Interviewing Heyo

[JustGeorge]

Hi @Heyo!

Thanks for volunteering to be interviewed!

To start off, I want to make sure my memory is correct. You are consider yourself agnostic regarding religious or spiritual beliefs, right?

 

[Heyo]

Hi @Heyo!

Thanks for volunteering to be interviewed!

To start off, I want to make sure my memory is correct. You are consider yourself agnostic regarding religious or spiritual beliefs, right?

Hi George,

I consider myself an Agnostic in the philosophical meaning as first described by Thomas Huxley. I try to withhold judgement when I have insufficient data. That isn't restricted to religious or spiritual beliefs.

Regarding the god belief, I not only don't know whether they exist, as the mere colloquial agnostic, I also think that we have insufficient data about the nature of "god(s)".

 

[JustGeorge]

Hi George,

I consider myself an Agnostic in the philosophical meaning as first described by Thomas Huxley. I try to withhold judgement when I have insufficient data. That isn't restricted to religious or spiritual beliefs.

I'm unfamiliar with Thomas Huxley or his philosophies. Is there anything I should know about him(or his ideas)in addition to this that may help me understand your worldview?

Regarding the god belief, I not only don't know whether they exist, as the mere colloquial agnostic, I also think that we have insufficient data about the nature of "god(s)".

I find it interesting you went to 'they' rather than to 'he', which is how many Westerners default.

Do you think its possible to collect data on such?

 

[Heyo]

I'm unfamiliar with Thomas Huxley or his philosophies. Is there anything I should know about him(or his ideas)in addition to this that may help me understand your worldview?

Huxley was a promoter of science and education. He was a member of the Royal Society, and he wrote on scientific methods. He also was a big fan of Charles Darwin and the ToE, which got him the nickname "Darwin's bulldog".
There is no defining book or even article on Agnosticism and there are others who expanded on the idea. One key element of my Agnosticism, the ignorance of the nature of god(s), was not mentioned by Huxley, but by Bertrand Russel.

I find it interesting you went to 'they' rather than to 'he', which is how many Westerners default.

I have made it a conscious effort to not assign a gender to "god", using "it" and "they". I will use the assigned gender for named gods.

Do you think its possible to collect data on such?

We can look at how the gods are referred to in literature. Ishtar, Bastet, Aphrodite and Hel are clearly referred to as female, Zeus, Thor and YHVH as male. But "god", as an umbrella term, is undefined.

 

[JustGeorge]

Huxley was a promoter of science and education. He was a member of the Royal Society, and he wrote on scientific methods. He also was a big fan of Charles Darwin and the ToE, which got him the nickname "Darwin's bulldog".
There is no defining book or even article on Agnosticism and there are others who expanded on the idea. One key element of my Agnosticism, the ignorance of the nature of god(s), was not mentioned by Huxley, but by Bertrand Russel.

I have found Agnostics vary pretty greatly in how they approach such topics.

I could see, and appreciate, one claiming ignorance on such a topic. It seems much of the disagreement you see in discussions are actually because two people aren't actually agreeing on what a deity(or something of the sort) is.

I have made it a conscious effort to not assign a gender to "god", using "it" and "they". I will use the assigned gender for named gods.

Makes good sense to me.

We can look at how the gods are referred to in literature. Ishtar, Bastet, Aphrodite and Hel are clearly referred too as female, Zeus, Thor and YHVH as male. But "god", as an umbrella term, is undefined.

They are undefined in any means that seems provable at this time, yes. Yet they seem to be a collective part of human experience.

Any thoughts on why?

 

[Heyo]

They are undefined in any means that seems provable at this time, yes. Yet they seem to be a collective part of human experience.

Any thoughts on why?

Michael Shermer has a good explanation:

His "agenticity" is so strong in some people that they see (more or less) rational agents everywhere. They give names to inanimate objects and talk about physical forces in a way as if the objects influenced by them have an urge to follow the force. For them, the Cosmological Argument makes sense, as they can't imagine anything to form, but through the will of a sapient entity.

