The Dream of Spaceflight, cont.
So in between running tests here at work, I tend to have some time on my hands... at least today. So I've been reading that book some more. I'm on chapter two now, entitled: The Romance of Spaceflight: Nostalgia for a Bygone Future

It mentions an artist, Chesley Bonestell, who was famous for his works of a space nature. I checked out some of his stuff online... its quite impressive. http://www.bonestell.org/Page_30x.html

Also in this chapter it suggests that there are seven zones of human experience. The first five are the 'natural zones':
1) the area of sensation immediately touching the sking
2) the area within two or three meters in which most social interaction takes place
3) the maximum area of social interaction, reaching out a few hundred feet
4) the area that extends as far as one can see or otherwise gather information from any one location
5) an irregular and varying area made up of all the zone-four areas that a person experiences during a lifetime

Beyond the five natural zones are two conceptual constructs:
6) the surface or biosphere of the Earth
7) the universe as far out as one can conceive - the realm of transcendence, the literal locus of ultimate answers to all our "why" questions.

The book alludes to the fact that any 'god' that humans might refer to would be a part of the 7th zone of human experience. To quote the book (disclaimer... this is a quote, NOT my ideas): "To conceive of the transcendent requires a symbol. One cannot worship "God" - a word, a vague feeling, an intellectual abstraction; one needs an image: Jesus, Buddha, a bearded man in the sky, a painting, a statue. Yet the natural tendency is for the image to literally become God, and the larger, elusive feeling that empowered the symbol fades, eclipsed by a host of this-worldly connections. Finally demystified, the statue reverts to its status as mere artifact. Thus every symbol contains the seeds of its own desacralization. The millennial nature of Christian theology generated the idea of spiritual progress, which spawned the notion of salvation through success in this world, which led to the secular idea of material progress, which in turn began to desacralize Christian theology. The last stage of this process is fundamentalist dogma, in which symbols have lost their numinosity and have degenereated to mere signs"

I know that's a rather long quotation... It actually took up most of the page it was on in the book. I understand how the author intended for this long, drawn out description to emphasize a point he was making, however, what he said clearly demonstrates that he is most likely agnostic. Saying that Jesus is not one and the same with God. He says that Christianity is a desacralization. {sidenote: I'm not doing as good of a job today defending my views as normal... but I just wanted to state some of these... quite honestly all i've done really is list several points that I generally would be able to extend upon in at least a paragraph each. bear with me!}