Path: Supernews!supernews.com!usenet65.supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!hub.org!news.IAEhv.nl!gmv.es!btnet-feed3!unlisys!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.nacamar.de!news.he.net!news.rain.net!news.teleport.com!ip-pdx16-29
From: duo@teleport.com (Tom Schuler)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.pagan,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Pentagram Symbolism (was Re: The symbols of a pentogram)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 97 13:37:13 GMT
Organization: Teleport Internet Services: Public Access User
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <5nrt94$k98$3@nadine.teleport.com>
References: <19970526204600.QAA12918@ladder01.news.aol.com> <19970606024401.WAA17774@ladder02.news.aol.com> <5nlv9m$1r6@kudo20.kudonet.com> <5nmg7a$qg1$6@nadine.teleport.com> <33a025cf.0@nntp1.nac.net> <5npppp$5a9$9@nadine.teleport.com> <33a0a0d3.0@nntp1.nac.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx16-29.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
Xref: Supernews alt.magick.tyagi:12913 alt.magick:105447 alt.pagan:218350 talk.religion.misc:298082

In article <33a0a0d3.0@nntp1.nac.net>,
   chaos@crystal.palace.net (Matthew R. Sheahan) wrote:
>Tom Schuler (duo@teleport.com) wrote:

>> I think your example proves the existence of the belief in gods but I don't 
>> think it addresses the gods themselves.
>>
>> I always treat gods who come to visit as real.  After they leave, I resume 
>> my doubting.
>
>well, if you don't demand that they be physical it works fine.  

By what right would I demand that in the first place?  If I want a physical 
god, I can just pick a rock or a star and promote it to divinity, but that 
won't have much effect on the behavior of the rock.  Just me.

>gods are perfectly real in exactly the same way that governments are 
>perfectly real.  they exist because of people's participation in them, and 
>they're never going to show up on your doorstep -- though of course their 
>representatives may do so with varying degrees of frequency -- but it may not 
>necessarily moot one much to act as if they don't exist.

When the government comes to visit, it gets exactly the same treatment from 
me.  The vehicles which embody the god or government are, in many ways, 
irrelevant.

>> There is ample evidence that subjective experience is still a form 
>> of reality, although it is an essentially different kind of reality than 
>> physical phenomena.
>
>that's true.  but physical phenomena are really a fairly uninteresting and
>pallid level of reality.  i don't think what's there matters nearly as much
>as what we think about it.  

Physical phenomena are not as obliging to our whims as immaterial phenomena 
are, but I think they can be just as interesting, if you don't insist on 
trying to make them dance to your tune.  They will, if you understand them 
well enough, but that requires a lot of effort on our part.  Rocks just aren't 
naturally friendly items.

>but however many neat tricks we've learned to do through assidious
>study of physical phenomena, we have yet to invent a pill which gives a
>person an integrated, healthy and effective approach to living life as an
>empowered individual.

That would be the most boring thing I could think of having.  Where's the fun 
in having happiness served up in a capsule?  I prefer to court and seduce my 
lover, not just pick her up and pay $50.  I prefer to build my own computer 
than buy a beige box from a kid wearing a cheap tie.  It may be more work, but 
it pays off.

Getting there is at least half of the fun.