A sharable construct

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
1

Just for fun, let’s assume that we cannot “know” anything about our spiritual nature other than being aware that we have one.

Let’s also assume that we must construct our own understanding of the world, our place within it, and how we should conduct ourselves. Further, let’s assume than a “good” construct is one that brings no hurt to any other and that the contents of the construct are agreeable to the largest number of people possible.

Surely, with all of our vast experience, study, and power of reason we ought to be able to forge a beneficial way of seeing the world, and describe a collection of behaviors to bring peace and contentment.

So, where do we begin? What would it look like?

JT

2

No takers huh? Well, I’m disappointed but not surprised. It was a VERY slippery slope!

JT

3

Hi tentative,

Patience, something like this question takes time!

our own understanding of the world
Without using known philosophies and viewpoints it is difficult to start, since the development of such has taken longer than we can perceive. Our ‘own’ understanding will always be coloured by the understanding we encounter in other people. Human Beings have always shared their observations and learnt from each other, rather than try what many attempt to do today – to find originality in every statement or deed.

There are apparently two approaches to an understanding of the world, one of them physical or material, the other metaphysical (but not immaterial). Both began with assumptions that were investigated and developed if there was something reliable about the assumption, or discarded if it was found to be unreliable. The first would probably be the method of sustaining life and establishing homeostasis, then to (following Maslow) move up the hierarchy of needs (physiological, safety, love, and esteem) that must be satisfied before a person can act unselfishly.

Consequently I see the struggle of mankind as the struggle to get out of the ‘deficiency needs’ and into the desire to become more and more what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming – self actualisation. It is here that Humankind realises intuitively that a presence has accompanied them. That something has meant for this stage of existence to happen and that we were sliding towards it all along – except when we hindered one another. That is when people can remain caught up in the need for esteem, since wanting admiration has of course to do with a need for power, and such people invariably fail to enter self-actualisation.

Seeking knowledge, peace, aesthetic experience, self-fulfilment, oneness with the source of life (i.e. the Mystery, G-d, Allah, Brahman etc.) or finding Nirvana, or ‘the Way’ or Tao is something that many people just haven’t got time for. Either they are caught up in deficiency needs, have an unhealthy need for esteem or have a bias against self-actualisation. Their bias is very often the over-accentuation of materialism, and perhaps a strong dedication to rationality and reason, disregarding the importance of intuition.

Those who go through self-actualisation are very often people who find an affinity with those who have made a similar experience and can usually accept that the experience isn’t exactly the same. I associate ‘Spirituality’ with self-actualisation, because these terms describe the same thing from a different angle. Spiritual people usually recognise and acknowledge each other (it is often the pupils of such people who see competition in the variance of teaching) because they know that they both have only scratched the surface, and, like the redefinition self-actualisation, spiritual experience is episodic.

I believe that we can all remain by those traditions we were brought up in, as long as we are willing to reform them to the state of mythology and review some expectancies that were expressed. Christianity for example must accept that ‘the Way’ of Jesus was transformed by the theology and pupils of Paul into the ‘Christology’ that we know today. That Christology has become increasingly fundamentalised since Luther and is one of the basic dangers to world peace today. But several Religions show this transfer from ‘faith’ to ‘belief’ and are for this reason equally as dangerous.

our place within our own understanding of the world
I find my own place within ‘the Way’ of Jesus as a follower of a person who became a myth shortly after his execution. We must know that we have no direct connection to the historical Jesus, although I believe sincerely that he was a real person. As a follower of Jesus, I believe that Religion is basically about trusting a basic set of principles and living by them, whether in an oppressed society or in freedom. In both circumstances there is varying acceptance or rejection from others.
It is about ‘searching, asking and knocking on doors’ and not about knowledge.

‘The Way’ as I call it, leaning on the historical indication that the early followers of Jesus called their movement something similar, is basically pacifistic, but not dogmatic about it. The movement was never and should not be passive in any way, and should expect a reaction to whatever they do, in whatever way it may be expressed. It is not an indifferent movement, but moved by compassion and concern for others – even for those who have possibly declared themselves enemies. The Cross, as a metaphor of violent opposition to insurgency, is always a possibility and should not be ruled out, but the Way is not an uprising, but a consequential resolve to follow the principles that have shown themselves to be reliable.

how we should conduct ourselves
I personally find Maslow’s Self-Actualizing characteristics very helpful for putting spirituality in a modern perspective. That woruld mean that religious people:

  • Have a keen sense of reality - aware of real situations - and strive for objective judgement, albeit knowing that we are all subjective
  • see problems in terms of challenges and situations requiring solutions, rather than see problems as personal complaints or excuses
  • have a need for privacy and are comfortable being alone
  • are reliant on own experiences and judgement - independent - not reliant on culture and environment to form opinions and views
  • are not susceptible to social pressures - non-conformist
  • are democratic, fair and non-discriminating - embracing and enjoying all cultures, races and individual styles
  • are socially compassionate - possessing humanity
  • accept others as they are and do not try to change people
  • are comfortable with themselves - despite any unconventional tendencies
  • have a few close intimate friends rather than many surface relationships
  • have a sense of humour directed at oneself or the human condition, rather than at the expense of others
  • are spontaneous and natural - true to oneself, rather than being how others want
  • are excited and interested in everything, even ordinary things
  • are creative, inventive and original
  • seek peak experiences that leave a lasting impression

Shalom
Bob

4

Hi Bob,

LOL, The no takers comment wasn’t for you. I figured I wouldn’t need to put bait on the hook for you. :stuck_out_tongue:

You have put forward a very comprehensive and thorough explanation and I can find nothing to add to the “to do” list. I can accept it in it’s entirety. BUT, at the risk of re-hashing an old issue, is there a way of presenting, urging, leading that stand’s a chance of becoming ‘the Way’ for at least half of the world?

I am immensely grateful and humbled by my having found the ‘Way’ and delighted to know that there are others with that intuitive understanding. At the same time, I would have that understanding for as many as possible. Our epistemic community is too small.

At some point, I must accept the notion that humanity is, for whatever reason, destined to continue in self-inflicted misery or, find some believable methodology to support.

I do understand the dangers of reification. As you have pointed out, all religions are based on a distorted view and use of the ‘Way’ regardless the originator of the message. I just can’t get past the simplicity of the message and the benefits that are possible. No, not just possible. Desparately needed.

Ah well, thank you for your support. Hopefully, there will be some others who have thought this through and are willing to share.

Damn. I just re-read what I wrote. Does this sound like the ramblings of some soft-headed optimist? :astonished:

JT

5

Hi tentative,

I hope I don’t disuade others by my posting, but it has to be said.

I must confess, the fact that others have gone along this path long before we have leaves me with little optimism. I find that ‘the Way’ is discovered or revealed to people who have been forced to ‘see’ with the heart, but who haven’t given up a social concern. It is a strange mix that helps people to become intuitive ‘seers’ – and another set of circumstances that make them into ‘presenters’ or ‘urgers’ or even ‘leaders.’

Those who have lead Humanity – or let’s say a part of Humanity – have been revered mainly for their willingness to uphold a selfless lifestyle, to put their lives in the service of their message and remain an example for others until death. I sometimes think the older these people have become, the more they should be revered, since the Martyred are truly redeemed from keeping up their example over decades.

Many people try to avoid ‘ecumenically’ binding themselves to or engaging themselves in the world, perhaps because they have the self-doubts that I have often felt. It is very much ‘us’ and ‘them’ amongst normal people. I have often been surprised by the bias I have found. You can easily come out and say “the world sickens me” or, “people get on my nerves.” It may even be the truth, but to hold on to society and want to make a difference is becoming rare in our time – if indeed it was more common in other times.

To reach half of the world we need to have an understanding of the plight of half the world. Since no more than a quarter of the worlds population live in conditions we would term as adequate, they seem to me far away. I even went to Sri Lanka on a mission of understanding with my wife, having an affinity for Eurasian people since being a child in Malaysia, and found myself taken back by the climate, the conditions and a reverence for the peoples of so many religions streaming through the streets peacefully on Sunday morning at six in the morning, on the way to their temple, church or shrine. I left the country, having watched how the ‘civilised’ behave, and I knew I had absolutely nothing to say – let alone proclaim - to the people of Sri Lanka, other than ‘I’m sorry.’

It was and is the tendency to mission or proselytise that has been the fall of true Spirituality. No-one who doesn’t hear before he speaks, who doesn’t try to ‘walk in the moccasins’ of another, has any right to propose something that could ‘enlighten’ or ‘redeem’ others. Besides which, I feel that most of the unfortunates in the ‘underdeveloped world’ need to be freed for our ‘free trade’ – which is far from free – before we start with self-actualisation. They suffer under so many deficiencies that we could not gain their attention if we tried.

Therefore, the ‘way of presenting, urging, leading’ can only be the way of sharing. We need to share their quandary and they need to have a share of our wealth. Only by this means can we find a way to develop a dialog – with the inherent danger that we find them to be wiser than we are. Their intuition is far superior in many ways to our sluggish pragmaticism, even if many of our contemporaries deem them superstitious.

I would agree, but as you can see, there are so many barriers in the way.

Shalom
Bob

6

OK. Out with the Bailey’s again I’ll leave the issue alone. Mustn’t develop any messianic complexes. It isn’t healthy.

I’ve got some other fun ones thunk up, so don’t go away.

WATCH THIS SPACE!

JT