[MD] God is dead?

[david buchanan]

Steve said to dmb:
...Pirsig never looked at the MOQ levels in terms of devolopmental 
psychology or cognitive development or evolution of worldviews as Wilber has 
with his system, so your Wilber knowledge may be more important than the MOQ 
in answering my question.

dmb says:
As I see it, the MOQ's levels have a "mater-of-fact evolutionary 
relationship" with each other.  So I think we don't  need to add any 
Wilberisms to make Pirsig's system about the "evolution of worldviews". The 
conflict of the 20th century, for example, is an evolutionary conflict 
between two entirely different worldviews. And I think that individual 
development paints the same basic picture of the situation. Its suppliments 
the historical perspective with a psychological view. I don't think Wilber's 
views would alter the MOQ. They just add some detail to the picture.

Steve wondered:
I'm wondering whether religion is a necessary or important stage of 
development for kids. I have a daughter and I have some desire to raise her 
within a church. I kind of think it may be good for kids.

dmb says:
I think that myths and stories are very good for kids. They need to learn 
conventional morality too. Most churches will provide that in their Sunday 
School classes. But I'm a dad too and I think there are better ways to teach 
kids about myths and morals. On certain topics, I'm definately 
home-schooling the boy.  I want him to know as many myths as possible. It 
builds imagination. Our myths express the values of our culture beautifully 
just as they are.  My daditute is that books and movies are better than 
Sunday School just because there's so much less baggage, so much less 
bathwater.  I mean, maybe Joseph Campbell would be more useful than Wilber 
or Pirsig is on this point.  Yes, mythic thinking can be understood as a 
phase in our evolutionary history and as a phase in the psychological 
development of each person, but its not the kind of thing we can ever shake. 
As I understand it, the myths and stories continue to animate and motivate 
and shape our minds and our culture.

And as I understand it, actual spiritual development  doesn't really show up 
until later in life. I wouldn't recommend church for that purpose either.

Also, kids should eat their vegetables.

Steve said:
I was also thinking about the relationship between adolescent angst and 
exististential angst and wondering if they are similar. Is existentialism a 
stage between a religious perspective and postmodernism or pragmatism or 
whatever.

dmb says:
Yea, that's pretty much how I see it. It appeals to 19 year old freshman and 
to excessively self-absorbed adults, kind of like Ayn Rand's Objectivism. 
But culturally too, it seems to be part of the transition from mythic 
thinking to rational thinking. It expresses the maturation process of the 
culture. All that talk about being responsible for creating our own lives 
and our own meaning is really good stuff. It also has a way of enshining 
moods and feelings as if they were metaphysical realities or permanent 
psychological features and I have all kinds of other problems with it.  I 
really hate Keirkegaard, for example. Strikes me as pathologically 
narcissictic and laughably grandiose about his little soap opera of a life. 
On the other hand Nietzsche was a dark, smug prick. So naturally I love him. 
  And you gotta admire Sartre just becasue he was so creative in so many 
ways, but I find him pretty much unreadable. Thanks for giving me the chance 
to be such a snob.

Steve said:
I hope that's enough to spark some discussion. I'm definitely interested in 
people's views on whether they would consider taking their kid to church.

dmb says:
I could probably complain about the baggage and the bathwater all day long. 
Call it a hobby. But the one that bugs me the most is that whole bit about 
original sin. This is exactly what a child does not need to hear. They don't 
understand it in terms of humanity's shared struggle with our natural 
condition or anything so abstract. They'll just take it to mean that God 
sees them as flawed, bad and naughty.  And so it will tend to shape their 
self-image in a negative way. I'd even say that teaching this so-called 
theology to kids constitutes abuse. And this is assuming they don't  learn 
about original sin from somebody who is also having sex with them.

I'm also afraid, if I raised him in the church, that my boy will inevitably 
increase in his cognitive abilities and then he'll accuse me of filling his 
head with bullshit.  Teaching him things I do not believe myself would 
eventually harm his ability to trust me.

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to 
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement