Religion as "structural coupling"

[LukeS]

I read a book by F Capra (The Web of Life) and he said life was coupled to its environment. Like a train carriage is coupled to the next, we are systems coupled to our environment.

In the definition of religion we have the idea of a "link" or "join" (yoga) and "bind" (religion) and "to hold, maintain, keep" (dharma).

So in this light religion is any set of ideas and procedures that bind us to being, link us to the universe, and maintain us in existence...

"The use of ropes for hunting, pulling, fastening, attaching, carrying, lifting, and climbing dates back to prehistoric times. " - Wikipedia Rope - Wikipedia


Likewise faith means "to trust". Not all situations are trustworthy. A community with well being, its ways would be trusted more. The ancient religious communities would have trusted (had faith in) leadership directed towards the tree of life, towards the fruits of the cosmic tree.

On the paths of hunter gatherer navigation one would tie, bind and link to the cosmos via a link to the leadership.

Who would the leaders leader be?

Tracking and foraging experts would have had trustworthy cues and signs in the environment. Interpreted as spirit guides of the spirit world, manifested in the mansions of the stars, seasonal shifts and animals, butterflies etc - which helped the leader on his way.


...or, are we on the "road to nowhere" as in the song by Talking Heads.

 

[qaz]

"link", per se, is a vague word.

 

[LuisDantas]

The definition attempted in the OP sure sounds way too wide. We are "linked to the universe" and "maintained in existence" in far too many ways that very few people would consider religious.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Likewise faith means "to trust". Not all situations are trustworthy. A community with well being, its ways would be trusted more. The ancient religious communities would have trusted (had faith in) leadership directed towards the tree of life, towards the fruits of the cosmic tree.

I read the whole post, but just responding to this piece. 'Faith' in English will not always mean trust. When there are people who rely upon you there are two components to faith. They have faith in you, and you keep faith with them. So it is something about trust and sometimes about trustworthiness. If you are faithful, then it means you are reliable or are worth trusting.

 

[LukeS]

The definition attempted in the OP sure sounds way too wide. We are "linked to the universe" and "maintained in existence" in far too many ways that very few people would consider religious.

Thatks I can get that , but I am wondering about etymology. Before we had all the modern day distinctions, what caused people to call "yoga" yoga for instance?

 

[LukeS]

I read the whole post, but just responding to this piece. 'Faith' in English will not always mean trust. When there are people who rely upon you there are two components to faith. They have faith in you, and you keep faith with them. So it is something about trust and sometimes about trustworthiness. If you are faithful, then it means you are reliable or are worth trusting.

I like to relate faith to neuroscience, and "trust" hormones. Like you'd have faith in a rope if you felt it was secure. Security and faith being correlates of oxytocin a brain hormone. The "safety" of the rope ("its secure" ) being a projection of a psychological state (i.e, "I feel secure relying on it").

So way back when, if a link was secure, or a yoke was secure, then by analogy yoga was a system which gave security (faith) to its adherents.

It wasn't you needed faith in yoga, but vice versa yoga was a secure link which caused trust to be produced. We all know for instance that simple breathing exercises reduce stress and cause calm.

This calm was the secure link to the cosmos, and hence the cause of the naming "yoga" to take place.

 

[LukeS]

I read "yoga" was called such because we "link" or "join" or "yoke" to the cosmic spirit. But prior to that there must have been everyday technology, which the concept of a link was based on. And a reason why it was regarded as similar.

The idea seems then to be related to domestication, maybe, or working animals. So the concept of "yoga" stems from there.

 

[LuisDantas]

Thatks I can get that , but I am wondering about etymology. Before we had all the modern day distinctions, what caused people to call "yoga" yoga for instance?

"Yoga", I have once read, means something akin to "path (towards perfection / personal improvement)".

It is a very general term, that is sometimes qualified as (for instance) Jnana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga or Karma Yoga, depending on the nature of the path described.

Religiosity is considerably better resolved, rooted and integrated in the Hindu communities when contrasted to the Christian and Muslim conceptions. Word reached me that they did not even feel any need for a word comparable to "religion" before meeting Christianity, which of course insists on making a sharp distinction between adherents and non-adherents.

Some aspects of "religion" are comparable to "Yoga", and others to "Dharma", as you note.

 

[LuisDantas]

I read "yoga" was called such because we "link" or "join" or "yoke" to the cosmic spirit. But prior to that there must have been everyday technology, which the concept of a link was based on. And a reason why it was regarded as similar.

The idea seems then to be related to domestication, maybe, or working animals. So the concept of "yoga" stems from there.

If I had to guess, I would bet that the distinction between yoga and dharma and everyday life never fully developed until contact with Christianity became more common. To this day there are many indications that the distinction is not supposed to be made.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I like to relate faith to neuroscience, and "trust" hormones. Like you'd have faith in a rope if you felt it was secure. Security and faith being correlates of oxytocin a brain hormone. The "safety" of the rope ("its secure" ) being a projection of a psychological state (i.e, "I feel secure relying on it").

So way back when, if a link was secure, or a yoke was secure, then by analogy yoga was a system which gave security (faith) to its adherents.

It wasn't you needed faith in yoga, but vice versa yoga was a secure link which caused trust to be produced. We all know for instance that simple breathing exercises reduce stress and cause calm.

This calm was the secure link to the cosmos, and hence the cause of the naming "yoga" to take place.

I have not read Capra's book. I don't necessarily disagree, but if yoga teachers stop teaching, then yoga is not a religion. As you say in the OP "Not all situations are trustworthy" and the rope is not a rope then. The religion uses you as the rope for someone else.

I think that too often religious teachers speak of belief; and everything is about believing. From this people get the false impression that religion is 80% belief. What about being trustworthy? When teachers emphasize belief too much, I think it usually means that they want to draw away attention from their own terrible behavior.

I know little or nothing about Yoga, but I tell you that tomorrow I could start a Yoga class and have 10 students. At least 5 would leave the class trusting me. What a disaster that would be for them.

 

[LukeS]

I have not read Capra's book. I don't necessarily disagree, but if yoga teachers stop teaching, then yoga is not a religion. As you say in the OP "Not all situations are trustworthy" and the rope is not a rope then. The religion uses you as the rope for someone else.

I think that too often religious teachers speak of belief; and everything is about believing. From this people get the false impression that religion is 80% belief. What about being trustworthy? When teachers emphasize belief too much, I think it usually means that they want to draw away attention from their own terrible behavior.

I know little or nothing about Yoga, but I tell you that tomorrow I could start a Yoga class and have 10 students. At least 5 would leave the class trusting me. What a disaster that would be for them.

Good point. Capras idea is theoretical biology, we are "linked" up to our environment like a train carriage to another. There are many wonderful gurus today, as people seek to replace Christianity I think. Basically my point is looking at cognitive archeology of the roots of the words for religion.

"Cognitive archaeology is a theoretical perspective in archaeology which focuses on the ways that ancient societies thought and the symbolic structures that can be perceived in past material culture." Cognitive archaeology - Wikipedia

I looked in a book on Hinduism, Oxford Press, and in the early centuries bce IIRC the term yoga appeared in the Rig Veda, associated with reining in the senses. Also in the Bagavad Gita, a yogi had a still mind like a sheltered candle flame. There have been numerous attempts at making sense of the etymologyand what the link / yoke are meant to be about.

 

[LukeS]

More on structural coupling f you've not read Capras great book:

"A living system couples to its environment structurally, i.e. through recurrent interactions, each of which triggers structural changes in the system. A cell membrane continually incorporates substances from its environment into the cell's metabolic processes. An organism's nervous system changes its conductivity with every sense perception. Living systems are autonomous, however. The environment only triggers the structural changes, it does not specify a direct from."

capra-con27.html

I am thinking that all life is coupling activity, atheism, faith science, friendship etc.

Joining binding keeping etc in the etymology of religion across cultures. What were the people thinking of?? The idea of coupling was not available, they had to use analogies from current technology.

 

[LukeS]

When I meditate, and imagine a "bond" or "link" to the universe, like a rope or something, or even the more sci fi and abstract ( I enjoy silvery etheric light), as an analogy for the whole process...I get absorbed in trance more deeply....