Guest guest Posted May 26, 2004 Report Share Posted May 26, 2004 On talk of the nation today, the topic was religious conservatism in the US (which is one example of the dominance of magical thinking). the show pointed out hat while in europe there are plenty of conservatives, there is no religious movement that affects politics. rational vs. magical. Chinese Herbs FAX: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 26, 2004 Report Share Posted May 26, 2004 In a message dated 5/26/04 2:55:57 PM, writes: > On talk of the nation today, the topic was religious conservatism in > the US (which is one example of the dominance of magical thinking). > the show pointed out hat while in europe there are plenty of > conservatives, there is no religious movement that affects politics. > rational vs. magical. > Are you saying that the Catholic and Muslim religions do not affect politics in France? Lutheran in Germany (Christian Democrat party)? Humanistic religion at NPR, a government subsidized radio program? While I am none of these, I don't fool myself into believing that rationalism is not a religion with its own high priests (Chomsky, for instance). DAvid Molony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 26, 2004 Report Share Posted May 26, 2004 Are you saying that the Catholic and Muslim religions do not affect politics in France? Lutheran in Germany (Christian Democrat party)? Humanistic religion at NPR, a government subsidized radio program? While I am none of these, I don't fool myself into believing that rationalism is not a religion with its own high priests (Chomsky, for instance). >>>>>They way i would divide it as those that want to see evidence and those that see their evidence only via their belief systems Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 26, 2004 Report Share Posted May 26, 2004 Hi you wrote: <<<I was also very precise about who I would characterize as a magical thinker, which despite your sarcasm is a technical anthropological term with a distinct meaning.>>> I have never heard the term " magical thinker " used in linguistic anthropology in the manner that you describe, although linguistic anthropology, etiology and epigraphy are areas that I have studied with great interest for several years (as part of my " magical " spiritual path, no less). ;-) The term " magical thinker " as I've seen used in linguistic anthropology (as is used by Daniel Raffalovich when referring to James Frazer's " The Golden Bough, " and Claude Levi-Strauss' " Structural Anthropology, " for instance), refers to the view that magic itself is also " logical and linguistically meaningful. " I have never seen the term used to imply fundamentalism in any way. Could you share the source(s) for your terminology with me so I could better understand your perspective? I'm genuinely perplexed. <<<I would submit that a magical thinker is willing to allow the ends to justify the means because the end is god's end and thus must be right. An elightened rationalist thinks of the greater good of society. America is a land of magical thinkers. Europe is much more representative of enlgihtened rationalism.>>> What you describe is fundamentalism, not mysticism or magic. Again, it appears we have different uses for the term " magical thought. " In fact, those who follow spiritual paths generally considered *mystical* or *magical* are frequently the target of mainstream fundamentalism, most definitely not the source of it (nor are these folks unconcerned with the " greater good of society, " as this is a core part of their belief systems). There is a huge difference between the belief that one view is " right " and should be forced upon everyone else (fundamentalism), and following a magical or mystical tradition or path. Of course, being a " magical thinker " from the anthropological perspective I've mentioned above does not preclude one from also being enlightened and rational. As Raffalovich says, magic itself can be quite logical. I know many enlightened, rational folks who follow magical spiritual traditions. None of them are fundamentalists or close-minded. I know I'm not. It just reminds me of the saying " the mind only functions when its open. " ;-) Kindest Regards, Andrea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 27, 2004 Report Share Posted May 27, 2004 We should remember that this country was established by corporate profit seekers and religious dissenters. Greed and religion came here at the early beginnings. The religious dissenters did not leave Europe because their brand of conservatism did not jibe with the rationalism of Europe. They came because they believed that the religious establishment in Europe was corrupt and perhaps too magical in its practice. These early fundamentalist dissenters organized themselves into corporate groups for their own promotion. Their thinking is the foundation of the American Capitalist system. They were more often aligned against any type of " magical " thinking. Sure they believed that God rewarded hard work and that prayer was important, but they did not look to magic. I don't think that the use of the term " magical " is correct. Perhaps you should substitute fundamentalist. Barry _____ On talk of the nation today, the topic was religious conservatism in the US (which is one example of the dominance of magical thinking). the show pointed out hat while in europe there are plenty of conservatives, there is no religious movement that affects politics. rational vs. magical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 27, 2004 Report Share Posted May 27, 2004 , " Barry Thorne " <thornedist@c...> wrote: > > > I don't think that the use of the term " magical " is correct. Perhaps you > should substitute fundamentalist. > ther majority of americans now believe in a literal interpretation of the bible. that is magical thinking. This country was indeed founded by anti-magical thinkers like Jefferson, etc. Alas, there efforts were to no avail. Fundamentalism is magical by definition. Magical thinking uses myth and fancy to explain the world and rejects rational thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 28, 2004 Report Share Posted May 28, 2004 Hi but remember that mysticism also has its own rationality. It is only different to the rationality of materialism. For example; synchronism is not-rationale in materialistic science (with the possible exception within Quantum-theory), but in mysticism it is rationale. Are Are Simeon Thoresen arethore http://home.online.no/~arethore/ - Thursday, May 27, 2004 5:41 PM Re: NPR synchronicity , " Barry Thorne " <thornedist@c...> wrote: > > > I don't think that the use of the term " magical " is correct. Perhaps you > should substitute fundamentalist. > ther majority of americans now believe in a literal interpretation of the bible. that is magical thinking. This country was indeed founded by anti-magical thinkers like Jefferson, etc. Alas, there efforts were to no avail. Fundamentalism is magical by definition. Magical thinking uses myth and fancy to explain the world and rejects rational thought. Todd Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including board approved continuing education classes, an annual conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2004 Report Share Posted May 31, 2004 The majority of Americans have always believed in a literal interpretation of the bible. This is a predominantly protestant country. The protestant revolution played a key role in the colonization of this continent by Europeans. That a majority of people in this country believe in a literal interpretation of the bible is not a recent development. It is true that Jefferson was a child of the enlightenment and a friend of reason. But he was not an atheist in matters of religion. He believed that the natural world itself was demonstrative of the existence of God. He was the author of the Virginia Statutes on Religious Freedom and considered religion to be an individual matter of conscience. He did oppose the power of priests and clerics and distrusted their influence of the minds of men and women. Jefferson wrote his own version of the New Testament with the miracles removed. Jefferson believed that Jesus represented the best moral example. I don't think that Jefferson intended to found a non-protestant religious nation. He just intended to limit the power of any sect or group that might assume absolute power. Jefferson's theory of natural rights stems from the notion of God-given rights. I think your desire for an atheistic state based on reason goes against a long history. I fear you will find much frustration in this endeavor. Perhaps it would be more fruitful to seek accommodation. Improve your skills and don't waste time trying to convince magic thinkers. You can do more by demonstrating skill in acupuncture than by arguing with those who will reject any but a fundamentalist view of the world. That is just the way it is and I don't think that you can change that. Barry _____ ther majority of americans now believe in a literal interpretation of the bible. that is magical thinking. This country was indeed founded by anti-magical thinkers like Jefferson, etc. Alas, there efforts were to no avail. Fundamentalism is magical by definition. Magical thinking uses myth and fancy to explain the world and rejects rational thought. Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including board approved continuing education classes, an annual conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.