Interesting and Humour - page 4229
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
The absence of elves in the forest is not scientifically proven either
I don't understand this desire to worship someone, to put restrictions on yourself, to imagine that someone is watching you all the time and therefore you need to behave. It feels like "very dangerous, scary" people, and without this feeling that they are being watched, they might do terrible things). I don't think there are any restrictions in this world that you can be punished for, they are there, and they are explicit! You can't walk off a cliff, you can't brake sharply at 120 km/h. You can't point a faq in the sky during a thunderstorm, etc. Here are the explicit prohibitions, for violation of which the punishment awaits inevitably) And what is bad and what is good, it is up to people to understand, treat people the way you want people to treat you, do what you want people to do for you, etc. About faith, you have to believe in tomorrow, in your dreams, ideas, love, etc.
PS: I don't want to offend, hurt or change anyone's opinion, it's just that since they have started to describe different religions, I decided to describe mine.And here again James Frazier's excellent monograph "The Golden Bough" comes to the rescue,
which shows in detail and coherently the transition from primitive wilderness beliefs to formalised religions,
and there's a huge number of examples (a really huge number) showing the different taboos of different peoples,
ancient people were really afraid of everything - because they could not effectively resist the forces of nature and the elements,
life was full of dangers and you could just randomly die any day and these horrors lasted for millennia,
and it wasn't until relatively late in life that man was able to feel relatively safe,
that formed particular patterns of human behaviour in the form of taboos and superstitions which developed later in religion,
or rather it was an attempt to curb the uncontrollable forces of nature by means of primitive magic,
which later formed the basis of religious thinking,
the book shows parallels between some archaic superstitions and later cults,
and this is demonstrated convincingly (but you need patience to read and understand),
remarkably, the first religions were not worship,
they were a contract between man and spirit (spirit of place, spirit of some element, ...)
and sacrifices were a gift/sacrifice to the spirit to placate it and expect help,
help in the form of favorable weather or successful hunting, etc.,
If it happened that there was a series of failures, the contract was terminated and the symbols of the spirit/god were brutally destroyed,
and this is not an isolated case but a pattern for all the peoples,
and this can be seen in the practice of modern uncivilized peoples (aborigines, Papuans),
and a shaman (or priest in later times) could be brutally executed for "inefficiency",
and this practice can also be traced to archaic cultures (e.g. ancient Ethiopia-Nubia-Sudan),
and is reflected in rituals and cults of later times (e.g. killing Nemian priests),
and many other examples throughout Europe, the Middle East and Southeast Asia and in the Americas and the islands,
it's also important to accept that the process of evolution of human consciousness is a process of liberation,
liberation from taboos and superstitions and wild delusions and various inherent self-limitations,
ancient man, according to Fraser, though wildly free, was constrained by a huge number of superstitions,
religions only formalised these superstitions into a structured form and then gradually came into the service of politics (royal power),
and the "pure" worship of an abstract deity (without an explicit contract) emerged at a relatively later time,
deep symbolic similarities between a deity and a king are also evident,
spirits turned into gods precisely in the period of the decomposition of the tribal system and the formation of hierarchies,
the formation of monotheism reflects the strengthening of absolute monarchy (particularly most clearly in the history of Judaism),
thus each time people's perceptions correspond to some aspect of life,
that is why Marx was brilliantly right in assertion "Being determines consciousness" ("To the criticism of political economy", 1859).
and in every era people have their own myths and legends, even now for example there are myths:
the almighty hackers, the secret world government, the Jewish conspiracy, all kinds of crazy conspiracy stuff,
not to mention all kinds of outright nonsense like astral parasites and stuff like that,
water structure, cheese eating, non-GMO foods, zirconium bracelets, dangerous WiFi,
pseudo-history, "new chronology", Great Tartaria, myths from pisspot sites like kramola.info and the like,
often accompanied by the wildest illiteracy and inability to filter content,
but there are also literate educated people who believe such nonsense...
Why does this happen? - Because the archaic structures of the human mind are at work here,
they haven't disappeared (very little time has passed) and in some people they manifest themselves in the form of such amusing superstitions,
as far as modern religions are concerned, they're still holding on,
but only because these archaic structures of consciousness have not turned off, have not atrophied,
and a lot of people still live by inertia in the archaic way of understanding the world,
and man is still mortal and suddenly mortal - this also fuels religion,
and religion is also fueled by various personal problems, illnesses and dramas,
a healthy person doesn't need to be religious - he just doesn't need it,
and no matter what the proponents of religion say, there's a very natural justification for these processes,
and it becomes particularly simple and straightforward when you look at it in historical retrospect,
religions and superstitions will exist until the archaic structures of consciousness cease to support them,
people's existence is steadily changing - and so is thinking and the collective unconscious,
"traditional values" are being rapidly devalued, but the world doesn't suddenly collapse because of that,
traditional religions will be replaced by something else, something more flexible and universal,
more holistic and more helpful to human development rather than inhibiting it,
even the fact that Buddhism without God was already a key step in that change,
and many modern Christian believers no longer believe in an old man with a beard,
they believe in some abstract higher power that they think can help them be saved,
this faith, although irrational in form, still has a rational selfishness about it:
and it's the same Fraserian ancient pact with spirit, but in a different form,
this covenant with God is now represented in most religions in the form of the requirement of conformity -
a correspondence of "righteous" behaviour and "godliness"...
Simply put, if a "servant of God" behaves correctly (observes the Commandments), his soul will be saved,
which, by the way, is not much different from the ancient Egyptian view,
and the supreme court in christianity is a full analogue of the egyptian aftertrial but without egyptian attributes,
those interested can read the Egyptian Book of the Dead, especially the Ani papyrus (in translation, of course),
and be surprised to see almost the same Christian precepts but in a slightly different form,
and not surprisingly, because the Abrahamic religions were largely based on Egyptian and Sumerian,
similar elements of the requirement of conformity are in Hinduism and Jainism and even in Buddhism (Dharma laws),
though the laws of Dharma are more oriented towards the impersonal Self rather than God, and instead of sins, there is obscurations,
and the impersonal Self (the beginning of Being) looks like a slightly more advanced form of God, but still irrational,
but still the main thing here is the rational egoism of law-keeping - the belief in salvation or nirvana,
if believers were not promised salvation/nirvana would they obey any laws?
this situation reminds me in a funny way of the pre-election relationship between the residents and the government:
the authorities keep promising and the people keep believing )))) - and it can be repeated endlessly ))))
This is found in almost all modern religions,
which (admittedly) were useful balancers for the society in their time,
However, it should be noted that restrictions are necessary for people who are irascible and savage,
and for progressive people they are meaningless because they don't steal or kill without these rules,
and those who steal and kill - even religion will not stop them,
in this sense, religions are not needed today - because they are not relevant as a set of rules,
because there's a penal code and other codes,
And how one dresses, how one speaks, what one listens to and what one does is one's own business,
religion can be an irrational choice of a desperate person or a fear of death,
sometimes religion is a fashion - and now it's really fashionable,
sometimes the choice of religion is a consequence of illiteracy and laziness,
because it is sort of a shortcut, a shortcut, a belief instead of a practice of self-improvement,
If religion does not require real inner work and you only need to believe - it seems to be an easy path,
unfortunately that path leads nowhere,
but the main thing, of course, is the already mentioned archaic structures of consciousness, the patterns, the vestiges,
which are based on primordial fears and superstitions, on irrational taboos carried over into modern times,
and there's no need to reinforce it today, but it's gradually crumbling,
today, traditional values and taboos are clearly falling apart, giving way to freedom,
dogma is giving way to experimentation and practice,
and religions will gradually evolve into other superstructures,
more flexible, more adequate and more effective, aimed at human development.
P.S.
disclamer: the above is not meant to offend anyone and reflects the author's point of view
Brief is wonderful! How happy for you that you have finally realised that no one has read your endless sheets.
A brief paraphrase of the text above: - religions are no longer relevant to progressives.
Also see the disclaimer.
Here again James Frazer's excellent monograph , The Golden Branch, comes to the rescue,
ancient people really were afraid of everything - because they couldn't effectively oppose the forces of nature and the elements,
life was full of dangers and you could randomly die any day and these horrors lasted for millennia,
and it was only at a relatively later date that man was able to feel relatively safe,
Is there any evidence to support this claim?
Is there any evidence for this claim?
Read the sources
Read the sources.
A reference to reading the whole of Lenin's big library?)
A reference to reading the entire big Lenin library?)
as well as the BNF, the London library and the library of congress
as well as the BNF, London and the Library of Congress
Brief is wonderful! How happy for you that you've finally realised that no one has read your endless sheets.
I, on the other hand, have been reading. Already at least +1.
A brief paraphrase of the text above: - religions are no longer relevant to progressives.
also see the disclaimer