April 2009


The Eric Voegelin’s Second Reality is a sort of a virtual life as we see it in the Second Life Internet game. The Second Reality consists itself in a new reality coercively constructed that undermines the true natural reality of a person (or a group of persons), making the natural objective reality void.

The Second Reality is a characteristic of any ideology and the process of dissociation from Nature and its objective reality is made by a self-inflicted violence ― a sort of a masochist process ― in which the individuals are persuaded to increasingly hate and deny the true reality as it comes from natural phenomena.

The ideological “second reality” is, therefore, a pathology ― it is really a mental disease ―, because ― as Voegelin put it ― it destroys the human language due to fact that as the ideological second reality looses contact with reality, the ideological thinker uses the language not to express the natural reality itself, but to express his/her alienation in relation to the true reality.

Just a comment to this post:

George Edward Moore’ s ethics is the poorest we can find in the history of ideas. Taking the example of Moore to argue against Harris is the same as watching two slim wrestlers running away from each other in the wrestling ring. Moore based its ethics on common sense, his ethics is static, conformist and did not offer any help to solve the problems that moral life represents.

What Moore did was simply accepting all established rules, and the scientific basis for ethics that he tried to find out was reduced to a total abandonment of tradition.

Harris follows Aquinas’ theory of “natural good” inspite of giving to it a different sense.

Is Subjectivity part of moral and ethics? Yes, it is! But…

Phenomenology taught us about a recent concept: “Intersubjectivity”. It means that there is a “fabric” of relations prior and preliminary to the definition of “Subjects” who are united by those relations.

Furthermore, Einstein’s relativity defined the “subjectivity” of the observer (subject); however, there are some laws of Physics that regulate those subjectivities by creating a possibility of interchangeable and conversion of several subjective realities ― e.g., there is a physical superstructure that is defined by natural laws (physics) which connects the observers’ relativity (subjectivity).

Recently, the Iowa Supreme Court has ruled in favor of same-sex “marriage” basing its decision upon the argument that “the moral opposition to it is based on religion”. Bearing in mind that there are judges involved in that decision, the argument is ― at least ― funny.

Any concept of marriage is based upon a religion; what changes and differs from one case to another, is the type of religion in stake. When we look into human History, we see that not all religions produced a civilization, but we can see that any major civilization could not exist without a religion. I am talking about facts, here.

The religion that supports same-sex “marriage” ― the religion followed by the Iowa SC judges ― and rules it out without the people’s auscultation (referendum) is a religion that is guided by a metastatic faith: the belief that it is possible to change the fundamental nature of reality ― changing not only human nature, but the essence of Nature as a whole. This religion is a naturalistic monism that denies the validity of natural reality itself, inspite of allegedly basing its beliefs upon a naturalistic Weltanschauung . So, this religion contradicts itself: defining itself as a naturalistic monism, it does not accept the very reality of human nature. It is a irrational religion.

On the other hand, the religion that supports the concept of marriage between a man and a woman is a religion that takes into consideration the attuning of the human soul with the indivisible divine, and this kind of religion is the one that has supported all major civilizations throughout Human History. Only religions that have adopted the Metaxy ― the experience of the encounter of human consciousness with transcendent reality ― have produced great civilizations. So, this latter religion (Christian religion, in the American case) respects the trends and essence of Nature and validates the importance of Metaxy; it is a double rational religion.

What is in stake with the definition of marriage is either the rationality that defines a civilization or the absence of rationality that condemns it to decadence.

Bilderberg Summit - Marriot Hotel, Wa, 2008

Bilderberg Summit - Marriot Hotel, Wa, 2008

“If you have a demagogue with a fanatic mass movement of personality cultists, who is imposing a program of extreme Bankers and financial oligarchs ― that’s fascism.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw

(2 hours video)

Just an addenda to this psychological point of view.

“Homophobia” is a natural condition in human being. It is intrinsically connected to the human nature and it is not a “psychological disease”, as the gay activists and our ignorant and manipulated political correct leaders meant to be.

By definition, a homophobe is somebody that repels any possibility of a sexual relation between him or herself and another person belonging to same sex. Period. A homophobe do not engage in violence against homosexuals; people who do it are criminals, not homophobes. As wikipedia put it:

In 1993, behavioral scientists William O’Donohue and Christine Caselles concluded that the usage of the term “as it is usually used, makes an illegitimately pejorative evaluation of certain open and debatable value positions, much like the former disease construct of homosexuality” itself, arguing that the term may be used as an ad Hominem argument against those who advocate values or positions of which the speaker does not approve. The social construct of masculinity is not defined by attraction to females alone but also by negative attraction to males. The addition of a fear of something unmasculine, given the terms scientific etymology, may be used illegitimately to imply that anyone with a different opinion is unmasculine.

The National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality, an organization affiliated with the ex-gay movement, describes the term homophobia as being “often used inaccurately to describe any person who objects to homosexual behavior on either moral, psychological or medical grounds.” They claim that, “Technically, however, the terms actually denotes a person who has a phobia — or irrational fear — of homosexuality. Principled disagreement, therefore, cannot be labeled ‘homophobia.’”

The term “homophobia” is, therefore, a bigoted coined terminology used by gay activists to stigmatize anybody that do not follow their cultural policies. As any term has an opposite meaning, “homophilia” should be its contrary, which means that ― following the Aristotle’s principle of the third excluded ― either somebody is homophobe or homophile. There´s no third choice.

When a heterosexual man got a no-go in a sexual approach to a female, he does not interpret her denial as an assault to his identity, rather he would think that her denial is due to his personal inability. This doesn’t happen in a homosexual side in relation to heterosexuality.

The gay social discrimination feeling is a self inherent psychological characteristic of gay condition. Any repulsive attitude from a heterosexual towards a gay sexual approach is considered by the gay agent as a form of violence, not only against the gay alone but also against the homosexuality condition as a whole. However, if a “gay macho” sexually repulses a transexual, this is something considered “natural” and “logical” from the gay point of view. This means clearly that, in gay perspective, the sexual repulsion is something exclusive of gay condition ― only gays have the right to sexual repulsion.

The exclusivism of gay sexual repulsion is a characteristic of a cultural elite that bases exclusively its personal identity upon sexual desire subjectivity, and upon hate on what they call “heterosexism” that is, at the end, heterosexuality itself.

The expression of gay sexual desire is, by itself, a matter of identity and therefore a matter of life or death ― the gay sexual desire is inegotiable in any possible way, and assumes itself as a unconditional and inalienable right. On the other hand, the sexual repulse from heterosexual side in relation to the homosexual act is considered by the gay activists as an unacceptable violence, and classified as a “crime” or “mental illness”.

Corollary

The gay cultural policy demands a compulsory elimination of any repulse regarding to the homosexual act from heterosexual side, that means the construction of a virtual culture, as it is impossible to coercively format a culture and/or change human biology. This means to decree and dictate the exclusive right of gays to sexual repulse.

One of the great coups of the movement for same-sex marriage has been to plant the premise that it represents the inevitable future. This sense has inhibited even some who know perfectly well that marriage is by nature the union of a man and a woman. They fear that throwing themselves into the cause of opposing it is futile — worse, that it will call down the judgment of history that they were bigots.

Contrary to common perception, however, the public is not becoming markedly more favorable toward same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage rose during the 1990s but seems to have frozen in place (at least according to Gallup) since the high court of Massachusetts invented a right to same-sex marriage earlier this decade.

via The Future of Marriage by The Editors on National Review Online.

According to Portuguese Catholic Church, 88.10% of the Portuguese citizens practice the Christian catholic rites, although the number of priests decreased by 8,4% in six years (2000 ― 2006).

A fé católica é professada por 88,10 por cento dos portugueses, segundo o último Anuário Católico, que aponta para um decréscimo no número de sacerdotes, situação que vai ser recuperada, segundo o secretário da Conferência Episcopal Portuguesa.

Os dados, relativos a 31 de Dezembro de 2006, indicam que apesar da quebra de 8,4 por cento no número de sacerdotes diocesanos entre 2000 e 2006, de 3159 para 2894, no mesmo período não houve alteração sensível entre os sacerdotes religiosos. “Essa quebra no número de padres vai ser recuperada em breve, pois desde então (2006) já há mais seminaristas”, afirmou o padre Manuel Morujão, sem adiantar números.

Pope Benedict XVI last night attacked the rise of aggressive secularism in Western societies, warning them that they risked drifting into a ‘desert of godlessness’.

He used his Good Friday meditations to compare deliberate attempts to remove religion from public life to the mockery of Jesus Christ by the mob as he was led out to be crucified.

‘Religious sentiments’ were increasingly ranked among the ‘unwelcome leftovers of antiquity’ and ‘held up to scorn and ridicule’, he added.

‘We are shocked to see to what levels of brutality human beings can sink,’ said the Pope at an evening ceremony at the Coliseum in Rome.

More…

“All stars have different time. Some are yesterday, other are today, another are twenty centuries ago.”

Rámon Gómez de La Serna