To Theists: Why do you value hope more than truth?

[Crunchy Cat]

“ Crunchy cat

depends whether one requires statements of truth to validate such hierarchies (in other words is there any one making a claim of directly perceiving such a hierarchy or are we just talking concepts - if we are just talking concepts we could slap anything down in a game of word association

philosophy
Reason
rulers
tinned spaghetti

Can you demonstrate a truth the heirarchy I listed doesn't validate?

yes, through the agency of number one

You mean they would invest the hope in themselves? How does that work?

no

Why does it not sound truthful to you but it does to others?

simulate or imitate?
(given that outside of science fiction novels, computers are yet to even come close to anything like consciousness, and that consciousness is the prime requisite for learning, I think you have to explain yourself)

I am of course working off of the speculation that computerized consciouness will come to be. Say that it happens and a computer can learn. Would it be practicing philosophy?

feedback from what?

Post mortem, other people, the environment. Basically any source that holds effect of what transpired.

if you couldn't recognize it, how would you know?

See above.

the whole issue strikes me as absurd
How can I recognize something I can't recognize?

Maybe rephrasing will help. Have you ever experienced an emotional extreme and not recognized it for what it was during the experience and then later recognized it after thinking about it?

so you have never had the experience of say, over eating more than what your body dictates as sufficient?

You bet, and I recognize it as well.

well no more cookies for Yorda

Cookies are an illusion also according to Yorda.

hence there is a difference between anticipating hell and participating in hell

A moment of pain and vs. a life of fear. That is a significant difference.

not if applied properly

Sounds fragile.

guess there are few pros that come with the human form of life then

Do you think hope is a pro or a con?

“
apart from participating in an environment ideal to his senses, what is leopard man's notions of paradise?

I would speculate freedom, autonomy, a non-judgmental environment, beauty, contemplation,... might be a few.

why?

Because its an extreme that doesn't appear to be temorary. A presense of intense continuous satisfiers and an absence of dissatisfiers.

lol - I know quite a few

Why do you think they find their lives to be paradise?

There's no such thing as only one extreme - there is always two
(have you heard of the word mechanomorphic)

You can have at least two extremes per variable and many extremes for multiple variables. If subjectivity is included then any variable can also be assigned an irrelevant value... but even so, its not clear how your statement is relevant.

And... no I have not heard the term mechanomorphic. I found a few utterly different definitions for it online as well.

given the links you provided I can't see how you come to that conclusion

What did you see with the links I provided?

no
I asserted that issues of religion is the only thing that separates human society from animal society

I am referring to this assertion:

you mean if there was no opportunity to be atheistic, jewish, christian or muslim?

Yep.

maybe something like animal society then?

what are you talking about?

It would appear some people want to behave as if they are in an 'animal society' and they want to be part of religion.

because they sometimes use cute bunnies as a narrative device to explain issues of higher human values?

Because their behaviors are motivated by 'sinful' thought that are in line with sodomy/bestiality. There's probably a 'mark of the beast' reference somewhere out there.

given our previous points of discussion, I don't understand what you are talking about

Lets try a rephrasing of the question. Given that the Christians of this human-animal subculture have invested hope both in their religion and in their culture, why do you think they might value that hope more than the obvious 'truth' that accordingly to their religion they are evil?

testing whether god is an anthropomorphic phenomena?
I doubt it

Start here.

http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl05ab.shtml

considering that real leopards don't do these things, I guess so

Is being a 'real' leopard what he is after?

given that he mentions having association with christianity as a child, it appears the cat is already out of the bag

The question what what qualities does that mini-they don't have because of theism.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

There are some real benefits to believing in a diety of some sort as well as some drawbacks. Research suggests that it helps with recovery from illness. Believing in god (although not attending religous services) is associated with greater productivity (at least at a population level). It appears to be a good way of warding off certain fears/anxieties that might otherwise prey on one's mind (serving as an opiate for those who can't afford tranquilizers, etc.).

