quest


I am a woman born 1949 and my quest is to find a mindmate
to grow old together as a mutually devoted couple
in a relationship based upon the
egalitarian rational commitment paradigm
bonded by intrinsic commitment
as each other's safe haven and secure basis.

The purpose of this blog is to enable the right man
to recognize us as reciprocal mindmates and
to encourage him to contact me:
marulaki@hotmail.com


The entries directly concerning,
who could be my mindmate,
are mainly at the beginning.
If this is your predominant interest,
I suggest to read this blog in the same order
as it was written, following the numbers.

I am German, therefore my English is sometimes faulty.

Maybe you have stumbled upon this blog not as a potential match.
Please wait a short moment before zapping.

Do you know anybody, who could be my mindmate?
Your neighbour, brother, uncle, cousin, colleague, friend?
If so, please tell him to look at this blog.
While you have no reason to do this for me,
a stranger, maybe you can make someone happy, for whom you care.

Do you have your own webpage or blog,
which someone like my mindmate to be found probably reads?
If so, please mention my quest and add a link to this blog.


Showing posts with label unitarian universalist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label unitarian universalist. Show all posts

Friday, April 10, 2015

733. Motivation For Behavior: The Difference Between Deficits And Benefits

733.  Motivation For Behavior:  The Difference Between Deficits And Benefits

I value rationality as one distinctive and superior quality, by which human individuals differ from instinct driven animals.  This is a premise, which many people do not share with me.   I am fully aware that those, who value being guided and determined by unconscious instincts and inclinations more than by rationality, cannot and will not agree with the following application of rationality on how to live.      

As I myself am both a non-breeder and non-religious, both are for me expression of the same rationality.   As a member of a non-breeders' group, I asked some puzzled question to religious non-breeders.    
In the entries 656. The Placebo Church  and 441. An Ingenious Self-Deception I have already expressed my wondering about the weird Unitarian Universalist placebo church.   My question to a member thereof concerning what needs and deficits were met, ended as an impasse.  

I did not get an answer, I did not even succeed to convey my question.   The exchange has inspired the following thoughts.

 
A rational person has an awareness for the importance of evaluating behaviors and actions by the consequences and by comparing them with alternative options for its causes and reasons.

1.  One important factor is the baseline.   Behavior improving the subjective wellbeing can have one or both of these effects:  It either restores the baseline to the neutral state of neither pleasure nor displeasure, or it adds pleasure above this baseline.  
This is an important distinction, because I consider only this baseline of not suffering as a human right, while seeking pleasure can only be justified when nobody else is harmed or taken advantage of.  

2.   People, whose behavior is caused by a deficit, often get additional benefits above the baseline.   Sometimes they consciously only recognize the benefits as if gaining these were the original purpose of the behavior.   They are unaware or in denial that the initial purpose was restoring the baseline.   

3.   Another factor is the experience of cognitive dissonance, when people want to be more rational than they really are.  They want to consider themselves as rationally seeking benefits and not as if they were helpless robots succumbing to urges.   The denial of urges and deficits is a method to avoid experiencing cognitive dissonance.

4.   There are different kind of subjectively perceived deficits.   Deficits can be innate or acquired, they can be physical or cognitive.   Rational behavior requires thinking about all relevant factors and about the long-term consequences before coping with the perceived deficit.   Just following the urge is often irrational.   

 
A rational way of life requires people to scrutinize carefully all their inclinations to behave.   For this purpose they ask themselves several questions.   The ones in the not comprehensive following list are important
  • Which is my baseline? 
  • Do I only get benefits or are there needs, deficits, urges, wishes, discontentment, dishomeostasis hidden behind the experienced benefits?
  • What would happen, if I resist the inclination to this behavior?
  • What alternative behaviors are there?   
When interactive behavior includes reciprocal impacts by and upon others, rational persons apply these questions to others as much as upon themselves.   Not only the choice between respect and disrespect depends upon this, but also the choice between supporting and refusing to become a victim, between continuing the interaction and avoiding the person.

A few examples:

1.  Food
 
When a hungry, not obese person eats, this is rational.
When a not hungry but also not-obese eats something for the pleasure of the taste, it is unnecessary but not irrational.  
But when an obese person eats because of boredom, stress or a similar reason, then this is irrational.

2.  Alcoholism as an addiction
 
2.1.  There is no physical or real need for drinking any alcohol at all.   Not drinking is completely rational behavior. 
2.2.  When someone drinks restricted quantities of alcoholic beverages with sufficient intervals in between, this can be be considered as rationally enjoying the taste.  
2.3.  But in the case of someone feeling an urge for alcohol intake to reach the baseline, then this is an addiction.  
In the case of denial, the addict claims to drink for pleasure and does not recognize and acknowledge the urge.   He is not aware of the irrationality of his drinking.    
2.4.  An alcoholic having asked and answered the questions can admit, that his urge to drink alcohol needs an approach, which is anything between self-control and therapy, but not drinking. 


When irrational behaviors are reinforced or even instilled by a social norm, they become an even more devastating problem.   This is unfortunate for the many people, whose life would be better without acquired, harmful urges.   
There are special dynamics at work.  People are trapped, because they are allowed to consciously experience some benefits.  These benefits do not suffice to rationally justify the amount of sacrifices, which are required.   But unconsciously these people also experience the additional relief of some urge, of which they are consciously in complete denial.   This denial impedes them from considering and attempting other, more rational methods to deal with the urges.  
The urges instilled by the social norm lead to behaviors, which override any healthy individualistic approach towards living in a balance of giving and receiving in the exchange with the social environment.   By these social norms, people are deformed towards willingly allowing to be exploited and taken advantage of while being mistaken as being important and useful.   
These victims are not aware that the social norm serves only the interest of those, who use their power, influence and greed to usurp more such advantages. 

Two of these instilled behaviors are breeding and religious behaviors.  Breeding and religion have one aspect in common with alcoholism.   There are enough non-drinkers, non-breeders and non-religious people as evidence of the existence of alternatives.

3.  Breeding
 
3.1.  In modern western societies and even in some others too, there is no individual need for breeding.   Not breeding is a completely rational behavior. 
3.2.  Under some limited circumstances in the past and in some remote places, the survival of old people depended and depends on raising children.   These people have no need to belief in alleged benefits of breeding, they are succumbing to a necessity.  
3.3.  But someone feeling an urge to breed only for reaching the baseline has a serious problem, like an addict.    
As children cannot be undone, once the mistake was made, breeders are usually in denial of any remorse.  They insist that breeding has brought them benefits.   They do not recognize and acknowledge to have succumbed to an instinctive or instilled urge.   They remain unaware of the irrationality of breeding.     
3.4.  While breeders are consciously in denial, they implicitly often show a glimpse of belated rationality, when they stop further breeding after the first child.   But this is not a conscious change to rationality concerning breeding. 

4.  Religion

4.1.  A rational way of life is not deranged by any religious behavior.   A rational, responsible and considerate treatment of others requires rationality and the absence of any religious behaviors.   No rational person is religious.   No religious person is rational.
Religion manifests itself by observable religious behaviors, which not only include personal sacrifices of money, time and comfort, but even worse it also determines how others are treated.   
Weird ritualistic body movements only impact one person.   But often religion can cause as much damage as an alcohol addiction.     When someone wastes the family money on church donations and his time at the church service instead of with his partner, he inflicts damage on others for irrational reasons. 
Worse are those, who transgress, acquire religious forgiveness and feel free to continue transgressing.   A man, who by following his polygamous religion copulates with other women, deeply hurts his monogamous partner who experiences this as cheating. 
4.2.  Religious behavior is an expression of a belief, which can never rationally be justified.   What is based upon science and evidence, is not a belief.    Only pretending by outwardly imitated religious behavior can sometimes be rational self-defense, when needed for self-preservation.   
4.3.  Religious people's denial is extreme.   I have repeatedly asked religious people, which urges, deficits and experienced dishomeostasis causes them to be religious.   Asking this questions seems futile.  They just seem not to understand.  They enthuse about all their emotional benefits and even feel offended, when I keep on asking about the deficits.  These deficits are the core of what makes them religious and distinguishes them from rational people.     
4.4.  Some religious people overcome their denial.   When they finally get rational, the only possible reaction is to free themselves of all the religious beliefs.   But while remaining a believer, no religious person will ever admit, that they feel urges towards merely reaching a baseline of basic wellbeing, which rational non-religious people already have without any religion.      


Therefore, breeding and religion are as irrational as alcohol addiction, the only real difference is the social norm, which encourages breeding and religion, while alcoholism is considered deviant.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

656. The Placebo Church

656.   The Placebo Church

In entry 441 I was expressing how a weird institution called Unitarian Universalist Church (UU) puzzled me, because it makes no rational sense.    They claim not to be a religion but they behave like one.  

In entry 589 I defined religion by also showing behaviors based upon irrational beliefs other than only the one in the existence of a deity.    These behaviors can be seen as rational methods of coping with irrational beliefs, while without such beliefs, the behaviors themselves are irrational.


In this sense the UU is a placebo religion.   

A person, who has by own experience or by reliable observation learned, that taking a painkiller brings relief from pain, can often experience the relief from pain by unknowingly taking a placebo, which is a pill without any chemical content.    It is a placebo by still looking like a pill, only the active ingredient is omitted.    

The christian religion has some psychological benefits for some people.  Their imaginary god's attributes help them to cope with human suffering.   The christian religion is especially attractive to victims finding an alleged sense in their sufferings and to perpetrators and evil doers finding alleged justification for harming others.   
  • The belief in being rewarded by the alleged god in the alleged afterlife misrepresents senseless suffering as if it were a valid method to earn such a reward.
  • The belief in an alleged god's alleged wisdom being beyond human comprehension attributes hidden reasons to suffering.
  • The belief in an alleged god's alleged wisdom and rewarding in the alleged afterlife allows the perpetrators to harm others without a bad conscience.   They perceive the alleged god as the proxy, who is considered the one responsible for the harm. 
  • The belief in an alleged god's alleged reward for forgiving is misused as the unjustified demand for being forgiven for unforgivable harm.  
The only active ingredient of any christian church is the god's impact upon the endurance of suffering and the inflicting of harm.   By being interwoven with the entire culture the christian religion has over its long history incorporated the additional supplying of many secular benefits.  As a result, many people completely lost all awareness for the differences between those benefits, which were due to the core of the religious beliefs, and those collateral and independent benefits, which were only added but not religious. 
This vague and indiscriminate notion of a church as being beneficial in a generalized and very special manner is the reason, why so many people experience it is possible to delete the god and create a placebo church, which still appears to be a church.    Just like the placebo pill looks like a pill.  


The placebo effect of a sugar pill is impossible for any person ignorant of the existence of painkillers, like some ingenious people in a remote area.   (Any similar effect would need other explanations like a general gullibility to suggestions and claims.) 

It is the same with the church.   Those, who have never experienced the christian religion as beneficial, are not prone to experience a placebo church as offering any benefits, which cannot be obtained elsewhere.   


But there is one decisive difference between taking a placebo pill and joining a placebo church:  

The placebo pill works, when the person does not know, that the pharmaceutical ingredient is lacking.   The placebo church is chosen for being the placebo, for having the god as the active ingredient eliminated.   


A person without pain needs neither a pharmaceutical nor a placebo painkiller.   The sugar in the pill can be obtained anywhere and in any form, the person without pain eats sugar when he wants to.   He does not make it look like a painkiller first.
I have never heard of anybody eating placebos, knowing that there is no medicine in them, only because of the sweet taste.   They rather eat real sweets. 

A person without religious needs does not need a church, neither one with a god nor a placebo church.  Such a person finds and enjoys the collateral benefits found in christian churches directly in secular alternative institutions.   He does not combine them to appear like a church.    
Self-labeled atheists in the UU are like people, who knowingly eat placebos for the taste instead of getting the real thing elsewhere.   


When a church already exists for those, who benefit from the delusion of the existence of a deity, then the additional use of such an institution for other benefits and also by non-religious persons can be rational.    
All the benefits offered by the UU are benefits available elsewhere, where each by itself can be experienced and enjoyed as secular.   Combining them as a placebo church is a deliberate bias.    Creating a placebo church for only non-religious benefits is irrational.   


I can think of only one explanation for this is a fallacy: 

It seems that there are two distinct types of self-labeled atheists.  
  • Those who are independent thinkers, to whom the insight of the irrationality of religious beliefs has come as an unavoidable conclusion and consequence of thinking.   Atheism and feeling free from needing any religion is emotionally beneficisal for them, because it makes them feel good about themselves.  
  • Those who have a strong need for the benefits of the delusion of the existence of a god, but who were so much disappointed by some event in their life, that they were unable to continue to believe.   They suffer from their persistent craving for their lost paradise of the delusion. A placebo church gives them the best relief for that craving.   
    As members of the UU they remain fence sitters, who look in the direction of atheism, but their behind is still entangled in christian religious needs.   
    The choice of an institution with the style of buildings and terminology as a placebo church accommodates the fence sitters' needs to remain in surroundings resembling their lost paradise.   

An example:  Somebody with sufficient knowledge in philosophy can either be the speaker giving a lecture in an auditorium or he can be the minister giving a sermon in a church with or without a god.   
They may even talk about the same topic, but there is a huge difference:
 
Independently thinking atheists attend the lecture.   They listen to information, which they afterwards reflect upon and which maybe influences their attitudes and their behavior.   But they actively process the information and choose what to make of it.

People, who prefer to attend services and to listen to sermons, do this in a more passive and submissive way.   Naming an event a service indicates, that there is a target, who is served by humble servants, who expect guidance and who are emotionally ready to be told what to do.   They do not choose or process, they attempt to follow, and rarely doubt the wisdom of someone with the halo of being called a minister.  


Becoming an atheist is only the first, but not sufficient step for rational people.   The logical next step is a rational reevaluation of all attitudes, values, opinions.   Whatever makes no sense without the christian belief, of which it had been derived, has to be reconsidered.
  
But the choice of a placebo church indicates the clinging to the values and world view of christianity and the wish to change nothing except having lost or deleted the god.


    

The following is a list of benefits as experienced and perceived by a member of the UU.   With his permission, I am quoting him literally. 
 
All these benefits do not need a church but can be obtained as good or better elsewhere.    My comments point to alternatives.  
1. fabulous live music of all kinds
No church is needed for life music.   There are many secular places offering concerts.    Anybody who wants to play in public, has a wide choice of places.  
2. liberal religious education, fellowship and musical training for children, making them aware of the great variety of religions and non-religious views
The place for education is the school.  Community colleges offer music lessons beyond the level of schools.  Pupils need to be taught scientific and skeptical thinking.   The place for information concerning religion are in history and social science lessons with sufficient mental distance.   They need to be taught, that religion is obsolete and enhances harming behavior.
Pupils also need to be taught interactive skills like communication, theory of mind, and a value system based upon rationality.   
3. fellowship and fun with people of liberal, non-religious and liberal religious views
People need fellowship with likeminded people.     Non-religious and liberal religious are contradictions.   Someone can either belief in a god or not.  This impedes fellowship.   There is a mental abyss between those, who belief in any god and those, who do not.   Something is weird when they join a placebo church instead of associating with their own kind.  
Liberal is a political term and has its place in a political party.  
4. promotion of enlightened values, including earth-friendly values among others, and tolerance for people of differing views.  
Tolerance for differing views (not different needs or tastes, unfortunate life situations or disabilities) is an indication of ignorance, stupidity and/or irrationality.   The careful evaluation of all views leads to the conclusion, which of them is rationally superior or is the only rational one.  From then on, differing views do not deserve tolerance.    Tolerance is the admittance of insufficient thinking.  
Rational non-religious people need secular non-religious and atheist groups, where religious people are excluded as a nuisance and annoyance.    Only fence-sitting atheists have tolerance for delusional believers.  
Enlightenment is the contrary of tolerated stupidity.   
5. social justice activities
This is the realm and task of political parties and task oriented pressure groups..
6. places where people can evolve their views as they are exposed to new or different ideas, not to mention help and healing in recovering from past indoctrination from dogmatic theology
This is the realm of secular psychological self-help, self-improvement and self-awareness groups and courses at community colleges.     The worst indoctrination is the delusion, that there are deities, afterlife, an immortal soul and such.   Any alleged help, which includes tolerating such insane beliefs would not be a real help, only a slight reduction of the damage. 
7. promotion of an open-minded approach to life in general
This is the realm and task of secular psychological self-help, self-improvement and self-awareness groups and of schools and all educational institutions.
8. non-religious weddings, child dedications, coming of age celebrations, and funeral services
All these celebrations are rituals based upon some interaction with a god.   A wedding means vows to a god, they are obsolete without a god.   People can best organize their celebrations according to their own individual needs.  
9. counseling and support for people going through difficult times
This is the task of qualified secular and rational psychologists.   A minister's kitchen psychology can do more damage than good.
10. community outreach supporting other organizations serving the most needy people in our communities and beyond
This is the realm and task of political parties and task oriented pressure groups.  They have to influence any country's government to fulfill its obligation to care and provide for the needy by getting sufficient tax from the rich.
11. a forum for the free expression of views which sometimes may run counter to those of the populous in general, e.g. opposition to war, oppression, etc.
This is the realm and task of political parties and of task oriented pressure groups.. 
12. an insitution where people can come together on a regular basis to meditate quietly and calmly on their lives and so on
This is the realm of secular psychological self-help, self-improvement and self-awareness groups and courses at community colleges and other educational institutions.    
13. a welcoming congregations accepting of people of different genders, sexual orientations, races, ethnicities, etc.
This is the common ground and every day situation of every functional group of people, who have joined it to pursue a hobby, sport, interest of any kind.  
14. all of these things and more available from one organization existing often like an island of liberality in the midst of a land of conservative religious people and their churches
It is pathetic to imitate, what one rejects.   Independent thinking atheists need a real alternative, not a placebo church.    
15. a denomination demonstrating a democratic way of functioning in the midst of many non-democratic, paternalistic institutions
A democratic way of functioning is the common ground of every functional group of people, who have joined it to pursue a hobby, sport, interest of any kind.  

There is no objective need for a placebo church to provide anything from this list.   A placebo church caters only for the need of people with a specific precondition.  

Saturday, November 26, 2011

450. Self-Labeling And Self-Deception

Self-Labeling And Self-Deception

Correct self-labeling is important for people, who are selective in the choice of with whom to interact.   Self-labeling helps to make a fast preselection for the decision, with whom to spend time, what to share, whom to trust, what to expect, whom to avoid.   

Therefore self-labeling has to be specific enough to draw a line between like minded people and mental aliens, but it has not to be too specific.   A label, that is too specific to be generally known does not serve the purpose.  A suitable label is a kind of an umbrella to include people with a fuzzy understanding of the label.  

Also the meaning of the label has to be roughly agreed upon by those using it for self-labeling, it is much less important, how much it is sometimes used incorrectly by others.   Someone using a certain self-label upon himself needs to be able to recognize with a low probability of error any other person as like minded due to using the same self-label.   But It is rarely possible to recognize someone as like minded, if the label is merely attached by others.     

Atheism is such a label.   Mistaken christians interpret is as the belief in the non-existence of their god.   Those using it upon themselves are usually better informed even though it is also a fuzzy label.   Not believing in the existence of a god does not automatically imply the absence of other weird beliefs.    
The absence of all beliefs is called apistia.   But would I call myself only apistic, some people would not understand this not widely used word.    But it is at least probably that a self-defined atheist really is one.  When the adherents of one religious creed use this label for anybody, who is not, they only define the absence of their specific belief, but not of any.

The correct use of a label is based upon the full understanding of the core of its definition.  Many ex-christians have partially adopted other religions as a substitute.  A good example are those, who call themselves both atheists and buddhists, based upon the claim, that buddhism were not a religion.   
The core of buddhism is the belief in reincarnation. That implies the unscientific religious belief in an immortal soul.   The buddhistic religious practice aims at influencing the sequence of the reincarnations.   This practice has some side effects, that are also beneficial before death and therefore without the belief in an immortal soul.   Meditation is an example of a method with such side effects.  
Buddhism stripped of the non-scientific beliefs is a conglomeration of exercises, some physically beneficial, some psychologically beneficial, some merely ludicrous.   But without the belief in the rebirthing of a soul it is not buddhism by its core definition. 

Somebody calling himself a buddhist without believing in the reincarnation of his soul, is using a label, of which he has not really understood the meaning or is in denial of it.   In this case, using the self-label buddhism is misleading.   The majority of buddhists in the Asian countries with traditional buddhism do believe in reincarnation without one moment of hesitation.   This justifies to assume that anybody using buddhism as a self-label is a religious person with an irrational belief, who does not really fit under the umbrella of atheism.  

People simultaneously defining themselves as atheists and as buddhists show a similar psychological mechanism as I already described in entry 441 about the unitarian universalists.   
They succeed in feeling good about themselves as having overcome the stupidity of the belief in a god.   But they also succeed to continue to feel good due to the security and protection of a religion promising them benefits when following in submission to rituals and exercises prescribed by others.    If they would make the mental step to mentally separate beneficial exercises from the label buddhism, they would lose the subjective feeling of security.    

Sunday, November 13, 2011

441. An Ingenious Self-Deception

An Ingenious Self-Deception

When the attraction of succumbing to religion and the displeasure of feeling stupid are equally strong, this leads to cognitive dissonance.      

Some people have found a ingenious mental trick to solve this cognitive dissonance.  

They created the unitarian universalist church.  

They claim it to be an atheist church.  That is as convincing as a non-money bank or a non-rail railway.   A church is a place of religion and faith instead of skepticism, even when avoiding the word 'god'.   The unitarian universalist church has all the characteristics of a church, ministers, sermons, church buildings.   

It certainly is not atheistic in the sense of apistia, of the absence of a need to believe and of living as if the option of a deity has never been considered.    It is not an atheist church, it is a wanna-be-atheist church, a kind of mental halfway house for those, who are already playing and learning how to be rational atheists.  But they still lean heavily on the mental crutch of the religion, that they have not yet really left behind.

The unitarian universalist church is not a church without a god, it is the church of the hidden and unmentioned god.  An empty placeholder fills the space reserved for this elusive god.   There is an empty frame for to the members to fill with their own imagination of the god.  The existence of the god is a taboo subject.  
The members of such a congregation avoid deliberately to deal with the question of the existence of a god.  This taboo of avoiding any clear statement concerning the existence of a god allows the wanna-be-atheists to perceive it as an atheist church, while believers are never challenged in their beliefs.  The believers take the existence of a god for granted, and the wanna-be-atheists consciously the non-existence,  Both can thus avoid to ever face the fundamental differences between their respective assumptions.  
 
They are encouraged to think and believe, whatever suits their needs.  This enables the wanna-be-atheists to attend a church and not feel stupid, they can thus avoid to feel any conscious conflict with their rationality and intelligence.    

They continue to enjoy all the emotional benefits of the christian delusion, while they label themselves as atheists.  Their consciously discarded god has been moved to the subconscious level.   Attending a church continues to have the same soothing effects as if they were still practicing their previous religion with an openly revered god.

It is one of the most ingenious self-deception I have ever come across.   It is an amazing mental construction for having the cake and eat it.   They enjoy the good feeling of having conquered the stupidity of religion.  But they also enjoy the good feeling derived from the delusion of a god, which is triggered by being in a church so much resembling an explicitly christian church.   They still enjoy the emotional benefits of the delusion, which at the same time they believe to have given up. 
 
But as ingenious as this self-deception is for those, who need it, it has no appeal to real atheists and apistics.   For them it is just pathetic and ludicrous.