David VanHorn wrote:

>> HOWEVER, that's not what I was arguing at all. Call it whatever you
>> want, I was just asking Dave to explain how HAI is different from a
>> religion, as far as this list is concerned.
> 
> I feel like I'm trying to explain color to a blind man.  :) HAI does NOT
> profess belief in any supreme being, nor does it ask you to reject any
> such belief. It's simply got nothing to do with it.

I think it really depends a lot -- more on the individual than on the
"thing" itself.

There are some religious people who explain their religion with an attitude
like "this is what makes me feel good, whole, happy, [your preferred
positive adjective], it may or may not work for you, here's what you can do
if you want to try it sometime" -- which is quite similar to how Dave
describes HAI.

OTOH, there possibly are people who would describe HAI or something like it
with the same or a similar fervor that religious fanatics can show: "This
is the way to save you and the world; if you don't do it this way, you're
doomed. And since I need a world where things work /this/ way, if you don't
do it this way, you're harming me and are my enemy." Or something the like.

I think it's pretty difficult to define what a "supreme being" is -- as
James's own message (the one about the AA experience) shows. Russell has
quite nicely (albeit way not comprehensively) explained what's difficult
about "knowable". 

I think there's probably no infallible definition of "religion" or
"unknowable". Therefore interpretation is needed occasionally, as to how to
apply these rules to a certain case. As in all good dictatorships, James
makes both the rules and interprets them when necessary. (And, also as in
all good dictatorships, he does so with the common good in mind.) 

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist