Shiz: I found your ideas interesting and provocative. I wanted to discuss the notion as to whether you felt or saw any tendencies in the books to create a caricature of religion as something that causes people to be constantly in a sense denying their 'true selves' and what exactly was the 'true self' in the eyes of the author? Clearly the whole idea of mixing fantasy into a story about an evil religious entity and an indolent "god" figure and then somehow mapping that to an atheistic point of view--imo--seems counter intuitive.
I guess I wonder how contrived you felt the characters were to believe in themselves but not in any greater sense of purpose outside of themselves. Outside of their own specific friends?
I also liked Titus's question, which of course cannot really be answered by those of us who believe about how an atheistic philosophy can create any affections of deep purpose or meaning outside of the self? I mean ultimately it all just seems motivated by an idea of altruism as long as I get something out of it.
In a way the book seems deceptive, if it's purporting to create "good feeling" when there's nothing upon which to base the goodness other than specific individuals. What made those individuals sympathetic? What is the purpose of suffering, for example, in an atheistic perspective. Were the badguys in this book wholely deserving of their bad end? And if so, why? Justice in the temporal sense is so unalterably uneven, that does blowing up the bad guy at the end, justify all the suffering that occurred to get there?
Anyhow... blathering... I've always found all this stuff ponderable... don't really care about splitting hairs about Zion, and it's definition, though... It's easy to oversimplify religion in our age, most of the religious already do that, and since few people outside of the religious, really get what religion is about... it's easy to suppose that since we have a nice government filled with benefits and relative peace and safety that the religious are just a bunch of spoil-sports or busybodies attempting to create meaning by mean means.
--Ray
--Ray
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
Shiz... You can add one small IMO anywhere in you statement, and to me it changes the whole comment. Not everything everyone [or you] says is an opinion. You comments have been full of items of fact, since you have read the books you have made your comments as one who "knows" what the books says.
To those who took issue with your comment and emailed me about moderating the thread it sounded like you were saying that anyone that thinks there is a hidden agenda is wrong... Just to be careful, before I asked for your edit, I showed your comment to my son who has also read some of the works. He said that IN HIS OPINION, you two read different books... It's perfectly fine if you feel the way you do, but if you state it as a fact you are no long just feeling it, you have moved to projection. That is what I as a moderator have to have a problem with. I represent all the people of this forum, I try very hard not to over moderate.
That said, as long as I moderate the current event topics there will be no "I'm right/You're wrong" comments that are submitted as fact. If someone had stated, that you are wrong for feeling the way you do I would have called them on that as well. I only brought up the doctrine point to remind everyone that we need to take those parts of the discussion elsewhere, if they start to derail the topic at hand.
FWIW, I feel I moderate very little, but when I do it is to keep the discussion "nice", not to interject my opinion. People's emotions get very hot over topics like this and I had some complaints, that's the only reason I got involved in the first place.
You are not being targeted by me. I haven't seen that you are being targeted by others. If you do feel that way, please ask for a moderation of my comments. Should other also feel that I have been heavy handed in this case would be happy to step aside right now and leave the moderation to someone else... I have absolutely no attachment to the job at all. Honestly, moderation is not only a thankless task but it's boring as heck to me personally to read discussion after discussion for which I have simply NO opinion on. I couldn't care less about political comments; I never used to read them. I do so now as a service, because I seemed to have the ability to come across as dispassionate. I wouldn't have read this thread, past the first post, except I needed to... I doubt I would ever have seen the movie, or read any of the books because they are not the type of books I read. My son is perfectly capable at 17 of making his own choices about books... so I wouldn't even have read it to "protect" him.
I take you concern seriously, because I was only asking of you what I have asked of Cat, Ray, Jason, Hiccups and Arbi in months past. Should you be treated differently? If yes, why?