Hello again my positivist colleagues,
Are you aware that Auguste Comte called "Positivism," the "Religion of Humanity."? Do you realize, as Comte defined it, the French founder of Positivism, that the effort to declare theology an anachronism is just another effort to force your, ad hoc, religion of scientism on other people?
I could count, but my posts are too forgetful to bother. I would estimate at most 5% of my posts included theological concepts. One was apropos to questions about the relationship between morality and piano technology, the other was simply a response to a replication. Other than that, no theology was involved. Don't turn me into a martyr, that will only embolden me.
Mz. Grassi, perhaps you would be more open to spiritual concepts if you read some Mary Daly.
http://www.marydaly.net/
Though she frequently changes her image, for this I would recommend, "Gyn/Ecology; The Metaethics of Radical Feminism."
Keep your positivistic religious ideals to yourself.
- Ben
________________________________________
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of David Ilvedson [ilvey at sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:57 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Morality and Piano Technology; was RE: Tuning--again
Awomen
David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA 94044
----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Chris Solliday" <csolliday at rcn.com>
To: caut at ptg.org
Received: 6/22/2009 5:53:01 AM
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Morality and Piano Technology; was RE: Tuning--again
>Amen,
>Chris Solliday, RPT
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jeannie Grassi" <jcgrassi at earthlink.net>
>To: "'Sloane, Benjamin (sloaneba)'" <sloaneba at ucmail.uc.edu>; <caut at ptg.org>
>Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2009 12:37 PM
>Subject: Re: [CAUT] Morality and Piano Technology; was RE: Tuning--again
>> Hello Ben,
>> While I admit I find some of your posts interesting, I must share with you
>> that I am getting tired of weeding out and deleting such emails as the
>ones
>> below. This List has usually been very good at limiting discussions to
>> technical and university-specific information I would appreciate it if you
>> could direct your comments to those areas. I can see that the discussions
>> in which you quite frequently find yourself appear to stimulate your
>> intellect, however they are cluttering up the List and I, for one, would
>> appreciate if you would continue such discourse in private and not in this
>> venue.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeannie Grassi, RPT
>> Bainbridge Island, WA
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of
>> Sloane, Benjamin (sloaneba)
>> Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:31 AM
>> To: 'caut at ptg.org'
>> Subject: [CAUT] Morality and Piano Technology; was RE: Tuning--again
>>
>> Hello Richard,
>> I suppose I would stand a greater chance of being heard by the people
>> who reacted as if outraged to Christian symbols, if I kowtowed to the
>> pluralistic interpretation of Jeffersonianism that it demonstrates, and
>> would initially have proceeded with a purusartha.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purusharthas
>>
>> In other words, I could have spoken of dharma opposed to artha, and
>> observed that we need to pursue most of all dharma in what we do, not
>artha.
>> Is there only artha in piano technology? If I am pursuing artha, why enter
>a
>> profession where artha is not likely? We, as piano technicians, in a
>> profession that typically does not pay well these days, must have some
>> appreciation for the pursuit of dharma, as that we do not stand much
>chance
>> of obtaining a great deal of artha in the process. Or we are fools for
>> choosing this profession. And you are fine with that, because we did not
>> employ Christian symbols. Somehow, we conclude this to be a morality free
>> from partiality in the enlightened West, because it does not employ
>> Christian symbols. Throw in some yoga, and you are open-minded kind of
>idea.
>>
>>
>> In Greek etymology we also can make this bifurcation, for eros really
>is
>> not what the flesh is. But the minute I make reference to Christian
>symbols,
>> and start talking about the spirit opposed to the flesh instead, I write
>> blasphemy.
>>
>> Ecumenicism and neutrality in religion, or going further, Comte's
>> positivism, on the surface, is the answer to all the worlds problems. "Why
>> can't we all just get along? But in reality, it just can't work.
>>
>> What is the science of morality, Richard? Why not objectively tell me
>> what is wrong about what I quoted in the bible if it is just another
>ancient
>> religious text? Why is it wrong to play pianos skillfully? This isn't
>about
>> stuffing anything in your e-mail box. It is just an idea that can be
>> evaluated objectively, and that you can respond to objectively. Tell me,
>> what is wrong with this idea?
>>
>> We can objectively evaluate different religious texts, and determine it
>> is impossible to be neutral. For instance, perusing the Vedas, we find
>that
>> Indra, a supreme Hindu deity, himself is prayed to, and sought for the
>> intoxicating drink, Soma:
>>
>> 9:113:1 "Let Indra the killer of Vrtra drink Soma in Saryanavat, gathering
>> his strength within himself, to do a great heroic deed. O drop of Soma,
>flow
>> from Indra."
>>
>> The Rig Veda; and anthology. tr. O'flaherty, W. D. New York: Penguin
>Books
>> 1981 p. 133
>>
>> Do you agree with that? Do you agree that drugs come from a, if not
>the,
>> supreme God? How do you respond neutrally, and not affirmatively, or
>> negatively? Yet in the Qur'an, we find
>>
>> 2:219 "They ask you [Prophet] about intoxicants and gambling: say, 'There
>is
>> great sin in both, and some benefit for people: the sin is greater than
>the
>> benefit.'"
>>
>> The Qur'an tr. Haleem, M. A. S. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2005 p.
>> 24
>>
>> And so, we respond with an ecumenical attitude to Hinduism and Islam? How
>is
>> that possible? These say entirely different things.
>>
>> I agree we need to be open on all sides, but it is impossible to be on
>> all sides of the issue.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Ben
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of
>> Richard Brekne
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 2:21 PM
>> To: caut at ptg.org
>> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Tuning--again
>>
>> Yes... well Ben... not meaning to be intolerant or anything... it is
>> basically just plain good form to find appropriate places to share ones
>> beliefs one way or the other about things like God, Nirvana,
>> Reincarnation, Indagadadavida, the Big Bang... Evolutionary theory, or
>> whatever.... Not to mention that to begin with I doubt seriously J.C.
>> himself would smile nicely at the idea of pointing ones very human moral
>> finger at another over such an issue, and then insisting on stuffing it
>> down everyone else mailbox whether they want it or not.
>>
>> I dont hear any Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Shinto's, Bai Hai's etc etc
>> etc ad absurdum.... let alone agnostics or atheists insisting on pushing
>> their trips on folks here. You want to do the Christian thing... fine..
>> go for it. There is a time and a place for the preaching bit.... and
>> it aint here. Here... its plenty suffice to hold oneself to the "do
>> unto others" bit... or whatever corresponds to your particular belief set.
>>
>> Cheers
>> "We"
>>
>> "Grin... boy do we ever agree on this point there David !"
>>
>> Dear "We,"
>>
>>
>> I believe some of the criticism of him is a result of the openness
>> with which he approached his faith in God, and has nothing to do
>> with how good a technician he is. That is part of what I was getting
>at.
>>
>> As for the suggestion that observations about the relationship
>> between morality, piano technology, and religious texts are not
>> necessarily appropriate and whether or not these have a place on the
>> CAUT list, I can only remind you that there are many Evangelical
>> Colleges and Universities that employ piano technicians in this
>> country that teach the bible is in fact a directive source for
>> conducting a moral life. As piano technicians working at accredited
>> schools, do they also not belong on the CAUT list along with my last
>> post?
>>
>> Who is being intolerant, the Evangelical piano technicians working
>> at bible colleges who rarely mention God on the CAUT list, or the
>> people forbidding so much as any mention of the slightest thing
>> approaching God on the CAUT list?
>>
>> - Ben
>>
>>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC