Maybe he did understand, yet disagreed with your characterization of a large set of people's beliefs. Literally comparing what some view as the cornerstone of their religion with rape does not belong on this board.
What does belong is the heart wrenching story of prioritization of life following the death of a family member, same with complications of a daughter. Many of us are planning on having children soon, so the perspective is very interesting.
As a Catholic I also object to Paul's failure to venerate the Virgin Mary.
You know what I think would make this posting better? If 'pg added a feature I just came up with to HN that allows us to collaboratively edit Paul Buchheit's stories as if they were Wikipedia articles or Stack Overflow answers. I bet, as a group, we'd sure do a great job of capturing what Paul thinks about what's important in life, and also we could better inform people about why they shouldn't use vi because modal editors are relics best left to the 1970s.
I care about the world that my daughter will grow up in, and I think it's important for people to understand that love isn't something that can ever be given or taken by force. It must be a gift.
You phrased that in an ambiguous way. I believe you mean that the gift is being able to feel love, not the love itself. Loving someone may cause you to give "gifts" to that person, but the love itself is not a gift to them. You are the one enjoying that gift from life.
It's not given or taken. It's not a thing. It's not a pie -- in which, once you've eaten it, no one else can.
It sometimes feel like it is a thing, a limited resource that we must hoard. Something made up of hormones and bioenergy. Something precious and delicate that we must protect. But that's fear, not love.
We're born in love. We receive it from our mother and father. But as we grow older, we forget that Love Is. So we attribute it to our parents. Our parents have bad days too. And we learned to seek out attention by doing things. We've substituted need for approval for love.
And then puberty happens.
What is it that the ancients say? A thirsty man stands in the middle of a river, screaming his heart out because he doesn't know what he needs it right there in him.
The gift is in remembering it's always been there. It's not something someone gives you because you've been a good boy. It's not that special: everyone, regardless of sex, race, or faith or lack of faith -- regardless of the acts you've committed, the shame, guilt, fear that tortue you -- everyone is loved. That is the "unconditional" part of "unconditional love."
Yes. Tell Paul what's appropriate in his own, intensely personal, unabashedly honest message from the heart. I'm going through pain in my life and I'm glad he shared it. His honestly about religion was heartwarming, and I knew there'd be people in the Hacker News comments looking to argue about it straight away.
Is he even talking about religion? I thought he was just trying to evoke the purposeful animating idea that people of religion think about when they think about God.
"Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?", asks the nerd. "No, for thou art not a day in a particular season and the comparison would make no sense. Also, stop using vi."
Hacker News is not about religion. It shouldn't be.
Sometimes the occasional jab at fundies is overlooked, sometimes the occasional mention of solace in a higher power is tolerated; but the nature of Paul's characterization was beyond the cultural norms of this board.
The strength and appropriateness of someone's statement in areas that are beyond his or her's direct involvement in a particular project or field should come directly from the innate strength of the arguments themselves and from the innate appropriateness of the arguments themselves.
Paul is a great man. He's directly impacted my everyday work flow and many of my ideas - but the closeness of this community is damaged by divisive and potentially offensive claims. If anything he should be setting the standard for what is expected here; and I say this with full knowledge of of how many of his potentially offensive arguments rang truth to my ears.
If someone is in pain and they wish to talk to someone close to them, even with potentially offensive ideas, that is one thing. Writing something on the internet and submitting it to an online forum, however, is an implicit acceptance of the review of others at that board.
I truly believe he is well meaning, civil, caring, etc. But this place will devolve quickly when the subject matter becomes highly subjective and divisive.
I am aware this 'God' concept is very abstract. Maybe I should have emphasized the any in 'any form or idea'. Indeed, I do not understand what it adds to this deep and wise essay.
If you feel the essay is deep and wise, then you got something out of it.
I suggest examining how the concept of God bothers you in the essay; I'm not saying this to say you don't get it or that you are wrong. That disturbing feeling is the Jungnian shadow speaking when one is trying to reject something. Unconditional love is unconditional: even the concepts and feelings that disturb you.
Though ... if it doesn't bother you, then there's nothing further to say, eh?
Good analysis. I think what maybe bothered me is that Paul mentions mindfulness, being present in the moment, and so on. I personally struggle to explain these concepts to an atheist friend of mine who mixes up these important aspects of everyday being with religious world views. They are separate, and I love to see such elegant essays that do not blend the two dimensions, mindfulness and faith (of any specific or abstract sort).
I can tell you that, if you meditate (mindfully) long enough, you will trip out. Whether what you see while tripping out is something you want to call gods, or God, that is up to each individual. The religions you encountered as a child will frame much of the experiences you have during the trip, whether you want that or not.
There is a big difference between talking about being mindful, and practicing mindfulness. People like talking about it for a variety of reasons, and none of that helps with practice. Being mindful, you are probing into the fundamental nature of things: things come and go, they don't satisfy, and they are not you.
Things come and go: that includes any of the heavenly and angelic beings you might encounter while tripping out meditating. Easy to do if you don't want to believe their realness in the first place. However, that also includes any fears and aversions you might have about religion.
So ... the religious and mindfulness are not really separate. I've written some cheat-sheets and minor how-tos on how to practice mindfulness while avoiding bringing in religion. Because I know a lot of people have hangups that trigger this. (And I want to eat :-)). But essentially: if you are religious, then the attachment you let go is that of slavish worship; if you are not religious, then the attachment is in the aversion to anything smacking of religion. Either way, your actions and thoughts are being controlled by things that happen in the early childhood, ... that's not really being mindful ...
I don't know how to talk about the "first flowering" -- that first time you feel unconditional love while meditating -- without bringing in talk about the wisdom traditions. At best, I say, "practice this, and see for yourself." Usually it is, "practice this so you can feel calmer and be more effective living your life." And if they start blissing, well, let them be even then. They can come to their own conclusions.
I don't know if that helps you talk with your friend or not. I think it will come out better in your own words anyways :-D
@leibniz sound interesting, how about taking this privately by email?
What does belong is the heart wrenching story of prioritization of life following the death of a family member, same with complications of a daughter. Many of us are planning on having children soon, so the perspective is very interesting.