Precisely what is wrong with today's dogmatic materialism

[Tyrion]

As a thorough remedy for your facile science credulity and your dismissal of philosophical arguments I would suggest reading the book Aping Mankind by Raymond Tallis, a neuroscientist who obviously has no religious interests to pursue on the issue since he is also an atheist.

But of course, if you are not interested in seriously studying the problematic of the mind, you should definitely refrain from reading the book.

Does he offer an actual alternative hypothesis, which can be researched and verified? Does he offer answers to those questions I asked at the beginning of the thread. Presumably you already read that book you recommend. If there are answers in that book, it might be worthwhile to read it. But it is too frequent to see empty posts, which send someone on a wild goose chase, by recommending some books. One would prefer to see a short summary first.

 

[inocente]

Given that (predictable) response, the tone of my previous post may have been justified after all.

I think not but if you want to lecture rather than debate then fine, my dopamine and serotonin levels are quite high today, or in non-brain chemistry terms I’m in a good mood.

I read a review of Tallis’ book: “This kind of personhood – the capacity, in fact the compulsion, to bring things together into some kind of coherent narrative, without which experience is not just senseless, but almost impossible, is what he believes science cannot now explain. Anyone tempted to suppose that science has explained it even in principle – and that means almost all of us – should read him, and realise we’re wrong.”

I agree, we have a long way to go. Where I disagree is with those who say we shouldn’t even start out because it might challenge their beliefs.

 

[edwest2]

I cannot help if you use your own nomenclature, which is nonsensical to others. You guys cannot even be consistent upon what the “soul” is supposed to be. Sometimes it is a “form”, other times it is an “animating principle”, yet other times it is the source of “intelligence” and “decision making”… which is supposed to be “immortal”… It would be nice if you would first figure out what you are talking about.

Have you ever heard that the whole is (usually) more than a simple sum of the parts? Is a house simply a pile of bricks, some iron-work, some wooden parts and a little glass here and there? Or is there a special arrangement of these parts, which will render the result more than just a “pile of bricks”?

I hope you noticed my smiley. The logical end of dogmatic materialism.

1. NOTHING about a human being is fixed. NOTHING.
2. Your brain is a biological device, nothing more. It only reacts to data (name removed by moderator)uts. Right? Wrong? MAYBE, just maybe, we can agree on a few totally material/functional rules. But as we all know, people do murder, rape and do other things to people, rules or no rules.
3. Sexual identity is not fixed. At the end of the day, some “experts” will tell you that pleasure is pleasure, and you will find ads in magazine (no names, please) like: "Bi-curious? Contact - a P.O. Box or e-mail.
4. Race has been abandoned according to some experts. There was a post about this not long ago. I referred the poster to a book about Forensic Anthropology.
5. Marriage, divorce? Whatever. Do what you want to do. Cross-dressing? What’s the problem?
6. And those who worship science as the ONLY source of knowledge, you just need someone’s OK to push certain laws through. Gay marriage and gay adoption are two good examples. Why? Because the APA said so, your honor.

Transgendered? Just got crossed off the list according to the APA.

ncregister.com/daily-news/psychiatrys-new-normal-transgendered-persons/

Next in line: “minor attracted persons.”

1. Progressive. A lie if ever I saw one. Those who worship the god Change are, by definition, Progressives. Science will give us everything, including psychiatry. Just get in front of a judge, with enough experts, and you can legalize euthanasia and other forms of killing like in-vitro fertilization. Some of those embryos - unique human beings - will be discarded anyway, so why not cut them up and use them for embryonic stem cell research?

Yep, all they want is “progress” but ONLY if it is agreeable to them. No debate allowed. They’ve got the answers.

“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” - William F. Buckley, Jr.

As far as I’m concerned, liberal and progressive are interchangeable.

1. Let’s reengineer the social order. Sure, a new guy comes up with a “new” idea and drags a country/countries into it. Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler… Yeah, once we get rid of certain things/people, it will all fall into place. Our leader is right!

From a Catholic standpoint: right is wrong, good is bad. Everything goes. The current propaganda line: “They’re not hurting anybody” Yeah, let’s topple the current social order and what’s been working for millennia and see what happens.

The only dogmatic materialism “sin” is boredom. The god Change demands… well, change. Change is exciting! Change is fun! Give us more and more and more distractions so we can ignore or try to replace the old because we’re right - guaranteed.

Sorry you mistook my hyperbole for what I think. The above contains everything, but I’m open to questions/comments.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Tyrion]

As a thorough remedy for your facile science credulity and your dismissal of philosophical arguments I would suggest reading the book Aping Mankind by Raymond Tallis, a neuroscientist who obviously has no religious interests to pursue on the issue since he is also an atheist.

But of course, if you are not interested in seriously studying the problematic of the mind, you should definitely refrain from reading the book.

A second answer is due. I went and watched his YouTube presentation. youtube.com/watch?v=U5baL9oh430 - one hour and 18 mins of wasted time. It was - as I suspected - without any constructive offer of alternative explanation. Then I went and started to look for criticisms, and I found some interesting observations. For example: adamus.nl/deconstructing-raymond-tallis/. No surprise there. Tallis is just another one, who likes to have his voice heard, to criticize others without offering real evidence for his criticisms. In other words, just another hoax.

 

[Tyrion]

I hope you noticed my smiley.

Sorry, that smiley was only an indication that your are patiently waiting for the discussion to continue… popcorn in the audience.

Sorry you mistook my hyperbole for what I think. The above contains everything, but I’m open to questions/comments.

I have absolutely no idea what you wanted to express in your post.

But let me answer something I understood. It pertains to “progress”. There is a wonderful and true observation about it. It goes: “There are two kinds of fools. One says: ‘this is old and therefore good’. The other one says: ‘This is new and therefore better’.” I hope you see my agreement. Nothing is good, just because it is old (not even good wine), and nothing is better just because it is new. Everything must be evaluated on its own grounds.

The real scientific approach is never “dogmatic”. It is always open to the possibility that one made an error either in the observation, or the interpretation or in the hypothesis forming. It never assumes that the current hypothesis will never be overthrown.

For the time being, there has never been an alternative offered to the biological interpretation. That does no mean that such an alternative will never be offered, and substantiated. I presented a few questions at the beginning of the thread. No one seems to be willing to “pick up the glove” - so to speak. As long as there is no competing hypothesis offered, all the “criticisms” firmly belong to the class called “baloney” or “bovine waste product”.

 

[LisaA]

I hope you noticed my smiley. The logical end of dogmatic materialism.

1. NOTHING about a human being is fixed. NOTHING.
2. Your brain is a biological device, nothing more. It only reacts to data (name removed by moderator)uts. Right? Wrong? MAYBE, just maybe, we can agree on a few totally material/functional rules. But as we all know, people do murder, rape and do other things to people, rules or no rules.
3. Sexual identity is not fixed. At the end of the day, some “experts” will tell you that pleasure is pleasure, and you will find ads in magazine (no names, please) like: "Bi-curious? Contact - a P.O. Box or e-mail.
4. Race has been abandoned according to some experts. There was a post about this not long ago. I referred the poster to a book about Forensic Anthropology.
5. Marriage, divorce? Whatever. Do what you want to do. Cross-dressing? What’s the problem?
6. And those who worship science as the ONLY source of knowledge, you just need someone’s OK to push certain laws through. Gay marriage and gay adoption are two good examples. Why? Because the APA said so, your honor.

Transgendered? Just got crossed off the list according to the APA.

ncregister.com/daily-news/psychiatrys-new-normal-transgendered-persons/

Next in line: “minor attracted persons.”

1. Progressive. A lie if ever I saw one. Those who worship the god Change are, by definition, Progressives. Science will give us everything, including psychiatry. Just get in front of a judge, with enough experts, and you can legalize euthanasia and other forms of killing like in-vitro fertilization. Some of those embryos - unique human beings - will be discarded anyway, so why not cut them up and use them for embryonic stem cell research?

Yep, all they want is “progress” but ONLY if it is agreeable to them. No debate allowed. They’ve got the answers.

“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” - William F. Buckley, Jr.

As far as I’m concerned, liberal and progressive are interchangeable.

1. Let’s reengineer the social order. Sure, a new guy comes up with a “new” idea and drags a country/countries into it. Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler… Yeah, once we get rid of certain things/people, it will all fall into place. Our leader is right!

From a Catholic standpoint: right is wrong, good is bad. Everything goes. The current propaganda line: “They’re not hurting anybody” Yeah, let’s topple the current social order and what’s been working for millennia and see what happens.

The only dogmatic materialism “sin” is boredom. The god Change demands… well, change. Change is exciting! Change is fun! Give us more and more and more distractions so we can ignore or try to replace the old because we’re right - guaranteed.

Sorry you mistook my hyperbole for what I think. The above contains everything, but I’m open to questions/comments.

Peace,
Ed

Marvelous Ed thank you! A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Those who have made gods of the mind and of science may well be in for a big surprise.

Tryion I’ve read your posts and your little tag line. Why on earth are you on a CATHOLIC forum demanding secular answers? I’ve seen your kind before my friend. I do not feed trolls. But I appreciate those like Ed who indicate that there is much more to a human being than a bag of chemicals responding to an electronic current. As Dr Alexander noted, there is no scientific explanation for conscious. He said we dont even have the first sentence to describe it. I would take the observations of a neurosurgeon over yours.

Have a nice day.
Lisa

 

[Al_Moritz]

For example: adamus.nl/deconstructing-raymond-tallis/. No surprise there. Tallis is just another one, who likes to have his voice heard, to criticize others without offering real evidence for his criticisms. In other words, just another hoax.

That review is pointless, since it does nothing to counter Tallis’ criticisms. I wonder if the reviewer even has read the book instead of just glancing over it. Of course he concludes not only with the mantra of ‘scientific progress’, but some silly ad hominems (“any length of shrieking irrationality to preserve this personal delusion”) on top of that. Pathetic really.

Another example of a closed-minded dogmatic atheist not being able to face in a proper manner counter-views that refuse to yield to prevailing scientism.

 

[Tyrion]

That review is pointless, since it does nothing to counter Tallis’ criticisms. I wonder if the reviewer even has read the book instead of just glancing over it. Of course he concludes not only with the mantra of ‘scientific progress’, but some silly ad hominems (“any length of shrieking irrationality to preserve this personal delusion”) on top of that. Pathetic really.

The fact is that there is nothing to “counter”. A few empty remarks, disparaging the biological approach. Looks like that no one is interested in making a constructive answer to the real question: “what is the alternative hypothesis”? What kind of evidence is there for it? That is what is really pathetic. You shy away from addressing the problem. Why?

Unfortunately I wasted that 1 hour 18 minutes to listen to his empty blabbering. There was no “meat”, just “fluff”. He is as much of a “neuroscientist” as Behe is a biologist.

Another example of a closed-minded dogmatic atheist not being able to face in a proper manner counter-views that refuse to yield to prevailing scientism.

Gotta love calling others “closed minded” and “dogmatic”… pot? kettle??? I am not aware of anyone being stupid enough to assert that ALL the problems of the world can and will be solved by the empirical method (though it may be that there is someone in a loony bin). At the bare minimum, none of the problems of the abstract sciences will ever be solved empirically. As such the “scientism” you guys love to denounce is just a figment of your imagination. It does not appear anywhere in reality. The proper terminology for your fallacy is “red herring”.

 

[Tyrion]

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

Actually… “a waist is a terrible thing to mind”… is the correct expression.

Those who have made gods of the mind and of science may well be in for a big surprise.

When?

Tryion I’ve read your posts and your little tag line. Why on earth are you on a CATHOLIC forum demanding secular answers?

First, I do NOT demand, I ask for… (why the need to misrepresent others? Does it feel good?) Second, I heard all the “faith” based answers before, and they are boring. I am simply curious if there are “rational” arguments out there. Because no matter what some people say, faith and reason are incompatible. If something is rational, it needs NO “faith”. If it needs “faith”, it is no longer rational. So far my wait was mostly fruitless. Once in a blue moon I meet a rational opponent. But most of the posters are already on my ignore list. And the list keeps growing.

But I appreciate those like Ed who indicate that there is much more to a human being than a bag of chemicals responding to an electronic current.

Another empty remark. Answer my questions at the beginning of the thread, and we shall be in business. What else is there? How do you know it? What is the evidence for it? Just don’t waste my time with “revelations”.

 

[edwest2]

Marvelous Ed thank you! A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Those who have made gods of the mind and of science may well be in for a big surprise.

Tryion I’ve read your posts and your little tag line. Why on earth are you on a CATHOLIC forum demanding secular answers? I’ve seen your kind before my friend. I do not feed trolls. But I appreciate those like Ed who indicate that there is much more to a human being than a bag of chemicals responding to an electronic current. As Dr Alexander noted, there is no scientific explanation for conscious. He said we dont even have the first sentence to describe it. I would take the observations of a neurosurgeon over yours.

Have a nice day.
Lisa

Thank you, Lisa. The crazy thing is: both the US and China are working toward building human-like brains. Without sounding alarmist, robotic bodies already exist.

