Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 13, 2017, 11:34:26 PM
587831 Posts in 45296 Topics by 6018 Members
Latest Member: Svengoolie 3
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Off Topic Discussion  |  I think Im an atheist. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 16
Author Topic: I think Im an atheist.  (Read 18303 times)
Fausto
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 134
Posts: 926



WWW
« Reply #180 on: February 22, 2011, 03:50:55 PM »

I've mentioned on this thread before that I'm a neopagan/wiccan. I won't go into my own beliefs, except to say they are probably closer to pantheism than anything. I will say that my own experience with ritual has never been empty or meaningless, in that its always served as a form of spiritual disipline, not unlike martial arts, rather than groveling before a (possibly non-existant) diety.

A few years ago, I began attending full moon circles at a Unitarian Universalist chuch. Many of the members of the circle were also members of the church. I resisted joining myself, as I was reluctant to go back to the same type of church that I'd been raised in (German Lutheran, not that there was anything wrong with it, I just didn't feel a connection to it). However, being curious, I decided to attend a sunday service.

If you've never been to a UU church before, I should mention that calling it a Christian church is misleading - although it started as an offshoot of protestantism, it includes Jews, Muslims, Bhuddists, Hindus, Pagans, and even Secular Humanists (ie, Athiests) as part of its congregation. I was shocked at how open minded everyone was. The church is devoted to a "discovery of personal truth through art, science, philosophy and the teachings of the world's great religions." Despite their differences, everyone got along, and are very much a tight-knit community.

I'm not trying to sell anyone on the UU church (this particular branch of the church happens to be particularly liberal - Indy, you'd hate it - so your mileage may vary in reguards to UUism in your area) . What I am saying is that it isnt impossible for people of radically differing faiths, or even no faith at all, to get along along and learn from each other without prostelytizing. I've seen it, it can work.
Logged

"When I die, I hope you will use my body creatively." - Shin Chan

"Tonight, we will honor the greatest writers in America with a modest 9 by 12 certificate and a check for three thousand dollars...three thousand dollars? Stephen King makes more than that for writing boo on a cocktail napkin." - Jimmy Breslin
Flick James
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 489
Posts: 4642


Honorary Bastard of Arts


« Reply #181 on: February 22, 2011, 04:11:27 PM »

I've mentioned on this thread before that I'm a neopagan/wiccan. I won't go into my own beliefs, except to say they are probably closer to pantheism than anything. I will say that my own experience with ritual has never been empty or meaningless, in that its always served as a form of spiritual disipline, not unlike martial arts, rather than groveling before a (possibly non-existant) diety.

A few years ago, I began attending full moon circles at a Unitarian Universalist chuch. Many of the members of the circle were also members of the church. I resisted joining myself, as I was reluctant to go back to the same type of church that I'd been raised in (German Lutheran, not that there was anything wrong with it, I just didn't feel a connection to it). However, being curious, I decided to attend a sunday service.

If you've never been to a UU church before, I should mention that calling it a Christian church is misleading - although it started as an offshoot of protestantism, it includes Jews, Muslims, Bhuddists, Hindus, Pagans, and even Secular Humanists (ie, Athiests) as part of its congregation. I was shocked at how open minded everyone was. The church is devoted to a "discovery of personal truth through art, science, philosophy and the teachings of the world's great religions." Despite their differences, everyone got along, and are very much a tight-knit community.

I'm not trying to sell anyone on the UU church (this particular branch of the church happens to be particularly liberal - Indy, you'd hate it - so your mileage may vary in reguards to UUism in your area) . What I am saying is that it isnt impossible for people of radically differing faiths, or even no faith at all, to get along along and learn from each other without prostelytizing. I've seen it, it can work.

UU is interesting. It's fairly common for deists like myself who are looking for some form of fellowship to join UU churches. You may find there are people of deistic leanings at the UU church you attend, and it's very likely that those who run the church organization are at least familiar with deism.

I've never been to one, and probably never will, as church and I don't really get along, but I have been intrigued.
Logged

I don't always talk about bad movies, but when I do, I prefer badmovies.org
Jim H
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 262
Posts: 3243



« Reply #182 on: February 22, 2011, 04:26:06 PM »

Hey Flick, what is there that is contrary to hardline atheistic belief that they refuse to believe exists? 
Logged
Flick James
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 489
Posts: 4642


Honorary Bastard of Arts


« Reply #183 on: February 22, 2011, 06:03:16 PM »

Hey Flick, what is there that is contrary to hardline atheistic belief that they refuse to believe exists?  

If you're genuinely interested in clarification of my beliefs or position I'll be happy to oblige. I really hope you're not out to get nasty, Jim, I really do.

There are hardline atheists (not ALL atheists, mind you) who hold there is no evidence of spiritual existence whatsoever. They tend to hold the idea that the Universe was pure accident, and that science explains everything. I'm not attributing these characteristics to you, because I don't know you. I am also not refuting anything you have ever said simply because we've yet to get into anything. I'm saying that such atheists exist, and in my exchanges with them they tend to be highly confrontational and if anything is said or offered that is contrary to those ideas that they see as absolute fact, they tend to have a similar knee-jerk rejection that I find very similar to extreme fundamentalists. That's my experience, and again, I'm not saying anything about you.

Now, I tend to believe that religion IS largely fantasy and mythology. You will find no argument with me on that notion at all. I am also skeptical of claims of the supernatural. This is not because I don't believe in the supernatural, but because I am skeptical of human honesty, and find that it is a part of human nature to invent and embellish one's experiences, and even more so when dealing with anything supernatural. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I'm sure you and I will be in perfect agreement on that. Those that claim the Bible is the Word of God, or that Jesus performed miracles, or that God spoke to Moses or Mohammed, or that they saw ghosts, have the burden of proof, and certainly have no reason to be upset if one demands it.

When it comes to extreme and resolute atheists, I find a similar phenomenon occurs. Evolution is fact, science is right, and even tend to have an almost nihilistic idea that everything was an accident and that EVERYTHING that was born of religion is absolute poppycock. Again, I'm not saying this is you, you do understand that, right? I believe there is sufficient evidence of human evolution from previous life forms, at least, there is far more scientific evidence of that than there is of Biblical Creationism. That having been said, there are enough holes in the evolutionary record, gaps that fail to connect we humans with our ancestors, that the jury is not exactly in just yet. I happen to believe in evolution, but this doesn't disprove the existence of a higher power or an intelligent creation of the Universe. Hardline atheists I have engaged with seem to hold that evolutionary evidence proves the non-existence of God. No it doesn't. I simply supports that the religious texts in regard to the nature and beginning of existence are incorrect. Science has failed to explain fully the observable order that exists in nature and the Universe. Science is constantly changing and what was held as true by science 100 years ago has significantly changed.

I reject religion, but I don't discredit EVERTHING that religion has produced as being useless as many hardline atheists I have encountered tend to lean. Religion served a very important role in the development of human intellect over many thousands of years. Religion allowed humanity to think in abstract ways that really didn't happen otherwise, in contemplation of things greater than themselves that they did not yet understand. The same form of abstract thought is necessary for scientific inquiry, and had religion not taught humanity to yearn to understand those mysteries, science would not have been born. Religion predates science, and in some ways religion lead to science. I agree with atheists that religion is a major limiting factor in humanity's progress, but when I submit that religion has also served an important purpose in humanity's "intellectual" evolution, most atheists I encounter reject this notion altogether. While religion has a history of getting many things dead wrong, it has also contributed to humanity's development of laws and systems of morality. I ran into an atheist once that said morality was a purely religious invention and therefore had no merit. I'm not making that up. Again, I reject religion, but I don't hold that religion has given us nothing of any worth. Hardline atheists tend to hold that idea, and will reject immediately any notion that religion has produced ANYTHING otherwise.

This is the kind of rejection that I am referring to. I'm not talking claims of pseudo-science that desperately try to prove that the Bible is accurate. I have the same disdain for that as I suspect you do.

I think your question deserved an answer, Jim. There's my answer. My position is based on a series of experiences. That's the best I can offer you. It is no more an endictment of all atheists than it is an endictment of all people of faith. It is my sincere hope that you will see that.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2011, 06:05:22 PM by Flick James » Logged

I don't always talk about bad movies, but when I do, I prefer badmovies.org
Torgo
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 534
Posts: 5275



« Reply #184 on: February 22, 2011, 06:12:07 PM »

For a good part of my life I thought that I was an athesist but as I got older realized that I was actually agnostic. My family members are all hardcore christians and not a day goes by that they don't mention being "worried" about me being agnostic. I don't think that they know what the word agnostic actually means. Ha!
Logged

"There is no way out of here. It'll be dark soon. There is no way out of here."
Allhallowsday
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 1741
Posts: 13015


Either he's dead or my watch has stopped!


« Reply #185 on: February 22, 2011, 10:12:38 PM »

But but but...butt...
 
Logged

If you want to view paradise . . . simply look around and view it!
indianasmith
Archeologist, Theologian, Elder Scrolls Addict, and a
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 1785
Posts: 10943


A good bad movie is like popcorn for the soul!


« Reply #186 on: February 22, 2011, 11:40:04 PM »

(Facepalm)

I . . . have created . . . a MONSTER!!!!!
Logged

"Carpe diem!" - Seize the day!  "Carpe per diem!" - Seize the daily living allowance! "Carpe carp!" - Seize the fish!
"Carpe Ngo Diem!" - Seize the South Vietnamese Dictator!
AndyC
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1401
Posts: 11156



« Reply #187 on: February 23, 2011, 12:08:31 AM »

I used to think I was agnostic, but now I don't know.  TeddyR
Logged

---------------------
"Join me in the abyss of savings."
Crosshatchling
New Visitor
*

Karma: 0
Posts: 1


« Reply #188 on: February 23, 2011, 02:32:31 AM »

I am both an atheist and an agnostic. You can be both. They are mutually exclusive terms.

Atheism/Theism deals with belief. Agnosticism deals with knowledge. I am an atheist because I lack the belief in a deity but I am also an agnostic because I don't know with absolute certainty that my belief is correct.
Logged
The Gravekeeper
addicted to the macabre
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 85
Posts: 759



« Reply #189 on: February 23, 2011, 10:20:54 AM »

Even though this conservation is winding down, I'd like to point out that aspects of atheism and religion are not mutually exclusive. It is more than possible to keep one's roots in religious belief and to subject those same beliefs to basic logic and reasoning without discounting them entirely. If an aspect of one's beliefs fly in the face of all evidence (and no, there is no definitive evidence for or against gods, nor how life came to be on this planet; evolution studies how life diversified, not how it started), perhaps it's time to review that aspect. But then, I'm a druid; we're encouraged to do this from day one and to keep submitting what beliefs we pick up over the years and discover for ourselves to reality checks. Does it fail to stand up? Review it; the real world is the inspiration for all religion, and is correct no matter what us humans think.

Sometimes beliefs get modified or abandoned, but a number of them hang on because there is either no proof that they're completely false or, sometimes, scientific evidence supports them (eg- the healing power of plants; all medicine has a base somewhere in the natural world, so it stands to reason that some plants in their pure form can help with some ailments. Of course, just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good for you, so some personal research into herbal medicine and consultation with trained physicians is a must.)
Logged
AndyC
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1401
Posts: 11156



« Reply #190 on: February 23, 2011, 10:54:15 AM »

I am both an atheist and an agnostic. You can be both. They are mutually exclusive terms.

Atheism/Theism deals with belief. Agnosticism deals with knowledge. I am an atheist because I lack the belief in a deity but I am also an agnostic because I don't know with absolute certainty that my belief is correct.

I tend to think of myself as a Christian Agnostic. I observe Christian holidays, attend the United Church of Canada, and identify as a Christian based on culture and values. I do not take everything in scripture as literal fact, nor do I necessarily think traditional Christian ideas about the nature of the divine are correct. I do, however, believe there must be something of that nature, that we aren't capable of understanding - at least not yet. Really, that's not very different from Flick James' Agnostic Deist beliefs, except that I see value in church as a cultural institution and community focal point. I also see religion as more of a group exercise.

Regarding Flick's comments about things science can't explain, I see consciousness itself as a great mystery. We understand enough to imitate learning, reasoning, memory with technology, but how a collection of neurons becomes self-aware is a total mystery. Why consciousness even exists at all, what purpose it serves, is a mystery. And it doesn't make sense to me to have self-awareness that just snuffs out after 80 years or so, which from its own subjective point of view, is as if it had never existed at all. Then again, the prospect of eternal life, even in a pleasant place, is no less terrifying when you consider it.
Logged

---------------------
"Join me in the abyss of savings."
The Gravekeeper
addicted to the macabre
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 85
Posts: 759



« Reply #191 on: February 23, 2011, 11:11:02 AM »

I am both an atheist and an agnostic. You can be both. They are mutually exclusive terms.

Atheism/Theism deals with belief. Agnosticism deals with knowledge. I am an atheist because I lack the belief in a deity but I am also an agnostic because I don't know with absolute certainty that my belief is correct.

I tend to think of myself as a Christian Agnostic. I observe Christian holidays, attend the United Church of Canada, and identify as a Christian based on culture and values. I do not take everything in scripture as literal fact, nor do I necessarily think traditional Christian ideas about the nature of the divine are correct. I do, however, believe there must be something of that nature, that we aren't capable of understanding - at least not yet. Really, that's not very different from Flick James' Agnostic Deist beliefs, except that I see value in church as a cultural institution and community focal point. I also see religion as more of a group exercise.

