So I thought this would be a nice change of pace, kind of a more encompassing topic open for debate on all fronts. I feel like I’ve been arguing against atheism quite often, and while that will be present here, there is certainly more to my ideology than rejecting one specific group. So let’s begin, and I’ll get a TL;DR down at the bottom.
Holy Books
As I Setian, I really don’t give holy books much of a focus. It seems that for many religions the holy book is the central foundation of belief, and it also seems that many opposed to religion put a lot of effort into arguing against holy books. The Setian sees a rather simple solution, which requires neither a bunch of literal, contradictory holy book, nor a belief that all human effort put into them was pure fabrication. The Setian sees holy books as relative, subjective interpretations of actual spiritual events. While some argue that the sheer number of mythologies works against a god, it’s actually quite expected when you understand culture relativism and how cultures develop. There are numerous cases where we can show different cultures interpreting objective things in relative ways. The constellations are the perfect example of this, as humans were truly observing the same stars, but creating stories relative to where they live, how they produced food, what their rulership was like, and so on. We believe it is the same for holy books. It’s not that all the books are literally true or fabrications, they are true beings interpreted through a certain lens, and in the western world that lens tends to be narrow and dogmatically enforced.
Burden of Proof
Setians do not necessarily accept that any one specific group has a burden of proof. If you have a position on something, whether positive or negative, we believe you should be able to present reasons for why you hold that position. It makes no sense to Setians that any individual with a view on how the world works could not be able to explain why they view it in such a way. Honestly, if you do not have reasons for holding the position you hold, we have no real desire or reason to seriously consider that position. There’s no point to considering something there are no reasons to consider!
Hatred or Denial of the Self
The vast majority of individuals out there, religious or not, either demean or reject the individual Self. To Setianism, the Self is the center of all metaphysics, morality, philosophy, etc. because its existence is the one thing we can be certain of, the one thing we can know directly. In the Abrahamic religions, the Self is seen as something disgusting and in need of saving. We are seen as fallen and broken, weak and insignificant. Physicalism and naturalism try to deny the very existence of this Self, doing whatever it can to support the mind, consciousness, and identity to nothing more than the individual brain. And then there are groups who seek dissolution, like in eastern religions, the loss of Self into something greater, whether it is God, the All, the Tao, Brahman, or whichever term we want to use. Setianism does not agree with any of these, which is one of the defining traits of Western Left Hand Path religions. It believes that the Self is something glorious and worthy of utmost respect, that it should seek t become separated from the All, God, or mindless Nature, and that it is the most powerful things each individual has access to. The only savior we need is within us all, and we are certainly more than meat and chemicals.
Suppressing Opposing Views
From book burnings and crusades, to closed forums and Reddit down-votes, people are always trying to hide and suppress dissenting opinions. Destroying their knowledge, only allowing individuals already in agreement to participate in discussion, and even to just get posts and arguments hidden on Reddit that the user does not like. The Setian appreciates the individual diversity of differing religions and ideology, and also believes that it can stand up to these religions and ideologies in debate if need be. What is the need to hide someone’s ideas if you are able to defend yours? It implies a weak position, embarrassment, and to a highly intellectual religion like Setianism it is extremely counterproductive. Luckily this is more an issue for fundamentalists of other ideologies, and not religions as a whole.
Fideism
This is where one puts belief and faith above logic and empirical evidence, such as those who believe the earth is 6,000 years old, that we lived alongside dinosaurs, and other beliefs that directly contradict logic and scientific knowledge. Religion is certainly not incompatible with science, but many individuals both religious and not tend to believe otherwise. Young earth creationists and flat earthers are extreme examples, but even anti-theism, in its belief that religion is objectively bad, can be fideistic. Setians insist that their ideology be supported by fact and valid logic, and fideism obviously contradicts that.
