leonardcohenforum.com

LisaLCFan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 7:46 pm

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 12:38 am ...religious people do not generally have a high IQ.

....Of course, one can simply deny the existence of different realms of knowledge and understanding, but that arguably fails to appreciate the vast complexity of the human mind and of the universe. There has been a great expansion of knowledge and understanding of the human mind and of the world/universe over the years, and that knowledge and understanding is constantly evolving.

For example, quantum physics has opened our eyes to the fact that things are far more complex than one might initially believe, for quantum physics bends and sometimes even defies concepts of classical logic and rationality, and yet, it is based upon sound reasoning, upon what may be considered newer and somewhat different types of logic and rationality. I think that it would be unreasonable to suggest that quantum physicists "do not generally have a high IQ" simply because they believe things that seem illogical and incomprehensible to other people.

Thus, perhaps it is not such a stretch to suggest that religious belief can also be assessed and understood within a new/different framework of logic and rationality, for although it may defy older systems of thought (systems of thought that possibly rendered it absurd and false), it can, perhaps, exist quite comfortably in newer systems of thought....

Lisa, I enjoyed your little essay, a lot. I only show part of what you wrote, because that portion reminded me of an observation I've read a number of times: As the fields of science advanced they expanded the limits of understanding, from the smallest subatomic particles to the immense outer reaches of our universe. However, we have long passed the time when understanding matter "at the limits" can be explained using proven science, so instead, scientists speculate and hypothesize to arrive at reasonable theories that appear to fit. It is at this point that the line between science and faith blurs, as science requires empirical evidence while theories are accepted without proof based on belief and trust. Who is to say that a belief in string theory is much different than the belief in a deity? Both require an act of faith.

4

a discussion on this theme is interesting, and lisa's 'essay' extraordinarily brilliant. what a mind!

it was a surprise to see a flurry of responses with that little sentence of mine. i wrote from experience, and from opinions that have been picked up. people turn to religion for various reasons: for example through reasoning, a need for a father figure, through ignorance, fear, persuasion, etc.

i admit that part of me is envious of religious people, because i am aware it gives a sort of comfort. unfortunately intellect stands in the way.
----------------------------------
watercolour

There's an element of faith whether the object is god or quantum physics because you just can't see round the back of a thing. I like to say jury's out on science. Just like jury's out on god, there's nothing but experience. Can't believe I'm putting in my two cents. Welp.

Anybody listen to Nick Cave's Wild God? I been transcribing songs about god in my notebook.

abby wrote: ↑Sat May 03, 2025 5:47 pm There's an element of faith whether the object is god or quantum physics because you just can't see round the back of a thing...

its4inthemorning wrote: ↑Wed Apr 30, 2025 9:46 pm Who is to say that a belief in string theory is much different than the belief in a deity? Both require an act of faith.

Indeed.

The whole concept of beliefs and believing is actually a really fascinating subject: if one thinks about it, almost all of our beliefs (if not all of them) require some degree of faith: a belief, by definition, is something that a person holds to be true (at least, at any given time, and based on their current knowledge and understanding -- beliefs can and do change), and faith is having trust and confidence in something. When it comes to all of the things that we believe (that is, the things that we think are true), from the mundane to the profound, we trust and have confidence in the sources of our beliefs, whatever those sources may be. Our beliefs can originate from our own personal experiences, or from evidence that we know about, or from things that we have read about and/or learned and heard from others, or from our feelings and intuitions, or from our memories, etc. -- we have to have "faith" in all of the sources of our beliefs in order to consider those beliefs to be true. If we lack faith in any of those sources (including ourselves), then we are less likely to form beliefs based on those things -- we either won't believe something, if we have no faith in its source, or we may remain sceptical about it until something changes.

Beliefs are also entirely subjective and personal: they are formed by the brain from a combination of external and internal elements, and thus each individual will have their own unique beliefs, their own unique reasons, and their own unique sources for all of their beliefs. Certainly, people may share beliefs with others, in general and more or less, but beliefs will always be very personal and subjective things, due to the fact that they are manufactured within one's brain.

Furthermore, I do not think that a person has any choice about what they believe: beliefs somehow form in the brain from a variety of sources, but we don't choose them -- they just happen (or, they just don't happen!). Of course, one can choose to analyse and question one's beliefs, one can choose to learn as much as they can about something, one can choose to immerse oneself in the lifestyle and study of something, one can choose to be as open-minded as they can possibly be (or one can choose to be stubborn and close-minded!), and one can choose to try new things and to have new experiences, etc.. All of these various actions may influence one's beliefs, sometimes causing one to develop new beliefs, sometimes causing one to discard old beliefs, sometimes causing one's beliefs to be solidified and strengthened, sometimes causing one's beliefs to be a bit weakened to the point of being sceptical about something that they previously believed. But, the beliefs themselves are not a choice -- they are a result of living our lives, they are a result of how our brains function, and the only choice we have is what we do before and after acquiring a belief, and how we let our beliefs influence our behaviours and actions.

It's a lot of fun to think and write about these things!

Hi Lisa. I can't help but hear a description of Leonard in what you've most recently written, a much more polite or perhaps generous way of putting it than G.'s bit about Leonard studying scripture like any other piece of literature. I like the idea that beliefs are what sort of settles at the bottom of the whirlwind of a self, can't help but aggregate sort of. But because I have such an aversion to belief, either don't want to look in that corner or the corner is relatively dusty & empty, I feel a little hard pressed to tell you what my beliefs are. But that does't mean they aren't there just the same

another inspired message from lisa. thank you! there is nothing written there that i take issue with; i just appreciate being able to read something that makes total sense. all i will say is that when someone says they believe in miracles, virgin births, walking on water, etc., etc. - well, that tends to make me silently question their powers of critical thinking. yes, i am quietly judging them - but who's perfect!

abby wrote:
>I can't help but hear a description of Leonard in what you've most recently written, a much more polite or perhaps generous way of putting it than G.'s bit about Leonard studying scripture like any other piece of literature.
---------------
hei abby. i did not intend to be impolite. at mcgill university leonard studied literature, and i have never had cause to believe that he thought 'holy' books should be treated differently than any others that can be found in a library. they are all written by people.

only one time did he ever get into the subject of religion with me, and that was just an email containing a very short paragraph about god. i carry it in my wallet, because it is a little bit special

stay well.

Sometimes I look back at what I've written & can't find the sense in it. That happened this time. What you'd written about Leonard seemed provocative but now doesn't seem so at all. You're right. Forgive me.

Is it in poor taste to share what Leonard wrote about god? If not, will you? I understand if it is private. I used to have a letter from Leonard I carried around with me too. It wasn't about anything but it was from him therefore dear.

You stay well too, G. & Lisa & Dar & everybody.

abby wrote:
>Is it in poor taste to share what Leonard wrote about god? If not, will you? I understand if it is private.
------
a couple of people have seen it.

I remember reading that, it was posted somewhere long ago but in my manic sifting through the forum a couple months ago I stumbled upon it. 2010 doesn't seem so long ago in Leonard years but in ordinary years it may as well be a lifetime. Cold comfort indeed. But also it's quite the call to action.

abby wrote:
>I remember reading that . . .
-------
yes, i shared it with a couple of people. we have known each other a long time, and i'm glad you are here. try to make more pictures; i love it when people do that!

a doodle from May Day

abby wrote:
>a doodle from May Day
------
thank you so much, abby. she looks sad, and nothing wrong with that. some of the best art, literature and music is sad - melancholia seems to inspire more than contentment. just continue, because creativity helps give meaning to one's existence. a desire to feel immortal through our work and actions is often the driving force behind inventiveness. i haven't made any pictures for a few days, too much socialising. have just come home from a rendezvous with friends now, so maybe i can have an hour or two to myself this afternoon.

stay well, and be good

"i'm the bad guy" https://youtu.be/5GJWxDKyk3A?si=-w34tK84ChIpjh-v

Just blows my mind how you're able to absolutely capture a person. When I doodle I move my writing utensil across the page almost absentmindedly until something materializes & then it becomes something almost on its own. That's what the sad lady was. In response to billie, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ui8kUKuLB ... Y2hpbmU%3D

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 11:57 pm [billie eilish]

I love the deep and vibrant colours in the Billie Eilish (?) portrait. I actually didn't know who it was meant to be -- I don't follow her and I don't know her music. As for her song, I thought you didn't like melancholic dirges, Geoffrey? Whatever the case, I didn't like her song, but I know a few people who provoke similar sentiments!

abby wrote: ↑Wed May 07, 2025 6:35 pm In response to billie [Florence + The Machine song]

I'd never heard of this singer/group, but I liked that song -- it was very touching at the end (and I adore Bill Nighy!).


Incidentally, why do people post links without saying what the link is for? I personally want to know what I am clicking on before I click on it (although, around here, I often do end up clicking, out of curiosity, and sometimes I have no idea why something was posted -- some of Geoffrey's links leave me scratching my head as to the point...). I do wish that folks would simply say, "Here's a song/video by...", or some other description. Is that too much to ask?