I imagine there are some other benefits as well. I can't see it becoming such an important part of human culture without it having helped some people.

You might be right and the theistic response to the question is interesting by comparison.

 

[Jan Ardena]

SnakeLord,

When one sees design it is because they have mistaken the hole in the ground as a perfect match for the puddle without realising the puddle has just adapted to fit the hole.

What complete and utter nonsense.
We see design because we understand design.

Jan.

 

[SnakeLord]

What complete and utter nonsense.
We see design because we understand design.

Who's "we"?

 

[lightgigantic]

“ Crunchy cat

depends whether one requires statements of truth to validate such hierarchies (in other words is there any one making a claim of directly perceiving such a hierarchy or are we just talking concepts - if we are just talking concepts we could slap anything down in a game of word association

philosophy
Reason
rulers
tinned spaghetti
”
Can you demonstrate a truth the heirarchy I listed doesn't validate?

as dealt with in other threads, making the claim of "reality" certainly requires more than the resources available by rationalism and empiricism - in other words, if you think objectivity can be revealed by your mind and senses, following that logic I can also jump over my knees
(at the very least, if you want to pass off your hierarchy as tenable , it is has a few missing links in it)

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
yes, through the agency of number one
”
You mean they would invest the hope in themselves? How does that work?

if one encounters the truth but rejects it out of hate/etc, its progress along the agency of number one (as opposed to number two)

1) I was trying to cheat you (duplicity , an aspect of madness)
2) I sincerely thought the 5 was a 10, but made an error of judgment, thus my state of being in giving you a 5 would be nondifferent from me giving you a 10

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
no
”
Why does it not sound truthful to you but it does to others?

something sounds true according to philosophical foundations - at the bottom end of the scale we have madness and at the top end of the scale we have consciousness purified from lust/wrath/envy etc.

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
simulate or imitate?
(given that outside of science fiction novels, computers are yet to even come close to anything like consciousness, and that consciousness is the prime requisite for learning, I think you have to explain yourself)
”
I am of course working off of the speculation that computerized consciouness will come to be. Say that it happens and a computer can learn. Would it be practicing philosophy?

certainly
therefore such things only remain certain in the genre of science fiction

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
feedback from what?
”
Post mortem, other people, the environment. Basically any source that holds effect of what transpired.

You have never encountered an arrogant person refusing to acknowledge that they are arrogant, or a lusty person refusing to acknowledge that they are lusty, etc .
If you say you would recognize it post mortem, that doesn't help you much, since the act of realizing you made a mistake of judgment (due to an emotional extreme) in hindsight is practically useless if the deed is done (for instance a person who goes berserk on his wife and her lover doesn't reap any great benefits if he realizes it was a mistake of judgment ten minutes after picking up a gun and letting loose a few rounds)

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
if you couldn't recognize it, how would you know?
”
See above.

you are yet to elaborate on what grounds you would acknowledge being in an extreme emotional state, since it is commonly observed that people in such states have the inability to recognize it

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
the whole issue strikes me as absurd
How can I recognize something I can't recognize?
”
Maybe rephrasing will help. Have you ever experienced an emotional extreme and not recognized it for what it was during the experience and then later recognized it after thinking about it?

of course, but such reflections do not prevent one from making mistakes of judgment during the period of emotional extreme, as indicated by the above eg of the man with the gun

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
so you have never had the experience of say, over eating more than what your body dictates as sufficient?
”
You bet, and I recognize it as well.

given the statistics of diseases that arise from over indulgence in opulent societies, your example is truly unique

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
well no more cookies for Yorda
”
Cookies are an illusion also according to Yorda.

Is Yorda an illusion too?

