On Ascending to Insanity and Shrimpton Fishing.
I have often pondered why the cliché is ‘descending into madness’ – given the number of people who end up firmly believing that they are the son of the Man upstairs, and spend the rest of their life with arms outstretched and tending their goatee beard, having moved from ‘talking to themselves’ to believing that they are in fact God, or at least JC – without passing ‘Go’. Surely the cliché should be ‘Ascending to Insanity’?
What is the alchemy by which so many people end up convinced by the same fantasy? I have just caught up with a documentary on James Randi – available for another six days on iPlayer, and I cannot recommend it highly enough – utterly enthralling to anyone interested in how and why people not only become consumed by irrational beliefs, but that so many people become consumed by the same beliefs – without ever meeting each other. Randi’s thesis (very roughly!) boils down to a view that people ‘believe what they need to believe, though they think they ‘chose’ what to believe’. Randi describes replicating Uri Geller’s spoon bending trick and revealing it to be part of the Magician’s arsenal of trickery – ‘Geller Believers’ accused him of having psychic powers himself and ‘being in denial’…I was promptly reminded of the time I was accused of having ‘buried’ the ‘traumatic’ occasion on which Savile abused me in a Duncroft dormitory in 1965….it being ‘unbelievable’ to a ‘true believer’ that when I said he simply wasn’t there – that he simply wasn’t there!
Suddenly, our world is full of people who have just realised they were abused in childhood by a celebrity – and there’s not a spoon bender in sight. Vanished, the lot of them. Mind you, there aren’t too many people abducted by aliens around at the moment, either. Each of these ‘beliefs’ have their own lingo – and it is extraordinary how quickly people catch onto the new lexicon. I watched a documentary on Broadmoor too (part two tonight!) and marvelled at how, even incarcerated in there for 25 years, the Thesaurus of abuse had penetrated. Elderly patients now claim to have been ‘groomed’ in childhood, ‘plied’ with alcohol – nobody ever admits to having shoplifted alcohol any longer, or lied to get into a pub underage, as we used to – nope, they now remember they were ‘plied with alcohol’ by sinister older figures – and I wonder how much of this can be accounted for by an instinctive understanding of the lexicon that well meaning counsellors ‘need to believe’.
Before I had time (or rather inclination, let’s be honest here) to put pen to paper – along came Michael Shrimpton QC. What can I say? Wow! Put’s Andrea Davison in the shade.
I first came across Michael when I had the misfortune to be moderating a ‘Madeleine McCann’ forum. Michael managed to pip Mark Williams-Thomas to the Madeleine bandwagon with his seminal INTEL/INFO:
“In my report to the joint of intelligence committee, in the case of Madeleine McCann, She was going to be abused by a senior member of the European commission in Brussels whose name is known to British Intelligence, I can’t identify him in Spyhunter but I know who it is, there is no way that Madeleine could ever be returned alive to her family because the danger would be even at her tender age of 4 she would recognise him and know who was abusing her. So the Germans had to murder her and indeed they eventually did sadly in December 2008”
Strange how the same people pop up time and time again in different conspiracy theories. I ran into quite a few old ‘acquaintances’ from the height of Madeleine hysteria, the Hollie Grieg hoax, Common Purpose, et al as I researched Michael’s ‘ascendancy’ to hallowed high priest of the child abuse clique and honoured guest and Guru for David Icke. These people must watch ‘Google trends’ like a hawk, and at the first sign of a word trending, formulate a theory full of buzz words like ‘cell’, ‘disinformation’, ‘intelligence operative’, and of course, the ever popular ‘plied’ and ‘grooming’. I’m amazed that none of them latched onto the Oscar Pistorius story, he could have been groomed by South African Intelligence, jailed so that he could be ‘terminated with prejudice’ and never reveal the presence of nuclear weapons removed from the Kursk when it sank, and, and, and….
Too late, Mark Williams-Thomas had already latched onto the Pistorius family…you have to be quick in this game.
Michael had been at full pelt while the media were interested in the London Olympics: he phoned a secretary at the Aylesbury Conservative Association – as you do when you are a self proclaimed ‘intelligence expert on national security’ – and patiently explained to her that German intelligence, which is ‘now in control of Al Qaeda’ was quietly steaming up the Thames in a submarine loaded with nuclear weapons removed from the Kursk, etc, etc,
‘The information was extraordinary and dramatic, in essence Mr Shrimpton announced that a nuclear weapon stolen from the sunken Russian submarine the Kursk a number of years ago, that such a nuclear weapon had been smuggled into the UK and was being stored in a London hospital in preparation to be used during the Olympic games.
He followed this up with calls to the Defence Secretary Philip Hammond to say that this ‘ere nuclear warhead had been stashed in an east London hospital…
His defence case statement filing is a joy to read…if you are behind in your study of current buzz words, do catch up – he has managed to work every single current conspiracy theory in there…but yesterday, our ‘corrupt judiciary’ (every conspiracy theorist knows that our judiciary is corrupt -and, er, Michael should know, ‘cos he used to be a judge…) sent him off for psychiatric evaluation before passing sentence on a charge of ‘communicating false information’. Will he end up in Broadmoor? He will certainly liven up that august establishment, and join forces with the ‘groomed’ and plied’ inhabitants of child abuse fantasy land – oh, did I mention that Michael is already on the sex offenders register? Framed by the Secret Service, see.
No surprise to find that he was at university with Meirion Jones, Child Abuse Exposer Extraordinaire….
Knew Michael Shrimpton (Guilty Nuclear Bomb hoax) http://t.co/I2MWraxwwL since Cardiff he genuinely believes fantasist not deliberate hoaxer
— Meirion Jones (@MeirionTweets) November 25, 2014
Indeed – Meirion was Editor of the University Paper, and Michael was President of the Union back in 1980… The same people pop up time and time again….
See, I was planning to write a piece yesterday about the latest Labour initiative about ‘Tory toffs’ and top public schools, and how Labour were going to remove their charitable tax relief if they didn’t start lending their best teachers to state school, and Harrods didn’t send their highly paid staff to stand behind the counter in Poundland, ‘cos it was all so unfair – if you went to a top school like Colet Court or St Paul’s School you ended up as Chancellor of the Exchequer or leader of the Liberal Party automatically and this was just an unfair advantage in life – only I couldn’t, because it just isn’t true.
You can go to Colet Court or St Paul’s School – and end up as Editor of the University Paper, or in the left luggage cupboard at Panorama, a left wing firebrand, part of the Labour fringe determined to expose those Tory toffs with all the advantages in life – just like Meirion Jones – who went to Colet Court and St. Paul’s and didn’t become Chancellor of the Exchequer.
But then he did get to meet Mark Williams-Thomas, who is busy ‘passing information to Operation Whateverthelatestnameis’ on the child abuse that took place at Colet Court and St Pauls’….
Stop! Stop! For pity’s sake Stop!
My head is reeling – how many of these people know each other?
Coming soon – Williams-Thomas reports on D-notice issued in respect of Meirion’s latest oeuvre on German submarine seen heading up the Thames in the direction of Duncroft piloted by Andrea Davison, carrying Shrimpton to safety with ISIS. Emily Thornberry resigns after accidentally tweeting picture of Pistorius carrying luggage holding Clegg bound and gagged and padlocked….
It’s got to the point where you can’t write anything without one of these nutters popping up in the story.
Edited by Anna to add: It seems that Michael is not a QC – though was a judge….I have now established that by following several more links including one where he was hired by the venerable Lord Christopher Monckton – who is the only Lord that the House of Lord’s have ever had to post on their web site a public note asking him to desist from describing himself as ‘sitting in the House of Lords’ after he appeared on an Australian TV show denying he was Sacha Cohen…
Well, actually the ‘Not sitting in the House of’ Lords Monckton was interviewed by Adam Spencer, following his hiring of the ‘Not QC’ Shrimpton about the ‘Not Nationalised’ Rannoch to Glasgow railway line which is now the only railway line in the world required to run – by law…
Are you sure you’ve got all that? Yes? I can climb out of this rabbit hole now? Personally, I’d sentence the whole lot of them to run the ‘Not Child Abuse Tribunal’.
Good. Now enjoy Lord Monckton attempting to prove that he’s not Sacha Cohen either…..
- Moor Larkin
November 26, 2014 at 11:32 am -
These nutters are abusing my intelligence. Meirion is denying now that the faked Surrey Police letter even existed until a year after his original investigation. The truth? He cannot handle the truth.
By their fruitiness shalt ye know them.
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/what-did-icke-know.html- Chris
November 26, 2014 at 11:50 am -
Talking of nutters, his mate Gojam is another keen to overlook (‘hide in plain sight’) the fact that Mick Shrimpton is what they call a ‘convicted paedophile’ http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/26/michael-shrimpton-found-guilty/
- Moor Larkin
November 26, 2014 at 11:57 am -
They must all be in it together…. like a ring….
- Robert the Biker
November 26, 2014 at 12:03 pm -
I wonder if his delusions would stand up to a couple of large lads asking him just who it was abused the kid:
MS – I can’t tell you, it’s a big secret
LL’s – *WHACK* try again
MS – Arghh, no seriously, I’ll get in trouble
LL’s – *WHACK* look around tossbag, you’re already in trouble.
MS – Arghh, THEM will get me.
LL’s – *WHACK* and when we get tired of using the baseball bat, we’ve got these secateurs…I give it five minutes until all illusiory thinking has been cleared out.
Unless, of course, he really does know something in which case you now have a name to ‘visit’
- Moor Larkin
- Chris
- Eric Hardcastle
November 26, 2014 at 12:48 pm -
I have something in common with Secret Agent Michael Shimpton. I too have been on the USS Enterprise. I was taken for a visit by a pal when on holiday in Hawaii about 10 years ago.
Am I an MI5/6 operative. I’m not telling.- Robert the Biker
November 26, 2014 at 12:51 pm -
Watch out! The German submarine will be following YOU about the place now!
- Robert the Biker
November 26, 2014 at 1:11 pm -
Dinsdale? Diiinnnsssdallle!
- Moor Larkin
November 26, 2014 at 1:15 pm -
In medieval times, it is now maintained, there were no such things as mental illness or psychiatry. Lunacy of various sorts was recognised – “good” as well as “bad” madness. But the deranged continued to mingle among society at large, and their voices made themselves heard alongside those of the sane, because they had their own truths to tell, be they supernatural or satanic.
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/103990.article
According to the anti-psychiatry movement, the Renaissance then brought a marginalisation of lunatics, symbolised by the ship of fools, which expelled and cleansed the crazy at the same time. And the truly dramatic transformation came in the 17th century, with what Foucault styled “the great confinement of the poor”.All part of the Class Struggle. No wonder Meirion worships the batty side.
- Robert the Biker
November 26, 2014 at 1:19 pm -
Hang on, doesn’t the London Bethlehem Hospital – the Bedlam, go back to medieval times?
- Opus
November 26, 2014 at 2:36 pm -
That is (if I recall correctly – though I was neither groomed or plied to the recollection; at least I don’t think so ) more or less what Foucault says in Madness and Civilization.
- Robert the Biker
- Moor Larkin
- Moor Larkin
November 27, 2014 at 9:19 am -
Get Me There!…
http://youtu.be/HqimEXmj1qc
a glimpse inside the mind of Mike perhaps.
- Robert the Biker
- Robert the Biker
- Justin
November 26, 2014 at 1:10 pm -
You say “Pestorius”, I say “Pistorius”.
Or was that deliberate? Pester us?
- Engineer
November 26, 2014 at 1:37 pm -
I quite like the Kursk one. It’s quite inventive. Just need to get Lord Lucan and Shergar in there somewhere (that’s in the theory, not in the Kursk – that would just be silly), and link it to Global Warming, and we’ve got a Full House in the great game of Conspiracy Bingo.
- Robert the Biker
November 26, 2014 at 1:46 pm -
Hmmmm…….
Lord Lucan was trying to fire Shergar out of the torpedo tube, but he got stuck and that ruptured the hull.
I can make up better nonsense than any ex-judge kiddy fiddler ever born
- Robert the Biker
- Retired
November 26, 2014 at 1:43 pm -
One slight error – he isn’t a QC. Re the conspiracy theories if we could get black helicopters, Prince Phillip and the ZOG in as well then we would have something.
- Fat Steve
November 26, 2014 at 1:44 pm -
Just a small correction …..less in the spirit of pedantry more perhaps in the forlorn hope that all is not yet totally lost in the legal establishment …..I don’t think Shrimpton is a Q.C.
- Moor Larkin
November 26, 2014 at 3:09 pm -
One of the moor amusing ironies of all this crapgame is how the anti-Establishment crusaders out there such great store on having a bastion of the establishment such as a QC on their side. I recall Mark Williams-Thomas employed a crack QC to add gravitas to his shitty pack of lies TV show called “Exposure”. Whores and Babylon comes to mind.
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/keeping-my-own-counsel.html- Fat Steve
November 26, 2014 at 3:55 pm -
@Moor Larkin … anti-Establishment crusaders …..I am not so sure they are anti establishment crusaders as much as they crusade in the hope of becoming the new Establishment
- Fat Steve
- Moor Larkin
- Mike
November 26, 2014 at 1:48 pm -
A serious question. Some of the conspiracy theorists come across as though they are just having a good time with tongues firmly in their cheeks (think the Apollo landing lot, even the Roswell lot). However, as for the nastier fringe, do these people actually believe the stuff they spout? Do they start off making it up and eventually come to believe it? Or are they bonkers and delusional from square one?
- Robert the Biker
November 26, 2014 at 1:56 pm -
I think some of them really do believe it, the problem is that there is some truth mixed in with the batshit crazy stuff; example, no aircraft hit WTC7 – true. Fact, some very heavy bits such as landing gear assemblies did hit this derelict and unstable building.
It may also be a desire for glory and recognition from some very sad and lonely people, imagine what a big man you’d be if you exposed the ‘truth’ about 911.
- Robert the Biker
- Don Cox
November 26, 2014 at 1:58 pm -
Compulsive liars are not uncommon. I’ve known several, including a couple holding down well paid jobs.
These characters are just liars who like publicity.
They don’t care how much harm they do yo others.
- Engineer
November 26, 2014 at 2:16 pm -
Much truth in that; though I think it’s more a case of ‘don’t realise’ rather than ‘don’t care’ on the harm to others point.
- Engineer
- Ho Hum
November 26, 2014 at 2:14 pm -
Not a QC? Depends upon what you think that’s being used as an acronym for….
- Jeff Wood
November 26, 2014 at 2:29 pm -
Shrimpton? Not a common name – my spellchecker has raised its eyebrows. Any relation to Jean?
- Opus
November 26, 2014 at 2:31 pm -
Wonderful stuff!
- Cloudberry
November 26, 2014 at 3:17 pm -
If you’ve got genuine believes fantasists on the one hand and deliberate hoaxers on the other, where does that leave the fantasists who don’t genuinely believe and the unintentional hoaxers, not to mention the liars?
- Duncan Disorderly
November 26, 2014 at 3:41 pm -
I’m not sure that the prosecution of poor Michael was worth the bother. The claim about the submarine was clearly preposterous. If he had wanted just to cause alarm, he would have made more believable claims.
- Robert the Biker
November 26, 2014 at 3:54 pm -
It’s amazing how supposedly clever people don’t do even basic research before they come up with nonsense!
Depth required by even the smallest naval submarine available to submerge fully – 10 metres
Maintained depth in the Thames, Thames barrier to London Bridge, mean high water @7 metres
Submarine must be surfaced to transit, not exactly invisible.
Maximum size of warhead carried on Kursk, 500 Kt, as it was an attack sub, not a missile sub, designed for attacking US carrier groups, none went missing btw. I believe 500kt is a misprint as that is quite big, even so, you need to have it somewhere near.
Conspiracy theory therefore unviable as no practical weapon available and no practicable delivery system, hence no bang at Olympics
Above from ten minutes research on Google - Opus
November 26, 2014 at 4:00 pm -
There are, I think, two sorts of conspiracy theorists, or rather, two rather different viewpoints are lumped together under that term. The first sort are those who make entirely unsupported claims which appeal to ones sense of the fantastic. Icke for example would appear to fall into that category, even if there are grains of truth in what he says – a stopped clock will be correct twice a day. The other sort are persons such as myself, who when told of some event or events ask – my BS meter going into the red – ‘and where is the evidence for any of that?’
To be believable, having a deep well-modulated voice with a middle or Upper-middle class accent and reeling off a vast amount of ‘facts’ to a room full of the fearful and suspicious is all one really needs to achieve believability. I much enjoyed Parts 1 and 2 of the linked Shrimpton videos.
- Chris
November 26, 2014 at 6:25 pm -
My mother has the misfortune of working with a Professional Conspiracy Theorist – he even has a ponytail so others of the same ilk can recognise him coming.
He was ranting about Shrimpton today, as it happens – everything Mad Mick says is ‘the truth’, “he knows what is happening” and, of course, he’s been ‘stitched up’ – he thinks it has a lot to do with ‘The Lee Rigby Conspiracy’. But then he also claims Jimmy Savile & Peter Jaconelli abused and murdered children to order for ‘The Royal Family’ at a hotel in Scarborough, and claims that he ‘has seen videos to prove’ of Jimmy Savile murdering children and hacking off their genitals ‘as trophies’. Indeed, “Britain is a Feudal Dictatorship”.- Robert the Biker
November 27, 2014 at 7:54 am -
Hey, I have a ponytail!
Probably down to the House of Windsor and the Illuminatti or something
- Robert the Biker
- Carol42
November 26, 2014 at 6:50 pm -
This lunacy is starting to make me doubt my own sanity. If there are so many fools who believe them maybe we are the exceptions! I sometimes wonder.
- Moor Larkin
November 26, 2014 at 7:10 pm -
How scary is it to believe the media AND the police AND the courts are crooked.
No wonder David Icke had a breakdown….- Chris
November 26, 2014 at 8:03 pm -
Worse will be to come Carol – whilst the lunatics have been busy pointing around at utterly apeshit conspiracy theories all the while not realising they are aiding and abetting “Big Brothers”, real social re-engineering had been implemented by ‘the powers that be’. Possibly the most toxic transformation of all (in tandom with the desecration of the Rule Of Law for all) is, via the media and the education system, those born after circa 1990 offer the future no hope whatsover, conditioned as they to parrot whatever it is they are told and they are incapable of questioning things or thinking laterally.
I will be seeking asylum to more cultured shores as soon as I can – I wouldn’t credit those Under 25 here to successfully cross an empty road without direct instruction so I don’t want to be around when the infantile cretins are the ones left to ‘look after us’ when we’re elderly. https://chrisbarratt.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/generation-ga-ga/
- Cloudberry
November 27, 2014 at 1:15 pm -
incapable of questioning things or thinking laterally …infantile cretins…
Something to keep them busy!
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-30225440- Ho Hum
November 27, 2014 at 1:24 pm -
It’s not necessarily all ‘Spot The Dog’, though, is it? NSFW….
http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/hot-wax-by-tyson-mcadoo
- Ho Hum
November 27, 2014 at 1:27 pm -
That just happened to be the first item in the search and it was too good to miss as a one off…. LOL
Otherwise, this isn’t just the stuff of infants.
- Ho Hum
- Ho Hum
- michael
November 27, 2014 at 1:31 pm -
Doesn’t have to be “more cultured”. After living outside the U.K. for 45+ years, I have found the young folks of the S.E. Asian country I spend much time in now, recently granted a longer leash by the military, to be resourceful, resilient and respectful of the elderly. Kids are given responsible errands to do from a tender age and taught respect for their elders. I think these qualities will gradually wither as the country is assaulted by globalisation, but not before my demise.
- Lucozade
November 27, 2014 at 9:29 pm -
Chris,
Re: “I will be seeking asylum to more cultured shores as soon as I can”
Where are you planning on going Chris?
- Cloudberry
- Chris
- Moor Larkin
- Duncan Disorderly
November 26, 2014 at 7:27 pm -
There is actually nothing modern about crazy conspiracy theories. Pope Boniface VIII was a victim of posthumous speculation about sodomy and demon worship. Then there’s all the crap about ‘The Jews’ and the Masons.
- Moor Larkin
November 26, 2014 at 7:30 pm -
Slightly unexpected to hear the Pope having a pop at Euroland yesterday. Maybe Farage is converting…
- Moor Larkin
- Opus
November 26, 2014 at 7:52 pm -
It appears that Mr Shrimpton has thus sat on the Immigration Appeals Tribunal – which as Anna knows is not strictly speaking a Court, so is it entirely correct to say that Shrimpton has been a Judge, even if he has judged? Notice the number of times he scratches or rubs his nose in the video. My girlfriend used to say that I was a Q.C. – qualified consultant.
- Moor Larkin
November 26, 2014 at 8:04 pm -
Just been remembering that Giovanni Di Stefano was jailed not long ago too.
Is the House of Laws having a clear-out?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21969624
During the trial, the court was told about Di Stefano’s links with President of Zimbabwe Robert Mugabe, al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden, and his “friendship” with the daughter of Slobodan Milosevic. - Dave
November 26, 2014 at 9:35 pm -
You need one of these. Hours of fun!
http://sebpearce.com/bullshit/- Carol42
November 26, 2014 at 11:48 pm -
Frightening indeed, I really am worried what sort of country my young grandchildren will inherit .
- Carol42
- neverironic
November 26, 2014 at 11:48 pm -
I wrote this back in 2011. it gives my reason why people have (need) a religious belief. but I based it on the belief that it (the religion) existed to satisfy a need – not that the choice was freely made. does this mean that I can claim the right to have my own documentary?
—————————————————————————————————————————————————–
It seems to me that most arguments about religion are pointless because they do not address the fundamental situation.To make a criticism either for or against a proposition, it is necessary to understand the basic needs that exist and that need satisfying.
So, people’s needs can be divided into two broad categories – physical and psychological. I write here only about the latter.
We all have four basic needs which are:-
1) Unthinking comfort. This is akin to the dummy or soft toy that calms a fractious child. Adults also have this need.
2) A ‘reason for existence’. The question ‘what am I here for’ needs answering.
(I classify the two above as personal needs – they do not need to be evident to anyone else.)3) Group affiliation. The ‘group’, ‘clan’, ‘tribe’ etc that we feel we belong to. Examples would be ‘I’m English’, ‘I’m a supporter of X football club’, ‘I’m in the barmy army’, ‘I’m a soldier’ etc. We all consider ourselves to be a member of several groups.
4) Power and my position in a hierarchy. We all need to know where we fit into our ‘group’. We need to know who has the ‘right’ to give us an order and who we have a ‘right’ to give orders to.
(I classify the two above as social needs – they are evidenced by our behaviour to other people.)There are many ways in which these needs can be satisfied but they are all liable to fail.
If a soldier’s needs are met by being in the army, his whole life suffers when he has to leave.
If a partner satisfies these needs, a whole life suffers if there is a separation.
And so it goes on.The only guaranteed method that exists to satisfy all four needs is a belief that cannot not be ended without the ‘permission’ of the believer.
Such a belief is called a philosophy (eg Confucianism) or an ideology (eg fascism, communism) or a religion (take your pick).The important point is that all these beliefs satisfy all four basic needs. And since they cannot be disproved, they are not vulnerably to forced ending.
Each individual has different degrees of need. Some like a lot of comfort but have very little wish for power. Some crave power but need little comfort. But we all have to some degree or other all four needs.
And so to ‘defend’ Christianity, as if all Christians are somehow ‘right’ is pointless. Christianity is just one of many ‘mechanisms’ that exist to satisfy the four basic needs. And the resultant behaviour of the believer will be the same as it would have been if a different mechanism had been chosen.
The fundamental truth of the mechanism doesn’t matter. We just choose a mechanism that works for us as an individual.
A good Atheist is still a good person, a bad Christian is still a bad person.
- Ho Hum
November 27, 2014 at 12:38 am -
Basic Need 1 – ‘Unthinking comfort. This is akin to the dummy or soft toy that calms a fractious child. Adults also have this need.’
Ah! Do you mean, like the sort of unwitting, happy, tit sucking that Paul wrote about to the church at Ephesus? For context see….http://biblehub.com/ephesians/6-12.htm
Or, maybe, the relaxed, untroubled approach to life that goes with his advice to those in the church at Galatia? Have a peek, for context at….(as more than 1 URL gets modded, hopefully this will be both obvious, and pass) gsso://biblehub.com/galatians/5-17.htm
Or the expectation of the fat, dumb, unthinking, cushy existence that Peter so glowingly told the early church that they might expect to participate in? Again, for the context, try…..gsso://biblehub.com/1_peter/3-15.htm
I don’t disagree with your last statement. But when, looking more broadly within proper context you seem to have got the application of your ‘Basic Need 1’ a bit wrapped round your neck, certainly in regard to the Christian faith, and probably also to other faiths and those who would attest that their lives are lived in accordance with other philosophies, you really just got there by accident, didn’t you?
Feel free to try again, though
- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 1:58 am -
quote: ‘But when, looking more broadly within proper context you seem to have got the application of your ‘Basic Need 1′ a bit wrapped round your neck, certainly in regard to the Christian faith, and probably also to other faiths and those who would attest that their lives are lived in accordance with other philosophies, you really just got there by accident, didn’t you?’
I honestly don’t know what this means.
‘wrapped around your neck’??? means what?
‘got there by accident’??? got where?
I assume this is all some type of slang. I don’t do slang in a ‘grown up’ discussion. there is far too much likelihood of misunderstandings – or of a total failure to understand.
- neverironic
- Ho Hum
- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 1:42 am -
oh dear. are you seem to be one of those bible bashers. how sad. but let me try and explain again.
my thesis was NOT that no-one had mentioned that we needed comfort in past writings. my thesis was that we have a NEED to produce this ‘Unthinking comfort’ by utilising some mechanism or other. the problem is that most mechanisms are liable to arbitrary removal.
if we choose smoking as our mechanism, we could lose one of our lungs and decide that maybe smoking wasn’t such a comfort after all.
if having a child produces feelings of blissful contentment, an unfortunate accident could remove that contentment.
the only mechanisms that we can rely on NOT to be arbitrarily removed are an immersion in philosophy, ideology or religion.
and religion is easier. the books are easier (certainly easier than philosophy and more straightforward than political ideology – in fact religious books are, in my opinion, simplistic) and you are not really expected to think – just accept. the cognitive dissonance that results seems to not be a problem once the first step into being a ‘believer’ is taken.
but above all else, the point I wanted to make was that everything is driven by a NEED to produce ‘unthinking comfort’.- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 1:45 am -
my comment above was in reply to Ho Hum. but it has appeared as a separate comment. it’s late at night and i’m tired – and that’s the only excuse i’ll offer.
- Ho Hum
November 27, 2014 at 9:48 am -
Ok. In words of one syllable, if you have a base ‘need’ to have a life in which your brain cells are at ease, you do not choose one that is truly faith based. Your notion that that represents, or produces, ‘unthinking comfort’, is daft.
Ooops! The inappropriate use of slang terminology. Tut tut. Think of ‘Daft’ as meaning ‘silly’
- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 10:46 am -
we ALL have needs and we all choose a mechanism to satisfy that need. for example: I have a physical need to satisfy, and stop, the feelings of hunger I experience at regular times during the day – and to satisfy my need I must eat food. the particular MECHANISM that I use may be potatoes or rice or bacon or whatever. but I use whichever mechanism is available to me.
it is the same for a person’s psychological needs. the need exists and must be satisfied. the MECHANISM that the person chooses may be religion or philosophy or ideology, and each type of mechanism will have sub-divisions which are available to the person. the person’s choice will be a combination of what is available and what best suites them.
if a person has been brought up in a community that is Christian, the mechanism that they will choose will probably be Christian and if brought up in a moslem community their choice will be islam. the way they interpret their religion will depend on the details of their particular ‘need’, thus:
a gentle person that has a need for gentle comfort will interpret their religion in a gentle way.
if a basically violent person has a need for violence then they will interpret their religion in a violent way (violence can be either physical or verbal).
if a person has a need to appear ‘superior’ to other people, then they will interpret their religion in a dogmatic and condescendingly supercilious way.
we interpret the mechanism to satisfy our needs. there is no absolute ‘truth’. just a mechanism to help us get through life with as few problems as possible. - neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 10:53 am -
quote: ‘……if you have a base ‘need’ to have a life in which your brain cells are at ease, you do not choose one that is truly faith based.’
I know some people that are happily serene in their lives. and they attribute that serenity to their religious belief.
so no – my notion is not daft…..or silly.- Ho Hum
November 27, 2014 at 12:14 pm -
The truth of any conclusion reached by any argument, regardless of the validity of the structure and form of that argument, is dependent on the veracity of the premises on which the argument is based.
You concluded from your argument that:
‘Christianity is just one of many ‘mechanisms’ that exist to satisfy the four basic needs. And the resultant behaviour of the believer will be the same as it would have been if a different mechanism had been chosen’
One of the premises was that, of these four basic needs, number one was:
‘1) Unthinking comfort. This is akin to the dummy or soft toy that calms a fractious child. Adults also have this need.’
I was merely trying to point out that, as far as Christianity is concerned, that has to be a nonsensical basis for subscribing to it, as an awful lot of the basic teachings of Christianity are that, actually, if you choose to be a Christian, that isn’t going to be so, nor should you expect it to be. And, albeit an assumption, I’d fairly reasonably expect that to be likewise true for others who profess to hold to other creeds or philosophies. Anyway, the notion that the millions of people who have been willing to die in the pursuit of their beliefs all did so in the pursuit of ‘unthinking comfort’ is both patronising and risible.
I can’t speak with any certainty for their motives (which at first glance might seem to be the wish to see the prevalence of truth and justice in our current society), but it might be interesting to know whether or not Anna, the Landlady, or Moor Larkin, write their blogs on the basis that it meets their quest after your number one need, ie ‘1) Unthinking comfort. This is akin to the dummy or soft toy that calms a fractious child’. And whether or not the grief that they get for their efforts is then possibly ‘comforting’ to some inbuilt, subconscious, masochism? Maybe…
Anyway, regardless of that, no, I don’t subscribe to your thesis, ie your ‘reason why people have (need) a religious belief’….. (but I).. based it on the belief that it (the religion) existed to satisfy a need – not that the choice was freely made’
- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 1:27 pm -
you really do seem to have got yourself hung up on the first of the ‘needs’ that I listed. I said that all four needs existed in all people and that religion was one of the mechanisms that people used to cope with their needs. can I say that again? – ALL FOUR needs exist and have to be satisfied. and I also stated that the size of the need differed in different people. I am not trying to say that everyone is the same – so for one person the need for a ‘comforter’ is quite small while for another person it may be fairly large. but one of the conveniences of religion is that it has the ability to satisfy all four needs simultaneously.
a quote from you: ‘…….but it might be interesting to know whether or not Anna, the Landlady, or Moor Larkin, write their blogs on the basis that it meets their quest after your number one need…..’
I have no idea why they write, but I suspect that the satisfaction gained is greater than the discomfort that results from some responses. but I didn’t say that everything one does in life is done to satisfy the first of my ‘needs’. that would be a simplistic attitude to take. we often do things in life that we know will produce discomfort – but there is always a positive outcome that trumps the negative discomfort. if there wasn’t, we wouldn’t do the thing.
my own needs for a ‘comforter’ are not satisfied by religion, and getting flak from you does not help me feel comforted – but it does give me great enjoyment giving and receiving opinions and arguing over them. so maybe Anna, the Landlady and Moor Larkin do their ‘stuff” because it satisfies their ‘need number 2 – A ‘reason for existence’. The question ‘what am I here for’.
I realise you don’t subscribe to my thesis. if you did that would destroy the basis of your belief – religions are supposed to be basic truths and human minds should submit to these truths. I see matters the other round – the human mind is a basic truth and religions are a mechanism to help us deal with the evolved inadequacies of these minds.- Ho Hum
November 27, 2014 at 1:39 pm -
This will never get anywhere. Let’s call it a day, shall we, by agreeing to agree on there being a Fifth Basic Need, ie the Need to Disagree?
- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 2:15 pm -
there is no need to disagree, so it’s certainly not a basic need.
there is, however, a polite and civilised convention – an agreement to disagree.
so, let us agree to disagree.- Ho Hum
November 27, 2014 at 2:20 pm -
Your ‘nom de plume’ is interesting.
Have you ever considered the discourse at
http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/
- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 4:51 pm -
my ‘nom de plume’ says more about me than my given name. so I rather like it.
I haven’t never looked at the ‘elsewhere’ site, but may do so in the future sometime. thank you for the link.
and now…..adieu – I commend you to your god.- neverironic
November 27, 2014 at 4:56 pm -
quote: ‘….haven’t never…..’
please read as ‘haven’t ever’ or ‘have never’.
sorry about that.
- neverironic
- neverironic
- Ho Hum
- neverironic
- Ho Hum
- neverironic
- Ho Hum
- neverironic
- neverironic
- Alex
November 27, 2014 at 8:20 am -
Surely this is a case of “judge not lest ye be judged”. I wonder how many of his former clients are now thinking that maybe they didn’t get particularly good value for money?
- Lucozade
November 27, 2014 at 9:00 pm -
Re: “as I researched Michael’s ‘ascendancy’ to hallowed high priest of the child abuse clique and honoured guest and Guru for David Icke…. did I mention that Michael is already on the sex offenders register? Framed by the Secret Service, see”
Sounds like, in his case at least, all this drama and ‘conspiracy’ bullshit is possibly a tactic to either deflect attention away from his own murky past/private life or to try and convince anyone who’ll listen he’s innocent by claiming to have been set up due to him having been able to uncover some big ‘conspiracy’. Though if he expects anyone to believe some of his crazy claims without any evidence he clearly is either mad or desperate.
He might have come across those images during some of his ‘research’, though most people would report that to the police rather than save it on a memory card you’d think…. :/
- Lucozade
November 27, 2014 at 9:40 pm -
Re: “though most people would report that to the police rather than save it on a memory card you’d think….”
….whoops, I forgot, the police are bad and all part of the conspiracy, my bad…. :-/ (joke)….
- theyfearthehare
November 28, 2014 at 3:18 pm -
You could lose the will to live reading this stuff, although I suspect thats what its often designed to do, a belief which ironically labels me as a conspiracy theorist, but hey ho
{ 78 comments… read them below or add one }