MichaelEmeryArt

"Losing one's Religion"

This has to take place,I know from experience,I also know one has to have something to replace it!,or else it is dangerous to the mind.I fairly sure in the Bible,for example there is a verse that says something to the effect of, " Look around all around,the trees,the woods,all of life,the rocks,the earth all of all,,That is Me,,,"Nature"..the "Purest Form"..like Simone Weil tries to explain in Gravity and Grace,,the Void must be created,in order to allow "God" to enter one's being.

## Belief's

“With a truly tragic delusion,” Carl Jung noted, “these theologians fail to see that it is not a matter of proving the existence of the light, but of blind people who do not know that their eyes could see. It is high time we realized that it is pointless to praise the light and preach it if nobody can see it. It is much more needful to teach people the art of seeing.”

― C.G. Jung

Belief is the state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case, with or without there being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainty. Another way of defining belief sees it as a mental representation of an attitude positively oriented towards the likelihood of something being true.[1] In the context of Ancient Greek thought, two related concepts were identified with regards to the concept of belief: pistis and doxa. Simplified, we may say that pistis refers to "trust" and "confidence", while doxa refers to "opinion" and "acceptance". The English word "orthodoxy" derives from doxa. Jonathan Leicester suggests that belief has the purpose of guiding action rather than indicating truth.[2]

To mistake the small "self" or ego with who we are, thereby obscuring the depths of our being (and thereby the Ground of Being, itself) is, however all too common. Albert Einstein, called it "an optical delusion of consciousness," observing: "A human being is part of the whole called by us the universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness."

"The true value of a human being," the great scientist noted, "is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive," he warned.

Study all religions until you see the 'sameness' in them all," an enlightened man once told me. He showed me that all spiritual paths begin at the same inner door - and that they all end at the same One destination - no matter how they wind along the contours each path naturally folllows.

I pretty much agree with what Leo states in this video....especially of locking oneself in any "belief"

## Related topic's

MEME's..something to be quite aware of

Humans can be literally poisoned by false ideas and false teachings. Many people have a just horror at the thought of putting poison into tea or coffee, but seem unable to realize that, when they teach false ideas and false doctrines, they are poisoning the time-binding capacity of their fellow men and women. One has to stop and think! There is nothing mystical about the fact that ideas and words are energies which powerfully affect the physico-chemical base of our time-binding activities. Humans are thus made untrue to "human nature." … The conception of man as a mixture of animal and supernatural has for ages kept human beings under the deadly spell of the suggestion that, animal selfishness and animal greediness are their essential character, and the spell has operated to suppress their REAL HUMAN NATURE and to prevent it from expressing itself naturally and freely. -Alfred Korzybski

Epistemology (; from Greek ἐπιστήμη, epistēmē, meaning "knowledge", and λόγος, logos, meaning "logical discourse") is the branch of philosophy concerned with the theory of knowledge.[1]

Epistemology studies the nature of knowledge, justification, and the rationality of belief. Much of the debate in epistemology centers on four areas: (1) the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how it relates to such concepts as truth, belief, and justification,[2][3] (2) various problems of skepticism, (3) the sources and scope of knowledge and justified belief, and (4) the criteria for knowledge and justification. Epistemology addresses such questions as "What makes justified beliefs justified?",[4] "What does it mean to say that we know something?"[5] and fundamentally "How do we know that we know?"[6]

Paul Waldu on Faith is the commitment of one's consciousness to beliefs for which one has no sensory evidence or rational proof. When a person rejects reason as their standard of judgment, only one alternative standard remains to them: feelings. A mystic is a person who treats feelings as tools of cognition. Faith is the equation of feeling with knowledge. To practice the "virtue" of faith, one must be willing to suspend one's sight and one's judgment; one must be willing to live with the unintelligible, with that which cannot be conceptualized or integrated into the rest of one's knowledge, and to induce a trance like illusion of understanding. One must be willing to repress one's critical faculty and hold it as one's guilt; one must be willing to drown any questions that rise in protest—to strangle any trust of reason convulsively seeking to assert its proper function as the protector of one’s life and cognitive integrity. The human need for self-esteem entails the need for a sense of control over reality—but no control is possible in a universe which, by one's own concession, contains the supernatural, the miraculous and the causeless, a universe in which one is at the mercy of ghosts and demons, in which one must deal, not with the unknown, but with the unknowable; no control is possible if a person proposes, but a ghost disposes; no control is possible if the universe is a haunted house. A person's life and self-esteem require that the object and concern of his or her consciousness be reality and this earth—but morality, people are taught, consists of scorning this earth and the world available to sensory perception, and of contemplating, instead, a "different" and "higher" reality, a realm inaccessible to reason and incommunicable in language, but attainable by revelation, by special dialectical processes, by that superior state of intellectual lucidity known to Zen-Buddhists as "No-Mind," or by death. A person's life and self-esteem require that this person take pride in their power to think, pride in their power to live—but morality, people are taught, holds pride, and specifically intellectual pride, as the gravest of sins. Virtue begins, people are taught, with humility: with the recognition of the helplessness, the smallness, the impotence of one's mind. A person's life and self-esteem require the person to be loyal to their values, loyal to their mind and its judgments, loyal to their life—but the essence of morality, people are taught, consists of self-sacrifice: the sacrifice of one’s mind to some higher authority, and the sacrifice of one's values to whoever may claim to require it. A sacrifice, it is necessary to remember, means the surrender of a higher value in favor of a lower value or of a nonvalue. If one gives up that which one does not value in order to obtain that which one does value—or if one gives up a lesser value in order to obtain a greater one—this is not a sacrifice, but a gain. Remember further that all of a person's values exist in a hierarchy; people value some things more than others; and, to the extent that a person is rational, the hierarchical order of the person's values is rational: that is, the person values things in proportion to their importance in serving this person's life and well-being. That which is inimical to their life and well-being, that which is inimical to their nature and needs as a living being, the person disvalues. Conversely, one of the characteristics of mental illness is a distorted value structure; the neurotic does not value things according to their objective merit, in relation to the person's nature and needs; they frequently value the very things that will lead them to self-destruction. Judged by objective standards, they are engaged in a chronic process of self-sacrifice. But if sacrifice is a virtue, it is not the neurotic but the rational person who must be “cured.” They must learn to do violence to their own rational judgment—to reverse the order of their value hierarchy—to surrender that which their mind has chosen as the good—to turn against and invalidate their own consciousness.<cite class="citation book">Waldau, Paul (2001).

Terry Eagleton outlines (more or less in no particular order) some definitions of ideology:[13]

1. the process of production of meanings, signs and values in social life;
2. a body of ideas characteristic of a particular social group or class;
3. ideas which help to legitimate a dominant political power;
4. false ideas which help to legitimate a dominant political power;
5. systematically distorted communication;
6. that which offers a position for a subject;
7. forms of thought motivated by social interests;
8. identity thinking;
9. socially necessary illusion;
10. the conjuncture of discourse and power;
11. the medium in which conscious social actors make sense of their world;
12. action-oriented sets of beliefs;
13. the confusion of linguistic and phenomenal reality;
14. semiotic closure;
15. the indispensable medium in which individuals live out their relations to a social structure;
16. the process whereby social life is converted to a natural reality.

## Justified true belief

Justified true belief is a definition of knowledge that gained approval during the Enlightenment, 'justified' standing in contrast to 'revealed'. There have been attempts to trace it back to Plato and his dialogues.[clarification needed][28] The concept of justified true belief states that in order to know that a given proposition is true, one must not only believe the relevant true proposition, but also have justification for doing so. In more formal terms, an agent $S$ knows that a proposition $P$ is true if and only if:

1. $P$ is true
2. $S$ believes that $P$ is true, and
3. $S$ is justified in believing that $P$ is true

This theory of knowledge suffered a significant setback with the discovery of Gettier problems, situations in which the above conditions were seemingly met but that many philosophers disagree that anything is known.[29] Robert Nozick suggested[year needed] a clarification of "justification" which he believed eliminates the problem: the justification has to be such that were the justification false, the knowledge would be false. Bernecker and Dretske (2000) argue that "no epistemologist since Gettier has seriously and successfully defended the traditional view.".[30]:3 On the other hand, Paul Boghossian argues that the Justified True Belief account is the "standard, widely accepted" definition of knowledge [31]

### William James

American psychologist and philosopher William James (1842–1910) is regarded by most psychologists of religion as the founder of the field.[9] He served as president of the American Psychological Association, and wrote one of the first psychology textbooks. In the psychology of religion, James' influence endures. His Varieties of Religious Experience is considered to be the classic work in the field, and references to James' ideas are common at professional conferences.

James distinguished between institutional religion and personal religion. Institutional religion refers to the religious group or organization, and plays an important part in a society's culture. Personal religion, in which the individual has mystical experience, can be experienced regardless of the culture. James was most interested in understanding personal religious experience.

Organized religion (or organised religion—see spelling differences), also known as institutional religion, is religion in which belief systems and rituals are systematically arranged and formally established.[1] Organized religion is typically characterized by an official doctrine (or dogma), a hierarchical or bureaucratic leadership structure, and a codification of rules and practices.

Religions that are not considered organized, or only loosely so, include many indigenous and folk religions, such as traditional African religions, Native American religions and prehistoric religions, as well as personal religions including some strands of Hinduism

## tan•gi•ble

1. capable of being touched; material or substantial.
2. real or actual, rather than imaginary or visionary.
3. definite; not vague or elusive:
4. having actual physical existence, as real estate, and therefore capable of being assigned a monetary value

# intangible

You can't touch this word — it is intangible. You can grasp the meaning of the word in your head, but you can't close your hands around it; you'll just put fingerprints on your monitor.

The Latin verb tangere means "to touch," and the 16th-century English word tangible comes from it. Something intangible can't be touched physically, but most of the time it is understandable or even felt in the heart. Sadness can't be picked up and thrown in the garbage can because it is intangible, but you can throw away the tissues wet with tears. Laughing is intangible too, but you can hold onto movies, pets, and friends that make you laugh.-vocabulary.com / intangible

Virtue ethics

Virtue ethics (or aretaic ethics[1] from Greek ἀρετή (arete)) are normative ethical theories which emphasize virtues of mind and character. Virtue ethicists discuss the nature and definition of virtues and other related problems. For example, how are virtues acquired? How are they applied in various real life contexts? Are virtues rooted in a universal human nature or in a plurality of cultures?