worshiping god

Current Events, World Discussion, Opinions etc
74 posts Page 3 of 3
FeralBrown
Posts: 5944
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:26 pm


STEVONOISEMAKER wrote :
It’s a good thing though, that way at least some places in the world have maintained their own unique little pockets of cultures that are not part of a massive and wealthy religion…


Yeah... that's the more sucky bit, to me, than any attempts at socio-religious conversion (the Muslims have, incidentally, had a much bigger global cultural effect, with far more violence, coercion and censorship than any Christian effort- noone ever seems to pick that one up) is the mere fact that such isolated people are being approached in the first place... (that was the gist of one of the comments I marked)
It's cool to learn and know stuff, but the expense is fukn hideous, and, in my opinion, once that road has been taken (particularly since the 70s/80s) there is seldom any option but to attempt some sort of cultural integration... It sucks, but that's the way of things, I think... :(
Missionary organisations like the one in that article tend to be more about Western globalisation ideals and purveyors of cultural morality than religious "education" as such... that's why they usually send two-fold missionary/academics into the field, rather than simply sending people with "the love of God in their heart"- in the case of Steve Benett, it was so he could study/learn the language for his own linguistic theories... I'd imagine he was put there partially by the missionary organisation, and partially on a government grant...

Either way, should be an interesting book!
FeralBrown
Posts: 5944
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:26 pm


venatrix wrote :
boondocksaint wrote :
this story is pretty unbelievable..

http://freethinker.co.uk/2008/11/08/how ... n-atheist/


how exciting! would love to read it. you can stand trial for murdering a person yet somehow it is legal to murder a culture. i am glad that this particular mission of cultural imperialism has completely failed.


Wasn't that also one of the initial ethical dilemas with the almighty television networks, and later revived for the internet?
It's what people do- maybe you should read "The Art of Memetics" and associated material before you grab the stick by the wrong end?

 

FeralBrown
Posts: 5944
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:26 pm


Incongruous, I'd like to check out your work (or at least your research materials) if ya don't mind!
Might even be able to put you onto some more literature and people if you're not up to your ears in footnotes yet...
:)

 

Incongruous
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:16 pm


yeah, its getting there. Still so much to learn and still a lot of reading to do.

It should be pointed out that being spiritual or religious, (or both), does not cause having a sense of purpose or direction, neither does having a sense of purpose or direction cause spirituality.

However, people with a sense of purpose and direction tend to engage in more purposeful behaviors and experience more positive emotion because they are more likely to get things done and this in turn gives them a sense of accomplishment and progress. In addition, there is some (limited) evidence out there that those who feel that they are working purposefully towards a greater good (such as working for the benefit of others or doing work assigned to them by God/Krisna/Allah), do experience a greater sense of fulfillment and overall wellbeing than do those who are working on exclusively satisfying their own personal desires.

 

Incongruous
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:16 pm


sorry didnt answer the question.

Yeah, if you have any related books Feral Brown that would be sweet.

Also, my research will be published when complete. I will get a copy to you.
venatrix
Posts: 2795
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:43 pm


FeralBrown wrote :
It's what people do-


And that makes it ok?

FeralBrown wrote :
maybe you should read "The Art of Memetics" and associated material before you grab the stick by the wrong end?


Maybe you should reconsider being so presumptuous, as I recommended in another thread in which you wrote off one of the most ground-breaking and significant theories on nationalism without a) reading the book and b) knowing anything about the subject.

 

FeralBrown
Posts: 5944
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:26 pm


^I DID ask for an explanation, and that wasn't why you said I was being presumptuous, in the first place, either... and when I looked into it I found you'd twisted (actually, amended) the quote to suit your needs... not very academic behaviour, y'know!
but anyway, you're welcome to continue discussing that in that thread- I've looked into it a bit (granted, mainly via summaries and commentaries) and am quite willing to have an educated debate about it- my opinions have been reinforced by what I've read, combined with what I do know for sure. :)

Also- If you've looked into memetics etc., you'd understand what I mean when I say "it's what people do". It has nothing to do with "wrong" and "right", it has to do with conceptual/cultural diaspora.
:roll:

 

venatrix
Posts: 2795
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:43 pm


You are not educated on the topic so an educated debate is not possible.

Instead of condescendingly referring me to some book (which seems to have no author...) you might have liked to simply explain yourself.

PS the quote that I used was verbatim from the book which is sitting behind me in my bookshelf. I have actually read the book, not just googled it.

