What is religion ?

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Fairy
Posts: 3751
Joined: Thu May 09, 2024 7:07 pm
Location: The United Kingdom of Heaven

Re: What is religion ?

Post by Fairy »

Belinda wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2024 11:31 am

When you look within yourself you can see that you can tell the difference between right and wrong.
Yes, and it’s experientially felt as the affects of cause and effect - And so as to what feels right or wrong depends on how we easily resonate toward some right feeling as opposed to repelling what doesn’t feel right.

People are either empaths or psychopaths. Just as there are good people or bad people. Being self-aware beings, we are conscious of our actions, feelings and emotions. We are conscious of life’s futility, fragility, and of our ultimate demise. It’s not a fortunate circumstance to be self-aware.
That’s why people find it intolerable without a God mother/ father figure to look after us, and to love us.

“The universe has no opinion of us. No matter how much we want to pretend, real life does not contain the quality of story. No arcs, no morals, no meaning. Life is what we make of it.”

So we choose to be selfish rather than selfless.
Dr Faustus
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2024 12:27 pm

Re: What is religion ?

Post by Dr Faustus »

Religion is just another word for imperiality. It never disappeared in the West. Only the appearance had changed.
promethean75
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: What is religion ?

Post by promethean75 »

Here's how it all got started if you want the real no-bullshit history of religion.

http://anti-dialectics.co.uk/Rest_of_Su ... Twelve.htm

"It was now expedient for theorists to transform the earlier personified powers of the 'gods' into impersonal 'forces' and 'laws' in order to provide a more relevant and persuasive rationale for these new forms of class domination (wherein kings and queens no longer ruled, these having been replaced by oligarchies, dictatorships, or early forms of republican government). Warring, envious and capricious gods (which in effect helped rationalise the interpersonal rivalries between warring royal families) had to be tamed and transformed into the aforementioned impersonal forces, principles and laws. Even so, where necessary the latter were still under the control either of a single Supreme 'Deity', or a Supreme Rational Principle, an Absolute. Naturally, a properly ordered Polis had to reflect a similarly 'rational' cosmic order."

"Superstitious individuals had earlier tried to interpret natural processes as the work of various assorted 'spirits' or 'deities', using anthropomorphic language to that end. Subsequently, in more developed class societies, priests and theologians indulged in these thought-forms for ideological reasons, in order to suggest that the natural and social order are 'divinely-ordained', the legitimacy of which not only couldn't, it shouldn't be questioned, let alone resisted. Subsequently, as we can see from the record, Ancient Greek Thinkers began looking for increasingly secular ways of theorising about the world in order to construct a less animistic rationale for the new forms of class society beginning to emerge in the 6th century BC. However, they also retained use of this transformed language, not noticing they had in fact banished the aforementioned 'spirits' and 'gods' in name alone (as Feuerbach half recognised), but the anthropomorphic connotations still lingered on, and there they remain to this day."

"In that case, Traditional Theorists would start to see reality as not simply 'rational', but as ultimately linguistic, constituted by the word of some 'god', or other. In ancient creation myths, the 'Deity' spoke and everything not only popped into existence, it sprang to attention and thereafter always did as it was told. On this view, seemingly inert matter had the capacity to obey orders (but only when addressed with the right sort of language -- hence, once again, the search initiated by generations of sorcerers for these magical words), as if matter was intelligent and possessed of a will of its own. Nature thus came to be viewed as an enchanted 'Being', with 'secrets' hidden 'beneath the surface', and because of the distorted view of language that underpinned it, this 'Being' could be recruited to the 'legitimation' and 'rationalisation' of class power."
Dr Faustus
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2024 12:27 pm

Re: What is religion ?

Post by Dr Faustus »

promethean75 wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2025 11:15 am Here's how it all got started if you want the real no-bullshit history of religion.

http://anti-dialectics.co.uk/Rest_of_Su ... Twelve.htm

"It was now expedient for theorists to transform the earlier personified powers of the 'gods' into impersonal 'forces' and 'laws' in order to provide a more relevant and persuasive rationale for these new forms of class domination (wherein kings and queens no longer ruled, these having been replaced by oligarchies, dictatorships, or early forms of republican government). Warring, envious and capricious gods (which in effect helped rationalise the interpersonal rivalries between warring royal families) had to be tamed and transformed into the aforementioned impersonal forces, principles and laws. Even so, where necessary the latter were still under the control either of a single Supreme 'Deity', or a Supreme Rational Principle, an Absolute. Naturally, a properly ordered Polis had to reflect a similarly 'rational' cosmic order."

"Superstitious individuals had earlier tried to interpret natural processes as the work of various assorted 'spirits' or 'deities', using anthropomorphic language to that end. Subsequently, in more developed class societies, priests and theologians indulged in these thought-forms for ideological reasons, in order to suggest that the natural and social order are 'divinely-ordained', the legitimacy of which not only couldn't, it shouldn't be questioned, let alone resisted. Subsequently, as we can see from the record, Ancient Greek Thinkers began looking for increasingly secular ways of theorising about the world in order to construct a less animistic rationale for the new forms of class society beginning to emerge in the 6th century BC. However, they also retained use of this transformed language, not noticing they had in fact banished the aforementioned 'spirits' and 'gods' in name alone (as Feuerbach half recognised), but the anthropomorphic connotations still lingered on, and there they remain to this day."

"In that case, Traditional Theorists would start to see reality as not simply 'rational', but as ultimately linguistic, constituted by the word of some 'god', or other. In ancient creation myths, the 'Deity' spoke and everything not only popped into existence, it sprang to attention and thereafter always did as it was told. On this view, seemingly inert matter had the capacity to obey orders (but only when addressed with the right sort of language -- hence, once again, the search initiated by generations of sorcerers for these magical words), as if matter was intelligent and possessed of a will of its own. Nature thus came to be viewed as an enchanted 'Being', with 'secrets' hidden 'beneath the surface', and because of the distorted view of language that underpinned it, this 'Being' could be recruited to the 'legitimation' and 'rationalisation' of class power."
That's really interesting, thank you for the link.
promethean75
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: What is religion ?

Post by promethean75 »

Well, i don't read Rosa's essays anymore because she still has that broke-ass british proletarian website that you can't fit to your phone screen so you gotta zoom in and out and left and right to read anything.

Rosa, seriously. You gotta get rid of that old Kalashnikov and come back to 2025. Now, how much do you need to upgrade? Engels financed Marx and by god I'll finance you if i gotta.
promethean75
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: What is religion ?

Post by promethean75 »

Btw if you didn't already notice the entire site is dedicated to a demolition of Hegel's DM, so it may feel uninteresting to someone who isn't well acquainted with DM and it's role and relation to HM (historical materialism). But don't let that turn you off because embedded in this extended attack on DM is all kinds of other good very relevant philosophical stuff that stands alone and is compelling by itself.
Post Reply