From: jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Choices (Re: How others see Rush fans)
Date: 23 Nov 92 16:49:10 GMT
Organization: Boston University Physics Department

In article <JUHATSAN.92Nov23180256@polaris.utu.fi> juhatsan@polaris.utu.fi (Juha2 Tapani Santala) writes:

> I have noticed some talks about religion in this mail box.
>Did You know that Neil has written also about this subject. 
>I think it was autumn 1983 in Backstage clus magazine. Some 
>seminary was attacking on Rush. So Neil answered and confessed 
>his faith: I believe in what man chooses to believe...
> OK that is a belief and called humanism.

You mean he believes that people have the ability to make choices
(not that he believes in whatever humanity chooses as its faith).
This is certainly a belief, but Neil that Neil called it "humanism"
especially in the sense of the "Humanist Manifesto" mentioned:

>By the way Humanist Manifesto I & II declares that humanism is a 
>religion and so also Supreme Court 1961 (Torcaso vs. Watkins). 

Neil has never (so far as I know) declared any personal attachment
or support for this document.

>So if You get kindly my point (and Neil's also), we all hold some 
>kind of belief systems that influence to our behaviour and values.

This is obviously true, empirically. But it does not make Rush lyrics
religious.

>I don't think that this a forum of evangelisation, but if as some 
>of You are thinking themselves non-religionists... sorry we all are 
>some kind of believers. If You choose not to decide You have made a 
>choice. Right.

There is a difference between making choices and subscribing to a
religion. All you've done is point to some manifesto and claimed
that because of a US Supreme Court ruling on this document people
who think that the ideas expressed in Rush lyrics are good and
accurate ones, are religious. You'll have to do better than that
to show that they are.

>In fact Rush's songs are quite interesting in the way their are 
>preaching. For example 'Closer to the heart' finds the key in 
>our heart and believes its goodness. 

The fact that Neil uses the word "heart" in closer to the heart
does not mean that he views the idea of one's "heart" in the
same way as Christianity (for example). In fact, in my opinion,
the word is used for its simplicity rather than any religious
connotation. You'll also need to provide an argument as to why
"CttH" `believes in the goodness of the `human heart' '. I don't
see this song as preaching but rather as an `open letter' format
plea incorporating what Neil sees as a fact: if the world is to
become a place where one live with a healthy conscience then 
that change will require the efforts of people throughout society.
And I see "Second Nature" from _Hold Your Fire_ as its companion
piece.

>But few years later more 
>pessimistic view is in 'Distant Early Warning' - Neil seem to 
>think more pessimistic to people's power to chage the thinks. 
>End is very clear - Absalom raised against his father and got his punishment
>(2Samuel13-18). 

Why does this bit from _Samuel_ show Neil to be pessimistic?
In my opinion Neil is just giving us an `early warning' of the
danger (that was) present in the Reagan administration's `hawkish'
stance towards the (ex-)Soviet Union, which clearly involved nuclear
weapons.

>You can name more that kind of songs.
>I still respect Rush musically very high but I see it in a different 
>eyes. I don't think myself intellectual higher than the others anymore,
>I hope (as Iused to when I was hardcore Rush fan). But Neil's lyrics 
>made me think and I saw it that when we have materialistic world view 
>we cannot say nothing about good or evil, because things just are 
>(leading humanists are affirming this also). That's true with this 
>band called Rush.


This isn't very clear to me, care to reexpress this?


>So for myself I found another Prime Mover, the who is same that Kerry 
>Livgren's (Yes, that man from Kansas). He has made record called Prime Mover
>with AD few years ago. It is still worth of listeningas also Kansas' Vinyl
>Confessions.

> So good luck to You folks, if some one wants to discuss with me, just send a
>message, but not on this forum, because this on different subject.

This certainly seems to be about Rush, so I don't see any problem
discussing it here.

Peace,

Gregg

-- 
Gregg Jaeger (jaeger@buphy)  Dept. of Physics (and Philosophy), Boston Univ.
"You see, the quantum mechanical description is in terms of knowledge" -Peierls
"One can _not_ put the psi-function... in place of the... thing" -Schroedinger
                   _De gustibus non disputandum_, NOT!