Philosophy Now Forum

secularized religion is a subjective man made creation from below. It has good points which enable it to serve as a policeman in society. Like rat poison it is 98% good corn. It is the arsenic that kills. It is man made interpretations that destroy what religion is capable of.

The transcendent origin of religion comes from above. Its purpose is to awaken Man to his conscious potential rather than used as political tool keeping man's being as it is. The emphasis of secularized religion is teaching what to DO. The emphasis of the transcendent origin of religion is to teach Man how to BE

Einstein makes us aware that the evolution of religion requires opening to the direct experience of conscience. It is one part of evolved human being. But without transcending dualism and opening to the third force which reconciles duality from a higher perspective, we can "feel" value but cannot receive help from above necessary to actualize it.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:45 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:16 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 1:35 pm

How wrong you are.
All the horrors come from the myth that life is a rehearsal. And that myth is religion.

DAM has it right. Political power either invents a religion to serve its own ends, or political power hi-jacks an existing religion for the same purpose.

Religion is a system of political power. What planet do you come from? You have the cart before the horse.

You think that because what 'religion' means to you is its social control function . If you pay attention to DAM you might see religion can be a philosophy that makes sense of our lives.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:43 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:45 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:16 pm
DAM has it right. Political power either invents a religion to serve its own ends, or political power hi-jacks an existing religion for the same purpose.

Religion is a system of political power. What planet do you come from? You have the cart before the horse.

You think that because what 'religion' means to you is its social control function . If you pay attention to DAM you might see religion can be a philosophy that makes sense of our lives.

But all religion is based on lies.
It's never going to end well is it?

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:56 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:43 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:45 pm
Religion is a system of political power. What planet do you come from? You have the cart before the horse.

You think that because what 'religion' means to you is its social control function . If you pay attention to DAM you might see religion can be a philosophy that makes sense of our lives.

But all religion is based on lies.
It's never going to end well is it?

I suppose you mean all religions are based on supernatural myths.

sculptor

From Plato's Cave

[Socrates] And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the cave, while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable) would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death.

Why do I get the impression that you are in sympathy with secularists who would catch a person leading another to the light and inflict the most horrid consequences.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2020 1:56 am sculptor

From Plato's Cave

[Socrates] And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the cave, while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable) would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death.

Why do I get the impression that you are in sympathy with secularists who would catch a person leading another to the light and inflict the most horrid consequences.

Plato's cave is just another myth. It probably says more about the limits of perception (in a Kantian way), and not intended to say anything about religion in particuar.
Your comments are groundless.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:40 am Your comments are groundless.

All comments are groundless because they are purely objective, and have no real ground on which to stand in and of themselves. Have you ever known an objective thing that can stand apart from every thing else, and know it is a part?

No doubt you'll make some thing up, and claim that thing your own, I mean where else can the groundless ground itself ?

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2020 10:56 am

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:40 am Your comments are groundless.

All comments are groundless because they are purely objective,

NO. All comments are grounded in the subject, obviously. None are objective. Comments are just reflections of some other thing.

and have no real ground on which to stand in and of themselves. Have you ever known an objective thing that can stand apart from every thing else, and know it is a part?

What a stupid question.

No doubt you'll make some thing up, and claim that thing your own, I mean where else can the groundless ground itself ?

.

Eh?

The evolution of religion must include the the evolution of morality into the experience of conscience. The trouble is that only a rare few know the difference between morality and conscience.

But suppose a group of individuals join with the purpose of organizing a Church of Conscience, how would it be structured? What could keep it fee from fantasy replacing conscience? What would be the difference between a church of morality and a church of conscience? I hate to admit it but it doesn't seem that humanity as a whole is ready for the evolution of religion which can open the door to the human experience of "meaning."

"
"That is why the most beautiful Church for me is the church of conscience, found in the silence of one's own presence. Unselfishness, humaneness, service to your brother - these are the values which the Church should practice for once, instead of con­stantly trying to gather in more souls. A cosmic religion is the only solution - then there will be no more Church politics of supporting the mighty at the cost of the human rights of the poor." Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 106.)

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 4:37 pm The evolution of religion must include the the evolution of morality into the experience of conscience. The trouble is that only a rare few know the difference between morality and conscience.

But suppose a group of individuals join with the purpose of organizing a Church of Conscience, how would it be structured? What could keep it fee from fantasy replacing conscience? What would be the difference between a church of morality and a church of conscience? I hate to admit it but it doesn't seem that humanity as a whole is ready for the evolution of religion which can open the door to the human experience of "meaning."

"
"That is why the most beautiful Church for me is the church of conscience, found in the silence of one's own presence. Unselfishness, humaneness, service to your brother - these are the values which the Church should practice for once, instead of con­stantly trying to gather in more souls. A cosmic religion is the only solution - then there will be no more Church politics of supporting the mighty at the cost of the human rights of the poor." Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 106.)

A church of conscience is structured democratically.
A church of conscience is kept free of fantasy by its members' knowledge and fine judgement.

Many people know the difference between on one hand, religious laws and precepts, and on the other hand, conscience.

Conscience is consciousness of the causes of behaviours of self and others, and also consciousness of how to improve behaviours of self and others. It is widely known, for instance, that it is better to rehabilitate criminals by regarding them as unwell and helping them to live happier lives that don't involve crime. It's also well known that some powerful men are badly behaved men, and nearly everybody can be educated in how to recognise powerful bad men and distinguish between them and powerful good men.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2020 12:00 pm NO. All comments are grounded in the subject, obviously. None are objective. Comments are just reflections of some other thing.

Is that a fact ..oh and what is this other thing.. is that the subjective...hmm

Ah yes, well I suppose groundless objective comments have to ground somehwere, might aswell ground themselves in the subjective personal opinions and interpretations, that are not actual facts...more like fictions.

.

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:07 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 4:37 pm The evolution of religion must include the the evolution of morality into the experience of conscience. The trouble is that only a rare few know the difference between morality and conscience.

But suppose a group of individuals join with the purpose of organizing a Church of Conscience, how would it be structured? What could keep it fee from fantasy replacing conscience? What would be the difference between a church of morality and a church of conscience? I hate to admit it but it doesn't seem that humanity as a whole is ready for the evolution of religion which can open the door to the human experience of "meaning."

"
"That is why the most beautiful Church for me is the church of conscience, found in the silence of one's own presence. Unselfishness, humaneness, service to your brother - these are the values which the Church should practice for once, instead of con­stantly trying to gather in more souls. A cosmic religion is the only solution - then there will be no more Church politics of supporting the mighty at the cost of the human rights of the poor." Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 106.)

A church of conscience is structured democratically.
A church of conscience is kept free of fantasy by its members' knowledge and fine judgement.

Many people know the difference between on one hand, religious laws and precepts, and on the other hand, conscience.

Conscience is consciousness of the causes of behaviours of self and others, and also consciousness of how to improve behaviours of self and others. It is widely known, for instance, that it is better to rehabilitate criminals by regarding them as unwell and helping them to live happier lives that don't involve crime. It's also well known that some powerful men are badly behaved men, and nearly everybody can be educated in how to recognise powerful bad men and distinguish between them and powerful good men.

Belinda you wrote

A church of conscience is structured democratically.
A church of conscience is kept free of fantasy by its members' knowledge and fine judgement.

Simone Weil wrote

Imagination is always the fabric of social life and the dynamic of history. The influence of real needs and compulsions, of real interests and materials, is indirect because the crowd is never conscious of it.

Imagination and fiction make up more than three quarters of our real life.

What if Simone is right? It means that all the knowledge and judgements are primarily fantasy. The church of conscience must be willing to admit the human condition as its foundation rather than using it as an excuse to profit from self serving imagination imagining itself as conscience.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:21 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2020 12:00 pm NO. All comments are grounded in the subject, obviously. None are objective. Comments are just reflections of some other thing.

Is that a fact ..oh and what is this other thing.. is that the subjective...hmm

Yes. Subjective facts, as there are not others.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:54 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:21 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 04, 2020 12:00 pm NO. All comments are grounded in the subject, obviously. None are objective. Comments are just reflections of some other thing.

Is that a fact ..oh and what is this other thing.. is that the subjective...hmm

Yes. Subjective facts, as there are not others.

No others?? If true, then Einstein's idea of the church of objective conscience is impossible

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:23 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:54 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:21 pm

Is that a fact ..oh and what is this other thing.. is that the subjective...hmm

Yes. Subjective facts, as there are not others.

No others?? If true, then Einstein's idea of the church of objective conscience is impossible

Since all facts are held memetically within neural tissue:
all facts can only be understood through the subjective lens of understanding.
Objectivity is only an aspiration.