The Dink Network

Striker, I thank you for your' constructive criticism - I welcome, because if I don't, I am burying my head in the sand. I do not wish to be closed-minded. Indeed, I have first-hand experience with fanatical Christians.

After reading your' post, I have these thoughts (of course, somewhat self-defensive):

- but I may meander a bit with my rebuttal

Please do not hold back. I am stronger now, and will not run away when the masses seem to disagree with me. How can improve my philosophy without seeing where it is flawed? All I ask is that the criticism be constructive and logical to some extent.

- No, all humans have the capacity to go to that "lowest denominator", but that does not mean that they go there under normal circumstances.

Yes, you are right. I ammend my former statement: Humans tend to sink to the lower denominator when in desperate circumstances (Jews during Titus' destruction of Jerusalem, 70 AD; Japanese cannabalism during latter years of WW2 etc.)
Or in times of extreme success, resulting in indolence (Internal corruption, crimes for etc... this is a bit of a "movie hook": Scarface, Saw, Hostel etc. Yet I believe it happens in real-life too: Think, the fall of the Roman Empire, the Corruption that led to the collapse of the British Empire and the problems that inflamed America, but are apparently being dealt with even as I type.)

- Regarding the rest of your' post, Striker, I would point to a favourite thinker of mine: the widely mis-understood Sigmund Freud.

Freud came up with the theory of Id <- Ego -> Super-Ego. The basic gist of this theory is that within our minds are a triangle of struggling motivators. These components have often been described as "sin and righteousness", "conscience" and the "choice". I would like to pull away from the former two labels with this statement: There is no right or sin, merely that which is constructive for X and what is destructive to X.

So, Id is what we want to do. "I'm starving! A Maccas Super-Meal-Deal would be swell!" Super-ego is the hold-back, think-again/ guilt factor. "Maccas? Outrageous! Think how fat and pimply you'll get, plus your' crap will be green for a week! Wait 'til you get home and eat lettuce, you greedy sod!" Ego strives to balance the two. "Just get a chicken burger now, to last you till you get home, then have an apple and some OJ."

The Bible supports this idea as well:

I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

 21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? - Romans 7.15-24

The author, Paul is freaking out because his Id and Super-Ego are in conflict.

You also mentioned, Striker, "such religious people merely suppress and deny these urges, so that they are expressed unconsciously or done in secret".

I would say yes, absolutely: for example, some strict christians will watch videos against "Rock 'n' Roll" (because that's the era they grew up in), but they enjoy the video clips of these bands whilst murmuring "Demonic! Evil!"

This is best addressed by comparing such mind-sets with Freudian readings of Shakespeare's "Hamlet".

It is clear that an innate desire to kill one's father and sleep with one's mother runs contrary to the very fabric of our society. For orthodox Freudian thinkers, the difference between this innate urge and the demands of our civilization is mediated by repression and sublimation. Either the inappropriate urges are repressed (which risks manifesting itself in psychological illness) or they are transformed into some expression which is useful to society.

From this interesting article. Worth a read.

So, often, strict Christians think that the Id = bad / If it feels good, it must be wrong. This is bad for the health, it is not holistic or balanced, and Biblical figure Solomon spoke against it:

 1 For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven: 2 a time to be born, and a time to die;a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted; 3 a time to kill, and a time to heal;a time to break down, and a time to build up; 4 a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; 5 a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing. - Ecclesiastes 3. 1-5

So I think balance is good. If you go all Id, all Ego or all Super-ego then you are either going insane or simply missing out on life's fun.