Universal Secular Religion? (USR)

[heavenlyboy34]

one world religion types make me

 

[Vessol]

one world religion types make me

This. I'm not religious, but people should be able to worship in any way as long as they don't restrict the liberty of others. This is why I don't like many organized religions.

 

[Travlyr]

one world religion types make me

One world government, one world religion, one world currency, one world salary, everybody is exactly equal in mind, body, spirit, and possessions singing kumbayah... Utopia!

 

[BootStompingAFaceForever]

100% ridiculous

 

[Acala]

get to the root

The plight of the human race is not the result of a lack of or loss of knowledge in the conventional sense and therefore cannot be solved by institutional accumulation of knowledge. This is why our efforts to educate people about liberty have largely failed. If you have done any of this work you know that time and time again you will meet intelligent, knowledgeable people who are simply "stuck" and cannot see the light. It is not the lack of knowledge that has doomed us.

The state of the world, with its brutality, corruption, and deceit, is a projection of the state of human consciousness in the aggregate. The vast majority of human beings are driven by emotions - fear, anger, sadness, hatred, and so on. These emotions are often so subtle that people do not even recognize they are being driven. But they are. Nearly all of them.

Because human beings are driven by emotions, they are easily and predictably manipulated. And there is a perennial class of human beings that specializes in manipulating the emotions of the rest of the species as a way of acquiring wealth and power. They are virtually always successful.

The only way to change the pattern of history, to free mankind from endless war and tyranny is not through building and preserving intellectual knowledge. Even the most knowledgable and intelligent are susceptible to manipulation. The ONLY way to liberate the human race is to change human consciousness - to dig out the emotional drivers that make manipulation possible. This is not to say that we need to make people unemotional, but just the opposite. What is needed is to make people fully aware of their emotional state. Not to teach them intellectual knowledge, but a direct experience of how their own consciousness works. A kind of deep emotional literacy. Only then will they be immune to manipulation. And then the human race will no longer be doomed to an eternity of corruption, brutaliy, and deceit.

 

[osan]

The plight of the human race ... cannot be solved by institutional accumulation of knowledge. ... It is not the lack of knowledge that has doomed us.

The state of the world... is a projection of the state of human consciousness... vast majority of human beings are driven by emotions - fear, anger, sadness, hatred, and so on... often so subtle that people do not even recognize they are being driven... ...are easily and predictably manipulated.


The only way to change the pattern of history... is to change human consciousness - to dig out the emotional drivers that make manipulation possible. This is not to say that we need to make people unemotional, but just the opposite. What is needed is to make people fully aware of their emotional state. Not to teach them intellectual knowledge, but a direct experience of how their own consciousness works. A kind of deep emotional literacy. Only then will they be immune to manipulation. And then the human race will no longer be doomed to an eternity of corruption, brutaliy, and deceit.

You were doing well until that last paragraph where you contradict yourself in a fairly subtle way. "Deep emotional literacy" is an intellectual pursuit precisely because it is literacy. You are incorrect that intellect fails. What you have not quite grasped, it seems, it that all those people of whom you speak, often live on the emotional bases you cite precisely due to the lack of the right intellect. There is all sort of intellect, just as there are all sorts of emotions. If you do not possess the right intellectual habits, you will always be lead around by the nose at the hands of your emotions. It is precisely intellect that raises you above mere brain-stem existence. To forsake intellect would be an act of suicide - probable literally so.

I agree with your contention about improved literacy. But you cannot have it without intellect. Mid-brain existence is the ultimate unexamined goal of so-called modern liberalism or progressivism. It's all about the feelings. Those have their place, that is for sure - but to allow them to rule one's every decision is wholesale lunacy.

 

[osan]

heh, I thought the title said 'Universal Soccer Religion'

That one already exists. Seems to be significantly powerful, too.

 

[osan]

There already is a universalist secular religion derived

A couple of things. First, I said "universal", not "universalist" - which really boils down to the difference between an adjective and a noun, respectively.

Second, you may have done well to have posed the question of what, precisely, would the tenets of this "religion" be? I was playing with the word, which I now realize was a large enough mistake that I ought not have gone there. Mea culpa.

What I have been hinting at here, apparently in poor fashion, was the dissemination of the basics of liberty to the population - training and education - in a manner similar to that of the way religions are advocated. The real difference here would be that the "facts" would be demonstrably extant and true whereas with religion, they are taken on faith, regardless of truth.

A religious devotion to liberty... perhaps that is the better way of phrasing it? I don't know.

from the (demonstrably false) premise that "all human beings are created as equals,"

Another grave, if somewhat subtle, error on your part. Being created AS equals is not the same as being equal in the sense you appear to imply, as below. People are clearly not equal - were this not so, we would be clones. We look differently, act differently, like different things, etc. and so on. Clearly we are not equal. But we are as equals. Put two newborns next to each other on a table. One is to become a doctor and the other a ditch digger. Give them the once-over and tell us which will be the doctor. Those infants are AS equals. One is neither master nor slave. Their rights are equal, which leads directly to their equivalence, i.e. their equal value as living beings. Being equals is in no manner the same as being equal. The two concepts are wholly and utterly foreign to each other.

it is commonly known as progressivism, but Mencius Moldbug calls it universalism; here he is on "tenets [that] are derived through reason rather than posited as articles of faith."

That poor guy needs to learn how to get to his point. Very tedious style wherein that which is of value risks being lost in a torrent of irrelevant noise. Not a good mode of communication when the subject at hand demands uncompromising clarity and precision. Just my plugged-nickel opinion, of course.