Every [philosophy/aphorism/religion/teaching/etc] seems to function as a causal map—an attempt to chart a pattern of consequence that steers me towards fulfillment and cautions me against undesirable pitfalls.
Ironically, all the worthwhile ones seem to be saying the exact same thing: it’s fine to use them as guides (especially in the beginning) but in the end, I have to figure things out for myself.
Definitely think for yourself! Everything is legit the same old shit. But I would be put of work if everyone was a free thinker. So… maybe help me corral the sheeple towards my pig pen? (This is your muse, talking to you, after all)
Haha, I am my own pig farmer sherpah goat, and I’m yodelling all my whatsy-whats back to the slaughterhouse.
Or in not insane talk, I am a cult leader and am spruiking my own cult. It would do my a great honour if a caveman such as yourself were to sign up to my own arcadian mkultra cool cult. You will be known as a kimion. and… its all beta, max. very iffy. (its my cultofkim, aka #COK)
cult leading is maybe not not insane talk… it may be the opposite of not insane… I’m confusion
I am ALWAYS down to sign up for something named #COK! 😂I’m confident I can bring a lot to the table, just based off the name!😆
LikeLike
I suspect that whatever challenges you face have been shared by many others across history, which is probably why we have such systems in the first place.
They absolutely have. ( (Un)fortunately?) the setting and context will vary, so it requires some independent thought to change up the approach but keep the principle when it comes to applying the tradition to the problem.
LikeLike
I’m not saying that one must become a mindless robot if you join an organized spiritual group. There’s a lot of room for variation, which is why there are an estimated 1,500 denominations of Christianity alone. Both Judaism and Islam also have variants. So does Buddhism. I’ve probably said this before, but at the end of the day, no matter what form of spirituality to which you cling, each person negotiates his or her own relationship with God.
We agree. The highest levels in any of these belief structures are more comfortable with other structures. because they know that. Some people cling to the details trying to differentiate their ideas when the most enlightened way is looking for common ground.
There’s a feeling of comfort and safety in tradition, but just like it’s better for parents and children to evolve beyond a parasitic relationship (though it’s definitely necessary at first), it’s better for people to evolve beyond mindless obedience to a given tradition, and apply the deeper principles behind whatever they were venerating.
LikeLike
I would say it isn’t skewed if you acknowledge that it IS skewed, but it’s skewed if you think it isn’t. From what I remember, Dan thought he had it all figured out until Socrates taught him otherwise.
LikeLike
This thought/musing makes me agree with it on a slightly broader scale. At face value, there are many “guides” to progress through life in an “acceptable” manner. I think no one is better than the other (my opinion). They all offer a means to get through trials and be a part of a community. Then you mention that they “run out of material”. There is no end game for many of these systems/guidelines. It’s as you say, you have to think for yourself, or seek the final answers for yourself. I believe the reason is that none of these systems have “proof” of the existence of the next level of things. When our mortal bodies expire, there is only anecdotes and claimed experiences that give any hint that we go on. In addition to that, we suffer from our survival instincts… a desire not to die. I feel the need to suppose that many of the folks that came up with these systems/guides succumbed to that survival instinct. They reaced the point of facing their own mortalities and ran out of ideas… or the ability to think rationally. The “fear” of death is base instinct in mortal animals like us. The fear of the unknown is part of that, me thinks. So, when these systems run out of material, I would posit that it is because like everybody else, we must achieve an acceptance of our ends. We have to come to terms with the possibility that when we take that final nap, the lights really do go out, and there is nothing after that. Some are fortunate enough to possibly reach a threshold and catch a glimpse of what might be next and come back with some idea of what might be (near-death experience). But given the possibility of something next, whatever is next is less than interested in revealing itself to us mortals until we are at the threshold. Those that get that glimpse are left without proof, and all we can do is believe/hope that they are right. It’s up to the individual at that point to accept what might be. No guideline for that, I guess…
Kent Wayne 
Leave a reply to A. Nonymous Cancel reply