Blogs


Notices

I worked my 2nd step this weekend.

Old 10-24-2006, 06:36 AM
  # 61 (permalink)  
Member
 
paulmh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,415
Teach I've got to disagree with you. BSPGirl uses SMART as a Higher Power in preciesly the way that Blake describes and in precisely the way that I use HP in my recovery. It categorically doesn't follow that just because I use a HP to recover, that I believe that that HP has a will.

My experience is this. It's not about the nature of G*d. It's about the nature of the addict. It's not about coming to believe in G*d. It's about undoing the harmful effects of the addictive nature. It's not about what I believe it's about how I live.

In AA we are invited to believe - and this explanation makes perfect sense to me - that the addict is a damaged self. The antidote to the damage is HP. What that HP is for each individual is of no consequence. If it's Jesus and all his little saints, but not an ounce of the individuals' life changes - then they'll continue to suffer. The addict has to break out of themselves to be - and I choose my words carefully - redeemed. But the story was, is and always will be about the nature of the addict and not about the nature of the cosmos.
paulmh is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 06:49 AM
  # 62 (permalink)  
I'm an addict.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 1,201
Had to get out from infront of my computer at the house and get to the office...but I want to finish my post above:

See I believe in science, but I'm not nieve enough to feel like we have reached the zenith of human knowledge, there are things out there that we don't understand, there are more rules governing the universe than we have on the books, just because we haven't labeled them and discovered their laws, doesn't mean they don't exist.

THis same reasoning is what has lead me to be agnostic (with buddhist tendencies) For me, I believe it is extremely closeminded to pick a religion since none of them are based on evidence, only faith, all were mad by men and men are faleable. On the other side of the coin, FOR ME I believe it is just as closed minded to be an athiest, same amount of lack of proof, athiesm is based on faith also......with either path, certain reasoning can be used (some more sound than others) to bring you up to a point that is very close to your chosen conclusion, but it allways requires a leap of faith to either declare there is a god or there isn't a god. I find it kinda funny when the 2 factions fight since they both have the same argument, and you can't argue faith.

Regardless of any of this, I am able to work the 12 steps of NA...thats what I was getting at.
Blake is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 06:52 AM
  # 63 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: in a better place
Posts: 1,406
great thread! Thanks Blake. I really enjoy reading what goes on in your mind. It's quite thought provoking.

I'm trying to rationalize the 2nd step myself and I don't subscribe to any religion. Whatever it is, it allows me to be able to reach depths within myself that I didn't know I could reach.

For example, I'm able to find the courage to call someone when I'm flipping out wanting a drink. I find the determination to leave the house or write in a journal or type here when there is liquor in my face (or my head) making me crazy. I find the clear mindedness to make a decision about something difficult or to think about something else when bad thoughts enter my brain.

I don't think about something or someone acting on my behalf. I think of myself using previously closed off spaces of my own being. The difference now is that those locked places have been unlocked somehow. I suppose you could say that the "power" that unlocked these places is the knowledge of the effects of alcohol on my body. This knowledge has driven me to make decisions that I wouldn't have made, take actions that I wouldn't have taken, and change the way I think about things.
c'est la vie is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 07:10 AM
  # 64 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: in a better place
Posts: 1,406
I think it gets cloudy to think about whose will I'm following. I obviously am the one making the decision and taking the action so how can I say that I'm not following my own self will? I guess if I make the decision with all the knowledge and clearmindedness I can find in a moment then I've tried to take out my own bias. Right?

I understand the "letting go" or "turning it over" as simply not worrying about things out of my control, or things that are past, or things that haven't happened yet. I don't really think much about whose catching the things I let go. I doesn't matter to me.

I think I'll stumble over the step that says that something will actually take something from me. How? I can accept my shortcomings and deal with them or I can try to change some of the bad behavior. But who, what or how are they being "taken"? (sorry Blake to derail from Step 2, but thought you might have some insight)
c'est la vie is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 07:16 AM
  # 65 (permalink)  
Member
 
BSPGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 889
BSPGirl uses SMART as a Higher Power
Nope I don't, I really don't think SMART is anything higher than me.

Marte
BSPGirl is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 07:19 AM
  # 66 (permalink)  
To Life!
 
historyteach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 9,293
...just because we haven't labeled them and discovered their laws, doesn't mean they don't exist.
You're right.
And it doesn't mean that there ARE more either.

In any case, you are still giving human attributes to a THING.
That personification is illogical and unscientific.
Just because it *may* be doesn't make it so.
And until there is *proof,* it makes NO sense to say an idea has a will of it's own.
The person who utilizes the idea has the will.

But, we can agree to disagree.

And I completely agree with you that an atheist depends upon faith just as much as a religious person does.

Paulmh;
Since I understand and agree with what you're saying, I have no clue as to what you disagree with me about.

You say Marte uses SMART as her HP. (edit; she says no to that idea, I'll continue to use the example, however.)
That does NOT mean that SMART has a will of it's own. That's all I'm saying. In inanimate object cannot have a will. Period.

I find the clear mindedness to make a decision about something difficult or to think about something else when bad thoughts enter my brain.
Here's a perfect example of will. That clear mindedness to make a decision. An object has no mind; it cannot make decisions. It has no will of it's own.
Hiya, C'est!

Shalom!
historyteach is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 07:48 AM
  # 67 (permalink)  
Member
 
paulmh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,415
Teach:

In that case you and I are going to have to agree to agree..
paulmh is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:08 AM
  # 68 (permalink)  
I'm an addict.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 1,201
Originally Posted by c'est la vie
I think I'll stumble over the step that says that something will actually take something from me. How? I can accept my shortcomings and deal with them or I can try to change some of the bad behavior. But who, what or how are they being "taken"? (sorry Blake to derail from Step 2, but thought you might have some insight)
I haven't gotten there yet, but I have discussed it at length.
6. We were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
7.We humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

First I have to make the distinction on the difference between a defect of character and a shortcoming. A defect of charater is an internal thing like jealousy, greed, self righteousness just to name a few (that I have by the way) a shortcoming is an external thing, the acting out on a defect of character, making fun of someone to make myself feel better, buying stuff I don't need b/c I percive it elevates my staus in life, player hating stuff like that...

I haven't worked those steps yet, but I believe (and I could be supprised by the time I get to them) the 5th step helps to bring these defects of character to light, the 6th step is about becoming aware of them and deciding on which ones are harmful (some defects of character can actually be benificial if used in a controled fashion) and need to be removed. THe 7th step is about focusing on those harmful defects and trying to not act out on them as much as possible till it becomes 2nd nature. THe god thing comesinot play for me (remember I'm using NA as my "god as I understand him") by trusting in my sponsor, calling other addicts, taking suggestions, writing about it, sharing at meetings about it, etc... NO RELIGION NESSECARY....

Teach, you sre right, just b/c we haven't been able to quantify other forces in the universe doesn't mean that there are any, but when looked at it logically one side of this argument is a whole lot less arrogant than the other, it IS possible that we know all that we will ever know about the universe, but that is just a little hard to believe for me, personally.

SMART isn't just a thing, it's a program of recovery, but even beyond that it is a community of recovering addicts, don't those addicts have a will? Isn't the collective will of those addicts focused on staying clean and helping each other stay clean? I am not that familliar with SMART so I won't assume anything else about it. NA has a will. NA has 3 parts, the program (steps & literature) the fellowship (people in NA) and my understanding of NA (my personal program). NA's message is that an addict, ANY ADDICT, can stop using, lose the desire to use and find a new way to live. NA's primary purpose is to carry the message to the addict still suffering. All that sounds like a "will" to me....at least that's how I use it.


And Marte, I'm not trying to tell you that you are following a higher power or anything like that, what ever you are doing with SMART is working in your life, so keep it up...I'm just offering some discussion.
Blake is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:11 AM
  # 69 (permalink)  
Knucklehead
 
doorknob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Davenport, WA
Posts: 4,005
Originally Posted by historyteach
And I completely agree with you that an atheist depends upon faith just as much as a religious person does.
That depends on how you define faith.

faith
n.
  1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
  2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See synonyms at belief, trust.
  3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
  4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
  5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
  6. A set of principles or beliefs.
For me, it is definition 2. If I want to convey the meaning given in definition 1, I chose words that don't imply a lack of logic and evidence, which in my opinion, faith does.

Obviously, I'm only speaking for myself.
doorknob is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:21 AM
  # 70 (permalink)  
I'm an addict.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 1,201
Logic only takes you up to a point DK, after that it's all faith...If god could logically be proven or disproven to exist, 100%, this discussion would not happen.
Blake is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:24 AM
  # 71 (permalink)  
To Life!
 
historyteach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 9,293
Teach, you sre right, just b/c we haven't been able to quantify other forces in the universe doesn't mean that there are any, but when looked at it logically one side of this argument is a whole lot less arrogant than the other, it IS possible that we know all that we will ever know about the universe, but that is just a little hard to believe for me, personally.
Oh, I'm not saying at ALL that we know everything! Goodness!
However, I know enough to know that we DON'T know everything. And that it's NOT an either/or circumstance. Logically, that would be rediculous to think it is!
When we know we don't know, then, we have to admit we don't even know the questions to ask.
And I don't think arrogance has anything to do with it. Ad hominum attacks are illogical too!

But, again, it's the people FOLLOWING the program that exert a will.
Not an inanimate object, or an idea. That's impossible.
So, I hereby now agree to disagree with you.

Doorknob;
Well, I agree with all but the christian and muslim examples of the definition of faith.
Your opinion is just that. OK. No arguement with an opinion.
However, I think that Blake and I are both saying that there needs to be a jump into the unknown to be an atheist. (Note, he called himself an agnostic -- as I once did!)
Since a negative cannot be logically proven, it therefore follows that one cannot prove there is *no* G*D. If it cannot be proved, then, according to your own opinion, it's illogical and there's a lack of evidence to say that there is no G*D.
Thus, one needs just as much faith to say there is NO G*D as there needs be to say there IS a G*D.

Shalom!
historyteach is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:41 AM
  # 72 (permalink)  
Knucklehead
 
doorknob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Davenport, WA
Posts: 4,005
I'm not asserting gods don't exist. I simply see no reason to believe that they do.

Atheism, in its broadest sense, is a lack of belief in a deity or deities. The opposite of theism, this broad definition encompasses both people who assert that there are no gods and those who make no claim about whether gods exist or not. Narrower definitions of atheism typically include only those who assert the nonexistence of gods, excluding non-believing agnostics and other non-theists.

Although some atheists tend toward skepticism, and toward secular philosophies such as humanism, naturalism and materialism, there is no single system of philosophy which all atheists share, nor does atheism have institutionalized rituals or behaviors.
It really was a non-issue until I starting looking for addiction help. From my perspective, similar to those expressed by many of the contributors to 'Keepers,' it has nothing to do with addiction and recovery.
doorknob is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:42 AM
  # 73 (permalink)  
I'm an addict.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 1,201
Teach, I wasn't calling you arrogant. I was saying that the belief that we know everything there is to know about the laws of the univese is arrogant. I KNOW that that isn't you. I was just staeting that logically, like you said, we don't know everything, so I don't pigeonhole myself...everything is open to revision.

THe people following the progam, collectively=will of the program.......think of it as a colony of ants, each ant has it's own life and it's own brain, but there is a collective force that cordinates the colony as a whole...the will of the colony. I'm not saying that people in NA are mindless ants or anything like that, that's just over simpilization, but the same concept holds true, collectively NA has a will, a purpose...
Blake is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:47 AM
  # 74 (permalink)  
To Life!
 
historyteach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 9,293
Wow, that's an interesting definition of atheism, dk.
I've always known atheism as a lack of belief in G*D -- the opposite of theism, as that definition says.

