Changing ones ideas
My 11-year old grandson is certainly changing his ideas about what he is capable of. He recently left the 'free-play' school and is mentally and physically growing fast, flourishing in the more stimulating structured atmosphere of the (gvt.) intermediate school. For his parents to take the risk of sending him there required quite a shift in their thinking. We don't condemn the philosophy behind the previous school's way of dealing with child development - only the slackness of turning the philosophy into teaching practice (Teaching? There didn't seem to be much of that going on at all.)
I have changed my ideas - or at least adjusted them - many times on the subjects of religion and politics. On politics I have more of a mix now of 'left' and 'right', not just 'left' - to put it in very oversimplified terms. On religion I have very definite view on 'bulk followings', and on the 'fellow-travellers' or 'running-dogs' who want to be very 'post-modern' but cling to the labels and (vaguely) defend some of the values-ideas of 'bulk-followings'. Some of these re-affirmed old religious values are not wrong - it is just the way the 'bulk-followings' exploit them and treat them as if they have a monopoly over them. The way they are presented and taught needs to be more subject to critique.
My 'ex' left an interesting article on my e-mail about an athiest who changed her ideas - remaining an athiest but becoming very soft-spoken and sympathetic to those who cling to the idea that there is a 'Lord-God Creator of the ('intelligently-designed') Universe', an Allah or a Jehovah or Whatever. Her main reason (which struck me as rather patronizing) seems to be, because poor people need this idea so badly.
I can't go into all my criticisms here, but I guess that bright self-assured liberally-brought-up Swedish lady has never intimately known anything of the oppressive side of religion - how easily it can blight ones childhood and cause ructions later when one is trying to struggle out to its miasma. Facing reality without comforting illusion later in life can cause one to easily 'overbalance' intellectually and ethically. Maybe it's better for the 'One-God' believing religious not to even try to 'individualize' (in the Jungian sense), though I have long regarded it as being the main psychological task of the individual if he or she is ever to become a 'real' mature individual.
I have changed my ideas - or at least adjusted them - many times on the subjects of religion and politics. On politics I have more of a mix now of 'left' and 'right', not just 'left' - to put it in very oversimplified terms. On religion I have very definite view on 'bulk followings', and on the 'fellow-travellers' or 'running-dogs' who want to be very 'post-modern' but cling to the labels and (vaguely) defend some of the values-ideas of 'bulk-followings'. Some of these re-affirmed old religious values are not wrong - it is just the way the 'bulk-followings' exploit them and treat them as if they have a monopoly over them. The way they are presented and taught needs to be more subject to critique.
My 'ex' left an interesting article on my e-mail about an athiest who changed her ideas - remaining an athiest but becoming very soft-spoken and sympathetic to those who cling to the idea that there is a 'Lord-God Creator of the ('intelligently-designed') Universe', an Allah or a Jehovah or Whatever. Her main reason (which struck me as rather patronizing) seems to be, because poor people need this idea so badly.
I can't go into all my criticisms here, but I guess that bright self-assured liberally-brought-up Swedish lady has never intimately known anything of the oppressive side of religion - how easily it can blight ones childhood and cause ructions later when one is trying to struggle out to its miasma. Facing reality without comforting illusion later in life can cause one to easily 'overbalance' intellectually and ethically. Maybe it's better for the 'One-God' believing religious not to even try to 'individualize' (in the Jungian sense), though I have long regarded it as being the main psychological task of the individual if he or she is ever to become a 'real' mature individual.
posted by Brian Lilburn at 4:09 PM
2 Comments:
I don't think anybody, not even the bright self-assured Swedish lady, would disagree with the fact that there is an oppressive side to religion. But just as with most things in life, it is not a matter of one or the other. Religion is just a tool, like a knife. It can be used to threaten and murder people, or to cut oneself free.
Hmm I love the idea behind this website, very unique.
»
Post a Comment
<< Home