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
hence there is a difference between anticipating hell and participating in hell
”
A moment of pain and vs. a life of fear. That is a significant difference.

my point was that such cajoling around the anticipation of hell is not sufficient to prevent one from acting sinfully.
Practically we see that a person, despite getting repeatedly punished, is still capable of performing the same deeds that warrant such punishment.
In Sanskrit it is called "the bathing of an elephant"
An elephant washes itself nicely in a stream and then the moment it comes out it throws dirt all over its body.
Similarly, so called atonement is useless as long as one is sheltering criminal desires in the heart
Thus it is seen that progressive systems of corporal punishment involve rehabilitation - offering positive alternatives to a life of crime - the degree that a theistic path is successful is the degree to which it can offer positive alternatives, as opposed to trying to drum up a storm with tactics of fear and punishment (actual or anticipated) – in other words fear and punishment is necessary but not sufficient

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
not if applied properly
”
Sounds fragile.

can you name a good process that can give a good result even if applied incorrectly?

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
guess there are few pros that come with the human form of life then
”
Do you think hope is a pro or a con?

Hope doesn't amount to anything unless it meets up with experience.
For instance both you and the meerkats hope you don't eaten alive by some other animal - statistically, that hope is fulfilled more easily by you, despite meerkats having an entire lifestyle aimed at avoiding such an outcome.

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
“
apart from participating in an environment ideal to his senses, what is leopard man's notions of paradise?
”
I would speculate freedom,autonomy, a non-judgmental environment, beauty, contemplation,... might be a few.

and how would you guess he arrives at these values in a way that is not inherently related to his participating in an environment ideal to his senses?
(In other words a worm could also derive similar values from the right piece of dog stool in the right environment)

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
why?
”
Because its an extreme that doesn't appear to be temorary. A presense of intense continuous satisfiers and an absence of dissatisfiers.

so if distinction is where one thinks it is at, why would an environment that empowers one to be constantly distinct not fulfill one's notion of paradise?
(paradise = ideal)

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
lol - I know quite a few
”
Why do you think they find their lives to be paradise?

to begin with, they know only a fool would expect to find paradise in this world

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
There's no such thing as only one extreme - there is always two
(have you heard of the word mechanomorphic)
”
You can have at least two extremes per variable and many extremes for multiple variables. If subjectivity is included then any variable can also be assigned an irrelevant value... but even so, its not clear how your statement is relevant.

And... no I have not heard the term mechanomorphic. I found a few utterly different definitions for it online as well.

So anthropomorphic is one extreme - (taking something that is not human and endowing it with human qualtiies)
and mechanomorphic is the other (taking something that is not a machine and endowing it with mechanical qualities)

You challenge that the term “god” is arrived at after anthropomorphizing nature
I challenge you that the term “nature” is arrived at after mechanomorphizing god

You challenge that anthropomorphism is objective
I challenge that it is subjective

who will resolve these issues?
(certainly not any medium within the realm of duality)

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
given the links you provided I can't see how you come to that conclusion
”
What did you see with the links I provided?

basically two categories
one was a "virtual church" made up of simple animated animals (I assume that they discuss things likely to be encountered in any other regular place of worship)

the other is a collection of sensual portraits of animals with uniquely human like features, much akin to super sexed comic book heroes

I can't understand what means you are advocating to bridge these two narratives

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
no
I asserted that issues of religion is the only thing that separates human society from animal society
”
I am referring to this assertion:

“

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
you mean if there was no opportunity to be atheistic, jewish, christian or muslim?

these are not religious issues?
”
“

Originally Posted by Crunchy Cat
Yep.
”
“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
maybe something like animal society then?
”

”
“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic

what are you talking about?
”
It would appear some people want to behave as if they are in an 'animal society' and they want to be part of religion.

Its not clear what resources you are calling upon to make this claim - to show that some people use animals as a narrative device to establish theistic values and that some other people use animals as a narrative device to establish sexual/ego values does warrant an inextricable connection

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
because they sometimes use cute bunnies as a narrative device to explain issues of higher human values?
”
Because their behaviors are motivated by 'sinful' thought that are in line with sodomy/bestiality. There's probably a 'mark of the beast' reference somewhere out there.

So when they use cute bunnies to give a sermon on the ten commandants, there is another segment where a tarantula with fantastic genitals comes out and molests the congregation?

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
given our previous points of discussion, I don't understand what you are talking about
”
Lets try a rephrasing of the question. Given that the Christians of this human-animal subculture have invested hope both in their religion and in their culture, why do you think they might value that hope more than the obvious 'truth' that accordingly to their religion they are evil?

because they have the hope not to remain in conditioned consciousness (or perhaps more correctly, they see a reason why they should not be satisfied by conditioned consciousness)

One could just as easily turn around and ask why is that atheists invest hope that satisfaction can be derived from material consciousness ...

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
testing whether god is an anthropomorphic phenomena?
I doubt it
”
Start here.

http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl05ab.shtml

appears like mechanomorphic subjectivity

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
considering that real leopards don't do these things, I guess so
”
Is being a 'real' leopard what he is after?

no
what he is after is pleasure through the mind and senses
imitating a leopard (but not to such a degree that he becomes unable to integrate into human society) appears to grant him that

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
given that he mentions having association with christianity as a child, it appears the cat is already out of the bag
”
The question what what qualities does that mini-they don't have because of theism.

hard to say
he is even indebted to Christianity for his atheism

 

[Jan Ardena]

Who's "we"?

Who do you think?

Jan.

 

[SnakeLord]

Who do you think?

Those that want to think they're special but can't unless they live under the delusion that they were made to be so?

And they'll try anything, regardless to how inherently worthless it is - from a tornado in a junkyard to trying to argue that ID is science, (lol) when what it comes down to is their misunderstanding of the relationship between the puddle and the hole.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Those that want to think they're special but can't unless they live under the delusion that they were made to be so?

And they'll try anything, regardless to how inherently worthless it is - from a tornado in a junkyard to trying to argue that ID is science, (lol) when what it comes down to is their misunderstanding of the relationship between the puddle and the hole.

I think you need this;

design

Definition:

1. transitive and intransitive verb create detailed plan of something: to make a detailed plan of the form or structure of something, emphasizing features such as its appearance, convenience, and efficient functioning
a well-designed car interior

2. transitive and intransitive verb plan and make something: to plan and make something in a skillful or artistic way

3. transitive verb intend something for particular use: to intend something for a particular purpose
The scholarship was designed to aid foreign students.


Jan.

 

[SnakeLord]

I am aware of the definition of 'design' although I thank you nonetheless. Unfortunately I fail to see why you posted it, it certainly doesn't add anything to your statements or retract from mine.

 

[Jan Ardena]

I am aware of the definition of 'design' although I thank you nonetheless. Unfortunately I fail to see why you posted it, it certainly doesn't add anything to your statements or retract from mine.

Then there is nothing more to discuss on this matter.

Jan.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

“ Crunchy cat

as dealt with in other threads, making the claim of "reality" certainly requires more than the resources available by rationalism and empiricism - in other words, if you think objectivity can be revealed by your mind and senses, following that logic I can also jump over my knees
(at the very least, if you want to pass off your hierarchy as tenable , it is has a few missing links in it)

Why can't objectivity be revealed by senses and thought?

if one encounters the truth but rejects it out of hate/etc, its progress along the agency of number one (as opposed to number two)

1) I was trying to cheat you (duplicity , an aspect of madness)
2) I sincerely thought the 5 was a 10, but made an error of judgment, thus my state of being in giving you a 5 would be nondifferent from me giving you a 10

I see.

something sounds true according to philosophical foundations - at the bottom end of the scale we have madness and at the top end of the scale we have consciousness purified from lust/wrath/envy etc.

I understand how emotional state might impact judgment and it is still not clear what the criteria for 'sounding true' is.

certainly
therefore such things only remain certain in the genre of science fiction

Interesting. Thank you.

