Big Think

Christopher Horne commented on the Humanities on February 15, 2008, 3:05 PM

I believe that to an extent, you have a point: what purpose does it serve to study art history if you're going for an MBA? Well, I can say that from my experience, it's a double-edged razor. History can teach a great deal about more than the topic at hand. While I was attending art history courses, I learned a great deal about religion%u2013a side effect of the courses, so to speak. In turn, this elevated my knowledge of the world and how it developed from monarchies to merchant class driven societies and in turn, democracy. On the other hand, if you are after a job in accounting, none of those topics will come up in the workplace except perhaps in the lunchroom, and hence they're lofty indeed. If you'd rather get it over quick without extraneous courses that won't go toward making your MBA or accounting degree any more the better, then opt out on the four year college and go a tech school where you'll be taught ONLY what you need to know (and you will find work once done). Otherwise, true, every big word you learn in college in your "19th Century English Lit" class will serve no purpose other than to entertain guests at a game of Trivial Pursuit at a party. BUT!!! The REAL point is to hone in your interests, since statistically more students change degree paths than not and with a rounded education, you'll get a shot at seeing what career you want to drive toward. Without these courses, you'll never know if you would REALLY rather be a librarian (where those lofty humanities are vital) than an IT specialist. That's my food for thought.

Christopher Horne commented on What do you believe? on January 22, 2008, 2:53 AM

How should the Bible be interpreted? Like any other work of ancient mythology: a collection of stories, all of which highly moralized and most of which set to the tune of allegorical readings. This book, albeit it wields a mighty strong voice of power in the hands of clergymen (and women, but lesser so amongst the women of churches), is a tool for keeping order as suggested here by the expert Peter Gomes, but it's also used to hold its followers as if in a trance to abide by its every word...some of those powerful words more so than others, but in all, that power it wields from its oblique scriptures (another point he makes) is and has been for thousands of years a tool to pacify, to structure, to influence, to essentially make sheep of men and women; This book has held so much sway that countless wars have been waged, countless lives lost, and all in the name of "God"; partly that's what's going on now in Iraq. Let's leap back a few thousand years and take away all the drama that's associated with what the Bible represented; it is amazing that it's stuck around this long with so many faithful believers. However, suppose that another man (or woman) came along with a contrary set of ideals to that of what the ancient cultures valued and spread the word (more or less) about collectivism, democracy, and these ideas that contradicted current philosophy and government to the point of drawing a large number of followers; that's what Jesus did, but suppose it was someone else? Would there be the worship there currently is? Well, Ghandi did much of what Jesus did in his own way in India to bring peace to Pakistan and India without so much as a single fist thrown%u2013John Lennon and Yoko Ono could be even more recent examples of radicals, what Jesus was, a radical. One day Ghandi might be immortalized and embellished upon the way that Jesus was, and I won't rule out whether or not he was divine (nor Buddha, Zoraster, Allah, Baha'u'llah, Brahma, etc.); after all, not many have brought peace through peaceful means, order through kindness and love%u2013but does that make Yoko Ono a living saint for working towards world peace? Maybe Ghandi was a prophetic character as Jesus, Brahma, Zoraster, etc. all have been claimed to be: but that doesn't hold any bearings on the Bible's interpretation. Jesus is but one man in the bunch. Then you've got John the Baptist, St. Christopher (we can't forget the saints), Daniel, Moses, and countless others both from the Old and New Testament. Maybe all of these people were real, and maybe they were fabricated in the tradition of storytelling. One way or the other, the polytheistic gods of the Roman Empire slowly but surely were overtaken by the teachings of the Bible and of Jesus the Savior. This doesn't make the old polytheistic gods dead, we now read them as myths, and one day too likely we'll read the Bible as myth as well. Already, many, many preachers and believers selectively believe and read much of the Bible as allegory. Yes, some history may exist within some texts, but at one point it was all seen as history, not a shred of allegory taken away. It was ALL taken seriously. So times are already taking place. The Bible was first introduced during the time when the West was merely the Mediterranean. It was at a time of great turmoil, change, and having seen the Greeks fall, the Romans shortly thereafter, the West was entering into the Dark Ages and something like the