Re: virus: Prisoners my Derrida!

Eric Boyd (
Sun, 21 Mar 1999 00:22:40 -0500


From: KMO <>
My one reservation with what you said is the "Faith isn't x, faith is y," statement. The lable "faith" gets applied to a variety of things including both x and y. My faith is mostly y, but I think Carl (and Dave Pate when he was part of the discussion) are right to be skeptical of and resistant to people who base their agendas on faith x. Where Carl and I disagree is that he claims that all faith is of the variety which he sees as being destructive, controlling, and incompatable with the tools of rational thought.

To Reed, KMO, and Richard:

I want to thank you guys for giving me an insight into a side of faith I had not previously seen -- to Reed for his "human" posts, his "lived in" faith; to KMO for the post on affirmations and the "it's who I am" paragraph; to Richard for "programming and purpose", two important watch-words. I had already decided that authentic experience and self-confidence were important concepts, but I see now that where these two meet and merge is in faith -- not the dogmatic kind, but rather that which identifies individuals; that which explains who-they-are to themselves. In this sense, a strong faith is what makes people "comfortable in their own skin", as it were -- anyone who has met many good priests I think knows how that looks.

That said, I doubt I'll use the word ("faith"), as it carries far too much baggage to be useful, and triggers quite nasty memetic responses in lots of people. As well, it's current usage almost always refers to some type of dogmatic behaviour -- which I think is why I had such a time understanding where you guys were comming from. If only we could find a word to describe this concept which hasn't been totally maligned by organized religion and fundamentalism... (ironically, those who preach about faith the most use it not to settle into themselves, but rather to bash others on the head...)