homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » I'm not a 'fallen human'! (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: I'm not a 'fallen human'!
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In the 'Sacred and sacriligeous' thread, Hawk has a quote: 'we are simple fallen humans'. Yes, I am a straightforward, simple person, but why should I consider myself 'fallen'? Does this apply only to Christians? If so, it seems to me that it is an extremely weak statement, and if it applies to all humans, and that must include all religions and atheists, then it loses all meaning anyway. I would be interested to hear opinions.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Agreed - I think our 'fall' is more a 'failure to become' the best we can be.

Any guilt/confession/forgiveness needs to be for things we do wrong, or things we fail to do - definitely not for who we are.

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211

 - Posted      Profile for Laurelin   Email Laurelin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, Christians don't just refer to themselves here. Christian doctrine says that all of humanity has 'fallen' as a result of, well, the 'Fall' ... the disobedience in Eden that led to disharmony between God and humankind, and each other, a rupture in the created world that Christians believe can only be healed through the sacrifice and reconciling work of Christ. Of course I don't expect rationalists and atheists to agree with this worldview.

I think humans are capable of great goodness and great beauty. "What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world. The paragon of animals." Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 2

But we have a very, very dark streak in us. Very dark. Much darker than anything in the animal world. Animals don't behave with the sophisticated cruelty and depravity that we are all too capable of. [Frown]

It's not an easy doctrine, but I do accept it. I find it easy to believe when I consider the utter horrors we can perpetrate on each other and on this beautiful world.

--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien

Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012  |  IP: Logged
Hawk

Semi-social raptor
# 14289

 - Posted      Profile for Hawk   Author's homepage   Email Hawk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
In the 'Sacred and sacriligeous' thread, Hawk has a quote: 'we are simple fallen humans'. Yes, I am a straightforward, simple person, but why should I consider myself 'fallen'? Does this apply only to Christians? If so, it seems to me that it is an extremely weak statement, and if it applies to all humans, and that must include all religions and atheists, then it loses all meaning anyway. I would be interested to hear opinions.

Fun to have an entire thread about a throwaway comment I've made. I'm quite surprised you found it controversial though, I would have thought this was a pretty standard phrase, but perhaps that's just me.

It applies to all humans, certainly not just Christians (although perhaps Christians are those who recognise it more in themselves, and thus recognise their need for salvation). We are all fallen, as we are all not as good, as perfect as we are intended to be by our creator. We have fallen from the ideal, and salvation is needed in order to raise us to the state God intends for us.

In terms of Boogie's comment, I agree it is wrong to think we need to apologise for who we are. But it is important that we recognise it, and understand that we can, and should, be better.

--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer

See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts

Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:

In terms of Boogie's comment, I agree it is wrong to think we need to apologise for who we are. But it is important that we recognise it, and understand that we can, and should, be better.

Except that we can't change who we are, we can change what we do and how we respond.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696

 - Posted      Profile for Evensong   Author's homepage   Email Evensong   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Which changes who we are. [Biased]

--------------------
a theological scrapbook

Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
and if it applies to all humans, and that must include all religions and atheists, then it loses all meaning anyway.

Indeed, it would have no meaning for you. Nor, perfectly, for me. It is a particularly odd notion, IMO. But, I suppose I am not one to judge, especially from your POV. [Biased]

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't know if I'm fallen, but I'm sure I stumble a lot.

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Francis Spufford redescribes it as the Human Propensity to Fuck Things Up. If anyone says that they don't share in the HPtFTU, for reasons religious or secular, be very very wary. And don't let them have any position of power over or responsibility for other people.

The reason for using the metaphor of a fall is that it's something that applies to all people, but it's not supposed to be of the essence of humanity.

It's very odd to say that it's a weak statement if it applies to all human beings, religious or atheist or both. Lots of statements about the human condition apply to all human beings.