Bible provided respite to those who found themselves scared, alone, or lost during those dark days: much like now but in a different way. The Bible was (for a time, like the mythologies that preceded it) a form of rudimentary science, a way of explaining all things not understood in the world through conventional means%u2013yet still providing very moralistic lessons. Never in history has the Bible been used without the power it possesses in the hands of its clergy. There's a funny thing about the Bible in that for those who feel they need it, it can be read for reassurance that things will work out with a little faith, but, so too do most world religions share this same dogma. Perhaps space aliens came down and told a handful of men how to help make civil societies...but I sincerely doubt that. The Bible is nothing new, even for its rhetoric. Other texts, such as the Bhagavad Gita (the Hindi "Good Book") is a text in which reincarnation plays a significant role. This is much like Jesus' second coming, not to mention his appearance after hanging from the crucifix that prompted Easter holiday; these texts share many similarities (look too to Buddhism at its Noble Truths and see how they resonate with the Ten Commandments). Both of these texts predate the Bible. The Dhammapada one of many Buddhist texts (particularly a more popular Buddhist text...much like the King James Bible of all the translations) and the Bhagavad Gita, meaning that of these "teachings" (if that name suits you, I prefer parables and lessons myself), teach of things that the Bible does and have for several aeons of circulation amongst peoples of the world%u2013Christianity is even in many ways said to be modeled after Zorastrianism. I think it only fair to look at these other religions (mainly monotheistic) as mere mythology the way one looks at the dead religions. Once upon a time Zeus was God and there was no hell, only malicious gods that toyed with mortals, but all gods influenced human's daily lives like moves on a checkerboard, in ancient beliefs. How could anyone who truly thought this matter over see it as anything more pragmatic than that? I'm not just talking the Bible, but all religious texts. In this case the Bible is the book of the topic, and for serious differences within just the Bible, look at the different denominations. The Bible itself has been passed down so many generations as well, taken, and written with several translations, so ultimately from Bible to Bible, Christian religion to Christian religion, you can read the same stories from different angles, in some cases with other elements, or even new stories all together. You have Lutherans vs. the Presbyterians, those two groups vs. Catholics, Catholics vs. both of them plus the Eastern Orthodoxy and Asian Orthodoxy who can't meet eye-to-eye with anyone else either (these differences going back ages before the Christian Church split into two, you even had the Gnostics who still are the most disagreed with of them all). Then branch out and differentiate those groups from some of the newer, less well-known enclaves of the Christian doctrine comprised of such as folks like Christian Scientists, Quakers, Anglicans, Pentecostals (who speak in tongues), Christadelphians, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists, Evangelists (though old, they've taken on modern forums such as Tele-evangelism) or even Mormons. Mostly, you've got disagreement within the texts as I suggested, and likewise, even additional newer texts. How can this be taken seriously? Should we consider followers of Islam or Baha'i to be Christian, too? In a sense since they are since they both recognize Christ. Jews are halfway there with the Old Testament in hand. Whose mythology should be interpreted how is a better question. So whose? To all the zealous, that moral mending junk is pure and simple bad advice; we could use fewer misogynistic homophobes. I've always been curious why so many people are SO caught up on dying and going to heaven or hell, that they have to be preoccupied with something that doesn't necessarily exist, that's probably not what's expected nor comprehensible: being saved?! Live here and now and let go of all that guilt, nobody knows what happens when we die...anybody, anybody? I'm all ears if I'm wrong. And then to believe the earth is ours for the taking and giving back isn't required, that there's no life out there but ours, and that we've been around for a miniscule 2000 some-odd years...WHY?! It's mass hysteria in my opinion. I personally prefer to live in the here and now, so how do I read the Bible? I don't make a habit of it, but I read it like poetry, like a play, I read like fiction because that's more than likely what it is. Perhaps there's some history intermixed, but who'd know where to look or what's real...even who's real, Jesus? Moses? Maybe they're both allegorical figures completely. The fact is unless you can definitively prove otherwise, I'll read a passage or two of your monster book the next time I'm in a motel.(I thought I typed this already...weird. I've noticed this beta version also messes with your interests in weird ways, hrmmm)

Christopher Horne commented on What do you believe? on January 21, 2008, 9:53 PM

How should the Bible be interpreted? Like any other work of ancient mythology: a collection of stories, all of which highly moralized and most of which set to the tune of allegorical readings. This book, albeit it wields a mighty strong voice of power in the hands of clergymen (and women, but lesser so amongst the women of churches), is a tool for keeping order as suggested here by the expert Peter Gomes, but it's also used to hold its followers as if in a trance to abide by its every word...some of those powerful words more so than others, but in all, that power it wields from its oblique scriptures (another point he makes) is and has been for thousands of years a tool to pacify, to structure, to influence, to essentially make sheep of men and women; This book has held so much sway that countless wars have been waged, countless lives lost, and all in the name of "God"; partly that's what's going on now in Iraq. Let's leap back a few thousand years and take away all the drama that's associated with what the Bible represented; it is amazing that it's stuck around this long with so many faithful believers. However, suppose that another man (or woman) came along with a contrary set of ideals to that of what the ancient cultures valued and spread the word (more or less) about collectivism, democracy, and these ideas that contradicted current philosophy and government to the point of drawing a large number of followers; that's what Jesus did, but suppose it was someone else? Would there be the worship there currently is? Well, Ghandi did much of what Jesus did in his own way in India to bring peace to Pakistan and India without so much as a single fist thrown%u2013John Lennon and Yoko Ono could be even more recent examples of radicals, what Jesus was, a radical. One day Ghandi might be immortalized and embellished upon the way that Jesus was, and I won't rule out whether or not he was divine (nor Buddha, Zoraster, Allah, Baha'u'llah, Brahma, etc.); after all, not many have brought peace through peaceful means, order through kindness and love%u2013but does that make Yoko Ono a living saint for working towards world peace? Maybe Ghandi was a prophetic character as Jesus, Brahma, Zoraster, etc. all have been claimed to be: but that doesn't hold any bearings on the Bible's interpretation. Jesus is but one man in the bunch. Then you've got John the Baptist, St. Christopher (we can't forget the saints), Daniel, Moses, and countless others both from the Old and New Testament. Maybe all of these people were real, and maybe they were fabricated in the tradition of storytelling. One way or the other, the polytheistic gods of the Roman Empire slowly but surely were overtaken by the teachings of the Bible and of Jesus the Savior. This doesn't make the old polytheistic gods dead, we now read them as myths, and one day too likely we'll read the Bible as myth as well. Already, many, many preachers and believers selectively believe and read much of the Bible as allegory. Yes, some history may exist within some texts, but at one point it was all seen as history, not a shred of allegory taken away. It was ALL taken seriously. So times are already taking place. The Bible was first introduced during the time when the West was merely the Mediterranean. It was at a time of great turmoil, change, and having seen the Greeks fall, the Romans shortly thereafter, the West was entering into the Dark Ages and something like the Bible provided respite to those who found themselves scared, alone, or lost during those dark days: much like now but in a different way. The Bible was (for a time, like the mythologies that preceded it) a form of rudimentary science, a way of explaining all things not understood in the world through conventional means%u2013yet still providing very moralistic lessons. Never in history has the Bible been used without the power it possesses in the hands of its clergy. There's a funny thing about the Bible in that for those who feel they need it, it can be read for reassurance that things will work out with a little faith, but, so too do most world religions share this same dogma. Perhaps space aliens came down and told a handful of men how to help make civil societies...but I sincerely doubt that. The Bible is nothing new, even for its rhetoric. Other texts, such as the Bhagavad Gita (the Hindi "Good Book") is a text in which reincarnation plays a significant role. This is much like Jesus' second coming, not to mention his appearance after hanging from the crucifix that prompted Easter holiday; these texts share many similarities (look too to Buddhism at its Noble Truths and see how they resonate with the Ten Commandments). Both of these texts predate the Bible. The Dhammapada one of many Buddhist texts (particularly a more popular Buddhist text...much like the King James Bible of all the translations) and the Bhagavad Gita, meaning that of these "teachings" (if that name suits you, I prefer parables and lessons myself), teach of things that the Bible does and have for several aeons of circulation amongst peoples of the world%u2013Christianity is even in many ways said to be modeled after Zorastrianism. I think it only fair to look at these other religions (mainly monotheistic) as mere mythology the way one looks at the dead religions. Once upon a time Zeus was God and there was no hell, only malicious gods that toyed with mortals, but all gods influenced human's daily lives like moves on a checkerboard, in ancient beliefs. How could anyone who truly thought this matter over see it as anything more pragmatic than that? I'm not just talking the Bible, but all religious texts. In this case the Bible is the book of the topic, and for serious differences within just the Bible, look at the different denominations. The Bible itself has been passed down so many generations as well, taken, and written with several translations, so ultimately from Bible to Bible, Christian religion to Christian religion, you can read the same stories from different angles, in some cases with other elements, or even new stories all together. You have Lutherans vs. the Presbyterians, those two groups vs. Catholics, Catholics vs. both of them plus the Eastern Orthodoxy and Asian Orthodoxy who can't meet eye-to-eye with anyone else either (these differences going back ages before the Christian Church split into two, you even had the Gnostics who still are the most disagreed with of them all). Then branch out and differentiate those groups from some of the newer, less well-known enclaves of the Christian doctrine comprised of such as folks like Christian Scientists, Quakers, Anglicans, Pentecostals (who speak in tongues), Christadelphians, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists, Evangelists (though old, they've taken on modern forums such as Tele-evangelism) or even Mormons. Mostly, you've got disagreement within the texts as I suggested, and likewise, even additional newer texts. How can this be taken seriously? Should we consider followers of Islam or Baha'i to be Christian, too? In a sense since they are since they both recognize Christ. Jews are halfway there with the Old Testament in hand. Whose mythology should be interpreted how is a better question. So whose? To all the zealous, that moral mending junk is pure and simple bad advice; we could use fewer misogynistic homophobes. I've always been curious why so many people are SO caught up on dying and going to heaven or hell, that they have to be preoccupied with something that doesn't necessarily exist, that's probably not what's expected nor comprehensible: being saved?! Live here and now and let go of all that guilt, nobody knows what happens when we die...anybody, anybody? I'm all ears if I'm wrong. And then to believe the earth is ours for the taking and giving back isn't required, that there's no life out there but ours, and that we've been around for a miniscule 2000 some-odd years...WHY?! It's mass hysteria in my opinion. I personally prefer to live in the here and now, so how do I read the Bible? I don't make a habit of it, but I read it like poetry, like a play, I read like fiction because that's more than likely what it is. Perhaps there's some history intermixed, but who'd know where to look or what's real...even who's real, Jesus? Moses? Maybe they're both allegorical figures completely. The fact is unless you can definitively prove otherwise, I'll read a passage or two of your monster book the next time I'm in a motel. (I thought I typed this already...weird. I've noticed this beta version also messes with your interests in weird ways, hrmmm)