Religious Philosophy

Religious Philosophy Final Essay

Rev. Phil Robinson

In any field of study it is important to understand some of the path which has led

that study to its current state. The ideas and concepts of religious philosophy as

an academic study have been around for as long as religious thought. Whether it

is defining what is and isn't classed as religion, how a particular religion should

be practiced, or analyzing elements of different religions, the concept of studying

and analysing religious thoughts has always been present. While the main drive

of religious philosophy through Europe by the Christians may have been during

the 18th century, examples of study outside of these conditions can be found

throughout history.

An early example of what we would recognise today as religious philosophy

might be "Euthyphro" which is an early dialogue of the Athenian philosopher

Plato (428-347 B.C.) . It contains a dialogue between the Ancient Greek

philosopher Socrates (369-399 B.C.) and a well know religious expert Euthyphro.

The discussion is an attempt to define the concept of piety and shows a very

serious early dedication to examining religion from a philosophical point of view.

In the East the exposure to religions unlike your own was far more common and

religious ideas were shared across them. Unlike in Europe in the 17th/18th

century the idea of adopting and embracing elements from different religions was

much more widespread. Without this attitude Buddhism may not have grown in

the same manner. It was, as it is today, versatile, adaptable and easy to fit in with

your own belief systems. In India, Buddhism grew out of Hinduism and was

distributed around the Eastern countries, such as China and Japan via the silk

road. The people of India, later reverted to Hinduism and Buddhism grew and

changed in its new surroundings.

Some early religions didn't just take influence and basic ideas from others but

integrated large pieces of dogma, orthodoxy, orthopraxy and in some cases

entire deities. A good example here would be Egypt in the Greco-Roman period

where the process was bi-directional. Romans were building Egyptian

monuments, Egyptian mummies were being painted and adored with Roman

images. Neither were prepared to abandon or fully integrate their religious ideas

or indeed any other elements of the society.

My point is this, that different religions have always studied each other and

compared and contrasted the results, yes it is true that some ethnocentric

religions have done this from a point of proving to themselves that they are the

correct set of beliefs but in the earlier development of religion and philosophy this

was also done to share and develop ideas.

This course introduced me to the works of Feuerbach who I had not been aware

of before. The concept of projection that derives from Feuerbach's "Essence of

Christianity" can be seen in many forms, not only as a creation of a god from the

mind of man (and here by man I mean a member of Mankind, male or female)

but also as a form of metaphysical manifestation.

As man creates ideas, concepts and thoughts within the private reality of his own

mind, he also projects and to an extent manifests these thoughts into the reality

of others. An inventor creates a new invention first of all in his mind only.

Likewise a preacher may project thought to his congregation.

I think that the projection Feuerbach was talking about is not only one within the

mind of individual men but also a projection into the global human knowledge

and a reality that is shared by all so if enough people think and believe

something is a particular way then to a certain extent it becomes true within the

frame of normal human existence and belief. In the words of The Buddha: "We

are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we

make the world."

The analysis of religion by breaking down separate components was a good

approach throughout. I enjoyed examining how they linked together like the

ingredients of a religion. For example "precepts and concepts" which are clearly

very different elements of religion but still have some degree of relationship

within their systems. A concept could translate into a precept if its importance is

such that it becomes a part of the orthopraxy and it is generally believed that it

should be practised by all.

For example, a respect for all sentient beings may be an existent concept that

eventually becomes used as a precept such as 'Thou shalt not kill'. Likewise that

same precept may transmit a concept of compassion to the many without

defining it specifically as such.

Classification of religion is just as difficult as it is to clearly define anything

complex into a particular set of properties but also maybe the very process of

creating categories is flawed, for example are all religions not dualist "and"

monist to some degree? If we look at the dualist concepts of "good and evil" and

"yin and yang" as examples we might see them as the following; Yin and Yang

are complements of each other rather than opposites and this may also apply to

good and evil. Is there really evil as a separate and distinct entity to good or is

evil only manifested by the absence or differing levels of good?

Christianity may be examined as a dualist religion on the basis that it sees both

good and evil yet it is monotheistic believing that all is the creation of one.

Likewise the yin or yang is one of two forces that mutually promote and restrict

each other to the level that when they are in balance they become one. The unity

and completeness of this one is the whole point of the yin yang philosophy, not

their separate and distinct properties or states. Monism and Dualism are both

apparent in most systems, there importance is elevated depending on the criteria

and level of analysis.

It was stated in the later parts of the course, when dealing with apocalyptic and

eschatological faiths, that there are also religions who completely ignore the "last

things" and deal solely with the life we are given. I believe that this may not be

"ignoring" but more examining things from a different scope. For example a man

may prepare for his death by preparing for the last days, not of the world, or of

the universe, but certainly of his world. If one believes that the world in which

they reside is contained entirely within themselves, such as in a projected reality

like that referred to by Feuerbach, does this apocalyptic nature of death not then

make the person eschatological.

The sections on the "god gene" and the studies that were referenced in this

course also interested me, the trouble with statistics is that you can make them

say almost anything you like. I read through a lot of studies relating to the brain's

responses to self transcendence and spirituality and all of them seem to be

flawed.

First of all I'm not convinced that selected groups are the best to draw any

conclusions from. In the "Self-transcendence in Australian twins" research, were

the subjects told the nature of the experiment, it seems to indicate by omission

and the fact that there were no results where they "never" went to church, that all

subjects had some degree of religious activity.

Secondly the method for assessment of a person's degree of spirituality seems a

little suspect. They were asked true or false questions such as these:

● Often I have unexpected flashes of insight or understanding while

relaxing.

● I often feel a strong spiritual or emotional connection with all the people

around me.

● I often feel that I am a part of the spiritual force on which all life depends.

● I sometimes feel so connected to nature that everything seems to be part

of one living organism.

● I love the blooming of flowers in the spring as much as seeing an old

friend again.

Is this really the best way to asses the entire complex sphere of religious and

spiritual activity? Even if you narrow it down to self transcendence, can a couple

of heavily weighted and romantically worded, true or false questions give an

accurate picture of the experience of an enlightened being?

I also took a look at the study "The Serotonin System and Spiritual Experiences"

in the "American Journal of psychiatry", and it would indeed seem to suggest that

the serotonin system is shown to have an effect on an individual's predisposition

towards spiritual experiences and religiosity. As with the other studies; the twins

research, and the god gene, you have to ask "What is the relevance of a change

in brain chemistry upon the experiences of the subject?" They are no less real

through a scientific explanation.

There are many physiological and chemical changes when a person is exposed

to stress or threat. This stress response is a natural part of human evolution but

stress is not a psychological anomaly any more than spirituality is. Explaining the

natural responses within the human body and giving things a scientific label does

not demystify the metaphysical elements of those responses. In the same way

that continuous exposure to stressful situations can increase one's predisposition

to release adrenaline and become more alerted to stress, surely increased

exposure to spiritual experiences will increase the neural and chemical

responses of the brain. The brain is after all like any other organ, it just responds

according to its functional biology and nature.

There is always the notion that the mind is not necessarily 100% a child process

of the brain. Therefore changes in the brain chemistry may affect the mind but

not to the extent that the mind is altered beyond choice. This process is a two

way operation, that is the conditioning of the mind can also affect the brain

chemistry in the same manner. With continuous and deliberate practises,

whether religious in nature or not, affecting the levels and receptors of

monoamines such as dopamine and serotonin in the brain. Meditation and prayer

may both be examples of such practises.

The big questions asked of life are what link religion with philosophy, man has

always sought answers to these question, who am I?, why are we here?, What is

matter?, what is reality?. Religion may have started as an early attempt to

explain the unexplainable but it has certainly become more than that. When does

philosophy become religion and vice versa? Is it the presence of a god or is it

more the presence of faith? If it is faith then a atheist can be also be said to be

religious as it requires as much a leap of faith to categorically deny the existence

of a supreme being, with no proof, as it does to declare the existence. This leads

to a questioning of existence itself.

How does something exist? Is there a difference between existence and reality?

Or is it true to say that simply be existing something is part of reality? What if the

item in question is not a physical object but a concept, thoughts exist but have

little physical presence other than electrical impulses, how about mathematics?

Nobody could deny the existence of mathematics yet it is purely conceptual, it

has no presence outside of the mind of those who understand it conceptually. If

we then look at the big question, "Does god exist?" then we might see that he

exists in the thoughts, beliefs, and prayers of those who have a relationship with

god. God certainly exists in the churches and communities that derive strength

from their faith. Whether you "believe" or think that there is some form of deity or

spiritual being become irrelevant. God is part of reality through his existence in

the hearts and minds of man.

In summary the course has extended not only my understanding but also led my

study into many different and enjoyable tangents, I took my time to complete the

course but enjoyed some extended research as a natural and logical progression

from the main study. The material presented was done so in a way that raised as

many questions as it answered and left me eager to further this line of study.

********************

Ordination with the Universal Life Church, is free  and lasts for life, so use the button.

As a long time member of ULC, Rev. Long created the seminary site to help train our ministers. We also have a huge catalog of Universal Life Church materials. Many have been ordained with the Universal Life Church for many years and it's Seminary since the beginning and can attest to its ongoing growth and change.

Try our new free toolbar at: ULC Toolbar