I'm a mutant (who would probably have won a Darwin Award in prehistoric times). I have never believed in a god. When I first heard a bible story (the Christmas story), I recognized it as a fairy tale. It had all the signs of one, quaint language, a tragic story, fairies (angles) and magic. I was surprised when I learned that people believed it really happened.

 

[JustGeorge]

Michael Shermer has a good explanation:

His "agenticity" is so strong in some people that they see (more or less) rational agents everywhere. They give names to inanimate objects and talk about physical forces in a way as if the objects influenced by them have an urge to follow the force. For them, the Cosmological Argument makes sense, as they can't imagine anything to form, but through the will of a sapient entity.

Why do you think so many jump to the idea, that, if such a force exists, it must be good or wise?

I'm a mutant (who would probably have won a Darwin Award in prehistoric times). I have never believed in a god. When I first heard a bible story (the Christmas story), I recognized it as a fairy tale. It had all the signs of one, quaint language, a tragic story, fairies (angles) and magic. I was surprised when I learned that people believed it really happened.

How do you think prehistoric you would have won a Darwin award? (Go ahead, make something up! )

How old were you when you realized people believed what you had always seen as nothing but a story?

If I remember right, you did youth work with a church for quite some time? How was it working in support of something that you saw as myth and others saw as truth?

 

[Heyo]

Why do you think so many jump to the idea, that, if such a force exists, it must be good or wise?

Wishful thinking? There is no rational reason, the agenticity mechanism only explains assuming potential dangerous agents. And I think it is a recent phenomenon. Many of the "old" gods were dangerous or at least indifferent.

How do you think prehistoric you would have won a Darwin award? (Go ahead, make something up! )

I'd possibly have adopted a lion kitten and lost fear of all lions and end up as lunch.

How old were you when you realized people believed what you had always seen as nothing but a story?

Around seven or eight. Around the time when they should have realized that the Bible stories were as invented as Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, but didn't.

If I remember right, you did youth work with a church for quite some time? How was it working in support of something that you saw as myth and others saw as truth?

It was pretty much irreligious. The main purpose (for us) was having fun, traveling to a foreign country and connecting to people (preferably of the opposite sex). The "work" part also wasn't very Biblical, it was more humanistic ethics than anything else. When it got religious, I kept my mouth shut, and so we got along.
I reserved the debates about religion for my teachers.

 

[sun rise]

I'd possibly have adopted a lion kitten and lost fear of all lions and end up as lunch.

I had a friend growing up that made nitroglycerine, put it in a snow drift and fired a rifle at it to try to get it to blow up the snow drift so he would not have to shovel. I put fireworks in a charcoal grill with live coals so I could take a picture when the fireworks went off and the coals scattered in the air.

Darwin never sleeps but sometimes he forgives our sins

 

[Heyo]

I had a friend growing up that made nitroglycerine, put it in a snow drift and fired a rifle at it to try to get it to blow up the snow drift so he would not have to shovel. I put fireworks in a charcoal grill with live coals so I could take a picture when the fireworks went off and the coals scattered in the air.

Darwin never sleeps but sometimes he forgives our sins

I did similar, but I wouldn't have been to do that in pre-historic times.

 

[JustGeorge]

Wishful thinking? There is no rational reason, the agenticity mechanism only explains assuming potential dangerous agents. And I think it is a recent phenomenon. Many of the "old" gods were dangerous or at least indifferent.

True. Not sure when or why things changed from being "lets be cautious of God/s" to "God/s love and care for us!"

I'd possibly have adopted a lion kitten and lost fear of all lions and end up as lunch.

I can respect and relate to that...

Around seven or eight. Around the time when they should have realized that the Bible stories were as invented as Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, but didn't.

Hey, hey now! I know Santa Claus is ridiculous, but I won't hear such slander about the Easter bunny.

Did you find there were any other kids(or adults) who suspected it to be myth, but wasn't saying so?

