Moral ... the mirror effect 'don't wish another what you don't
wish to ownself' .... According this all are equal ... egalitarism.
But this is valid only partially ... in some things all people are equal
.... that they are human beings ... on this level of generalization or
abstraction .... but on lower level of consideration the rule is difference.
So, moral is a set of rules on higher level of generalization. In practice
there are neccessary rules for dealing with different people.
./.
The statement of the Catholics that the God is God how for Theists
so for Pagans is an authoritarian statement with intention to devaluate
those who has critical standpoints about the God, present onterpretation
of religion .... A common arrogancy ... Already the term 'Pagan' is an
affront ... Pagan was not a Church member ... alien ... Similar terms
are Green, Jew, Pifke, Toth, Rac, .... Paganism as institution never existed
.... If they have no better term to name the opinion of others then better
ignore them. Among those who do not accept God are more streems: Atheist,
Liberals, Mithologists, Agnostics, .... equally organized or no. The statement
about 'pagans' is dominative and undemocratic.
./.
West Europe is democracy only in comparison to dictatorships, communism,
fascism. In comparison to Liberalism the term 'democratic' is already not
so uniquely valid even for West Europe. Liberalism today does not exist.
It is only an imagine or theory or ideology.
./.
All theisms are authoritarian doctrines. ... rooting in ancient societies
of Mid East, India, ... Christendoom was not democratically elected by
peoples ... it was enforced by different rulers, religious and secular,
.... The story sound plausible for the state of mind of average human of
that time ... Christendom is a bit misinterpreted Judaism, a pure authoritarian
doctrine, .... Christendoom was intended to to make people more free ....
free of fear from unknown ..... offering belief in human being derived
from transcedental idea as liberation from fear ....but put them under
the rule of dictators, deceivers, manipulators, ..... I do not know what
was the original doctrine of Europe before it took over Christendoom from
Romans and Greeks ... ....In Europe there were rebels against the church
... but these rebels also called themselves on God .... so lot of unclear
....
./.
Catholic church cannot be considered as democratic organization. They
do not tolerate other views. They cannot suppose that the source of idea
and value is human individual .... according them all is coming from some
outside power ... so, all reality is only God's 'shadow'. Human should
not have own standpoint, one must consider oneself only through the eyes
of the God .... for them the only reality is God ... human is a poor machine
driven by God ...or used ... without own identity ... On the other hand,
human can not know anything about God, becuse this human is of infrior
value in comparison to God ...Human existence is God's will ... human
need not to bother about own existence because cannot understand it. What
human is doing is only what God is doing. Here is not the problem that
somebody has not right to communicate his/her imagines about the other
system or higher system but the way how they are doing this. With this
way of communication they are posing themselves in a position of manipulator,
hiding cause, exposing only effects. And they are still arguing that what
they say are words of God. With this they are putting themselves above
the human. They suceeded to integrate a relative large group of people
with this story but disintegrated many individual lives. For this their
success somebody else payed a very high price.
./.
God is human's picture about another system. But it is almost impossible
to prove its correctness. It is a possibility, it can be and need not be.
Both possibilities are equal. And one has right to believe in this picture
with some probability higher than average, but it is good if one is letting
several percents of critical standpoint to it. But they require 100% belief.
./.
Ideas are human creations. So, there can be so many of them how many
humans are on the Earth. When it is not possible to bring evidence about
the correctnes then the decision must be based either on democratic consensus
or every to stay with own, this is tolerance. This is reality. Somebody
who believes in some idea, as different from things and from nature just
present around us, then one could expect that somebody else can have a
different idea, and if the encounter happens in some competive field, then
rules are neccessary to solve the disputs. These rules are democracy.
./.
These ideas about God are about the greatest whole one can imagine.
This is thinking in globals. It requires whole information which is not
present. So, the reality is partiality, not whole. And there is also no
proof that thinking in globals is advantageous over thinking in partialities.
One can arrieve to same point in space following only partial information
in right succession with much less the same effort and same time as with
a good overlook and map .... other things being equal.
./.
Global ideas are heuristics for new situations. Human's grasping of
his/her existence was a new event in past times. Human needed some guide
and created it in form of religion, belief in God. Today human is equipped
with much sophisticated knowledge about environment in which is living
.... so the religion should also be new.
./.
Liberty is also global idea but its content is different.
./.
Is internet replacement for God?
./.
Religion is a trial to definy the individual and collective(social)
equilibrium and stability .... Equilibrium and stability of individual
is given mainly by his/her (-1) level .... PSY, MET, GEN, .... The first
religions tried to inerprete this (-1) level by the influence of higher
system ..... the creator .... But the rules they prescribed were right
for that times ... but I am not sure wether they are the best ones for
nowday .... I think there are better interpretations ....The present human
is on a half way between the start and some ideal ....
./.
Religions argu that individuals do not need to make decisions at all
only to follow the orders of authorities ... because all is decided ahead
by some higher power ... and authorities are denominated by this higher
power ... so if one is trying to decide something on his/her own, one will
come in conflict with this higher power and authority .... Is this
truth?
./.
All present religions and moral system prescribe loyalty to authority
... not loyalty to oneself ... the latter is disvalue ... So, the identity
of individual is recognized only when is attached from outside .... from
inside individual is zero ....
./.
According God .... God gave human group environment .... in which it
can live ... to have equlibrium and stability ... by the act of creation
... God decided all ... gave rules... [[[[[[If so then one can argue that
God prescribed wars also ... Or is possible God a human invention with
the aim to ....Or the problem is that God gave rules under the assumption
that all individuals are same ... copy of one original ... Is this assumption
correct ...Rules are interpreted by different paeople ...]]]]]]
./.
God's religion teaches that God as main authority, creator, ... created
human being and its surronding as an automatic machine which will follow
God's instructions unconsciously, that all what human percepts and thinks
are only manifestations of God's will. But the same imagin can also be
described in another way: as conscious acts of every individual as supreme
decision maker about ones own life. The only thing what individual cannot
attach to ones own will (or to mankind) is the creation of the humans surronding.
Human heredeted this, found it as given when one became conscious. So,
we have primary nature as given by higher system (as matter and idea) and
the man-made nature (matter and human's idea) as reshaped primary nature.
In this latter human has full decision freedom and responsibility. This
is the view of open systems as compared to the first view, which is of
the closed system.
./.
Your comment:
©Copyright 2001 Pavel Kollar