“dogmatic materialism” - as promoted by some - focuses only on secularism. Religion needs to go. Show me the math, the tests, etc. Right now, dogmatic materialism results in:

“If we cannot have common values, common truths, sufficient communication on the essentials of human life–how to live how to respond to the great challenges of human life–then true society becomes impossible.” Pope Benedict

Commentary from The Practical Catholic:

"How true this is. Where there is no communication, no culture, no shared experience, there is no society; because there is no people. There remains only a vast and foreboding, unforgiving sea of individuals ready to crash upon each other and the world with the slightest wind. Without a common basis, we have not the vaulted pluralism we’re taught to embrace, but Babel, in all the confusion and madness of a society with no binding forces. Already we are seeing the tensions of this fragmentation breaking out across cultures.

“Without common values and truths, such as in the socieites we find ourselves in, we find the fabric of society torn like Joseph’s cloak, by a great many tribes which would like to lay claim to the title of favored. Leftists, conservatives, anarchists, nihilists, secularists, objectivists, the shallow, the entertainers, the entertained, all vying for control against each other. Tribalism can indeed spawn differentiation, but without some common ground, and in the face of increasing jargon not only in the academies but in the cultures; we shall be left with madness. In the end this tribalism can only result in the decline of all their claims, and the alienation of one from the other. Babel is the happenstance when society tries to become God.”

Pope Benedict:

“We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires. The church must defend itself against threats such as “radical individualism” and “vague religious mysticism”. [emphasis added]”

Commentary from The Practical Catholic

“Pope Benedict does not play language games, he is unconcerned with the postmodernist’s corner on untruth. Neither should we be. Notice how he calls relativism a “dictatorship” instead of agreeing that no values and no Truth are the way forward for society. What many fail to recognize is that imposing nihilism and arbitrary tribalism is a form of dictatorship. Where untruth or half truth is the common order, there can only be oppression. Political correctness has asked us to abandon our value-laden language and to pick up a new language proper to the secular forum. However, this secular newspeak is value-laden against the traditional claims of the Western world and as such, is a poison rather than a new order. We can and should bring our own conviction laden language to the table, if we’re going to have any sort of real dialogue at all. Misinformation and restrained convictions are not the proper building blocks for a democracy.”

Truth is not limited to one realm - science. Truth, as given by the Church, is a key component. Even if neuroscience doesn’t reach a conclusion now, a lot of people still need the Whole Truth to live a life that is good for them and society in general.

Peace,
Ed

 

[LisaA]

Thank you, Lisa. The crazy thing is: both the US and China are working toward building human-like brains. Without sounding alarmist, robotic bodies already exist.

“dogmatic materialism” - as promoted by some - focuses only on secularism. Religion needs to go. Show me the math, the tests, etc. Right now, dogmatic materialism results in:

“If we cannot have common values, common truths, sufficient communication on the essentials of human life–how to live how to respond to the great challenges of human life–then true society becomes impossible.” Pope Benedict

Commentary from The Practical Catholic:

"How true this is. Where there is no communication, no culture, no shared experience, there is no society; because there is no people. There remains only a vast and foreboding, unforgiving sea of individuals ready to crash upon each other and the world with the slightest wind. Without a common basis, we have not the vaulted pluralism we’re taught to embrace, but Babel, in all the confusion and madness of a society with no binding forces. Already we are seeing the tensions of this fragmentation breaking out across cultures.

“Without common values and truths, such as in the socieites we find ourselves in, we find the fabric of society torn like Joseph’s cloak, by a great many tribes which would like to lay claim to the title of favored. Leftists, conservatives, anarchists, nihilists, secularists, objectivists, the shallow, the entertainers, the entertained, all vying for control against each other. Tribalism can indeed spawn differentiation, but without some common ground, and in the face of increasing jargon not only in the academies but in the cultures; we shall be left with madness. In the end this tribalism can only result in the decline of all their claims, and the alienation of one from the other. Babel is the happenstance when society tries to become God.”

Pope Benedict:

“We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires. The church must defend itself against threats such as “radical individualism” and “vague religious mysticism”. [emphasis added]”

Commentary from The Practical Catholic

“Pope Benedict does not play language games, he is unconcerned with the postmodernist’s corner on untruth. Neither should we be. Notice how he calls relativism a “dictatorship” instead of agreeing that no values and no Truth are the way forward for society. What many fail to recognize is that imposing nihilism and arbitrary tribalism is a form of dictatorship. Where untruth or half truth is the common order, there can only be oppression. Political correctness has asked us to abandon our value-laden language and to pick up a new language proper to the secular forum. However, this secular newspeak is value-laden against the traditional claims of the Western world and as such, is a poison rather than a new order. We can and should bring our own conviction laden language to the table, if we’re going to have any sort of real dialogue at all. Misinformation and restrained convictions are not the proper building blocks for a democracy.”

Truth is not limited to one realm - science. Truth, as given by the Church, is a key component. Even if neuroscience doesn’t reach a conclusion now, a lot of people still need the Whole Truth to live a life that is good for them and society in general.

Peace,
Ed

Another wonderful post and thank you for the reference to the Practical Catholic. I have a few treasured site where I look for wisdom.

It dawned on me that the Left, the atheist crowd, and others in that line of thinking want to make us INDISTINGUISHABLE…from each other–men marrying men is the same as men marrying women, self determined gender, demeaning of male and female roles, actiions, dress or vocation. They also seem to want us to be indistinguishable from animals, thus we must respond to our animal nature, our animal desires and our animal pleasures. Oddly enough, ANIMALS have no problem in males being males and females being females.

Secularism seems also to rob joy and beauty from our lives. Even compare religious art of say the Renaissance with what passes for “art” today…I find it more disturbing than beautiful. Music as well has degenerated, no melody, filthy lyrics.

Everything appealing not to our better angels but to our base nature.

Our faith is what keeps us above this fate in my opinion.

Lisa

 

[humble_catholic]

According to this site, the term NDE was only coined in the '70s. Presumably people either never had them before then or they called them something else, like visions (apparently 25% of people who have them are nowhere near death at the time).

NDEs are very fashionable right now, the current vogue being for floating apparitions, perhaps influenced by the occult notion of astral projection or superhero comic books.

Other than the anecdotes written to sell books there is no evidence that NDEs are anything other than delusions and false memories.

Whereas non-scientists either just accept or reject NDEs, scientists study them to try to understand and explain them. This is basically why science will explain the mind when philosophers couldn’t - scientists are not satisfied with philosophers’ comforting tales.

Inocente, my bad, I should have specifically said veredical Nde’s which are Nde’s in which a patient has seen or heard things that are either in his field of hearing and vision that he could hear or see I’m his present condition or hearing things that are not within his field or vision or hearing.

A great example of this is the nde of Pamela Reynolds .

youtu.be/6R654H_qOvA

Just because people didn’t experience these things as much in the past doesn’t mean they aren’t real. Modern medicines ability to keep the body and brain alive or fresh has increased dramatically during the last 100 and this is most likely why we have more great examples to work with.

You cannot just call veredical Nde’s anecdotal because of the independent corroboration of the evidence by non biased witnesses.

The evidence for veredical Nde’s has gotten nothing but strong through the years

 

[humble_catholic]

Another wonderful post and thank you for the reference to the Practical Catholic. I have a few treasured site where I look for wisdom.

It dawned on me that the Left, the atheist crowd, and others in that line of thinking want to make us INDISTINGUISHABLE…from each other–men marrying men is the same as men marrying women, self determined gender, demeaning of male and female roles, actiions, dress or vocation. They also seem to want us to be indistinguishable from animals, thus we must respond to our animal nature, our animal desires and our animal pleasures. Oddly enough, ANIMALS have no problem in males being males and females being females.

Secularism seems also to rob joy and beauty from our lives. Even compare religious art of say the Renaissance with what passes for “art” today…I find it more disturbing than beautiful. Music as well has degenerated, no melody, filthy lyrics.

Everything appealing not to our better angels but to our base nature.

Our faith is what keeps us above this fate in my opinion.

Lisa

Lisa this is called moral relativism which is the belief that morality is subject and there is no objective right or wrong . Using this line of thinking to the extreme a moral relativist can say that while rap is wrong in our culture, it may be perfectly ok in another culture.
Moral relativity leads to nothing but chaos.
Almost all people will recognize that there are acts that are objectively evil, but the moral relativist-atheist must deny what their heart is telling them because it goes against their worldview, but u can occasionally see them slip when they say “this is absolutely wrong because it just is”

 

[LisaA]

Lisa this is called moral relativism which is the belief that morality is subject and there is no objective right or wrong . Using this line of thinking to the extreme a moral relativist can say that while rap is wrong in our culture, it may be perfectly ok in another culture.
Moral relativity leads to nothing but chaos.
Almost all people will recognize that there are acts that are objectively evil, but the moral relativist-atheist must deny what their heart is telling them because it goes against their worldview, but u can occasionally see them slip when they say “this is absolutely wrong because it just is”

Of course we can always quote that wonderful line “It all depends on what the definition of is, is…”

Relativism is truly a frightening spector but has wide appeal. What other philosophy would allow the 60s mantra “If it feels good do it” to become law.

