Gordon Allport´s Ideas About Mature and Immature Religious Orientation; Extrinsic, Intrinsic, and Batson´s "Quest"

Allport’s work on intrinsic and extrinsic approaches to religion laid the foundation for many subsequent studies of religious styles, and his critiques of behaviorism set a pattern that is found today is some of current critiques of the medical model in psychology. On psychology of religion In his book, The Individual and His Religion (1950), Gordon Allport illustrated how people may use religion in different ways. He makes a distinction between a “mature” religious orientation and an “immature” religious orientation. A person with a mature religious orientation would have an approach to religion that is dynamic, open-minded, and able to maintain links between inconsistencies. In contrast, a person with an immature religious orientation would be self-serving and generally would embody the negative stereotypes that people have about religion. More recently, this distinction has been encapsulated in the terms “intrinsic religion,” referring to a genuine, heartfelt, devout faith, and “extrinsic religion,” referring to a more utilitarian use of religion as a means to an end, such as church attendance to gain social status. These dimensions of religion were measured on the Religious Orientation Scale of Allport and Ross (1967). Extrinsic Religious Orientation is a method of using religion to achieve non-religious goals, essentially viewing religion as a means to an end.[4] It is used by people who go to religious gatherings and claim certain religious ideologies to establish or maintain social networks while minimally adhering to the teachings of the religion. People high in extrinsic religious orientation are more likely to conform to social norms and demands rather than what the religion requires, and are often prone to twist religious beliefs to serve their own political goals. Gordon Allport stated that people high in extrinsic religious orientation use religion, “to provide security and solace, sociability and distraction, status and self-justification” (Allport &Ross, 1967, p. 434). (Whitley & Kite, 2010)[1] According to Whitley and Kite, a person with an Intrinsic Religious Orientation sincerely believes in their religion and all its teachings and attempts to live their life as their religion teaches that they should (Whitley & Kite, 2010).[1] This agrees with what Daniel Batson implies; that while a person with an extrinsic religious orientation sees religion as a means to an end, a person with an intrinsic orientation sees their religion as that end. To them their religion is, "An active directing force, not just a tool used to reach self-serving ends."[4] Those with this orientation find their religion to be the most important aspect of their life and seek to contextualize other aspects of their life through their religion. A third religious orientation proposed by Batson is the quest orientation. People with this orientation treats their religion not as a means or an end, but a search for truth. As Batson said, "An individual who approaches religion in this way recognizes that he or she does not know, and probably never will know, the final truth about such matters. Still the questions are deemed important, and however tentative and subject to changes, answers are sought."[4]

Robert Bellah´s Five Stages Heading to Subjective Morality- Actually a Demographic Trend vs Truth

Robert Bellah´s observations are helpful: "Robert Bellah begins by defining religion as "a set of symbolic forms and acts that relate man to the ultimate conditions of his existence." He argues that beginning with the single cosmos of the undifferentiated primitive religious worldview in which life is a "one possibility thing," evolution in the religious sphere is toward the increasing differentiation and complexity of symbol systems. His evolutionary religious taxonomy specifies five stages: primitive (e.g., Australian Aborigines), archaic (e.g., Native American), historic (e.g., ancient Judaism, Confucianism, Buddhism, Islam, early Palestinian Christianity), early modern (e.g., Protestant Christianity), and modern (religious individualism). In the modern stage of religious evolution, the hierarchic dualistic religious symbol system that emerged in the historic epoch is collapsed and the symbol system that results is "infinitely multiplex." In this posttraditional situation, the individual confronts life as an "infinite possibility thing," and is "capable, within limits, of continual self-transformation and capable, again within limits, of remaking the world, including the very symbolic forms with which he deals with it, even the forms that state the unalterable conditions of his own existence." "This argument foresaw the reflexive individualism that characterizes both the intellectual culture of post-modernism and the "new religious consciousness" of the 1960s and 1970s. With Charles Glock, Bellah undertook a project in the early 1970s to investigate the latter, the results of which were published as The New Religious Consciousness (University of California Press 1976). In his concluding remarks, Bellah foreshadows the argument of Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life —written with Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Ann Swidler, and Steven M. Tipton (University of California Press 1985 [second edition 1995], hereafter Habits )—in arguing that the deepest cause of the 1960s counterculture was "the inability of utilitarian individualism to provide a meaningful pattern of personal and social existence. The crisis of the 1960s therefore was "above all a religious crisis." As a response to the sterility of the utilitarian worldview, the counterculture turned to the American tradition of expressive individualism in the form of a spirituality grounded in the primacy of individual experience and the belief in nonduality, exemplified by the appropriation of Zen Buddhist practices. Again foreshadowing the argument in Habits , Bellah highlights the danger that expressive individualism may come to articulate with utilitarian individualism, to which it was originally a response. When expressive individualist-inspired religious symbols and practices "become mere techniques for 'self-realization,' then once again we see utilitarian individualism reborn from its own ashes." Thus, by the 1970s, Bellah's positive embrace of the "wide-open chaos of the post-Protestant, postmodern era" in Beyond Belief: Essays on Religion in a Post-Traditional World (Harper 1970) had grown more cautious as the full consequences of the "modern" religious epoch became more evident. By the 1980s, the relationship is clearly strained. Understanding that the treatment of religion in Habits is an elaboration of the fifth "modern" stage of religious evolution makes clear that the "infinite possibility thing" he lauds in "Religious Evolution" has become the hyperprivatized "Sheilaism" ("my own religion") he laments in Habits . Particularly troubling about the personalized and privatized modern religion examined in Habits is that it is underwritten by what Alasdair MacIntyre in After Virtue (1981) calls an "emotivist" view of ethics that reduces the foundation of moral claims to the subjective feelings of individuals and renders the development of common moral understandings difficult if not impossible. Yet, Bellah was an Episcopalian Christian. He was observing a popular trend of some demographic significance. http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/bellah.htm

Feeling Connected To What? Human Evolution and Shamanism

Spurred by a post a bit unhinged and indulging wildly about fantasied scenarios of human cultures millions of years into the past. Ni Koek Modern humans have only been around for about 200 000 years. And what you suggest never happened, there have been extinctions before but not remotely as you suggest. *** · Mark Rego Monteiro Ni Koek Based on archeological evidence. Spiritual desires for feeling connected are another thing. Shamanism has existed at least since 40,000 years ago. ·*** Nico Koekemoer Mark Rego Monteiro Archeological and DNA evidence. Desires for feeling connected to what? · Reply · Share · 2h Mark Rego Monteiro Nico Koekemoer Evidence-wise, there are category issues and overlaps, since archeological, paleontological, and biochemical evidence incorporate broad levels of analysis in physical terms. Radiographic is also key, as is other forms of stratigraphic analysis, and interpretation. As for feeling connected, that is a psychological and anthropological disciplinary insight and knowledge domain, to be clear. Quick point, Durkheim studied such human events as suicides, and developed the term "anomie" for a sense of anxiety at social disruption. To be fair, Marx had formulated an observed alienation in workingpeople (the "proletariat") when being exploited. Spinoza, even earlier, had observed the process of emotional identification and understanding in introspection, all before Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung´s kinds of crucial developments. All that reflects two basic leading questions. First, that of human nature and why and how people do things with each other, with tools for hunting and gathering, symbolic communication and reasoning, and the meaning of history. Why would biologist R Dawkins go from nasty, angry, and poor stereotyping scholarship in "The God Delusion" to a similar position using such "woo" words as "The Magic of Reality"? Why would ND Tyson speak without basic scholarship about spirituality, and then say, "We are IN the Universe. It´s so spiritual!" or the like? They are starting to experience positive emotions in existential issues, instead of merely operating according to cognitive analytical assertions. Second, the metaphysical question has been posed as Christian scholars revived, reformed, and modernized ancient Greek philosophy. Why is there something instead of nothing? Aristotle answered that a First Cause must exist, but he fooled himself by going with his assumption that the Universe is Eternal. There is only, he thought, an Unmoved Mover. At least he had that insight. The monk Thomas of Aquinas had Jesus Christ´s legacy and the Bible to work with, which feed a clearer understanding of history, cosmology, spiritual practice, divine agency, and the locus of eternity in the higher order divine entity identified as the "Creator." Not, as some mythologies, intelligently if with less and insufficient explanatory power, hypothesized, something like the Greek merging of Uranus and Gaia. As someone who was getting a degree in Biological Anthropology, I quickly learned that my interests in psychology were amplified and undergirded in studying the interface of human bio-psychosociality and culture. Just as humans relate to each other and one another, they relate to the natural world, and to the cause of the natural world that includes us. Just as relating to the natural environment has been overshadowed by prevailing Western industrial practices following both scientific mechanicism and economic business profiteering, ecological biological science has formulated the concepts that support more spiritual expressions with feelings like Francis of Assisi, or indigenous practices. Ecologists alone, however, are illuminating in that University classes often virtually remain so mechanistic and economically influenced that they ignore the very real dangers of modern industrial degradation of the environment. "Environmentalism", thus, represents a philosophical view of human relating to the environment in a qualitatively distinct way than scientific ecological science. Social science antipositivism and interpretivism is related, in making self-awareness relevant. Since Piaget, we also have terms based on constructivism, how humans take action to create truths like "sustainability eco-social justice activism, (sub-)culture, and innovating spirituality." Ecopsychology, based on the Freud-Jung sequence and legacy, has also emerged as of at least the 1990s, although expressions go back through John Muir, Wordsworth, and so on. Then we come to the meaning of human interaction, which in Western culture have a unique spiritual-religious tradition that proposed UN human rights to the world after WWII, and was accepted by much of that world community. Pre-modern Shamans were at a preliminary stage in relating to the Universe´s natural forces, processes, and interacting components, its Causal Creator Entity, and similar factors. In fact, it´s all kind of a litmus test. If you have to ask so basic a question, you´re pretty much overspecialized, which is pretty much the standard fare under scientific materialism. It would be a good time to broaden your horizons. I might recommend Fritjof Capra´s Systems Theory of Life, the legacy of his original Tao of Physics, and Comparative Religion scholars like Huston Smith, Robert Bellah, and Ninian Smart.

Attila the Hun at the Gates of Rome: Josiah Royce´s "Beloved Community" Philosophy for Integrity

Ex-president Barack H. Obama´s spiritual path to Christianity is interesting to read about, as are the varying paths those of FD Roosevelt, Eleanor, Fannie Lou Hamer, Malcolm X, Wangari Maathai, Gandhi and Kasturbai, and Mohammed Yunus. The UN human rights culture raises questions about the subtler aspects of Western history and its principal psychocultural driving force, the Christian religion. Consider the history starting with Attila the Hun´s invasion of Italy, devastation of Verona, and approach to striking distance of Rome. In a recent OP, I mentioned Josiah Royce´s "beloved community" ideas that Christian integrity involves an individual and shared process of historical construction. I combined that with Weber and Simmel´s antipositivism and interpretivism, which involves value awareness, and with Rickert, individualized historical detail. With James, Freud, Jung, and Tubman´s kind of spiritual experience, we can understand sequences represented by the legacy of the legacy of Christian monasticism following the Desert Fathers Anthony the Great and Evagrius, in spiritual developmental schemes like Purgatio, Illuminatio, and Unitio, including "divinization" or "theosis." That can be considered in terms of other spiritual traditions like Buddhism´s Four Noble Truths and Right Meditation. In addition, scientific studies like Davidson et al 2003 have found immune system benefits from meditation, as one scientific linkage and correlate. Medically impossible healings are recorded by a variety of medical sources like C. Crandall MD´s and L. Mehl-Medrona MD, PhD´s cross-cultural records, which confirm a broader range of phenomena as in C Keener PhD´s work. Let´s look at the basic account of Attila the Hun´s position at Rome here.

"The Huns came from East of the Volga in Asia, and by the 370s AD/CE, crossed the Volga River in what is now modern Russia. By 452, "Attila returned to Italy renew his marriage claim with Emperor Valentinian III´s sister Honoria, invading and ravaging (the area) along the way. Communities became established in what would later become Venice as a result of these attacks when the residents fled to small islands in the Venetian Lagoon. His army sacked numerous cities and razed Aquileia so completely that it was afterwards hard to recognize its original site. Aëtius had defeated Attila at the Battle of Troyes in Gaul, but lacked the strength to offer further battle. Aetius only managed to harass and slow Attila's advance with a shadow force. Attila finally halted at the River Po. By this point, disease and starvation may have taken hold in Attila's camp, thus hindering his war efforts and potentially contributing to the cessation of invasion.

Emperor Valentinian III sent three envoys, the high civilian officers Gennadius Avienus and Trigetius, as well as the Bishop of Rome Leo I, who met Attila at Mincio in the vicinity of Mantua and obtained from him the promise that he would withdraw from Italy and negotiate peace with the Emperor.[41] Prosper of Aquitaine gives a short description of the historic meeting, but gives all the credit to Leo for the successful negotiation. Priscus reports that superstitious fear of the fate of Alaric gave (Attila) pause—as Alaric died shortly after sacking Rome in 410.

Italy had suffered from a terrible famine in 451 and her crops were faring little better in 452. Attila's devastating invasion of the plains of northern Italy this year did not improve the harvest. To advance on Rome would have required supplies which were not available in Italy, and taking the city would not have improved Attila's supply situation. Therefore, it was more profitable for Attila to conclude peace and retreat to his homeland."

"As Hydatius writes in his Chronica Minora: The Huns, who had been plundering Italy and who had also stormed a number of cities, were victims of divine punishment, being visited with heaven-sent disasters: famine and some kind of disease. In addition, they were slaughtered by auxiliaries sent by the (Eastern) Emperor Marcian and led by (Western general) Aetius, and at the same time, they were crushed in their [home] settlements ... Thus crushed, they made peace with the Romans and all returned to their homes."

The modern view more secularly states that the ambassadorial group with Pope Leo I, "combined with a plague among Attila's troops, the threat of famine, and news that the Eastern Emperor Marcian had launched an attack on Hun homelands along the Danube, forced Attila to turn around and leave Italy."

Attila the Hun died in 453 at age 47, according to his contemporary Priscus, during the night with his newest wife, Ildicó. There was no wound, but blood, leading to speculations of a hemorragh. His three sons in their rash, egotistical lusts for power, were defeated and slain by 468. As for the Christian Emperor Valentinian III, after Attila´s death and the reduced Hun threat, he was goaded by a vindictive and ambitious Christian Senator Petronius Maximus to murder his top general Aetius personally with the aide of his eunuch chamberlain Heraclius, bashing the unarmed Aetius on the head. Priscus writes that in the next year, the ambitious Petronius Maximus, also resentful about Valentinian III committing adultery with Maximus´ wife, arranged for two assassins to murder Valentinian III while he went to practice archery, and Heraclius at the same time.

Attila´s turning back after meeting with Valentinian´s group with Pope Leo I in 452, and then dying prematurely in 453 at age 47 under unusually unsuspicious circumstances is remarkable. It gains greater significance in examining the psychosocial and cultural components of additional surrounding contexts in historical development. Goaded by an ambitious Senator, Emperor Valentinian III assassinated his main general, and was then assassinated in turn by that same Senator. As events unfolded, by 476 AD, the last Western Emperor Romulus Augustulus, a figurehead, was removed from power by Odoacer, who became the King of Italy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila

I´ll save the exploratory analysis in spiritual modernization for a subsequent OP. For now, what do you think of the strange occurrence of and context around Attila the Hun´s desisting from attacking Rome and young premature death with a new wife? &&& By comparison and contrast, Pope Damasus in the 360s became pope as Gratian became the westernmost of three Emperors. In 374, Ambrose was the Roman governor when Auxentius the Arian bishop of Milan died. A conflict developed about the next appointment, and Ambrose appeared to try to maintain calm. A cry arose to appoint Ambrose himself bishop, although he protested his lack of formal qualifications. He was not baptized nor trained in theology. Nevertheless, in an exciting drama, he fled but was appointed anyway. Ambrose at once adopted an ascetic lifestyle, donated his money and distributed his lands to the poor. In 378, Emperor Gratian issued an edict of toleration. As alignments continued to develop with Bishop Ambrose´s influence and the Senate by 380, the three emperors issued the Edict of Thessalonica that outlawed any religion except Christianity. Gratian thus refused the pagan priest designation "pontifex maximus," removed the pagan Alter of Victory from the Senate, and stopped payments to pagan temples. Although reflexively at odds with modern religious freedoms, the historical context did not yet involve Christianity´s University-based system or scientific and Enlightenment accomplishments, as well as the events leading to globalization and the UN human rights and sustainability community. For example, devotion to early Christian martyrs was active, including Tombs in the Catacombs. In 383, Gratian was perceived as favoring pagan tribal Alans over Romans, and was in Gaul. Magnus Maximus gathered many in his British garrison and headed to Gaul. Near Lutetia (Paris), many of Gratian´s troops defected, and Gratian fled. He was captured in August at Lugdunum (Lyon) and killed, or assassinated rather. Some years later he was deified as Divus Gratianus, the "Divine Gratian." Magnus Maximus proceeded to Italy, where MM Flavius Bauto had a powerful force that stopped him and protected the 12 year old Valentinian II. Negotiations followed in 384 that included Ambrose, and led to an agreement with Eastern Theodosius I that made Magnus Augustus of the West. As Emperor, Magnus ordered the execution of the first six heretics including Priscillian for Priscillianism. He considered the accusation that of magic. When Magnus issued an edict after 387 criticizing the Roman Christians for burning down a Roman synagogue, Ambrose objected and asserted that there were cries that "the Emperor has become a Jew." In 387, Magnus invaded Italy, but was defeated as Eastern Emperor Theodosius I was led by Richomeres. Maximus was defeated at Poetovio, and finally surrendered at Aquileia. He asked for mercy, but was executed.

Josiah Royce´s "Beloved Community" Philosophy of Christianity As a Foundation for "Integrity Theology"

Josiah Royce´s philosophy of religion observed that God´s immaterial reality only had its alternative expression through human form and needs. In addressing Nietzsche´s pessimism about Christianity, he asserted instead a notion of the historical construction of “mutually interpretive activity which requires shared memory and hope,” "people´s interest in and valuing of objectives and ideals beyond immediate gratification that has moral effect," and forming the "beloved community." Royce left UCal Berkeley in 1882 to teach at Harvard, where Wm James was his philosophical antagonist. Royce´s discussion of Christian community makes a quick survey of some contemporary figures helpful, such as earlier personalities like Lucretia Mott, Harriet Tubman, Elias Hick, Washington Gladden, and others who were engaged in social reform Christian activism. Other more secular figures of the Progressive era like W.E.B. DuBois, Booker T. Washington, Samuel Gompers, Mother Jones, and John Muir. It is worth noting that while Quakers like Lucretia Mott practiced silent waiting worship, Harriet Tubman had been injured as a victim of a violent act. Her injury is reported to have left her with a kind of epilepsy, but a coherent experience of visions that gave her a passionate religious attitude. Jane Addams is worth mentioning as an activist who became a public philosopher. Also of note is that judge and Swedenborgian CC Bonney initiated the organizing of the 1893 Chicago Parliament of World Religions in that era.

Royce´s ideas can be correlated with Sigmund Freud MD´s accomplishments in therapeutic psychology and their diversifying legacy. Before his less than empirical "Oedipus Complex" terminology, Freud had observed the benefits of simple hypnotic relaxation and talk therapy which led him to observe two primary results: first, "abreaction" emotional reconnection with forgotten traumatic events. Second, "catharsis" or alleviation followed. His first successful patient was "Anna O.", now known to be the woman who went on to be the successful social worker Bertha Pappenheim. Based on these concepts from empirical observations, Freud inferred psycho-neurological conversion and repression as the causal processes. Additional observations can be identified in the work of others like Wilhelm Reich MD and Carl Jung, whose notion of Higher Self in terms of the Imago Dei and Jesus Christ provides a spiritual high level context resulting from Freud´s "catharsis." Beyond William James´ initial efforts, Jung´s technique of "active imagination" thus might be an additional level of explanation to understand Harriet Tubman´s actual benefit in having transpersonal experiences. In addition, Francis C. Sumner was a pioneering Afro-American psychologist who contributed at a Vienna psychology of religion conference at that time, with his paper, "The Mental Hygiene of Religion." It is also worth noting that philosophies of history like Joseph Priestley´s in the late 1700s had been rationalist. Priestley became limited by his avalaible resources, since rationalism meant materialism. He thought science alone could illuminate people for a Deist God. Hegel , who was active until 1831 on the other hand, took Kant´s Freedom vs. Nature duality, and argued that the Spirit goes beyond Nature. William James in his work also began to recognize the importance of individuals, along with validating religious experience. Those combinations of views already opens possibilities more coherent with Freud´s early empirical ideas of abreaction emotional reconnection and catharsis in talk therapy. Royce had discussed the human individual taking action in relation to Christianity, and Jesus´ morality, in particular. With Jesus´ teachings based on his loving Commandments, Freud´s insights begin to demonstrate an empirical foundation for the healing power of love, and with Jung´s Higher Self idea, can be taken to imply the way the transcendent interacts with the transpersonal psychology of love, that provides a crucial orientation to advanced social capacities. Thomas of Aquinas in the 1200s, for example, had been able to take Aristotle´s First Cause idea and diversify it into five "vias" that provide insight into God´s nature, including God as the Uncaused Cause. Aquinas also organized epistemology, identifying through ethics the four basic categories of law: Eternal, Natural, Human, and Divine/Scriptural. With Divine/Scriptural law, Aquinas captured the manner in which Jesus´ teachings, represented by his 2 loving Commandments as ethical foundations, were relevant in Western thought. Jung´s Higher Self refers to the Imago Dei, the view of humanity being created in the image of God, with Jesus Christ having a key role. (Aion, 1951)

In a comparative perspective, we might look at the Buddha´s non-Judeo-Christian experience in ca. 500 BCE, and Anthony the Great´s experience after 270 AD/CE. First, Buddha spent six years as a seeker who left luxury and observing introspectively in frequent meditation the process that illustrated the Four Noble Truths. The First Noble Truth of suffering includes such insights as living with what we hate or being separated from what we love. Afterwards, he experienced nirvana, or enlightenment, as a form of high level catharsis. We can also go back to the experience of Anthony of the Desert, the Father of Christian Monks, after 270 AD. In his asceticism, he passed through cycles in which he identified "demons" of loneliness, boredom, and lust. After some 30 years and repeating episodes of crises, he had a notable crisis that was followed by exceptional tranquility and rejuvenated vigor and energized youthful appearance. Freud´s observations of talk therapy processes appear comparable in defining a spiritual growth process. Anthony´s legacy of Christian monks began developing their understanding of these processes, with Evagrius noting eight vices, and Benedict of Nursia confirming John Cassian´s earlier three stages: Purgatio, Illuminatio, and Unitio. The result of following the spiritual path was then "divinization" or "theosis." Again, Harriet Tubman´s experience, and the legacy of James´ and Jung´s broader observations, help revive recognition of that level of spiritual-religious experience.

Are you familiar with Josiah Royce´s name or ideas in response to Nietzsche? What about the other ideas and figures mentioned?

Joseph Priestley´s Science and Ministry, George Fox et al, and Spiritual Practice.

In relation to a news article about the greenhouse effect from 1912. Abr Bro We should really thank Joseph Priestly who discovered both Oxygen and CO2. · Reply · 7h Abr Br I see upon review that Priestley is credited with "carbonated water," but merely contributed to observations about carbon dioxide. He is credited in a close heat with another guy for the identification of oxygen, which he called "dephlogisticated air." I also reviewed his original and more extensive work in ministry. As a minister, he was a rationalist and in favor of science and history. He also appreciated certain qualities of integrity in early benevolent Christianity, and referred to their loss as corruption. However, he never appreciated the significance of spiritual practice Christian monasticism, with remarkable stories of people like pioneer Anthony of the Desert, Evagrius who authored the eight vices, John Cassian, and Benedict of Nursia. They identified three famous stages in spiritual practice, Purgatio, Illuminatio, and Unitio in what they call now "divinization" or "theosis." He missed fundamentally that early Christians weren´t benevolent because of rationalism, but in the spirit of uninstitutional religious Christian community. In the mid to late 1600s, Spinoza had some understanding of emotional insight. George Fox´s Quaker-Friends had also developed a sort of spiritual practice in their silent waiting worship. They did become famous for their integrity such as opposition to slavery by Priestley´s day. I´ve been reading about the German Christian Wolff who wrote a comparative work about Confucius, with ample humanist leaning. He also wrote another work on Confucius including Moses, Christ, and Mohammed. Meanwhile, he would have done well to read G Vico and H Grotius, both who emphasized an ongoing relevance of Providence. G Leibniz also was inclined towards rationalism, but referred to the difference between the higher order God and imperfect human beings who can correct their mistakes. These advances create a "wonderful spontaneity" in people´s lives, Leibniz observed. He was intensely interested in the quality of early Christianity, and concerned about the corruption that he recognized that had emerged historically. He believed that logic and comparative history. He was familiar with "conversion experiences" and had understood it to be important in his early years. He had been disappointed when he had not had one.

Psychosomatics and Superstition: Beyond Scientific Materialism and Attila the Hun to Transcendental Healing

Anto Calh Mark Rego Monteiro, I understand what psychosomatic is... but we were talking if a drug related cure based on traditional knowledge... like in Egypt or something, not that Egypt wasn't advanced... like in Alexandria... Knowledge of chemistry was limited... so they associated prayers to the high! · Reply · 15h · Edited Mark Rego Monteiro Anto Calh "Knowledge of chemistry was limited...." That is the standard focus of scientific materialism. When overspecialized people confuse "science" with truth and as greater than its philosophical basis in the full range of human behavior and multidisciplinary philosophical disciplines. I like emphasizing Freud and Jung´s types of psychological developments, because that alone is key in understanding the limits of "science," its philosophical nature, and the problem of overspecialization and scientific materialism. Thinking that the question, "How are you feeling today, now?" is irrelevant or never complicated is part of the value of Freud´s and Jung´s et al´s work. It relates to the importance of David Chalmers´s kind of philosophical work on mind, among others. The separation of the "sciences" from their philosophical nature is associated with various problems, with anti-psychosomatic prejudice one, and anti-religious attitudes another. In Richard Dawkins´ type of attitude, already present in Charles Darwin´s attitudes, and going back to Descartes at least, they don´t question their own knowledge of religion and such behaviors of prayer. They resort to calling it "childish." It is a conceit due to "science´s" hyperdevelopment, and the underdevelopment of human studies. The British George Fox of the Quaker-Friends in the 1600s developed a simpler form of worship with insights like silent waiting worship, and found himself also able to heal. He didn´t publicize that, but he did write about it. Scientific developments can be impressive, but they can be costly and have complications, or they can be harsh. Combined treatments are possible. However, there are often benefits to understanding spiritual-religious healing in diverse senses. These days, that also involves human rights and sustainability issues. 1 · Reply · 14h Antonio Calhau Mark Rego Monteiro, You are generalizing the concept of truth, or rather speaking of truth in general, addressing to the epistemological question of what is truth. I was talking of a particular situation or event being truth or not, a rather discrete concept, you are taking the whole for the part, or rather the part for the whole. The question faith as you say is so to say absolute, rather than a question of faith, mutually exclusive concepts. · Reply · 2h Mark Rego Monteiro Antonio Calhau The context here is the truth of transpersonal and transcendental healing, and you began your comments here expressing your incredulity and throwing around the scientific paradigm in adversarial fashion. I´m not "generalizing the concept of truth," since the concept of truth is not subordinate to science. You are experiencing your perception of mistakenly depending on scientific materialism, and probably adherence to Catholic religious dogma, as the "truth." Medically impossible healings in relation to spiritual-religious testimony nicely demonstrate how science is not its pretense of "reality," but is merely the philosophical modeling of physical reality. Scientific philosophy, and Catholic dogma, is subordinate to the larger truth that Christian- and University-based modern philosophy in all its disciplines can identify, categorize, express, and catalyze. That is how epistemology in philosophy accounts for "science," which is a popularized misnomer for "scientific philosophy." You are inverting reality in a way that reflects your scientific materialist bias. Your "particular situation" serves to continue your inverted position that you began in opposition, and all without you having communicated any appropriate recognition of the legitimacy of truth, not "science." Identifying your worldview of "scientific materialism" is key to deconstructing your attempt to rely on its supremacism and polarized notions, not just around religion. "Absolute faith" and "faith in question"? I recall that you are a Catholic, and this issue combines your scientific materialism and your own religious stance. In order to make sense of your own terminology, you have to start tying your terms to empirical referents. Catholic "faith" ties you to the notion that you are not to question your denominational doctrines. That compromises your own intellectual understanding, and the manner in which you relate to science no less, it is reasonable to surmise. Again, this post refers to a transpersonal healing, and I am asserting that as a reflection of the standard of reality, normally said now that "science can´t explain." In truth, science is scientific philosophy, and it is philosophy that can draw on its broader resources in multiple disciplines to identify human phenomena, including the transpersonal and transcendental, along with relationship and value contexts. In fact, there are scientific concepts being used, such as alignment, synchronization, and harmonization, which reflect human biorhythm experience that relate no less to wave mechanical phenomena and knowledge in physics. In any event, your comments suggest that you didn´t intend to express a conflicting opinion, and in fact aren´t aware that you did. Your reference to whole-part relationships, general-particular levels of explanation, indicate your effort as far as it goes. In fact, you seem to demonstrate your Catholic sensibility of "absolute faith that God exists" but deference to science´s generating knowledge that substitutes for science-related myths. You are projecting that back to Greco-Roman Alexandria in Egypt, a scientific materialist context. You are, nevertheless, off-track and reinforcing your own misunderstanding. More to the point is that transcendental events from that era, like Socrates´ being spurred by the Apollo Temple Delphi Oracle to begin his Socratic method and Galen´s father´s apparent divine dream are reports that gain phenomenal status outside scientific physicalism. Jesus appeared, and Anthony of the Desert´s story as the Father of Christian Monks can be acknowledged for his transpersonal dream identifying the location of the hermit Paul of Thebes. Reports by early writers, as reported in SJ Hanna´s work for Christian Science, the likes of Origen, Tertullian, Eusebius, and others, refer to Christian healings. Christian miracles for a historical time seem generally undervalued, with the "Miracle of Peter and Paul" of Attila the Hun´s pacification by Pope Leo in the 450s often reduced materialistically and disenchantingly to the Pope´s human persuasiveness, or Attila´s exhaustion after so much pillaging. In fact, I might cite FD Roosevelt and Gandhi to reassert the influence of spiritual Christian causes and effects to understand the power of love, anchored by its supernatural foundations in shamanic healing, Jewish prophetic culture in Jesus´ heritage, and the supershamanic Jesus Christ´s loving teachings, transcendentally oriented Commandments, and Resurrection. A survey would be interesting, with St. Benedict´s experiences not least of all in the 500s AD. By the 1300s, however, we have Ms. Julian of Norwich and her healing experience and Maria of Jesus´ "astral projected image," along with Cabeza de Vaca´s healing of Native Americans linked to his survival for an extended period following his being shipwrecked in the Conquistador age. George Fox founded the Quaker-Friends in the UK in the 1600s based on little education but spiritual reflection and insight. With innovations like worship based on silent waiting, he wrote about experiences in which others were healed by him. He minimized their publicity, but was literate in recording them in writing. The 19th century can be acknowledged for the appearance of US Ethan O Allen´s type of Christian spiritual healing, a few Europeans in Switzerland, Mesmerist proto-hypnotic, proto-psychotherapeutic mind cures, Catholic Lourdes in France, the US´ Mary Baker Eddy´s Christian Science, and JP Lake´s ministry legacy, and others. Similarly, the insights of Freud and Jung´s circles in therapeutic psychology. If you intend to balance and correct your early assertions that accuse me of having a "conceited idea of the science paradigm", you are only demonstrating how your notions are undisciplined and serving your psychological complex. I already suggested M Rosenberg´s insightful system based on feelings, that might be applied in general, "How are you feeling today, now? Happy, sad, mad, glad, or scared? Or something else?" The social sciences also deserve enormous credit, with Max Weber and Georg Simmel not least of all, for articulating antipositivism and interpretivism in identifying UNDERSTANDING as a key objective that involves human interpretation by observers with values. You have some vocabulary to work with, and the desire to understand. However, until you learn to sit and do some mindfulness meditation, and apply yourself to the topic of antipositivism and interpretivism, and question your own scientific materialism and apparently unquestioned Catholic dogma, you are spinning your wheels.

Ninian Smart: From The Gold Bible to William James´ Mysticism.

Sal hil • 5 days ago but he was critical of Peter Burger for "assuming the non-existence of God."[1] Religious Studies is, however, interested in why people believe that their religious statements or experience is true Cute, but easily refuted. Religions can already tell you why their followers believe and why their doubters don't believe. If you don't like those answers, then Berger is right, you've got to assume the non-existence of God for the sake of doing any meaningful 'religious studies'. That doesn't mean you've got to deny God, although it's a tough endgame to avoid. Let em explain. So, ever notice that mental health professionals have a tough time having normal relationships? That's partly because they've spent thousand of hours breaking human sentiments such as "love" down into their bare components and so the illusion don't work for them anymore. Explaining religions as human constructs will have the same effect in the long run for those who pursue. I grew up Mormon hearing stories about the gold bible. I was at best on the fence with belief, my Mom an opportunist believer and my older brother pretty much a sincere believer, but we never went to church so I'm not saying that one for sure. My aunt and uncle, mom's sis, were big time church goers. I think about all of them a lot. I try to understand them, but as you can see (on other posts I've made) I'm making sense out of it in terms of need and psychology. Thinking in these terms all the time pretty much assures I could never personally take belief in a gold bible seriously. Because I can't, even if I feign a certain respect for the belief of my bro, it's going to be a tense conversation with him because virtually impossible to not come across as patronizing. So when Christians say religious studies is the work of the devil, you've got to see their point, no matter how much you insist you aren't judging or denying God ro their beliefs. 1 • Reply • Share › Avatar brmckay Saltyhills • 10 hours ago • edited from the OP - "but [Roderick Ninian Smart] he was critical of Peter Burger for "assuming the non-existence of God."[1] Religious Studies is, however, interested in why people believe that their religious statements or experience is true Saltyhills responding to the OP - "Cute, but easily refuted. Religions can already tell you why their followers believe and why their doubters don't believe. If you don't like those answers, then Berger is right, you've got to assume the non-existence of God for the sake of doing any meaningful 'religious studies'." I looked up the two type of religious experience, "numinous and mystical" which it turns out according to Wikipedia William James made three points about. "Regarding the authoritativeness of mystical experiences, James makes three points: first, mystical experiences are authoritative for the individuals who experience them; second, they have no authority over someone who has not had the experience; third, despite this, mystical experiences do indicate that the rationalistic consciousness does not have sole authority over matters of truth." Smart was right to discount the assumption that "God does not exist". At the very least it being an unscientific posture. My personal quibble with the term "existing" applied to God, is one of semantics. The context responsible for existence, does not itself actually exist. But the essential no-thingness causes a lot of trouble for anybody not already heavily invested in intuiting the nature of infinitude. 1 • Reply • Share › Avatar greenpeaceRdale1844coop brmckay • 2 hours ago • edited You are hot on a trail, with your use of the term "semantics" and then "existence." I don´t see that you stay on track with your terms, however. It is clear by your phrasing, that you mean "have material form" by "existence." That´s scientific materialism, however, that normally makes fallacious assertions incoherent with philosophical truth and empiricism both. In short, materialism does not provide an adequate philosophical definition of "existence." You approach that when you address James´ larger context of truth. James´ work is important and interesting. I was just looking at his presentation of testimonies. He demonstrates a break with David Hume´s self-contradicting ideas that have prevailed since he stayed with his assertion that invalidates any foundation to scientific lawfulness. While Hume´s assertion has been left hanging because of its inconsistency and implicit invalidity in empiricism, it does have some applicability to examining semantics. And that applies to Hume´s second and third other assertions, that in effect witnesses to miracles are unreliable because miracles by definition are not credible. James examined and presented various testimonies of mind cure, mostly related to Mary Baker Eddy´s Christian Science, and understood that there is coherence in their content and apparent corresponce to reality in terms of quantity of people and resources involved in the social phenomenon. James´ own focus is limited. However, those healing testimonies in his work already meet a larger criteria for empiricism. They occur in relation to people experiencing God, in addition to Christian features or epiphenomenal features, directly or indirectly. That´s helpful in assessing then, that God´s existence is better understood through philosophical methodology, with epistemology helping situate science in its spectrum. I gather that´s where I would situate your preferred concept of "infinitude." I´ll proceed here with the question, "Why is there something rather than nothing?" helps in conceiving God as the "Tesseract" to our reality in mathematical-geometric terms. There is also a related argument from, "What is the predicate of our own minds?" that has both a direct epistemological consideration and the historical-sociological. Thus, the Kalam Cosmological argument uses the essential features of material reality as the complement to the predicate values of their predicate cause. That presents the features of God´s role in existence. Material existence is now defined by scientific philosophy cosmologically, with time, space, and matter-energy all having a beginning at the Big Bang event (hypothesis). God, then, as predicate cause, is timeless, spaceless, and immaterial. We see the effects in material experience in events now categorized as Transpersonal Psychology and Transcendental, that imply the supernatural depending on semantics. • Edit • Reply • Share › Avatar Saltyhills brmckay • 3 hours ago Smart was right to discount the assumption that "God does not exist". At the very least it being an unscientific posture. There are two basic ways the assumption "God does not exist" might be taken. if the statement implies philosophical naturalism, then I can understand a protest. The statement usually only implies methodological naturalism, which would simply bring religious studies into line with any other objective kind of research project. When a doctor, eh hum, at least a doctor who doesn't watch Fox news, sees black lungs and a profile of chain smoking, possible causes such as angry deities or grand conspiracies aren't entertained. That doesn't rule out the possibility that God cursed the patient's lungs. We just have no way of consistently taking that possibility into account. So we assume it away for the sake of doing what we can. I do understand there are candidates for other "kinds of knowledge" put forth by various parties. Not a fan of James. Thought "varieties" was dumb, but whatever. Suppose James is right. Now, how do you apply this when comparing two different religions, or explaining features of a religion? My personal quibble with the term "existing" applied to God, is one of semantics. The context responsible for existence, does not itself actually exist. But the essential no-thingness causes a lot of trouble for anybody not already heavily invested in intuiting the nature of infinitude. kind of a different subject. But for the sake of this discussion, we could say God does or doesn't exist, or something in between, and then just say our explanations of religions don't take God into account -- whatever his or her status. Not because we are necessarily biased against God, but because there is no consistent way to bring the guy (or gal) into the picture. Part of that is due to the nature of so-called lived experience -- it's subjective, and outside the scope of my tools to access. Say I'm a professor. How am I going to give the kids a multiple choice test that in part involves evaluating the content of a religious figure's mind or subjective experience? 1 • Reply • Share › − Avatar greenpeaceRdale1844coop Saltyhills • a few seconds ago I see the excellence in your point making the distinction between philosophical and methodological naturalism with relation to "God doesn´t exist." I tried to locate "Burger," and found "Berger", who appears to be a theist anyway. It would have been methodological on his part, apparently. That´s a helpful formulation to understand the course of the New Atheists, for whom their method has become "madness," what they would otherwise deny is actually "philosophical" given statements by a few of them that "philosophy is a kind of science," "God is a delusion (science is reality and truth)," "religion is poison (made famous by a non-scientist)" and "philosophy is dead." New Atheism is really a perspective in popular forums, that makes observations like Chris Hedges´ of its religious nature astute. They are simply not literate in key aspects of social thought, which in fact complexly involves religion and the philosophy of religion. Their assumption in effect of religious naturalism is what we are then inferring, ironically. As far as I know, haven´t seen that term used before. Thus, they are poorly informed about basic issues. I just got a glimpse at some of Rev MLK´s thoughts, scholarship really, that science involves knowledge and power principally, while religion involves wisdom and control. Certainly in the case of Comparative Religious Studies, the issue of social studies´ interpretivism, aka antipositivism, becomes a key subject to treat. As for your continuing concerns about how to apply "this (James´ insights on the authoritativeness of mystical experiences as a legitimate non-rational truth)", I´d say that the established relationship and your disengagement from an embedded perspective means you as a person keep building conceptual and communicative bridges as you muse. In the University, the secular view rules. People with embedded, unexamined views may be challenged, or may get uncomfortable, or the like. For me as an empirical theist with UU foundations, I realized that UUism is smart, but seriously limited for my full engagement as a modernized Christian. As for your "multiple choice test", the professor needs to establish a scholarly context. Someone´s going to have an interesting proposed system by now of mystical experience, and that becomes the format for categorical thinking and reasoning. I found an article from the J of the Scientific Study of Religion, for example, regarding psilocybin. Then I found this by N Smart, of all people, talking about RC Zaehner´s work on three categories of mysticism, for another.

Everyone Had To Be Christian, So "Christian" Accomplishments Aren´t Christian"- Not Quite

Peter Smith Mark Rego Monteiro since almost everyone had to be everyone had to be Christian (at least outwardly) in those days, its no surprise "Christians" did those things! Again, you are confusing correlation with causation. Mark Rego Monteiro Peter Smith You´re trying to make Christianity irrelevant by equating their accomplishments with your own ideological version, and scapegoat them with your negative account. Indeed, "everyone was a Christian," well, how?, and what are the causal connections? I´ve already been presenting the comparative analysis. Violence is universal. I´ve pointed out elsewhere here that the Hongwu Emperor Zhu Yuanzhang was brutal, and Literary Inquisitions were a brutal phenomena that were repeated over time and dynasties. King Ashoka in India became a Buddhist because of brutality. Islam conquered with the sword all the way to Asia, and was slaughtered at Baghdad in 1258 by the Mongols. Brutality is a human bio-psychological tendency, not religiously caused. And not "caused" by Christianity. If you want to try to assert a humanist ideological causation, that humans are genetically driven to develop Western type Civilizations, you have to show how it developed and converged roughly equally everywhere. "Human biological purity." That´s pretty self-evidently absurd. Better look up your nature-nurture basics, to add another direction for you to pursue adequate literacy. As such, we note in appropriate detail from modern developments first, that Love Heals. Freud´s talk therapy revealed abreaction emotional reconnection with repressed memories and emotions and catharsis. His resistance to additional insights led him to faint twice when Jung started talking about collective unconscious type ideas. Jung went on to call his Higher Self linked to the Imago Dei and Jesus as meaningful figure. Thus, Christian monasticism began as Anthony of the Desert was motivated by the NT to become an ascetic. Not, say, Pythagoras. Cassiodorus in the 500s was a well educated administrator in Rome and Constantinople who became a monk. He created a Classics curriculum to advance Christian understanding, not to advance paganism, nor anti-Christian philosophy. A study of monastic literature of the lives of monastics provides a wealth of material about spiritual experience in the Christian context. Joan of Arc, a girl who became a warrior leader according to coherent Christian and historical details, is a fairly exciting example. By the time extreme non-conformist metaphysical types were making their appearances, like Hume (d 1776), they were committing silly materialist fallacies by rejecting miracles as impossible, and assuming them to be superstition. That´s a basic anti-philosophical fallacy of rationalism. Hume also argued that causality was not possible because of reductionist atomism. Meanwhile, Newton´s religious views were less unconventional than Hume´s, and he asserted the transcendental and lawful Creator´s relation to lawful physical reality. That corresponds to new understanding of emergentism. Newton indulged in Biblical studies, no less, not Greek philosophy. Also at that time, George Fox was emerging at that time, no less, with little formal education but ample spiritual intelligence. He gave another example of resurgent high integrity in Christianity, now in Protestantism. His soundly streamlined Christianity promoted silent worship similar to meditation, an "inner light" psychological approach, and resulted in high integrity community, including Marg Fell his wife. His proteges were sought out by a young college grad dissident Anglican T Clarkson to back him in his pioneering investigative and organizing anti-slavery social movement campaign. Thus, the comparative evidence, the spiritual origins of monasticism, the classics, Joan of Arc, David Hume´s fallacies, Newton´s transcendentalism and Bible interest, and George Fox´s example, are all details that refute your unjustified and unempirical assertion that Christianity can´t be associated with its accomplishments. Your assertion is ideological, not empirical.

Christopher Hitchens On Religious Instruction and the Age of Reason- Pretentious Is Not Accurate

Ia Yanc “If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in a quite different world.” -Christopher Hitchens- 5 ·

Mark Rego Monteiro Ian Yancey Oh, you gave me a rather lame drool of a comment above, so I can´t resist. Hitchens was a rather reactionary sort who demonstrated little integrity as he ratched sensationalism and misdirection not least of all against Mother Theresa. You should certainly avoid such mistaken pretension with a little more authentic characters: " “God has commanded us to be concerned about the slums down here, and his children who can´t eat three square meals a day.” I would urge you to give priority to the search for God. Allow his spirit to permeate your being....If you don not have a deep and patient faith in God, you will be powerless to face the delays, disappointments, and vicissitudes that inevitably come.” Or, you can snidely follow Hitchens who made as simplistic a mistake as having Tom Paine for a hero and having no idea that he had at least one Quaker parent, the religion that led the anti-slavery movement and modern social movements, as with Susan B Anthony, the founding of Oxfam, and Greenpeace, no less. Sad pretension.

Ian Yancey Mark Rego Monteiro I only took a quote from Hitchens for two reasons. One, because the statement happens to be accurate. Two, he is/was the most pretentious and intellectual person in opposition of religious thinking. 1 ·

Ian Yancey Mark Rego Monteiro the shaping of children's minds is historically utilitarian. Disgraceful by way of teaching what to think instead of how to think. ·

Mark Rego Monteiro Ian Yancey "Accurate" So, you jump right ahead because you AGREE with his statement, and assume it´s TRUE. Just exactly how familiar are you with the social sciences? Not much, apparently. One comparative perspective is ancient Greece of Aristotle. Hey, Alexander the Great wasn´t known for being particularly pious, but was tutored by Aristotle, a great philosophical intellect who spurred Christianity´s own scholarship greatly. Alexander the Great executed his family rivals, according to a rationale, succeeded brilliantly and often enough, brutally and began to put statues of himself in temples. Then, he was assassinated at the age of 32. Aristotle fled at the word of the assassination. So much for reason without religion in ancient Greece. By the time of the Neoplatonic Academy in 529, those philosophers were a bunch of elitists, with no interest in Jesus´ integrity or its institutional deviations. Eastern Emperor Justinian closed them down in the doomed Eastern Empire (by 1453). By contrast, early Christians from Paul to Justin Martyr´s legacy after around 165 AD were Christian philosophers. Anthony of the Desert´s legacy after 270 AD founded Christian monasticism. Cassiodorus instituted classical learning for monks by the 500s, and by 1150, Christians were turning monastic schools´ legacy into the U of Paris, then later Oxford, and Cambridge. They loved learning, and Thomas of Aquinas took Aristotle´s First Cause logic which he couldn´t reconcile with his view of an Eternal Universe and a inaccessible Unmoved Mover. The Bishop Tempier of Paris also responded to complaints overvaluing Aristotle and asserted that God´s omnipotence applied. As per God, things could move in curved lines, contrary to Aristotle. Yay for the church. And so on to through abolition from George Fox´s Quaker legacy and a dissident Anglican college grad, FDR, Eleanor, Gandhi, and Rev MLK, and many others. Reason is a valuable development, but has been directed by informed spiritual awareness, not atheist rationalism. was developed by Christians, not atheist materialists. Sorry. As for Hitchens, indeed, you don´t get that "pretentious" is not a credible quality. "Most intellectual"? Confusing "religion" with "fundamentalist religion" is not even just a gradeschool error, but evidence of psychological issues. Clearly, it is a common enough confusion amongst Americans, who have been indoctrinated in superpower propaganda of various kinds by Big Biz profiteers, or some splinter view. Sadly, even Obama´s example generates people saying, "Yeah, but he doesn´t really believe." Sorry, but America´s WWF fan mentality is not sustainable. As I demonstrate in various points, Hitchens´ fallacies and pretensions reverberated with the prejudices of low information people. You need to inform yourself better with religious scholars like Huston Smith, who started me off with Taoism. Otherwise, Chris Hedges is the most progressive public voice who confronted the New Atheists. Brian L McClaren is also an activist, though a little more toned down. You´ll need to face the consequences of your standards at some point. Meanwhile, James Hannam has done great historical work. All on top of Karen Armstrong´s work. · Reply · 11m Mark Rego Monteiro Ian Yancey Education has various challenges, not least of all in America´s post WWII superpower fantasyland ratcheted by Big Biz profiteering corp execs and their indoctrination. Your jumping on the scapegoat of religion bandwagon is as utilitarian as they come, "Religion is the problem because Hitchens is pretentious and intellectual!" Excuse me? I was raised atheist humanist, and in high school my ex-Catholic atheist hum. dad´s interest in liberal arts including psychology gave me the fuel to perceive my need for non-objectified reality. I picked Huston Smith´s Chinese Tao at first, and Unitarian Universalism´s "spiritual path." Meditation and prayer, like religious membership, provide measurable benefits. Their depth involves the discussion of spiritual-religious phenomena that include the values we find in nature, and the need to recognize the threat to nature by overindulgent and heedless economic industrialization and production. I started with Taoism, Buddhism, self-help stuff, Kung Fu, casually, to Jungian type psychology. When you get to "love heals," and "Rev MLK was righteous and religious," you then ask, "Where does that kind of love come from?" Jesus was no fundamentalist, and his legacy has resurgent integrity. Fundamentalists, on the other hand, are a different group. Where do they come from? They emerge in force from America´s Big Biz profiteer corp execs after FDR´s amazing New Deal for his Christian service values. How to think? Man, that´s how you think. I owe it all to the lack of prejudice and the valuation of liberal arts education. I see now it needs to be called Multidisiciplinary Philosophy with empiricism to put "science" in its more restricted, value free objectivist place.

Stakeburning, Theocracy and Oligarchy, Church and State, and Worker Ownership

Tho J. Alle The right want to have some sort of hybred theocracy/oligarchy and call still it capitalism. They really do not know the meaning of the word. If only the workers owned the means of their production.

Mark Rego Monteiro Tho J. All That´s such a key point. Except that the very premise of the rationalist philosopher who innovated that phrase is Jesus himself, and his spiritual-religious legacy in monastic schools that became Universities. It is the very structured diversity of monastic-church-University Western Europe on Jesus´ driving core of loving spiritual integrity that produced the educated monk Luther and the Reformation. That´s what defines the predicates of the pioneering anti-slavery movement, where young college grad and dissenting Anglican T Clarkson sought out the Quakers, the proteges of informally low educated spiritual genius George Fox and well known for their unusual integrity and anti-slavery position. They succeeded by 1840, but as they started, a Christian doctor inspired Robert Owen´s pro-social biz model and activism, which all inspired the 28 workingpeople who founded the Rochdale Co-op grocery in the 1840s. That´s the foundation of Social Europe, but what Marx rejected in his political fixation and other materialist assumptions. ·

Tho J. Alle Mark Rego Monteiro religion has a bad habit of burning you at the stake.

Mark Rego Monteiro Th J. All Gee, where have I heard that before. Apparently, few like me have studied Biological Anthropology adequately to differentiate authority figures of all kinds and associate their violent tendencies with their human biology. That´s how the relatively limited "stake burnings" fit into the category of violence by authorities in China, India, Islam, and other forms of violence by authorities in historical civilizations, whether Greece or Rome. Not that clear on Alexander the Great´s executing his family rivals, slaying the enemies until his assassination at age 32? Or why King Ashoka became a Buddhist after a particularly violent battle. That´s why the development of modern University-based education is a basic fact to address. Christians developed monasticism out of the general fact of spiritual-religious experience through meditation and prayer, with Anthony of the Desert the attributed founder. Later Christians turned monastic schools into Universities, and Thomas of Aquinas Christianized Aristotle´s metaphysics around God through Jesus, not the "Unmoved Mover," along with the basic epistemological areas of Human Laws, Natural Laws, Divine Law, and Eternal Law. Descartes played his pivotal role in using philosophy, but his orientation to mechanicism quickly led to the undiscerning excessive application to human affairs, where G Vico began critiquing and asserting one anti-rationalist, anti-mechanicist alternative, now called constructivist epistemology with a Christian metaphysical touch, "truth is what people make and create, allowing for Providence." Max Weber and Georg Simmel made strong advances for anti-positivism, that human beings can´t be just submitted to description, calculation, and prediction without severe consequences, based on their values, agency, and symbolic systems. So, time to go a little deeper to see why "inquisitions" are more about human biology that was using the Christian religion hypocritically, and other religions according to biological individualistic tendencies. Human biology underlies violent tendencies, and that includes the impulses that have led humans in Christian culture to WWI, Soviet Russia´s cooperation with the Nazi Hitler, Hitler´s anti-Christian opportunistic system, Tojo´s militarism based on Western education without any accompanying linkages to Christian religion. How gentle were the Japanese? And who was Oskar Schindler? A Catholic who showed how he made an ethical choice, steeped in his business culture. Who led the end of WWII? Just some scientific intellectual? Is that who you think FDR was? FDR, and Eleanor´s variation, was raised on nothing less than the Social Gospel. Jesus´ teachings weren´t just doctrine for right or wrong and club membership to the right answers. He taught spiritual practice and loving integrity. The result was the historical resurgence of loving integrity, including the intense spiritual practice in monasticism. By now, Religious Tolerance from the likes of Grotius, Locke, and Jefferson led to the likes of Schopenhauer´s Hindu-Buddhist studies, and Swedenborgian Christian CC Bonney´s founding the effort led by a Presbyterian dissident for the 1893 Chicago Parliament of World Religions. Buddhism, yoga, tai chi, like Jungian type psychology, have helped promote alternative spiritual practices for greater understanding of the distinction between church doctrinal conduct and individual spiritual experience, practice, and growth.

Seneca On Religion As Useful to the Rulers, and Then Came Jesus

Ir Mi "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Mark Rego Monteiro Ir Min Ah, he died 65 AD/CE. While Christianity is subject to the humanity, the biological tendencies of its humans, its special accomplishments reflect an unusual ability to generate effective resurgent integrity proponents of Jesus´ loving integrity. Thus, Christians developed monasticism, monastic schools into Universities, broke off from Roman church autocracy, unleashed the Scientific Revolution, Enlightenment, and economic organizations, began to end absolute monarchy, ended slavery with Civil Rights and pioneered social and ecological movements, and founded the UN with human rights and now sustainability. FDR and Eleanor were raised on the Social Gospel, Gandhi loved Jesus and read the Bible regularly as a Hindu and trained lawyer, and Rev MLK helped lead the 1960s counterculture for Civil Rights. The cynical secular materialists that buys into Seneca don´t quite understand themselves and the chains they refuse to doff. Seneca the Younger - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seneca_the_Younger Irene Minerick Mark Rego Monteiro what chains? I know exactly what I am without following a religious organization. I know for a fact I’m free from any religious dogma that people use to control the masses. The religious “leaders” twist every thing that mankind has written in their bibles, Torah, Quran, Sutra etc..., to suit their own agendas, as they killed in the name of their god. They use their “books” to control the masses to their way of thinking and judge others who don’t walk in lockstep with their “beliefs.” Christianity did not unleashed scientific, economic revolution or enlightenment of any kind, it tried to stifle it. Plus religion had nothing to with the Civil War either. Do you know what Christians have done to scientists, doctors and great thinkers? They prosecuted and harmed them in so many ways. BTW, no “god” wrote anything. If there was a “god,” wouldn’t you think there would be only ONE holy book and not the many that exist today? There would be only one religion, one set of tenets/rules that people must follow, not the many dozens that exists today that people use to harm and judge others. I’m a Humanist, I believe there are a lot of good people out there vs evil. My favorite quote by Thomas Paine captures what I believe and strive for every single day.... “The World is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.” Check out how religion destroyed people. This is just one small example of the harm religion has caused throughout mankind’s history... https://www.wired.com/.../famous-persecuted-scientists/amp Galileo to Turing: The Historical Persecution of Scientists WIRED.COM Galileo to Turing: The Historical Persecution of Scientists Galileo to Turing: The Historical Persecution of Scientists · Reply · 11h Peter Smith Mark Rego Monteiro since almost everyone had to be everyone had to be Christian (at least outwardly) in those days, its no surprise "Christians" did those things! Again, you are confusing correlation with causation. · Reply · 4h Mark Rego Monteiro Irene Minerick You´re free of chains? So, a fixation on scapegoating a human institution and behavior with no balanced and well-informed scholarship except for a dirty laundry list is your standard of "free thinking"? That´s a fixated viewpoint, and tendentious scholarship, at best, and ideological bigotry on the bad side. Thus, you fail entirely to grasp any sense of my points because of the lens of your humanist materialist anti-religionist dogma. So, to help disclose the commitments to truth over ideology, I have a degree in Bio Anthro, worked in social services, activist, interfaith seeker become Christian, and masters in IR and more, and when you start scapegoating religion, nothing remains for me but to point out your fallacious ideology and correct your fixation. Max Weber made an effort to identify the "spirit of capitalism" in comparative perspective to identify why capitalism arose in Western Europe. That´s another point to add to what I already mentioned about "economic organizations." But the point applies from another angle. Chinese authorities have committed their own inquisitions and atrocities, as with the Hongwu Emperor Zhu Yuanzhang who killed millions. The Chinese Literary Inquisitions have been a recurring historical phenomena hardly linked to the abstractions of Christian theology, involving such offenses as a writer offending an emperor in which whole families would be killed. King Ashoka in India converted to Buddhism because of the brutality of the wars he led. Let´s go to Islam, the Aztecs, the ancient Greeks, and the Romans, for starters in assessing human bio-psychological tendencies. Thus, what distinguishes Christianity is not the appearance of human indulgence and violence, but how that violates the integrity standard set by Jesus and the early Christians. And then the manner in which that integrity resurged related to spiritual-religious experience. Your attempt to scapegoat religion and limit it to violence and "mind control" misses the point of establishing human beings´ bio-psychological tendencies as a standard. Unlike Christianity, Islam began with violent conquest, for its part. Its Golden Age of scholarship collapsed for a lack of cohesive forces. Yet, Islam has consolidated its presence, and its culture stands now in relation to Western Civilization, making clarification of Christianity´s role in the West quite important. And your kind of poorly informed anti-religious ideological extremism. (continued) · Reply · 1h Mark Rego Monteiro Irene Minerick "Christianity did not unleashed (sic) economic etc revolution of any kind....it tried to stifle it" You are trying to make an intelligent statement, but are just making an unjustified assertion that shows ideology at work, not understanding. Try to justify your point. You have heard of Galileo and maybe Darwin, and are stereotyping as badly as any Christian fundamentalist. I made empirical references to events, such as Christians developing monastic schools into modern Universities. That´s basic scholarly procedure. The educated monk Thomas of Aquinas at the U of Paris in the 1200s made historical foundational intellectual efforts that applied Christian standards to Aristotle´s incoherent position. First Cause logic by him explained led to an implication that there was a common origin of all things. He couldn´t reconcile that with an Eternal Universe, but stuck with the Eternal Universe. His God was an inaccessible Unmoved Mover, and he couldn´t correct his own ideas like there is no curved motion." Aquinas created the comprehensive philosophical educational foundations by applying the Christian logic to First Cause logic that linked Jesus´ omnipotent lawful personal and parental God to a lawful Creation. The church, meanwhile, is made of individuals, and Bishop Tempier of Paris responded to complaints that there were slavish followers of Aristotle adhering to his limiting assumptions. Tempier issued a Condemnation affirming God´s lawful omnipotence. That was good. The rest is fascinating and as basic as the church-monastic-University networks making all the scholarly work available to Newton, work by Kepler, Descartes, etc. "The Civil War....no religion" You apparently mean the US Civil War. You mean after groups like the Quaker Christians led abolition in the US North, with Lucretia Mott noteworthy in association with Afro-Am Marg Forten? Or Wm L Garrison influenced by Presbyt Rev John Rankin´s book? Or Quaker daughter Susan B Anthony´s pre-women´s suffrage abolitionism? Or Harriet B Stowe´s involvement with Christian abolitionist projects? Yeah, you´re not well informed and are wearing ideological blinders. "If there was a god (sic), there´d be only ONE holy book" You´re projecting and apparently rebelling against some doctrine that was likely forced on you. "Science" does provide a powerful perspective of sorts, but the Big Bang didn´t create monotony, but diversity. Same with sacred abiogenesis. The same with human evolution. The same with shamanism. The same with Christian-based University philsophical liberal arts that includes "science." My dad was ex-Catholic atheist humanist. I was raised valuing education and empiricism. We can trace biological evolution to human diversity. Jesus´ loving integrity for Moses and God has made possible modern University-based archeology and anthropology etc. That development has led to globalization and the UN human rights community. Even before that, Catholic missionaries already began studying China, leading to things like Schopenhauer´s and Emerson´s studying Hinduism, and later Swedenborgian Christian CC Bonney´s initiating the 1893 Parliament of World Religions. High integrity Christians led such initiatives despite church opposition. CC Bonney expressed a pluralist view, " But, properly understood, these varieties of view are not causes of discord and strife, but rather incentives to deeper interest and examination." In fact, pluralism goes back in Christianity to Jesus´ teachings to "go and learn" and the likes of the Apostle Paul´s reasoning and philosophers like Justin Martyr. It is the process that led to the high integrity Social Gospel educated FDR´s vision of the UN human rights that put up a high integrity Christian-based secular standard for the world´s religions. (continued) · Reply · 34m Mark Rego Monteiro Irene Minerick So, you´re a Humanist, and believe there are "good people vs evil." And where do you think you got your standards from? In terms of biological survival, the ancient Greek Alexander the Great had "good" down. Get in power when your polygamous mom goaded a jilted ex-lover ex-bodyguard of her husband King Philip of Macedon to assassinate him. Then, Alexander executed his family rivals. Is your good, "Might Makes Right"? And your "evil" Christian "Love thy neighbor as thyself"? Thomas Paine was the son of a Quaker, and his ideas reflect that. He also said, "My mind is my church" I recall. He remained a Deist, but opposed to church institutions. Yet, at his death, he requested burial in a Quaker cemetery. They refused because of his rather rebellious, scathing, and indiscreet reputation. That was Paine´s life. The Quakers have many fine examples, and their founder George Fox is excellent, with his spiritual reflection and identification of sitting in silent waiting for God´s inspiration based on an inner light in relation to Jesus. He´s usually linked to a group of sixty founders, including Marg Fell who became his wife, and wrote for women´s rights. You want to sustain your anti-religious fixation. That is not sufficient to understand not just the "good," but the healing power of love. Philosopher Spinoza had a key insight about emotional awareness around the time of George Fox, but even more comprehensive and linked to the Quaker community was Elias Hicks around the time of Paine´s passing. Lucretia Mott was influenced by Hicks. Also of note was the native Seneca prophet Handsome Lake, who was an prominent tribal figure and alcoholic who had a vision. The vision has been analyzed for how it combines Quaker and Native values. HL´s alcoholism was cured, as were others. Jefferson wrote him a letter of congratulations. Harriet Tubman is another interesting figure. Injured on the head, she began having visions in her life of spiritual significance that are associated with her becoming devoutly religious. As Rev MLK said, "I would urge you to give priority to the search for God. Allow his spirit to permeate your being....If you don not have a deep and patient faith in God, you will be powerless to face the delays, disappointments, and vicissitudes that inevitably come.”

Libtards? Is Empathetic, Progressive, and Educated All We Are?

Mark Rego Monteiro We "libtards" need to learn a little more about our empathy, and how to apply that deconstruction stuff, which is the best application, or extension of anything we´ve learned. One problem is overspecialization. Another is getting more spiritual than secular. I identify more with "progressive" than "liberal," myself, and my identity isn´t defined by science, much as I love it. Human rights is closer, but where exactly do "human rights," and for that matter "science," come from? And why do "progressives" not seem all that focused so that we seem to be losing. And if you look at sustainability statistics, and human rights ones, no less. We´re losing badly. We need to go from deconstruction to what I got turned onto in my IR masters, social constructivism and constructionism. By referring to myself and the rest of us progressives as "libtard", I´m coopting that attempted term of insult right now, of course. It reflects my personal growth and creativity efforts, and projecting the results of self-care and understanding of self-esteem and pro-active, pro-social engagement with an apparent adversary. As a "libtard", I already embraced an interfaith spiritual path based on my family´s educational values, interest in therapeutic psychology, and Comparative Religious Studies, while in high school. In that context, I sought out Kung Fu in college, already after I had found my way to Bio Anthropology. It´s a long story, but I knocked on doors for an NGO, taught science in Africa, and left a corporate job after three weeks to work in social services with substance abusers there as I was starting out. Long story short, all our possible "bleeding heart" mentality and knowledge is in accordance with a standard, which has been underappreciated by progressives as secularization has emphasized science. In fact, "science" has assumed the definition of "truth." In fact, "science" is scientific philosophy, and is a Christian-based practice based on Christian religious philosophy. It breaks down to Aristotle rejecting the First Cause argument. Christian, not just "CAtholic," Thomas of Aquinas addressed that well. Aquinas´ contemporary Bishop R Grosseteste was a protoscientist at that time and modern historian James Hannam, among others, has written about the matter. Galileo´s own situation wasn´t cut and dried, and the worst harshness was by a Pope and the Catholic Church, which had already been rent asunder not by scientists, but by "ye" monk Martin Luther. The Catholic Descartes was frolicking about in Holland, no less. Other Christian scientific adventurers in Protestant lands include William Harvey, who came along in biology before Newton came along with Hooke and Boyle in England. Huygens, van Leeuenhook and others. Locke, too, and Grotius in moral philosophy´s early branching. If you know about the New Atheists, they have also misrepresented things in the extreme. Slavery began to be ended as a young college grad and dissenting Anglican T Clarkson sought out the famous Quaker-Friends for their integrity and pioneering anti-slavery sentiments in the 1780s. He then pioneered modern social movement investigating and organizing with their anchor and a growing network including W Wilberforce in Parliament. NGOs do a lot of that stuff nowadays, and Quakers no less led the founding of Greenpeace and Oxfam, as well as spurring early women leaders like Susan B Anthony, AFro-Am Olaudah Equiano, and the Underground Railroad. I sense that "libtard" is a term that gets inserted in the psychosocial and cultural space that has been created by the artificiality of secular and mechanicist pretensions. I recommend paying more attention to the role of spirituality with an eye to integrating it with other progressive interests. Jesus was no fundamentalist, but he deserves to be championed, as even Gandhi said, "I love Christ, and read the Bible 'faithfully'." There is a progressive image problem. The Social Gospel was the main influence on FD Roosevelt and Eleanor as they founded the UN. Secularism has given us the UN and human rights, so that the pro-poor Grameen Bank of Mohammed Yunus using his Western education gives us a prominent example at that modern level of UN community of nations. Vandana Shiva is an ex-physicist and activist for small farmers and agroecology. Wangari Maathai was an African biologist, pioneer as a woman, in her founding the Green Belt movement. Progressive healing seems focused on medical practitioners, and OC Simonton MD and Lewis Mehl-Medrona MD, PhD, Lissa Rankin MD were/are advocating combining the spiritual approach in healing. We need to get righteous, not proud. And Jesus is the appropriate name with the orientation at our disposal. Again, he was no fundamentalist. Rev MLK was quite a good representative, with his degree in sociology and doctorate. He actually referred to the problem of overemphasizing science, incidentally, when he said, “We have genuflected before the god of science only to find that it has given us the atomic bomb, producing fears and anxieties that science can never mitigate.” We need to broaden our spiritual vision, even with the informally educated Fannie Lou Hamer and her Farm Co-op, based on an alternative economic model, widespread in Social Europe and in food co-ops etc. Jesus for progressives with a righteous spirit. Not just "left-wing", but very much pro-social, spiritual, and building a society that does a good job. Social Europe does, but they´ve been riding the ghost of FDR that inspires UN human rights, it seems. "Libtard" is a word. Righteous is the answer for liberals and progressives, and Jesus is the way behind progressive pluralism, Muslim, Jewish or whatever. UN human rights and sustainability and Greenpeace, Oxfam, Fair Trade type activist style.