A space for cooperation between the seekers of "something more"

[torrentialrain]

The understanding of the mind is the most interesting and least explored domain, particularly when coupled with a belief that reality does have a fundamental mystery to it, that it is not mere matter, that there is a "something more."

A lot of people want to get at this "something more" in the depths of the mind, but do not want to be bound to any particular religion or philosophy. People want to investigate questions of deep meaning, but there seems to be no good place in modern society to pursue those answers with others, for those questions to be taken seriously.

Could such a space exist? Does it even really make sense?

Some basic requirements:
-It would be an open-ended investigation and not dogmatic.
-It would allow the exploration of all religions, atheistic points of view, and philosophy.
-It would be able to bring in literature and art, mythology, and other aspects of the humanities.
-It would take into account psychoanalysis, psychology, and the social sciences.
-It would take its findings to be of practical and serious value: it should affect how people live their lives; it is not 'mere scholarship.'

Now some bigger issues:
-It would be something that would be able to keep out low-quality, low-information, and low-thought contributions (academia is relatively good at this).
-It would be something which would genuinely benefit from collaboration.

What would be the model for this?
-A new kind of academy or institute or university?
-A think tank?
-A society akin to the old explorers' societies or even something more like the Freemasons?

So these are just some starting points. Does anyone else relate to this desire?

Should there be a place where anyone who is seeking meaning and believes in "something more" can go?

How could such a place attract the brightest minds?

Is this whole idea way too broad? Could there ever be any really effective conversation when the starting assumptions are so different?

And does it make more sense to create something to educate the new and the seeking, or to create a way for active seekers to actually discover new perspectives?

In the end, is real collaboration on these topics even possible, or is this whole area necessarily the creation of solitary individuals: spiritual seekers, artists, and writers who basically work and think on their own?

 

[Sunstone]

I think the time has arrived for some institution or organization with a mission along the lines suggested in the OP. There are already the beginnings of a secular science of human spirituality, an institution or organization to promote and facilitate that science will become all but necessary at some point, if it is not already so.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It would be an open-ended investigation and not dogmatic.

I want to make a better full reply tomorrow; but, this caught me.

I think an option that really stumps seekers is thinking that dogma is a limitation on free thought and expression. In "modern society" in America, we are taught dogma/teachings are restrictive as you see in a classroom while it is erotic and we hold more wisdom if we are a writer, artist, or philosopher even.

This keeps a lot of seekers from finding the positive in their "dogmatic" experiences and harnessing those aspects and ideas in the religion, faith, or worldview they adopt or are called to at present moment. If we are always looking at structure as restrictive and non-structure as freedom, them we pull always from discipline and thereby jumping from one religion to another and/or accepting religion as a philosophy or idea rather than a person's reality and way of living. It becomes separate rather than one's life.

So, one method is relook at dogma or your experiences and interpretations of it so you want be stuck in that "I have to be outside of dogma" feeling. It's a form of indoctrination. Instead, dogma is more defining the discipline of whatever path you seek.

So if you are one to be without religion, how do you live? That is your dogma. Indoctrination whether by environmental influence or within family is very strong and I think getting over that outlook of "this is bad and this is good" would help a seeker a lot.

I mean, I'm just going by personal experience and what I'm still discovering now. I don't like structure. I realize that in what I follow. But structure isn't the definition of dogma. So, defining things in a more positive light would be another way for seekers.

In my opinion, in related, I don't see a "something more." Maybe releasing the hierarchy look can help some seekers. It's another indoctrination outlook whether it's healthy or not. It depends on the preference and need of the seeker.

Okay. i admit. I thought this would be a short thought. Guess not.

 

[RRex]

I can't help but think of Terence McKenna. I highly recommend his videos on YouTube.