Lisa

 

[edwest2]

Another wonderful post and thank you for the reference to the Practical Catholic. I have a few treasured site where I look for wisdom.

It dawned on me that the Left, the atheist crowd, and others in that line of thinking want to make us INDISTINGUISHABLE…from each other–men marrying men is the same as men marrying women, self determined gender, demeaning of male and female roles, actiions, dress or vocation. They also seem to want us to be indistinguishable from animals, thus we must respond to our animal nature, our animal desires and our animal pleasures. Oddly enough, ANIMALS have no problem in males being males and females being females.

Secularism seems also to rob joy and beauty from our lives. Even compare religious art of say the Renaissance with what passes for “art” today…I find it more disturbing than beautiful. Music as well has degenerated, no melody, filthy lyrics.

Everything appealing not to our better angels but to our base nature.

Our faith is what keeps us above this fate in my opinion.

Lisa

You’re right Lisa. Prior to 1968, the media reflected and respected our values. Our Federal and local governments did too. In the Five Year Plan from 1968 to 1973, the media was subverted, our culture was subverted and our Supreme Court, which was doing a fine job, was subverted when it - not the people - legalized abortion. The worst you could legally get regarding dirty magazines in 1968 was Playboy, plus a handful of girlie magazines sold behind the counter, and which only showed partial or full nudity, but by the 1970s, you had stores selling images of prostitutes engaged in graphic intercourse.

I lived through it and I could not believe the change. As the 70s passed into the 80s, the media gradually (that’s the key) turned its spotlight away from the good and moral to focus on the dysfunctional person or family or other groups of people. Even cartoons were eventually included. And year after year, it kept getting worse.

The Catholic Church has been called ‘the greatest truth-telling institution on earth.’ I believe this 100% and those of us who know that truth will recognize the untruths whenever we see them, and let’s encourage one another as the Bible tells us.

Art? Oh my God. When I realized that appreciating “art” meant accepting nonsense and junk as worthy of being shown in galleries and museums, that is why I quit college. To paraphrase: Me: “What was that spiral of duct tape on the floor?” My life-drawing instructor: “That’s a man’s life!” Uh huh. I’m not paying money to think contrary to reality. And I still keep up with the “fine art” scene and nothing’s changed.

Music? I have to roll up the window of my car when someone pulls up next to me at a stoplight. And movies? What happened to beauty, tenderness, and sincere love? No, it’s man at his worst and everything is Xtreme. Violence in the past was getting shot and falling over, today, too often, it’s about long, drawn out, graphic, brutal, cold, heartless killing, sometimes for sport. Or Dexter. Poor guy, he’s compelled to kidnap people and cut them up, followed by putting it all in a trash bag. I’m still waiting for the show about that lovable family of cannibals next door who have to be discreet about their eating habits.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I cannot help if you use your own nomenclature, which is nonsensical to others. You guys cannot even be consistent upon what the “soul” is supposed to be. Sometimes it is a “form”, other times it is an “animating principle”, yet other times it is the source of “intelligence” and “decision making”… which is supposed to be “immortal”… It would be nice if you would first figure out what you are talking about.

What is contradictory about the soul being the form of the body, the animating principle of the body, and having faculties of intellect and will? Surely something can be looked at from different angles while still being the same thing.

 

[LisaA]

You’re right Lisa. Prior to 1968, the media reflected and respected our values. Our Federal and local governments did too. In the Five Year Plan from 1968 to 1973, the media was subverted, our culture was subverted and our Supreme Court, which was doing a fine job, was subverted when it - not the people - legalized abortion. The worst you could legally get regarding dirty magazines in 1968 was Playboy, plus a handful of girlie magazines sold behind the counter, and which only showed partial or full nudity, but by the 1970s, you had stores selling images of prostitutes engaged in graphic intercourse.

I lived through it and I could not believe the change. As the 70s passed into the 80s, the media gradually (that’s the key) turned its spotlight away from the good and moral to focus on the dysfunctional person or family or other groups of people. Even cartoons were eventually included. And year after year, it kept getting worse.

