virus: obj. exp. of 'religious experience' (formerly Level Three-Belief and Utility))

Thu, 31 Oct 1996 06:35:16 -0600

Kenneth Boyd wrote:
> The most compelling evidence is direct observation. In this case, there
> is a major verifiability problem. Those who DO observe are convinced,
> and those who do NOT observe go agnostic or atheist. Judging from the
> lack of a consensus religious reality, and the lack of application of
> science on even an individual scale to this, it is time to bring science
> to bear on the religious/spiritual domain.

I'm rather agnostic, but remain somewhat apologetic, since I was brought
up in a rather religious environment. Anyway, I wrote up the following,
once while trying to order various thoughts. I was trying to find an
objective basis for why various individuals might have what they call
'religious experiences', while taking into account that no two such
'experiences' never seem to be the same. Comments are welcomed.
(I should add that, in light of my rather recent introduction to
some specifics about evolution, and memetics, I may greatly modify
the write-up at some point.)

> Even an agnostic/atheist might seriously wonder if there is an active
> "Spiritual Disinformation department" [obviously, does not have a
> physical implementation!]; if so, whichever organization this department
> works for should be treated as highly dangerous to the human species,
> since this department seems to try to work over every culture on Earth.

Now *that*, I hadn't yet thought of. Heheh....

- JPSchneider.