 

FeralBrown
Posts: 5944
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:26 pm


Wow! You're good! You knew exactly which page to find the quote on, and everything! Unfortunately I lack that prowess, but still have the interest, so I did it my own way... like I said, I DID ask, so this bit
"Instead of condescendingly referring me to some book (which seems to have no author...) you might have liked to simply explain yourself. "

Gets a LOLx2

re: the educated discussion- while I haven't studied "nationalism as a historical phenomenon" or whatever, you're being presumptuous (and somewhat blind, given my input to all these discussions) saying I can't hold an educated discussion on symbology (mythology) as it pertains to the psyche OR cultural phenomena... unlike yourself, I don't carry on about my studies and credentials. :)

The authors names are Wes Unruh and Edward Wilson.
I didn't explain because you never like what I have to say.
Read the book. It might open your eyes to a few things.

 

ionized
Posts: 1474
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:20 pm


Incongruous wrote :
I'm currently writing a masters thesis on the psychology of success and wellbeing. In it, I am investigating whether there are a set of fundamental beliefs that people hold that tend to facilitate long term wellbeing in life. As part of my studies I have studied several of the world's major religions and philosophies (Confucianism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism and Islam) and I'm pleased to report that science and religion are starting to merge, and I believe at some point in the future we will have an integrated universal perspective.

The merge is occurring on several levels. A lot of it is coming from research into positive psychology (i.e. the power of positive thought) and quantum physics. My knowledge is mostly on the psychological side, but my gut feeling at this stage is that the interaction between religion and psychology occurs at the level of core principles. For instance, concepts like love, compassion, wisdom, etc have been central to religious thought for thousands of years, and there is renewed psychological research into their impact and importance in human life.

What I can say, with some confidence, is that the world's major religions all promote and share the following core principles, which could possibly be considered as fundamental laws of the universe:

1. Wisdom
2. Justice
3. Humanity (love and compassion)
4. Transcendence
5. Honesty and Integrity

There exists clear evidence that people who have a sense of purpose and direction in life, who believe that they are part of something bigger than themselves and who engage in transcendental meditation tend to be healthier on average, lead happier and longer lives and are less afraid of death.


I'm a bit two minded on the integral approach to spirit. One one side it seems like a great idea, find the common esoteric themes that are expressed through traditions, throw away the dogma, junk and nonsense ideals and move on with an agreement that rituals and approaches to faith are just differing metaphors to encompass the oneness of the higher self. On the other side, is another grafting of beliefs into a complete whole really what its all about? Who is to say that wont represent some kind of esoteric globalization of the mind?

I also find it interesting and somewhat re-assuring that there seems to be some sort of a consensus on the more subtle levels of consciousness. Vedanta, buddhism and kaballah (and more) all seem to report similar levels and gateways of mind that one might experience in meditation or prayer. Whether its purely psychological, who knows but only religious tradition seem to acknowledge and provide a methodology for getting there, something which science has at its worst, ignored and at best had difficulty with to date. If the two are to 'meet' as such then I imagine there will need to be some sort of shift in the way science views such phenomena.

The 'quantum connection' though is an interesting one, with a whole new set of arguments arising on both sides of the debate/belief. Not entirely sure that anyone is actually sure about what is going on at that level, let alone close to proving that mind can affect matter. It can be easy to have feelings either way. I personally have a hunch though that artificial intelligence or the augmentation of the human mind through technology would possibly be the next frontier in this regard or at least allow us to map these internal processes a lot better?!?

 

venatrix
Posts: 2795
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:43 pm


FeralBrown wrote :

Gets a LOLx2


99% of everything you say gets a hefty headdesk mate. i have been trying to avoid discussing anything with you because it inevitably turns nasty and i am frankly over it.

 

Incongruous
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:16 pm


Yes, nice response Ionized. I appreciate your points on the integral approach to spirit and that religion is the only discipline that has provided a clear methodology for transcendence as yet. Indeed, I must admit that one of my goals in life is to research this area and find easier ways to reach self-realization than what currently exists so that the average person can make the journey, rather than just very rare, sage-like types. At the moment it seems to be an enormous sacrifice for anyone who takes on the challenge and requires huge amounts of discipline and self-restraint.

Whilst I'm not sure if there are shortcuts (or that if going looking for them is a good idea), I have the hunch that integrating the information that can be found in the different disciplines may yield improved methods for reaching the same goal. For instance, Buddhists on the transcendental path have to abstain from pleasure seeking. Perhaps you could help people do that by utilizing cognitive-behavioural therapy which is a psychological intervention.

Personally however, I do like the idea of oneness of mind and the grafting of many beliefs into a coherent whole. I like the idea of taking bits and pieces that one learns throughout life and through different belief systems and integrating them into a single unified perspective.

The idea of unity could be argued as a core purpose of life from some perspectives anyway. If you think about levels of consciousness, then at one level, we have the conscious mind, and through meditation and other techniques that can be merged with the subconscious mind, creating a single unified mind. Then, if you can merge that single unified mind with the superconsciousness then there is connection. The Buddhist approach that we all have a quantum soul which is simply that part of the superconsciousness which exists within us kind of indicates that we are all inseparable from the universe anyway.

And yes, of course science is the slow one in relation to this. Its good though that things are slowly starting to change. Medical science and psychology both are quite conservative disciplines that have had to work hard for many years to build their credibility as professions, and as such it is understandable that many practitioners are reluctant to say things that cannot be supported with hard evidence. But things are changing. For instance, the rise of the positive psychology movement has led to a strong shift away from psychologists simply focusing on people's problems and instead looking at how they can use positive thought to prevent mental illness.

And yes, I think research into AI and brain-machine interaction will yield interesting results.

 

ATREYU
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 2:07 pm


Incongruous wrote :
Yes, nice response Ionized. I appreciate your points on the integral approach to spirit and that religion is the only discipline that has provided a clear methodology for transcendence as yet.


Shamanism is a discipline that has a clear methodology for transcendence, and i don't think it is classified as a religion, the same with Occult/Magical disciplines which underlie all "religions" anyway.

+Its funny how science is trying to prove truths which have been taught in many cultures and passed down for generations for thousands of years. The proof is in the experience, and as far as i remember at school we were taught that Science is based on "Observation" as apposed to "Participation". Observing others and measuring their brainwaves will give a new understanding of the physical processes but it can never equal the experience.

 

treedreamer
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:00 pm


perhaps if there is god then we are only closest to it when we suspend or cast off our egos. impossible? hope not.

is that enlightenment perhaps? to find, recognise and trust in the source (??), untainted by our fears and drives.

hmm hmm, interesting thread. i see god as in all of us and in the good we try to do for each other. empathy if possible. nature - if god is out there then surely it dwells in the landscapes.

you guys are making it pretty complicated. language seems an inadequate way to express or define god. i think we likely need to feel it. how rational is a concept of god? hmm hmm

 

Luminous Lights
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 1:52 am


 

ionized
Posts: 1474
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:20 pm


Incongruous wrote :
Yes, nice response Ionized. I appreciate your points on the integral approach to spirit and that religion is the only discipline that has provided a clear methodology for transcendence as yet. Indeed, I must admit that one of my goals in life is to research this area and find easier ways to reach self-realization than what currently exists so that the average person can make the journey, rather than just very rare, sage-like types. At the moment it seems to be an enormous sacrifice for anyone who takes on the challenge and requires huge amounts of discipline and self-restraint.


Yes well like most things, society will help the individual to a certain point. We have no qualms in aiding a child to become mature, educated, moral and insightful. But as soon as the individual wants to surpass the status quo in accepted beliefs then delving into esoteric traditions, seeking sages in caves or adopting ones own practices must be attempted and can be viewed with suspicion. Unfortunately considering some of the religious traditions on offer as well as the amount of diluted new age clap trap that is about, suspicion can at times be warranted.

Incongruous wrote :
Whilst I'm not sure if there are shortcuts (or that if going looking for them is a good idea), I have the hunch that integrating the information that can be found in the different disciplines may yield improved methods for reaching the same goal. For instance, Buddhists on the transcendental path have to abstain from pleasure seeking. Perhaps you could help people do that by utilizing cognitive-behavioural therapy which is a psychological intervention.


I suppose the question there is does CBT satisfy the subconscious? To take it further, can someone be hypnotised into thinking they are enlightened and if so, will they by some loophole in reality be connected to the akashic field or equivalent? Considering the amount of crap people pump into their own ego to suppress even their most basic fears, I would be surprised and a bit dismayed to think shortcuts were possible. Interesting idea though.

Incongruous wrote :
The idea of unity could be argued as a core purpose of life from some perspectives anyway. If you think about levels of consciousness, then at one level, we have the conscious mind, and through meditation and other techniques that can be merged with the subconscious mind, creating a single unified mind. Then, if you can merge that single unified mind with the superconsciousness then there is connection. The Buddhist approach that we all have a quantum soul which is simply that part of the superconsciousness which exists within us kind of indicates that we are all inseparable from the universe anyway.


