Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    	I was somewhat offended by the thrust of this article. Not only
    does it belittle the principles that guide my life, but it says I'm
    both stupid and docile. OK, there are times when I've failed to be
    brilliant - or even passably sentient - and I've put up with a lot of
    guff in my time, but those lapses do not prove the rule. But that's my
    opinion, what's yours ?  Do you, too, feel that Christ called upon all
    those who believe in his words to be altruistic ?

    I agree with you, Dave.  I found Simon's thesis offensive.
    
    -- Mike

I'd say it was "provocative" rather than offensive.

It seems to me that altruism is a very important element in ensuring the
survival of the species.  In lower animals, if there is a choice between doing
something that benefits the species or doing something that benefits the
individual (i.e. the individual's chances of reproducing and having its
offspring survive), the choice is generally made in favor of the invididual.
For example, lets say a pride of lions is attacking a huge herd of zebras.  If
the zebras stood and fought they could easily defeat the lions through sheer
force of numbers.  However, it doesn't make sense for any individual zebra to
stand and fight, because it would stand a high risk of dying.  It's safer for
the individual zebra to run away, so the entire herd runs away from the lions.

Humans, though, have the intelligence(!) to see beyond their immediate self
interest and do what is best for their community, nation, species, or world.
We have evolved cultures that (often) direct our behavior in ways that benefit
entire communities rather than just individuals.  Who knows, if enough people
are altruistic the human race might even survive.

    				-- Bob

Something else has occurred to me.  Simon looks at human behavior in terms
of evolutionary forces and concludes that altruistic people are "maladaptive".
What I think he's missed, though, is that it's not only individuals who are
subject to evolutionary forces but also entire cultures.  A culture that
encourages altruism has a better chance of surviving than a culture that
does not encourage altriusm.

An altruistic individual might be maladaptive in the individual sense but would
be highly adaptive in the cultural sense.  Mother Theresa doesn't have any
children, but her cultural "offspring" (influences on her culture) have a very
good chance of surviving.

        			-- Bob

    Re .0
    
    I don't buy it.
    
    I don't believe people like Mother Theresa don't do what they do out
    of a sense of obligation.  Nor do I believe people give selflessly and
    sacrificially out of a sense of having no real choice, as they do when
    paying taxes or going to war.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

    Richard, (pause while adjusting "Devil's Advocate" hat)
    	you don't believe that Mother Teresa doesn't do what she does
    because it's expected of her ?  Because she believes Christ expects it
    of her ?  (removing "DA" garb)
    
    	Dave

    No doubt Simon has a horrible time understanding Christ's sacrifice 
    on the Cross and the Christian life. There's something greater than
    this life and we never find it in this life or the next without a
    spirit of giving and sacrifice. 'For it is in giving that we recieve
    and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.'
    
    Peace,
    Mary
    

    Wha'do I know?  I'm just studying to be a little, dumb, docile critter.
    
    E Grace

    Mary,
    	Christ was not part of Simon's study group. Couldn't be. First, he
    isn't available to study. Second, he wasn't "human" and the study was
    of humans. 
    	A thought along a similar line; it seems all "gods" require some
    sort of maladaptive behavior from their worshippers. Christ requires
    altruism from believers, others require human or other sacrifices, some
    limit food sources ... they all seem to demand that we do the
    irrational or maladaptive. Hmmm, perhaps I should say "religions"
    rather than "gods". I wonder what maladaption New Agers are saddled
    with. 

Mother Theresa could have selected a whole lot easier way to express her
love and faith.  Many do.

I remember seeing an ad on TV many years ago depicting a Catholic
Sister doing nursing service under highly undesirable and primitive
conditions.  A voice says, "I wouldn't do what you're doing for a
million dollars."  The Sister looks up into the camera and says,
"Neither would I."

Peace,
Richard

    Richard,
    	you may have "re:.6"ed your .10, but you didn't answer the
    question posed there. Yes, she could find a less demanding way of
    "doing her Christian Duty", but that wasn't the question. Do you not
    believe that she feels that she is doing as Christ (or God) expects her
    to do ?  (I see I took off my DA hat too quickly)

Okay, Dave.  I would say "to some degree" MT probably is doing what
she believes God has called her to do.  She is very committed; committed
beyond what most people, even most altruistic people, I believe, feel obliged
or empowered to do.  I think "docile" is hardly an appropriate descriptor
for her.  "Impassioned," "extreme," "obsessed;" to me, these would be far
more accurate descriptors for Mother Theresa and her work.

How does Dave Meyer view MT in light of Simon's theory?

Peace,
Richard

    Re: .9
    
    Believe it or not, Mother Theresa and others like her do what they
    do because this 'altruism' actually brings great love and joy to
    them. This is why the Sister replied that she wouldn't do what she
    did for a million dollars; money isn't valuable enough for the 
    sacrifice that they make, but the great love that they recieve
    is the only thing that makes it worthwhile.
    
    The love they recieve is not particularly from the unfortuate people
    they help, but it is from God Himself and therefore not understood
    by the world.
    
      "Give and gifts will be given to you; a good measure, packed
       together, shaken down, and overflowing, will be poured into
       your lap."  (Luke 6:38)
    
    The care and love which they give comes back to them abundantly and
    this is something that no amount of money can buy. 
    
    Why are people like Mother Theresa so happy with so little and
    the rich and famous and glamorous so unhappy and restless with
    their abundance?  The 'misers' of this world who don't spend a
    'dime' without measuring the returns beforehand and evaluating 
    the worth never find happiness.
    
    It takes a step of faith to give without counting the cost, but
    Christians, anyway, can rely on God's promises of eternal abundance
    for those who do. This is what it is to follow Christ and to take
    up our cross. When we do that, we see that the words Jesus spoke
    is true, "For my yoke is easy, and my burden light."  (Matt 11:30)
    
    Simon is a poor, poor, fellow because he (and so many others like
    him) is sudying "the world" for the answers to life and the world
    (life in the flesh) can never provide life-giving answers. Such 
    studies will always have to label Christians and others who live
    according to God's ways and values in such terms as 'stupid'
    and 'maladaptive' and 'fools'.
    
    	"See what love the Father has bestowed on us that we may be
    	 called the children of God. Yet we are. The reason the world
    	 does not know us is that it did not know him (Jesus)." (1 John
         3:1)
    
    John continues,
    
    	"Beloved, we are God's children now; what we shall be has not
    	 yet been revealed. We do know that when it is revealed we shall
    	 be like him (Jesus), for we shall see him as he is." (verse 2)
    
    Christians do know Jesus and in knowing him his Way is not stupid,
    foolish, maladaptive, or burdensome. It is, rather, the only true
    "Way, Truth, and Life".
    
    The world grows cold because worldly values as expounded by people
    like Simon have been adopted by the poor lost people of this world
    who are, unfortunatly, looking for happiness in all the wrong 
    places instead of turing to God and listning to Him.
    
    Peace of Jesus,
    Mary
    
    ...by the way, Christ was both fully God and fully human - inseparatly
    so.
    
    
    
     

    	Dave Meyer believes that Mother Teresa is indeed an impassioned
    altruistic person. I don't believe she is docile, at least not in the
    usual sense of the word, and the only way she might be thought to be
    "stupid" is that she did not perpetuate her genetic line. Try to
    remember, I quoted the article and commented upon it in a negative way.
    I don't believe as the author does. The author made some disturbing
    points that apply to some altruistic behavior, points which apply to
    the way some Christians act, but which I don't believe apply to me or
    to many others.