> > So, who’s right? Is it one out of the jumbled clusterfuck of spiritual > beliefs? Or is it the Fact, that Life IS here and now. > The ‘Dream of Utopia’ points at Life, not some spiritual other shit. > That’s why I ask if it’s dead.
Well Ok, but you are setting up a false dilemma. Above you have capitalized the following words "Fact", "Life" and a double capital of "IS". Basically, if you consider what something is, like "its red" or "its round" you are considering its nature, or its essence. It is possible however to cease to consider what is and turn your consideration to the fact that it is. When you do you transcend what life is and consider the fact that it is, or to use your writing, the Fact, that Life IS. Now, it turns out that you can experience the fact that life is in some very, what are called, "profound" ways. You can either appreciate its meaning fully or not. When you no longer are considering what is but the fact that it is you are going beyond the physical to the metaphysical, or going beyond the natural to the supernatural or going beyond the sensory to the extrasensory. That is the "some spiritual other shit" because it is not what is, but rather is the fact that it is. That is why it is "other" or transcendent. It is also Immanent meaning roughly "here and now." That is why "the Fact, that Life IS here and now" IS "some spiritual other shit"... it just happens to be YOUR "some spiritual other shit". It turns out that the appreciation of the meaning of the fact that life is in its fullest sense is the experience underlying all of the religions. The meaning of that experience is expressed, indirectly through the books and stories that constitute the religious texts and genuine religious activity and mythology is about the problem of knowing what it means to be and is part of the intellectual history of mankind. You might think it is easy to know what it means. It is not. Now many activities and beliefs interpret these texts literally. For them God is basically like any other thing capable of either being or not being and they believe he "happens" to be. They interpret religion not existentially but essentially. They think it is about what is not the fact that it is. These people are fundamentalists. Their interpretation is truly not even religious. It is just bad science. However, when the religions are not interpreted essentially then we can see their value. Their value is in their appreciation of the meaning of "the Fact, that Life IS here and now." So you raise a false dilemma between religion and what you are saying. With respect to Utopia I recommend that you read Kierkeguard on despair "The Sickness Unto Death". He analyzes what despair really is and how one falls into its clutches. It is truly a very big problem. Utopia is not being realized because of something that is called Maya or illusion in the hindu literature. It is called original sin in the christian literature. In the Hindu litterature it is noted that all suffering comes from a failure to realize the true nature of life. To put as close to your terminology as I can: When "the fact, that life that life is here and now" fails to become "the Fact, that Life IS here and now" then there is suffering. You should be careful about prematurely cutting out the meaning of the religions because you correctly realize that their literal interpretation is false and even distracting. Now to the most important question: Is the dream dead. I think the answer is no. Not even in the most evil would I say dead... or at least not completely incapable of being resurrected. We know basically that there is this problem, the problem of Maya or original sin and there is this clouding of our vision but religious experience still happens. The real question can be posed in terms of the myth of Lot and his fleeing of his city. The dream is alive. We are like in a game with the stakes doubling. The technical capabilities we have for communication now are making possible a major reawakening. They also make possible our destruction and these capabilities, the ones we currently have are nothing compared to what is in the biological design / neurology synergy. We are about to become very capable. Are we responding to it is the question. Good luck. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