Inversion of Religions and Reactionary Behavior
Setianism, though the modern manifestation grew out of LaVeyan Satansim, looks down upon inversion for the sake of inversion. Symbols, rituals, they should all mean something to you, not be entirely based in the inversion of an old religion. We have no problem with the indulgence of LaVey, but do not buy into the whole shock-value mindset of those types of groups. This goes for The Satanic Temple as well. Likewise we see this with atheism more and more, where atheists tend to be focused on bashing and attacking the Abrahamic religions specifically, rather than a true philosophical attempt to seek truth and question. Religion stands on its own, how true can it be if it relies on rejection of another religion or ideology. One should live for themselves and seek truth, not live to offend others and engage in a vendetta against one’s former religion.
Monism
Setianism does not accept any kind of monism, whether material or immaterial. For example, it rejects reductionist solutions to the mind-body problem, whether they are material or immaterial. Material monism is rejected because it attempts to reject axiomatic self-existence, and immaterial monism is rejected because, solipsism aside, an external world of matter is almost as self-evident as the internal world of internal world of immaterial consciousness.
Healing through Spirituality
Setianism rejects all forms of faith healing, even if it accepts the psychological benefits things like prayers can have. It is staunchly opposed to movements like anti-vaxxers or exorcism, anything that treats a true medical issue as a spiritual one. It is debatably immoral to withhold proper treatment for children and adults alike, in favor of religious activity. What’s more is that there’s no real valid argument to make for a god not wanting us to use medication. It’s nothing but irresponsible and harmful, and gets no respect from Setianism.
TL;DR
1) Holy books are culturally relative interpretations of objective events, and should not be taken literally, nor should they be discarded as pure fiction.
2) If you have a position on a topic you should have reasons for holding that position, not pass along some “burden of proof.”
3) The Self exists, in such a way that we cannot even deny or reduce its existence. The Self is not something disgusting in need of saving, nor should it be eliminated into something greater.
4) If one’s position was strong in its reasoning and evidence, one would not burn books, kill those of opposing views, or even exclude outside groups from discussion or down-vote ideologies to hide them.
5) All beliefs should be based on reason and evidence.
6) An ideology should stand on its own merit, not be a simple inversion of or reaction to another religion or ideology.
7) The cosmos are not reducible into a single substance.
8) Faith healing should never override proper medical treatment.
Holy Books
As I Setian, I really don’t give holy books much of a focus. It seems that for many religions the holy book is the central foundation of belief, and it also seems that many opposed to religion put a lot of effort into arguing against holy books. The Setian sees a rather simple solution, which requires neither a bunch of literal, contradictory holy book, nor a belief that all human effort put into them was pure fabrication. The Setian sees holy books as relative, subjective interpretations of actual spiritual events. While some argue that the sheer number of mythologies works against a god, it’s actually quite expected when you understand culture relativism and how cultures develop. There are numerous cases where we can show different cultures interpreting objective things in relative ways. The constellations are the perfect example of this, as humans were truly observing the same stars, but creating stories relative to where they live, how they produced food, what their rulership was like, and so on. We believe it is the same for holy books. It’s not that all the books are literally true or fabrications, they are true beings interpreted through a certain lens, and in the western world that lens tends to be narrow and dogmatically enforced.
Burden of Proof
Setians do not necessarily accept that any one specific group has a burden of proof. If you have a position on something, whether positive or negative, we believe you should be able to present reasons for why you hold that position. It makes no sense to Setians that any individual with a view on how the world works could not be able to explain why they view it in such a way. Honestly, if you do not have reasons for holding the position you hold, we have no real desire or reason to seriously consider that position. There’s no point to considering something there are no reasons to consider!
Hatred or Denial of the Self
The vast majority of individuals out there, religious or not, either demean or reject the individual Self. To Setianism, the Self is the center of all metaphysics, morality, philosophy, etc. because its existence is the one thing we can be certain of, the one thing we can know directly. In the Abrahamic religions, the Self is seen as something disgusting and in need of saving. We are seen as fallen and broken, weak and insignificant. Physicalism and naturalism try to deny the very existence of this Self, doing whatever it can to support the mind, consciousness, and identity to nothing more than the individual brain. And then there are groups who seek dissolution, like in eastern religions, the loss of Self into something greater, whether it is God, the All, the Tao, Brahman, or whichever term we want to use. Setianism does not agree with any of these, which is one of the defining traits of Western Left Hand Path religions. It believes that the Self is something glorious and worthy of utmost respect, that it should seek t become separated from the All, God, or mindless Nature, and that it is the most powerful things each individual has access to. The only savior we need is within us all, and we are certainly more than meat and chemicals.
Suppressing Opposing Views
From book burnings and crusades, to closed forums and Reddit down-votes, people are always trying to hide and suppress dissenting opinions. Destroying their knowledge, only allowing individuals already in agreement to participate in discussion, and even to just get posts and arguments hidden on Reddit that the user does not like. The Setian appreciates the individual diversity of differing religions and ideology, and also believes that it can stand up to these religions and ideologies in debate if need be. What is the need to hide someone’s ideas if you are able to defend yours? It implies a weak position, embarrassment, and to a highly intellectual religion like Setianism it is extremely counterproductive. Luckily this is more an issue for fundamentalists of other ideologies, and not religions as a whole.
Fideism
This is where one puts belief and faith above logic and empirical evidence, such as those who believe the earth is 6,000 years old, that we lived alongside dinosaurs, and other beliefs that directly contradict logic and scientific knowledge. Religion is certainly not incompatible with science, but many individuals both religious and not tend to believe otherwise. Young earth creationists and flat earthers are extreme examples, but even anti-theism, in its belief that religion is objectively bad, can be fideistic. Setians insist that their ideology be supported by fact and valid logic, and fideism obviously contradicts that.
Inversion of Religions and Reactionary Behavior
Setianism, though the modern manifestation grew out of LaVeyan Satansim, looks down upon inversion for the sake of inversion. Symbols, rituals, they should all mean something to you, not be entirely based in the inversion of an old religion. We have no problem with the indulgence of LaVey, but do not buy into the whole shock-value mindset of those types of groups. This goes for The Satanic Temple as well. Likewise we see this with atheism more and more, where atheists tend to be focused on bashing and attacking the Abrahamic religions specifically, rather than a true philosophical attempt to seek truth and question. Religion stands on its own, how true can it be if it relies on rejection of another religion or ideology. One should live for themselves and seek truth, not live to offend others and engage in a vendetta against one’s former religion.
Monism
Setianism does not accept any kind of monism, whether material or immaterial. For example, it rejects reductionist solutions to the mind-body problem, whether they are material or immaterial. Material monism is rejected because it attempts to reject axiomatic self-existence, and immaterial monism is rejected because, solipsism aside, an external world of matter is almost as self-evident as the internal world of internal world of immaterial consciousness.
Healing through Spirituality
Setianism rejects all forms of faith healing, even if it accepts the psychological benefits things like prayers can have. It is staunchly opposed to movements like anti-vaxxers or exorcism, anything that treats a true medical issue as a spiritual one. It is debatably immoral to withhold proper treatment for children and adults alike, in favor of religious activity. What’s more is that there’s no real valid argument to make for a god not wanting us to use medication. It’s nothing but irresponsible and harmful, and gets no respect from Setianism.
TL;DR
1) Holy books are culturally relative interpretations of objective events, and should not be taken literally, nor should they be discarded as pure fiction.
2) If you have a position on a topic you should have reasons for holding that position, not pass along some “burden of proof.”
3) The Self exists, in such a way that we cannot even deny or reduce its existence. The Self is not something disgusting in need of saving, nor should it be eliminated into something greater.
4) If one’s position was strong in its reasoning and evidence, one would not burn books, kill those of opposing views, or even exclude outside groups from discussion or down-vote ideologies to hide them.
5) All beliefs should be based on reason and evidence.
6) An ideology should stand on its own merit, not be a simple inversion of or reaction to another religion or ideology.
7) The cosmos are not reducible into a single substance.
8) Faith healing should never override proper medical treatment.