It was pretty much irreligious. The main purpose (for us) was having fun, traveling to a foreign country and connecting to people (preferably of the opposite sex). The "work" part also wasn't very Biblical, it was more humanistic ethics than anything else. When it got religious, I kept my mouth shut, and so we got along.
I reserved the debates about religion for my teachers.

How long did you do Youth work? What was it like? How old were you?

Do you find there was much difference between Biblical ethics and Humanistic ethics?

 

[Heyo]

Hey, hey now! I know Santa Claus is ridiculous, but I won't hear such slander about the Easter bunny.

My parents got me to question my disbelief for about 5 seconds when I was 5 or 6. I had checked outside the house and there was nothing. Then I went in for breakfast. After that, the nests outside were full. My parents were both inside all the time, so ... my parents had employed the neighbours, just to mess with us.

Did you find there were any other kids(or adults) who suspected it to be myth, but wasn't saying so?

It wasn't really a question I or my friends were interested in at the time.

How long did you do Youth work? What was it like? How old were you?

About 3 or 4 years. You had to be 14 to get a "Jugendgruppenleiterschein", and I got mine right away. The work was fun, even though it mostly resembled to herd a bag of cats.

Do you find there was much difference between Biblical ethics and Humanistic ethics?

At that time, I didn't know enough about either to judge, but what we were told was much in line with my own morals.

 

[JustGeorge]

My parents got me to question my disbelief for about 5 seconds when I was 5 or 6. I had checked outside the house and there was nothing. Then I went in for breakfast. After that, the nests outside were full. My parents were both inside all the time, so ... my parents had employed the neighbours, just to mess with us.

It wasn't really a question I or my friends were interested in at the time.

Understandable, that is a bit young for such big questions.

About 3 or 4 years. You had to be 14 to get a "Jugendgruppenleiterschein", and I got mine right away. The work was fun, even though it mostly resembled to herd a bag of cats.

And you did temporarily herd cats of the feline variety later... How are your cats, and in what quantity?

At that time, I didn't know enough about either to judge, but what we were told was much in line with my own morals.

What are your morals?

 

[Heyo]

And you did temporarily herd cats of the feline variety later... How are your cats, and in what quantity?

All are well, as far as I know. I had 16 over the last year and 4 are staying with me, they are spayed, so there will be no more and I have no intention to give more away, so will be no less.

What are your morals?

I roughly follow value ethics and the 3 pillars my moral rests on are #1: wellbeing, #2: equality and #3: liberty.

 

[sun rise]

Jugendgruppenleiterschein

"youth group leader certificate" according to Google

 

[JustGeorge]

All are well, as far as I know. I had 16 over the last year and 4 are staying with me, they are spayed, so there will be no more and I have no intention to give more away, so will be no less.

Not a bad number.

I roughly follow value ethics and the 3 pillars my moral rests on are #1: wellbeing, #2: equality and #3: liberty.

It seems on the surface these three values would be pretty self explanatory, but if there's one thing my time on the forums has taught me, its that the same words can mean different things to different people.

What does wellbeing, equality, and liberty mean to you? To whom else does it extend to? Care to share any examples, or more details?

 

[Heyo]

It seems on the surface these three values would be pretty self explanatory, but if there's one thing my time on the forums has taught me, its that the same words can mean different things to different people.

What does wellbeing, equality, and liberty mean to you? To whom else does it extend to? Care to share any examples, or more details?

Let's start with equality. Equality, in a moral sense, means to me to judge actions the same, widely independent of who does them (given both are moral agents on about equal standing). Equality is the opposite of hypocrisy.
Wellbeing is a state to live in without suffering, preferably even having fun. Actions that cause (needless) suffering are immoral and should be avoided.
Liberty is doing - and especially not doing - what one wants. But there have to be restriction, especially when liberty collides with equality or wellbeing.
E.g. abortion. Abortion is a liberty an expecting mother should have. However, from about the 24th week of pregnancy, that may collide with possible suffering of the fetus. In that case, restricting the liberty of the pregnant person is moral, since it collides with the wellbeing of the fetus.
And then there is a 0th moral principle, I haven't mentioned, yet: survival. Self-preservation allows for actions that are immoral under other circumstances. To complete the above example: ending a pregnancy after the 24th week is still moral, or at least amoral, when the life of the pregnant person is on the line.

