Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 7:01 pm
You might be right.
And I'm not trying to convince you. More or less I paraphrase and categorize what other people write. To triangulate and then to put it in packets I find useful - for whatever it is I am doing here in this thread. So, if I seem off, I expect people to let me know.
There were times I think I somewhat convinced myself of it. I was immersed in it... going to church regularly 3 times every week... participating in all other church-related activities... and visiting elderly shut-ins with my Mother. Although I did not have a choice (as a child), my heart was open... and I wanted truth. I recognized similar effort being made by the adults. We were all good people doing the right things by the Bible, and yet I eventually learned that only a certain number of Christians would supposedly get into Heaven. What was the reason for that? There was so much that didn't make sense in the way it was interpreted and believed.
I think this is a key phenomenon and separates out people by how they respond. You have a belief system. Some parts seem good, others unpleasant but maybe right, others feel more questionable. At some point one's own emotional reaction becomes so strong or one decided to validate this.
I think there are people who as a rule will always shove that down and away. And this, of course, is not restricted to religions. It coult be that you support trans rights, but something about the way wokeness around this and gender is being presented in schools feels wrong. You can shove that down and support everything you are supposed to, or you can mull it, even bring it up - at your own risk - with others 'on your team'. So there are people who can take seriously their own reactions to messages/policies handed down from the authority and there are those who can't. And really there are all sorts of gradations and further one can be open to one's own reactions in some areas but not others. For some it leads to a break from the whole belief system. For some, they remain a half-outsider. Still in, but not agreeing on some core idea. (that can be very tough, especially these days as we head back into Medieval us/them categorizing).
When I was 14 or so and visiting my Father in another state (as I had done since I was 7), our conversation turned to religion in a way it never had. He revealed to me that he had studied theology and he explained that there had been so much varied interpretation (and manipulation) of the Bible throughout history, that it really could not be a clear representation of what it was claimed to be. I respected my Dad. He was a no-nonsense, intelligent and good man. The fact that he knew more about the Bible's history than I did, and he didn't believe it, mattered to me and aligned with my questions about it.
This can happen also. We encounter a counter-expert. And something about their views rings true.
Honestly, I felt I was another part of nature. I was happiest in nature, playing with lizards and frogs and other forms of life, exploring wild places away from all the adults, and it felt like I belonged just as nature belonged. It didn't make sense that I would be condemned to a Hell for not believing in and worshipping a God of some sort... but I tried to do what I was taught.
Did you actually conceive of it this way, the being another part of nature? Or is that how the adult sees what the young you was like?
Yes. We are imprinted with beliefs that are handed down through the generations. But how distorted does all of that become in the process? Humankind evolves... we don't think or believe in the same ways as our ancestors, so it doesn't necessarily make sense to apply their beliefs to our world. Especially not at the expense of what feels innately true to us. Reverence should be given to those basic senses and feelings. Children are not faking it... they are in touch with the truth of their being. Adults who have lost touch with that, might then search for something to imprint as that. It's very weird. It seems to me that the truth of my being cannot be taught to me by anyone else, nor should it need to be. Rather, it's up to me to remain clear enough to see/hear/feel/know/use it. Of course, I might learn through or be inspired by others, but I do not need an interpreter or leader. That's just how it is for me... perhaps it is different for other people, although I don't know why it would be. Why wouldn't we be born into this world 'spiritually' complete?
Children anthropomorphize. It is a kind of assumption out there, amongst non-spiritual, non-religious people that belief in God or spirts or something beyond or what gets classed as the supernatural or...(the list goes on) only arises from indoctrination. But that's just not true. There was a large study of this, which I can't find (just tried), that showed that children have this tendency.
Hmm. My first reaction is to resist the classification/label of 'New Age' because there can be so much distortion and dismissal associated with it.
Yes, I have judgments of much of what gets classed as New Age. At the same time, I have beliefs that also get categorized there.
But actually, yes, it probably fits in many ways. I certainly didn't know anything about that as a child -- but when I began exploring New Age ideas, they were speaking my innate language much more than Christianity had.
OK
Thank you for the discussion. It's interesting to try to put these ideas and experiences into words.
Great.
What do you sense and use for yourself?
I generally don't like to go into this in a philosophy forum. Once I start going into it, I am more or less making assertions about reality and then it's fair game to expect me to back this up. The problem being that words on a screen is certainly not my justification and it shouldn't be for others. My beliefs have built up over a long time (though perhaps with foundations similar to yours from childhood - I was sort of Christian, but never exposed in the way your were. My father was an atheist and my mother was a mystical agnostic (I know, that's an oxymoron, but it's an accurate desciption. I went to a Christian school for two years and loved chaple and stories and praying, but I was never really Christian). I loved nature and people. I anthropomorphized a lot and not just animals. But it took leaving home and coming into contact with a greater variety of people to start exploring experiences and ideas that were outside one of the two mainstreams around me in childhood: Abrahamis religion and secular science influenced worldviews.
I think the physicalist explanation of reality is very effective for some things, but is extremely limited. There's a kind of assumption in philosophy forums that if you can't convince others to believe something via rational (and even online) discussion, then you are irrational for believing it. That's just silly.