Is Ideology Philosophy? Is Material Reality Materialism? The Next Frontier of Interpretivism, Symbolic Mind, Spirituality, and Consciousness

A comment about Jesus not being religious led to an interesting string of comments: E A 📷 Seems clear to me from all I know Jesus was a practicing Jew who knew his scripture well. He was faithful to the heart of it in his revolutionary spirit that turned the patriarchal dominant elite’s and the culture’s beliefs and practices on their collective head. He distilled the true essence of Judaism in the commandment to love your God with all of your life force and your neighbor as yourself in a single life of love. He was the most religious of all. We need this religion. If you define religion as inherently oppressive and bad because of the history of it I feel like we are missing something fundamental about the necessity of it to give our lives shape and meaning. We are still in a process of overcoming the oppressive character of patriarchal religion with a mystical religion of loving connection that liberates us to pursue compassion, justice, and peace in the knowledge that all is one Reply Share 8h Edited Mark Rego Monteiro E A Wonderfully said. I´ll add on the terms that I actually had to invent, despite all the wonderful people and minds at work on these issues. "We live in Jesus´ living legacy of loving integrity for Moses and God in University-based, UN human rights-sustainability-pro-social business society with structured pluralism, and the problem of indulgence in hypocrisy and materialism." Multidisciplinary Philosophy, that includes scientific philosophy and empirical methodology, is the perspective that values University-based philosophical scholarship adequately, not "science," or "economic science," or "democratic politics," which all link to forms of materialism and ideology. Reply Share 7h R C Mark Rego Monteiro materialism - I take matter very seriously. So do the scientists that invented, from matter already present in the universe, the material stuff that saved my life. They also followed the ideology of the materialistic scientific method, rather than on, say, Ayurvedic or Hippocratic medicine. Indeed, ideology itself is the study of ideas. We use and misuse words that have many meanings and shadings. Words, are, after all, symbols - not the thing itself. As symbols, they are both multivalent and vulnerable to being ham-handed manipulated. It would be easy to see what I am writing to being beside the point. It may be, but it is also the point on which any rational discussion depends. Reply Share6h Mark Rego Monteiro R C Well, I would recommend that considering the value of the terms "empirical" and "philosophical." Christian fundamentalism, incidentally, seems artificially inflated by economic materialists, with corporate executives having funded Billy Graham evangelicals in conjunction with Cold War anti-communism against FD Roosevelt´s pro-social Social Gospel New Deal. Meanwhile, "material reality" is one thing, "ideological materialism" is another. No, "ideology" is not the study of ideas. Philosophy is. Ideology is the a non-philosophical, and even anti-philosophical position in which unexamined assumptions are used to drive logical formulations that can use and appear philosophical. They systematically exclude antithetical, oppositional ideas and issues. "The God Delusion", by R Dawkins, for example, ignores such basic philosophical issues as identifying the appropriate phenomena and knowledge domains, the epistemic and epistemological domains, of the issues in question. When asked if he has studied any theology, he responded, "I wouldn´t study Leprochology to study Leprechauns." Actually, that would involve Anthropology and Folkore, at least. It´s an unscholarly response, and what is called in philosophy, a fallacy. Dawkins has even said about such crucial component disciplines as, "Psychologists and sociologists deal with certain ideas" while showing no literacy nor understanding that they also inform Comparative Religious Studies, not to mention Theology, and the Philosophy of Religion. He has avoided actual scholarship, mocked and ignored what is in fact not just unscholarly fashion, but unphilosophical and, to come back to it, ideological. Meanwhile, "Science" doesn´t impose metaphysical ideological materialism, but operates according to methodological naturalism. In fact, an adequate multidisciplinary philosophical assessment of the metaphysics of "science" deconstructs it to its historical and philosophical symbolic nature, that originated in Christian spiritual-religious practice. That in turn was adjusted from ancient Greek spiritual-religious practice. The monk Thomas of Aquinas took Aristotle´s esoteric First Cause argument, and Christianized it in relation to an active and effective Creator God, lawful, loving parent of the empirical Jesus of Nazareth. Newton´s comments, about God, no less for example, actually fit well into the strong Kalam Cosmological argument version of the First Cause argument. His contemporary Quaker-Friend lead co-founder George Fox, however, took actions that help discern the non-rationalist aspects of spiritual-religious experience that have been widely disadvantaged by materialist ideologies. Meanwhile, the material world is a basic part of our human experience, and our human spiritual experience. I have expressed in a few comments across the threads some particularly rich pieces that draw on my own college background degree of Biological Anthropology, even after working in social services with substance abusers, financial services customer service, and getting a masters in International Relations grasping social constructivism based on symbolic interactionism quite concretely based on my background, and more. The problem here is confusing material reality with materialistic ideology. "Science" is not in fact "science," it is scientific philosophy, a difference that underlies the simplistic confusion of anti-theist materialists mistaking Christian fundamentalism, literalism, and related sociological issues with religion and God themselves. By recalling that "science" is scientific philosophy focused on the study of physical matter and material processes, the vast and enriching wealth of University-based philosophical knowledge with empiricism can be adequately respected and communicated accurately. Including not requiring an independent scholar activist and practitioner like myself to have to innovate the necessary terminology, i.e. spiritual-religious phenomena. That is the phenomena that scientists need to defer to when they show the minimum philosophical literacy about the relevant disciplines. That´s the kind of deferral that leaves, for example, doctors facing medically attested, medically impossible healings with spiritual-religious testimony with their compartmentalized terms like "spontaneous remissions." For the switch in philosophical epistemology to a psychosocial empirical assessment, however, the role of a person´s spiritual-religious life gets coordinated literately in a transpersonal psychosocial kind of assessment, with awareness of transcendental reality. OC Simonton MD´s Cancer Clinic for combination or pure psychosomatic treatment, with transpersonal spiritual encouragement. It is such clarity of distinctions that are in fact necessary to overcome not just scientific materialism, but two other prevailing, and ultimately widely toxic forms, secular and economic materialism. Profiteering businesspeople have had two major classes of opportunities to assert their preferred of power and control in corporate-consumer culture: public relations/advertising as Ed Bernays´ consulted and conceived the cigarette "Torches of Freedom" campaign to get women smoking in the 1920s, and the anti-Social Gospel New Deal theology funded by the executives of the National Manufacturers Assoc. My Biological Anthropology degree complimented my upbringing by a father with a doctorate who valued Noam Chomsky, and my work as an activist with Ralph Nader´s legacy PIRG not for profits, that taught be about the Sierra Club and Greenpeace, for starters. My interfaith path was also informed by the important post-Christian interfaith perspective of Unitarian Universalism. That is why I refer to my interfaith UU Christianity as empirical theism. It´s important to get clear about the distinctions between material reality, scientific philosophical phenomena and knowledge, ideological materialism, and spiritual-religious phenomena and knowledge. Radiation therapy can cure cancer, but, my atheist humanist dad had a massive heart attack after his biopsy, so they had to wait. The radiation therapy was then a devastating success. He took a few months to recover, then rushed back to work for a few months at his hi-powered UN offical´s job, and then died of pneumonia. Meanwhile, there are all kinds of testimonies by people with spiritual-religious practice, including Louise Hay´s Religious Science-based work, Catholic Lourdes and Beatification miracles and Christian Science, which has massive records. Louise Hay used a heavily holistic, bodywork psychotherapy approach to cure her cancer in six months. Along with medically attested testimonies by other sources like Marlene Klepees´ recovery from cerebral palsy, Bill Owens´ recovery from liver failure, and Ryan Hare´s recovery from chickenpox complications. C. Crandall MD, a Christian doctor, has become renowned for his testimonies, while L Mehl-Madrona MD does multicultural work full of testimonies. Again, material reality relates to human symbolic reality, methodological naturalism is not metaphysical ideological naturalism, and multidisciplinary philosophy includes scientific philosophy and empiricism, along with social studies disciplines and more. Most of all, ideology is reactionary and unphilosophical (or anti-philosophical) not philosophical. R C Mark Rego Monteiro one of the definitions of ideology is "study of ideas". You are invested in its modern use as a diss, rather than a word with a distinguished history. "philosophy of the mind which derives knowledge from the senses" (as opposed to metaphysics), from French idéologie "study or science of ideas," coined by French philosopher Destutt de Tracy (1754-1836) https://www.etymonline.com/word/ideology ideology | Etymology, origin and meaning of ideology by etymonline ETYMONLINE.COM ideology | Etymology, origin and meaning of ideology by etymonline ideology | Etymology, origin and meaning of ideology by etymonline Reply Share 3h Regina Christianson I did not say "materialistic ideology", I said materialism " 1748, "philosophy that nothing exists except matter" (which is the sine qua non for the scientific method) https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=materialism materialism | Search Online Etymology Dictionary ETYMONLINE.COM materialism | Search Online Etymology Dictionary materialism | Search Online Etymology Dictionary Reply Share 3h Mark Rego Monteiro Regina Christianson You may consider my use of "ideology" as a "diss" if you project your own idealization of the term, and ignore the empirical issues I raise, not least of all the distinction between philosophy and ideology. In fact, your own link shows your using an etymological origin instead of the current meaning, "a systematic set of ideas...", part of what I mentioned, and the current usual meaning, " is usually taken to mean, 'a prescriptive doctrine that is not supported by rational argument.' " You have not understood the definition link you provided, and have misrepresented it. That all works together at this site, "contemplative mystics," for which identifying ideology, ideological materialism, scientific philosophy (aka "science"), empiricism, philosophy, and spiritual-religious knowledge, and more, is not a small matter. Reply Share 2hEdited Mark Rego Monteiro Regina Christianson As for materialistic ideology, and materialism, you don´t seem to understand the equivalence you just demonstrated, and mistaking of categories. Materialism as a philosophy that "nothing exists except matter" is an ideology, since it does not apply outside of "the scientific method" and the forms of scientific philosophy. That´s why I used the term "methodological naturalism," which would be the equivalent to "methodological materialism." That only applies as "philosophical" within its legitimate philosophical discipline, where the phenomena and knowledge operate. And that is why its common use has led to it commonly being called scientific materialism, and scientism. It clearly has spread and influenced other disciplines along with a related viewpoint called "positivism." However, philosophy is the actual and current term for the study of ideas and knowledge and applied in diverse disciplines, with philosophical truth being defined essentially as logical coherence and correspondence to reality. It is the basis of discussing whether your assertion about "ideology" using a definition from the 1790s is current or not. Any assertion by you that that idea is current is not logically coherent, nor does it correspond to reality. That is how philosophy establishes truth. That is defined clearly by M-W in one of the various definitions, according to context, "2b: a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means", although that gets broadened when reconciled with the more common use, " 1b: the sciences and liberal arts exclusive of medicine, law, and theology," and "1a: all learning exclusive of technical precepts and practical arts" Combining 2b into 1a and 1b, it gets even clearer, "a search for understanding reality in all learning, as in the sciences and liberal arts." https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/philosophy Not ideology. That´s why deconstructing, and clarifying the meaning of the term "science" is so important. In fact, what you did personally for "ideology" works well for the term "science" in reestablishing its philosophical nature, and ending much confusion by people being mislead by using "science" to assert ideological materialism. "Science" used to be called "natural philosophy." In fact, that is what it is, or in more current terms, scientific philosophy. That applies to physical and material objects and processes. That´s why empiricism is an important alternative and foundational concept that underlies the scientific method. Thus, when Freud the neurologist had patients suffering pain with no identifable organic physical wounds, he had to listen to their words. His first therapeutic psychological treatment wasn´t technical "psychoanalysis." It was empirical psychoanalysis as he listened to patients´ words as they reflected on their pain. As they remembered and shared, they went from one event to another and the pain got better. They eventually remembered painful childhood events now called traumas. All this was human symbolic communication, not nerves signals themselves. Thus, it is empirical, not scientific. Sociologists and philosophers like Max Weber developed the term "antipositivism" and "interpretivism" to differentiate the method used in the social studies disciplines from the scientific method. It is, however, philosophical and empirical. It involves the use of symbolic systems that are energetic, and psychosocial, and so non-material, but immaterial. That´s a good sound empirical and philosophical basis for what we call mind and consciousness, and "spiritual" and "transpersonal" as it relates to spiritual-religious knowledge. The very term "science" relates to how these issues have modernized. JF Ferrier got at a key angle as he introduced the term "epistemology" into English. His work is actually extremely piercing on these very issues, and he says, "This leads Ferrier to suggest a change of focus for philosophy; instead of the empirical endeavor of a “science of human nature,” he prefers a more metaphysical approach, which is the development of a “philosophy of consciousness.”" https://iep.utm.edu/ferrier/ Material reality studied by scientific philosophy, not merely "science", then is part of these various issues that acknowledge spiritual-religious phenomena and knowledge, along with the other facets like philosophy, psychosocial levels, and so on. Re Ch Mark Rego Monteiro nonsense. You make up what you want to be true and say it is true, cherry picking bits and pieces of what is true. You ignore the historic meanings of the words because they do not conform to your requirements. That is sloppy scholarship; that is ahsitorical. But rant away. Nothing you write has anything to do with the contemplative masters listed in the group's title and their wisdom. Reply Share 2h Mark Rego Monteiro Re Ch Ah, nothing that sloppy about what I´ve done. That´s all you, although it goes beyond carelessness. "Nonsense", accusations of "making things up", and unsupported accusational characterizations are ad hom and projection, not logical argument about the subject matter. It seems like you´re not paying attention, or rather, you are clinging to untenable distorted assumptions that you don´t want to question for unacknowledged reasons, and want to cover up my argument that "Ideology doesn´t mean 'philosophy of mind...' anymore, but has come to mean a 'set of ideas about human life that rejects logical argument.' It is philosophy that provides the framework for multidisciplinary logical reasoning and discussion of positions and issues. Your calling it a "rant" is ad hom and projection, it´s own kind of "rant," not actual logical, rational argument. You are demonstrating why University-based academic scholarship functions in community and with empiricism at a higher level as I have demonstrated. Given the specific points I´ve made, what you are expressing is demonstrably your own projection, and attempt to manipulate information egotistically. Your words merely apply to you yourself, sadly. "Ahistorical", no less, doesn´t mean that the past origin persists imposed over what has developed and changed. Ahistorical in this case means how you rather conscientiously are rejecting clear information about how your preferred meaning is no longer current. In fact, your conduct is anachronistic. As I´ve explained in some detail, even using your own links in part, the term "philosophy" is the study of phenomena in generating knowledge and the study of ideas both. A comparative effort that I make is the meaning of the term "science." Historical etymological analysis does inform an analysis of how the shift from scientific "natural philosophy" has corresponded to people indulging in materialistic ideology, meaning a system of ideas about culture and human life that resists logically coherent discussion. In fact, a simple reflection on cause and effect, a philosophical reflection with similarities to Buddhist practice, suggests that overexposure to and overspecialization in scientific materialistic practice leads to indulgence, or even a kind of intoxication. Whether from insufficient literacy in therapeutic interactional psychosocial studies, or spiritual-religious practice itself, past spiritual practice such as the monk Thomas Aquinas´ helps understand the current options for spiritual modernization. As a result, the use of psychological and spiritual knowledge to detach from current ideological materialism with spiritual-religious practice, experience, study, and knowledge, all permit an individual to avoid the trap you have embraced and try to project in anger elsewhere. Ideology is not philosophy, and usually is anti-philosophical in resisting rational argument, as you do here. Spirituality, as in contemplative practice, is an activity that supersedes material reality, that corresponds to such popular perceptions as "mind over matter" and "love conquers all," along with the insight of psychosocial and cultural disciplines. That is where the understanding, expressed in part, of modern society being in Jesus´ legacy of loving integrity in University-based philosophical scholarship with structured pluralism, provides insight and tools. Your expressing yourself around accusations and ad hom, and failing to respond clearly to rigourous points, is evidence of your own issues, no one else´s.