THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
07/23/04 -- Vol. 23, No. 4
El Presidente: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
The Power Behind El Pres: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
Back issues at http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent will be assumed authorized for inclusion
unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe, send mail to mtvoid-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe, send mail to mtvoid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Topics:
First Principles (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
A Psychological Basis for God (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
This Week's Reading (DEAD MAN'S FLOAT, SMITH OF WOOTON
MAJOR & FARMER GILES OF HAM, PATRIOTIC GORE, and
SCIENCE FICTION HANDBOOK, REVISED) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: First Principles (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
When we see the world enflamed in fighting in the name of
religion, it is easy to forget that religion's original intent was
to save the world from the moral evil of atheism. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: A Psychological Basis for God (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
I have been giving some thought to the concepts of religion and
God and how the conceptions of God--or the gods--might have
originally formed. I am trying to see if there might be a
psychological basis for the belief in something bigger behind it
all.
Now immediately I am sure I have offended the person who believes
that all of the their conceptions of God came about by divine
revelation. Some take the Bible literally and say it tells us
precisely how our ideas of God were formed. They believe from the
Bible that there was a time when God actually communicated openly
with humans. But even they have to admit that there are multiple
religions that contradict each other about God. They have to
allow that there are a lot of people out there who have different
opinions of God than they do. Okay, then let me say this
speculation is about all religions with the possible exception of
the One True Religion, whichever religion that happens to be
(assuming it exists).
In the past in this notice I have theorized about the origins of
the concept of God. I said that I think that the concept of God
may be a memory from the first year of life. Much of the forming
of our personalities comes about in the months. Smoking may be an
outgrowth of infantile thumb-sucking and the psychological
dependence on that oral habit. Similarly some belief in a larger
being may come in the earliest months after birth. In the first
days of life you basically know only that there is yourself and
there is The Other One. The Other One is big. She feeds you.
She takes care of your needs. She gives you affection. Your
world is better because she is there. At times she even
disciplines you. As you grow older this woman takes a very
different role in your life. But the idea has already been
implanted in you that there is this huge guardian looking after
you. If it is not this human-sized woman, it must be something
bigger. Hence, you have God.
Another possible origin of God is as insurance. You think,
"Yesterday my neighbor's house was struck with lightning. I don't
want that to happen to me. I need something to do to protect
myself. I need some logic on who gets hit and who doesn't. No
human can protect me so let me pray to something bigger
controlling it." If you don't believe in God you have no
protection from lightning. You have no protection from disease.
At least believing in God gives you a plan for what to do to
protect yourself from uncontrollable things like lightning and
disease. You either admit to yourself that you have no protection
from lightning or you tell yourself that there is someone who
controls the lightning and you are staying on his good side. If
you think that way you just become very religious.
And there is more to it than that. Suppose you are convinced you
know what God
wants of you, you do it, and you still have bad luck. Then you
can say you are being tested and you must continue to believe.
This may even be the origin of our concept of heaven. You have to
believe that it is not all chance and that there is a God who will
reward you in the long run. Heaven is where you do get justice,
but other living people just don't see it. It is behind the
curtain, so to speak, but everybody is sure that accounts are
settled fairly after death. It also may be the place where
unfinished business with other people comes to be finished. Maybe
you have been meaning to tell your boss off for years. Then he is
hit and run over by an omnibus. You will get another chance in
heaven.
Monotheism itself may have a similar homey psychological origin.
The Greeks had gods who fought among themselves and even fought
along side humans. There are gods on the battlefield in the
Iliad. In fact, there are god on each side of the battle. Now
think about this, you can be doing exactly what one god wants and
another comes along and skewers you like a shrimp on a sate
stick. There is no single divine will and no way to align
yourself with one to be safe. Monotheism more or less guarantees
that it is possible to work God's will and there isn't some other
God hanging around who will skewer you for it. If there is more
than one God you never can be sure you will not get caught between
them in an argument.
What is this all leading to? Not much. I am just suggesting that
there may be simple psychological explanations for a lot of our
basic religious beliefs. These beliefs are what they have to be
to help keep us sane. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Well, I'm back to my regular reading. Actually, I've been doing
it all along. I just decided that while I was on vacation was a
good time to comment on the Hugo nominees, rather than try to
spread out the previous weeks' reading over five weeks of
vacation.
Beth Sherman's DEAD MAN'S FLOAT (ISBN 0-380-73107-X) is the first
of a series set on the Jersey shore, specifically in Ocean Grove
and Asbury Park. While some of the descriptions of the area were
recognizable, I guess I'm not as familiar with that part of the
shore as people who grew up here. If you are a longtime shore-
goer, you'd probably enjoy them, but I can't really recommend them
for others.
