Gregg:
Philosophically speaking (as well as psychologically) this is
fascinating . . . !!
Math --> Pythagoras (Plato's teacher)
Good --> Socrates (Plato's other teacher)
Academy --> the name of Plato's school (where he taught Aristotle)
So, I'll take Plato for the win . . . <g>
Mark
Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>:
> Hi All,
>
> Thanks for these wonderful reflections. Corinne, I love the sound
> of the "Kalogenic Universe."
>
> My reaction to the Church of Belief site was split. First, as
> folks who know me know, I am not a huge fan of "Church" in a
> traditional sense. Nor am I a huge fan of post-modernism. And I did
> not see anywhere in the "doctrine" the relationship between
> postmodernism and science. And it had a cultish, creepy feel, at one
> level, which probably was mostly a projection as I looked more into
> it.
>
> My positives, however, were more significant. Echoing Martin and
> Chance, folks need something to flock together...and, I would add,
> to do so with love in their hearts. Indeed, this is the best thing,
> IMO, about churches and religions. And, right now, this is something
> that we are socially losing. Our fragmented pluralistic society
> lacks a shared vision that folks can organize around with love in
> their hearts.
>
> My family discussed this idea some. I asked Jon (17, senior) what a
> Church meant to him and he said a place where people worship a God.
> Andee did not like the idea or sound of a "Church," but liked the
> idea of an academy or school or movement of some sort. My daughter
> Lanie (who is 14 and a freshman) and I spent about 30 minutes
> talking about what we would "believe and value" if we started a
> "church-like" thing. After some time, we called it an "academy" and
> we would invest in that academy with "lived practices" that would
> have beliefs and values. The name we came up with was "The Academy
> for the Advancement of Science and Humanistic Living" (ASH worked as
> initials, because they are Andee's 😊). Here are some of the things
> we jotted down, broken down into beliefs, values, and practices,
> without much wordsmithing or worrying about overlap:
>
> Beliefs
> We "believe in" science and math as ways to get at truth about reality
> The universe is evolving and changing, and has since the Big Bang/beginning
> Humans are very small in some ways (e.g., space/time size relative
> to the vast vastness).
> But human knowledge and human experience are very
> important--basically this is everything. (This and the former point
> gave us a nothing-everything tension).
> Humans are changing the planet in many ways
>
> Values
> We want to increase or contribute to beauty, truth and goodness
> We want to increase love
> We want to decrease evil
> We want to increase morality and wisdom
> We noted my ultimate value justification, Be that which enhances
> dignity, well-being, and integrity
>
> Practices (Activities, Seeking and Learning)
> Being kind to others (and one's self)
> Seeking a life filled with productive work, love, and play
> Seeking meaning and purpose
> Seeking ways to grow/develop/mature
> Learning about science
> Learning about the humanities
>
> That was not a bad 30 minute exercise.
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tree of knowledge system discussion
> <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Diop, Corinne Joan
> Martin - diopcj
> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 11:45 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Church of Belief Science?
>
> I also found the Church of Belief Science really compelling-- except
> for the word "church" (a reaction similar to Chance's), the blatant
> recruitment for priests and donations on the home page, and that the
> canons must be upheld no matter what. The canons seem like a good
> code of ethics and not too difficult to agree about, except I had
> issue with the one on "Responsible Parenthood and Guardianship" that
> says, "A child is someone from conception in a maternal environment
> (or embryonic insertion in a maternal environment) up to, but not
> including, the age of 18" since it seems set up to be a bit
> anti-choice-- like suggesting the zygote is immediately considered
> someone and a child... it is also not clear why the brink of 18 is a
> magic cut off for childhood.
>
> As for Bahai... I went to the Bahai Temple in Wilmette, IL out of
> curiosity, back when I was still more shopping around for community
> than I am now. The tour guide talked about the 9 entrances for the 9
> major religions, a nice symbolism, but I have a good friend who is
> neo-Pagan so I asked about the entrance for that or for indigenous
> religions. The guide said they value all religions for the stage
> they are at, and neo-Paganism would be like kindergarten. Bahai is
> the final stage, of course. That hierarchical thinking squelched any
> further interest.
>
> Anyway, back to the anti-choice thing... does anyone know Brian
> Henning or read his work? I remember reading his ideas about the
> Kalogenic Universe, about evolution generating beauty, and also
> about making choices that have the most overall beautiful results.
> Like when there are less unwanted births the murder rate goes down,
> so even though curbing births might not be an obviously beautiful
> choice at first, it might be overall. (I can't find the source for
> that anymore-- it's from the days of hard copies rather than scans
> and links... and I am thinking he may have rewritten that.)
>
> I caught up on reading these posts and links instead of what I was
> supposed to be doing, but I am fairly certain that was the most
> kalogenic choice...
>
> Thank you!
> Corinne
>
>
>
> Corinne Diop
> Professor of Art
> JMU
>
> ________________________________________
> From: tree of knowledge system discussion
> [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Chance McDermott
> [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 9:30 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Church of Belief Science?
>
> Thank you for sharing, Gregg. I like what Martin had to say about
> people needing to "flock" together towards an image, even if that
> image were to lead to a dead end.
>
> I would be curious to know more about the success religions like
> Belief Science these days, as, right or wrong, I am hit with
> negative emotional reactions from three directions. The first is
> organized religion itself, which I have an aversive reaction towards
> due to being raised in a conservative Christian environment (this
> aversive reaction has matured into a healthy defensiveness rather
> than the hot antagonism I felt as a younger person, but nonetheless
> the gut response remains). Secondly, Scientology is the prominent
> example of how manufactured religions can go awry, and so "Belief
> Science" triggers that association. Thirdly, there is the ingrained
> concern about being drawn into small cults, and Belief Science gives
> me that feeling as well.
>
> Again, these are emotional reactions from my own personal web of
> experiences and associations. On a descriptive level, the religion
> looks reasonable on paper. The organization seems self aware and
> transparent that Belief Science is there to meet a basic human need
> for belonging and community, and that Belief Science has been
> mindful about constructing itself in such a way that an in-group is
> achieved without creating a hostile relationship with the resulting
> out-group, and does so with a meta-awareness that beliefs are
> culturally contextual. It reminded me of a more secular Bahai.
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Bah-25C3-25A1-2527-25C3-25AD-5FFaith&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ySeKDpETU-2QS8hUCr1zESDYhYLSGKzazothKkB9LNk&s=73cm_TX4Dy1oL-Gl053_QORWB5I53f5FiVs0MJPaF84&e=<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Bah-25C3-25A1-2527-25C3-25AD-5FFaith&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=WHzD-_dBTq077iXFuqtPUd-4ARONlIkWP5zbFKpjfsc&s=p5QOi66CCDWHRRXnrivHeFTbM6biBt0rPbwdtPuzsyU&e=>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 7:32 AM martin johnson
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> wrote:
>
> I would say "it is meaningful to have a belief in what is 'true',"
> in he comtext of saying that animals also function by images,
> imagives appear as imagination, animals traveling as a group to a
> destination where there is food, water, have an an image of where
> they are going, and a belief they will get they. It is crucial to
> survival. Having images and beliefs is crucial to human survival --
> even though sometimes a group belief leads to a dead end. It is in
> nature and an essential to human functioning to have beliefs, and
> meaningfull. When a new truth arrises and displaces the old truth,
> that is part of the process of culture. This view depends on the
> assertion that reality only exists in contexts, that there is no
> objective truth, object in the sense of existing without context. It
> is hubris to say one has the TRUTH, which scientist sometimes say
> (as in physical scientist claiming a corner on how science has to be
> performed.) Martin Johnson
>
> On Dec 4, 2018 10:21 AM, "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx"
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi List,
>>
>> I stumbled across this site, the Church of Belief Science and
>> found it interesting. It adopts a postmodern, social constructivist
>> view of religion and belief in general, meaning that the focus and
>> meaning of truth is found in what people consensually agree to be
>> true. The founder is a psychologist/counselor whom I had heard of,
>> but I was not aware that he started this group.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Gregg
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
> or click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
> or click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
|
