Timothy Bates wrote:
> > In regards to a theology of gods or Gods, they are not entirely without use.
> > If I find that a belief in a particular God or set of gods is useful to my
> > overall development, how is this a bad thing?
>
> How is it a bad thing? It is bad for you when you make decisions that are
> based on a faulty reality. It is for us when your spirituality convinces you
> that we are blasphemers. It is for you again if another religionist decides
> that your God is competing with hers.
Speak for yourself. Only I decide what is "bad" for me. Blashemphy? Who is speaking of blasphemy? You are confusing 'experimental' mental states with religious dogma. More importantly, short of this post, my own experiences are mine to cherish in the privacy of my own mind. As I stated quite clearly, I do not believe any insights I gain in this type of work as TRUE, nor do I run around and proselytize those beliefs to others. Therefore if there is a danger, it is only a self-inflicted one upon myself. In the spirit of transhumanist self-responsibility, it is my own risk to take.
> >Internally believing in anything "as if
> > true" has its uses, no matter how absurd the belief.
>
> Saying something has its uses is meaningless: the question is what are the
> uses? what are their relative costs? More to the point, can you hold that
> belief consistently in the context of all of our knowledge and does it
> maximize the rate of knowledge acrual? History has given us repeated
> demonstrations that it effectively minimizes progress.
Again my friend, you are confusing internal and experiential states of mind with social reality. The costs are mine and mine alone to assess. Whether I can hold any particular and transitory belief consistent with my other knowledge is my decision to make and no one else's. Who are you to decide my own internal states are good or bad? Doesn't that put in you the category of thought police?
Paul