This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
“What view of religion might advance humankind’s psychological maturity?”
Through understanding, humankind continuously increases its psychological maturity. Yet there remain lifestyle concerns and unknowns; e.g., is evolution controlled?
Religion is each person’s acquisition and implementation of preferences for how to experience the unknown and variously integrate the resulting understanding or privation into their life.
Religion tends to respond to progress yet preserve plausible ethics and thus is an evolving art form; e.g., ancients regarded the sun a supernatural power but moderns understand it’s a natural nuclear reactor. Yet the supernatural ethic survives--perhaps as one object of humility.
Religion is expressed in stories, music, symbols, and other art. Institutional religion inculcates art into its young, preserving both understanding and misunderstanding. Each newborn has the duty to itself to achieve understanding in its lifespan, often overcoming natural or cultural limitations. Thus, people have widely differing psychological maturities; humankind must accommodate peace and limit harm.
In humankind’s collective consciousness the people share secular goals: justice, tranquility, defense, prosperity, the privilege of liberty, continuity for posterity, and in-it-togetherness. These goals accommodate beliefs yet authorize limitation of harm. For example, people who advocate taking poison to worship a deity must be limited.
Just governance obtains its authority from the governed--the people. The people must maintain the monopoly on force and coercion through written law that can be modified when injustice is discovered. Just force and coercion apply to behavior and not to thought, such how to express humility, a private matter.
Unfortunately, throughout history, politicians and clergymen have co-operated to use religion as a tool with which to usurp the people’s power. Only the governed can stop usurpation of their power.
Institutions that interfere with the people’s secular goals must suffer the rule of law.
Celebrate
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Sidharth Hariharan
Phillip Beaver 10+
I see four elements in your simile:
- “The vehicle you like” is an assumption you trust and commit to. For example, your inherited culture.
- “The destination is the same,” asserts that each human has the identical destiny. I wish you’d tell me what that is, but in case you don’t, I’ll offer: termination at death of the body, such that personal influences on the timelessness of existence is all that remains.
- “The path might be different.” Does the difference come from “the vehicle you like,” the environment you are in, or the personal decisions you make, or something I did not think of?
- There are “thorns in the path.” Despite the vehicle, you must make some choices and take action as you encounter problems.
I’ll try to restate this in secular terms. A person cannot control life, since every person has the same destiny. However, to conduct life, he must trust and commit to a philosophy. Despite the philosophy, his influences will depend on his reaction to the problems.
Please correct me where necessary and comment.
Phil
Sidharth Hariharan
its just like you interpretted me the way u liked or understood that doesn't mean you are wrong and I am right or the other way around..
Phillip Beaver 10+
However, with partial understanding (I still don’t know what you mean by “same destiny”), I do not agree with your premise: “Every religion leads to the same place or destiny.”
For example, Christians claim that the Bible is the word of God. However, some Christians do not take their claim literally. When “the word of God,” does not make sense to them, they reject “the word of God.” There are countless examples, but I will take one that is barely controversial.
Mark 16:17-18. “And these signs will accompany those who believe . . . they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all . . .” (Some Christian TEDsters will attack me for questioning “their ‘scripture’,” but I reject their possessiveness and cite my preferences regarding what I studied—my response to literature that is available to every person.)
All Christians believe, but only some handle snakes; only some drink poison. Habitual snake handlers die of snake bites. A sect that drinks poison together dies together. Their religions terminated their lives before their contributions to humankind could run their natural course.
Perhaps your point is that everyone’s destiny is death. If so, I agree, but contend death is not a product of religion, except in cases like snake handlers and poison drinkers.
Please comment.
Phil
Sidharth Hariharan
I am not pointing anything at you but pardon me, perspective about anything or any belief should be widened but not blind due to widening.
Phillip Beaver 10+
Thoughts I share apply to no one but me. They are neither truth nor opinion: they are my preferences. Your responses to my preferences are neither an issue for me nor a threat to your preferences for you.
Please comment.
Phil
Phillip Beaver 10+
For the record, I totally disagree. Threats to health and life caused by religious practices should be limited law. Thus, it should be illegal to handle poisonous snakes as a religious practice, and parents who expose their children to poisonous snakes should lose custody of the children. And that is just one example of the importance of written law trumping religious practices.
Sidharth Hariharan
Phillip Beaver 10+
I do not tolerate a dialogue wherein the other party puts words into my statements. I have neither used the word “god” nor “he” in reference to a god in my dialogue with you. Below is the only sentence of mine containing “he,” and there are none with “god.”
“A person cannot control life, since every person has the same destiny. However, to conduct life, he must trust and commit to a philosophy.”
You are forgiven, yet I await your recognition of what you are doing and an apology.
Phil
Jim Moonan 30+
Sidharth Hariharan