Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Need New Philosophy based on the Principle of Mutual Respect

Posted 6 years ago on Feb. 25, 2012, 10:33 p.m. EST by Puzzlin (2898)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I believe, for good reason, in a need for a new religion based on the principle of mutual respect between sentient life forms (capable of feeling and perception), and on the principle of respecting knowledge. This religion would not have a leader, instead being purely personal to adherents.

This new paradigm shift would be firmly based in our discovery of new technologies through developing sciences. We are entering a world where all humans can be awakened to their collective inner giants. We are slowly unshackling ourselves from old school thoughts based in fantasy and mythology.

OWS is no accident or fluke. It is a direction, or a path, if you will, we found to start journeying. We are on our way facing the truth so we REALLY gain freedom over the tyranny of the past. Knowledge is POWER.

The ideas I'm having come from research and reading. At heart, I'm a philosopher considering all angles and what seems to harmonize most with the meaning in our lives.

Good Luck to ALL and any ideas along these lines of what this paradigm shift, which is coming, will be like. This isn't fantasy, the future holds many promises and there's a dark side. We are all players in it, and how each of us proceed will certainly determine the outcome.

Let's make it good.

The Puzzler



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

Mutual respect is not a matter based on religion. Mutual respect is a social decision independent of religion.

The essence of religion is that it requires the acceptance of an unsubstantiated claim. A claim promoted as being true by someone who knows that the claim is not known to be true. In that sense, the essence of religion is a lie. A commitment to a spirit-based worldview. Remove the spirit aspect of religion and you no longer have a religion. At most, you have a philosophy.

Religions must be learned or imposed in order to persist. They are not a necessity for any humans. They are psychological impairments for relating to the world. The solution to psychological impairments is therapy, not alternate forms of psychosis.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Very good point LeoYo. I agree that in the traditional sense religion is not a good answer for much of anything. In that sense, I speak more of a philosophy and not religion. But it doesn't address the religion problem. The current religious pathways need to changed, perhaps radically considering that revelations no longer can be entertained, we need evidence and proof. If we want myth, we need to call it myth and not the "truth"

Leo, thanks, you brought some good intelligence into the discussion. Religion imprisons people in their own minds. We need honesty and evident truth that requires no faith to believe.


[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

This goes right back to therapy. Unless a religious community engages in a self-imposed exile to live in a social vacuum, religion has to exert itself upon the greater society in order to maintain a sustainable body of believers. The more out of touch with reality a religious perspective is, the more it will require believers to reinforce eachother's adherence to the perspective. In other words, left to themselves without social reinforcement, individuals are more likely to question religious dictates and stray from unquestioned doctrines. Deep down, people can discern between the world of their religion and the world in which they live no matter how far into denial they are. Their denial can only be maintained by consciously suspending their reason in areas where their reason leads to counter religious conclusions. If forced to engage their reason to confront the dishonesty of their religious perspectives, they will be undergoing the therapy needed to liberate their minds from the emotional attachments of religion that allows them to ignore the reality of their own inevitable and permanent mortality.

Nobody likes to be called a liar or to have their most cherished beliefs acknowledged as being lies. Therein lies the essence of the therapy. In the most diplomatic way possible, the confrontation with religious perspectives must be one of a clearly declared confrontation with dishonesty. Whenever a religious person asserts their religious perspectives, an approach has to be taken that honestly questions those perspectives and leads the religious person with their own reason to the place they don't want to go. As with any therapy, the 'therapist' has to be trained in optimally dealing with the situation and recognize that the 'patient' can discontinue or resume the therapy at anytime according to their personal comfort. The 'therapist' must also be aware of various 'tricks' or dishonest tactics employed by 'patients' to defend their beliefs and know how to neutralize those tactics. Examples of such tactics are things like Pascal's Wager or the Proof of Love (i.e. being asked if you love your father and if you say yes then being asked to prove it, this being used as justification of a person claiming to know that a god exists despite not being able to prove it). The bottom line of the therapy is that the subject is a person's lack of demonstrated honesty, not a matter of personal differences of perspective. No matter what a defensive person may say to save face before discontinuing a conversation, in the end, they will only have the revealed dishonesty of their own thoughts to contend with.

And just as with the social reinforcement of religious groups, people who choose to pursue the path of ideological honesty will do much better with a support group of people going through the same process.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Very well said LeoYo. This is why there's such a delicate balance in facing the truth since we want the truth to conform to our feelings and desires. So, we tend to build walls around our most cherished beliefs to protect ourselves from truths that could undermine these wishes.

I first thought of these ideas when considering in philosophy, the tough-minded philosopher, and the weak-minded philosopher. I find myself on the tougher side. In fact, the mystery of ALL our lives, being at center of all our wants and desires is exactly want motivates my own personal belief in this Universe and what it may be. But I don't let my desire over run me, this is why I'm also checking back with my scientific grounding to understand new ideas in context of their probability of being true, that evidently true.

So, the ideas are great, and I love discussing these possibilities, it really has been a life long pursuit of my own happiness but I would never characterize newly discovered ideas or possibilities as the Truth. They must go through the process of finding evidence for their validity.

Wonderful discussion, and respectful. Many say these discussions can't be done without troubles, but if mutual respect is followed as the most important rule we can do it politely. Then we learn. This was my intention here and I'm here to share not knock down.


[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

I should add that in my experience, I've found two questions that should arise often in a religious conversation; "Based on what?" and "What are you talking about?" The question of "Based on what?" usually arises from an unsubstantiated religious assertion while the question of "What are you talking about?" usually arises from an assertion involving the idea of a god. When someone asserts "God" as if it's a reality, it must be asked what the person is talking about. Unable to provide a real world reference, the most that most people will be able to do is to refer to the Bible. At such a point it must then be confirmed for clarity that the person is referring to a storybook character. If the person has any objection to that description, they will be free to show how its inaccurate. As it can't be honestly denied that the Bible is a book of a collection of stories in which its god is a character, a person may try to distinguish it by claiming the stories to be history. At that point, the first "Based on what?" question may arise in which case knowledge of literary criticism and archeaology will go a long way in showing that the stories aren't history.

[+] -5 points by DKAtoday (33487) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

People dump the modern day Pharacies. The truth is your responsibility to find.

Do not be led blindly.

Weigh substance and content the truth is yours to find.

[-] 3 points by francismjenkins (3713) 5 years ago

It's called atheism :)

[-] 1 points by friendlyopposition (574) 5 years ago

how is mutual respect a tenet of atheism? Last I checked, there isn't a universally accepted set of principles or tenets, only one binding belief - there is no God.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 5 years ago

You're right, there are no doctrines in atheism, but atheists, on average, have a higher tendency towards certain things (and we simply believe that the idea of a god lacks adequate evidence).

[-] 3 points by alexrai (851) 6 years ago

There are plenty of "religions" if you want to call them that that which have those criteria. Native American spirituality for one, Buddhism is another, various incarnations of new age fluff too...

Even Christianity can have a spiritual twist, Miguel de Molinos "The Spiritual Guide" is a great classic on Christian spirituality; Molinos was of course tossed in jail when his teachings became popular enough to be seen as a threat from the Catholic establishment in the 1600s.

Even atheism can be kind of spiritual, I have an atheist friend who is quite gung ho about this "systems theory" book which is almost like Atheist Buddhism... we even agree philosophically on most things, with the exception that I believe in a Creator (different from a guy in the sky), and a soul, and he believes there is no god and we're just a process like a flame/fractal.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Good post with another good point. Really, I think we can always borrow from what's best from all the religions. Fortunately for me through my years of philosophical questing and exploring the different religions, I am able to see the good in all of them. Usually they have the best of intentions.

Problem is, all of them cross the line at some point and enter a world of fantasy and illusion. (Some less than others) At some point they usually demand Faith to believe something incredible and it is there they all fail and hit the proverbial brick wall.

I think we have to start by being honest with ourselves and build from what was good and right from the old world and reject the bullshit that never smacked of truth or required unquestioning faith.

We need the sort the riff from the raff and move the world ahead a step or two.

[-] 1 points by alexrai (851) 6 years ago

I agree, at their core they are all very similar; some are just more corrupted (or co-opted maybe) than others. I like to think that regardless of what spiritual perspective you come from, we're all kind of sitting in the same circle, staring into the same fire-light. :)

Its really too bad that people have been so put off by the actions of dogmatic "religions" that they've thrown out everything even remotely spiritual, I hope there is a re-genesis. I think there will be, I mean 15 years ago it was difficult to find a spiritual bookstore, now they are all over the place, and the ideas too.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Mystery is at the heart of it. Religion needs to leave the mystery as it is and not try to define the undefinable. This is one big beautiful mystery but always a mystery as long as we inhabit the body at the very least. We can know some things but ultimately not much. The new religion has to help us understand who we are not who wish we could be or want to be. Reason must have it's day.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

A poignant point, let the mystery stay the mystery and stop making up stories to act as if this great mystery isn't so great that it can't be known.

Isn't always a little surreal when others begin describing what our after life will actually be like? How could any of us actually know?

Does anyone get why I call my self this name:


[-] 3 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

It's been tried. Try, for example, Quakerism, Unitarian-Universalism, primitive Christianity or ethical humanism, all of which are based on notions not only of mutual respect, but of universal love. I read somewhere once that if only 10% of the population actively practiced the Golden Rule it would revolutionize the world and that always seemed like a reasonalble proposition to me. If anything, to me one of the most important aspects of the occupations was the transformative social relations that they actually embodied. It was really dramatic to cross the street in Manhattan into Zuccotti Park from an environment in which no one would make eye contact with anyone else to an environment where the first person you encountered of any sex would throw their arms around you, kiss you and tell you that they loved you.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Redjazz, excellent post, you hit the nail on the head, the golden rule. That's the keeper.The religionists tried to hijack the rule and say God give it to them. It was a bold-face lie superseding the written religions. This rule came from the people and was always based in reason.

Basically, it underpins most of the reason if not all, to act with respect toward others.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 6 years ago

A lot of the new testament mirrors Buddhism which is why some scholars believe that the lost years of Jesus were spent in the Himalayas where he learned from Buddhists.

Even some of the passages where he says he has "been to the light" reflect the Buddhist ideal of reaching enlightenment.

Offer the other cheek is Buddhist.

Not judging others when you have faults is a Buddhist concept.

The meek shalt inherit the earth is similar to the Buddhist belief that we should respect even the lowest life.

The golden rule is Buddhist.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

Many scholars feel that Jesus going to the Himalayas was a bit of a stretch, but that instead he became an Egyptian Adept during his lost years. The story is found in Matthew 2:13-15 where an angel appears to Joseph in a dream and tells him to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt and stay there until the death of King Herod.

The Al-Muharraq Monastery is where it is believed that Jesus and his family stayed. Christians have preserved a stone that Jesus was believed to have slept on. The stone is now an altar in the Church of the Virgin Mary.

According to the traditions of the Coptic Church (one of the earliest Christian Sects), this stone altar is a fulfillment of the prophecy found in Isaiah 19:19-20: In that day there will be an altar to the Lord in the heart of Egypt, and a monument to the Lord at its border. It will be a sign and witness to the Lord Almighty in the land of Egypt.

The Al-Muharraq Monastery is located in the geographic center of Egypt, thus putting the stone in “the midst of Egypt.

Egyptian philosophy provided the core for the Greek and Roman Mystery 'cults', of which Socrates and Plato were initiates. Thus "been to the light" reflect the mystery cults 'ideal' of reaching enlightenment.

Offering the other cheek has been thought to be not a pacifist origin, but an act of ultimate victory that one hasn't been broken by oppression. They may take your material possessions, beat you physically, but the spirit can not be broken. Is that all you have? Is that your best shot?.. offer the other cheek - let them keep trying for my mind is my own.

The 'Golden Rule' is pretty universal, not just Buddhist. Here is a list of about 2 dozen religions that have some version of it:


[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 5 years ago

There are many examples of Jesus words paralleling Buddhism teachings.

It makes sense that many cultures have a version of the Golden Rule however there are many more examples. While he may not have been to the Himalayas there were Buddhists in what is now Iran and Afghanistan. There is no doubt that most of the New Testament and in particular Jesus teachings and parables are closer to what we find in Buddhism than what we see in the old testament.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

There are many examples of Jesus words paralleling Buddhism teachings.

No doubt. I believe that the language of compassion is universal as well. Empathy is mostly an inborn human trait. That we ignore it on a group level has more to do with the pressures put on us for personal survival by those that have power.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Buddhist. Interesting. It does go way back. I thought maybe it pre-dated even the buddhists. I will have a take a closer look to refresh my mind on this important tidbit.


[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 5 years ago

Most historians point to Buddha living at around 560 BCE.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Yes, it all fits together well as the historical context is considered. There's many of these pieces but once they come together, it does make sense and understanding once again may be achieved.


[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

It does.... read my reply above yours. Keep on the hunt!

[-] 3 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

That was a good refresher. It does fit perfectly in the sense that once again human beings, even though separated by geography, can and do develop along parallel lines, and find these inherent truths. Even as we think of these truths today we can hardly understand how worlds could exist anyway where these principles would apply. For instance, stealing, most people know immediately that it's wrong to steal. It really breaks the golden rule, first, and, then there's the particulars how one harms others, the ways are infinite.

I could not imagine a World existing that wouldn't be bound by the Golden Rule. That's inherent to infinite degree.

I find that inspiring. I guess that's exactly why it's GOLDEN.

The Puzzler

[-] 2 points by badlimey (48) 6 years ago

I don't believe in God, I just believe in Good, can I get an Amen?

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Yes, you can. Also, I will call you enlightened badlimey! Good JOB!!!


[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

A big one. You'll be better off thinking that way. The whole concept of God is tainted by so many different religions that someone uses it, it could almost mean anything to anybody. It's an ultra-generalization on high delusion. Good, keep your focus, you'll find more there.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 6 years ago

I personally don't need a religion at all.

People can follow whatever religion they want as long as they do not trample the rights of others. First and foremost, laws should not be created based on religious texts or ideals. Blowing people up in the name of religion or because you are afraid of their religion is bad too.

"But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." -Thomas Jefferson

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago


I rejected the old time mythological based religions many years ago. Unfortunately, having been raised as a practicing catholic I was hopelessly brainwashed into the order. My parents were more catholic "light" so my indoctrination left me a way out. I took interest in philosophy and after a decade or so I was freed. I swung over to Unilateralist Unitarian for a little stint, more, or less, to socialize with free thinkers.

But, in the end, all of us need to find the truth about this world. For the strong minded philosophers out there, religion is not needed. For the tender minded, they need support. For those folks they need a religion not based in myth but rather reason. And then they may ask without regret whether or not God really exists, or even what God is.

Personally, I think there has to be more alternatives to what's out there now. Also, I feel sorry for indoctrinated, they are so brainwashed they may never be released from the spell.

By the way, Jefferson rewrote the bible, taking out all the supernatural hoopla reducing it down to a book of morals. It amazing he rejected established religion in his day. Sadly, many still don't realize this and somehow think our constitution is based in religious principles which IT IS NOT. Jefferson never wrote the constitution like that. He truly was a man of the enlightenment.

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 6 years ago

My problem is when people confuse the intent of the first amendment. It is not about freedom FROM religion it is about freedom OF religion.

As an atheist myself I do not fear religious symbols in public places. I am OK with a Christmas tree in a public school or a prayer at a graduation ceremony if that is what people want to do. As long as they do not deny a prayer from one specific religion. I would not condone the ten commandment being posted in a court room however because it implies they are the law of the land.

I was confused by Bloomberg not allowing prayers at the 9/11 memorial services. While I do not believe in God I respect that more than 90% of Americans do and a memorial service is an appropriate place for them to pray.

As for Jefferson, from what I can tell he believed in God but was cautious concerning organized religion. There are many examples where he talks about a creator.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

TJ was a Universalist Unitarian. It was one of things which attracted me to that religion as I left Catholicism way behind. Understanding that religion I kind of get where Jefferson was coming from. One of their tenants is: there are many paths to God, and it's personal choice which one you pick. Atheists go to that church. In fact, I have learned much from atheists. I find they are very well grounded. But UU is not perfect, and they don't outright reject all the crazy religions but try to accept them all. A melting pot if you will.

As far as the ten commandments, some are good, but not all. The jealous God commandment is not only a give away that religion is fatally flawed but patently absurd. AN atheist would be in violation of that commandment from the get go. I always enjoy personally the one about "thou shalt not kill" since the bible contains a litany of killings sanctioned by God, and God performs some himself as he bans entire towns. And as we all know the phase: ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS, it really means thou shalt not kill BUT..............we have excuses, pick one, and kill all you want.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 6 years ago

The ten commandments have no place in a court room. It has nothing to do with some of them being good or bad. They are the laws of Moses.

They really are not all that great a list of commandments anyway.

The first four tell me I must believe in the God of Moses.

The fifth tells me I must honor my parents. (Oh no I don't)

The sixth tells me I shall not kill (but my country can send me to war)

The seventh tells me I shall not have sex with anyone I am not married to (Why not?)

The eight tells me not to steal (but the government steals from me)

The ninth tell me not to bear false witness.

The tenth is just the eighth repeated do not covet.

So really the only one that counts is do not steal.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

I agree totally, NO PLACE. It seems the advocates for posting them in court rooms disavow reason in favor of faith in things that are unbelievable. If it's incredible then maybe it isn't credible even with a heavy dosing of faith.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

In order for there to be laws of Moses, there would have to have been a historical Moses. Half of the laws of the popularized version of the Ten Commandments are simply common social laws.

The fourth commandment demands a day of rest. Regardless of it being deity oriented, it's ultimately a labor law for an agrarian society.

The context of the sixth commandment applies to members and guests of the society, not to opponents in war or rebellion. It's a law that is common to human societies.

The seventh commandment does not state that one shall not have sex with anyone they're not married to. A man of that society could have sex with an unmarried prostitute without it being adultery. The seventh commandment is against sexual breeches of trust which again is a law common to human societies with all their various forms of marriages.

The eighth commandment against stealing is likewise common to human societies and mostly confined to being within the society as people of various societies throughout time have shown no problem with stealing other peoples' lands.

The ninth commandment against bearing false witness is another rule common to human societies for discerning the truth in legal matters.

Like Christmas trees or menorahs or any religious expressions, laws expressed through religion have no place in a public venue.

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 6 years ago

With millions of aborted children and vd and aids, etc. I can see why #7. #9 says not to lie against someone. Seems like common sense to me. If he is the real god, which he claims to be, I get 1-4 too then. If you're an atheist though, I can see why you reject it all.

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 6 years ago

He is not the real God so why put up a sign in a court of the land telling me:

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me.

That is totally inappropriate.

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 6 years ago

How do you know he is not "The real God?"

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

What is REAL?

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 6 years ago

Of course I cannot know for sure but empirical evidence leads me to believe he is not. The fact that they gave him a sex is a dead giveaway.

In the beginning, a male dominated society create a male god in his own image.

How do you know he is "The real God"

If there is a question why post in a court of law that I must have no other gods before "him".

What if I am Hindu and chose to worship Vishnu or Native American and worship the Great Chief.

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 6 years ago

If you live in this country you are free to do that. You are free to question all you want, or not. It it entirely your choice.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 6 years ago

But do you understand the problem with having the ten commandments in a court room?

I am OK with a Christmas tree in a school, as prayer at graduation, a nativity scene in the town square, and many other religious displays.

To me the ten commandments in a court room is different. It implies that the ten commandments are integrated with our system of justice. I would much rather see the first ten amendments to the constitution since they, the "Bill of Rights" are critical to our system of justice.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

I agree Joe. The ten commandments definitely don't belong in court rooms. Justice is built upon Reason not some mythical Divinely given ten commandments. As another poster here said they were gleaned from the knowledge of those days and passed off deceptively as divinely sanctioned by the almighty himself which is another creature of mythical proportions.

Surely, no one would ever disagree that they liked their stories back then 2000 some years ago and made up some real elaborate stories of ALL kinds of mythical Gods, heroes, saints, etc...,

But little did they know that the real Universe would even more amazing and wonderous then their made up stories. Who'd thunk it.

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 6 years ago

I hear what you are saying.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22863) 6 years ago

I get what you are saying, but why do you want to enshrine this new paradigm in a religion? Isn't that extremely limiting? Or do you say that because you think that is something most people can grasp?

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Beautifulworld, your very intuitive. Your exactly right, I think we need have it as a religion first and call it that way. Personally, I have removed the shackles of the current religions and don't need it. But it is this realization that it won't work for everyone that makes me think it has to be an alternative religion first. Humans are very social creatures and we need others to agree with us, etc,,,. So, it will the first step away from the religions that mislead people and have them believe in very strange stuff using blind faith.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22863) 6 years ago

Interesting. I'll think about it some more.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

The way I look at is religion is a natural step in the evolution of humans. Religion is like kindergarten. Our next step which builds from the last will be middle school. Once we appeal to reason and science we will learn what we need to eventually graduate. But the road is perilous, and we could have a catastrophe before we learn enough to avoid it.

But, hey, we're all rolling the dice. We're here to experience this and someday we know something else about it, maybe. The end of this rainbow is one gigantic mystery, and it's there staring us down as we steer it down. Nobody gets out alive.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22863) 6 years ago

I love reading your posts, Puzzlin. They're always interesting.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

I do appreciate it. : )

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

It is so much easier to live your life with a "religion" telling you what to do- don't eat pork
kill the infadels
burn the witches
MOST IMPORTANTLY - believe ME and believe the book

teaching your children this garbage -
do as I tell you or God will put you in hell when you are dead
is easy

living by - and teaching your children how to live by -
a true INTERNAL judgement of good and bad
is very difficult

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

I agree. I think the best foundation to set for children is teaching them through reason. Our constitution was set upon these principles of reason and mutual respect.

For me personally, I have raised one son, and raising another, I have equipped both of them with I term "BullShit" detectors. He has worked extremely well. It starts as simple as: Son, how do you know the Truth? His answer (because I drilled it into him LoL) - Evidence

A beautiful one word answer that leads one away those who have big claims but not one shred of evidence for a such a extraordinary claims. And as I say, the more extraordinary the claim, the more evidence please. Also, evidence is best indicator possible to tell if something is true.

One beautiful truth is the golden rule. It's proven Golden.


[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 5 years ago

why a religion? why not just reasoned thought, and egalitarian simplicity.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

I think really the idea of religion has to be clarified in the context of how I'm intending to use it. This was a neglect on my part for not being more clear.

In my case, I'm thinking more in terms of people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence of this Universe and themselves, and how this can be derived rational verifiable methods. I think many answers we seek will come from science and the well has run dry on the old time religions. It's played out. Although it's inevitable anyway we must build upon the foundation of the past. This is crucial and there's a strong foundation that already exists. Re-inventing the wheel is never fruitful. In next 100 years we can do some pretty great things. But we're in peril and time is running out for us to get our heads out of the sand.

This "new" religion could inspire us whereas the old time religion suffers from a denial of science while strangely looking to it for validation which will NEVER come. It's like melting in the face of science. Our world is filled with what science DOES but that old time religion is only contained within a few old outdated books, hard to understand, and not a "lick" of science in any of them. What is truly hard to believe is how people can still believe any of it.

I was raised as a catholic and went through all the rituals as a child just so you know a little of my background.

This subject is of interest for obvious reasons. Personally I just can't accept lies as the truth. Many talk about truth. Some use it so they can lie more. I know more than most about this subject. I'm motivated by it.


[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

DID SOMEONE ASK FOR A NEW RELIGION... that respects all...?? ok... see --> http://empiricalchurch.org/home/

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Nope, wrong. This is Jesus wrapped in Reason, which is one heck of a duality Moshen, don't you think?

[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

umm.. no... its a pluralist religious order, where all religions are allowed to be studied and practiced.. side by side... and no one is forced to convert in anyway... but ... those of faith must be open to discuss their faiths... openly... to argue... openly.. and have an open mind... All Religions are welcome, including most forms of Metaphysics... occult sciences... etc... excluding only satanism... for obvious reasons... It is a union of religions based on God.. and godly influences on the earth.... hence Hindu fits perfectly as most hindus will admit their views of multiple gods, are simple descriptive aspects of the various cosmic forces created and manifested by the one god... and all are part of the whole. Besides... what is wrong with Jesus???? his gift is free, and it is only limited churches that demand conversion... not I.. and not Jesus... the gift of salvation is free... and all can accept it if they did not have to convert... for example Muslims... Muslimm by definition means "believer in god".... and Jesus... first and foremost promotes god.... God matters... So... when you ask for a unified religion... of all religions... I have provided it for you... which is open to all, and works to bring unity to all, and end the strife. If you cannot see that.... its probably my fault.... I am considering a re-organization based on my failures to properly explain it... to open minded people.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Too bad Jesus never really existed.......

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 5 years ago

Debatable ... but even if he did exist, I'm quite sure there was no walking on water :)

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

I'd second that one on the water walk. Miracles are for those who don't do science. They like the old myths that promise what they wish for earnestly.

On his existence, there's much doubt, and definitely nothing even close to conclusive evidence. Crucifixions were very common in those days. People rising from the dead, not much.

You should watch the God That Wasn't There movie. It makes a clear and strong case for No Jesus.

Seek your own truth. I found it out there. It doesn't hide. You just have to know how to recognize it as the evident truth. Thomas Jefferson, one of our founding fathers, and author of the constitution, was enlightened and knew much on the subject. He railed against the dogmatic religion of his day. It enslaves people's minds. Funny tidbit, he re-wrote the bible stripped of all it's supernatural BS and miracles. Left in the morals like the golden rule which had it's origins way before the new testament became known written by all those unknown mysterious authors.

Good discussion, thanks. And enjoy! Be happy, you have purpose!!!


[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 5 years ago

I'm studying organic chemistry and probability theory as we speak, and sometimes I feel like I need a miracle to stay motivated (this shit is hard, but somehow I keep getting A's, no idea how) :)

[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

I suggest.... http://empiricalchurch.org/theory/

if you read all the links... you may feel inspired in more ways than one.... Science rules the day... always... but that does not mean we have to give up faith in something more... much more.. bigger.. and the ultimate goal of science... to understand reality and be like god.. to rule the universe.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

For me (BSEE), I was motivated, initially, by learning about things I was curious about. I had dire curiosity to know how things really worked in all the technical detail. This curiosity then blossomed into interest and there's the motivation start button. Once my interest sparked up, my attention was there looking for these answers. It's a process and funny enough so are we although we are largely unconscious of it.

Also, learning can be a delicate sport. It has be done in an atmosphere where the interest level is kept perked. I had teachers who would slowly talk me to sleep. The hardest part of the class was staying awake. LoL

Good job! The more natural your learning process is and works, the better off you are. I graduated with a 3.74/4.00 GPA. At the end it was a ball buster.

But I again, I would stress the idea of interest. To this day I love my work. I design electronic circuits from concept to schematic, to PCB layout, prototype, compliance tests, and FMEA analysis. It's a good feeling making something new that never existed before. I also work in the H.E.L.L. lab - High Energy Lightning Lab. I get to blow up things in a controlled fashion and dissect the remains. Testing has it's perks.

Good Luck in Your Journey!


[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 5 years ago

Well, my story is I have a law degree, but I'm taking these evening classes because a) I have a post 9/11 GI bill & so I get paid to go to school, b) there's no jobs for lawyers right now (and I need to eat), and c) for some reason I got the science bug (and so my goal is a grad degree in molecular bio, probably an MS or MA, but who knows, maybe a PhD).

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

I considered graduate school at one point, MBA. But my experience gave me the edge I needed to hold on and continue. I've been layed off quite a few times in my career field due to various business reasons, one was a buyout. The longest period was in 92 for six months due to the defense fallout right after the Gulf War. I worked in military projects during the Reagan Military Buildup years. I helped test chips for the Trident Ballistic Missile which was just one of those projects. Fun times.

I do wish you the best with your new path.