The Catholic Church has been called ‘the greatest truth-telling institution on earth.’ I believe this 100% and those of us who know that truth will recognize the untruths whenever we see them, and let’s encourage one another as the Bible tells us.

Art? Oh my God. When I realized that appreciating “art” meant accepting nonsense and junk as worthy of being shown in galleries and museums, that is why I quit college. To paraphrase: Me: “What was that spiral of duct tape on the floor?” My life-drawing instructor: “That’s a man’s life!” Uh huh. I’m not paying money to think contrary to reality. And I still keep up with the “fine art” scene and nothing’s changed.

Music? I have to roll up the window of my car when someone pulls up next to me at a stoplight. And movies? What happened to beauty, tenderness, and sincere love? No, it’s man at his worst and everything is Xtreme. Violence in the past was getting shot and falling over, today, too often, it’s about long, drawn out, graphic, brutal, cold, heartless killing, sometimes for sport. Or Dexter. Poor guy, he’s compelled to kidnap people and cut them up, followed by putting it all in a trash bag. I’m still waiting for the show about that lovable family of cannibals next door who have to be discreet about their eating habits.

Peace,
Ed

Heavens yes…remember when you considered the underwear section of the Sears catalog racy? I think ironically the Feminist movement has a LOT to do with today’s ills. It was supposed to free women but in fact the “equal rights” started morphing into “the same.” Whether it was dress or language or vocation, suddenly we wanted a bunch of She Men with foul mouths and never seen in a skirt. Women were “freed” to have sex without strings attached…just like men thanks to contraception. Except that it didn’t always work and so we needed abortion to take care of the er…problem? Oh and those who had babies couldn’t count on the males who impregnated them. After all, we’re “free” to be you and me…with apologies to Marlo Thomas…cough cough.

What passes for art is in my opinion a big hoax but no one has the courage to tell them that the Emperor Has No Clothes. I visited the Vatican with its amazing collection of every form of art from ancient Egypt to ancient Greece and Rome, through the Renaissance and even the Impresionist era…all the way to Modern Art. Room after room of beautiful, uplifting portraits and sculptures, celebrating the best in human creation. Then near the end was the modern art room…I could tell that the Vatican had the same opinion as did I. Ugly modern paintings and sculptures sort of jammed into a room like the afterthought they were. I am sure they were valuable but stick figures or chaotic patterns to the Sistine Chapel? Oy vey!

I guess it’s Counter Culture but I do not know the appeal of ugliness. Even the best selling novels today are pornographic or violent. We are supposed to celebrate disturbing images and ugliness? I guess it goes hand in hand with the violence of abortion and gang wars, the squalor of slums and gradual (as you noted) destruction of the family thorugh government programs and redefining marriage.

The Church has the Truth and as they say Truth is Beauty and Beauty Truth, I’ll take this any day.

Lisa

 

[edwest2]

Heavens yes…remember when you considered the underwear section of the Sears catalog racy? I think ironically the Feminist movement has a LOT to do with today’s ills. It was supposed to free women but in fact the “equal rights” started morphing into “the same.” Whether it was dress or language or vocation, suddenly we wanted a bunch of She Men with foul mouths and never seen in a skirt. Women were “freed” to have sex without strings attached…just like men thanks to contraception. Except that it didn’t always work and so we needed abortion to take care of the er…problem? Oh and those who had babies couldn’t count on the males who impregnated them. After all, we’re “free” to be you and me…with apologies to Marlo Thomas…cough cough.

What passes for art is in my opinion a big hoax but no one has the courage to tell them that the Emperor Has No Clothes. I visited the Vatican with its amazing collection of every form of art from ancient Egypt to ancient Greece and Rome, through the Renaissance and even the Impresionist era…all the way to Modern Art. Room after room of beautiful, uplifting portraits and sculptures, celebrating the best in human creation. Then near the end was the modern art room…I could tell that the Vatican had the same opinion as did I. Ugly modern paintings and sculptures sort of jammed into a room like the afterthought they were. I am sure they were valuable but stick figures or chaotic patterns to the Sistine Chapel? Oy vey!

I guess it’s Counter Culture but I do not know the appeal of ugliness. Even the best selling novels today are pornographic or violent. We are supposed to celebrate disturbing images and ugliness? I guess it goes hand in hand with the violence of abortion and gang wars, the squalor of slums and gradual (as you noted) destruction of the family thorugh government programs and redefining marriage.

The Church has the Truth and as they say Truth is Beauty and Beauty Truth, I’ll take this any day.

Lisa

As an older friend of mine told me about those clean and wholesome TV shows from the 1950s and early 1960s, like Leave it to Beaver, or I Love Lucy or Father Knows Best: “You could never live up to that.” He didn’t like them because, somehow, he thought he just couldn’t acquire some good role models and actually live like that. No, I’m not saying the time period was perfect and of course people sinned, but my God, it wasn’t splashed all over magazine covers.

OPEN SCANDAL was not encouraged. Gossip was wrong. We were never taught we were better, we were just taught right from wrong, and that right and wrong didn’t end when we became “mature adults.” If I’m going to have kids, I need to walk the walk and do the right thing not just say one thing and do another. Again, I’m not saying people were perfect but even as a boy, I could see my adult neighbors MAKE THE EFFORT to control their words in public, to be friendly and polite, and to help each other out. No, we did not all go to the same Church but we shared common values and we were “all on the same page,” except for a few bad apples who we were told to be polite to but otherwise avoid. No, none of these people seemed to want others in their life and they could be mean at times. But we weren’t mean in return. Personally, it just confused me.

In the late 1960s, the counter-culture wanted society reformed into their image and likeness and wanted us to love what they loved. Mostly, deformed sexual relationships and any mix or match group of couples you could think of, with benefits. So the goals today are the same as 1968: sex with anybody, legalize marijuana, forget marriage, easy divorce, lots of contraception and the ultimate form of contraception - abortion. Nudity, euthanasia, turn Christians into villains, hypersexualize everything, starting at 5 years old and up, etc.

And yes, the radical feminists who launched the National Organization for Women in 1965 were definitely a part of what went wrong. Just look at NOW today. now.org/

Now, we are the new counter-culture. And with Pope Francis leading the way, along with a Cardinal or two and some priests and Archbishops, we are righting the ship as I write this. God always leaves a remnant. Always.

Peace,
Ed

 

[LisaA]

As an older friend of mine told me about those clean and wholesome TV shows from the 1950s and early 1960s, like Leave it to Beaver, or I Love Lucy or Father Knows Best: “You could never live up to that.” He didn’t like them because, somehow, he thought he just couldn’t acquire some good role models and actually live like that. No, I’m not saying the time period was perfect and of course people sinned, but my God, it wasn’t splashed all over magazine covers.

OPEN SCANDAL was not encouraged. Gossip was wrong. We were never taught we were better, we were just taught right from wrong, and that right and wrong didn’t end when we became “mature adults.” If I’m going to have kids, I need to walk the walk and do the right thing not just say one thing and do another. Again, I’m not saying people were perfect but even as a boy, I could see my adult neighbors MAKE THE EFFORT to control their words in public, to be friendly and polite, and to help each other out. No, we did not all go to the same Church but we shared common values and we were “all on the same page,” except for a few bad apples who we were told to be polite to but otherwise avoid. No, none of these people seemed to want others in their life and they could be mean at times. But we weren’t mean in return. Personally, it just confused me.

In the late 1960s, the counter-culture wanted society reformed into their image and likeness and wanted us to love what they loved. Mostly, deformed sexual relationships and any mix or match group of couples you could think of, with benefits. So the goals today are the same as 1968: sex with anybody, legalize marijuana, forget marriage, easy divorce, lots of contraception and the ultimate form of contraception - abortion. Nudity, euthanasia, turn Christians into villains, hypersexualize everything, starting at 5 years old and up, etc.

And yes, the radical feminists who launched the National Organization for Women in 1965 were definitely a part of what went wrong. Just look at NOW today. now.org/

Now, we are the new counter-culture. And with Pope Francis leading the way, along with a Cardinal or two and some priests and Archbishops, we are righting the ship as I write this. God always leaves a remnant. Always.

Peace,
Ed

Well I could also tell you about those wholesome shows that I grew up with . They were funny and entertaining and had an uplifting messages. You knew who the good guys and the bad guys were!

I didn’t know NOW still existed! Oh my a trip through that website was like time travel. Of course the big thing is those evil Conservatives’ War on Women. I guess people believe this? Oh and Lesbian rights…to do what exactly? From Rachel Maddow to Ellen, they seem to be doing whatever they want.

I love your last sentence…the remnant survives and is the foundation for turning the tide of this descent into darkness of secularism and relativism. Thank you!

Lisa

 

[edwest2]

You’re welcome.

Correction: NOW was founded in 1966.

Ed