RELIGIOUS SINGULARITY

THINGS THAT POP INTO MY BRAIN

In my last post, I ended by mentioning the possibility of there being such a thing as a "Religious Singularity."   After I published that post, I thought to myself, "Norm, just exactly where did that come from?  Why did that pop into your head, and what do you even mean by that?"   To be honest, thoughts like that do just pop into my brain and then I begin to think about what I said.  In that sense, my posts are more often than not an opus of intuition or what one might call informed intuition.   So with these questions still in my mind, I thought I would pause to explain or try to explain what religious singularity means. 

By now any regular reader of my posts understands that my use of the term "religion" is extremely broad; so broad in fact that it encompasses almost every aspect of human activity whether one is of a theistic or secular mindset.  I believe humans are prone to be religious, homo religioso,  to systemize whatever ideological belief they share with others, whether it be theistically based or secularly based.  In fact, I would say we all posses both a secular and theistic religious perspective with a preferential emphasis on one or the other as being what one means by religion.  We humans tend towards discrimination; that is, separating out what it is we believe or don't believe, what it is we have in common and don't have in common, what makes us unique and or what makes us similar. This ability  is as old as human intelligence. 

The term "singularity" may seem a bit misplaced when talking about religion, as singularity frequently refers to a mathematic or scientific term or of things being distinct or possessing a unique nature.  Singularity is also a term used by  Ray Kurzweil and his prediction that there will come a time, in the not too distant future, where the merger of mankind with mankind's creations, machines, trans-humans will occur.  It is perhaps, in Kurzweil's concept of merger or crossing into a new way of being that is similar to what I have in mind when talking about a religious singularity.  Let me be clear, however, that I'm not talking about man and machines, but rather a much different merger of sorts, a merger of the vast array of human experiences, ideas, perspectives and thoughts as defining the complexity of what it means to be human in a way that does not diminish or violate the uniqueness and distinct character of those experiences, ideas, perspectives and thoughts. 

THE PARADOX OF ONE

In all religion, secular or theistic, there runs a thread that talks about oneness or one.  Almost every theistic religion, regardless of the number of gods or divinities ultimately gets to the one in which everything resides; that being in which we live, move and have our being as the  apostle Paul quoted in the Book of Acts.  In secular religion, such as found in the United States, this is expressed in the  expression, "Ex Pluribus Unum," "From the many one."  That this phrase was put in the Latin gives it that theistic feel, but it should be understood as a secular creed or aspiration rather than a theistic one. It is, nevertheless, rightly understood to be a religious creed or aspiration. Above all, religion is about paradox whether one is talking about secular or theistic religion.  E. Pluribus Unum is an expression of paradox.  While the differentiating paradigm is found in all religions, religion ultimately moves towards oneness, towards what it is we have in common.  In my opinion, religion as a whole must move away from the perennial questions of "Why" and "What happens next"  to the more urgent questions, "What now" and "How."  Each theistic religion in its own way has answered the why question and the what next question that are dependent on belief.  What is desperately needed now are acts of faith in seeking to answer the what now and how questions.


A CHANGING WORLD

My wife and I have just returned from a Mediterranean vacation that lasted roughly three weeks. Every time we travel long distances, I am mindful of how much our world has changed, how much smaller it has become, how much more in focus it is becoming.  What would have taken weeks and months to get to where we travelled took us only hour from our home in middle of the United States to Venice, Italy.  I suffer jet lag because my body has not had the time to adjust to the time changes that occur so quickly when traveling by air.  In some ways my jet lag serves as a metaphor for the fact that our technology exceeds our ability to mentally catch up to it. 

Our world is smaller, and in its becoming smaller, we encounter both diversity and similarity on a scale that is breathtaking.  The world is a changing place, a place of many crossroads interlinked by travel both real and virtual, not to mention our ability to communicate with others around the world at the speed of light.  Technology is advancing at an extremely fast pace and we are utilizing devices and innovations our great grandparents would have thought as sheer fantasy.

In some ways it remains illusionary in that it too is sucked into the differentiating paradigm that exists between real and virtual, that our minds have not yet totally grasped.  In virtual reality, the differentiating paradigm is more pronounced, in my opinion.  I am not just talking about games that allure the juvenile mindset, but the virtual "truth telling," the sound bytes of information that remove the burden of having to think.  This is for me is the greatest challenge that the internet poses for people, the illusion that everything on the net contains a kernel of truth and the allurement that I can find an answer to all my questions, all my needs through an internet search engine.

With all theses advances, however, we have yet to come to grips with who we are and what to do with ourselves.  We are poised to merge with our technological creations without knowing who we are.  Many intelligent and wise individuals are worried that our technology is advancing faster than our ability to understand its ramifications.  Some are quick to dismiss theistic religion as pointless, yet, to my knowledge they have not bothered to consider the void that would be created by its absence.  We are in some sense so worried about the harm that is done by humans on the environment that we sometimes fail to take time to understand our environment, our human nature, that in my opinion is best examined through the lens of theism. Until we come to grips with the human environment and the diversity it offers, we are ill suited to save anything else. 

BRIDGING THE GAPS

It is easy to point out the flaws of theistic religion, but secular religions is just as flawed if not more so in its supposed rationalism that negates the need of an outside other, the need for a mechanism to observe ourselves objectively in the light of the paradox that is represented in the concept of the divine. The go-it-alone mentality that is evident in some secular religions exposes a lack of understanding the need for objective observation. Apart from psychoanalysis, secular religion has no lens by which to examine the human environment. It's denigration of theism strikes me as an act of willful ignorance, if not arrogance.

I recently read an article in Huffington Post by Joey Savoie, entitled "What makes the New Atheists So Charitable?"  In this article, he discussed Effective Altruism (EA) that is a charitable movement amongst the New Atheists.  What struck me in this article is that what they are defining as EA is nothing new and can be found in almost every theistic religion.  The article quoted Sarte that morality, 'comes from within and grow outwardly.'"  This is something I can readily agree with, but it is hardly something new or something that Sarte came up with.  This concept is well established in both the Hebrew and Christian scriptures and it serves to remind me and others that what New Atheists are trying to promote as a new way of seeing things is rather saying something that's been around for ever without the need for the concept of god.

I agree with the article that goodness is part of what we humans are very capable of on our own, that that there no longer exists a need for a god concept for humans to be good.  Ironically, Jesus taught the same thing some two thousand years ago.  Goodness has always been a human capability, but I would remind New Atheists or any other form of atheism that the god they do not believe in, most sincere and informed theists don't believe in either, and it is why I consider atheism a theistic religion.

As I said in other posts, I have an appreciation for atheistic thought, but am far from convinced that they are offering anything new, and in fact I find them limited in their perspective and appreciation of diversity of thought and perspective offered by other theistic religions.  What I do appreciate is their willingness to try find a moral path without the rigid control of some theistic religions, to remove the training wheels, as it were, that many theistic religions impose as being necessary to ensure morality and proceed in a more liberated fashion.  Frankly, I don't think "God" objects.
 
Ancient theistic religions have provided us with various answers to the perennial question, "Why?" and have attempted to define "Who" we are.  Secular religion, for the most part has ignored these perennial questions and have contented themselves that answering the question "how" we got to be here and "what" we're made of as sufficient - that science and technology is all that is needed to improve our world.  Atheism, by and large, tends to look secular in this regard, but I still maintain that lingering behind the question of how to be moral is the perennial questions why, who are we and the merging questions that all religions must face, "What next" and "How."

I am hopeful that in our current, very violent world this awareness is growing; that there is a greater need for dialogue; the sharing of diverse thoughts and perspective than at any other time in our history; that there is a need for a paradoxical merger and blending of thought, idea, and perspective that permits adaption while maintaining the uniqueness and distinctness of their origins.  This is what I mean by Religious Singularity.

Until next time, stay faithful.