About Sidian

Bio

Open Source Religion proponent, founder of www.OpenSourceReligion.net

An idea worth spreading

Open Source Religion is the global phenomena in which multiple beliefs (eg: salvation and karma) from both religions and personal beliefs are utilized within an individual.

I'm passionate about

Design, Innovation, Passion itself, and the teaching of and study of Open Source Religion.

Comments & conversations

137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
What will be the dominant religion of the United States in 100 years?
I believe it is most likely that the Proprietary Religions of today in America (Christianity, Catholic, etc) will more or less pass away, though some of their Belief Modules very well may linger, and the predominant "religion" will be Open Source Religion (being discussed here: http://www.ted.com/conversations/7552/after_8_years_i_believe_i_ve_c.html) Due to globalization, our world is getting VERY small in regards to world views, philosophies, spirituality, and religion. Before the internet, very few Christians had the daily happenstance of running into Muslims. These days everyones philosophies are everywhere. Notice that the more this occurs, the more "modular" our beliefs become. What I mean by this is that they are becoming swappable, disposable, added, deleted, and so on. Think of how many Christians have simply omitted Biblical rules due to inconvenience or immorality of the rule (You shall not wear cloth of wool and linen mixed together). Or have you ever met a Christian that believes in Karma? I have, many times. The result is a spiritual ecosystem in which the individuals customized belief system is more important than the religions those beliefs may come from. The result is Open Source Religion. This trend will continue and grow exponentially as technology grows exponentially. I believe Open Source Religion is the religion of the future.
137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
After 8 years I believe I've cracked the code for Open Source Religion.
No forgiveness needed, as you've not stepped on my toes at all. Open Source Religion, by nature, cannot suffer the same ego-faults that religions of the past have. The reason for this is that there are ZERO beliefs/dogma within OSR. Zero. OSR is a foundation upon which people can build in whatever beliefs they so choose. This being the case, there can be no prophets, save for the prophets of people's specific belief systems (Jesus, Buddha, or even modern people like Neal Donald Walch). OSR cannot ever be hijacked by anyone's personal beliefs, including mine, because the very foundation of OSR is that we all build our own religions. I hope this helps clarify, please let me know. I should better explain the statements you quoted as well... "Virtual empire..." This is in reference to a literal "virtual" (read as digital) empire of websites that would allow us to explore Open Source Religion together. Not that you can't do this on your own already, but it would be so cool to do this online, don't you think? "Steve Jobs of religion" This is my favorite because it's kind of ridiculous. :) What I mean by this is very oriented toward a sort of innovation and product development perspective. I feel I have a natural knack for putting together the current shaky state of religion into logical, useable ideas and products and services. OSR is the first example of this and I have a couple more I've already been working on a few years which I'm very excited about. Short answer, no, I don't intend to be a messiah of any kind. Personally I'm very Pantheistic, but you'd never know that by looking into Open Source Religion.
137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
After 8 years I believe I've cracked the code for Open Source Religion.
Hi Frans. I'm not sure I understand most of your first propositions. But I can certainly give you examples of Belief Modules as you have asked. I replied above to Rhona and pointed out some modules. Here I will list more. You will notice that they tend to fall in two broad categories (as mentioned in my discourse) of religious and non-religious beliefs. Note these are not my personal Belief Modules. 1. Minimalism 2. That you are a "cat or dog person" 3. Reincarnation 4. Salvation 5. Love at first site ALL beliefs are Belief Modules. The only reason I refer to them with this new terminology is to further exemplify the perspective of OSR: that people these days are interweaving beliefs and belief systems more than any other time in human history. Our beliefs are more modular than ever before.
137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
After 8 years I believe I've cracked the code for Open Source Religion.
The Belief Modules presented in Rhona's reply would be "positive anything/everything", truth, love, joy, that we are born to have fun, and positive peer influence. Each of these is a Belief Module. Now let's try CONTRASTING part Rhona's OSR system, for the sake of clarity about OSR. She believes in hanging out with peers. Another persons OSR system might have a Belief Module that does not favor interaction with peers, such as an Asceticism toward society or company in general, perhaps in the pursuit of Enlightenment (another Belief Module). So we can begin to see how Belief Modules can interfere with one another and also how contrasting from one obviously positive module, does not necessarily conclude in a negative module. I 100% believe, if I had the resources, I could build the world a website in which we could list, share, delete, and evolve our personal sets of Belief Modules.
137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
After 8 years I believe I've cracked the code for Open Source Religion.
Ben you are exactly the kind of person I wish to connect with. There are an innumerable amount of people in your same situation. And you are forced to say well I'm part this, some of that, and this one thing from over here. Really you are a practitioner of something we've all been experiencing for quite a while - Open Source Religion. Glad to meet you. :)
137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
After 8 years I believe I've cracked the code for Open Source Religion.
Interesting how you began by proposing that OSR is like these 4 or 5 other philosophical stances, then I very specifically noted how they are not. Yet now you render your proposition down to some very generalized accusations that OSR is "trying to be unique and original. Which is impossible". Many things you say show that you don't understand the idea of OSR, which I fully admit may well be my fault. But allow me to point these out so that you can see we are not even on the same page to BEGIN to discuss the implications of OSR. 1. "You are offering; a social network to join under to anticipate beliefs" No. Beliefs already exist. People are free to create more, sure, but that's not the "purpose" of OSR. 2. "with the word RELIGION, will come the question of "God(s)." If you insist, but the definition of religion does not necessitate a God: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion 3. ""Religion" indicates a religious community." This also shows a misunderstanding of the definition of religion. 4. "Belief module, nice word. The "anticipation of a recognized belief system"" This shows you do not understand OSR. Again, OSR does not "anticipate" belief systems or beliefs themselves. Each of the statements above show that you either do not understand Open Source Religion (which may be my fault), and that you are using a personal definition of religion. I'm sorry OSR doesn't conform to one of the very many philosophical practices you are familiar with. It isn't about creating one new perfect religion. It's about recognizing and helping evolve the billions of very unique religions, each existing in every individual person. Yours being irreligious ignostic-naturalist, and perhaps spiritual hipster. To quote a man who's enlightenment favors words to be forgotten is also quite ironic.
137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
After 8 years I believe I've cracked the code for Open Source Religion.
Each of these nuanced philosophical stances you've referenced still feel very "thrown in" in regards to trying to relate them to OSR. Did you read the article? You say you don't see the point of OSR and then parallel it with Ghandi's philosophy. This seems contradictory. Whether I personally believe they parallel one another? I'm not sure. Ignosticism has certain underpinnings and assertions about "God", it's existence, and it's relevancy. OSR in of itself is not concerned with any of those questions. Again, naturalism has certain suppositions about the universe. While such a philosophy fits INSIDE of OSR, OSR is not itself defined by any such philosophy. It is also not necessarily about "coming together". Please read the article before commenting, or ask me to explain if you don't feel it's explaining itself well enough. If it helps: think of each of those philosophies you have referenced as Belief Modules. In Open Source Religion, one recognizes these Belief Modules in themselves and in others, and recognizes the global phenomena in which we construct belief systems from these modules. Again, OSR in of itself comes equipped with ZERO Belief Modules.
137786
Sidian Jones
Posted almost 3 years ago
After 8 years I believe I've cracked the code for Open Source Religion.
Religious Naturalism appears to be "spirituality that is devoid of supernaturalism". I'm not sure why you would compare OSR and Religious Naturalism. Open Source Religion is the global phenomena in which multiple beliefs (eg: salvation and karma) from both religions and personal beliefs are utilized within an individual. So OSR does not, in itself, dictate your beliefs, therefor it is neither devoid of nor full of supernaturalism. Irreligion is defined as an absence of religion or an indifference towards religion. I also don't understand this comparison. Open Source Religion is defined by your beliefs, so it is not the absence of religion, nor are the practitioners indifferent.