To assert that it's unknown if there's a G*D or not, I've always known to be agnostic. It cannot be proved that there is a G*D, nor that there is no G*D. Therefore, anyone who follows this belief is an agnostic, NOT atheist.

Your definition combines the two into one. I don't agree with that idea, but, so what? lol!
Where'd you get this definition?
Just curious.

Shalom!
historyteach is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 08:52 AM
  # 75 (permalink)  
To Life!
 
historyteach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 9,293
Blake,
I understand, and appreciate your clarification about the arrogance issue.
Thanks!

But, again, ants are animate beings. Not human, of course, and with much smaller brains, but, they are animate and they are beings. Yes, they have a will. Often that will is brought about by instinct, which again only a being can have.

This statement, I can definately agree with:
THe people following the progam, collectively=will of the program.......
With the emphasis on the
PEOPLE.
That's *my* opinion. And there's no sense arguing with an opinion, right?

Shalom!
historyteach is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 09:01 AM
  # 76 (permalink)  
Knucklehead
 
doorknob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Davenport, WA
Posts: 4,005
That one was from Wiki.
doorknob is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 09:08 AM
  # 77 (permalink)  
I'm an addict.
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 1,201
I don't think we are arguing teach, I agree completely, the will of the PEOPLE, collectively, is the will of the PROGRAM. NA is a fellowship of people, thus that fellowship has a collective will. That's what I was getting at. Kinda like the collective will of america was that george bush deserved another 4 years in office....boooo.....anyway, it's america's will that he be president.

I just assumed SMART was a collective of people also.
Blake is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 09:10 AM
  # 78 (permalink)  
Knucklehead
 
doorknob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Davenport, WA
Posts: 4,005
This is from Don's 'Definitions' thread.

Try this one....

“Definition of Agnostic:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/agnostic.htm

Agnosticism is a concept, not a religion. It is a belief related to the existence or non-existence of God.

An agnostic is a person who feels that God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved, on the basis of current evidence. Agnostics note that some theologians and philosophers have tried to to prove, for millennia, that God exists. Others have attempted to prove that God does not exist. Agnostics feel that neither side has convincingly succeeded at their task.

Are they Theists? No, because Agnostics do not believe in a God, or a Goddess, or in multiple Gods, or multiple Goddesses or in a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses.

However, some Agnostics consider themselves to be Atheists. That is because the term "Atheist" has two slightly different meanings:

1. A person who positively believes that no God(s) or Goddess(es) exists. … This is the definition of Atheism used by most Christians, other Theists, and dictionaries of the English language.
2. A person who has no belief in a God or Goddess. Just as a newborn has no concept of a deity, some adults also have no such belief. The term "Atheist" is derived from the Greek words "a" which means "without" and "Theos" which means "God." A person can be a non-Theist by simply lacking a belief in God without actively denying God's existence. This is the definition of Atheism used by many Atheists. They use the term "strong Atheist" to refer to a person who denies the existence of one or more deities.

Some Agnostics feel that their beliefs match the second definition, and thus consider themselves to be both Atheist and an Agnostic. ….

An agnostic usually holds the question of the existence of God open, pending the arrival of more evidence. They are willing to change their belief if some solid evidence or logical proof is found in the future. However, some have taken the position that there is no logical way in which the existence or the non-existence of a deity can be proven.”
doorknob is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 10:52 AM
  # 79 (permalink)  
Big Idiot Man Child
 
windysan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: La
Posts: 5,664
Originally Posted by doorknob
This is from Don's 'Definitions' thread.

i think i am one of these
windysan is offline  
Old 10-24-2006, 01:02 PM
  # 80 (permalink)  
Member
 
BSPGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 889
And Marte, I'm not trying to tell you that you are following a higher power or anything like that, what ever you are doing with SMART is working in your life, so keep it up...I'm just offering some discussion.
Oh I know, I took it that way, no worries, but some discussions just go in circles, lol

Marte
BSPGirl is offline  

Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:41 PM.