Moderator: Dan~
The destination is irrelevant, we don't even know that there is any great destination, but that shouldn't matter.
It all goes back to how Religion/Spirituality, at one point, was deemed as a necessity to achieve self-actualization.
pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:IMHO all journeys lead "somewhere" ... both planned and unplanned journeys.
Your words echo the thoughts of 17th century European intellects after discovering the sophistication of Chinese culture ... paraphrasing ... how could they develop such a sophisticated culture/civilization without religion?
pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:Provocative post Bob ... in a positive sense.
Seems to me that rituals ... traditions ... stem from two motivations:
1) To codify ... reify ... adherence to desired human behaviour. So obvious in Confucianism. St Augustine "Woe you torrent of human custom! Who can stand against you".
2) To perpetuate a desirable experience. The "religious" rituals ... at least some of them ... likely started with an individual who experienced something of value (to the individual) and he/she believed others could have the same experience by following a rigid prescription of actions.
the Church (particularly the hierarchy) used itself as a means to power rather than as a means of spiritual fulfillment.
PavlovianModel146 wrote: Hi Bob,
Great to see you!
It seems that we both agree on a general starting point and essentially agree (in a roundabout way) on where the whole process of belief has ended up now. I think that we're probably both right, but I submit that you're more right.
We seem to diverge somewhere in the middle where my natural tendency is to look for social-cultural phenomena whereas you take a more humanist/individualist slant and focus on what the process of faith means for the faithful. You seem to point out that the church can no longer fill a hole in people's lives. I tend to agree with that, though my slight disagreement comes not from the Church taking on the values of society, but that the Church (particularly the hierarchy) used itself as a means to power rather than as a means of spiritual fulfillment. They didn't submit themselves to the will of society, they wanted the will of the cloth to become the will of society and it ultimately backfired.
If they could have found a balance, and some denominations do (it's a matter of messaging) then they might have had longer-lasting majority success.
I say that you're more right than I am because any sort of societal or cultural phenomena is going to, ultimately, come by way of a change in individual tendencies barring some major event. Of course, had there been a singular event that caused the current state of affairs, we could point to it pretty easily.
Lump wrote:In China they have put buddhist monks in isolation prisons, where any normal person would go insane after a week, but these monks has been able to be in isolation for years, keeping their minds intact, the west can learn much from such spiritualism.
pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:the Church (particularly the hierarchy) used itself as a means to power rather than as a means of spiritual fulfillment.
Largely true ...
The same argument can be made for all grandiose human institutions ... politics, economics, finance and so on.
Success is understandable in the "dark ages" ... the age of illiteracy and lack of communication enablers.
Continued success is a paradox ... people are not that dumb.
Points to the battlefield extending beyond the earth's plane ... a galactic battlefield.
tentative wrote:Surprised to see a couple of old friends on my quarterly check in. Hi Bob. Hi Pav. (I'm not ignoring all others who have posted thoughtfully to this thread.)
I agree with Pav that what we call "religion" is really just a form of social gathering and communication - but that is no more than joining the neighborhood book club. Any connection between religion and our spiritual nature is pure happenstance that can only happen on an individual basis. Bob, like-minded groupings sounds nice, but in any church gathering.... You know. You've been there.
It is almost amusing that we are stuck with words to describe that which is life instead of silently just going about living. Granting agency and power to words is the defeat of spirituality. ah crap, I just.... and that is the problem, isn't it?
(I'm not ignoring all others who have posted thoughtfully to this thread.)
pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:(I'm not ignoring all others who have posted thoughtfully to this thread.)
Only me ... no biggy
phyllo wrote:Psychopaths and sociopaths don't have empathy or compassion. That's about 5% of the population.
What's wrong with the current "social contracts"?
I think that the scientific position is that psychopathy and sociopathy are mostly biological. I'm suggesting that empathy and compassion cannot be relied on to solve human problems. Some people will always "act out". Attempts to teach empathy and compassion to psychopathic prisoners have generally failed. They simply "fake empathy" to get what they want.Are you suggesting nature or nurture? One can easily be coerced to ignore empathy and compassion. (that's the evil part of us) This is only true assuming that empathy and compassion is some genetic arrangement oblivious to nurture. What are you suggesting?
I'm not sure what you expect out of the social contract. It seems that the current ones contain a good deal of give and take trade-offs. There are some very oppressive countries but that's not the norm in Western countries. It's certainly not all "might makes right".Anything wrong with our social contracts? I guess nothing is if might makes right is always the ultimate answer. There might be other ways of seeing our social conditions.
I agree with Pav that what we call "religion" is really just a form of social gathering and communication - but that is no more than joining the neighborhood book club.
Any connection between religion and our spiritual nature is pure happenstance that can only happen on an individual basis.
It is almost amusing that we are stuck with words to describe that which is life instead of silently just going about living.
[/quote]Granting agency and power to words is the defeat of spirituality. ah crap, I just.... and that is the problem, isn't it?
Arcturus Descending wrote:Hi Tent,
Welcome back and where have you hailed from? Like the swallow coming back to Capistrano. It is very good indeed to read you.I agree with Pav that what we call "religion" is really just a form of social gathering and communication - but that is no more than joining the neighborhood book club.
That is true in part but I don't agree that that is all it is about. Religion, organized religion, namely, Christianity or even paganism, where people do come to places to worship is also all about just that...worshiping together, having some common thread and connection with Something which they perceive to be greater than they are. That root is for me (although I do not worship anymore) -I'm a pagan lol) more than just a social gathering and communication.
I think that religion basically, Judaism Christianity came about in order to *bind up* (religare) what is barbaric in us human beings. We are still in the process of killing one another, destroying one another, but religion does somewhat refine our souls/spirits/emotions - unless one is a fanatic. It brought about a code of morality and ethics.
Any connection between religion and our spiritual nature is pure happenstance that can only happen on an individual basis.
I don't think that I agree with this either, Tent, but maybe I am not understanding what you are saying.
It is true that some who practice their religion are not necessarily spiritual or ethical but at the same time, there is a strong connection between religion and one's spiritual in many individuals. People also practice their religions because of their human spirit and their need to worship something which is greater than they are, which transcends them, which feeds their spirits, which promotes a more optimal life for them. For the most part, there cannot be religion without the nurturing and nourishment of the human spirit which includes spirituality. It all comes down to balance and harmony and wholeness.
It is almost amusing that we are stuck with words to describe that which is life instead of silently just going about living.
But sweetheart, this is a philosophy forum. How is it possible to come here, to share our perspectives and philosophies by being totally silent?![]()
![]()
Granting agency and power to words is the defeat of spirituality. ah crap, I just.... and that is the problem, isn't it?
Oh yes indeedy! That's what I was saying - kinda - I think....Spirituality is not just about one thing or the other. We all hear that voice within differently and we all follow different paths to discover our self. There is not just one way.
Return to Religion and Spirituality
Users browsing this forum: No registered users