A few lines that completely destroy the bad joke that is "New Atheism"--especially of the Harris and Dawkins variety...AKA, biologists with zero physics education rambling like half-wits

I bring up Freud because I personally prefer Jung.

how it might feel like admitting defeat, but would you want to risk not doing it if you do come out better in the end?

Wouldn't undergoing psychotherapy for the purpose of gaining better control over my own mindbody be a form of personal growth and self-actualization? This seems to me like the opposite of "admitting defeat"--if I ever chose to go down this route, I would assume that I would do so for reasons of empowerment, not defeat. So I don't understand the question.

I've had an enormous stress this past year that will likely never be repeated in my life again, so I have every reason to think that simple time and meditation can and will normalize my stresses out... if this doesn't happen, I'll of course consider psychotherapy. But I'm scheduled to take plenty of psych classes in college and know plenty of budding would-be psychologists, many of whom are dear friends, so I do think I'll be in quite good company regardless.

To quote Schrodinger once more,

The world consists of the elements of consciousness--this world within which we have just discovered the emergence of the brain as a highly specialized phenomena, something which might have emerged but which might quite well have remained non-existent and which is, in any case, by no means sui generis. And now we are asked to believe that this special modification of the higher mammals had to happen in order that the world should dawn on itself in the light of consciousness; whereas, if it had not emerged, this world would have remained nothing but a drama plated to an empty house, not present to anyone and hence not in the real sense present at all!

If this is really the ultimate wisdom to which we can attain in this question, then to me it seems to be the utter bankruptcy of our picture of the world. And we ought at least to acknowledge it, and not act as though it did not matter to us, or jeer, in our rationalistic wisdom, at those who try to find a way our, however desperate.

There is something far grander, far more in accord with a clear recognition of what it is all about, in the ideas of Schopenhauer or Fechner. For Spinoza, the human body is a "modification of the infinite substance (God), in so far as it is expressed in the attribute of extension," and the human mind is that same modification, but expressed in the attribute of thought.

/r/DebateReligion Thread Parent