Working on some new terminology. Monorealism is the belief in one reality. That all things that are real are part of reality and that anything that isn't part of reality is not real. In contrast monotheists and polytheists tend to believe in "other realities" which are "outside" of the world of science and are experienced through emotions generated by the imagination. Our "world" includes "everything that is real" and excludes everything that is not real. We may not know what is and isn't real but our position is that whether or not we know it's status, that everything that is real is real and everything that is not real is not real. There are no other states where something is real in "another world" or in a "different reality". Our definition of reality would include all other realities that are actually real.
Monorealism also accepts the Sacred Principle of Scrutiny in that we apply the principles of science to determining what is and isn't real. We might believe something is true that we can't prove because we don't know everything. But if we believe in something it's because we have a reason to believe it's real. it's because we have some evidence, or a theory based on logic, or some mathematical model where at least the math works (string theory).
Monorealism excludes faith in that everything we believe in is subject to scrutiny. We have accepted that if we are proven wrong that we will change our minds. Faith excludes scrutiny and if you accept something based on faith then you are expected to continue to believe it no matter what.
Realists experience the world through understanding. We rely on logic, reason, wisdom, and scrutiny as the foundation of our beliefs. In contrast beliefs that require emotions and the imagination are not considered to be reliable.
We are monorealists who believe in monorealism because of our monorealistic point of view. Who likes this idea?
I also want to throw out another term I call "The Faith Paradox". Two people from two different religions are in a room who both believe different things that are mutually exclusive. That can not both be right, but they can both be wrong. both have accepted their position based on faith which can't be questioned. You are a realist listening to the claims of these two people. How do you determine who is correct?
For example, many Christians claim that you can only get to Heaven through Jesus. Muslims claim that you can only get to Heaven through Mohamed. Since both used the word "only" they are mutually exclusive. Since both want to convert me them how do I determine which one will get me to Heaven, if there even is Heaven?
The question really is - which one is real? How do we determine that using faith. Do we wait for the deity to speak to our heart (ie. use our emotions and imagination)? But both of these people did that can came to conflicting conclusions. One or both perhaps were influenced by Satan. But since each religion has a billion people then at least a billion of them failed to get accurate information using faith as a tool to determine reality. As an outside observer I would have to conclude that if I made my decision based on faith that there is at least a 50% chance that I will be wrong.
So - how does one determine the truth between two conflicting world views based on faith? Perhaps both people could pray to their deities and then have a contest with swords and the one who is victorious is the one with the stronger deity? But they've been running that test for centuries and the results are inconclusive. So what is left? The only way they can really determine who is correct is to turn to reality.
If one can prove scientifically that they are right then they win. But anything proven scientifically is part of the real world, the physical universe that does not require faith. So if people who have conflicting faiths want to determine what is real then they have to come home to reality.
So - let's just skip the faith crap and start with reality? Ultimately they have to come to us bacause reality isn't something that you can ignore forever. Reality doesn't go away when you stop believing in it. Faith is like kicking a rock and imagining that you are punishing the rock when you are only hurting your own foot. It's not about what you believe in, it's about what's real. Ultimately is about the one reality that we all share. That's why I'm a monorealist.
Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality
"We believe in the one true reality!"
Letter to the Editor
People seem surprised when Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lies to Congress as if they expect him to tell the truth. Why should he tell the truth? After all, who is going to investigate him? The Justice Department? He is the Justice Department. And even if he were investigated, brought to trial and convicted of perjury he'd never go to jail because Bush would pardon him just like he did for Scooter Libby. So Gonzales and anyone in the Bush administration can break the law with impunity and get away with it.
The Democrats don't have the votes to impeach Bush and Cheney. It takes two thirds of the Senate to remove Bush from office. The Democrats want to impeach Bush but nothing is going to happen unless the Republicans decide to stop the lawlessness too. The Republicans are the ones allowing Bush to flaunt the law. We need to hold the Republican party accountable for allowing the Bush administration to act lawlessly.
Went to Extreme Pizza for lunch today. They advertise a lunch with a pizza with 2 toppings so I ordered a pizza with canadain bacon and pineapple. The told me that the canadian bacon counted as 2 toppings and had a list posted as to how many topping each topping counted as.
I was going to suggest that one of my dollars counted as 2 dollars but instead I decided to walk out and go to Taco Bell. I really hate it when companies try to screw you by doing things like claiming that some of their topping counts as two toppings. Sorry Extreme Pizza, you lost a customer today.
Never pick a fight with a blogger who buys data by the terabyte.
Letter to the Editor
I believe the reason America is in trouble is that our leaders have turned their backs on reality, relying too much on faith instead. The candidates in both parties have stated how faith is part of their private and public lives. What I want to know is -- where does reality fit into your life and will you make your decisions as president based on faith or reality? I want to know if you've are willing to make a personal commitment to the pursuit of reality the way it really is and let reality guide you to restore the soul of our nation?
Asking a question on some open source support forums is sort of like this example where I will substitute asking directions to make a point. Although I support open source software, generally when you get a commercial product you don't get the kind of attitude that you get in some free software discussion lists. This is often similar to what it's like.
Q. Excuse me, can you give me directions to the Tech Museum in San Jose?
A. You don't want to go there. The Exploratorium in San Francisco is much better.
Q. But I'm meeting a group of people and we already have tickets to go there. Can you give me directions?
A. Well, that was a mistake. You all would have had a much better time at the Exploratorium instead. Maybe you all can sell your tickets and go to the Exploratorium?
Q. Maybe that would have been better but we have Tech Museum tickets and the rest of the group is waiting there for me and I just need directions to get there.
A. Well, did you look it up on Google maps?
Q. No - perhaps I should have, but I didn't. I just need to know how to get there. Can you give me directions?
A. Well if you had looked it up on Google maps you wouldn't need to be here asking for directions.
Q. I know that. But I didn't look it up, I don't have a computer with me, and I just need directions about how to get there.
A. You know if you had a Palm cell phone you can download Google Maps and then you would know how to get there without having to burden people like me with your questions about asking directions. You have a responsibility to at least try to figure it out on your own before you pull over to ask directions. And if you had decided to go to the Exploratoruim in the first place you wouldn't need to know how to get to the Tech Museum. It's people like you who go to the wrong museums and don't look up where you are going on Google maps, and don't have a PDA cell phone that ruin life for everyone else. I have deemed you unworthy of an answer.
Q. Thanks for NOTHING! All I wanted was an answer about how to get somewhere and all I get is a lecture.
A. Hey, I'm just trying to help! It seems to me that the "burden of humility" should be on the person asking for assistance, not the person providing it. I think that your response above is actually more arrogant than what you are complaining about. I've been to both places and I don't think it's wise to go to the Tech Museum. You should get offended when someone who has been down that road before tries to tell you that the premise behind your question is ill founded. If it's not, can't you simply ignore the response instead of arguing with it? If you don't want my help you shouldn't have asked for it.
Letter to the Editor
I remember in 1998 when President Clinton has an encounter with Monica Lewinski. Conservatives were outraged and demanded impeachment. Clinton lacked the moral integrity to be a public servant, they claimed, because he had committed "adultery". The Neocons were salivating for a divorce saying that Hillary had to leave Bill for the self respect of women. Wendy Vitter, wife of Senator David Vitter said Hillary should not be forgiving saying, "I'm a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary. If he does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony, trust me."
Now in 2007 when David Vitter who called for Clinton's resignation has been exposed having relations with multiple prostitutes you don't hear the moral outrage. No one is using the word "Adultery" to describe Vitter, nor are conservatives calling for his resignation because he has asked for and received forgiveness from God and therefore the problem is solved. I personally have a problem with giving forgiveness to those who refuse forgiveness for others who have done something similar.
If the Vitter's want to be forgiven they need to ask forgiveness from the Clintons who they attacked during their time of marital crises. These people were absolutely viscous the way they went after Bill and Hillary and now I think they should answer not for the sin of Adultery, but for what they did to the President and the country. I believe that if the Vitter's ask for grace then they should earn it by saying that are sorry for having denied grace to others.
I don't remember anything like THIS when the Jesus freaks were going after the Clintons!
From: http://frcblog.com/
Statement on Sen. David Vitter
The statement by my friend and form colleague, Louisiana Senator David Vitter, was very disappointing. He admitted to a “serious sin” in a statement he released to the press on Monday, prior to news reports revealing that his phone number appeared on a long list of client’s numbers of the now infamous DC Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey.
In the release David assumed complete responsible for what he did and that he “asked for and received forgiveness from God and [his] wife in confession and marriage counseling.” These allegations first surfaced about 4 or 5 years ago when David was considering running for governor of Louisiana. He backed away from the race admitting to marital problems and he and his wife sought counseling. This public revelation coincides with that time frame.
While I commend him on assuming personal responsibility and working to make things whole in his life, I cannot defend David’s behavior. Adultery is a serious matter that affects not only the individuals involved but families and the well being of the entire community. Voters have the right to consider issues like this when they assess the character of an elected official.
Having said that, the American people have shown themselves to be very forgiving toward a public official who admits their failures and takes redemptive steps. And despite what some have said since he released his statement, so does God. Proverbs 24:16 reads “For a righteous man many fall seven times and rise again, but the wicked shall fall by calamity.” I hope to see David back on his feet again.
Letter to the Editor
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says he has "Gut Feeling" that terrorists are going to strike something this summer. I have a gut feeling that he's just covering up for Bush and trying to distract attention away from the upcoming report that mo progress is being made in Iraq. My gut feeling is that if there were a terrorist attack that Chertoff wouldn't be any more ready than we are for Hurricane Katrina.
Letter to the Editor
When Republicans held control of Congress in the 1990s the had occasional sex scandals with prostitutes and fathering children out of wedlock. But by 2006 Republican morality had sunk to a new low with conservatives like Reverend Ted Haggard having gay sex on methamphetamines and Republican Congressman Mark Foley trying to have gay sex with underage boys.
But now Republican Senator David Vitter has publicly apologized after his phone number was linked to being a client of an alleged Washington prostitution ring. What this means is that Republicans are making a moral comeback, moving from gay sex with boys on drugs to adult heterosexual sex with female prostitutes. This shows that Republicans have reversed course and are now heading back in the right direction. If this trend continues they might start talking about getting out of Iraq and balancing the federal budget.
Letter to the Editor
On September 30th 2003 Bush told reporters in Chicago, "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of..." Today Bush made good on his promise and took care of Scooter Libby by commuting his sentence. Unfortunately there is only one remedy for a president who commutes the sentence of someone who lied to cover of for his own crimes and that's impeachment. But the Republicans are standing in the way and allowing Bush to continue to be lawless.
Letter to the Editor
I rarely agree with this new Supreme Court but the decision they made to make the nation more colorblind was the right decision. I'm old enough to remember when I was in the 4th grade when they stared busing kids around to schools far from their home to end segregation. I thought it was a bad idea then and it's still a bad idea today.
I agree with Justice Roberts, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." I think that racial policies that were intended to integrate society has institutionalized segregation making us all aware of the race of a person and that race should play a role in decisions. But why is it important to classify a person based on the frequencies of light reflected by the surface of a person's skin? After all, we all come from Africa if you go back far enough and we all have black ancestors. All of humanity evolved from black people and we're all pink on the inside.
Racial identity is racist. I think that black leaders such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have done black people a disservice and that it's time that black people stop thinking of themselves as "African Americans" and start thinking of themselves as ordinary people. If we are going to have affirmative action then let it be for poor people and let's achieve integration by building the best schools in the poorest neighborhoods where they are most needed.