[sarcasm] But if she's got a website soley dedicated to vilifying her, then she must be right about something! I mean, they're probably all just afraid and even jealous of her because they know they're wrong! And that's the devestating truth! [/sarcasm]
I was in a bookstore yesterday, and noticed she's got almost an entire shelf devoted to her - every book has her picture prominently on the front cover. I didn't bother reading the titles too carefully; that much glossy-pastel and obvious stupidity hurt my eyes and my brain. The worst was her newest, something about Jesus (yay, heresies!), filed under the "New Non-Fiction" section. What part of anything S.B. has to say about Jesus could ever qualify as "non-fiction"?
I think bookstores need a new section, way off in the back of the store, but far from the Children's section (which should be at the front, anyway), named something like "Delusional Ravings" or "Ridiculous Semi-Coherent Fantasy" or something.
I bought The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, to help cleanse my mind of her existence. Later, at a different store, I found an old S.J. Gould book, too. Joy.
Yes, I've seen the "Occult" sections, but that word is obviously a corruption of "cult"; a word for which I have no functional definition to distinguish it from "religion". "Occult" probably has a neutral meaning to the majority of non-fundies, so it doesn't really convey the abject stupidity of authors like S.B. or Deepak Chopra.
So putting (some of) Dawkins' books in with other religious writing isn't completely terrible, except they really belong in the "Science" section (which is where I found the one I bought). Ideally, the "Science" section should be cleansed of books by IDiots like Behe.
Actually, if I recall correctly Occult comes from occultus, meaning hidden. The use of occult to describe religious practices (depending on who you ask) either --separates those which must be hidden from polite society or the authorities from more politically appropriate ones or --indicates that the religion in question has access to deeper, hidden spiritual secrets.
Cult on the other hand comes from cultus meaning care. Properly, the cult is the actual care due to one's deity, in the form of prayer, sacrifice, veneration, groveling, what have you.
So, you can have a cult within an occult religion: there was a Cult of the Virgin (may still be) which specifically venerated Mary within the Catholic Church, which of course claims access to deep spiritual secrets.
Of course, that is where they come from. How they are used these days seems to have meandered from the original meanings.
5 comments:
[sarcasm] But if she's got a website soley dedicated to vilifying her, then she must be right about something! I mean, they're probably all just afraid and even jealous of her because they know they're wrong! And that's the devestating truth! [/sarcasm]
I was in a bookstore yesterday, and noticed she's got almost an entire shelf devoted to her - every book has her picture prominently on the front cover. I didn't bother reading the titles too carefully; that much glossy-pastel and obvious stupidity hurt my eyes and my brain. The worst was her newest, something about Jesus (yay, heresies!), filed under the "New Non-Fiction" section. What part of anything S.B. has to say about Jesus could ever qualify as "non-fiction"?
I think bookstores need a new section, way off in the back of the store, but far from the Children's section (which should be at the front, anyway), named something like "Delusional Ravings" or "Ridiculous Semi-Coherent Fantasy" or something.
I bought The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, to help cleanse my mind of her existence. Later, at a different store, I found an old S.J. Gould book, too. Joy.
A lot of bookstores do have an "Occult" section in them. Of course, this is where you're likely to find books such as The God Delusion.
Yes, I've seen the "Occult" sections, but that word is obviously a corruption of "cult"; a word for which I have no functional definition to distinguish it from "religion". "Occult" probably has a neutral meaning to the majority of non-fundies, so it doesn't really convey the abject stupidity of authors like S.B. or Deepak Chopra.
So putting (some of) Dawkins' books in with other religious writing isn't completely terrible, except they really belong in the "Science" section (which is where I found the one I bought). Ideally, the "Science" section should be cleansed of books by IDiots like Behe.
Actually, if I recall correctly Occult comes from occultus, meaning hidden. The use of occult to describe religious practices (depending on who you ask) either
--separates those which must be hidden from polite society or the authorities from more politically appropriate ones
or
--indicates that the religion in question has access to deeper, hidden spiritual secrets.
Cult on the other hand comes from cultus meaning care. Properly, the cult is the actual care due to one's deity, in the form of prayer, sacrifice, veneration, groveling, what have you.
So, you can have a cult within an occult religion: there was a Cult of the Virgin (may still be) which specifically venerated Mary within the Catholic Church, which of course claims access to deep spiritual secrets.
Of course, that is where they come from. How they are used these days seems to have meandered from the original meanings.
Post a Comment