Uncouth PerspectivesNot on the rug, man.

…just be good?

Even though I’ve studied it quite a bit, I have never understood why people argue that morals cannot be exclusive from a god / religion / whatever. The same-old “atheists have no morals” rhetoric.

Perhaps it is because those who express these feelings cannot control themselves?

I have to admit that the idea of people who cannot control themselves or urges being a part of something that gives enough structure to control those urges has great appeal to me… because hopefully those urges will be controlled. But I really feel that it needs to be something: a) substantative and b) not as bad or worse than the “urge.”

Also, one of the biggest problems is that the people who DO successful commit to something which makes their lives better or “beats the urge,” then often they try to push this on other people and/or when faces with an argument against the belief, they react poorly or violently. This is because the belief is more important in it’s ability to defeat the urge than in and of itself.

Take, for example, religion as the belief in this role. I’ve had great conversations with people who do not share the same religious beliefs as myself. Take, as another example, my doctor. My doctor is a very devout Christian and we have had very good discussions about religion. I don’t trust my life any less to him (…i hope) and we can have a very rational, friendly dialogue. But this is not always the case.

It is my theory that one of the greatest things in the way of pluralistic dialogue is the fact that many individuals belief is not based on the belief, in and of itself, but other factors, such as the belief acting as an agent against an urge or that “this is what the family believes so it’s what I believe.” The biggest problem with this is that when faced with challenges to the belief, even in casual dialogue, it’s hard for an individual to face disparate arguments.

It’s important to understand this. There are some people who you can be frank and open with, some you need to be more careful in how things are worded, and some who conversation may simply not be possible

I am going to file this under “What the hell?”

http://www.kctv5.com/news/14034556/detail.html

A small bookstore in Kansas City burned thousands of books. The primary reason for this seems to be that they simply have too many books and people will not take them. However, the owner has been quoted as saying the wants to talk about the declining in reading.

“We hope to spark a conversation about the importance of books in the
face of a marked shrinking in reading trends, and staggering waste
streams of actual books,” said Prospero’s Books owner, Tom Wayne.

I have to admit that I am torn on the idea of declining readership. I will not argue that people are reading less and that this is being supplanted by other forms of media (video, music, TV, etc). What I am not convinced of is that the internet and technology is part of that. If you want to talk about how the children don’t know a good story because they only have enough attention to watch an ad on TV, I’m with ya. Do not even get me started on the quality of a lot of the media out there. But looking all the forms of media (if you were include books in this category), I just think there are more forms of literary competition for books (take for example, a complete shot in the dark, blogs and blog readership).

I’m a old-fashioned reader in these enlightened days. I like to take a good book and a warm drink and snuggle up until I fall asleep. Hell, I have a reading chair. I cannot soak my stories in over the dull refresh rate of a monitor (much to the anger of my wife when she’s trying to get me to read a story she’s written). But I am not going to be so dense as to suggest that it’s not possible or worthwhile to get quality online or in digital form. I know many people who do their reading online and, well, more power to them.

Another important fact is that, in whatever form you are talking about, there is a lot.. a LOT.. of crap. And there are a lot of crap books. Whether we’re talking about the latest serial romance novel (Does my bias on things ever show through?) or the latest “how to feed your employees cheese and make money!” book. So just because I’m not reading your crap book does not mean I’m not reading.

I just have a hard time believing that we are in the dark days of literacy. I find it more likely that things are general the same as they’ve been. The intellectual elite read. Those who are interested read. The “masses,” in whatever their form, find easy and simple ways to be entertained, which may or may not involve reading. Some people just do not want to read.

I’m not going to say which class I fall into, but suffice to say I’ve a story about an assassin and his pet dragon calling my name.

Technorati Tags: books internet reading