From: Elizaphanian (Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 11 2002 - 09:02:37 GMT
Hiya David,
I'm glad you're having fun too :-)
> DMB says:
> Sorry to bore you. Demythologisation? I suppose that's part of it, but the
> main idea is to analyze the motifs and heroes by comparing a wide variety
of
> myths and finding the common features. This puts Christ and Christianity
> within a larger context of understanding, rather than in a context of
faith
> and belief. I'd hardly call this avoiding the archetypes. I'd call it
> studying the archetypes.
>
I thought 'demythologisation' precisely _was_ putting things into a larger
context, ie by abstracting and comparing common features. But as you said
yourself that we couldn't avoid living out the archetypes, what's wrong with
using the traditional language (when appropriate)?
>
> DMB says:
> I'm comfortable with theological language. No problem. And I think I do
> grasp your point, that your campaign stands independently of your
> Christianity. I think its not all that subtle. Its just that I don't
believe
> it. It not even just the campaign. It goes back to the political threads
> too. You've been resisting the intellectual level from several angles. (No
> Anglican jokes this time.)
Why don't you believe it? From my (necessarily biased) point of view, I'm
resisting intellectual-level distortions of Christianity, yes, but from a
higher level intellectual/mystical point of view. I still think you've got
me packaged in that box marked 'Conservative Christian', and you're not
actually engaging with _me_ or what I think.
> DMB says:
> I guess I wouldn't be able to recognize intellectual dishonesty if I
weren't
> capable of it myself. Ha! Takes one to know one! But to be more precise,
it
> seems to me that you have begun your examination of the intellectual level
> with the conclusion already in mind. That's backward. The conclusion comes
> last. That's what i mean by intellectually dishonest. In terms of Pirsig's
> intellectual level, mainstream Christian theology simply doesn't rank. Its
a
> social level thing. It seem that you understand that, but won't accept it.
These comments are the reason why I don't think you've understood my point.
>
> Cliches of the counter culture? Like what? I should tell you that in
1967's
> Summer of Love, I was looking forward to kindergarten. Sure, I've read
about
> it, but I'm too young to have lived it. In the 70's I was a Baptist
> midwesterner. Colin Wilson? I'm not familiar with him. Atheist? I was an
> Atheist briefly in college, about twenty years ago, but that was just a
good
> way to get the Bapsist stink outta my hair. It seems your crystal ball
needs
> new batteries.
I owe you an apology. I was operating under the impression that you were
significantly younger than me. You're not. Oops. But my point was that your
arguments were current at that time, and seem redolent of that era, that's
all.
> DmB says:
> Re-state my understanding of your campaign? OK. Fair enough. This should
be
> easy because you recently said it yourself.
But the whole point of 'active listening' is that you explain how YOU
understand my position, in YOUR OWN WORDS, and wait for me to say if you've
understood my point or not. Obviously we can't get to perfection, but we can
get much closer than we're getting now. As I say, I don't think you've
understood my perspective. It's perfectly possible to continue disagreeing
with me in all sorts of ways (I outlined three major ways in one of my
posts, there are probably more) so you won't be risking anything if you
accept my challenge. But it might lift our dialogue out of its rut.
Sam
www.elizaphanian.v-2-1.net/home.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 11 2002 - 08:59:19 GMT