[ 14. May 2013, 13:46: Message edited by: Dafyd ]

--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams

Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
No, Christians don't just refer to themselves here. Christian doctrine says that all of humanity has 'fallen' as a result of, well, the 'Fall' ... the disobedience in Eden that led to disharmony between God and humankind, and each other, a rupture in the created world that Christians believe can only be healed through the sacrifice and reconciling work of Christ. Of course I don't expect rationalists and atheists to agree with this worldview.

It should be noted that not just rationalists and atheists disagree that all humanity suffers a congenital curse due to the fruit-based transgressions of a distant ancestress, but all adherents of non-Abrahamic faiths as well.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hawk

Semi-social raptor
# 14289

 - Posted      Profile for Hawk   Author's homepage   Email Hawk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
No, Christians don't just refer to themselves here. Christian doctrine says that all of humanity has 'fallen' as a result of, well, the 'Fall' ... the disobedience in Eden that led to disharmony between God and humankind, and each other, a rupture in the created world that Christians believe can only be healed through the sacrifice and reconciling work of Christ. Of course I don't expect rationalists and atheists to agree with this worldview.

It should be noted that not just rationalists and atheists disagree that all humanity suffers a congenital curse due to the fruit-based transgressions of a distant ancestress, but all adherents of non-Abrahamic faiths as well.
And quite a few Christians as well.

I don't think we are fallen because of some historical fruit-eating. I think Eden is a poetical expression of the human condition in general.

--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer

See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts

Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Francis Spufford redescribes it as the Human Propensity to Fuck Things Up. If anyone says that they don't share in the HPtFTU, for reasons religious or secular, be very very wary. And don't let them have any position of power over or responsibility for other people.

The reason for using the metaphor of a fall is that it's something that applies to all people, but it's not supposed to be of the essence of humanity.

But isn't that the basic premise of the Fall as metaphor? That the HPtFTU is due to some external factor and that it can, theoretically, be gotten rid of?

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Which changes who we are. [Biased]

It might do, it might not. There are aspects of brain chemistry which can't simply be changed by deciding to change them. Some things are who we are - permanently.
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think we need to apologize for who we are, insofar as pretty much all of us are vicious, selfish, miserable sinners with no life in us- atheists and non-Abrahamic believers included.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I think we need to apologize for who we are, insofar as pretty much all of us are vicious, selfish, miserable sinners with no life in us- atheists and non-Abrahamic believers included.

I don't agree - a baby is not a selfish, miserable sinner. It is selfish, very - but this is natural and necessary, not sinful. Of course we have to learn to be less and less selfish in order to live in society. But if we did not care for ourselves we'd have no chance of caring for other people.

We need to be proud of who we are - and sorry for what we do wrong. Not sorry for who we are, that way leads to poor self esteem and bitterness imo.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Our deeds proceed from who we are. A person does selfish and hateful things because he is selfish and hateful. Not all of my misdeeds are beyond my control, so when I reflect on what I've done I find myself running out of excuses.

I am very bitter about myself- bitter that I hate people and gossip about them. I consider my apathy before the suffering of others not worthy of esteem. We don't strive to escape selfishness merely to participate in society- striving for charity is caring for ourselves.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Many thanks for all the responses; much appreciated.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Agreed - I think our 'fall' is more a 'failure to become' the best we can be.

Yes, that sounds very sensible and could apply to all.
quote:
Any guilt/confession/forgiveness needs to be for things we do wrong, or things we fail to do - definitely not for who we are.
Yes, agreed; but I would take that as forgiveness by the person one has wronged, also forgiveness of oneself if one knows one has done all that one could to right a wrong; not forgiveness by any god.
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
No, Christians don't just refer to themselves here. Christian doctrine says that all of humanity has 'fallen' as a result of, well, the 'Fall' ... the disobedience in Eden ...

That's something of a sweeping statement isn't it? I think there must be a rapidly diminishing number of people who, with the knowledge available now, could still believe in the factual truth of Adam and Eve?
quote:
...that led to disharmony between God and humankind, and each other, a rupture in the created world ...
No problem if people know that it is a strong story, to teach altruistic behaviour of humans to each other.
quote:
...that Christians believe can only be healed through the sacrifice and reconciling work of Christ. Of course I don't expect rationalists and atheists to agree with this worldview.
Well, no, I certainly cannot agree with this last part! [Smile]
quote:
I think humans are capable of great goodness and great beauty.
Agree completely. I was watching the Richard Feynmann programme yesterday in which he talks of why people with a thorough understanding of the structure and evolution of a certain type of beautiful flower finds that this knowledge adds to his appreciation of its beauty, not subtracts from it, and points out that believers do not have access to a special form of the appreciation of beauty.
quote:
But we have a very, very dark streak in us. Very dark. Much darker than anything in the animal world. Animals don't behave with the sophisticated cruelty and depravity that we are all too capable of. [Frown]
Yes, I agree, but this must depend on our genetic make-up, and the training we had as children. I think I'd say that The tendency has not been selected out by natural selection because it has not threatened our species' survival.
quote:
It's not an easy doctrine, but I do accept it. I find it easy to believe when I consider the utter horrors we can perpetrate on each other and on this beautiful world.
Yes, I can understand that. It would be a dream come true if those who perpetrate so much violence could accept, as good people do, the restraints necessary to live in harmony. I look at it from a humanist standpoint but the goal is the same.
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Fun to have an entire thread about a throwaway comment I've made.

Yes, it is quite a nice feeling, isn't it? [Smile]
quote:
I'm quite surprised you found it controversial though, I would have thought this was a pretty standard phrase, but perhaps that's just me.
I wouldn't say I found it controversial, [Smile] but thought it might make an interesting question.
quote:
It applies to all humans, certainly not just Christians (although perhaps Christians are those who recognise it more in themselves, and thus recognise their need for salvation). We are all fallen, as we are all not as good, as perfect as we are intended to be by our creator.
Yes, I agree, until it comes to the God's intention part. If there was a God to intend something, how come he faild so spectacularly to impart the idea to all, I wonder?

Having read this through before posting, I think a new word instead of 'fallen' would be useful.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032

 - Posted      Profile for Anselmina     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I think we need to apologize for who we are, insofar as pretty much all of us are vicious, selfish, miserable sinners with no life in us- atheists and non-Abrahamic believers included.

You must hang out with the wrong people, Zach! Or only the wrong people. Most people I know don't fit this description. The 'no life in us' bit I recognize as the standard Biblical-based phrase, as in 'without God there is no live in us'. But there are different ways of applying that.

--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!

Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thank you Evensong, Lil Buddha, Le Roc, Dafydd, Crreusos, Zach82

I certainly do not think we all have a vicious streak or something; there isn't evidence for that is there. To spend time blaming oneself for past wrongs does not help. For a start, such wrongs cannot be changed, and surely we have evolved to be aware of our responsibility for our actions and, for most of us, to take that responsibility.
At the time, we took the action that seemed appropriate and it is only with hindsight that we perceive the snags.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
I certainly do not think we all have a vicious streak or something; there isn't evidence for that is there.
I think there is quite abundant evidence that it is there.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Okay, there are too many who do have a vicious streak, and that is deeply saddening, but nowhere near enough (fortunately) to threaten the survival of the human species.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
Okay, there are too many who do have a vicious streak, and that is deeply saddening, but nowhere near enough (fortunately) to threaten the survival of the human species.

Not only too many- if the Milgram experiment is any indication, the vast majority of us would torture a man to death simply because a man in a white lab coat told us we wouldn't get in trouble.

The fact that we can restrain our malice just enough to perpetuate our species is of little comfort to me.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Actually if you listen to some evolutionary psychologists they believe the vicious streak is there because it gave evolutionary advantage. In other words we survive because of it, not despite it.

Jengie

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211

 - Posted      Profile for Laurelin   Email Laurelin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
SusanDoris - not enough to threaten the species? We came near to nuclear annilhilation in 1962 and the situation was still perilous in the early 1980s. [Ultra confused]

The doctrine that man fell doesn't mean that Christians believe that humanity is not capable of goodness or that we are irredeemable.

It does provide a framework for trying to understand the darkness within. Animals do not kill or torture for pleasure, as a rule. But we do. We are higher than them, yet our behaviour can be so much worse.

If we are not capable of actually being torturers, we are capable of turning a blind eye to others' cruelties.

--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien

Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
Okay, there are too many who do have a vicious streak, and that is deeply saddening, but nowhere near enough (fortunately) to threaten the survival of the human species.

I'm a great deal more comfortable with those that say "all have sinned" than those who say 'only some have - those nasty people over there, the people who've done really bad things, but not me - I'm middle class and quite nice really'.

Even without theology, empirically, HPtFTU seems to fit what one sees in oneself and around about much better than any other explanation.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
That's something of a sweeping statement isn't it? I think there must be a rapidly diminishing number of people who, with the knowledge available now, could still believe in the factual truth of Adam and Eve?



"Factual" is an interesting word, isn't it. I don't believe the creation story in Genesis is the literal truth, and I don't think it was ever intended to be - it is metaphor. But that doesn't make it untrue.

I don't think the Garden of Eden was a physical location, and I don't think that Adam and Eve are the literal first humans and the ancestors of everyone on the planet. Again, it's metaphor. Adam and Eve are archetypes used to explain the fallen, sinful nature of mankind. I'd describe it as factual, but not literal.

"Factual" because it's telling us true things about the nature of man, the nature of God, and the relationship between man and God.

[ 14. May 2013, 15:47: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The interesting thing is how this idea has been secularized, for example in various psychological ideas. Jung has the idea of the shadow side, which is rather similar, although I suppose he would argue that it must be integrated into the whole person. So it can be seen as a sort of disowned side of oneself.

I can see that it's meaningless for atheists, but then one still has to deal with one's own negative or dark side, doesn't one?

Reminds me of the poem by Robert Lowell, 'To speak of woe that is in marriage', although I think the phrase is from Schopenhauer originally.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649

 - Posted      Profile for Raptor Eye     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can understand why some would not like to think that they are fallen. It sounds as if they're on the slippery slope!

I wonder about the story of the fall. Did humankind start off as perfect, so that it must aim to regain what it lost when the first people were deceived into thinking that they knew better than God? There are some who still do think they know better than God, so how will it ever be achieved, unless God comes to sift those out and put everything right?

It surely wouldn't be fair to do that unless someone was sent first to make the way clear to everybody, would it?

Hmmm.

[ 14. May 2013, 18:19: Message edited by: Raptor Eye ]

--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10

Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Not only too many- if the Milgram experiment is any indication, the vast majority of us would torture a man to death simply because a man in a white lab coat told us we wouldn't get in trouble.

Yes, that was quite chilling. But wasn't the sample of people who took part quite small? I wonder whether, if they had used a very large sample, which of course it would have hbeen unethical to do, would the majority have been those who were not prepared to take wrong actions? I'd like to think so.
quote:
The fact that we can restrain our malice just enough to perpetuate our species is of little comfort to me.
Okay, I think I'm with you on that thought! However, I don't think it's anywhere near as worrying as that, - because we have only to consider the number of humans around today and the rate of increase to realise that extinction is a long way off.
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Actually if you listen to some evolutionary psychologists they believe the vicious streak is there because it gave evolutionary advantage. In other words we survive because of it, not despite it.

Ah, yes, I had forgotten that. I think there was a New Scientist article about it a while ago.
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
SusanDoris - not enough to threaten the species? We came near to nuclear annilhilation in 1962 and the situation was still perilous in the early 1980s.:

I agree that was a dangerous situation, but biologically, there would still have been many millions of humans in various parts of the world, even if the disaster had been a super volcano or something, to survive as a species.
quote:
The doctrine that man fell doesn't mean that Christians believe that humanity is not capable of goodness or that we are irredeemable.

It does provide a framework for trying to understand the darkness within. Animals do not kill or torture for pleasure, as a rule. But we do. We are higher than them, yet our behaviour can be so much worse.

If we are not capable of actually being torturers, we are capable of turning a blind eye to others' cruelties.

Can't argue with any of that, but it is a rational description of humans, and does not need religious beliefs to make it so.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've written some more, but it needs editing, so I'll be back tomorrow! [Smile]

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091

 - Posted      Profile for Jack o' the Green   Email Jack o' the Green   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
When entering a Times competition about what was wrong with the world, G.K. Chesterton simply wrote "Dear Sirs, I am". I think that sums it up rather nicely in the sense that we can use the idea of human's fallen state to be honest with and about ourselves rather than as a doctrine to beat others round the head with. I don't feel guilty about it - which isn't the same as not feeling guilty about things which I have deliberately done wrong or failed to do right - as there is a 'givenness' about the condition. However, it is something to be aware of. Perhaps in today's Western society, it is an important correction to the "Aren't we wonderful" self esteem culture which seems to be in fashion nowadays in some quarters.
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Our deeds proceed from who we are. A person does selfish and hateful things because he is selfish and hateful. Not all of my misdeeds are beyond my control, so when I reflect on what I've done I find myself running out of excuses.

I am very bitter about myself- bitter that I hate people and gossip about them. I consider my apathy before the suffering of others not worthy of esteem. We don't strive to escape selfishness merely to participate in society- striving for charity is caring for ourselves.

[Overused]

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108

 - Posted      Profile for Bostonman   Email Bostonman   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Not only too many- if the Milgram experiment is any indication, the vast majority of us would torture a man to death simply because a man in a white lab coat told us we wouldn't get in trouble.

Yes, that was quite chilling. But wasn't the sample of people who took part quite small? I wonder whether, if they had used a very large sample, which of course it would have hbeen unethical to do, would the majority have been those who were not prepared to take wrong actions? I'd like to think so.
That's a nice bit of wishful thinking combined with an unlikely assumption about his sample. There have been plenty of similar experiments (the Stanford Prison Experiment comes to mind), as well as the entire scope of human history. Were lynchings in the American South a large enough sample size? Was the Rwandan Genocide? The Holocaust? Or were these all just the result of bad eggs? Because the good eggs in the middle class were certainly going along with it.

quote:
Can't argue with any of that, but it is a rational description of humans, and does not need religious beliefs to make it so.
Nobody said it needs religious beliefs to make it so. You claimed in the original post that it is not true. Now you accept that it is true, whether we believe in the facticity of Adam and Eve or not. I'm not sure how this sentence isn't a 180-degree turn in your view.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hey, Zach82 [Overused]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bostonman:
That's a nice bit of wishful thinking combined with an unlikely assumption about his sample. There have been plenty of similar experiments (the Stanford Prison Experiment comes to mind), as well as the entire scope of human history. Were lynchings in the American South a large enough sample size? Was the Rwandan Genocide? The Holocaust? Or were these all just the result of bad eggs? Because the good eggs in the middle class were certainly going along with it.

I could speculate that one of the goals of religion is not so much to decry the behaviour of bad eggs, but somehow explain the ease with which good eggs permit themselves to go along with horrible things. Assholes acting assholishly is pretty self-explanatory, but how does someone get to the point (as in the Milgram experiments) where they are shouting "I'm killing him!" but are still pressing the damn button?

It is possible to say, simultaneously, "I am a perfect creation, just the way God wants me to be" and still say "I need ways to check in morally sometimes, because as a human I have blind spots." If we don't find those ways, we instigate our own fall.

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Russ
Old salt
# 120

 - Posted      Profile for Russ   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Not only too many- if the Milgram experiment is any indication, the vast majority of us would torture a man to death simply because a man in a white lab coat told us we wouldn't get in trouble.

Yes, that was quite chilling. But wasn't the sample of people who took part quite small?
My understanding is that similar experiments have been carried out since, and there are always people prepared to do the torturing. More people will do it if the experimenter who tells them to appears to be a high-status person - a professor at a prestigious university rather than a graduate student in rented office space.

All of us humans, we're imperfect in various ways - broken, empty, compromised, deceived, shortsighted, addicted, wanting, whatever way you want to express it. That's the truth that underlies the doctrine of the Fall. That there was a pre-Fall state and a literal Fall event is a myth - I don't know whether it's a form of conservative "Golden Age" wishful thinking, or a legend that conveys that truth in story form.

