AtD blurb - "false" religiosity?

[Paul Mackin]

On Aug 17, 2006, at 1:18 PM, David Morris wrote:

> On 8/17/06, Chris Broderick <elsuperfantastico at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Pynchon put it well when he said that intelligence is about  
>> learning the shape of one's own ignorance.
>
> Where did he say that?
>
>> I'm a happy atheist, and I don't think I'd bring anything to the
> table in terms of discerning "false" from "true" religions.
>
> Pynchon didn't say anything about "false religions."  He said "false
> religiousity."  There is a world of difference between the two.
>
>> Someone (I think it was Keith, though in the tangle of
>> the digest, it's hard to tell) said:
>>
>> Why would a man of his talent be so OBVIOUSLY ironic, huh?
>>
>> Pynchon doesn't exactly avoid the obvious.  Consider all of the  
>> silly puns, slapstick and schtick in his  books (Joaquin Stick?!)   
>> So just because it is unsubtle doesn't mean it ain't Pynchon.
>
> I gotta agree with you there.  But Keith's larger argument is that
> Pynchon wouldn't waste his time on a work primarily meant as a
> commentary on current events, and I fully agree.
>
> David

I'm with David and Keith on this. The present day association when  
they occur are not very important. Won't say there're comic relief  
but something like that.

On the meaning of false religiosity I think it mainly means  
pretending to be religious.

There  is one kind referred to in James 1:26 that  involves failing   
to bridle one's tongue. (among other things)

If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his  
tongue, but deceives his own heart, this man's religion is vain.

Keith may be able to interpret that one.