Regarding Flick's comments about things science can't explain, I see consciousness itself as a great mystery. We understand enough to imitate learning, reasoning, memory with technology, but how a collection of neurons becomes self-aware is a total mystery. Why consciousness even exists at all, what purpose it serves, is a mystery. And it doesn't make sense to me to have self-awareness that just snuffs out after 80 years or so, which from its own subjective point of view, is as if it had never existed at all. Then again, the prospect of eternal life, even in a pleasant place, is no less terrifying when you consider it.

I recently attended a lecture regarding consciousness and our perception of reality. Fascinating stuff, especially since it seems that our conscious perception of the world is an after-thought, so to speak. For example, if you flash something in front of someone for a just a frame or two, their eyes definitely saw it and their bodies can actually form the right hand shape to "pick it up" (next time you reach for something, take a look at your hand; unless you have a mental disability that impairs your dexterity, you hand makes the perfect shape to pick it up without any conscious manipulation from you), but they often can't tell you what they saw!
Logged
AndyC
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1401
Posts: 11156



« Reply #192 on: February 23, 2011, 11:31:43 AM »

I am both an atheist and an agnostic. You can be both. They are mutually exclusive terms.

Atheism/Theism deals with belief. Agnosticism deals with knowledge. I am an atheist because I lack the belief in a deity but I am also an agnostic because I don't know with absolute certainty that my belief is correct.

I tend to think of myself as a Christian Agnostic. I observe Christian holidays, attend the United Church of Canada, and identify as a Christian based on culture and values. I do not take everything in scripture as literal fact, nor do I necessarily think traditional Christian ideas about the nature of the divine are correct. I do, however, believe there must be something of that nature, that we aren't capable of understanding - at least not yet. Really, that's not very different from Flick James' Agnostic Deist beliefs, except that I see value in church as a cultural institution and community focal point. I also see religion as more of a group exercise.

Regarding Flick's comments about things science can't explain, I see consciousness itself as a great mystery. We understand enough to imitate learning, reasoning, memory with technology, but how a collection of neurons becomes self-aware is a total mystery. Why consciousness even exists at all, what purpose it serves, is a mystery. And it doesn't make sense to me to have self-awareness that just snuffs out after 80 years or so, which from its own subjective point of view, is as if it had never existed at all. Then again, the prospect of eternal life, even in a pleasant place, is no less terrifying when you consider it.

I recently attended a lecture regarding consciousness and our perception of reality. Fascinating stuff, especially since it seems that our conscious perception of the world is an after-thought, so to speak. For example, if you flash something in front of someone for a just a frame or two, their eyes definitely saw it and their bodies can actually form the right hand shape to "pick it up" (next time you reach for something, take a look at your hand; unless you have a mental disability that impairs your dexterity, you hand makes the perfect shape to pick it up without any conscious manipulation from you), but they often can't tell you what they saw!

Where the brain stops and the mind begins is a major mystery. How does the physical input, output, processing and storage connect to the basic awareness of the self. That's where the existence of a soul, or something like it, seems plausible to me.

And the fact that everything we know, our whole sense of reality, is a matter of our own perception, there is no absolute certainty that the universe is at all as it appears to us. Objective reality might well be an illusion. Is matter, energy, time, space all in our minds? I don't believe it is, but I can't be 100% certain.

Philosophy is a love-hate thing for me. I find it fascinating, but also very disturbing at times.
Logged

---------------------
"Join me in the abyss of savings."
Flick James
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 489
Posts: 4642


Honorary Bastard of Arts


« Reply #193 on: February 23, 2011, 11:42:28 AM »

I am both an atheist and an agnostic. You can be both. They are mutually exclusive terms.

Atheism/Theism deals with belief. Agnosticism deals with knowledge. I am an atheist because I lack the belief in a deity but I am also an agnostic because I don't know with absolute certainty that my belief is correct.

Well, that's the point, NOBODY KNOWS! Thank you for defining your terms, something most people don't seem capable of doing. The people that I tend to bump heads with are people who deal in absolutes when it comes to the Universe. I may have painted a fairly broad stroke in regard to atheism in an earlier post, but sadly I feel that atheists have fallen into a trap of taking the road of absolutes. Where I get on board with atheism is when they are being rational, in particular the arguments of the problem of evil, inconsistent revelations, and argument from nonbelief. These arguments are valid criticisms of religion, but don't really prove anything. Where I get off the train is when, and more atheists do this than not, it becomes a shoving match where religion or people of faith are incapable of anything of any worth, something history does not bear out.

I credit atheism and deism, a belief held by some of our founding fathers, Thomas Paine directly and Thomas Jefferson loosely, as very useful tools in the development of humanity's reason. Through those types of divergent thought, religion has lost a great deal of it's stranglehold on the masses. For this I am very grateful. It is a good thing. On the negative side, atheism has contributed to polarizing people rather than attempting to find common ground. Atheists seem to believe that it's a simple matter of removing religion from the world and everything will be better. I don't believe that. Humanity is going to forever be yearning for something spiritual, and since humans have a need for ritual and structure, religion provides it and services a need. I don't have this need myself, but most people do. If this need is so widespread I must accept that it is a part of human nature to need such a thing. For me personally, deism works quite well. It has a basic belief system allowing for people to believe in something spiritual, yet doesn't suffer from the dogmatic quagmires of revealed religion. It doesn't dictate what God is or what God's behavior or plans for us are. Also, it embraces science and reason readily. In deism, reason and spiritual belief are not separate, they are happily united.

If it sounds like I'm promoting deism, well, I guess I am. I've never been remotely as happy or at peace with either atheism or Christianity, and I have been both. I've been happily deist for about 8 years now. And being happy is what it's all about. I am free of the seething hatred that I used to have. While I still have a strong disdain for religion, I'm not as angry about it anymore. I just don't care. I can't prevent people from believing in the Bible or the Quran or being a hardline atheist. I just enjoy the discussion, and try to gain as much as I can from the experience.

Oh, and post long messages about my beliefs and positions. Yikes.  Lookingup  
Logged

I don't always talk about bad movies, but when I do, I prefer badmovies.org
Jim H
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 262
Posts: 3243



« Reply #194 on: February 23, 2011, 01:40:58 PM »

Quote
Why consciousness even exists at all, what purpose it serves, is a mystery.

I'd say consciousness is a fairly large survival advantage.  It allows you to place priority on a number of things, plan better for the future, etc.  It may also be a natural side effect of higher intelligence.  It might be worth noting by most definitions a number of other animals have it as well.

Quote
How does the physical input, output, processing and storage connect to the basic awareness of the self.

It is a fascinating question.  I'm of the opinion it is purely physical, of course.  Which is why people can have their personalities and beliefs greatly altered through brain damage.

Quote
If you're genuinely interested in clarification of my beliefs or position I'll be happy to oblige. I really hope you're not out to get nasty, Jim, I really do.

It was an honest inquiry.  I don't know why you seem to think I've been offended by something you said, or that I'm upset with you.  I honestly didn't fully understand what you were getting at (which is why I asked the same question twice), and based on your response here it appears I misunderstood what you were getting at in your post a couple pages back.

Quote
Hardline atheists I have engaged with seem to hold that evolutionary evidence proves the non-existence of God

Yeah, I know what you mean.  There are plenty of stupid atheists out there.

Quote
Science has failed to explain fully the observable order that exists in nature and the Universe. Science is constantly changing and what was held as true by science 100 years ago has significantly changed.

I think it's best to say science remains incomplete, personally (as, most likely, it always will).  But, I'd say that is semantics and not really important.

Quote
Again, I reject religion, but I don't hold that religion has given us nothing of any worth. Hardline atheists tend to hold that idea, and will reject immediately any notion that religion has produced ANYTHING otherwise.

This is the kind of rejection that I am referring to

Ok, this is where I'll explain further why I was thinking you were making what you called an audacious claim about the nature of the universe - something I should have done earlier.  You see, a fairly typical definition of strong atheist, or a hardline atheist etc, means someone who claims, basically, "I am 100% positive that God(s) doesn't exist, I know it.".  Which is irrational.  But, still, there is nothing in the world that exists that is obviously true that flies in the face of this belief.  The only thing that would, of course, is hard proof of God's existence - and saying such exists is certainly an extreme claim about the nature of the universe.  Obviously though, this is not what you were saying.

I see now you're using a more specific definition of the term than I would.  You're referring to a subset of atheists we see online a good deal.  I feel like they need their own term, the atheists so frothing at the mouth there's no point in really even talking with them.  I honestly don't know what to call them though.

I will add that atheists like these are the Westboro Baptists of the atheist world.  They get out there and yell a lot, so they seem to be an extremely disproportionate percentage of the population.  But, they just yell the loudest and are actually a minority.  I'd hazard a guess and say most atheists have never had a serious discussion about this kind of thing (I'd say the same about most religious people) - they simply lapsed out of their respective faiths or never had one and have no interest in it further than that.

So, that said, now that I understand what you were getting at, I don't have any significant disagreements with you on anything at all.   Smile
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 16
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Other Topics  |  Off Topic Discussion  |  I think Im an atheist. « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.