Go to Holy Church of Blog
- Add a comment
- Go to Odysseus had a good post today that made me think
Success……I have no issue with the use of the word “spirituality”,
although it brings to mind for me a “state of being” as opposed to “religion” which seems more as a “course of practice”. The pitfall with religion seems to be that it has a tendency to become dated. Some particular course of ritual may work well within a particular time, culture, or paradigm, but may become less effective when these things change. However, the tendency of humanity is to cling to tradition, even after it becomes awkward and less effective.
posted by
telemachus
on October 5, 2006 at 5:28 PM
| link to this | reply
descriptions
that's what it comes down to
descriptions come from perceptions
and if the perception is flawed, then the description can have errors
and if, like the rest of life, flaws are not dealt with, then others will reject the flawed thing.
again my basic philosophy is i can only understand what i experience.
and, no matter the religion or lack of it, all basically boils down to how you interact with the present instant. period.
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 5, 2006 at 2:43 PM
| link to this | reply
kid, that Picard must be one smart guy. =) I'll have to watch it.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 5, 2006 at 12:43 PM
| link to this | reply
SuccessWarrior, you might enjoy watching certain episodes of
Star Trek: The Next Generation. I'm thinking of one in particular,
Who Watches The Watchers, in which the crew of the Enterprise D gets involved (whether they like the idea or not) with a culture that is several centuries behind theirs in terms of its intellectual development (even though this culture exists in the 24th century and is, in fact, covertly being observed by Federation anthropologists). Picard tries to make this same point - that what seems mystical or inexplicable now can be explained once our culture develops to a more advanced level.
posted by
kidnykid
on October 5, 2006 at 10:51 AM
| link to this | reply
Exacly Tony. It can be used as a crutch for some people
And if they truly need it to walk, then it would be mean to take it away. We should be getting them into physical therapy though so they can someday leave the crutch behind and live their own life of personal responsibility based on what they know to be good and right choices for themselves.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 5, 2006 at 10:27 AM
| link to this | reply
I agree, SuccessWarrior.
People
believe in religion. Belief and faith imply they choose to believe something that they can't prove is true, although they believe it is. To believe in something that hasn't been demonstrated is, I think, a sign of immaturity. Having said that, it makes many people happy, or at least hopeful. The main objection should, as always, be with people who use religion as a way of excluding and defeating others.
posted by
Antonionioni
on October 5, 2006 at 10:05 AM
| link to this | reply
Maybe it's just semantics but I would agree with everything you said if...
we used the word spirituality instead of religion. To me, religions are manmade organizations designed to gain control of people and/or their money.
Science should certainly study the spiritual realm. At one time, it was all spiritual. It shouldn't be dismissed when there are obviously effects from the things that you wrote about.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 5, 2006 at 9:51 AM
| link to this | reply
The quest for the “truth” actually embodies both science and religion.
I see science as the “quest” for truth as in our actions to find solutions in the natural world, i.e. cures, technology, etc. Conversely, religion may be viewed as the “practice” of truth in that it is an endeavor to exhibit truthfulness in our character and actions, as well as to development discernment in choosing the correct path before us. Science does not presently give us all of the answers.
As solutions become proven in the physical realm, they clearly pass into the realm of science, as you point out. However, religion is often our foremost effort and our only tool where science is absent. At the point where our science becomes all encompassing and we fully understand the universe, we will have come to fully understand God and our religion and science may then merge. Many scientists consider it preposterous to look into the spiritual realm and yet it is in that very realm that discernment of an adjacent dimension might first be understood. Why should we dismiss ghosts as opposed to studying them? Why should we dismiss miracles instead of studying them? Why should faith healing not be studiously approached? The reality is that science and religion compliment one another so that balance can be achieved between the overly pragmatic and the overly speculative.
posted by
telemachus
on October 5, 2006 at 9:42 AM
| link to this | reply
One good Blasphemer deserves another, TV
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 5, 2006 at 9:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Blasphemer!
Just returning the favor!
posted by
TVBlogger
on October 5, 2006 at 9:23 AM
| link to this | reply