Wednesday, 30 October 2019

Religion escapes from Captivity


When you read this written by an unquestionably clever person you wonder what narrow definition of ‘religion’ is at work:

It is against the horizon of these principles that I listened to my students with great interest today as we began discussion of Lucretius’s atomistic metaphysics as outlined in De Rerum Natura.  In order to achieve ataraxia or tranquility and freedom from anxiety, we must overcome our two primary sources of anxiety:  fear produced as a result of religion (I think this is a bad translation, as the concept of religion as a distinct domain of human behavior and practice doesn’t really arise until the 17th century), and fear of death.
(from: larval on religion - Levi Bryant post)

Narrowly enough defined, almost anything, however paradoxical, will have some truth in it. The more you examine it the more exiguous that truth will appear till a climax of evanescence is achieved and in the light of common day it is seen as no more than a commonplace trope or a wikism.

The concept of religion was formed in the 16th and 17th centuries,[31][32] despite the fact that ancient sacred texts like the Bible, the Quran, and others did not have a word or even a concept of religion in the original languages and neither did the people or the cultures in which these sacred texts were written
(from Wikipedia on Religion:
Wikipedia on Religion)

That is wispy like the chocolate bar that is mostly air. Listen up babes, (I had to say that) what were the prophets on about, to what end were the great councils called? Are you in or are you out? Are you a people of God or are you a rabble? Everything does not have to have a ‘meta’ entry to exist. Conditions exceed their boundaries and enable poetry in their escape from captivity.

No comments: