Critical Thinking, Logic, Reason & Empathy. :-)

[PureX]

These were NOT common traits among all the religious I used to hang out with!

I think you're using your criteria for judging their reasoning. Doing that, of course most people appear to be unreasoning. When in fact, they just have their own priorities and methods for validation. These may appear strange or sub par to you, but your reasoning is not the yardstick by which all reason is to be judged.

That's why I think honesty and humility are far more important than whatever methods we choose to determine value or truth.

 

[PureX]

These too are human traits

Yes, but not the actively engage ones.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, but not the actively engage ones.

Speak for yourself

 

[Soandso]

All those things can coexist with religion. They don't exist in opposition

 

[ppp]

All those things can coexist with religion. They don't exist in opposition

Most religions have dogma (a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true). Definitely in opposition.

 

[Soandso]

Most religions have dogma (a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true). Definitely in opposition.

I would say dogmatism definitely is in opposition to those things, but religion isn't by default dogmatic, nor does it have a monopoly on dogmatism. I feel that agnostic theism is a valid approach as long as folks are willing to be open and flexible to change their perspectives as new and better evidence comes in

 

[Quintessence]

All those things can coexist with religion. They don't exist in opposition

Yup.

The principles outlined in the OP can be present within contemporary religions - and in cases already are - and without much difficulty at that. Religion, unsurprisingly, is extremely diverse and heterogenous. The things the OP mentioned might not technically be able to coexist in every specific religion, but in religion more broadly? It's not even hard.

 

[ppp]

I would say dogmatism definitely is in opposition to those things, but religion isn't by default dogmatic,

I suppose that could be true, but I have yet to see it. Even the less rigid religions make assertions about the nature of reality being a function of personal experiences.

 

[Soandso]

I suppose that could be true, but I have yet to see it. Even the less rigid religions make assertions about the nature of reality being a function of personal experiences.

That's fair. I suggest looking at atheopaganism for an example of what non-dogmatic religious practice can look like. There are others out there, but it's a good place to start

 

[Quintessence]

I suppose that could be true, but I have yet to see it. Even the less rigid religions make assertions about the nature of reality being a function of personal experiences.

All human worldviews - whether labeled as religious or otherwise - rely on axiomatic assumptions that are simply granted as true. All of them. Humans have to have some operational foundation in order to have a functional worldview. I wouldn't characterize that as bearing the signatures of dogma or rigidity, though, unless we want to go with the perspective that all humans are rigid, dogmatic animals (which I suppose you could).

 

[ppp]

That's fair. I suggest looking at atheopaganism for an example of what non-dogmatic religious practice can look like. There are others out there, but it's a good place to start

Sure. I am aware. I have friend who transitioned from Wicca to a form of atheopaganism. I don't know if their particular flavor has a name, I attened a few of their ceremonies, and it felt a lot like LARPing to me. Not an insult. I love LARPing.

 

[YmirGF]

I am a 63-year-old agnostic theist who is in the process of deconstructing from Christianity. I wish Critical Thinking, Logic, Reason & Empathy (without dogma & archaic ritual) would replace religion on the planet Earth!
The new .org could be named: CREL.org.
- Critical Thinking
- Reason
- Empathy
- Logic

There are more constructive cures for boredom. My perception is that if you are "deconstructing from Christianity" and feel a need to tell others about that, frankly, you need to get out more.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's radical wokeism! Blame the Democrats.

I blame racoonism.

 

[Revoltingest]

Another rum, mon vieux?

No speak Frog...if that's what that jibber jabber is.

 

[pearl]

I am a 63-year-old agnostic theist who is in the process of deconstructing from Christianity.

Deconstruction is normally followed by a hypothetical reconstruction. In your case maybe without the dogma.

 

[ppp]

All human worldviews - whether labeled as religious or otherwise - rely on axiomatic assumptions that are simply granted as true. All of them. Humans have to have some operational foundation in order to have a functional worldview. I wouldn't characterize that as bearing the signatures of dogma or rigidity, though, unless we want to go with the perspective that all humans are rigid, dogmatic animals (which I suppose you could).

I agree. But what you are describing is the insolubility of the problem of hard solipsism. That is not what I am talking about One does not need a god or a non-physical realm in order to have a functional worldview. What we see from the religious is the dogmatic assertion that some cosmology unquestionably true. Sometimes it is in the blatant agression of, Believe or burn in Hell. Other times it is in the more passive-agressive approach of, One day you will open your heart to wisdom.

 

[pearl]

Usually, a deconstruction is followed by a hypothetical reconstruction.

 

[Quintessence]

I agree. But what you are describing is the insolubility of the problem of hard solipsism. That is not what I am talking about One does not need a god or a non-physical realm in order to have a functional worldview. What we see from the religious is the dogmatic assertion that some cosmology unquestionably true. Sometimes it is in the blatant agression of, Believe or burn in Hell. Other times it is in the more passive-agressive approach of, One day you will open your heart to wisdom.

Yes, one doesn't need any particular axiom to have a functional worldview. Though... hmm... when I think on it though, there are some that humans do more or less need to have any sort of functional worldview - such as taking for granted that as a human you are capable of knowledge and can make judgements to assess and navigate your environment, or that the environment exists in the first place. But aside from such foundational axioms, this is a good point. That sort of dogmatism isn't constrained to what is conventionally labeled religious in Western culture - for example, scientism is in effect applying religious (aka, strongly devoted and strongly held) dogmatism into one's perspective on the role of science. It seems these sorts of extremes stand out in the public consciousness in spite of possibly not being all that common in practice. Oh well.

 

[Heyo]

All those things can coexist with religion. They don't exist in opposition

In theory and to an extend but critical thinking, logic and reason have a tendency to lead to atheism and that's why religion is usually opposed to them.

 

[dybmh]

I am a 63-year-old agnostic theist who is in the process of deconstructing from Christianity. I wish Critical Thinking, Logic, Reason & Empathy (without dogma & archaic ritual) would replace religion on the planet Earth!
The new .org could be named: CREL.org.
- Critical Thinking
- Reason
- Empathy
- Logic

I think there needs to be something added to this to prohibit arrogance and most important *rigid thinking*.