• Lucid Dreaming - Dream Views




    Results 1 to 3 of 3
    1. #1
      Banned
      Join Date
      Apr 2005
      Posts
      3,165
      Likes
      11

      The Mad Scientist Archetype

      The Mad Scientist Archetype

      For all of those Secularists and Atheists who can’t imagine how renouncing God and Religion could at all hurt the cause of Morality and Civilization, please refer to the most recent of our Culture’s Psychological Archetypes – the “Mad Scientist”. I suppose it might not be entirely new. While Catholic Civilization still held its sway in the West, there was the “Alchemist Archetype” – the Wizard of the Material Realm. Sometimes held suspect, as their quest for Gold was often interpreted for its Worldly Motives, but it was again often argued in their favor that it was Spiritual Gold, that is, the transformation of Carnality into Spirituality that they were truly working toward. I suppose there is always a continuum of motives in these such pursuits. But of the new Archetype – the Mad and Evil Scientist, we find no redeeming excuses or mitigations – they are just plain old BAD. Now, why is it that the Artistic Intuition so readily links the propensity toward Materialistic Science with an inclination toward Absolute Evil?

      I’ve tried endlessly to explain in rational and dynamic terms why it is that a purely Scientific and Materialistic World View would of necessity drift away from any Moral Obligations. Yes, the Secularist can and does often make certain verbal assurances – empty tribute and lip service paid to Morality – like the United States speaking in favor of Human Rights. As long as it is just talk, there are no problems. But anytime Morality becomes inconvenient to the Materialist, suddenly they can find no solid reason why they can’t violate what had only been loose, casual, verbal constraints. As long as they don’t get caught. Again, the United States and Great Britain not knowing of any torture until photos and videos are shown on CNN. As long as photographic evidence never appears, the Anglo-Axis is completely Moral. They say they’ve introduced REFORMS, yes, they now forbid soldiers to carry about cameras.

      And in the case where Scientific Materialists have State Sponsorship, then the damage their Evil can do is almost quite endless. Without Religion, these Intellects no longer build Great Cathedrals, but invent and assemble Nuclear World Destroying Weapons, and synthesize incurable population control diseases like HIV and AIDS. And it is not just physicists and chemists and such. The whole Rational Process seems to serve Evil. Look at Economists. They have decided that a Six Month Unemployment Rate of 5% which creates and maintains a real unemployment rate of 15 to 20% (as people who lose jobs in the six month period don’t often find another job in six months) is just perfect for keeping the Labor Class desperate and willing to work for subsistence wage, no benefits and little or no health care. It is the glib imposition of human suffering that does not even make them flinch. It is the Mad Scientist at work.

      The Rational Mind every day discovering anew that its own Selfish Ends justify any conceivable means. And still we will hear about how Secularists are superior in morality to the Religious Civilizations. That is, until their own Destruction of the World finally shuts them up.

    2. #2
      Member TAISIA's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 2005
      Posts
      79
      Likes
      0
      Leo, you have such insight on so many topics.
      I always read the threads started by you.
      But you always seem to be so agnry. Am I reading your tone right? Forgive me if I am wrong.

    3. #3
      Banned
      Join Date
      Apr 2005
      Posts
      3,165
      Likes
      11
      Originally posted by TAISIA
      Leo, *you have such insight on so many topics. *
      I always read the threads started by you.
      But you always seem to be so agnry. *Am I reading your tone right? *Forgive me if I am wrong.
      Well, 'angry' is not quite the right word for it. I can be angry, and it is not very pleasant, and not so nearly coherent.

      But I do have an agenda. I really do think that most people are wrong in their cultural and religious assumptions. Perhaps it would be better to convert people by some subtle movement of arguments, where I start by being agreeable but then slowly work in the 'buts' and and the 'howevers' until I am completely opposite of what I originally pretended to agree with. But the problem with such subtlety is that people remember only that you had agreed with them in the first place. It recalls to mind Peter's refutation of Paul as being dangerous to doctrine. Peter had started out speaking in a respectful and polite style regarding Paul, and now that is all that people remember -- and hardly nobody regards with full seriousness a warning and accusation that was initiated with such sweet civility. Peter was being subtle and so everybody missed his point.

      So I do not aim toward subtlety. I don't pretend to give any respect to opinions that I think are wrong, and why should I? Being openminded is a fine virtue in 14 year olds. But by the time one is 65 one should know the difference between right and wrong, and to pretend to condone and respect wrongness in any of its forms is frankly hypocritical. And to pretend to go along with it, even for a moment, for the sake of seeming civil and polite, well, it leaves the impression that wrongness is forgiveable and tolerable. But it isn't. Wrong is wrong. One should never pretend there is any acceptable alternative to being right.

      But, no, it is not 'anger'. "Self-Righteous" might express a closer picture to the reality of my tone, though it is not generally considered a good thing. But as I said before, if one doesn't know right from wrong at the age of 65, then what has one done with one's life?

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •