Re: virus: Science and Religion

Martin Traynor (
Thu, 26 Sep 1996 12:22:03 +0000


On 25 Sep 96 at 13:04, Reed Konsler wrote:

> What is the difference between the universe in which there is no absolute
> truth and the universe in which there is absolute truth, but it is
> impossible to perceive objectively and with any certainty? Said another
> way: What is the differece between inherent ambiguity and "as if"
> ambiguity.

The difference is subjective.

> >Yes. That's why I decided to change the way I read this list. I have
> >decided to look at memes only-- not their content--- and work from
> >there.
> This is an interesting idea. It sound a bit like deconstructionism. Could
> you give an example of how you distill this out? You're welcome to use me
> as an example (ug, kind of like being psychoanalyzed by your girlfriend) if
> you try an use one of my lucid posts.

Yes, I'd be interested in seeing that too. (BTW, never go out with a
psychologist. I do and it's a living hell ;).

>...Religions are viruses of
> the mind. They are parasites...

I would argue that the successful ones are symbionts.

> But why is Star Trek less significant than Catholicsim?

Personally speaking it isn't. I've learned valuable lessons from both
James T. and the pope on how not to behave.

> I'm absoutely not against spiritual experience...I
> just want my delusions to have equal weight with the Pope's. After all, I
> have as much proof.

Well said. May I borrow that quote?

Version: 2.6.2i
Comment: Requires PGP version 2.6 or later.


Martz <>
For my PGP key, email me with 'Send public key' as subject