In Reply to: Re: Zeitgeist Something Perry (and others) might appreciate posted by Perry on February 04, 2008 at 18:06:40:
No, it wasn't directed at you. I once told you that I had more in common with you than you might think. I can't really explain it properly, since you don't believe in a God but I do. But I am rational and scientific and also quite a skeptic too, and I subscribe to my own mish-mash brand of beliefs with different seemingly-conflicting principals, which do not present too much discord and dissonance for me (let me keep my illusion!).
I was reacting to the sweeping statements in part I of the clip. I hate when someone talks like they know it all when they are interpreting things we each have a right to interpret and find out for ourselves--whether it's from a *religionist" or "anti-religionist." I hate when people communicate in a way that says, "I did all your thinking for you, so trust me when I tell you to swallow this." Conspiracy buffs tend to talk like that too, and apparently this film footage was made by people who believe in conspiracy.
My comment on the religion of being anti-religion is in general about the way people make a religion out of different things, upholding beliefs which are sacred and anethema to discredit. I figure we all hold on to our own illusions. One example is the way I see former drug users get off of drugs, only to get addicted to something else, keeping the adage alive: Once an addict always an addict. But it's anethema to suggest they're still addicts. Since all of us could at one time be called "religious fanatics" the tendency for us to find new replacement dogmas after leaving is probably quite high.
Hope I'm making sense to you. Anyway, glad you took the time to spell out your humanist beliefs. I've not had any trouble understanding where you're coming from, but some other people have repeatedly said they do. :-p