From: strom@watson.ibm.com (Rob Strom)
Subject: Re: Achilles heels for religion?
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 18:01:07 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Research

In article <qwg+kVB@engin.umich.edu>, ingles@flea.engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:
|> 
|> In article <1992Mar31.210234.14722@watson.ibm.com>, strom@watson.ibm.com (Rob Strom) writes:
|> > In article <1992Mar29.205854.293@cs.yale.edu>, rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
|> > 

...   [first paragraph deleted]

|> > |> I'm not interested in generating examples of "good morals." I'm
|> > |> interested in whether children are taught to act in a manner which
|> > |> will be generally likely to make them happy.
|> > |> 
|> > 
|> > These two paragraphs imply a difference of value systems between
|> > Eric and me.
|> > 
|> > The second paragraph sounds like hedonistic ethics:  maximize
|> > your own happiness --- don't think about others, including
|> > future generations.  My value system is very much concerned
|> > with being fair to others, being helpful towards the disadvantaged,
|> > and replenishing and improving the earth for the sake of
|> > future generations.
|> 
|>  Hmmmm. I suggest that, while this is a common misunderstanding of
|> what many (*not* all) atheists believe, it is a distorion and not
|> terribly accurate. (See the FAQ file, question #3.)

Well it was because of the FAQ file, question #3 that I found
Eric's comment surprising.  In my response, I restricted myself
to calling it a difference between me and Eric, not a difference
between me and "many atheists".

[why helping others and providing for the future is a good thing]

|>  Hopefully, this should make it clear that I am for being fair to
|> others, helping the disadvantaged, and improving the Earth as much
|> as you, Rob, but I arrive at this from a greatly different direction.
|> (Actually, I want to keep the Earth in good shape because my
|> children and loved ones will have to live in it... and I'm planning
|> on living a *long* time, so I want to keep things nice for me, too.
|> :-> )
|> 
Actually, it's not clear that the authors of the Bible
and commentaries arrived at similar conclusions from
a "greatly different direction".  We may be just
using different words to describe it.

|> > Your first paragraph implies that the purpose of literature
|> > is the pleasure of reading only, not also the personal
|> > growth which comes from the reading.  I disagree.
|> 
|>  I, personally, agree that literature can be and often is a source
|> of personal growth. However, I doubt it can generally serve as a
|> *primary* means. I think living and working and learning among
|> good people is far more important, and, indeed, more than
|> sufficient to bring up 'good' people.

It's not clear that we disagree here.  Certainly setting
an example is a paramount concern of Jewish ethics.
Remember we are commanded to be "a holy people
and a light unto the nations".  The emphasis
on literature comes from the traditional view that
part of being a good person includes reading and
studying.

|> 
|> > You also use the phrase "sneak it by".  This seems to
|> > (ironically) contain a moral judgment, implying that
|> > it is somehow underhanded to teach something indirectly
|> > rather than directly.
|> 
|>  Actually, I tend to agree with this. If I were to read, say,
|> "The Grasshopper and the Ant" to a child, I'd talk with them
|> afterward about what the story meant, rather than leave it
|> entirely up to them. (Mind you, I think the socratic method
|> works best in such things, so don't think of it, at Matt Wiener
|> apparently does, as a 'lecture.' By the time a kid is capable
|> of understanding a moral thought, they are capable of some
|> level of discussion and interaction.)
|>  But I still think that *seeing* a hardworking parent will
|> teach a 'lesson' far more effectively than any fable.
|> 

Again, not clear that we disagree.  In fact, I might
go further and say that it may be more important to
talk to a child after he reads the story of the
7 lean years and 7 fat years than after he reads
"The Grasshopper and the Ant".  The Bible's messages
are usually more subtle.  There may be multiple
messages, and the connections to what the same
characters did in other stories may be important.



-- 
Rob Strom, strom@watson.ibm.com, (914) 784-7641
IBM Research, 30 Saw Mill River Road, P.O. Box 704, Yorktown Heights, NY  10598
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.satanism