You have never encountered an arrogant person refusing to acknowledge that they are arrogant, or a lusty person refusing to acknowledge that they are lusty, etc .
If you say you would recognize it post mortem, that doesn't help you much, since the act of realizing you made a mistake of judgment (due to an emotional extreme) in hindsight is practically useless if the deed is done (for instance a person who goes berserk on his wife and her lover doesn't reap any great benefits if he realizes it was a mistake of judgment ten minutes after picking up a gun and letting loose a few rounds)

I have encountered refusers and that doesn't mean they don't really understand and internally agree. Fortunately most people encounter emotional extremes from childhood to adulthood... and the post mortem does become valuable because you learn to identify differences in emotion and how they impact you.

In your example (somewhat seprate) although the husband might not be doing something in his best interest, he has the effect of keeping his wife's (and lovers) genetics out of the gene pool; therefore, those particular influences for adulturous behavior will be nixed.

you are yet to elaborate on what grounds you would acknowledge being in an extreme emotional state, since it is commonly observed that people in such states have the inability to recognize it

I am not sure I understand the request. My acknowledgement of being in an extreme emotional state is due to my ability to detect difference, remember patterns, understand what behaviors my emotion motivates, etc.

of course, but such reflections do not prevent one from making mistakes of judgment during the period of emotional extreme, as indicated by the above eg of the man with the gun

Greater difficulty might indicate a need for more practice / education. Also, with or without emotion people are going to make mistakes or purposeful choices... sometimes fatal ones.

given the statistics of diseases that arise from over indulgence in opulent societies, your example is truly unique

You might be surprised how many people realize they over eat but simply don't bother not doing it because they value food related experiences more than their health.

Is Yorda an illusion too?

Accoriding to Yorda... yes.

my point was that such cajoling around the anticipation of hell is not sufficient to prevent one from acting sinfully.
Practically we see that a person, despite getting repeatedly punished, is still capable of performing the same deeds that warrant such punishment.
In Sanskrit it is called "the bathing of an elephant"
An elephant washes itself nicely in a stream and then the moment it comes out it throws dirt all over its body.
Similarly, so called atonement is useless as long as one is sheltering criminal desires in the heart
Thus it is seen that progressive systems of corporal punishment involve rehabilitation - offering positive alternatives to a life of crime - the degree that a theistic path is successful is the degree to which it can offer positive alternatives, as opposed to trying to drum up a storm with tactics of fear and punishment (actual or anticipated) – in other words fear and punishment is necessary but not sufficient

I agree, the threat of hell is not sufficient to get people to behave the same. What it does however, is prevent people with 'problem' behaviors from dealing with the problem in a healthy manner and instead labling it sin. It also keeps their thoughts unrealistic by thinking a place dedicated to torturing people for eternity exists.

can you name a good process that can give a good result even if applied incorrectly?

No, but I can name a better process that is leaps and bounds less fragile.

Hope doesn't amount to anything unless it meets up with experience.
For instance both you and the meerkats hope you don't eaten alive by some other animal - statistically, that hope is fulfilled more easily by you, despite meerkats having an entire lifestyle aimed at avoiding such an outcome.

Would you consider all the hopes of the psychic folks on psigog 'meeting up with experience'?

and how would you guess he arrives at these values in a way that is not inherently related to his participating in an environment ideal to his senses?
(In other words a worm could also derive similar values from the right piece of dog stool in the right environment)

Is it important if his values are influenced in any way by his senses? I consequently don't think a worm has the mental capcity for values.

so if distinction is where one thinks it is at, why would an environment that empowers one to be constantly distinct not fulfill one's notion of paradise?
(paradise = ideal)

Distinction is only one aspect of identity and does not fulfill the variety of psychological needs that people have.

to begin with, they know only a fool would expect to find paradise in this world

So by not expecting to find paradise they find paradise?

So anthropomorphic is one extreme - (taking something that is not human and endowing it with human qualtiies)
and mechanomorphic is the other (taking something that is not a machine and endowing it with mechanical qualities)

Isn't the opposite extreme of anthropomorphization the absence of anthropomorphization? It's not clear how mechanomorphism works... do you mean like a 'political machine'?