Thats also an interesting point, as from what I gather, the psychoanalytical approach sees such experiences as emerging from the subconscious mind or the realm of the Id, where as the transcendental approach tends to see manifestation of the higher self as exactly that, such experiences are the ego consciousness engaging in a process of reconnecting with the Higher self, Collective subconscious etc...
While there seems to be a lot of validity to certain psychological processes taking effect on a very fundamental level, I personally believe that at a certain point we start tapping into something higher than the subconscious.

Incongruous wrote :
And yes, of course science is the slow one in relation to this. Its good though that things are slowly starting to change. Medical science and psychology both are quite conservative disciplines that have had to work hard for many years to build their credibility as professions, and as such it is understandable that many practitioners are reluctant to say things that cannot be supported with hard evidence. But things are changing. For instance, the rise of the positive psychology movement has led to a strong shift away from psychologists simply focusing on people's problems and instead looking at how they can use positive thought to prevent mental illness.

And yes, I think research into AI and brain-machine interaction will yield interesting results.


I suppose its easy to acknowledge the constrictions of a serious career in academic disciplines and how publishing work with with less than provable results would spell an end to such a career. Unfortunately the trap is to assume that it is the end of the matter and to see such restrictions as a nice limitation as to what we 'know'. From my very limited knowledge the amount of co-incidental evidence that alludes to a field of consciousness that is present or can manifest from time to time seems quite compelling. Such things could easily point to existence of a universal consciousness, or 'god' if that's what your looking for.

Yes, there are those tentative steps being made between science and faith to slowly shake hands. It will be interesting to see how this develops. The measure of ones own internal experience or faith is in subjectivity and emotions, the very antithesis of science. Certainly its a fascinating time to be alive.

Either way I think the esoteric traditons were developed towards facilitating the internal psychic processes and enable people to explore and maintain their emotional state. If we eliminate or devalue such notions of self maintenance entirely by the assumption that they are useless due to lack of scientific evidence of our antiquated notion of what god is supposed to be, then we are in particularly dire straits as a species.


Just as a last point, I'm interested in your view on the spiritual evolution of man. Do you view it as a linear process, as in we have been slowly progressing towards a greater understanding of our interconnectedness with consciousness or alternatively have we 'fallen from grace' as it were. Many ancient texts speak of a time when man was closer to god. The Yugas and the metaphor of Eden for example. Kind of in the latter camp myself but curious as to your thoughts?

 

Luminous Lights
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 1:52 am


I think ATREYU is 2/3 there! The individual conceives God through perception and experience.
God is also attitude.
eg.
Christian lifestyle, Muslim lifestyle, Hindu lifestyle.
So who or what God is is anyone's guess!

As ionized was saying what is faith but trust in a guess...

 

bobret the hobret
Posts: 3249
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 8:15 pm


[quote=
As ionized was saying what is faith but trust in a guess...[/quote]


I like that..........


the thing about christianity and evangelism especially is that they "pich" a " personal relationship with jeses". From what I have learned, christianity is the only religion that offers this.

?

 

ionized
Posts: 1474
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:20 pm


bobret the hobret wrote :


I like that..........


the thing about christianity and evangelism especially is that they "pich" a " personal relationship with jeses". From what I have learned, christianity is the only religion that offers this.

?


Christianity is also the only religion that makes a hero out of the vanquished. Interesting though not surprising considering it emerged out of a culture of persecuted jews under roman oppressors. Regardless of how fucked and possibly mis-representable that fact might be for the spiritually weak minded, it marks an interesting development in humanities evolution on the notion of suffering and compassion.

 

Cyberwlf
Posts: 4812
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 11:00 am


Also interesting where Christians persecute Jewish people when Jesus was a Jew himself... lor

 

FeralBrown
Posts: 5944
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:26 pm


that's a two-way street, and more to do with human nature than religion, really...
What religion was Mohammed, again?

 

FeralBrown
Posts: 5944
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:26 pm


ionized wrote :
bobret the hobret wrote :


I like that..........


the thing about christianity and evangelism especially is that they "pich" a " personal relationship with jeses". From what I have learned, christianity is the only religion that offers this.

?


Christianity is also the only religion that makes a hero out of the vanquished. Interesting though not surprising considering it emerged out of a culture of persecuted jews under roman oppressors. Regardless of how fucked and possibly mis-representable that fact might be for the spiritually weak minded, it marks an interesting development in humanities evolution on the notion of suffering and compassion.


Absolutely... and it wasn't just Jews, which was another unique step (as opposed to forced conversion)... it's always been an incredibly viable world-view for anyone "suffering oppression", despite all the dogma attached... One of the super-hilarious things about that is that even lower-middle class and up can get a socially-justified whiff of this, and reinforce their faith (no matter how dubious the value of said faith may be), because of the way that society tends to push the individual into these precarious "underdog" positions through lack of understanding... while at the same time eating it's own tail, so to speak... it's interesting how often "evolved/elevated thought" winds up looking like persecution, and therefore defeats itself...
The Beatitudes rock the world, and anyone who disagrees just reinforces them...
>riddle:mystery:enigma>

 

Incongruous
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:16 pm


Just as a last point, I'm interested in your view on the spiritual evolution of man. Do you view it as a linear process, as in we have been slowly progressing towards a greater understanding of our interconnectedness with consciousness or alternatively have we 'fallen from grace' as it were. Many ancient texts speak of a time when man was closer to god. The Yugas and the metaphor of Eden for example. Kind of in the latter camp myself but curious as to your thoughts?


In response to your question:

It's difficult to say for sure, so I'll answer it in a slightly roundabout way. I think it goes back to the religion-science debate.

Clearly, the religious techniques to reach transcendence have been around for thousands of years, and as such, people have been occupied with achieving transcendence for thousands of years. Also, many items of wisdom (which I'll define in short as everlasting universal truths) have, by definition, also been around for thousands of years. Thus, both the techniques and the necessary wisdom have been around so back in the day there were plenty of people who probably reached enlightenment. Religion was also very popular back then, so we could expect many people to be attracted to, and to attempt the path of enlightenment.

Whilst religion is still very popular in parts of the world today, what differs our society now from what existed in the past is our high level of knowledge (note - that I carefully distinguish knowledge from wisdom here). This additional knowledge has come from scientific advancement. However, unfortunately, at the present moment, there is far too much emphasis on the teaching of knowledge and far too little teachings on wisdom, and thus the overall wisdom of society has not really increased much over the last 2000 years. Because it is wisdom that aids transcendence and self-realization, and not knowledge per se, unfortunately I don't think we are much more advanced now than what we were before. As such, it would be good if more people promoted the teaching of wisdom.

The main way having additional knowledge will help is by integrating our knowledge of the various disciplines. However, having knowledge of the process is clearly separate from actually experiencing the process as someone said.

 

Incongruous
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:16 pm


Ionzied said:

Just as a last point, I'm interested in your view on the spiritual evolution of man. Do you view it as a linear process, as in we have been slowly progressing towards a greater understanding of our interconnectedness with consciousness or alternatively have we 'fallen from grace' as it were. Many ancient texts speak of a time when man was closer to god. The Yugas and the metaphor of Eden for example. Kind of in the latter camp myself but curious as to your thoughts?


In response to your question:

It's difficult to say for sure, so I'll answer it in a slightly roundabout way. I think it goes back to the religion-science debate.

Clearly, the religious techniques to reach transcendence have been around for thousands of years, and as such, people have been occupied with achieving transcendence for thousands of years. Also, many items of wisdom (which I'll define in short as everlasting universal truths) have, by definition, also been around for thousands of years. Thus, both the techniques and the necessary wisdom have been around so back in the day there were plenty of people who probably reached enlightenment. Religion was also very popular back then, so we could expect many people to be attracted to, and to attempt the path of enlightenment.

Whilst religion is still very popular in parts of the world today, what differs our society now from what existed in the past is our high level of knowledge (note - that I carefully distinguish knowledge from wisdom here). This additional knowledge has come from scientific advancement. However, unfortunately, at the present moment, there is far too much emphasis on the teaching of knowledge and far too little teachings on wisdom, and thus the overall wisdom of society has not really increased much over the last 2000 years. Because it is wisdom that aids transcendence and self-realization, and not knowledge per se, unfortunately I don't think we are much more advanced now than what we were before. As such, it would be good if more people promoted the teaching of wisdom.

The main way having additional knowledge will help is by integrating our knowledge of the various disciplines. However, having knowledge of the process is clearly separate from actually experiencing the process as someone said.[/quote]
74 posts Page 3 of 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests