As a science fiction fan, I’ve recently bought the first 2 seasons of Babylon 5, and have been watching them in sequence. I’m near the end of the first season now, and I’m loving it. Quite different from Star Trek - in Trek, mankind has evolved, in B5 it, well, hasn’t. Technology is much more realistic, the universe is more consistent, and there’s a larger story that was planned from the start, instead of mostly independent episodes like in Trek.
After watching an episode, I love to go read more about it, and, as the series is somewhat old now, there’s a lot about it on the Web. I found, for instance, a site called The Lurker’s Guide to Babylon 5, which has annotations for every single episode. Including comments by J. Michael Straczynski (jms), the series’ creator.
And, when reading the annotations for a 1st season episode, Soul Hunter, in which a race of beings collects “souls” of the dead, which originates a discussion between several characters about whether souls exist or not, and what they are, I found this gem of a comment by jms:
One person at a post production house we’ve used has indicated that he has “theological problems” with working on that episode; not because it’s *against* what he believes — he’s worked on horror movies and stuff with devils and the like — but because it takes a point of view he doesn’t much like…in that he has to sit and defend the whole *context* of his ideas…meaning, it’s making him think. He can just poo-poo the stuff against what he believes, support what he does believe in…but he isn’t quite sure where this show comes down, or where it makes *him* come down.
Interesting, don’t you think? That guy didn’t have any problems with horror stuff, with devils and such, because he already knew he condemned it. But stuff that forced him to think, or at least threatened to do so, gave him “theological problems”.
But I can sympathize. 
Religion and thinking don’t mix…
Related posts:
Subscribe to this blog
I think that last sentence, “Religion and thinking don’t mix…”, is slightly taking it to the extreme. But since this is a philosophical blog, we’re both entitled to our opinions
I’ll say little about it: I think someone’s spiritual orientation should not be used to infer something about that same someone’s intellectual (dis)ability. I think that’s as bad as saying “atheists” are the spawn of the devil and, as such, must be wiped from the face of the Earth.
Why can’t someone both worship the Fetid Twin Gods of Destruction, Dogar and Kazon (some will recognise this small reference from somewhere else, but I digress), and bring about the unification of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity into a single Theory of Quantum Gravity? Would it be worth that much less just because its creator liked to sacrifice living animals to his twisted creed?
I am fully aware that is an extreme example, but I hope my point got across. I simply meant to say that thinking and “believing” aren’t that intertwined at all.
Well, my point is that you only keep having irrational beliefs if you don’t think too hard about them. Like in jms’s example: the guy didn’t have any problem with stuff he opposed, but stuff that got him thinking about whether souls existed or not, and what they were… now THAT was a problem. Why? Because irrational beliefs are like a form of life that only thrives in the darkness… you point a flashlight (reason) at them, and they wither and die. They cannot survive in the light.
Intelligent people can, as you imply, keep such beliefs for decades, even their entire lives, because they unconsciously create a “defense mechanism” - “I shall not question this”, “I shall not think too hard about this”, “I shall not submit this to the same standards I submit everything else in my life to”, and so on.
I was like that for 26 years of my life, as I said in the “I can sympathize” link. From that alone, you should see that I don’t think “only complete idiots have religious beliefs”.
I believe in souls, because I like the concept of it. That there’s a mystical force inside everyone that drives them, makes them thrive. Of course, a “soul” may be the result of the billions of synapses that occur in the majority’s brains. But isn’t it still a “soul”? Once the synapses stop occurring, you’re pretty much dead
It’s like giving your (insert object name here) a name that is not its normal designation. We give our pets names, and that doesn’t change what they are, after all 
I enjoy the concepts of Heaven and Hell, but not the “Evil must be vanquished by the almighty God” version. Maybe it’s because I’ve played Diablo II one hour too much, but its concept of the eternal battle between Heaven and Hell being “fought” on the mortal realm through “subliminal messages” and “conversions”. There was even an angel that betrayed Heaven. Of course both the demons and angels there are much more corporeal than I assume they are in our reality.
Heaven is nice to ease the “pain” of Death, Hell is nice to “ease” the pain of all kinds of abuse (meaning, the ones abusing will eventually burn in a thousand flames for all eternity).
What if I think Lead should be called Polar-bearium because its chemical symbol is Pb? It’s a “valid” (more like ridiculous) point
Returning to the topic at hand, am I in the dark because I have chosen to believe in something that may not have a physical manifestation, but rather a spiritual one? I have no idea if there are souls, if there aren’t, if they’re the electric surges that happen all the time in my brain, or the effects the hormones my hypothalamus and hypophysis produce on my heartbeat?
Being “a man of science”, I am fully aware “the heart”, and “feelings” are all results of a few chemical reactions. Yet I have opted not to go around “spoiling” every person who has “fallen in love”’s “happiness”. It’d be wrong of me, they’re not hurting anyone, it’s harmless for them to “love”. I won’t digress into “hate”, “rage”, “anger”, “jealousy”, “thirst for revenge”, “sleepiness”, “libido” or even “indiference”. Any good biochemistry book focused on neurological chemical reactions can cover those topics up waaaay better than I can at the moment
PS: And I have absolutely no idea how placebos work, medically speaking.
I read your post on individualism and my jaw was dropped to find someone else that shared my views on the topic.
I started to read other posts of yours and found that it was more than just the individualism that we shared views on.
Thusly, as you mention in this post that you’re a Sci-Fi fan, I’m even more inclined to recommend to you the TV series Firefly and the movie Sereniy both by Joss Whedon.
I’m not going to go into the details, in case you’re already a fan, but if you’re not, you should be, so e-mail me back and I’ll tell you all about it.
I’ve never seen an episode, but I’ve been meaning to check it out. Think I’ll put them in my Netflix que.
Thanks for the links to me. You’ve got a really great blog here, it’s the kind of stuff I like to read. I’ll be posting a link to you later today.
Martian