. Or just because they love an atheist parent. Who knows? Atheism is not a coherent ideology (as many religionists would like to characterize it). So to move into an sort of memetic coherence, we have to adopt something other than a strictly competitive approach to religion. I'm not saying don't criticize at appropriate times, I'm not telling anyone to hesitate to protect ourselves however necessary from real religiously inspired threats to human life, health, and safety. The fatwa on Salaman Rushdie, for example. Zionist insistence on a Jewish Jerusalem, for another. Pedophilic priests, and of course plenty of hideous examples of sanctioned violence, rape, and other atrocities against women, in most religions. Osama Bin Laden. The Taliban, and so on. I'm sure we've all got our favorite examples. And indeed any time someone's looney religious zeal for mythology threatens science education, I'm always on your side. But still this insistence on critical competition can't really build a community.
I do also think it bears pointing out that the earliest attempts at science were almost entirely at the patronage of religious endeavors. Yes, the church was wrong in handling its conflict with Galileo, but then it also bears noting that the only reason the Church's opinion mattered at all was that they were the ones footing his bill in the first place. And in the United States during the civil rights struggles for desegregation, the black community found its political strength through their church connections. So I don't think any of us should get too heavily invested in the dogma that religion always sucks.
I do think that a more symbiotic parasite approach through simple human conversation is the way . . . the Radiant path. We simply lead with our virtues, and our sins, and while its not chock full of supernaturalism, it does have the beauty of being simple and probably fitting into one page of text or less if you choose to edit it that way. At a minimum its just a short grocery list - pick up: Reason, Empathy, Vision - drop off: Hypocrisy, Apathy, Dogmatism. I suppose I could add "ice cream", or "safe sex", but I wanted to keep it simple. So what we have is a potentially very simple message, easier even than telling someone to read a story or a book, and much less commitment than insisting on a personal commitment to Jesus. And yet, not necessarily incompatible with some versions of those things. And so if religious people like it, they will talk to us, if they don't they won't. Let them self select. You don't have to be an atheist to start a conversation here, so I don't think a dogmatic default of competition is a wise strategy. Indeed I have only occassionally described myself as an "atheist". Usually I'm an "agnostic", sometimes "Unitarian Universalist", and even once in a long while "Sufi" just to through people off. I'm quite the flip-flopper. I'm even a Freemason. Thankfully the virtues and sins are not so mood specific.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
SecondSpeaker
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 9
Reputation: 7.90
Rate SecondSpeaker
Second to the First Speaker
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #11 on: 2008-12-29 19:49:45 » |
|
Answering gets a bit difficult. My own fault I guess. An answer would get rather lengthy and probably better a Wikipage. As I am rather busy putting up a Wiki in Dutch discussing the possibilities of creating an unbelieve and to find some people nearby who really want to invest some serious efforts I fear it will take some time before I get to it. Meanwhile my goal was to see if there was some "life" in here and if not being of some help to stir it up. I stress I am sympathetic to the goals. As far as it goes:
(1) I would think it better to remove the "originally" qualifier from your text. Although I agree the "religion" is adaptive I guess it's goal is not.
(2) I would urge you to update or remove old stuff. For instance it doesn't feel good that http://www.churchofvirus.org/wiki/InterestingBooks was updated last 6 years ago.
(3) I would have suggested as "homework" D Dennett's "Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon" to get an inkling of what's needed. Did not find any reference on it on CoV. However I saw Salamantis (notorious guy I learned) posted http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/articles/media/2004_10_29_religion.htm on http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=42464 which could serve as an abstract of the book without mentioning it (it was not written by then). The disadvantage of reading Dennett is that as always he is trying to schlepp along the most sceptic (here:religious) reader. This takes a lot of extra reading and I don't think he will ever succeed as he keeps reasoning. A hopeless task. I am preparing an abstract in Dutch on my Wiki. Maybe I will find some time to translate that and post it somewhere here. I don't agree with MoEnzime that " a more symbiotic parasite approach through simple human conversation is the way . . . the Radiant path …. At a minimum its just a short grocery list - pick up: Reason, Empathy, Vision - drop off: Hypocrisy, Apathy, Dogmatism. I suppose I could add "ice cream", or "safe sex", but I wanted to keep it simple. So what we have is a potentially very simple message, easier even than telling someone to read a story or a book, and much less commitment than insisting on a personal commitment to Jesus." Again this approach is founded on reason. It will not work that way. (Q: what is meant by "Radiant (path)")
(4) Would suggest replacing the Wiki system by MediaWiki. Apart from that: I could not get logged into the Wiki (I did not find a real place to do so and when I got asked for name and password it didn't work). Links on the "bestof" page are broken.
Sorry but time's up (1:45 here) maybe I get back.
|
|
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4289
Reputation: 8.79
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #12 on: 2008-12-29 21:19:05 » |
|
Aangenaam en welkom.
Ik ben het eens met uw opmerkingen over de verklaringen van MoEnzyme.
Mag ik alsjeblieft de URL van uw site heb?
Tot wijziging van de wiki is dit nodig om in te loggen op de BBS met een voldoende hoge Meridian rang. Ik zou voorlopig verlenen u een positieve beoordeling.
Hermit
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.47
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #13 on: 2008-12-30 13:49:26 » |
|
Kerk is van het virus naar een nieuwe taalkundige profielen? 
Sante
Fritz 
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.78
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:A rather blunt question ...
« Reply #14 on: 2008-12-30 14:45:22 » |
|
Quote from: SecondSpeaker on 2008-12-29 19:49:45
(4) Would suggest replacing the Wiki system by MediaWiki. Apart from that: I could not get logged into the Wiki (I did not find a real place to do so and when I got asked for name and password it didn't work). Links on the "bestof" page are broken.
|
I would convert to MediaWiki without hesitation if it was easy, but the conversion from PhpWiki looks pretty labour-intensive. What do you see as the main advantages that MediaWiki has over PhpWiki?
As Hermit alluded to, you will be logged into the wiki automatically if you are logged into the BBS and your Meridion reputation sufficiently high (currently 6 iirc).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
