tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post3431847197296538311..comments2024-03-18T11:13:57.904-07:00Comments on Metacrock's Blog: Proudfoot's Reductionism: Losing the Phenomena of Religious ExperienceJoseph Hinman (Metacrock)http://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-12025940343066061062016-09-09T14:02:02.907-07:002016-09-09T14:02:02.907-07:00undifferentiated unity and mystical concept of God...undifferentiated unity and mystical concept of God is not new but O dpmn't beklieve in subverting Christian doctrine to myistical experioence, There is more to Christianbelief tahnexperioence although it's important,Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-24211533940401662552016-09-09T05:31:54.686-07:002016-09-09T05:31:54.686-07:00Thank you for the reply. I just read through the T...Thank you for the reply. I just read through the Trace of God and enjoyed it. I believe Whatey's experience was just feeling a presence of love surround him, and that is what he tries to explain using natural means. For undifferentiate unity his theory would struggle. Also, again, for the history of theism he is attacking a very modern idea of God.<br /><br />Also, I missed out the r in McHargue's name, you can read about him at http://kernelmag.dailydot.com/issue-sections/headline-story/14304/science-mike-mystical-experience-podcast/ Also of interest a recent convert to atheism (she read Krauss et al) from evangelical Christianity was profiled on unbelievable on Premier Christian Radio. Shortly after she came out as a humanist she had a mystical experience, undiffereniated unity, and now is back as a spiritual/light theistic sort of person. Glad that (as I suppose I might interpret it) God can use such events to show his existence to people who just made the move to atheism.Erlendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03854528556692898657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-80373444207835474252016-09-08T23:30:38.022-07:002016-09-08T23:30:38.022-07:00He has his own theory about what makes religious e...He has his own theory about what makes religious experiences. He had one but remained an atheist. Essentially it is about taking the infancy expectation of a motherly figure. Look up the book, it tries to advance the argument. That might also, I guess explain why children are more prone to religious-type experience?<br /><br /><b>he doesn't believe in the inner life or in private tates he thinks it's all re labeling of misidentified physiology, But he's very dishonest about data.He mislabels stuff all the time. Since he did not use the M scale we don't know if he had the same experience.</b><br /><br />I am not skilled in the science or philosophy of the argument, but historically his argument would have a bit of a problem: he believes theism is about a loving, paternal force, but that was only the very late conclusion of Christianity (with antecedents in Jewish thought). It does not mark religious thought of most societies throughout history. Also, he seems to believe religious experience is about feeling love, rather than epithelial opening/peeling back of the material world.<br /><br /><b>I read his book but I came away more apt to think he reduces love out existence rather than urging it. The diversity argument (or exclusivity argument you mention) I aim to get around to dealing with that one very soon,maybe next week. there are two major experiences from mystical experience, sense of the pnumenious, (love included) and undifferentiated uity. </b><br /><br />Also have you come across Mike McHague? He is writing on God and experience- about how he was a believer, then atheist, then believer again because of a religious experience.<br /><br /><br /><b>I have not heard of him but sounds interesting</b>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-18264899813596119072016-09-08T16:00:00.329-07:002016-09-08T16:00:00.329-07:00I meant to say epiphanial, not epithelial.I meant to say epiphanial, not epithelial.Erlendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03854528556692898657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-52776873533564331672016-09-08T09:24:43.329-07:002016-09-08T09:24:43.329-07:00He has his own theory about what makes religious e...He has his own theory about what makes religious experiences. He had one but remained an atheist. Essentially it is about taking the infancy expectation of a motherly figure. Look up the book, it tries to advance the argument. That might also, I guess explain why children are more prone to religious-type experience?<br /><br />I am not skilled in the science or philosophy of the argument, but historically his argument would have a bit of a problem: he believes theism is about a loving, paternal force, but that was only the very late conclusion of Christianity (with antecedents in Jewish thought). It does not mark religious thought of most societies throughout history. Also, he seems to believe religious experience is about feeling love, rather than epithelial opening/peeling back of the material world.<br /><br />Also have you come across Mike McHague? He is writing on God and experience- about how he was a believer, then atheist, then believer again because of a religious experience. Erlendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03854528556692898657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-85233875526283039572016-09-07T21:10:09.089-07:002016-09-07T21:10:09.089-07:00no I have not. does he use those studies? I do inc...no I have not. does he use those studies? I do include in my book atheists who have statistical experiencesJoseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-47420723447431412382016-09-07T10:18:26.447-07:002016-09-07T10:18:26.447-07:00Have you read The Illusion of God by Whatey? He tr...Have you read The Illusion of God by Whatey? He tries to understand religious experiences from an atheistic stance.Erlendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03854528556692898657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-79479832372423936432016-09-07T09:33:47.799-07:002016-09-07T09:33:47.799-07:00right. I said having the data that we have enables...right. I said having the data that we have enables us to inner God from the data, It does it because it tells us what is a real experience what is not, once we know that we can if thye experience transforms our lives or not, so it just subjective. It's reasonable to assume that if ?God is real experiencing him will transform our lives because that's the point orf religion.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-70985548093739944922016-09-07T00:25:37.895-07:002016-09-07T00:25:37.895-07:00"the data from m scale and other such studies..."the data from m scale and other such studies gives us the basis we need from which we can logically infer God.Best explaination."<br /><br />The M scale provides a cross-cultural framework of comparability for the experiences.<br />It says nothing about the source of that experience.<br /><br />Moksha.Mokshahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05654246870408394398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-64873607041079423142016-09-06T18:48:37.477-07:002016-09-06T18:48:37.477-07:00And not whether it comes from God.
What we have h...And not whether it comes from God.<br /><br />What we have here are a bunch of experience that feel religious to people who already are convinced God exists, but not to people who do not.<br /><br /><b>the data from m scale and other such studies gives us the basis we need from which wecan logically infer God.Best explaination</b>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-6101923380438577402016-09-06T05:56:16.869-07:002016-09-06T05:56:16.869-07:00...Moreover, the M scale research shows that athei...<i>...Moreover, the M scale research shows that atheists relate to the experience the same way religious people do they just use a different terminology.</i><br />Right. So whether it feels religious or not comes down to your personal background.<br /><br />And not whether it comes from God.<br /><br />What we have here are a bunch of experience that <i>feel</i> religious to people who already are convinced God exists, but not to people who do not.<br /><br />PixAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-14411115005898074002016-09-05T13:11:51.705-07:002016-09-05T13:11:51.705-07:00thanks Jim. I think your right. We see it all over...thanks Jim. I think your right. We see it all over the place and it's hard to get people to understand it.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-42886452431922389102016-09-05T11:17:57.470-07:002016-09-05T11:17:57.470-07:00Nice post, Joe. I agree that this is part of an ag...Nice post, Joe. I agree that this is part of an agenda to reduce the phenomena to what is amenable to scientific analysis. We see it with consciousness in the work of Dennett and the Churchlands. Although I think that concepts and beliefs play a part in all experiences, this can't account for the unexpected and the novel aspects of experience, and the aspects that can't be described in language but only pointed at.Jim Bratonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09732842134504645743noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-13699008851430372342016-09-05T06:37:10.371-07:002016-09-05T06:37:10.371-07:00, but only the most tenuous of evidence that God i..., but only the most tenuous of evidence that God is behind them, and yet here you are labelling them as religious experiences.<br /><br /><b>That is a common misconception started by message board atheists who had no other argument. It is total bull shit, they are explicitly religious almost all who have them say so. If you study the nature of the experience no way it could not be. Anything about the meaning of life and the nature of reality is going to boarder on religious. Moreover, the M scale research shows that atheists relate to the experience the same way religious people do they just use a different terminology.</b>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-43149812326818817252016-09-05T02:27:20.905-07:002016-09-05T02:27:20.905-07:00You use this re-labelling trick yourself. You have...You use this re-labelling trick yourself. You have a whole bunch of studies that prove people have certain experiences in common, but only the most tenuous of evidence that God is behind them, and yet here you are labelling them as <i>religious</i> experiences.<br /><br />PixieAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com