But that's life, and it's better to get used to the fact and forgive ourselves, each other, and all human organisations, including churches, for not being what they should be.

Best wishes,

Russ

--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas

Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Patdys
Iron Wannabe
RooK-Annoyer
# 9397

 - Posted      Profile for Patdys     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My glass is half full today.
For me, it simply means I have not yet realised my full potential as a human being. I never will. But with the help of God, and all of those around me, I can become closer to my full potential.

So what is my full potential? My usual hobbyhorse. Perfect love with heart, mind, strength and soul. Being fallen is wonderful as it both recognises I am not and never will be perfect but also recognises my capacity for change for the better. No matter where I am at.

--------------------
Marathon run. Next Dream. Australian this time.

Posts: 3511 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The reason for using the metaphor of a fall is that it's something that applies to all people, but it's not supposed to be of the essence of humanity.

But isn't that the basic premise of the Fall as metaphor? That the HPtFTU is due to some external factor and that it can, theoretically, be gotten rid of?
If by external factor you mean not of the essence of humanity, yes. That it can theoretically be got rid of in the New Jerusalem, yes. That it can be got rid of entirely pre-mortem, most major Christian denominations have flatly denied.

--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams

Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
HughWillRidmee
Shipmate
# 15614

 - Posted      Profile for HughWillRidmee   Email HughWillRidmee   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
We are all fallen, as we are all not as good, as perfect as we are intended to be by our creator. We have fallen from the ideal, and salvation is needed in order to raise us to the state God intends for us.
Actually your creator (in the sense of the creator of your personality) is a mixture of the genetic material you inherited from your parents and the experiences you have so far encountered. The experimental evidence suggests quite clearly that none of us have what we would like to call Free Will.

“ ideal” “perfect” What ideal is this? What perfect is this?
Do you mean your personally revealed versions, the version of ideal/perfect that your version of a version of religion tells you to mean, do mean an unknowable ideal which we’ll only understand once we’re dead or what? I assume you mean whatever your god thinks is ideal/perfect, but precisely what does he think – shall we start with which of the 630+ commandments count and which don’t? – and how do you justify your in/ex-clusions?

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Except that we can't change who we are
I wish it weren’t so but the evidence (rather than wishful thinking) backs you up

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I think we need to apologize for who we are, insofar as pretty much all of us are vicious, selfish, miserable sinners with no life in us- atheists and non-Abrahamic believers included.

No you shouldn’t apologise for what you are if that you is the inevitable result of events beyond your control - though your need to apologise is, it seems, also beyond your control. Atheists (this one at least) sometimes do/does things that are ethically wrong, we also know that it is extremely unlikely that anyone has ever “sinned”. Not sure about the “no-life-in-us”; presumably this is jargon which those in the know will understand – as with much jargon it’s just silly when taken at face value.

I consider my apathy before the suffering of others not worthy of esteem. A lack of self-esteem seems to be closely allied with addictive behaviour. Misuse of mind-altering techniques, including supernatural belief, seems to thrive in people who need relief from their disdain for themselves. There, but for the luck of the draw, go I.

Not only too many- if the Milgram experiment is any indication, the vast majority of us would torture a man to death simply because a man in a white lab coat told us we wouldn't get in trouble. I think you have misunderstood the point of Stanley Milgram’s work. This was experimental testing of people's obedience to authority figures, in other words it was about how far we would go, at the expense of a non-authority figure, to avoid the authority figure's displeasure.

Avoid getting involved with authority figures seems a rational conclusion – but then, for many, the ultimate authority figure is an invisible, inaudible, untouchable, etc. being that is intensely concerned about what we wear, what we eat, who we mix with, who we go to bed with, what we do when we’re in bed.... oh and, h/t to the late George Carlin, ...... he always wants money - lots and lots of money!

quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
It does provide a framework for trying to understand the darkness within. Animals do not kill or torture for pleasure, as a rule. But we do. We are higher than them, yet our behaviour can be so much worse.
Yes – we are higher in the sense that we have brains that have abilities that other animals’ brains don’t – though birds might pity us for being earthbound – fish for our restriction to inhabiting the smaller part of the planet – bats and bees for our dependence on such a limited visual spectrum, and snakes and spiders for our need to devote so much time to the pursuit and consumption of other forms of life.

Our evolutionary development meant we (of all hominids) survived this far – we have unique abilities, particularly in social structures, but we also have the downside that these abilities can work against us. We still crave fat and sugar because those who craved them (at a time when our ancestors were usually hungry) caught more food and could support bigger brains. Now food is, for most of us, abundant we still have the cravings – and I, for one, have the waistline to demonstrate it. Evolution doesn’t do good – it does successful.



--------------------
The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things.. but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them...
W. K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)

Posts: 894 | From: Middle England | Registered: Apr 2010  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Seeing Dafyd's sig makes me think.

'We remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams'

Could it be said that our 'proper state' is in relationship with each other and God, and that it's our lack of relationship (via death, selfishness etc) with each other and God that's a sign of being fallen/having the HPtFTU?

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211

 - Posted      Profile for Laurelin   Email Laurelin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If evolution does successful rather than good - which seems obvious - then where did the higher notions of morality and altruism originate from? I've seen it argued that altruism developed because it benefits us. Amd yet upthread it was said that we have thrived on the evolution scale because of our vicious streak, not despite it. Where does morality come into this, then? If we have to be vicious in order to survive, to have come as far as we have, why then put a moral angle on the viciousness?

And yet we are appalled, and rightly so, at the scale of the viciousness we are capable of. The Holocaust. The Rwandan genocide. Syria. How the hell is any of THAT remotely justifiable from an evolutionary point of view? The very notion is deeply repugnant.

SusanDoris ... your view of human nature is more rosy and benign than other atheists/rationalists I have talked to. I once knew an atheist who declared that they thought the human race was so malign they wouldn't care if we were wiped from the earth. I found that a very bleak worldview. Because I think we are worth saving. I think God thinks that too.

However ridiculous you may find my Christian beliefs, mine is not a worldview devoid of hope or of redemption.

--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien

Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
No you shouldn’t apologise for what you are if that you is the inevitable result of events beyond your control - though your need to apologise is, it seems, also beyond your control. Atheists (this one at least) sometimes do/does things that are ethically wrong, we also know that it is extremely unlikely that anyone has ever “sinned”. Not sure about the “no-life-in-us”; presumably this is jargon which those in the know will understand – as with much jargon it’s just silly when taken at face value.
What a comfortable life you must have led. I am absolutely sure that the person that chopped off this girl's hands during the Sierra Leone civil war sinned.

“The doctrine of original sin is the only empirically verifiable doctrine of the Christian faith," as Reinhold Niebuhr claims.

quote:
A lack of self-esteem seems to be closely allied with addictive behaviour. Misuse of mind-altering techniques, including supernatural belief, seems to thrive in people who need relief from their disdain for themselves. There, but for the luck of the draw, go I.
If you are only capable of sin because of the "luck of the draw," then you are only capable of virtue for the luck of the draw. Which I find very sad.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Susan Doris seems in two minds - thus, saying that maybe the Milgram experiment had a small sample! Yet why would the atheist bother if large numbers of people could be barbaric? It is a natural phenomenon, isn't it?

I often think of Paul's words - I do not do the thing I want, but the very thing I hate (rough paraphrase). In some ways, Freud said the same thing. I think there are solutions to this enigma, some religious, and some not.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Actually if you listen to some evolutionary psychologists they believe the vicious streak is there because it gave evolutionary advantage. In other words we survive because of it, not despite it.

Jengie

I do not think the Milgram experiments demonstrate a vicious streak. Nor does even the Rwandan genocide. What they demonstrate is how our gregarious nature helped us be a successful species. In animals which live in groups, there will be a leadership structure. There will be followers. Most will be followers to some degree. Milgram took advantage of this need to follow, to be part of the structure. Many of the participants were not vicious, indeed they suffered whilst complying. The need to be part of the group subsumed personal reservations. This is part of the why of Rwanda, the Holocaust.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I do not think the Milgram experiments demonstrate a vicious streak. Nor does even the Rwandan genocide. What they demonstrate is how our gregarious nature helped us be a successful species. In animals which live in groups, there will be a leadership structure. There will be followers. Most will be followers to some degree. Milgram took advantage of this need to follow, to be part of the structure. Many of the participants were not vicious, indeed they suffered whilst complying. The need to be part of the group subsumed personal reservations. This is part of the why of Rwanda, the Holocaust.

How does this redeem human nature one jot? We're all so weak willed that our viciousness can become a community activity with a little leadership?

I don't give myself points just because I feel bad for doing what I know I shouldn't, or because I'm too weak willed to do what's right.

[ 15. May 2013, 04:55: Message edited by: Zach82 ]

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I was not offering absolution. Regardless of the mechanisms of why, we are still responsible for making those decisions.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can't accept the notion that humans are enlightened and moral creatures when I read stories like this:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/disney_world_srich_kid_outrage_zTBA0xrvZRkIVc1zItXGDP

Original sin might be a tough pill to swallow for some, but sometimes it absolutely makes sense.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:

I don't give myself points just because I feel bad for doing what I know I shouldn't, or because I'm too weak willed to do what's right.

Seems like quite an excellent get-out clause to me.

"I can't do what's right, it's my fallen human nature you know"

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Basically, in order to test the concept, only two questions need to be asked of anyone, regardless of faith.

1. Do you have a personal moral code which you believe in and try to live by?

And if the answer to that is "yes", then the second question can be asked.

2. Do you keep it all the time?

The Christian concept of sin (Gr ἁμαρτία hamartia) is rooted in the meaning "missing the mark". There has to be a mark to miss. If one's moral code is malleable, for example determined more by what we think we can get away with than some idea of what is right, then the answer to question 2 will be "yes"! But I'd say that's just missing the mark in another way. A form of self-deception. A moral code with an "if I can get away with it" escape clause strikes me as an immoral code.

So I reckon missing the mark is a pretty general human failing, regardless of where the lines are drawn. Anyway, that's how I understand the fallen condition in a wider sense i.e. regardless of world view.

The issue of whether there is an objective mark (God's law) is of course connected to that. But that's an external "ought to". If we have a personal moral code, that's an internal "ought to".

I haven't personally met anyone who thinks they get a pass on both, when it comes to consistency of behaviour and attitude. Maybe I've led a sheltered life?

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:

I don't give myself points just because I feel bad for doing what I know I shouldn't, or because I'm too weak willed to do what's right.

Seems like quite an excellent get-out clause to me.

"I can't do what's right, it's my fallen human nature you know"

Can I throw out a concrete historical example of the complexity of original sin?

Suppose you are living in a military dictatorship with your family. You know the military leaders are up to no good, you have seen the soldiers take away your friends and neighbors off to prison camp for speaking out against the regime. Your conscience calls you to join them, but you have two primary school age children. You know this regime is not beyond torturing anyone, including children.

So what do you do? By not speaking out, you lend legitimacy to the current regime. You are in the eyes of Holy Scripture and Tradition, "complicit with evil." Yet you have your family to worry about.

Understood this way, original sin captures the complexity at the heart of ethical decision-making, especially in extreme situations. I think the point isn't that we are not good people, we definitely have good intentions. And there are people of extreme good character, Nelson Mandela and others. But to be honest, most of us probably aren't going to be that heroic. Most of us probably would not die for what is right.

Most of us, I'll bet, would find it very, very difficult to completely forgive someone who harmed or worse, murdered our children. The Lord Jesus Christ said it plainly "We are to forgive others." Perhaps most of us will eventually forgive, but it takes time due to our frail human nature.

But God is still merciful to us when we have supremely failed at pretty much everything he taught us through Jesus Christ. And grace says that even when we find ourselves doing things we thought we will never do, God still abides with us.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools