The Evolution of Religion

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Nick_A
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Nick_A »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:30 pm
Nick_A wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:23 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:54 pm
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.
Assume respect for life as a universal value able to be felt by conscience. Would beings on the Alpha Centauri or similar solar system have a conscience to match its consciousness?

Would beings with higher intelligence feel there obligation to support conscious life reaching its potential in a way humanity is still incapable of for whatever reason? If yes, then respect for life is an objective universal value permeating our universe which our conscience could evolve to feel.
Belinda
Posts: 4010
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Belinda »

Nick_A wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:10 pm
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."

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.
Imagination is indispensible to human creativity.

Fiction is an art form that is capable of expressing important ideas and feelings.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2187
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Sculptor »

Nick_A wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:31 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:30 pm
Nick_A wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:23 pm

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.
Assume respect for life as a universal value able to be felt by conscience. Would beings on the Alpha Centauri or similar solar system have a conscience to match its consciousness?

Would beings with higher intelligence feel there obligation to support conscious life reaching its potential in a way humanity is still incapable of for whatever reason? If yes, then respect for life is an objective universal value permeating our universe which our conscience could evolve to feel.
Centaurans are probably unlikely to value earth people, but then I've never met one, and speculation about them is vanity.
But you might just as well compare and ask how humans feel about pigs, goats, or sheep as ask how Centaurans feel about humans.
The idea of "universal respect for life" is refuted by a SINGLE breach of respect, such as Hitler for Jews, or my respect for a flea.
So the answer is no there is no such value.
Nick_A
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Nick_A »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 11:43 pm
Nick_A wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:31 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:30 pm
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.
Assume respect for life as a universal value able to be felt by conscience. Would beings on the Alpha Centauri or similar solar system have a conscience to match its consciousness?

Would beings with higher intelligence feel there obligation to support conscious life reaching its potential in a way humanity is still incapable of for whatever reason? If yes, then respect for life is an objective universal value permeating our universe which our conscience could evolve to feel.
Centaurans are probably unlikely to value earth people, but then I've never met one, and speculation about them is vanity.
But you might just as well compare and ask how humans feel about pigs, goats, or sheep as ask how Centaurans feel about humans.
The idea of "universal respect for life" is refuted by a SINGLE breach of respect, such as Hitler for Jews, or my respect for a flea.
So the answer is no there is no such value.
As a species, humanity is yet to evolve to experience a quality of conscience like respect for life. It is our potential. Of course some more evolved individuals may experience conscience but as creatures of reaction, we are just as likely to produce saints as those who follow those like Hitler

Einstein is referring to awakening conscience. It is a beginning. But it requires people with the humility to open to the experience. A church of conscience could lead the way but as of now how many know how it could be structured free from fantasy. Our species is not yet ready.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2187
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Sculptor »

Nick_A wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:55 am
Sculptor wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 11:43 pm
Nick_A wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:31 pm

Assume respect for life as a universal value able to be felt by conscience. Would beings on the Alpha Centauri or similar solar system have a conscience to match its consciousness?

Would beings with higher intelligence feel there obligation to support conscious life reaching its potential in a way humanity is still incapable of for whatever reason? If yes, then respect for life is an objective universal value permeating our universe which our conscience could evolve to feel.
Centaurans are probably unlikely to value earth people, but then I've never met one, and speculation about them is vanity.
But you might just as well compare and ask how humans feel about pigs, goats, or sheep as ask how Centaurans feel about humans.
The idea of "universal respect for life" is refuted by a SINGLE breach of respect, such as Hitler for Jews, or my respect for a flea.
So the answer is no there is no such value.
As a species, humanity is yet to evolve to experience a quality of conscience like respect for life.

It is our potential.
Idle speculation. But why would I ever respect the life of a flea trying to drink my blood, or let's say a corona virus.

Of course some more evolved individuals may experience conscience but as creatures of reaction, we are just as likely to produce saints as those who follow those like Hitler

Einstein is referring to awakening conscience. It is a beginning. But it requires people with the humility to open to the experience. A church of conscience could lead the way but as of now how many know how it could be structured free from fantasy. Our species is not yet ready.
You'll have to cite the reference to Einstein. I find it hard to believe he's support any kind of church.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8543
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Dontaskme »

Nick_A wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:55 am
As a species, humanity is yet to evolve to experience a quality of conscience like respect for life. It is our potential.
While it is incumbent on a self-aware species, aka humans, to awaken from the dream of separation (awakening to it's true god self) it is not incumbent for humans to judge or interfere with those who have not yet awakened. The pain and suffering that comes with the apparent isolation and separation from God, albeit an illsuory separation.. is an essential part of the journey toward full awakening which we all must experience in time. So the christian idea of the fall of man is all a necessary part of this awakening process. In forgetting our true nature, is what drives us to seek it, because we already know the truth, because we are that LIVING TRUTH for there is only God.
Our not-knowing limited contracted separate state of who we are is not to be feared, for it's how we reconcile and come together again with God, it's the only route, and always the perfect opportunity for every one of us to wake up, but only in their own time when that awakening is meant to happen, it is only when life evolves it to happen in a person, does it happen, and not one second before.
Let the Homer Simpson's BE ..for they are not ready yet, but that doesn't mean they will never be ready.

.
Nick_A
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Nick_A »

Sculptor wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 9:10 am
Nick_A wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:55 am
Sculptor wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 11:43 pm

Centaurans are probably unlikely to value earth people, but then I've never met one, and speculation about them is vanity.
But you might just as well compare and ask how humans feel about pigs, goats, or sheep as ask how Centaurans feel about humans.
The idea of "universal respect for life" is refuted by a SINGLE breach of respect, such as Hitler for Jews, or my respect for a flea.
So the answer is no there is no such value.
As a species, humanity is yet to evolve to experience a quality of conscience like respect for life.

It is our potential.
Idle speculation. But why would I ever respect the life of a flea trying to drink my blood, or let's say a corona virus.

Of course some more evolved individuals may experience conscience but as creatures of reaction, we are just as likely to produce saints as those who follow those like Hitler

Einstein is referring to awakening conscience. It is a beginning. But it requires people with the humility to open to the experience. A church of conscience could lead the way but as of now how many know how it could be structured free from fantasy. Our species is not yet ready.
You'll have to cite the reference to Einstein. I find it hard to believe he's support any kind of church.
"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.)
Remember the difference between conscience and morality. Morality consists of what a diety wants people to do and how we interpret it. It is purely subjective. Conscience is a direct emotional experience of objective value. It isn't taught but it is remembered. Simone Weil gives a good example
There Comes

If you do not fight it---if you look, just
look, steadily,
upon it,

there comes
a moment when you cannot do it,
if it is evil;

if good, a moment
when you cannot
not.
A church of conscience would teach the ability to impartially look. It would teach how to look without judgment regardless of how much a person wants to judge. Continuing to do so enables the emotional experience of objective conscience by bypassing acquired fears and conditioning which create our judgments.
Nick_A
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Nick_A »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:32 pm
Nick_A wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:55 am
As a species, humanity is yet to evolve to experience a quality of conscience like respect for life. It is our potential.
While it is incumbent on a self-aware species, aka humans, to awaken from the dream of separation (awakening to it's true god self) it is not incumbent for humans to judge or interfere with those who have not yet awakened. The pain and suffering that comes with the apparent isolation and separation from God, albeit an illsuory separation.. is an essential part of the journey toward full awakening which we all must experience in time. So the christian idea of the fall of man is all a necessary part of this awakening process. In forgetting our true nature, is what drives us to seek it, because we already know the truth, because we are that LIVING TRUTH for there is only God.
Our not-knowing limited contracted separate state of who we are is not to be feared, for it's how we reconcile and come together again with God, it's the only route, and always the perfect opportunity for every one of us to wake up, but only in their own time when that awakening is meant to happen, it is only when life evolves it to happen in a person, does it happen, and not one second before.
Let the Homer Simpson's BE ..for they are not ready yet, but that doesn't mean they will never be ready.

[/quote}

The first step in awakening is the experience that you are the wretched man with the potential to become the New Man. Anything else is fantasy. If we are unable to emotionally experience conscience, it is far better to give up the dreams and begin at the beginning.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8543
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Dontaskme »

Nick_A wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 9:12 pm
The first step in awakening is the experience that you are the wretched man with the potential to become the New Man. Anything else is fantasy. If we are unable to emotionally experience conscience, it is far better to give up the dreams and begin at the beginning.
The first step in awakening is to experience there is no man to wake up or experience the experience of waking up.

The rest of the quote above is just a load of old worn-out, out-dated, man-made beliefs that have no reality or substance except as dogma, stories, aka illusory ideas arising in and to consciousness that has absolutely no agenda but to be exactly as it is...which is the awareness of story, but not the story.

.
Nick_A
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Nick_A »

Dam

My need to feel "meaning" is the reason for my interest in the essence of religion and how it can evolve to for Man including me and the human need for meaning. Simone describes my interest
I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil
The purpose of science is true as is the essence of religion. Two essential truth cannot be opposed. It just means that humanity as a whole lacks the quality necessary to to put the corruption of science and religion aside long enough to experience that they are complimentary from a higher conscious perspective.

Your idea of awakening to realize we are God goes against science since it denies the necessity of fragments which you consider a dream

I am well aware that I am in a minority. I know that ideas suggesting our conscious source must be hated by secularism. A person accepting a conscious source and our relation to it cannot be a secularist. But even though it is a minority view, who am I to ridicule those like Plato, Simone Weil, Prof Needleman, Basarab Nicolescu, and others all aware of the complimentary relationship between the non-corrupted horizontal purpose of science and the vertical purpose of religion

The vertical evolution of religion is just part of the process. The question is if the vertical evolution is possible because of our attachments to technology? Who knows?
Belinda
Posts: 4010
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Belinda »

Nick_A quoted Simone Weil.

I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil


But men built and continue to build that "bridge leading toward God". It's impossible for men to know whether or not that man-made bridge is supported on more than faith which leads men to try to make our lives meaningful. The "identical thought" just as Simone describes it, is a thought that comes from men and the evolution of cultures, and is the backbone of what most people today call morality.
It is a step too far to claim "this thought is the truth". Moreover it's not the business of science to be "bridge leading toward God". No scientist ever believes they have or can find ultimate truth. It's politically dangerous to place the burden of finding and discovering meaning upon any person or institution whether that be a religion or science.

Each of us makes meanings as we live our lives and then each of us dies and our meanings are thereby finalised.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2187
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Sculptor »

Belinda wrote: Sat Jul 18, 2020 9:58 am Nick_A quoted Simone Weil.

I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil


But men built and continue to build that "bridge leading toward God". It's impossible for men to know whether or not that man-made bridge is supported on more than faith which leads men to try to make our lives meaningful. The "identical thought" just as Simone describes it, is a thought that comes from men and the evolution of cultures, and is the backbone of what most people today call morality.
It is a step too far to claim "this thought is the truth". Moreover it's not the business of science to be "bridge leading toward God". No scientist ever believes they have or can find ultimate truth. It's politically dangerous to place the burden of finding and discovering meaning upon any person or institution whether that be a religion or science.

Each of us makes meanings as we live our lives and then each of us dies and our meanings are thereby finalised.
This is the tragic confusion of a woman endowed with great reason clinging forlornly to the hope of god.
It is so sad that such a great mind was wasted on such trivial persuits.
Nick_A
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Nick_A »

Belinda wrote: Sat Jul 18, 2020 9:58 am Nick_A quoted Simone Weil.

I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil


But men built and continue to build that "bridge leading toward God". It's impossible for men to know whether or not that man-made bridge is supported on more than faith which leads men to try to make our lives meaningful. The "identical thought" just as Simone describes it, is a thought that comes from men and the evolution of cultures, and is the backbone of what most people today call morality.
It is a step too far to claim "this thought is the truth". Moreover it's not the business of science to be "bridge leading toward God". No scientist ever believes they have or can find ultimate truth. It's politically dangerous to place the burden of finding and discovering meaning upon any person or institution whether that be a religion or science.

Each of us makes meanings as we live our lives and then each of us dies and our meanings are thereby finalised.
We know how the aim of science which is discovering the nature of truth has become corrupted by pragmatism or its use to serve the goals of Man. We know how the aim of the essence of religion to experience the nature of truth has been also corrupted by pragmatism and its desire to use religion. With that in mind, consider the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11:
11 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward,[a] they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.

3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

8 So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel[c]—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
All parables and myths in the Bible have both a literal and a psychological meaning. What does it mean psychologically to move eastward? The people used their own ideas rather than the Lord's plan (bricks instead of stone) to build the tower so God stopped building the city. Can you see why and how building on Man's ideas could have resulted in a demonic city.

We are building a bridge leading to God. Suppose it foundation causes it to fall through ignorance of universal purpose as did the Tower of Babel? If we are so eager to corrupt science and religion through pragmatism, what else is possible?
Nick_A
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Nick_A »

Sculptor wrote: Sat Jul 18, 2020 10:49 am
Belinda wrote: Sat Jul 18, 2020 9:58 am Nick_A quoted Simone Weil.

I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil


But men built and continue to build that "bridge leading toward God". It's impossible for men to know whether or not that man-made bridge is supported on more than faith which leads men to try to make our lives meaningful. The "identical thought" just as Simone describes it, is a thought that comes from men and the evolution of cultures, and is the backbone of what most people today call morality.
It is a step too far to claim "this thought is the truth". Moreover it's not the business of science to be "bridge leading toward God". No scientist ever believes they have or can find ultimate truth. It's politically dangerous to place the burden of finding and discovering meaning upon any person or institution whether that be a religion or science.

Each of us makes meanings as we live our lives and then each of us dies and our meanings are thereby finalised.
This is the tragic confusion of a woman endowed with great reason clinging forlornly to the hope of god.
It is so sad that such a great mind was wasted on such trivial persuits.
Was this great mind really wasted? Simone was a much admired member of the Marxist party in France. Her dediction to experience truth forced her to surpass political agendas and die a Christian mystic and intellectual influence on Pope Paul V1
Simone Weil and Thomas Merton were born in France 6 years apart - 1909 and 1915 respectively. Weil died shortly after Merton entered the Abbey of Gethsemani. It is unclear whether Weil knew of Merton, but Merton records being asked to review a biography of Weil (Simone Weil: A Fellowship in Love, Jacques Chabaud, 1964) and was challenged and inspired by her writing. “Her non-conformism and mysticism are essential elements in our time and without her contribution we remain not human.”
Does that really appear like weak mind to you?
I had the impression of being in the presence of an absolutely transparent soul which was ready to be reabsorbed into original light. I can still hear Simone Weil’s voice in the deserted streets of Marseilles as she took me back to my hotel in the early hours of the morning; she was speaking of the Gospel; her mouth uttered thoughts as a tree gives its fruit, her words did not express reality, they poured it into me in its naked totality; I felt myself to be transported beyond space and time and literally fed with light.
Gustav Thibon
There are many things we don't understand. What good is closing the mind in condemnation when it can be opened through impartial conscious contemplation?
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2187
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The Evolution of Religion

Post by Sculptor »

Nick_A wrote: Sat Jul 18, 2020 5:42 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Jul 18, 2020 10:49 am
Belinda wrote: Sat Jul 18, 2020 9:58 am Nick_A quoted Simone Weil.

I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil


But men built and continue to build that "bridge leading toward God". It's impossible for men to know whether or not that man-made bridge is supported on more than faith which leads men to try to make our lives meaningful. The "identical thought" just as Simone describes it, is a thought that comes from men and the evolution of cultures, and is the backbone of what most people today call morality.
It is a step too far to claim "this thought is the truth". Moreover it's not the business of science to be "bridge leading toward God". No scientist ever believes they have or can find ultimate truth. It's politically dangerous to place the burden of finding and discovering meaning upon any person or institution whether that be a religion or science.

Each of us makes meanings as we live our lives and then each of us dies and our meanings are thereby finalised.
This is the tragic confusion of a woman endowed with great reason clinging forlornly to the hope of god.
It is so sad that such a great mind was wasted on such trivial persuits.
Was this great mind really wasted? Simone was a much admired member of the Marxist party in France. Her dediction to experience truth forced her to surpass political agendas and die a Christian mystic and intellectual influence on Pope Paul V1
Well - there you go. My point exactly.
Achieved nothing.
Simone Weil and Thomas Merton were born in France 6 years apart - 1909 and 1915 respectively. Weil died shortly after Merton entered the Abbey of Gethsemani. It is unclear whether Weil knew of Merton, but Merton records being asked to review a biography of Weil (Simone Weil: A Fellowship in Love, Jacques Chabaud, 1964) and was challenged and inspired by her writing. “Her non-conformism and mysticism are essential elements in our time and without her contribution we remain not human.”
Does that really appear like weak mind to you?
I did not say her mind was weak. You might want to read more carefully.
I had the impression of being in the presence of an absolutely transparent soul which was ready to be reabsorbed into original light. I can still hear Simone Weil’s voice in the deserted streets of Marseilles as she took me back to my hotel in the early hours of the morning; she was speaking of the Gospel; her mouth uttered thoughts as a tree gives its fruit, her words did not express reality, they poured it into me in its naked totality; I felt myself to be transported beyond space and time and literally fed with light.
Gustav Thibon
There are many things we don't understand. What good is closing the mind in condemnation when it can be opened through impartial conscious contemplation?
Post Reply