[-] 0 points by DJnamaste (-6) 5 years ago

Your post makes no sense. We don't need a new religion, we need the end of religions. Some philosophers believe that this will eventually come. Perhaps when we become smarter. There was the tribal times when we revered our ancestors, now religion when we revere God(s), then, one day, we will enter the age of science when we will revere truth; real truth backed up by evidence.

If science is not enough for you and you really need a religion, then you should try the Church of Reality - www.churchofreality.org/

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

I agree totally with what you just said. I think it is a throwback to earlier times in our history. We are evolving and since I made a career staked in science my respect for science has deepened over time. It gives us all the answers now. Religion stopped giving answers a long time ago and is really stuck in the mud in the modern world. It really is a throwback that lingers on but the dye is cast, and the evidence proves it's waning.

Good one.

[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

That is... one of the things... Christians would have to be ready to debate and defend..... just like all religions would be asked to defend their views... in.. open forums of discussion... instead of controlled sermon sessions... discussion... between religions leads to peace and understanding.... closed sermons where questions are not allowed... is what leads to biased dogma... and causes religious strife. I have solved this problem, by providing a neutral playing field for all to discuss and socialize and discuss god.. openly. Where someone.... can say... "jesus never existed".. but then YOU... would have to back that up somehow... or admit you cannot... because lets face facts... there is plenty of evidence to suggest someone lived named Jesus... but whether he had special powers is debatable... either way it does not matter because his message is very good... brotherly love... stems from Jesus... and it led to Islam... so every Muslim owes Jesus a debt... so even if he did not exist... his story is a good one. But like I said... we must be open to discuss it.. in detail.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Oh yes, we have to be willing to discuss it, and it relates to this movement as it concerns itself in aligning with the truth about things. The evident truth (which is proven with evidence) is what is paramount to ALL of us, equally. It's not about some nice magical story that seems to have some tidbits of truth here and there, and secret codes, hidden truths, contradictions, paradoxes and confusion.

It's really about truth we know because we have evidence of it. Not hearsay, he said, she said, or it is written here or written there. Concrete evidence. If I say it's so it doesn't make so. Never does, only tangible existent evidence can make it so. It's a place we can all know very intimately just like our very bodies. It just just depends on how deep you want to go and how much time you have to learn these things.

Another premise I want make clear here, and this is ONLY my personal opinion, and not to offend any atheists, but I do have a belief in God, but it is not the God from the Christian Bible. And I certainly don't want offend them either.

So everyone can have their symbol of choice as long as it doesn't get in your way of your Reasoning ability to recognize the evident truth. As humans we do like to visualize as way to understand our Universe.

So, back to the Jesus question. It's not important to me and due to sensitivities around such a subject we can leave it there. I'm free of the problem altogether. Read Thomas Jefferson's holy bible, I tend to agree more with him. Some good, some, well, I'll leave that one lay too.

Move ON. Good Luck!

[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

Well... technically.. Atheists... or agnostics... etc.. are welcome.. as the foundation of the Empirical church... is SCIENCE ... empirical evidence... empirical analysis... of reality... It seems you agree... those who do not believe in any traditional religion... are welcome 24 hrs a day... 7 days a week... to do work and discuss science... everyday... theory.. everyday... and when they feel like it... they can discuss religion.. as they wish too.... religion which is discussed as all the major religions of the world... separated by day.. and hour... so that if you want to discuss Christianity... then you show up on sunday... if you want to discuss Judaism... Saturday... Islam... is on Friday... etc.... All are welcome... if you can handle open free discussion... and defend your views.. if not.. then you better shut up... and go hide in a corner. I developed this to end religious strife in the streets and bring it into an open forum of discussion.... such that any religion that does not have the faith... to defend itself... will shy away. Debate.. open.. non-violent... IS THE KEY TO UNDERSTANDING.... EACH OTHER... and end the conflict.. and all of it... moderated by the truth of science. thus...

it would seem... my church... the Empirical Church of Humanity... give you exactly what you asked for.... A pluralist religious order... based on science and reason and open clear discussion of facts.. and reason and logic.... hence a unified religious order. it is what you asked for... I provide it. -------http://empiricalchurch.org/home/

It is what the world needs.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Ok, I will check it out. From what you said it sounds good. I do realize from my Unitarian Universalist experience that there are many paths and I have an open mind to fully understand that. Personally, I would never feel right to force my way of believing onto anyone. I have an EGO but it's one that I can fit through doorways.

Thanks for your post Mosheh, it seems you found yourself a good answer, and certainly one that's evolving with the world and not stuck in ancient thinking where many things weren't understood well and substituted with supernatural explanations since science wasn't there to fill in.


[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

Your feedback... would be appreciated... it is designed to do what needs to get done... please forgive the errors you find, as it is due for a re-write.... to better explain its purpose and goals and function in service to gods children.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Ok, I promised this and I did read through enough of your material to form an initial opinion.

As Dale Carnegie used say, there's no such thing as constructive criticism. I tend to agree with him here. But, with one caveat, if your smart enough you can push yourself through and set aside your previous believes and honestly consider new ideas. Just because your smart doesn't guarantee you be able to do it. The difficulty is quite high. I have forced habits on myself to insure even when my emotions want to carry me off I anchor myself and listen.

Also, before preceding to my critic, I want to also state that human language, itself, is far from scientific and leads to much confusion most of the time. This is why it's almost impossible to get more than one person in synchronization with the exact same idea. The words used to describbe all ideas are flawed and again far from scientific. Mathematics is a pure science where it is highly proven and it's meanings precise to infinite precision. Language is almost the exact opposite.

Now, to what I think of the web site of the Empirical Church of Humanity as put forward by you. I find the intention is good and there is a desire of unifying people in a common cause. But the path you are trying doesn't interest me and personally, having been raised a catholic, and then rejecting it, I do not look for any answers from Jesus. Literately, I have done that and circled back many times before I could effectively leave it behind for good. As child I was immersed in those beliefs and as a child my world view was limited so I was in short, brainwashed. Jesus, and the thought of him became psychologically second nature to me. A given and we were to trust our elders this was the flawless truth. As I grew in age I noticed the cracks, the dualities, the confusion, the rituals, the horror, and a world to be feared. I was shy and feared authority because they seemed angry and mad. DO this or else. And please don't condemn me or damn me. The nuns, I remembered them, being shy was actually a good ticket since it kept out the line of severe corrections.

Also, let's get this word EMPIRICAL defined very clearly here:

em·pir·i·cal [ em pírrik'l ]

1 based on observation and experiment: based on or characterized by observation and experiment instead of theory

2 derived solely from experience: derived as knowledge from experience, particularly from sensory observation, and not derived from the application of logic

3 based on practical medical experience: based on practical experience in the medical treatment of real cases, and not on applied theory or scientific proof

4 depending upon experience or observation alone, without using scientific method or theory

It's number four which bothers me most. It seems you already have beliefs based largely on empiricism, hence the church title, but it does neglect science which I'm sure you didn't intend. There's a flaw. I'm a big adherent of experience and it is what we do constantly but science is a different kind of experience and it has a command over what happens with us. Reality is made up from many different attributes many which we likely totally unaware of. In philosophy, reality is one of the big subjects and relates directly to truth is as far as we can know it. Even there, with truth, there's many attributes. Some are objective truths, like eating to survive, not walking off a cliff, but, then we have a myriad of subjective truths were are often confused with the objective ones.

