Grin Juice Concentrate
by rsbakker
Definition of the Day – Bureaucracy: a complex organization of humans (often attributed to governments, but actually perfected by corporations) meant to maximize innocence and to minimize accountability in order to better generate irrational outcomes.
So I had an interesting morning in the coffee shop: one beginning with absolute declarations of what God demands of women, and ending with a joke about geriatric cunnilingus.
Things were just swimming with The Unholy Consult when I happened to overhear this guy a couple of tables over telling another guy how ‘the prophet’ had told ‘man’ about the indecency of women appearing in public. The private sphere, he insisted, is every bit as glorious and rewarding as the public, but the obscenity of modern society was such that women were ‘confused,’ to the point where they could no longer cherish what was their exalted role.
Now, I admit I was offended – morally offended. I had just read the story about how Lara Logan, the CBS’s chief correspondent in Egypt, had been raped and brutalized by a gang of men in Tahir Square while thousands of others were celebrating Mubarak’s fall from power. The sordid contradiction of this still makes my head spin: the way human triumph and squalor so effortlessly flow through the same ancient sewer system.
I felt the need to show this guy he was an idiot.
But I’ve grown suspicious of this feeling over the years. I could tell by the sheer intensity of his declarations that he was an Idealogue in the Old Testament sense. And I could feel a matching intensity swelling in my breast. Piety – oh, my.
Then he turns to me and says, “You’re that famous author, aren’t you?”
And I reply, “Well, I wouldn’t say ‘famous.’ Notorious in some small circles maybe.”
“Notorious? Why is that?”
“Well, because I write about how stupid human beings are…” I explained what I thought our three biggest cognitive shortcomings were: the way we’re hardwired to think we’re more right than others, to unconsciously manufacture evidence of our more-rightness, and to be downright allergic to doubt and uncertainty.
“Hardwired? I find it interesting you would use a transitive verb. So tell me, who did the hardwiring?’
“Who? Why does there have to be a who?”
And we were off to the races. I didn’t even dent this guy, and trust me, I’ve sent many, many religious idealogues trotting away pale-faced with doubt. I’m the guy who waves the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses in off the street – truly. He was as certain as certain could be.
I said, “These are extraordinary claims you’re making.”
“Extraordinary? Not at all. What do you mean?”
“You’re saying that you’re know what God Almighty wants.”
“I don’t know anything.”
“So you don’t know the proper place of women?”
“God knows – not me!”
Holy Moly. It was like playing three card monte with language: every time I pointed out the red queen, he would hold up a black one and say that God decides what we call red. And so it went, until he told me he found me insulting. I laughed, and said, “Dude, have you ever heard a recording of yourself?”
At which point he decided to play “the bigger man” game: he stood up, and said, “Well then, I apologize,” and held out his hand in friendship… except that it was shaking for rage. Literally.
I took his hand and said, “Hey look. Stick around: I can talk about this stuff all day.” And I seriously could. Out of honest curiosity, sure, but probably out of some instinct to establish ideological dominance more.
No. He had to go. And I believed him. Then he asked me for my name, and you know what? some instinct felt viscerally threatened by the request. I gave it to him anyway.
Afterwards a couple of female regulars took his place, wily and irreverent souls, and one of them told me a joke that a prison inmate had told her earlier in the week: “What does an 85 year old woman taste like?”
“I don’t know.”
“Depends…”
What a morning. I could spend a lifetime parsing the significances and implications.
Mr. Bakker – will you be at ICFA this year?
That sounds pretty interesting, albeit annoying. What religious background was that guy hailing from?
At least when I’ve gotten into arguments with such people, the best idea is to simply not accept any of their ridiculous premises. I remember asking a guy why I should follow the teachings of a long-dead Iron Age barbarian, and he seemed genuinely confused, like it was something obvious that we should care about what Iron Age barbarians thought about morality 1,400 years after the fact.
I have had many similar discussions and at one point in my life (when I was in Junior High), I would have been the one to tell you “God decides what we call red”. Then, thanks in no small part to puberty and the realization that I liked other guys (and the social ostricization that goes along with being “different” in a small, nothern Minnesota town), I began to change my perspective on things…but it took awhile.
Not too long ago, I was reading Jan Westerhoff’s “Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka” on the bus and was approached by someone who asked what I was reading and why and then went into a diatribe against Buddhism (essentialy: godless heathens who will burn in hell since they are atheist and haven’t been reborn). Then I told him I was gay. He wanted to save my soul right then and there. He wanted to pray with me and when I said no, he wanted to pray for me. I reminded him “for all have sinned and come short of the glory of god” and that if he is praying for anyone, it should be for himself and for more humility and compassion. Then, thankfully, he got off the bus.
I think these types of conversations are important in that I think it is healthy to continue to challenge other people’s views and to have your own views challenged. I know at times it feels like banging your head against a brick wall and you’re convinced that both of you will leave the conversation with the exact set of convictions you had when things began, but I think all of our beliefs evolve over time and part of what informs the evolution are confrontations like this one.
Unfortunately evolution can be a maddeningly slow process 🙂
I was watching American Idol with my wife the other night and I told her how I was constantly amazed at how each one of the thousands of people were convinced that they, and only they, would be the next American Idol. It’s both extremely amusing and deeply disturbing at the same time.
Do you think your fear was racist?
I never considered that the default assumption would have been that he was Middle-eastern, but it makes sense. The guy actually looked like ‘Milky’ out of Me, Myself, and Irene!
I wasn’t making a judgement call or anything, just curious if you thought about that. You said he used the term, “the prophet” which isn’t something you really here unless the person speaking is Muslim, and then you mentioned fear, so, you know…
heh, I once had a conversation with a friend who was trying to explain to me the scientific possibility of a horn destroying a city wall. When I pointed out the scientific flaws, she ended the entire argument with “Well I believe in God and God can do anything, so I don’t need science to tell me whats’s possible.”
That was fun.
“Well I believe in God and God can do anything, so I don’t need science to tell me whats’s possible.”
I remember broswing through the philosophy section at a bookstore and came across a book on paradoxes and the blurb on the back asked the question “Can God create a rock that He can’t lift?”
Anyone have an answer?
Yeah, cause he can’t lift it he calls it rock n’ roll!! \m/
This is pretty obvious, but the reason he got angry is because you were exposing cognitive dissonance. One way I always know I’m losing a political/scientific/moral argument with my girlfriend is when I start to lose my shit, specially if she’s totally calm about it.
Also, don’t get shot please. There’s Jesus Camp Crazy and Cut Off My Wife’s Head Crazy, know what I’m saying?*
*Assuming muslim from “prophet” and misogyny. So sue me.
Oh and dharma:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox
Wikipedia has an answer for everything.
Awesome. Thanks.
I’m the guy who waves the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses in off the street – truly.
I haven’t done that, but I have heard a few mormons say to me “Well, we really need to get going now…”
I actually felt really guilty after the first one (ah, virgin guilt!). Because fuck all this truth buisiness, I’m unraveling what keeps him going and am I going to be there for him? No, I am not.
This guy, shaking with rage? What does an animal do when it’s cornered? And were all cornered, to some degree. He’s got nowhere else to go, Scott. Nowhere. More so, he’ll be going to nowhere with no one, as well. That’s a hell of a corner.
Or, to switch to the mercenary side of my brain, perhaps a vector is not to challenge his conceptions off the bat, but to ask if there were no god, what would he have? Would he have nothing? Start seeding, by simply asking about, the idea that there is a survivable alternative. That way if you break his conceptions, he has a place to retreat to. So he isn’t stuck in a corner?
One of the mormons I spoke to just thought humanity could not fix itself up – it’d have to be a god job. Clearly he saw no other viable path. It’s pretty logical, when there is only one path, to adhere to it absolutely.
And I’ll second Jorge’s concern. Be well – I wish I had resources to send on that matter.
Also, that joke is just morally wrong…
ooo careful, RSB, the guy’s going to be buying your books and marking them up with red pens. Seriously though, this was a beautiful little blog to end the day with, I giggled more than once. cheers.
RSB, what coffee shop do you go to man!?
Every java joint that I frequent is usually populated with individuals that are not nearly as entertaining as yours! Or, the cliental are not strong willed enough to start arguing with a stranger.
Either way, I understand your moment of worry. I’d have been hesitant to give my name too. (Who knows, maybe he was just trying to make a gesture of formality?)
…and yet there’s something so head-scratching about hearing a tale of someone who has set forth so many arguments on the cultural and neurological construction of “morality entitlement” suddenly expressing moral outrage toward an “obviously inferior/incorrect” morality. I think my head wants to explode.
“Yeah, cause he can’t lift it he calls it rock n’ roll!! \m/”
I’m having a Jack Black School of Rock moment…
What I don’t understand is the hostility of those who are debating the existence or the nature of their perception of “God”. It’s fine with me to debate. I think that any system or fact or belief or system that denies being questioned is made of of a lot of people who don’t really have any faith. If it’s not worth examining, it’s not work talking about.
I don’t believe anyone ‘really’ knows anything if it’s simply rote memorization. It’s through discussion and debate, that we come to know anything we hold as truth more fully. To incorporate the structure of these ideas as our own.
While I believe there is some form of higher power, how could I even imagine for a second, with any degree of seriousness, accept the interpretation of any religious work that I have read at face value? It’s impossible. On contradictions alone, the discrepancies are staggering. But I’m just trying to imagine how those people who were supposedly entrusted with imparting ‘the Lord’s message’, had that message imparted to them. Was there a giant TV that imparted the knowledge of the creation of the world on fast forward? Was was the information beamed directly into the writers mind? How, could that person really comprehend that and hope to communicate that to us, with their primitive understanding? How many discrepancies would there be if just a modern man tried to illustrate something like that to a 3rd world person right now, via any medium whatsoever? The what would be the differences, intellectually, between a deity and person in a B.C. time frame? I can’t even legitimately comprehend. It might as well be a prodigy in molecular physics attempting to describe pouring a glass of water into a tub of random chemicals to a 4 year old. In detail.
I like to be challenged, not because I know I’m right, but because I hope that I’m not completely wrong. Because debate can help bring me closer to comprehension. Maybe.
To me, it would really suck to find out tomorrow that there IS nothing afterwards. Even if I’m not completely sure what the rules are. Because that means we’re all just meat in the end, and raising my kids to believe that they should seek always their own advantage first, as long as they don’t get caught – is actually the best way to raise them – if I want what is best for them. Also, it means that I better get any payback that I think someone deserves, while I’m alive. Since karma(golden rule/hell) ain’t gonna do sh*t. Which is a shame. It’s nice to let some things go, since they’re on someone else’s radar.
I’ve read the Prince of Nothing novels many times at this point. I’ve loaned them out ot friends and rebought some of them a half dozen times. I find them to be fascinating on several levels. They have challenged my perception of some things, while reinforcing others.
But even as obvious as it sometimes seems, that there could not be anything more than our existence.. two items lend me enough doubt to disbelieve the raw science of it all. One is that just about every living thing reacts to music. It’s like a cheat-code for the behavior of creatures great and small and all designers of complex systems like to put cheat-codes in their creations. The other is the fact that water, out of all elements, floats when it freezes. It’s the only one that does so and life appears to be completely depended on that happening. It isn’t great, but it’s enough for me to hold out a little hope that there’s something bigger out there that means for us to become greater than we are someday.
I keep thinking about that line “God knows – not me!”. Is the responce (if you can think ahead of time) to ask how he knows what god knows? Isn’t that an extrodinary claim?
Oh wait, he’ll turn to opaque texts and game the ambiguity of current language (like all languages, it’s been made up on the fly (well, maybe not programming languages…)). Damn, the guy beats me without even being here! This is hard chess!
Oh yes, it is so fun to talk to people like that, where’s it really is a waste of time and breath. Some just simply are on repeat track with a scripted order of nonsensical responses they keep using.
They acknowledge something you do not, and that’s that, nothing you say will shake them.
[…] Every one of us has encountered fringe people with fringe opinions over the years. We all have the experience of looking someone in the eye and realizing that it quite simply does not matter what you say. So […]