You challenge that the term “god” is arrived at after anthropomorphizing nature
I challenge you that the term “nature” is arrived at after mechanomorphizing god

Actually, I am saying that 'God' is the result of anthropomorphizing reality (not nature... leave that one to 'Mother nature'). Also, wouldn't mechanomorphizing a sentient life form be the same as applying the features of that sentient life form on a machine? That's pretty much anthropmorphization. Transformers, Gobots, Hal...

You challenge that anthropomorphism is objective

Evidence for it exists in abundance in that link provided.

I challenge that it is subjective

If I show you a piece of paper with 3 dots and an arc, I can guarantee you will see a happy face... as will everyone else who sees it. That's pretty objective that its a real psychological phenomena in humans. Go to this URL:

http://www.chevron.com/products/

and take a look at the car. Do you see a car or see a sentient life form?

who will resolve these issues?
(certainly not any medium within the realm of duality)

I don't think there is any resolving to do with anthropmorphization. It is what it is and there is evidence abound. The only resolving that makes any sense is providing evidence that mechanomorphism as a real human psychological phenomena really exists.

basically two categories
one was a "virtual church" made up of simple animated animals (I assume that they discuss things likely to be encountered in any other regular place of worship)

the other is a collection of sensual portraits of animals with uniquely human like features, much akin to super sexed comic book heroes

I can't understand what means you are advocating to bridge these two narratives

these are not religious issues?
”
“
Its not clear what resources you are calling upon to make this claim - to show that some people use animals as a narrative device to establish theistic values and that some other people use animals as a narrative device to establish sexual/ego values does warrant an inextricable connection

So when they use cute bunnies to give a sermon on the ten commandants, there is another segment where a tarantula with fantastic genitals comes out and molests the congregation?

The bridge is the people whom are going to church are the same ones whom are pumping out those images born of their own desires. They are a tad more than 'sensual' on average... they are downright explicit and / or violent. Maybe you just saw a few of the nicer pics and missed the average like the lion person eating the throat off a live deer while raping it.

Regardless, it's probably a moot point because it looks like (haven't completely read it yet) that you might have answered the core question in the next quote below... reading now....

because they have the hope not to remain in conditioned consciousness (or perhaps more correctly, they see a reason why they should not be satisfied by conditioned consciousness)

I know you would eventually provide an answer to the original question . I'll add it to the pool of answers received. Thanks!

One could just as easily turn around and ask why is that atheists invest hope that satisfaction can be derived from material consciousness ...

I don't think its a matter of turning anything around. If you have questions about atheist thought / feeling then just ask. Myself and others would be happy to answer.

appears like mechanomorphic subjectivity

Well, I think there is alot of work to do to establish solid evidence for mechanimorphics being a real psychological phenomena. My impression is that it is being used as a poor counter-tactic to avoid the very real anthropomprhic psychological phenomena.

no
what he is after is pleasure through the mind and senses
imitating a leopard (but not to such a degree that he becomes unable to integrate into human society) appears to grant him that

Do you think he has desires other than identity?

hard to say
he is even indebted to Christianity for his atheism

It would appear he found a non-religious method of human relationship with an outlet for hope. Allthough possibly the result of trial and error, he seems to have hit something on the head.

 

[lightgigantic]

“ Crunchy cat

as dealt with in other threads, making the claim of "reality" certainly requires more than the resources available by rationalism and empiricism - in other words, if you think objectivity can be revealed by your mind and senses, following that logic I can also jump over my knees
(at the very least, if you want to pass off your hierarchy as tenable , it is has a few missing links in it)
”
Why can't objectivity be revealed by senses and thought?

because the senses are essentially subjective - just like my feet are essentially beneath by knees, so the possibility of jumping over them, even amongst Olympians, never arises

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
something sounds true according to philosophical foundations - at the bottom end of the scale we have madness and at the top end of the scale we have consciousness purified from lust/wrath/envy etc.
”
I understand how emotional state might impact judgment and it is still not clear what the criteria for 'sounding true' is.

sounding true is a matter of opinion - given that people are situated at different levels of madness/purity of consciousness, not all opinions are equal

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
You have never encountered an arrogant person refusing to acknowledge that they are arrogant, or a lusty person refusing to acknowledge that they are lusty, etc .
If you say you would recognize it post mortem, that doesn't help you much, since the act of realizing you made a mistake of judgment (due to an emotional extreme) in hindsight is practically useless if the deed is done (for instance a person who goes berserk on his wife and her lover doesn't reap any great benefits if he realizes it was a mistake of judgment ten minutes after picking up a gun and letting loose a few rounds)
”
I have encountered refusers and that doesn't mean they don't really understand and internally agree. Fortunately most people encounter emotional extremes from childhood to adulthood... and the post mortem does become valuable because you learn to identify differences in emotion and how they impact you.

does such post mortem knowledge actually empower a person?
in other words is knowing that a certain emotional state tends to result in certain behaviours - is that sufficient for a person to refrain from those said behavours?

In your example (somewhat seprate) although the husband might not be doing something in his best interest, he has the effect of keeping his wife's (and lovers) genetics out of the gene pool; therefore, those particular influences for adulturous behavior will be nixed.

do you think he is concerned about the gene pool or something else?
Why don't we hear similar stories of rage from men who have donated at sperm banks?
“

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
you are yet to elaborate on what grounds you would acknowledge being in an extreme emotional state, since it is commonly observed that people in such states have the inability to recognize it
”
I am not sure I understand the request. My acknowledgement of being in an extreme emotional state is due to my ability to detect difference, remember patterns, understand what behaviors my emotion motivates, etc.

and if by entering such an emotional state your very ability to detect and so on was affected, what then?

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
Is Yorda an illusion too?
”
Accoriding to Yorda... yes.

then I guess the only thing she can do to maintain her philosophical stance is to remain silent, lest she contradict herself by coming to the platform of elaborating on the non-nature of reality

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
my point was that such cajoling around the anticipation of hell is not sufficient to prevent one from acting sinfully.
Practically we see that a person, despite getting repeatedly punished, is still capable of performing the same deeds that warrant such punishment.
In Sanskrit it is called "the bathing of an elephant"
An elephant washes itself nicely in a stream and then the moment it comes out it throws dirt all over its body.
Similarly, so called atonement is useless as long as one is sheltering criminal desires in the heart
Thus it is seen that progressive systems of corporal punishment involve rehabilitation - offering positive alternatives to a life of crime - the degree that a theistic path is successful is the degree to which it can offer positive alternatives, as opposed to trying to drum up a storm with tactics of fear and punishment (actual or anticipated) – in other words fear and punishment is necessary but not sufficient
”
I agree, the threat of hell is not sufficient to get people to behave the same. What it does however, is prevent people with 'problem' behaviors from dealing with the problem in a healthy manner and instead labling it sin.

What is the healthy way of dealing with it and how does the use of the word "sin" frustrate that end?

It also keeps their thoughts unrealistic by thinking a place dedicated to torturing people for eternity exists.

Its not clear on what basis you are asserting that hell doesn't exist - although the difference between saying something doesn't exist and saying one has not seen something to exist may appear slight, it distinguishes a fallacious statement from a truthful one

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
can you name a good process that can give a good result even if applied incorrectly?
”
No, but I can name a better process that is leaps and bounds less fragile.

what is it?

(NB - if by applying your said process incorrectly it hinders the ability to experience pleasure to the point of rendering one psychologically unhealthy, you will also be required to explain why it is better)

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
Hope doesn't amount to anything unless it meets up with experience.
For instance both you and the meerkats hope you don't eaten alive by some other animal - statistically, that hope is fulfilled more easily by you, despite meerkats having an entire lifestyle aimed at avoiding such an outcome.
”
Would you consider all the hopes of the psychic folks on psigog 'meeting up with experience'?

no
that's why I dismissed it
(and that's also why they don't, I imagine)
such is the nature of philosophical foundations (from the shrouds of madness to clear perception

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
and how would you guess he arrives at these values in a way that is not inherently related to his participating in an environment ideal to his senses?
(In other words a worm could also derive similar values from the right piece of dog stool in the right environment)
”
Is it important if his values are influenced in any way by his senses?

if you are trying to pass off his use of the word "paradise" in some theological sense, most certainly

I consequently don't think a worm has the mental capcity for values.

it certainly values dog stool

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
so if distinction is where one thinks it is at, why would an environment that empowers one to be constantly distinct not fulfill one's notion of paradise?
(paradise = ideal)
”
Distinction is only one aspect of identity and does not fulfill the variety of psychological needs that people have.

therefore we have primary needs and secondary needs
For instance one can practically live anywhere provided there is food and shelter - still we see that the time and energy people put into engineering their lifestyles (particularly amongst humans) does fall in with such needs (for instance the money that the Leopard man spent on dentist and tattoo parlor bills could probably have seen him through ten years of baked beans).

This is because if the primary needs are dealt with, our next task lies in bringing our secondary ones on par

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
to begin with, they know only a fool would expect to find paradise in this world
”
So by not expecting to find paradise they find paradise?

Just because they don't expect to find it in the medium of taking birth in a body that is subject to various diseases, trials and tribulations and death, doesn't mean they don't expect to find it

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
So anthropomorphic is one extreme - (taking something that is not human and endowing it with human qualtiies)
and mechanomorphic is the other (taking something that is not a machine and endowing it with mechanical qualities)
”
Isn't the opposite extreme of anthropomorphization the absence of anthropomorphization? It's not clear how mechanomorphism works... do you mean like a 'political machine'?

we'll take it to the other thread
“

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
basically two categories
one was a "virtual church" made up of simple animated animals (I assume that they discuss things likely to be encountered in any other regular place of worship)

the other is a collection of sensual portraits of animals with uniquely human like features, much akin to super sexed comic book heroes

I can't understand what means you are advocating to bridge these two narratives

these are not religious issues?
”
“
Its not clear what resources you are calling upon to make this claim - to show that some people use animals as a narrative device to establish theistic values and that some other people use animals as a narrative device to establish sexual/ego values does warrant an inextricable connection

So when they use cute bunnies to give a sermon on the ten commandants, there is another segment where a tarantula with fantastic genitals comes out and molests the congregation?
”
The bridge is the people whom are going to church are the same ones whom are pumping out those images born of their own desires.

They are a tad more than 'sensual' on average... they are downright explicit and / or violent. Maybe you just saw a few of the nicer pics and missed the average like the lion person eating the throat off a live deer while raping it.

Regardless, it's probably a moot point because it looks like (haven't completely read it yet) that you might have answered the core question in the next quote below... reading now....

assuming that the authors of both materials are the same persons, then that would indicate a conflict interest - in other words they are sincere theists pretending to be interested in sexed up animals or they are sincerely interested in sexed up animals pretending to be interested in theism

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
One could just as easily turn around and ask why is that atheists invest hope that satisfaction can be derived from material consciousness ...
”
I don't think its a matter of turning anything around. If you have questions about atheist thought / feeling then just ask. Myself and others would be happy to answer.

if you hold the notion of "hope" as an instant indication of something fishy, answering such inquiries would be quite tricky

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
no
what he is after is pleasure through the mind and senses
imitating a leopard (but not to such a degree that he becomes unable to integrate into human society) appears to grant him that
”
Do you think he has desires other than identity?

Identity (what you think you are) is what shapes desire for everyone

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
hard to say
he is even indebted to Christianity for his atheism
”
It would appear he found a non-religious method of human relationship with an outlet for hope.

so has the leopard man

Allthough possibly the result of trial and error, he seems to have hit something on the head.

what is that he has hit?