Life After People (History Channel)

[JoeRedskin]

Acedia is still a the actual root evil and no one (even given the "que sera" from 70Chip), is argueing for it or, IMO, exhibiting its symptoms. In leveling your various assertions of sinful behavior and/or, mental illness, you continue to assert that your emotional reaction is the only legitimate way for a human to consider and deal with the hypothetical physical destruction of humanity. However, the alternative to this ultimate sadness you seem to require is the acknowledgment that, while sad, it is beyond our control and we will not spend more than a moment thinking about it. This is not acedia.

Someone who approached this issue with acedia would have nothimg more to say than, "ehh so what".

"Sloth (or acedia) is a kind of spiritual laziness (as opposed to mere physical fatigue or depression). It means not making it a priority to do what we should, or change what we should in ourselves. Some people might call it apathy, which means a lack of feeling." Seven Deadly Sins - Sloth/Acedia

You, in a very patronizing and emothionally elitest fashion, confuse apathy with an introspective resolution on how to deal with the destruction of our physical being.

When I was a child, death and events out of my control scared me. They scare me still, but, as an introspective adult, I recognize them for what they are - either inevitable or events beyond my control and for which the self protective purpose of the fear instinct is inapplicable. I feel, understand, and accept the emotion, then, with thought and care, I move beyond it.

If I and others have practised this process throughout our lives and need not be struck with deep introspection each time a variation on this theme is presented, that is not laziness but a recognition of an already solved problem for which deep thought is not required. With experience, I need not conduct intrusive surgery to determine if each cut has caused internal injury.

In fact, the assertion that it is natural to feel overwhelming sadness and that those who don't are clearly apathetic can, itself be a indication of sloth. Surrender to emotional responses is easy and requires no thought or introspection. That is a failure to make "it a priority to do what we should" and a true spiritual laziness.

All but the truly apathic will experience emotional responses, it is how we deal with them that determines our vitality.

[MTK]

Wow did this thread take a giant toke off the ol' bong or what.

[JoeRedskin]

^^ Ah well, it happens.

It is the type of subject one would discuss at 2:00 in the morning after a few hits.

saden1, don't bogart the roach dude.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Acedia is still a the actual root evil and no one (even given the "que sera" from 70Chip), is argueing for it or, IMO, exhibiting its symptoms. In leveling your various assertions of sinful behavior and/or, mental illness, you continue to assert that your emotional reaction is the only legitimate way for a human to consider and deal with the hypothetical physical destruction of humanity. However, the alternative to this ultimate sadness you seem to require is the acknowledgment that, while sad, it is beyond our control and we will not spend more than a moment thinking about it. This is not acedia.

Someone who approached this issue with acedia would have nothimg more to say than, "ehh so what".

"Sloth (or acedia) is a kind of spiritual laziness (as opposed to mere physical fatigue or depression). It means not making it a priority to do what we should, or change what we should in ourselves. Some people might call it apathy, which means a lack of feeling." Seven Deadly Sins - Sloth/Acedia

You, in a very patronizing and emothionally elitest fashion, confuse apathy with an introspective resolution on how to deal with the destruction of our physical being.

When I was a child, death and events out of my control scared me. They scare me still, but, as an introspective adult, I recognize them for what they are - either inevitable or events beyond my control and for which the self protective purpose of the fear instinct is inapplicable. I feel, understand, and accept the emotion, then, with thought and care, I move beyond it.

If I and others have practised this process throughout our lives and need not be struck with deep introspection each time a variation on this theme is presented, that is not laziness but a recognition of an already solved problem for which deep thought is not required. With experience, I need not conduct intrusive surgery to determine if each cut has caused internal injury.

In fact, the assertion that it is natural to feel overwhelming sadness and that those who don't are clearly apathetic can, itself be a indication of sloth. Surrender to emotional responses is easy and requires no thought or introspection. That is a failure to make "it a priority to do what we should" and a true spiritual laziness.

All but the truly apathic will experience emotional responses, it is how we deal with them that determines our vitality.

That is an impressive post. There is no way I would have ever come up with such an eloquent way to describe your thoughts with spot on analysis. Bravo Joeredskin

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Indifference is perfectly acceptable. This delusion of yours that you can somehow control the fate of the universe is rooted in your alienation from God. The abolition of physical man or physical nature is only tragic in a universe that has mankind at the very center. You're heirarchy is all out of kilter so you worry too much about things that are not your responsibility and over which you ultimately have no control anyway.

Excellent post. Problem is, those that don't believe in God see this as a bunch of bull-honkey. Kind of like when the world was believed to be flat. Several people came up with theories / evidence that it was round (Ptolemy, Eratosthenes, Galileo Galilei of Pisa...the latter being the first to put it on paper i believe) but no one listened until after Columbus actually made it. Because when you have yourself as the center of your universe, you have a fool as your leader. I often struggle with control issues, and therefore lose sight of what I really should be doing. That being said, Saden does not have delusions that he can control his own fate, he has a lack of knowledge, or belief, that life after his demise even exists. To put it simply, if you don't believe in an after life, things on the planet, including the planets ultimate destruction, seem to be bigger than what they actually are. We (as in 70chip, myself and several others) believe there will be life after we leave this world. Therefore we do not worry ourselves, or even slightly concern ourselves with something so insignificant in our minds.

(makes me wish I had the speaking ability of joeredskin, cause I don't feel what I was trying to communicate came out well, but I guess it will do)

[MTK]

How does anyone believe there is an after life? What are you basing this on exactly? Sorry but that sounds very delusional to me.

I don't believe either way, because I honestly don't know. I haven't been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt either way.

I'm just amazed when people can firmly say yes there is an after life, or no there isn't. How can anyone be 100% sure??

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

How does anyone believe there is an after life? What are you basing this on exactly? Sorry but that sounds very delusional to me.

I don't believe either way, because I honestly don't know. I haven't been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt either way.

I'm just amazed when people can firmly say yes there is an after life, or no there isn't. How can anyone be 100% sure??

You can't be. I didn't say "I was convinced", I said "I / we believe". Just like you don't believe either way.
I also take the stand that it is better to believe (In God) and have the possibility of eternal life, then to not and take my chances. Why take the road that couldn't possibly lead you anywhere?

To ask, what are you basing this on exactly. You seriously don't know? It's the best selling book of all time.

If you are waiting to be "convinced beyond a reasonable doubt" on anything, you will have a long wait my friend. Some things are by faith, and faith alone. Even if I am wrong, tell me, what is the harm in it? But if you are wrong, do you want to know the harm in it?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

You can't be. I didn't say "I was convinced", I said "I / we believe". Just like you don't believe either way.
I also take the stand that it is better to believe (In God) and have the possibility of eternal life, then to not and take my chances. Why take the road that couldn't possibly lead you anywhere?

To ask, what are you basing this on exactly. You seriously don't know? It's the best selling book of all time.

If you are waiting to be "convinced beyond a reasonable doubt" on anything, you will have a long wait my friend. Some things are by faith, and faith alone. Even if I am wrong, tell me, what is the harm in it? But if you are wrong, do you want to know the harm in it?

Do you believe everything you read?

Faith can be a dangerous thing.

I don't see any harm in not being sure what to believe when it comes to God. I have a hard time believing that if he does indeed exist, he would think any less of someone questioning his existence since there is no undeniable proof of his existence in the first place.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

How does anyone believe there is an after life? What are you basing this on exactly? Sorry but that sounds very delusional to me.

I don't believe either way, because I honestly don't know. I haven't been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt either way.

I'm just amazed when people can firmly say yes there is an after life, or no there isn't. How can anyone be 100% sure??

Not trying to be flip, but honestly the only way is Faith in something other than that which can be seen.

Christianity, for example, exists ONLY if Christ was raised from the dead. Paul himself made the point that Saden often makes, which is, that if Christ was merely a man, and the resurrection a hoax, then Christians are indeed the most pitiful of men. This is the very thing Saden often argues, interesting that the Bible agrees with him. Of course, the next part is that Christ did indeed raise up, and witnesses attested to that fact. Now at this point in history, Every person is given the self awareness to hear this argument and make the choice to believe through faith or not.

Every belief in an afterlife hinges primarily on the faith of something unseen, and by definition untestable (except in FRINGE) and unverifiable to the modern man.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Do you believe everything you read?

Sarcasm as a rebuttle???

Faith can be a dangerous thing.

I'm not disagreeing, but why do you think so?

I don't see any harm in not being sure what to believe when it comes to God. I have a hard time believing that if he does indeed exist, he would think any less of someone questioning his existence since there is no undeniable proof of his existence in the first place.

There is nothing that says you shouldn't "question" in the bible. In fact, it encourages it to better your faith. I've personally been toying with the notion that we all go to heaven and the bible is used as a guideline to keep us on the straight and narrow. View your relationship with your kids as that of one with you as the child and God as your father...when you do that, how can you send your children to eternal damnation? But you try to set guidelines for your kids to follow by to be better people. Hell, we even lie to our kids about Santa Claus etc because of how we feel it will better them. So if we can do that, how come God can't give us a guideline / handbook to try to live by?
You also need to keep in mind, while we as a species are intelligent, we are not all knowing. To me, undeniable proof of His existance is the fact that we are here. The body is amazingly complex, beyond comprehension even. No soul / existance of a life has ever been found in a body, yet we know it to be there. That's just a human, what about the billions of other organisms on this planet, or the solar system, or beyond?
I think you might mistake anyone that speaks about God / religion as trying to push their views, and some do, I am not though. You can believe what you want. I know there is absolutely nothing I can say that will change your mind, or several others on this site. I am merely stating my belief and you can take it or leave it. It's a pleasure to have conversation sometimes, and the questions posed to each other can and do bring good discussion.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Not trying to be flip, but honestly the only way is Faith in something other than that which can be seen.

Christianity, for example, exists ONLY if Christ was raised from the dead. Paul himself made the point that Saden often makes, which is, that if Christ was merely a man, and the resurrection a hoax, then Christians are indeed the most pitiful of men. This is the very thing Saden often argues, interesting that the Bible agrees with him. Of course, the next part is that Christ did indeed raise up, and witnesses attested to that fact. Now at this point in history, Every person is given the self awareness to hear this argument and make the choice to believe through faith or not.

Every belief in an afterlife hinges primarily on the faith of something unseen, and by definition untestable (except in FRINGE) and unverifiable to the modern man.

Very true. Which again begs the argument, why believe in something that can't possibly bring you any good.

I would argue that if Christ's resurrection was indeed a hoax, we are not pitiful, but lived a good life and we are all worm food anyway so it won't matter.

[CRedskinsRule]

Well, again Paul disagrees with you as well, and lays the foundation of the eat, drink, and be merry now for tomorrow you die philosophy.

But I was using the point to address Matty's question, that one comes to believe in an afterlife through Faith in a higher power, and not because of any proven verifiable testable process.

[SmootSmack]

Fear of things invisible is the natural seed of that which everyone in himself calleth religion.-Thomas Hobbes

Anyhow, I believe in God, I'm religous but still, while I know it's inevitable, the idea of not being here anymore scares me, worries me, perplexes me...maybe I don't believe enough?

Kudos to you that have overcome that, I'm just not among you.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Acedia is still a the actual root evil and no one (even given the "que sera" from 70Chip), is argueing for it or, IMO, exhibiting its symptoms. In leveling your various assertions of sinful behavior and/or, mental illness, you continue to assert that your emotional reaction is the only legitimate way for a human to consider and deal with the hypothetical physical destruction of humanity [this is indeed my position]. However, the alternative to this ultimate sadness you seem to require is the acknowledgment that, while sad, it is beyond our control and we will not spend more than a moment thinking about it [this is an also my position though you make it seem like it's an either or proposition]. This is not acedia [check my first usage of the word apathy, this word engineer shit doesn't work on me].

Someone who approached this issue with acedia would have nothimg more to say than, "ehh so what" [and to be indifferent is to be what exactly?].

"Sloth (or acedia) is a kind of spiritual laziness (as opposed to mere physical fatigue or depression). It means not making it a priority to do what we should, or change what we should in ourselves. Some people might call it apathy [I am one of them], which means a lack of feeling." Seven Deadly Sins - Sloth/Acedia

You, in a very patronizing and emothionally elitest fashion [sometimes you just have to be, I'll work on getting it under control], confuse apathy with an introspective resolution on how to deal with the destruction of our physical being [when? where?].

When I was a child, death and events out of my control scared me. They scare me still, but, as an introspective adult, I recognize them for what they are - either inevitable or events beyond my control and for which the self protective purpose of the fear instinct is inapplicable. I feel, understand, and accept the emotion, then, with thought and care, I move beyond it.

If I and others have practised this process throughout our lives and need not be struck with deep introspection each time a variation on this theme is presented, that is not laziness but a recognition of an already solved problem for which deep thought is not required. With experience, I need not conduct intrusive surgery to determine if each cut has caused internal injury.

In fact, the assertion that it is natural to feel overwhelming sadness and that those who don't are clearly apathetic can, itself be a indication of sloth. Surrender to emotional responses is easy and requires no thought or introspection. That is a failure to make "it a priority to do what we should" and a true spiritual laziness.

All but the truly apathic will experience emotional responses, it is how we deal with them that determines our vitality. [WTF?]

See comments following quoted text.

Eloquent indeed. What isn't obvious is of course that my conversations were with two different people and how you mange to mish-and-mesh what I said in my responses. Clearly 70Chip felt that his position was superior and CRedskinsRule didn't understand my position though he respected it (I probably should have done a better job respecting his position). I love how you also dismiss me as an elitist smug sob all the while implicitly convaying your take as a more rational position.

70Chip expclititly said "Indifference is perfectly acceptable." If such a postion is not reflective of apathy I don't know what is. If he wants to clear the record he is more than welcome. And of course he went with the godlessness as the cause of my concern.

I am not sure what warented the highlighted long blob of text. Everyone here is an adult and I shouldn't be expected to explain everything as if I am talking to a child. Certain things should be abvious and need not explination, especially when it comes to the doom of us all.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by saden1

See comments following quoted text.

Eloquent indeed. What isn't obvious is of course that my conversations were with two different people and how you mange to mish-and-mesh what I said in my responses. Clearly 70Chip felt that his position was superior and CRedskinsRule didn't understand my position though he respected it (I probably should have done a better job respecting his position). I love how you also dismiss me as an elitist smug sob all the while implicitly convaying your take as a more rational position.

70Chip expclititly said "Indifference is perfectly acceptable." If such a postion is not reflective of apathy I don't know what is. If he wants to clear the record he is more than welcome. And of course he went with the godlessness as the cause of my concern.

I am not sure what warented the highlighted long blob of text. Everyone here is an adult and I shouldn't be expected to explain everything as if I am talking to a child. Certain things should be abvious and need not explination, especially when it comes to the doom of us all.

Originally Posted by saden1

Kudos to CRedskins for at least feeling sad. Are my post not clear enough as to my position from the get go?

Acedia used to be a deadly sin until it was merged into sloth. You know what's really sad? Christians advancing apathy as a virtue.

I believe that this post started the "mish mash".

Do you really deny that you are an "elitist smug snob"??? ;-)