>>
>>16554
I see, but under what restriction is the soul tied to enlightenment? Can one not understand the world through the way it works, and in the embrace of patience, obtain an inner peace centered around love for your fellow man and their well being? Of course, I refer to loving them directly, not through a conceptual proxy before doing so. I cite for you Immanuel Kant's reply to a fine reverend's question: "What is enlightenment?"
He answered: "Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) 'Have the courage to use your own understanding,' is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
His point is that enlightenment is only achievable when information is examined without the filter of self-imposed restrictions and misplaced focus, namely most traditions. The human species shouldn't rely on traditions in the pursuit of enlightenment, as they are incapable of adapting to humanity's constantly shifting society and knowledge. If the ideas which humanity holds on to can not change, then what change can be brought about in humanity? Under this train of thought we can conclude that many of our perceptions and traditions (such as marriage and political parties) are outdated and are no longer required as a tool. In other words, what was once a necessity is now a hindrance. Inefficient traditions hold us back by diverting our efforts and resources toward the things which we used to use for progression. If these traditions are inefficient, then we need new ones. The need for something new means the idea is outdated, and as fallacious as it may sound, perhaps our perception of the soul is outdated as well.
It actually isn't that far fetched to consider that the soul is capable of being examined empirically. It is supposedly composed of energy, is it not? The problem here is that we're currently incapable of observing this energy without the aid of a spiritualistic guideline. This just means we aren't quite capable of fully understanding it yet. You see, all things which exist in our universe can be quantified and measured- it is an observable truth of the cosmos. Unfortunately, our current epoch of science is still in its fledgling era. It will be a long time before we can put non-falsifiable concepts to the test, so while they may be required for theology, attempting to teach them before our understanding can even begin will only restrain our progression toward enlightenment.
The fact that we can not readily observe a concept or event simply means that its true nature is currently shrouded by ignorance. As such, humanity- in the event that we do not destroy ourselves- will one day know how these things work. The only way to get there without inadvertently beating ourselves up is to proceed with patience and understanding of observable truths.
Our societies are more liberal than back in the early days of world civilization, but to put things in perspective: For many ages humanity had thought that the cosmos revolved around the Earth. When presented with contradicting evidence, the church looked to their traditions and said "This does not fit with our understanding.", at which point they denounced Galileo's discovery despite the evidence shown to their faces. The truth he presented did not conform to their practices, and was thus labeled incorrect. This is what I mean when I say that most traditions hold us back. A tether to some sense of material devotion or allegations of the spiritual only serve to divert our focus away from necessities.
To enlighten oneself entails a conclusion which must be arrived at on one's own, and then comparing that conclusion to what is known to be true. Not to cast away the wild possibilities we concoct, but to observe them under the assumption that they aren't correct. Then, if they can't be explained or denied, we "keep them on hold" until we can. Then, finally, when we are capable of confirming or denying the possibility, we can observe a truth which in all likelihood will spark more possibilities. With more questions asked than answered, we must alter what we once knew as the truth in accordance to what is truly known.
Through the advent of science and rationalism we can discover the truth. It's not a perfect system, but it's the most efficient one we know. Its best feature is that we can alter it if we find something wrong with it- a direct opposite to non-changeable and inefficient traditions. The process of pushing ourselves to advance the whole will force us to observe the answers we seek. Enacting patience will steer us toward progression. And in that progression, we will be able to know what a soul truly is and whether or not it is as important as we once thought it to be. It is this kind of understanding which will lead the human race to prosperity. Without taking the step, the risk of progression, we can only entrench ourselves in squabbles between which "perfect teaching" is more perfect than the other. Breaking free of our anchors will lead to unprecedented advancement and unity. A varied civilization of wide beliefs in all shapes and forms with one common goal: human advancement to the point of cultural enlightenment. Oneness with the natural sphere of the universe.
Our nature is designed to observe the cosmos. We are made from the universe, and we can not join the universe in harmony if we can not adapt our view of it to conform to its truth rather than what we believe to be its truth. The unity we achieve will lead us to colonize the stars not as a race, not as a religion, but as a species in search of the ultimate truths.
In the future, they will strain to find the blue planet orbiting a middle aged star several hundred light years from where they stand and say "That spec of light is where we came from". They will think of their history lessons and how we used to be an intolerant, superstitious, geocentric form of life. They may mention something like "What barbarians we used to be." in a thought fueled not by contempt, but by intrigue.
They will lie closer to universal enlightenment than we ever could have, for they will understand a greater portion of the universe than we do now. They will know that to understand the universe is to understand yourself, and they will express their understanding in mathematics- the purest form of truth. They will refuse to accept the idea that they have access to the answers they seek, especially when the cost is their ability to progress unhindered.
So long as the human species lives on, we cannot avoid a yearning to understand the universe. We cannot deny our urge to advance toward a singularity of truth. The unfortunate situation we're stuck in is that there is no help for us in sight. We're all on this planet together. As it stands, the human race is insignificant. We are threatened by our self importance and apathy, a preference to assign ourselves the favor of some entity more than the favor of our own species. Knowledge and understanding are the tools we have no choice but to use to achieve enlightenment, and the thirst for knowledge and understanding can never die. This thirst will drive us to a glorious dawn, without unnecessary restrictions, and with proper understanding a cosmic unity can be achieved.
>Rudeness is a problem in public, not on boards :P
What enlightenment can you possibly achieve without empathy?
]
[
class /
co /
eh /
fit /
halp /
jew /
lit /
phi /
pr /
rnb /
sci /
tg /
w /
zom
]
[
a /
grim /
hi /
me /
rx /
vg /
wp /
x
]
[
be /
cake /
cd /
d /
di /
elit /
fag /
fur /
gif /
h /
men /
pco /
s /
sm /
ss /
unf /
v
]