 

[JustGeorge]

Let's start with equality. Equality, in a moral sense, means to me to judge actions the same, widely independent of who does them (given both are moral agents on about equal standing). Equality is the opposite of hypocrisy.

I take then, exceptions are made for those who might be particularly impaired in some area or the other, then.

"Equality is the opposite of hypocrisy." Care to go further on that one?

Wellbeing is a state to live in without suffering, preferably even having fun. Actions that cause (needless) suffering are immoral and should be avoided.

I love that you include fun in there. I think it does matter, over time.

Liberty is doing - and especially not doing - what one wants. But there have to be restriction, especially when liberty collides with equality or wellbeing.
E.g. abortion. Abortion is a liberty an expecting mother should have. However, from about the 24th week of pregnancy, that may collide with possible suffering of the fetus. In that case, restricting the liberty of the pregnant person is moral, since it collides with the wellbeing of the fetus.
And then there is a 0th moral principle, I haven't mentioned, yet: survival. Self-preservation allows for actions that are immoral under other circumstances. To complete the above example: ending a pregnancy after the 24th week is still moral, or at least amoral, when the life of the pregnant person is on the line.

Good illustration here.

You throw survival in as well; how do you rate that with the others? Do you feel all of these ethics have equal importance?

 

[Heyo]

I take then, exceptions are made for those who might be particularly impaired in some area or the other, then.

Yes, we don't know if non-human animals are moral agents and usually assume they are not.
Children are not moral agents, nor are people with limited mental capacity, but there is no fine line between children and adults. The law sets an arbitrary date, but you don't become a fully moral agent, just by turning 18 (or whatever date it is where you live).

"Equality is the opposite of hypocrisy." Care to go further on that one?

An example of hypocrisy would be "religious liberty" rights, as they are wanted by some extreme evangelicals and republican lawmakers. They want a privilege to display their faith without granting the equal right to other faiths. The Church of Satan frequently points out the hypocrisy by erecting Baphomet statues near Christian displays, usually the ten commandments.

I love that you include fun in there. I think it does matter, over time.

It does. But I don't think it is a moral right. We have an obligation to do no harm, but we don't have an obligation to do good.
A moral act (or, in most cases, refrain from acting) can be neutral. A good act is going above and beyond moral obligation.

You throw survival in as well; how do you rate that with the others? Do you feel all of these ethics have equal importance?

Survival is not a thing we usually have to contemplate in our modern world. It is so rare indeed, that we often forget about it when talking about morals. So, it isn't on par with the other pillars, but can override all of them in special circumstances. Without survival being moral, killing in self-defence would be immoral. I can't see that as moral, and I guess very few people would.

Other than that, there is no hierarchy. That's why moral dilemmas exit. One has to carefully way one right against another when they conflict. We had that recently in the pandemic. Liberty (to not get vaccinated) had to compete with wellbeing (not being subjected to the virus).
I made an (only half joking) comment about people wanting to go to church without masks. I said they should have the right to go in (their liberty), but not to come out (potentially harming other people).

 

[sun rise]

An example of hypocrisy would be "religious liberty" rights, as they are wanted by some extreme evangelicals and republican lawmakers. They want a privilege to display their faith without granting the equal right to other faiths. The Church of Satan frequently points out the hypocrisy by erecting Baphomet statues near Christian displays, usually the ten commandments.

I'm watching a story where Judaism's stance on abortion (at least to some) is being used to challenge bans on abortion based on Christian theology. So it's going beyond displays to actual people's lives and the choices they are allowed to make. The most recent story I saw was Lawsuit challenging Indiana abortion ban survives a state challenge