Different Witches

[Antlerman]

Define what worship entails. What is the motive behind it, and what the act elicits in people? Is that seen elsewhere in human individuals and societies, without it necessary being focused on a supernatural symbol such as a god? How is it not fair to understand them as the same thing, even those the objects of devotion are different - whether they are secular or religious?

 

You don't live/hold to any ideals? Are you a simple forest animal without human-level conceptual thought? What about your atheism? A better world through reason? A world free of superstition and religions, such that it motivates participation in discussions like these? Those for instance. What about truth, justice, and equality? Are those ideals, or just some other thing in nature like a grub for eating under a rock on the forest floor?

 

From Dictionary.com

1. worship: reverent honor and homage paid to god or a sacredpersonage, or to any object regarded as sacred.

By definition, I don't worship.

I don't see how worship and rational thoughts are entwined. Surely I can do one without the other.

 

I can believe in no god without believing in an anti-god either.

Dictionary definitions. *yawn*. I asked specifically, in a psychological/sociological context to understand the underlying motivations behind the act of worship. Not what the dictionary defines it as. There is a big difference. Things like this need to be understood in much larger contexts than 3 or 4 sentences. That said however, even with the dictionary definition, it is homage to an "object" regarded as sacred. Ideals are just that, depending what level of reverence you give them. Those that would be militant toward their ideals for instance, could in this light be said to "worship them".

 

I think this is proving my original point about understanding reality. If you look simply at surface definitions, you utterly miss human reason, sociological, psychological, cultural, linguistic, hermeneutic, creative, etc; all of which shape, define, and influence *reality* to us. To take one slice only of what we look at to perceive our world, and call that one slice reality and all else being "out of touch" with that narrow understanding, is the true comedy in it, the true irony.

 

We live in a symbolic world. That is a fact.

[Rev R]

From Dictionary.com

reverent honor and homage paid to god or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.

 

Also from Dictionary.com:

Sacred:

1.devoted or dedicated to a deity or to some religious purpose; consecrated.

2. entitled to veneration or religious respect by association with divinity or divine things; holy.

3.pertaining to or connected with religion ( opposed to secular or profane): sacred music; sacred books.

4.reverently dedicated to some person, purpose, or object: a morning hour sacred to study.

5.regarded with reverence: the sacred memory of a dead hero.

6.secured against violation, infringement, etc., as by reverence or sense of right: sacred oaths; sacred rights.

7.properly immune from violence, interference, etc., as a person or office.

 

Object

1. anything that is visible or tangible and is relatively stable in form.

2. a thing, person, or matter to which thought or action is directed: an object of Medical investigation.

3. the end toward which effort or action is directed; goal; purpose: Profit is the object of business.

4. a person or thing with reference to the impression made on the mind or the feeling or emotion elicited in an observer: an object of curiosity and pity.

5. anything that may be apprehended intellectually: objects of thought.

 

So there may be something that by definition you worship. It's just that you don't think of it as such because of a conditioned bias against the term.

 

edited for proper sentence structure.

[par4dcourse]

[Dictionary definitions. *yawn*. I asked specifically, in a psychological/sociological context to understand the underlying motivations behind the act of worship. Not what the dictionary defines it as. There is a big difference.

 

We live in a symbolic world. That is a fact.

 

Since I am only educated in electronics and music, I do not know the psychological/sociological context and must trust Webster et.al. for definitions.

 

I don't have to worship any of those symbols since they are not sacred to me. I think most of the time a cigar is just a cigar.

 

 

 

[par4dcourse]

 

So there may be something that by definition you worship. It's just that you don't think of it as such because of a conditioned bias against the term.

 

 

Again, no-one or no thing is worshiped by me. If I don't think of it as such doesn't that sort of negate the act? "No-god" is not a person or thing.

 

 

 

[Rev R]

So you are saying that there is no thing in this universe which fits the above given definition of sacred (which is a pretty broad definition) that you pay any sort of homage to or hold any reverence for?

[Antlerman]

If I don't think of it as such doesn't that sort of negate the act?

...said the thief to judge.

 

"No-god" is not a person or thing.

Then what are the words? This is nothing:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(not entirely true. It is white space, actually).

[par4dcourse]

So you are saying that there is no thing in this universe which fits the above given definition of sacred (which is a pretty broad definition) that you pay any sort of homage to or hold any reverence for?

 

I don't get out in the universe a lot, so my realm of experience occurs mostly on earth. In my part of earth, I consider worship to be homage to a god or god-like being, and as such I stand by my statement that I worship nothing. I don't consider belief in any idea or high respect for a person or group to be worship.

 

As a side note, I have enjoyed Lunatic's posts and have no issue with her personally. I also don't believe witches or anyone else can magically affect me in any way, physically or mentally, and I don't think she really does either.

 

 

 

[Antlerman]

I don't get out in the universe a lot, so my realm of experience occurs mostly on earth.

Which magically is not in the universe! Talk about mythologies.....

 

Earth outside the universe in the vast realm of nothing, alone, no stars, no gravity, no physics...

 

In my part of earth, I consider worship to be homage to a god or god-like being, and as such I stand by my statement that I worship nothing.

So then you admit to a partial view of reality, and have no right to say what is and isn't reality for others? "In my part of the earth, I consider..."

 

I don't consider belief in any idea or high respect for a person or group to be worship.

Then what do you call God? Just some arbitrary chosen object that people bow towards for no particular reason at all? Are you really so lacking in understanding that it is a symbolic act? And that that symbol is all about ideals? What is the flag, for instance? Cotton? Nothing but cotton?

 

Again, my point is I find it ironic how you make jabs at religion when you have no understanding of it outside of its surface structures only. A world of surfaces? Is that your reality?

 

As a side note, I have enjoyed Lunatic's posts and have no issue with her personally. I also don't believe witches or anyone else can magically affect me in any way, physically or mentally, and I don't think she really does either.

Oh, people are affected all the time by curses and spells and whatnot, whether you want to attribute them to supernatural spirits or the mind. The fact is people are affected by beliefs. All the time. Every day. Even atheists like you. Don't kid yourself.

[Rev R]

I don't get out in the universe a lot, so my realm of experience occurs mostly on earth. In my part of earth, I consider worship to be homage to a god or god-like being, and as such I stand by my statement that I worship nothing. I don't consider belief in any idea or high respect for a person or group to be worship.

 

That's fair. I thank you for showing me your scars.

[par4dcourse]

Again, my point is I find it ironic how you make jabs at religion when you have no understanding of it outside of its surface structures only. A world of surfaces?

 

 

I still find it difficult

My original post." I" , meaning myself alone, "still find it difficult", again, my problem, not a jab at anyone " to worship the unseen/unknown." .

I don't know the 'psychological/ sociological" implications, or what the universe thinks, I'm just stating my southern NC atheist point of view, which I think is clearly and succinctly expressed.

 

 

[par4dcourse]

I don't get out in the universe a lot, so my realm of experience occurs mostly on earth. In my part of earth, I consider worship to be homage to a god or god-like being, and as such I stand by my statement that I worship nothing. I don't consider belief in any idea or high respect for a person or group to be worship.

 

That's fair. I thank you for showing me your scars.

 

Good discussion!

 

 

 

[Horsey_Girl]

Many poison dart frogs secrete lipophilic alkaloid toxins through their skin. Alkaloids in the skin glands of poison frogs serve as a chemical defence against predation, and they are therefore able to be active alongside potential predators during the day. About 28 structural classes of alkaloids are known in poison frogs.^[3][16] The most toxic of poison-dart frog species is Phyllobates terribilis. It is argued that dart frogs do not synthesize their poisons, but sequester the chemicals from arthropod prey items, such as ants, centipedes and mites. This is known as the dietary hypothesis.^[17] Because of this, captive-bred animals do not contain significant levels of toxins. Despite the toxins used by some poison dart frogs, there are some predators that have developed the ability to withstand them, including the Amazon ground snake (Liophis epinephelus).^[18]

 

Chemicals extracted from the skin of Epipedobates tricolor may be shown to have medicinal value.^[19] One such chemical is a painkiller 200 times as potent as morphine, called epibatidine, that has unfortunately demonstrated unacceptable gastrointestinal side effects in humans.^[20] Secretions from dendrobatids are also showing promise as muscle relaxants, heart stimulants and appetite suppressants.^[21] The most poisonous of these frogs, the Golden Poison Frog (Phyllobates terribilis), has enough toxin on average to kill ten to twenty men or about ten thousand mice.^[22] Most other dendrobatids, while colorful and toxic enough to discourage predation, pose far less risk to humans or other large animals.

 

 

[asanerman]

Iunaticheathen thanks for the post.

 

Par4dcorse, Antlerman and R. Rev, thanks for the mental sparring.

 

Mental gymnastics do strengthen the "mind muscle" , poetically speaking that is.

 

saner

[Horsey_Girl]

Many poison dart frogs secrete lipophilic alkaloid toxins through their skin. Alkaloids in the skin glands of poison frogs serve as a chemical defence against predation, and they are therefore able to be active alongside potential predators during the day. About 28 structural classes of alkaloids are known in poison frogs.^[3][16] The most toxic of poison-dart frog species is Phyllobates terribilis. It is argued that dart frogs do not synthesize their poisons, but sequester the chemicals from arthropod prey items, such as ants, centipedes and mites. This is known as the dietary hypothesis.^[17] Because of this, captive-bred animals do not contain significant levels of toxins. Despite the toxins used by some poison dart frogs, there are some predators that have developed the ability to withstand them, including the Amazon ground snake (Liophis epinephelus).^[18]

 

Chemicals extracted from the skin of Epipedobates tricolor may be shown to have medicinal value.^[19] One such chemical is a painkiller 200 times as potent as morphine, called epibatidine, that has unfortunately demonstrated unacceptable gastrointestinal side effects in humans.^[20] Secretions from dendrobatids are also showing promise as muscle relaxants, heart stimulants and appetite suppressants.^[21] The most poisonous of these frogs, the Golden Poison Frog (Phyllobates terribilis), has enough toxin on average to kill ten to twenty men or about ten thousand mice.^[22] Most other dendrobatids, while colorful and toxic enough to discourage predation, pose far less risk to humans or other large animals.