Book Review
Im currently reading two books, The End of Faith by Sam Harris, a very refreshing mix of philosophy, neuroscience and good old common sense. Its about how peoples brains are wired such that it is possible for them to deny the very obvious -that they will die- ,and convince themselves of the rationally implausible (eternal life, reincarnation, whatever). He also goes on to prove how all moderate branches of religion are only a combination of secular knowledge. scientific fact, and scriptural ignorance, and how nostalgia has been taken to a whole new level (into sacredness) when people contemplate ancient texts that for all their faults and errors, are stunning because, they do say a great deal about human literary/philosophical achievement in an age when people still believed the earth was flat.
An aquaintence of mine collects loads of antique shite, and I was at his place the other day and was shown an old pocket book made out of bark with a strange form of sanskrit writing inked onto it. In all common sense, it was probably written by some village witch doctor in Indonesia among a people who had adapted Sanskrit (which could explain why it looked like Sanskrit, but didnt make any sense to people that could speak the language). It was probably no better then any book on homeopathy you can get at Borders, but because it was damn old and looked strange (which is an understatement) it looked like it had achlemic secrets in it. Ha-ha! How funny, I felt affected by it man, I mean, Im pretty sceptical most times, but for a split second this old thing looked really amazing. But nostalgia for the ancient world man, it fucks with our brains.
Anyway, its an enjoyable read, a non-fiction blockbuster that is extremely well thought about, which is rare I think (these days everything is churned out in a month and slapped on with the lastest buzz word -There are still books of every flavour slapping on Da Vinci and Gospel and expecting to sell. Ugh!). Simple on one level but a great deal more complicated when you really get into it and start looking up the other material hes referenced. Which is all good books should be
The other one is What we Believe but Cannot Prove, edited by John Brockman. Its another fun read. A collection of short essays by todays leading thinkers (Authors, scientists, sociologist etc.) and all the things they well, believe but cannot prove. Some of them will remain unprovable in our lifetimes, some of them are based thesis that the writers are dedicated to proving during their careers. But most of it are things that the average person at some point or other has entertained. Like, how real is our reality, or is it all percieved? Is intelligent life only unique to our earth? Is what we percieve as human conciousness the product of the evolution of our brains and our ability to command language -I think this is pretty obvious, although loads and loads of people still believe it the soul.
Although it is more reasonable to assume that the ability to percieve and interact at will with the world is the definition and state of being alive and the cause of emotion, intelligence, action- and what we think is the soul is merely the fact that we are alive and that we know we are (so when people say that dead people lack something, it is not because their soul has left them but because they have simply stopped living!) Where does all that life go to then? I believe it goes into the things they have written, the people they have talked to, the knowledge they have contributed to the world that the world remembers. Just as what remains of the body goes back into the earth to nourish whatever that still lives. It is a weak philosophical proposition, but it makes more sense that some kinda physical thing actually leaving our body and entering a different dimension.
The world is full of interesting things, and if anything tells you it has the answer that it has the truth then its better to stay far away from them. Because the world (universe, all the universes) is/are too complex for us to know all of it. We can only say this is what we know, never this is The Truth. Ironically, religion got it right on this front, the devil is the deciever, and what better way to decieve then to convince individuals of The Truth and stagnate furthur inquiry beyond whatever is sacntioned by whatever religious text.
Im currently reading two books, The End of Faith by Sam Harris, a very refreshing mix of philosophy, neuroscience and good old common sense. Its about how peoples brains are wired such that it is possible for them to deny the very obvious -that they will die- ,and convince themselves of the rationally implausible (eternal life, reincarnation, whatever). He also goes on to prove how all moderate branches of religion are only a combination of secular knowledge. scientific fact, and scriptural ignorance, and how nostalgia has been taken to a whole new level (into sacredness) when people contemplate ancient texts that for all their faults and errors, are stunning because, they do say a great deal about human literary/philosophical achievement in an age when people still believed the earth was flat.
An aquaintence of mine collects loads of antique shite, and I was at his place the other day and was shown an old pocket book made out of bark with a strange form of sanskrit writing inked onto it. In all common sense, it was probably written by some village witch doctor in Indonesia among a people who had adapted Sanskrit (which could explain why it looked like Sanskrit, but didnt make any sense to people that could speak the language). It was probably no better then any book on homeopathy you can get at Borders, but because it was damn old and looked strange (which is an understatement) it looked like it had achlemic secrets in it. Ha-ha! How funny, I felt affected by it man, I mean, Im pretty sceptical most times, but for a split second this old thing looked really amazing. But nostalgia for the ancient world man, it fucks with our brains.
Anyway, its an enjoyable read, a non-fiction blockbuster that is extremely well thought about, which is rare I think (these days everything is churned out in a month and slapped on with the lastest buzz word -There are still books of every flavour slapping on Da Vinci and Gospel and expecting to sell. Ugh!). Simple on one level but a great deal more complicated when you really get into it and start looking up the other material hes referenced. Which is all good books should be
The other one is What we Believe but Cannot Prove, edited by John Brockman. Its another fun read. A collection of short essays by todays leading thinkers (Authors, scientists, sociologist etc.) and all the things they well, believe but cannot prove. Some of them will remain unprovable in our lifetimes, some of them are based thesis that the writers are dedicated to proving during their careers. But most of it are things that the average person at some point or other has entertained. Like, how real is our reality, or is it all percieved? Is intelligent life only unique to our earth? Is what we percieve as human conciousness the product of the evolution of our brains and our ability to command language -I think this is pretty obvious, although loads and loads of people still believe it the soul.
Although it is more reasonable to assume that the ability to percieve and interact at will with the world is the definition and state of being alive and the cause of emotion, intelligence, action- and what we think is the soul is merely the fact that we are alive and that we know we are (so when people say that dead people lack something, it is not because their soul has left them but because they have simply stopped living!) Where does all that life go to then? I believe it goes into the things they have written, the people they have talked to, the knowledge they have contributed to the world that the world remembers. Just as what remains of the body goes back into the earth to nourish whatever that still lives. It is a weak philosophical proposition, but it makes more sense that some kinda physical thing actually leaving our body and entering a different dimension.
The world is full of interesting things, and if anything tells you it has the answer that it has the truth then its better to stay far away from them. Because the world (universe, all the universes) is/are too complex for us to know all of it. We can only say this is what we know, never this is The Truth. Ironically, religion got it right on this front, the devil is the deciever, and what better way to decieve then to convince individuals of The Truth and stagnate furthur inquiry beyond whatever is sacntioned by whatever religious text.
I have come to discover that religious doctrines are based on the fear of death, fear of life, the fear of feeling & are propagated by people who desire control. It has been my experience that religious fantics are the most souless, sterile, frightened & emotionally destitute people one could have the misfortune to meet.
I would assert that there may very well be a principle of universal truth, but that there is no actual truth that can be accessed by the human mind. I would also assert that religious doctrines are based not on truth, but on personal & cultural biases & preducices. One of the most amusing of these "truths" is the belief that humans are the center & purpose of "creation". How could a bunch of frightened monkeys, on the a backwater planet on the outer rim of of one of billions of galaxies, possibly the darlings of the divine.
However... I would also assert that there is indeed a spiritual nature to life but that the exploration of this nature is best left within the realms of intuition & personal experience. My tradition states... "If you try to hold it or try to conceptualize it... you lose it." To me spirituality is the exploration of ourselves & our relationship with life. But the moment we we try to hold a fixed idea of what that's about, we lose the experience of it. Life is bigger than we are & our ability to analyze. I also consider spirituality a life process... not preparation for death. What lay beyond is unknowable... & irrelavent. Life is now!
Finally... the biggest problem with the question of religion is it's tendancy to divorce spirituality from biology & from sexuality. To be blunt... this has far more to do with control & oppression than enlightenment. Religion is politics... pure & simple. I they can control peoples' sexuality they control their lives, their thoughts & enforce conformity. They can collect taxes (or tithing), tell people how to live, what to honor... & convince them to send their children to kill & die in stupid, pointless wars.