Comic Book Creator talks about his atheism.

[edhopper]

I found this interesting, especially his ability to be rational in the face of peril.

http://www.vertigocomics.com/blog/2012/06/28/vertigo-on-the-ledge-with-sean-murphy-writer-and-artist-of-punk-rock-jesus


"I stopped praying in 2003.

I was living with a friend in Colorado who loved to surf. I loved road trips, so we threw two boards into my pickup and headed to California. It was good to get away--I'd hit a major writer's block with a script I'd been working on called PUNK ROCK JESUS. One of my main characters was (like me) a devoted Catholic. He was also in the IRA, so I ended up doing a lot of research into the history of The Cause. Much of the IRA dogma made no sense to me, and while I began questioning the motivation behind IRA convictions, I also began questioning my own Christianity. I didn't know what to think anymore, so I put both PRJ and my faith on hold.

My friend was an atheist, and soon I found myself very convinced by his beliefs--those based on science and not on dogma. But becoming an atheist overnight was too scary, so instead I decided to try it for a month and see how it fit me. ....more..."


I think I will pick up his book.

[cbayer]

1. It's a her and I don't think she has written it.

I can't find links to anything published by her.

[edhopper]

2. It's Sean Murphy

a "him" and published by DC.

http://www.vertigocomics.com/comics/punk-rock-jesus-2012/punk-rock-jesus-1

[img][/img]

[cbayer]

3. My bad - why does the article list another writer when the whole thing was apparently

written by him?

Anyway, not a comic book fan and his stuff looks flat out weird.

Enjoy and sorry for the error.

[edhopper]

4. I see

I think that is the blog poster and the end is signed by the artist.
I didn't post this to promote the comic, but because I thought his explanation of his move to atheism was interesting.
It is the opposite and the more rational take on an event similar to Cat Stevens conversion to Islam. Where he interpreted a natural phenomena as an act of God.

He tried Zen Buddhism and the I Ching, numerology, tarot cards and astrology. Still, he was not ready to abandon superstardom. Then, in 1975, another scrape with death changed his course forever. While visiting a friend’s house in Malibu, California, Stevens took to the ocean for a swim. Caught in a rip tide while utterly alone, he fought against the current to the point of near-exhaustion. He realized that no one—not his manager, not even his thousands of adoring fans—could save him from drowning. He shouted aloud: “God, if you save me, I’ll work for you!” According to Stevens, it was at that moment that a little wave came from behind, pushing him to forward; he found the strength to swim safely ashore. “I was alive!” he said, recounting the story with great emotion, nearly 30 years later. “It was like being born again. I said ‘God…thank you! But now what? What was I supposed to do next?’”

Rip tides are caused by a break in a sandbar and are over when the water rushing out reaches equilibrium and the normal ocean currents once more flow shoreward. Not need to bring God into it. Also ocean swimmers learn to never swim against a rip tide, swim at a right angle, parallel with the shore, and you will soon be out of it. Cat let his irrationality win over in an completely natural event. Sean used his critical thinking to save himself.

[cbayer]

5. Fascinating comparison!

Both of them just gave up and let whatever would happen happen.

And both of them either made the right choice instinctually or serendipitously.

However, Cat Stevens really was at some risk, while the surfer most likely was not.

In the end, neither of their experiences have much to do with god, imo. They are just experiences that led each of them down their current road.

I suspect that Cat Stevens was looking for a religious path, while the comic book writer was looking to get off one.

That's how life goes.

[edhopper]

6. I have been in similar experiences to both of them

Sean Murphy was at much more risk than Cat Stevens. Being pushed under by waves while your board is dragging you is much more dangerous than a rip tide, which I explained can easily be countered.

Agree that Cat was looking for some answer until he got one. Though that to me bolsters the atheists argument about religion.

[cbayer]

7. What exactly is the atheists argument about religion?

[edhopper]

8. Well one of the arguments is

that it is simply an internal quest to find meaning and that humans can perceive events that are random and give them a meaning that they don't innately have.
It's like the Virgin Mary in the tree trunk I posted earlier.

[cbayer]

9. While there are those that see no need to find meaning in life, is there a problem with those

that do? I sure hope not.

Much of scientific discovery was made by perceiving or observing random events and giving them meaning that they didn't have at that point.

LIthium was discovered as a treatment for Bipolar disorder after someone observed that there were lower rates of certain psychiatric disorders in areas where the Lithium content in the water was higher than usual. What had once been a terrifying illness without clear cause or treatment became one of the most easily treatable illnesses because someone observed something and proposed a meaning for it.

[edhopper]

12. Of course not.

I was pointing to the people who need God for a meaning to their life, and those who don't.

Your example shows the difference between humans using their organizational skills to find actual connections or creating connections that aren't there.
the difference between, "that pattern of grass means there could be a lion there", or "those patterns of stars are actually gods in the skies."

Or that an ordinary rip tide, behaving as rip tides usual do, and thinking that God was intervening.

[cbayer]

17. Let's consider this option.

Way too many people do not understand rip tides or how to deal with them when they get into dangerous waters. If someone makes what appears to be an intuitive decision by giving up fighting it and believes that they were handed some direction by a force external to themselves, can you with certainty say they are wrong?

[edhopper]

20. Occam's Razor says they probably are

I don't like the infinitely small probability argument.
Absent any other evidence the likely hood is pretty small. And since the natural occurrence occurred natural. i see no need to add this divine intervention layer.

The difference is also that they say with certainty, that they are right.

[cbayer]

23. However, since you have no knowledge of their actual experience, how would you know.

If someone feels they were *touched* in some way, I think Occam's Razor would lead to the conclusion that they were.

Unless you have reason to conclude that they are, in fact, suffering from a delusional psychiatric disorder. I don't believe that Cat Stevens has such a disorder. While I have serious doubts about whether a god saved him, it would be rather presumptuous of me to take the position that it did not occur.

[edhopper]

24. His description

seems pretty similar to an ordinary rip tide experience.
A supernatural agent would require more extraordinary evidence than is presented.
And people experience or misinterpret experiences all the time.
That is the point to my premiss.

You seem to think that only people with mental problems can misperceive things, that is obviously far from the case.
The Virgin Mary in the tree trunk is again a good example. I have no doubt many believe that is a sign from God. They are wrong.

[cbayer]

26. But who is to define what is the misperception and what is the *real* perception.

The Kurosawa movie Rashomon.

If you are not familiar with it, here is a brief synopsis. A wedding party is traveling through a forest and are attacked by robbers. The story then proceeds to show the perspectives of all parties - the bride, the groom, those attending to them and the robbers. Each story is remarkably different, but in the end you can only conclude that they are all equally true, even though substantially contradictory.

Did they all perceive or misperceive? Who is in a position to say?

[edhopper]

27. Science and rational thought

as your example illustrated.

I have seen most of Kurosowa's films.

Something did actually occur in the woods. The story illustrates how simple human perception is sometimes inadequate to see or remember things. More argument that Cat Stevens simply was wrong in his assessment. Giving a super natural agent to a natural phenomena.

[cbayer]

28. You are not saying that science and rational thought are never shown to be wrong

after future research and thought, are you? Of course you are not.

Neither science nor religion can claim absolute truth, imo. Those that do have blinders on and do neither a service.

So what did happen in the woods? What might there be that is greater than simple human perception? What else are we missing?

[edhopper]

29. It is self correcting

something religion usually is not.

I don't know of any "truth" that any religion in itself has shown.

What is missing is objective observation. The film is about subjectivity, not objectivity.

[cbayer]

30. Good conversation. In our subjective ways, we see things differently,

and that's ok by me.

[edhopper]

31. That is very true.

[rug]

10. That reminds me of Luther's encounter with the thunderstorm.

[cbayer]

11. Am I going to have to look this up or are you going to tell the tale?

[rug]

13. It's fairly well-known.

Luther was going to become a lawyer when he was caught in a thunderstorm and made a promise he would become a monk if he survived.

The rest is history.

http://www.luther.de/en/blitz.html

[edhopper]

14. This Luthor?

[img][/img]

(It is a comic book thread)

[rug]

15. I'll give you a prize if you can type the proper pronunciation of Mr. Mxyzptlk.

No cheating.

[edhopper]

16. I believe

it's "Mixes'pickle-licks" at least that's how I always said it.
Now I will go Google it.


According to the imp himself:

[rug]

18. I remember it as Mix-yez-pit-lek.

There was a whole episode about it a long time ago.

[edhopper]

19. That sounds right

but you have to say it with a 5th dimensional accent.

[rug]

21. *

[edhopper]

22. How is THAT pronounced?

[rug]

25. I'm afraid to.

God knows where I'll end up.

[dimbear]

32. It's a reasonable conjecture. Martin Luther was a rabid Jew hater, and Superman is Jewish.

You can tell easily from his original patronymic, which was 'El.'

[rug]

33. The Ark must have been destroyed with Krypton.

[2ndAmForComputers]

34. Recent depictions of that character have put a xenophobic twist in his Superman-hate.

Refers to him as "the alien" with a sneer. That wasn't present in pre-Crisis, mad-scientist Luthor.

You know, theme MAY be some subtext here.

[edhopper]

35. You think it is an analogy

for Obama and the Birthers?

[2ndAmForComputers]

36. Predates that by at least a decade.

I think it's just a general purpose bigotry subtext.

Who knows, maybe a writer thought, "hmmm, Luthor, Luther..." -- but that's just wild speculation on my part.

[edhopper]

37. I thought you were talking about the current

revamped Superman comic.

[2ndAmForComputers]

38. That can be seen in the animated series from the 90's IIRC.

But yes, this really took off in recent comics. In Legion of Super Heroes (which takes place 1000 years in the future) it even developed into a KKK-like Human Supremacy movement. And, in the present timeline, Luthor found allies in the US military who think like him.