Anyway, you would likely appeal to more Jesus centered folks who speak of ideas in those terms. Nothing wrong with that. I n a past life I related to the mystical Universe through those lenses. As I stated before, at the time, it was my only choice to be christian and my first glimpse of something that frankly none of understand very well. But, as human nature has it, it's fun to pretend we know more. But, unfortunately, and letting the Buddhists in here for a quick thought, this thing is so flipping large, we haven't a clue. GOD = No Thing. So there's the let down. Get over it and get the right symbol in your head but it's not him. That doesn't mean he's not there, for the peanut gallery, it means get over yourself, when you die you MAY find out, accept it and get off the wishful thinking it verges on silly. Now that really is my opinion but to make a point.

My thoughts, ideas, and beliefs, are mine. Some others out there may have similar ideas but we'll always beg to differ as is customary. Since I really don't formally belong with any church, although I did check in with Unversalists, and found their teachings largely in line with mine, my beliefs have become even more my own. Since I really did read about all of the philosophers, philosophies, all the religions, and all possible scenarios for what's happening in this Universe, I by default, choose my own way which would be hard to follow by anyone unless they felt reading about 200 particular books. But, as we all learn, there's many interconnections so we do always have this common ground we're calling them by different names, different stories, favorite myths, on and on.

So, I do applaud you. You have learned and your embarking on a journey you'll never stop taking. Your thoughts will evolve as you already realize so the beauty is ahead of you. Ponder your possibilities. We all have purpose and as we realize that we become happy. We can leave ALL the rest to the great mystery which is comforting. Death will be a nice pleasant surprise but we need not obsess over it. We may have some more answers there but again, it's utter speculation. I have already accepted my own death having come close quite a few times, since then my fear has waned and I need nothing to cuddle with when I let it go. Not that moment can't catch me by surprise and my shock may be momentary. It's likely we can be distressed in the moment just before it occurs, very natural. I will treasure the experience as it finishes. We all dream. And dreams are fantastically beautiful if your good at it.

Good Luck with your web site. Keep your mind open and think about your methods, these are the tools that yield your new ideas by refining the old. And, face your dualities, if your not finding them your not looking close enough. They are always there. Philosophy is a prickly beast, vacillating is part of the natural progression.

We never have to be in denial of who we really are. I am a very mysterious person.

The Puzzler

[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

thank you... for your comments... but it seems to me.. you may not of read this one link...... http://empiricalchurch.org/theory/

What you should understand.... is that my beliefs... are based only... only... only... only... in the sciences... And the reason I believe in a creator is because I developed a unifying field theory... which suggests it... based on the empirical evidence.... it was that... was caused me to develop a religion which is based on the empirical analysis of religious texts... for what they are worth... NOT ALL RELIGIOUS TEXT IS BAD.... it serves a great good. MOST... modern religions... are moderates... meaning they do not take every line as doctrine... as dogma.. but they focus... focus.. on the good parts...

they have too... otherwise... Jews would still be stoning people... and Christians would all give away their wealth and live in communes, and Muslims would be going to war all over the world....
Moderation... is a result of modern perspectives of science. The church I am building... is based on expanding this empirical analysis of.... the text... the facts.. the history.. and our future.

It is meant to be... a neutral playing field... where all religions can meet and discuss reality... based on science.... and so... bring science into the fold as a religion for a new age.. based on theory... starting... starting... starting.. with my proposed unifying field theory.. which suggests a creator and fits genesis... and fits empirical evidence. please see the link... it has a lot of pictures.. to help it make sense.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

I understand what your saying but the word empirical implies experience ONLY. Science is a method that can use experience (experimentation) but eventually has to move beyond that to be proven. Experiment is simply part of the process but is not the answer. I realize it's a technicality but it's in the name which is the first thing you present in getting this out there.

As you consider science, it can and does get rough, and demands utmost scrutiny. You always have to be willing to yield your position when the evidence proves another position is better than one you may have and may have had for a long time. So, truly, science will trump all other possibilities as ideas are checked against the evidence.

This is essentially why religion will continue to have a place in our hearts and minds. For example, most folks want to know about the after-life and wish earnestly that one exists to boot. Science can't touch that subject ever in my view. We learn this truth ONLY upon death and there is absolutely no other way to learn the truth before then. Of course, you and me both know that this doesn't others from believing they have an answer for it. They want that answer so badly they will settle for a made up answer. The wishful thinking in these cases is rooted deeply in fear. For good reason and those who claim death doesn't frighten them, generally are lying. It's more likely, they have simply accepted it as I have, and the worrying stops. In fact, most times I wait patiently with anticipation of a what a beautiful wonderful thing death may be. But, it still doesn't mean I know. I don't and can't, especially as science is brought in to consider such a condition. Maybe the conservation of energy gives some hope but still, no answer.

The simple fact, we don't have many answers, and philosophy is rich with the big questions, but those have no answer, far from it. We have some little answers, but what we really want to know, no answer.

So, there it is. We just have a difficult time grasping how big this mystery really is. Then we vacillate and forget about that, and go for those answers anyway. I've been a philosopher for many decades now. So, being through the process, I have a very deep appreciation and respect for what we're into but as I have learned extremely well as soon as you think you have something quite large, think again, look for the duality (paradox), and once you find it, take a deep breath, and realize that this is actually a good thing. Why? Because none of us are any better off than anyone else, at the bottom is the mystery and those think they gone past it always seem either fanatical or out of touch. Basically, we are all in denial and we never want to admit just how little we really know. Personally, I just find it amusing, but as I have learned, as we journey the planet, the journey itself is what we got. The here and now. The beyond, is just that, BEYOND.

Accept it. It's the ONLY way period. But don't take my word. Go around the circle, and keep going around, eventually you'll see it, and, frankly, it in itself is beautiful and wonderful. It is exactly there where I was able to recover MY belief and move out from the old ancient symbol filled stories. Most of us do start there and before we reject it, it has to be explored completely

Personally, in most cases, I find faith a "cop out" to our wishful thinking. John Locke discussed this and his opinion was have a little faith but make sure it's largely based on evidence.

Good Luck! Your on the right track. Now refine your thinking and keep evolving. Once you get this bug, if your like me, you'll never stop. The searching is the very best part and from EXPERIENCE I must tell you the search never ends and neither should it. We have to look or think maybe we missed something. Again, and personally, I'm not missing a damn thing, I search endlessly and it has always been worth it. It does help and allows you to feel good that you haven't treated your life as some spectator sport. Dive in, and take the ride. I have taken many fanciful rides and have enjoyed many them. I'm alive and I'm living.

Also, perception, perhaps the most important thing you can ever consider. We're there, our mind is there.

I hope this has helped you find the right path. You have to do it your self which you may realize is ONLY inevitable. Always remember when you die, you do it, ALONE. This is key.

The Puzzler

[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

Well, I appreciate the kind words.

But with all your words, you have yet to admit it is what you asked for... a science first, pluralist religious order to unite world religions and end the strife, bring unity, and allow for the expansion of reason and logic in a world of faith... so as to reduce the blindness.

if that is not what you seek... then please explain what you seek that the Empirical church would not provide.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Realistically, and with a heavy dose of acceptance, I realize that many will not be interested enough to spend as time as I have searching for these answers to want what some of us care dearly about.

It means, I don't mind, and completely understand why with what I now know, I find myself somewhat isolated in my thinking. I decided to change myself instead of trying to change the world. It's the easier road and one that will supply amble reason to continue. Some few may hear some things I say and find inspiration there. That's a perk but not one that I have to have.


[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

Ummm... that did not answer my question...
let me try again...

Why not open a branch of the Empirical church... yourself??? It can be modified in many ways. I offer my services, if it was desired.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Ok, you have a deal. I will read it over and let your know my constructive opinion. But I will I say this now, which is where my interest was sparked from, an empirical foundation is one hell of a great start. After studying philosophy for many years, off and on, but primarily in my twenties, I came to the conclusion that experience is not only the BEST teacher, it's the only one. Everything we will know comes through our experiences. David Hume, who happened to be an atheist (which would not have been a necessity for his belief), was the first to really drive home this idea, experience is the place where all ideas are born.

I will chime back when I finish looking it over, and we can discuss it then.

Thanks for the great discussion. And Good Luck!!!


[-] 1 points by c8h10n4o2 (3) 6 years ago

Why do we even need religion? Is there the belief that without religion society would collapse and total anarchy would unfold? Honestly, how unethical so many christians are, and how skewed so many other religious people are, it can be also impractical to actually have a religion. At this moment the political world is filled with religious ideals and people preaching they have the right solution because it corresponds with the bible; where in reality they are actually just preaching their own bias. Honestly, I would rather think logically, and question everything, then be in anyway subjected to an ideal bias based on a belief system that cannot be proven.

[-] 1 points by MoshehThezion (98) 5 years ago

the bible... as far as Genesis... can be found to fit.. all.. ALL MODERN EVIDENCE... AND I CAN PROVE IT.... SEE--- http://empiricalchurch.org/theory/ read all the links... and know... yes.. I wrote that over 10 years ago... its not perfect... there are considerable flaws.. but the root concept.. of a dimensional progressive pattern... holds...

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Religion is myth making, and we still need the myths. See Joseph Campbell on this one. He has an eloquent way of presenting it this way. We just can't outright dismiss it. But, yes, it can be much better.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

I don't see that you have demonstrated a need much less the basis for filling the need. You glossed right over that. You could say "I believe, for good reason, in a need for a new social disease based on the principle of aerosol spreading.

You want to talk about hand to hand contact as being superior to aerosol and I haven't accepted the need for the disease yet. "For good reason" that is so good you don't even have to state it, much less defend it?

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Taoism meets your test and has been around a long time. A very long time. Yes, some have tried to bend it to their purposes (power and domination), but with little success. Where is the hegemony in history guided by Taoism?

The Kuanhsien Tao, Quanshen Dao, also called Northern Taoism, is also called Complete Perfection or, the Complete Realization sect. Being a monastic tradition they interacted with the meditative traditions of Chan Buddhism and Neo-Confucianism. Kuan hsien Tao taught mutual respect for all three of these traditions and stressed individual, spiritual, and moral discipline as opposed to liturgical, ritual, or philosophical concerns.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

We already invented one ... it's called atheism :)

I hear it's real popular in places that do respect their fellow humans, like Norway.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

There's many different kinds of athiest. In some respects I'm one. Skeptical is a damn good state of mind to be in most of the time, especially when others start fashioning their way of utopian living and thinking so much that everyone else SHOULD follow them. We're into something big here and anyone who thinks they have even remotely figured this out is full of shit. So, I'll agree, the atheist is usually the most reasonable one in the room. They fear death no more or less then any of us other poor buggers.

Personally, I think this is actually where it will begin. We will finally reach that Age of Reason, the enlightenment Jefferson really dreamed of, this will be A big part of the shift. On top of that, we love&live to dream and it infinitely motivates us. When we marry this two we will fly to the stars, and it will be great and wonderful.

Buckle up!

[-] 1 points by rayolite (461) 6 years ago

Love and understanding.

(un = unconscious der = of standing = conscious) The realm of reason is consistent with the intentions of the millions of animals breathing their many forms of life into our genetic pool, stoking our collective unconscious, when it is is understood, even a little.

All that is not for the many initially. The U.S. Constitution on the other hand, carries "natural law" sensitivity to biological genetic response structures that shape our existence and evolution through epigenetics.

Adopting meanings through it are naturally fulfilling in more than one way. There is the historical record of social contracts, recent facts gathered published easily show this going back to 1215 and the Magna Carta.

When we involve ourselves with the evolutionary aspects of social contracts that enhance our evolution there is inspiration. Uplifting and visionary things are fun.

Article V, our first and last right . . . is recomended. Lately, it looks like we can get real here, state by state, law of the land. Check the preparations


[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

This essentially is exactly what's happening. On many levels we evolve and it all means something and tells something. And it's big, it's why we came, it's why we're here. And it's completely shrouded in mystery. We dance with life in this fantastical mystery which beckons us but doesn't us require to know much. We think to dream not how to beat our heart. What a wonderful predicament to in. ANd there it is, the beauty, surrounds us continuously.

Good Luck on the Journey.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

And we need cancers that don't kill you.

The essence of religion is to discredit "other's" beliefs or non belief in order gain acceptance of their belief. It is the first zero sum game. If you say to nonmembers of your group, "It doesn't matter what you believe," your numbers start to drop.

I have found about 3800 religions in history, most of which obviously no longer exist, and, as a consequence, are no longer doing any harm. Why not pick from that list? Following the principle you describe, if every individual had their own religion, it is unlikely that they could do serious damage to the others. Short of that, the Tao, or what I would call modern Taoism comes fairly close.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Certainly an interesting take. There were many incarnations of God working the Earth thousands of years. It seems the people in that period thought it might be true and some thought they were, God. You believe that today and you will have no followers but rather a ticket to have your head examined. Taoism is a very interesting "path" but as with all others eventually it claims some ideas that go into the clouds.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Like most "ways" every generation of copies start sliding in the direction of agendas. A bunch of people walking in the same direction is perceived by some as a parade they would like to lead. One man's schizophrenia is another man's religion. Does the voice inside your head sound familiar?

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Our generation has one thing, a technological advantage. Brain science will some day answer our big questions not any religion. Any religion that turned away from science made a bad step. Miracles have absolutely nothing to do with science and are very hard to believe. Religions require Faith for this very reason, is the opposite of what science does, which is to prove things.

A new viable religion will not turn away from science but rather use it.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Eliminate the middle man (girl?)

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Life is experience and as we experience learning new ways, new ideas, new truths, we will adapt, it's our nature........

Time to SHIFT

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Science will not turn away from religion but rather use it?

A new viable religion will not turn away from science but continue to abuse it?

Sometimes, in order to see if a statement that sounds plausible, makes sense, it is useful to reverse it in some ways. This is one of those times. When you are stranded in the desert with a number of things you can try to carry towards survival no one can question that your choices reflect your sincere beliefs in what is most important to you. Your choices may spell your doom, but they are your choices. And ultimately, they affect the gene pool.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

A good point you bring up. I will try to bring some light to the matter. Science really essentially was born from religion. It starts with curiosity and then we just be ourselves, human. We love to create, relish new thoughts, new ideas. As we do this we do it better and develop science as the next step. Religion gives the sense of wonder and longing to know deeper truths. The two are one and the same as you inspect closer. Aristotle, was one of the first to be mult-dimensional this way.

Yes, there's something to this. We all are going somewhere. That we can sure.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

I fail to see any evidence that religion is a precursor to curiosity. If we watch primates and other animals (even birds) that use sticks and other objects to find food in places that they are unable to see into. Most people would equate that with curiosity. And there are other examples. Pick a date for the "Genisis" (I had to use it) of religion and we will see if we can find indications of curiosity that predate it. I believe you could just as easily posit that religion was born out of science by those seeking power from being able to explain things (often incorrectly) that others could not. The Shaman, the Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court are two thousands of stories that use that premise. Might be something there? Some would say that religion could never have existed without the answers from science to create the justification for asserting power.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

There is a definite relationship between religion and science just as surely as Isaac Newton was a devote Christian. The first colleges were religious, and people learned to read, to read the bible, write, to write about it! That was prevailing for these religious schools. Religion does embrace science more than anyone really thought. We embody duality. The connection is sure, true, and actually the further you look at at, it was a necessity. Had to be.

Interesting! Thanks for the conversation!

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Kinda skipped over the first curiosity question, hmmm? So I will take that as a concession that I am right.

No, there isn't

If "a" exists and "b" exists, neither can be said to be the cause of the other nor are they a prerequisite for the other. Republicans exist and lemons exist, there is no definite relationship between them even if John Boehner likes lemonade or not. Isaac Newton was a scientist but not every person who was religious was a scientist. Have you never studied logic?

Do you know why the first colleges were religious? They had all of the money, except for monarchs. Monarchs preferred tutors, the class size was smaller.They also sponsored a great many scientists and other academicians.Don't know where you came up with this fiction but you should read more history (not written by a religious sect.) Those in the Inquisition thought their embrace was excessive and not altogether welcome.

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 6 years ago

What on earth makes you think that people will follow a new one anymore than they have the old

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Actually in the past people more or less had to follow or lose their head. Now, the old time religion is dead and less people year by year follow those old antique ways.

It's time for the shift.

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 6 years ago

Nice Idea.But religion based on mans ability to reason(knowledge)has been done.It goes by many names(Occult).The religion of your political leaders.Does not seem to be working out so well for us.No problem with what we have if people would practice it and not tolerate those who profess one thing and do another.A good example again the Politicians.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Because reason is very powerful, and this will be nothing like any of the old time religions which require much faith, ignore reason, and removing half your brain so you don't think too hard.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 6 years ago

That's Buddhism.

Everything old is new again.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

I always liked how the buddhist considers GOD. They call him the No-Thing. ANd actually having learned that decades ago I can still see the genius in the idea. The buddhists have a wide open view of things and it is refreshing. Good for them.

[-] 1 points by ComeTogetherNOW (650) 6 years ago

I think we are entering a period where technology utilizing AI will mass produce all the goods people need without much need for human intervention. An age of intelligent machines. I'm sure of this.

Also, the old religions will begin to loses their hold on us as we appeal to reason and develop science for the good of us all.

Then we may see real peace in this world. Tyranny loses it's grip. We can only hope some day the world, the Universe AWAKENS!!!

[-] 0 points by secnoot (-14) 5 years ago

I wonder if the lions will respect the antelopes right to exist?

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Although the saying: Anything is Possible, is an absurd proposition.

I could say simply, Anything is Possible.

The Puzzler

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 5 years ago

If you're saying you need a new religion, it's because you never had the old one in the first place - it's not a new religion that you need but A religion that you need.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Good point, and in my case, you hit the nail on the head. I was raised Catholic but it didn't work. I had always sensed something just wasn't right about what I was being indoctrinated into.


[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 5 years ago

Yes a new religion that values life beyond borders is a great idea.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

Ok, got you down for that one. I right there. We're human beings first. Got it!

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 5 years ago

It is difficult for people who have experienced kindness, broken bread with, and laughed with people of other lands in their homes to think about bombing them. We want a new world where people... here... realize that the people... there.... just want the same things in life that we want, a chance for a better life for themselves, and their children. Unfortunately politicians, governments, and corporations are keeping that from happening.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

This is the lesson isn't it? I have also seen and experienced many different people from different cultures and countries. I am married to a Colombian woman so there's that experience as well. Yes, we are all mostly loving people, it's all our natures. Killing each other is very unnatural and can only be carried off by dehumanizing us first.

Odin, you got some truth there. This is the kind of truth I'm talking about and you know it when you got it. Good One!

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 5 years ago

Thanks, and thank you for the great post which forces people to think. I have extended family on three other continents. We have had kids from all over the world live with us on different exchange programs during the years my kids were in high school, and my own kids have traveled to six of the worlds continents. It makes a difference on how you look at life, and hence your ability to swallow the faux justification for wars.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 5 years ago

There is hope and maybe this world can be saved. I/m there doing my part even if I was the last one standing. You know this feeling, it's our very lives. It's good to realize this more often and it's never an accident when it happens , this is truth we all live and breath. We can always get to a better place and it's always worth it to do it. Our prime motivator has always been love, and it is from there we precede on the right path. Hate is the absence of love and is always mistaken/misguided.

Yes, this is the intention, to think of these things. This thread was made with good intention and it is now a work of ALL us silly humans thinking of things we can never understand but won't stop trying anyway. A worthy attempt once again at scratching the surface of something so big how could we could we ever possibly comprehend it? The Great Mystery :D

Good Luck on your Journey Odin!

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 5 years ago

And on yours too my friend.

[-] 0 points by adaldk (-11) 5 years ago

so, you're anti abortion?

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Perfection is not known in the Real World. It exists only as concept or ideal. Like Plato's forms.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

OK, I up for it...

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 6 years ago

Idk about that. The investment firms and banks with regard to the economy, seem perfectly useless.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

So, true, they build up these houses of cards, paper. We must focus on the reality, the one we can feel in our hand, see with our eyes. Greed should never have been rewarded. It's bad perception but somehow they lost touch of reality.

[-] 0 points by Rennaye (34) 6 years ago

Thanks Puzzlin, I see that clearly you k-n-o-w !!! Keep posting along this line. Others will wake up as we go along.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Thanks Rennaye!!!

[-] 0 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 6 years ago

Buddhism. It's been here for awhile now.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Remember, many have already seen this truth. And they know it's coming. But not enough. We have to pull everyone else up by their bootstraps. We live in a dynamic world not one that many of the old time religions seen as static. Eternal.

The shift will come off the existing foundation. Certain truths are already known others are yet to be discovered.

Thanks Black Sun,