View Single Post
Old 05-03-2006, 09:29 PM   #33
littlemanpoet
Itinerant Songster
 
littlemanpoet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Edge of Faerie
Posts: 7,066
littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.littlemanpoet is battling Black Riders on Weathertop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davem
The question is whether in either case we are dealing with a 'fact' about the Primary World, or a particular Secondary World. Speaking as an Introvert I'd tend to give priority to a Secondary World over the Primary one.

Of course, the Primary World is also in some ways an amalgam of all our Secondary Worlds - we invent our own model of 'reality' which we project onto the things around us - we tell ourselves a story about it. The 'real' world has no colours, sounds, tastes, textures. Quantum theory tells us that all that is 'really' out there is energy. Our brains interpret that sea of energy & invent the colours, sounds, etc. 'I' exist as a character in my own invented secondary world, the one my brain has put together.

LMP, Formendacil & others 'really' see a fallen but redeemed creation when they look at the world. Many others see nothing of the sort. What happens though is that we get so caught up in our 'Secondary World ' that we forget that we're dealing with a fantasy.
We need to distinguish between how davem is using the phrases Tolkien coined, from how Tolkien used them. The difference is subtle but profound.

Tolkien meant, by Secondary Reality, a mental construct, passed, by means of the written word (in Tolkien's case), from the author's mind to the reader's mind, in order to engender Secondary Belief.

Secondary Belief is the act of entering into a story one reads, knowing it is not primary reality, but engaging the story as if it is while in the act of reading.

Willing Suspension of Disbelief, by contrast, is the act of choosing not to get derailed by a lack in either the story or the reader's ability to engage the story, in order to .... engage the story.

davem means a mental construct, created in the mind of the perceiver, by means of the senses from Primary Reality to the mind, engendering - by nature - Primary Belief.

As I said, a subtle but profound difference. Tolkien coined the phrases in order to shed light on story and the reading of stories. davem is using these same phrases in a way that confuses things; without the intention of doing so, I would bet. However, there are perfectly adequate words and phrases to describe what davem is really talking about: "world view; weltanschauung; philosophy of life".

Primary Belief is believing something to be real. It is unhealthy to have Primary Belief regarding Secondary Reality. Of course, what davem is more or less saying is that we're all delusional and we might as well enjoy it and let each other have the delusions of our choice. Sorry, that's not good enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laitoste
I refuse to believe in a God who tells someone to "kill thirty-one kings in all" (Joshua 12), or who appoints misogynistic jerks as his mouthpieces (Paul).
Thank you for kindly offering yourself as an exemplar of my contention that belief is a choice one makes. I am figuring that the pejorative appelation "jerk" is meant to be something that always is linked to "misogynistic", in which case we can dispense with it and concentrate on the main point. Note, first, though, that this is a psychological illness to which you are giving a moral valuation. In other words, what is being said here is that God is morally inferior to the one who refuses to believe because of the misogynist mouthpiece and the killing command. Now: (1) how is Paul a misogynist? (2) what are the facts of the case regarding the 31 kings? (3) How can a creature be morally superior to its creator?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Formy
Let me be clear: I sincerely believe that Christianity is the BEST way to Heaven. It is the easiest way, the way deliberately outlined by God as the RIGHT way. It offers benefits and help that no other path has.
Formendacil, are you sure this is what the Latin-rite Church believes? If so, it has sadly left the path of orthodoxy, accomodating itself to something it should not. I'd appreciate it if you could produce documentation, because I think you're incorrect.

That's all I can manage for now. Alatar, I'll respond to your post when I get a chance.
littlemanpoet is offline   Reply With Quote