Profane man is also homo religiosus

@Indonesia-Phil said
Well then you should not use the word 'experiment', since this implies method, observation and a measurable result; your 'man alone in the world' is pure imagination.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to put across, perhaps you would clarify.

There are experiments of the mind, used by ethics, and experiments with matter, which are part of the scientific method. Anyone would expect not to fall into language when dealing with a well established branch of philosophy.

@Lionel-Hutz said
Debate Eliade's the sacred and the profane.

Go!

Regarding his Sacred and the Profane work, his idea that universal structures of religious experience are shared across all cultures, contains some grains of truth, but I don't agree with all of it. There are ample differences in religious experiences in different cultures as to make this idea less than convincing.

Eliade was a pretty smart guy. I don't consider him a major intellectual though. His studies in politics and religion seemed to jump erratically from one discipline to another, and his admiration for fascist governments and their intolerance for anyone who thought outside the government approved "box" seemed to be at odds with his free-thinking ways. Though I admire his intellectual curiosity, I'd consider him to be little more than a political and spiritual gadfly.

@Suzianne said
Psychologists would have a problem with a concept of the religious self.

I'm not sure it truly exists. I mean, some people like to describe themselves as such, but it is like wearing a self-made costume only to appear like something you're not. Most people who describe themselves in this way most certainly are not.

What makes one a Christian or one of any other religion. Is it what I want to call myself, so it is like a coat we want to wear, or like being a liar when someone tells lies so that defines them, or murder when one murders, or an honorable person who behaves honorably, perhaps something else, something that happens to them not what they do?

@mchill said
Regarding his Sacred and the Profane work, his idea that universal structures of religious experience are shared across all cultures, contains some grains of truth, but I don't agree with all of it. There are ample differences in religious experiences in different cultures as to make this idea less than convincing.

Eliade was a pretty smart guy. I don't consider him a major ...[text shortened]... is intellectual curiosity, I'd consider him to be little more than a political and spiritual gadfly.

I appreciate your thoughtful response.

I definitely agree that there are major differences. However, wouldn't the religious experience (phenomenologically speaking) be the same in all humans? I refer, of course, not to the rituals themselves but the inward manner of experiencing the moments/spaces in which the profane and sacred worlds link up.

@Lionel-Hutz said
I appreciate your thoughtful response.

I definitely agree that there are major differences. However, wouldn't the religious experience (phenomenologically speaking) be the same in all humans? I refer, of course, not to the rituals themselves but the inward manner of experiencing the moments/spaces in which the profane and sacred worlds link up.

However, wouldn't the religious experience (phenomenologically speaking) be the same in all humans?


Yes, I suppose it would be the same in all humans. I would be very careful however before attaching any other similarities to different faiths.

@mchill said
Yes, I suppose it would be the same in all humans. I would be very careful however before attaching any other similarities to different faiths.

Alright, so let's do a thought experiment together and see if we can unearth some common ground in our positions, shall we?

I will put an idea on the table and you tell me what do you think: If the religious experience itself, phenomenologically speaking, is the same among cultures and eras, could we say that they all exist in a narrative space wherein the driving force is an ontological "thirst", i.e. a desire to explain/experience things in the narrative realm?

@KellyJay said
What makes one a Christian or one of any other religion. Is it what I want to call myself, so it is like a coat we want to wear, or like being a liar when someone tells lies so that defines them, or murder when one murders, or an honorable person who behaves honorably, perhaps something else, something that happens to them not what they do?

This is what discernment is for, and why we've been told to foster it.

We need to be able to tell those who ARE what they claim, from those who WEAR what they claim, like a coat they put on to fool others.

Too many "Christians" do not show discernment, or even apparently know what it is.

@Suzianne said
This is what discernment is for, and why we've been told to foster it.

We need to be able to tell those who ARE what they claim, and those who WEAR what they claim, like a coat they put on to fool others.

Too many "Christians" do not show discernment, or even apparently know what it is.

I'm not following you, you are saying we should know, because we should know?

@KellyJay said
I'm not following you, you are saying we should know, because we should know?

Are you pretending to not know, or are you just turning your head when you see it?

@Lionel-Hutz said
Alright, so let's do a thought experiment together and see if we can unearth some common ground in our positions, shall we?

I will put an idea on the table and you tell me what do you think: If the religious experience itself, phenomenologically speaking, is the same among cultures and eras, could we say that they all exist in a narrative space wherein the driving f ...[text shortened]... e is an ontological "thirst", i.e. a desire to explain/experience things in the narrative realm?

If the religious experience itself, phenomenologically speaking, is the same among cultures and eras, could we say that they all exist in a narrative space wherein the driving force is an ontological "thirst", i.e. a desire to explain/experience things in the narrative realm?

It's possible, but this abstract hypothetical misses an important point. i.e. There are only a tiny number of faiths that declare there is an all-knowing, all-powerful God that created heaven and earth, heaven and hell, and only one that goes on to declare that we already stand guilty before him, and are unable to save ourselves, except through faith in the one who paid the ultimate price for our transgressions.

Other faiths, phenomenologically speaking, share some of these same traits, however (IMHO) it takes the whole package of things I just spoke of to secure the future God made possible for us.

@mchill said
It's possible, but this abstract hypothetical misses an important point. i.e. There are only a tiny number of faiths that declare there is an all-knowing, all-powerful God that created heaven and earth, heaven and hell, and only one that goes on to declare that we already stand guilty before him, and are unable to save ourselves, except through faith in the one who paid the ultimate price for our transgressions.

Indeed, Christianity is distinct as it has both an spaceless/timeless sacred experience while, at the same time, having a central figure who is divine although it takes part in a precise historical time and then it reveals himself every week when the communion takes place.

It is, in that sense, an anomaly among religious practices throughout history and across the world.

Yet, wouldn't the exception disprove the rule once the odd-one-out is pinpointed?

@Suzianne said
Are you pretending to not know, or are you just turning your head when you see it?

You have not made your point so I do not understand you yet. Do you think we have some internal innate knowledge that knows when someone is a Christian and when they are not?

@KellyJay said
You have not made your point so I do not understand you yet. Do you think we have some internal innate knowledge that knows when someone is a Christian and when they are not?

Okay, turning the head it is.

@Suzianne said
Okay, turning the head it is.

You are not being clear, I cannot READ your mind, is this some sort of god-like power you possess that YOU know and no one else has? I asked if someone just needs to proclaim they are a Christian and that is all it takes, or something has to happen to them to make them one. You are claiming discernment as if it's something everyone can turn on and off at will, you are not being clear, and suggesting I'm turning my head is disingenuous of you when you refuse to explain yourself when questioned.

@KellyJay said
You are not being clear, I cannot READ your mind, is this some sort of god-like power you possess that YOU know and no one else has? I asked if someone just needs to proclaim they are a Christian and that is all it takes, or something has to happen to them to make them one. You are claiming discernment as if it's something everyone can turn on and off at will, you are not ...[text shortened]... ting I'm turning my head is disingenuous of you when you refuse to explain yourself when questioned.

You're missing the entire point.

You SHOULD know, and you claim to, every day, but you clearly don't.

"You are claiming discernment as if it's something everyone can turn on and off at will"

Not everyone, but certainly Christians, yet you can't. Speaks volumes, about you and the entire Republican Party.