When I bought J. R. R. Tolkien's SMITH OF WOOTON MAJOR & FARMER
GILES OF HAM (ISBN 0-345-27351-6 and ISBN 0-618-00936-1) it was
one mass-market paperback; now they are two trade paperbacks.
Back then, the appeal was that these were the only other works
available by Tolkien other than THE HOBBIT and THE LORD OF THE
RINGS. Now, the appeal is more that these are about the only
other works published under Tolkien's name that are primarily his
work (other than THE SILMARILLION). They are enjoyable enough
children's fables (albeit with a bite), but not necessarily better
than a lot of similar works. I guess I'm saying that if you pick
these up expecting another "Lord of the Rings" experience, you
will probably be disappointed.
Edmund Wilson's PATRIOTIC GORE (ISBN 0-393-31256-9) is an
overview of American writing connected to the Civil War--fiction,
non-fiction, and poetry; before, during, and after the War. Given
that it has 816 pages, I cannot even list all the authors covered,
so I will just mention a couple of interesting points.
One is a discussion by Confederate Vice-President Alexander H.
Stephens of some of the actions taken by Lincoln during the War
Stephens, in his "A Constitutional View of the Late War Between
the States; Its Causes, Character, Conduct and Results Presented
in a Series of Colloquies at Liberty Hall", quotes Supreme Court
Justice Benjamin R. Curtis (of Boston) as having said, "No citizen
can be insensible to the vast importance of the late proclamation
and orders of the President of the United States.... It has been
attempted by some partisan journalists to raise the cry of
'disloyalty' against anyone who should question these Executive
acts. But the people of the United States know that loyalty is
not subserviency to a man, or to a Party, or to the opinions of
newspapers; but that it is an honest and wise devotion to the
safety and welfare of our country, and to the great principles
which our Constitution of Government embodies, by which alone that
safety and welfare can be secured. And when those principles are
put in jeopardy, every true loyal man must interpose according to
his ability, or be an unfaithful citizen. This is not a
government of men. It is a Government of laws. ... The second
Proclamation, and the Orders of the Secretary of War, which follow
it, place every citizen of the United States under the direct
military command and control of the President. They subject all
citizens to be imprisoned upon a military order, at the pleasure
of the President, when, where, and so long as he, or whoever is
acting for him, may choose. They hold the citizen to trial before
a Military Commission appointed by the President, or his
representative, for such acts or omissions as the President may
think proper to decree to the offences; and they subject him to
such punishment as such Military Commission may be pleased to
inflict." (page 417) This still (again?) seems pertinent today.
Another was George Washington Cable's analysis (in his book "The
Negro Question") of why the North, having fought to free the
slaves, was so willing in the last part of the 19th century to let
their condition in the South be reduced almost back to that level,
and why the South, having made such a fuss about states' rights
before and during the War, was so willing to rejoin the Union and
cede many of those rights. Cable's answer is that the North was
really fighting for Union, and that freeing the slaves was merely
an excuse--they didn't care about the condition of the Negroes (to
use Wilson's term). And the South was really fighting for
slavery, and states' rights was merely an excuse. Whether this is
actually true I don't know, but it certainly explains a lot of
otherwise odd behavior. (Note: The vast majority of the Acts of
Secession passed by the Southern states did in fact mention
slavery as one of the reasons for their secession.)
There was also a Retro Hugo nominee for "Best Related Book" that I
read. Well, actually, I read the 1975 L. Sprague de Camp and
Catherine C. de Camp, SCIENCE FICTION HANDBOOK, REVISED (ISBN 0-
070-16198-4), a revision of the 1953 edition. It is still quite
readable, but with flaws. For example, de Camp's summary of the
history of imaginative fiction is concise, but marred with
questionable claims (such as the claim that the novel originated
in Alexandria under the Ptolemys). Of course, it's more than made
up for by finding out that Seabury Quinn was so popular as a
"Weird Tales" author that when he was taken to a New Orleans
bordello, the staff offered him one on the house.
The discussion of how publishing works is, of course, very out-of-
date, but the discussions of how to choose names and other
technical aspects of writing are still pertinent. (I wish more
people would follow his dictum: "The writer must not, however, let
his linguistic enthusiasm lead him to give names too long or too
difficult or too full of diacritical marks")
Of the first World Science Fiction Convention, de Camp notes,
"TIME [magazine] wrote up the convention, noting its more juvenile
aspects." (page 3) It's nice to see some traditions haven't
changed in sixty-five years. [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
If a million people believe a foolish thing,
it is still a foolish thing.
--Anatole France
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/J.MolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mtvoid/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mtvoid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/