Can you help me with this thought Experimet?

Question

I Kant get my head around Hegel! lol (English humour!)

The meeting of conflicting concepts.
The marriage of Hebrew and Greek thinking.
Resulting in Christianity! Hum!

According me Hegel's problem is that he let Religion play too much of an important roll in his thinking.

Though maybe the reverse is the case of both Rand and Marx.

I see that a little more complexity is needed if the cross breading of thoughts before we can find the beast adapt for the Race!
That is the Human one!

Want would you say about the offspring resulting from a religious orgy.
Lets call him Spiritual Sentiment

And the off spring of the Rand and Marx union.
Lets call her Co-operationalism

Let's take Spiritual Sentiment and Co-operationalism
lock them in a room with soft lights and easy listening music and let nature take it's course.

How would the baby be?

Thank you, could you go just a little deeper.
This is the Philosophy Cat. is it not?

A good point Uncle
"incentive to enter that room"
How about survival?

Wow, Great stuff coming here.
I'll head head in the clouds for a while with this I think.

Gee ;-)) Please leave a least a little hope.
Oh, my I honestly didn't think of the shortened froms.
Thanks! your wicked man!!!

Answer 1

I believe both of these phenomenon are perfectly compatible. What's more, both sentiments come from the same place in each individual adherent. Spiritual Sentimentality and Co-operationalism are inherent to humanity and each individual has both traits in them (oh hold on and don't get the panties in a bunch!)

Both sentiment arouse similar passions in individuals. The brotherhood of man, helping each other out, etc. Adherents to both sentiments want to operate as individuals who are a part of a community of humans.

The troubles and divisions arrive with the addition of leaders. Those whose drive to prove themselves more pious or more logical than the rest, attempt to persuade more individuals to their cause. From the beginning of time, men have led and men have followed. Arousing feelings of nationalism, religiosity or nihilism, they've driven generational stakes between us.

Judaism and the British Empire are two perfect examples. In creating nations, the leaders of both have created in their respective societies feelings of belonging to a club. One can still hear the cry of the peasants "god save the queen" as the guillotines fell and poverty ruled the land (but not for the queen, mind you.) Moses led his flock through the desert portending this act to be the will of god, all in the promise of a new land these wanderers could call their home. He forgot to mention to these people they would have to spill the blood of the Ca'ananites to get their country and gave up his ghost before having to take part in the genocide.

In all respects humanity is to blame for our divisions. Once the need for leaders and group identification is put away, we will find ourselves with your proposed arrangement. We will most certainly still argue the existence of God (I hope) but, we will find all of the artificial divisions placed in our minds were just an illusion we allowed, nay welcomed in our lives.

Answer 2

I think there is an inherent conflict in the philosophical DNA of these two. An incompatibility of genotypes that would result in an unsuccessful attempt at procreation. Marvin Gaye and aroma candles aside, SS and Co-op would reach an impasse in the sense that SS has a dominant gene called religion, while Co-op has a dominant gene, Logic. This would seem to be the rub.

[add] Well, in all honesty, I suppose there could be hope if the offspring of this union were to undergo some sort of gene therapy.

Answer 3

I caught some of it at the end, and I really like the expression "Co-operationalism" when it works in reality, and I think it does on a regular and recurring basis, but usually, or primarily, when there is an impetis to do it. Well, so my question would be "What would give those folks an incentive to enter that room and produce that baby?"

We might use nation building as a model -- Nations are usually created by common interests, common language, or in a lot of cases common fears that lead to a common defense. --- in short "How would we or anyone or anything scare these folks into cooperating? hmm ? And of course, how could we protect the rights of those who didn't want to cooperate or change their ways, while at the same time protect ourselves from them? hmm?

added: My gauges on matters like this, and in my personal life are "Freedom of choice", "Harmony", and "Honesty". -- Of course, what do I know? I am just an Orangutan wearing a Christmas bonnet that keeps sliding off of my head. -- chagrin

edit: Yo Sly Fox, "survival" sounds good.

Answer 4

Some theologians claim that Mary was in the service of the church as a child and the priests performed sacred rituals on these virgin girls. These sacred rituals were nothing less than sexual orgies. Hence the jesus concept and maybe your Spiritual Sentiment...

Co-operationalism has exited Europe for a long time. It is a very socially co-operative society and believe it or not the spiritually sentimental and co-operationalists have already copulated and the Europian Union is this child. For me Europe is a wonderfully free and social co-operative environment. I am from Africa and now live in Europe... This is paradise...

Answer 5

I don't think the merging of Greek thought and Hebrew though were resultant in Christianity even though the Greek language was the language of the day.

I think that early "Christian" thought was for the Synagogues to get back to religion and away from the forces of Roman occupation and the anti-Jewish results thereof.


As for soft lights and sublime music allowing a baby to be born without the inherent instinct for fear. I don't think so. Fear is for our survival and, unfortunately, it leads to religious belief. We are a social animal which means we share our fears and our beliefs and are easily led by people with their own agendas.

Answer 6

You'd probably get some inkling perusing "Watch Your Dreams," Ann Ree Colton.

"Climb the Highest Mountain," Mark Prophet, does put Hegel, Kant, Marx in proper perspective.

As you doubtless are aware, Hegel critiqued Kant for "not going far enough." Yet Hegel erroneously reified--idealistically reduced, much as Marx illogically denied, Spirit.

Would suggest Kierkegaard's three spheres of human awareness: the Aesthetic, as existential immediate maslowian needs-gratification; the Ethic, as maslowian self-actualization, the "paradise" of Kant's democracy, Hegel's Spirit, Marx' inverted Mosaic procession; and the Religious or Spiritual, as Self-realization http://www.yogananda-srf.org as germane to your "thought-experiment."

When one progresses to genuine Spiritual awareness, one is in a demonstrably distinguishable awareness, e.g. high gamma wave Mind-attunement. Therein, lucidity, a la "The Master of Lucid Dreams," Olga Kharitidi, M.D., "The Masters and Their Retreats," Mark Prophet.

This is the Spirit of which you allude. The Holy Christ Self of Whitehead's successful Dyadic, unto Holy Spirit's Triadic sublimation into One Mind Soul of Plotinian feedforward, Whiteheadian process, Husserlian Pure Ego and intersubjective Community of the Holy Spirit, Buber's I-Thou, which is the Way of the Christ Child whose birth we commemorate at winter solstice.

The baby grows in Grace, all-Way in Continuum contact with Spirit, Soul, inner child, inner sense, "innocence." The ad-ult, ad-Ultimate, championing by the Holy Family matrix, of the Holy Child, ensures Oneness with Abba, "daddy," which is the Mark of the Holy One of Is-Ra-El.

The Second Coming is the Oneness of Christ Truth in the believers, and is occurring even today. Those, such as Saint Padre Pio and Doctor Maria Montessori, demonstrate the Second Coming, Immanuel, which all are intended to experience, as Sons and Daughters of the Most High.

Answer 7

You knew I couldn't resist right....?

- 1) The spirit of an independent-operationalist with a capacity to reason.

-sophiaseeker-
.............................................................................

Basicly the conclusion I got was:

1) a= Some spiritual-sentiments are co-operationalist and b= None of the Non-spiritual-sentimentalist are Non-Co-operationalist.

2) to me a Non-spiritual-sentimentalist would amount to our current definition of "Atheist", even though I disagree with this definition.

3)non-co-operationalist in my mind simplifies to independent operationalist.

4) Simplifying 1b) above further we get:

5) No Atheist are Independent operationalist.

6) Again a= Some spiritual sentiments are co-operationalist.
- And b= No Atheist are independent operationalist.

7) why is this more complicated then the 'God Proof??'

8) This is where I start, admittedly taking undiscretionary-liberties admittedly...

9) Ahh... what the heaven, I simply married 6a with 6b which is part of the same conclusion and came up with the result you see above....

This feline, looks like, one of his 9-lives may be up for grabs, right???

___________________________

..............................**added**..............................

1) According to Carroll(see link), it is verbally convenient to call something "old" as compare to "not-new" and vice-versa in "new" and "not-old"

2) the question then becomes how does one come to understand truly that "not-old" and "new" are the same thing?

_____________**Back to you**_______________

Answer 8

I do not understand how you might use the ones units, however here is a approach you'll realize the greenhouse final result of CO2, in comparison to water vapor. Just realize that transparent nights cool off speedily, cloudy or humid nights do not. Think of nights within the wasteland. Without water vapor the greenhouse final result is negligible.

Answer 9

Utopia, remove all religion from the beginning and each man would see his fellow as an equal without barriers. By now it's too late.

Answer 10

you cannot breed dogs with cats