User talk:Aliman

Atheism and Spirituality:
Atheism is essentially used in two ways, the first generally used in the Western World, is really a synonym for the results of rationalism (see also philosophy of science). However, there are religions such as Buddhism which do not have deities but have key concepts that are incompatible with rationalism. Subud seems to fall into this latter category. However, on their website they appear to use the word "God" as a synomym for "Universe", as a rather vague concept less well defined as Abrahamic monotheism but a deity nevertheless. My main problem with Subud is that it is obscure. With you having a perfectly legitimite interest in it, perhaps it might be worthwhile to wait until somebody more neutral writes about it. Atheism is a controversial issue (see talk:atheism), so we need to tread carefully. Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 12:34, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Dear Duncharris,

Indeed! The Humanist Manifesto II, in part, says that:

--Authoritarian religion does a disservice to humanity; --There isn't enough evidence for the supernatural; --Nature is primary rather than God; --God won't save us, we must save ourselves; and, --Fear of Hell is harmful because it takes the focus away from life here and now.

Many folks in Subud would agree with this. My particular viewpoint goes along the lines of Process theology, which is directly in line with these statements and other statements like them. The problem with your point of view above is that you are arguing against an outdated version of theism (from as far back as the Middle ages). Some of these outdated ideas are that God is omnipotent and thus controls everything, that human beings have little or no power and God determines human destiny, that God is a personal entity and is supernatural, that classical or authoritarian religion is acceptable, that theism cannot solve the problem of evil, etc. None of these ideas (and a host of others, see, e.g., "Ominpotence and Other Theological Mistakes" by Charles Hartshorne) make much sense to a process theist, or to those (some of which are in Subud) who are open-minded theists.

Also, I'm not sure what you're saying about Subud being "obscure." Could you clarify this? Aliman 09:58, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Re: Subud
Oh golly, this is a bid old! I really don't know about subud, but would be concerned that persons with a certain philosophical view are pushing their own POV. This had something to do with the atheism article didn't it? In which case the mention of subud in atheism should be proportional to its importance within atheism. Does that help? Dunc|&#9786; 17:02, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Still not sure what you mean about having a problem with Subud being obsure.


 * What is the context around the statement about persons with certain philosophical views pushing their own point of view?


 * Certainly Subud is fairly unique because it embraces theists and (at least) weak atheists and agnostics. But I agree that very little energy should be spent on Subud within the atheism article.  Maybe one sentence, mentioning it, with a link to Subud just like other "spiritual" things that atheists could partake in and not contradict with their atheistic views.  Aliman 00:33, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Using Wikipedia
I'm glad that there's some Subud folks interested in the Subud article on Wikipedia. I don't think there's any way around spending at least an hour or two in self-education about Wikipedia before editing articles. There are various commands to learn, and if you simply enter and make changes without knowing them, the text may not come out right. Also, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia which anyone may edit, and people are "watching" the Subud article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Watching_pages), and, e.g., if changes are made that violate the NPOV policy (Neutral_point_of_view), the changes made will just be deleted, and, yes, chaos may ensue. Some people in Subud have to learn how to write objectively about Subud. As well as the above links, I suggest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tutorial

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NPOV_tutorial

I also suggest that people establish an identity for themselves and log-in every time. This way, we all know who's doing what. Wikipedia is about community, and thus it requires knowing who you're talking to. Aliman 18:07, 12 September 2005 (UTC)