In this article, I will aim to give new meaning and purpose to the idea of 'God', 'religion' -- and the purpose of religion. I call this type of religion which I view as a creative integration of 'pantheism and deism' as opposed to religion in any type of 'institutionalized and ritualized manner -- 'Multi-Dialectical-Humanistic-Existential' spiritualism and religion. It is a philosophical and logical extension of 'DGB Philosophy' and the rest of the contents of 'Hegel's Hotel'. (See my profile for a brief discussion of DGB Philosophy and Hegel's Hotel...) What follows is a brief synopsis of how I arrived at where I arrived philosophically, spiritually, and religiously:
.....................................................................................
If God created man in his/her own image, then God is definitely 'multi-bi-polar' Because man -- and life in general -- is definitely 'multi-bi-polar' from protons and electrons, to acids and bases, males and females, deficiencies and excesses, right and wrong, good and bad, narcissistic and altruistic, dominant and submissive, authoritarian and democratic...and on and on we could go.
If man wants to teach and preach a religion that fully acknowledges and accepts the multi-bi-polarity of both man and God, then religion has to move away from 'righteous, either/or, narcissistic and/or anti-narcissistic -- extremist and divisive -- religion'.
Rather it has to move towards a full 'humanistic-existential' religion that teaches and preaches 'dialectic and democratic integrationism'; not authoritarian righteousness, submission and divisionism.
It has to urge man to be accountable to himself, and to other people, plants, animals, and resources that he has to share the earth with; and at the same time, it has to urge man to be 'humanistic and compassionate' -- within the realm of accountablity -- again, to himself, and to other people, plants, and animals that he has to share the earth with.
Furthermore, a 'bi-polar, humanistic-existential' religion -- as opposed to either a 'narcissistic or anti-narcissistic righteous' religion has to teach people that 'utopia' is not in 'heaven'; neither is 'purgatory' in hell'; rather that the earth -- and man's life -- is the 'dialectical meeting place between heaven and hell', and that 'utopia' can be achieved right here on earth if we all aim for the right 'homeostatic, dialectic balance' between the 'spirituality' of Heaven and the 'sensuality' of Hell; between the reason, logic, ethics, morals, restraint and integrity of 'Heaven' vs. the pleasure and biological impulses of 'Hell'.
Stated differently, what I just said above -- before everyone gets 'their shorts in a knot' and starts 'throwing eggs at my work' -- is simply a reformulation of Nietzsche's classic first book -- 'The Birth of Tragedy' -- where Nietzsche trumpeted the value of ancient Greek tragedy and pre-Socratic philosophy as being basically the ideal 'humanistic-existential dialectical/homeostatic balance' between 'Apollonianism' (Heaven -- and man's ethical-restraining and spiritual side) and 'Dionysianism' (Hell and man's pleasure-seeking, biological impulse side).
'The Birth of Tragedy' is a greatly undervalued masterpiece of philosophical work as it 'dialectically bridged the gap' between Hegel -- and the birth of much of modern psychology: specifically, Freud and Psychoanalysis, Jung and Jungian Psychology, and Perls and Gestalt Therapy, among many other similar but different schools of psychology and psychotherapy.
Which brings me to my second last point: 'Heaven' from a psychological, analytic perspective can be viewed as an external projection of man's 'spiritual and ethical' side (his externalized 'Superego' or 'Topdog') while 'Hell' can paradoxically and bi-polarly be viewed as an external projection of man's 'sensual and pleasure-seeking' side (his externalized 'Id', 'Shadow', or 'Underdog'). It is no coincidence in my mind that 'heaven', 'superego', and 'topdog' are all located 'above' while 'hell', 'id', 'shadow', and 'underdog' are all located 'below'. This is the internal workings of the human mind and psyche -- externalized in mythology and religion as well as in every other aspect of his life and culture.
What I think a 'dialectical-humanistic-existential' religion should be teaching then is 'utopia-here-on-earth-by-way-of-dialectical-integration-and-homeostatic-balance-between-heaven-and-hell-God-and-The-Devil-Apollo-and-Dionysus-spirituality-and-sensuality-superego-and-id-persona-and-shadow-topdog-and-underdog-male-and-female-black-and-white-Christian-and-Muslim-parent-and-child-man-and-animal-man-and-earth...' I call this 'Multi-Dialectic-Evolutionism-Differential-Unity-and-Wholism'.
One last thing: If man's 'ethical restraint system' functions alone, man self-destructs (religiously speaking this type of person is 'obsessed with heaven'); if man's pleasure-seeking system functions alone, man self-destructs (religiously speaking, this type of person is 'obsessed with hell'). If man's 'humanism' functions alone (politically, these type of people are often referred to as 'bleeding heart liberals'), then man self-destructs (not enough accountability); if man's 'existentialism' functions alone (politically, these type of people are often called 'cold-hearted, redneck, conservatives'), man again self-destructs. The type of utopia that we all should be looking for is 'dialectical-integrative-balance-between-heaven-and-hell-here-on-earth-here-and-now'.
Perhaps it is also no coincidence that the half way and meeting point between the 'brain' and the 'loins' is the 'heart'. If we want to get closer to utopia-on-earth, then we all have to have more heart...integrating our brain with our loins...our ethical restraints and our compassion with our biological-pleasure-seeking impulses. Neither side can fulfill man's individual and collective self-actualized destiny nor man's peace and differential unity within himself, his fellow man, and his natural environment -- alone.* -- dgb, April 4th, 2008.
................................................................................
*The 'triadic-dialectic' between 'mind', 'heart' and 'loins' with the heart being the meeting place between these 'three different energy zones in the body' is an idea that I picked up and slightly embellished (the heart as the meeting place) from Plato. I'm not a big Plato fan but this idea has stayed with me over many years. The idea of a 'triadic-dialectic' in man can also be found in Freud's work with his division of 'superego' (social conscience), 'ego' (conflict-mediating part of the mind), and 'id' (biological impluses). The difference between this triadic division of the 'mind-brain-psyche' and Plato's is that Freud's model is 'all within the divisional functions of the mind if you will' whereas Plato's model seems to include the body -- the 'heart' and the 'loins'.
I look at this article as a 'gateway' article. There should be more articles to come in the development of these 'freshly developed' thoughts... -- dgb, April 5th, 2008.
No comments:
Post a Comment