Recent posts on the ‘soul’/abortion question

https://redfortyeight.com/2022/05/08/secularism-and-the-eonic-effect-religions-sudden-decline-whats-causing-it-and-what-comes-next-inglehart/
https://redfortyeight.com/2022/05/08/the-calamity-of-abortion-issues-falling-into-the-hands-of-politicians-and-theologians-are-thus-politicians-also/
https://redfortyeight.com/2022/05/08/updated-abortion-and-human-psychologytwo-streams-of-soul-religion-staying-wary-of-christianity-the-pernicious-idiocy-of-the-popes-on-abortion/

Updated: Abortion and human psychology…two streams of ‘soul’ religion… Staying wary of Christianity….the pernicious idiocy of the Popes on abortion…

Christianity is uniquely confused and plagued with disinformation. The realm of secular humanism is almost worse, but your basic option in a secular time. There is no reason why secular humanism has to be so braindead. And there is no reason for such people to dismiss all spiritual beliefs as superstitions. Such people have rarely studied Kant and can’t see their own metaphysics and superstition. They find Nietzche groovy and degenerate into pseudo-philosophers. The issues of soul are a case in point. There is much superstition there, but the core meme is an aspect of human psychology and can’t be amputated. Spiritual beliefs are in the materialism of Samkhya equally material and many students of yoga claim to be doing a spiritual study, but yoga invokes Samkhya at the start and is thus not technically a ‘spiritual subject’.
The history of Christianity can help as a ‘religious’ exercise to see the way the whole subject degenerated, turning ideological and political and serves no purpose beyond crowd control by politicians.

I think our comments on abortion and soul are on the mark although there are still many obscure points here. But the theological injunction against abortion by the theologians has totally misled the public. Such people are not spokesmen for god, but hopless idiots in a tradition so corrupted as to be a dead loss. The reproductive process is an aspect of nature which all too often spawns unlimited or exponential life processes. We must bring human reason to bear to see that women cannot be regulated in the manner of theological now rightist/fascist politics.

I have revised this at some points as indicated as notes in a further update… Update: this account here can I hope help to orient thinking on abortion and soul questions, but it is still some…

Source: Updated: Abortion and human psychology…two streams of ‘soul’ religion… – 1848+: The End(s) of History

Secular humanism  

Source: Secular humanism – Wikipedia

<a href=”http://https://redfortyeight.com/2021/12/01/with-scotus-set-to-hear-abortion-case-anti-choice-groups-prepare-to-enact-post-roe-strategy/“>https://redfortyeight.com/2021/12/01/with-scotus-set-to-hear-abortion-case-anti-choice-groups-prepare-to-enact-post-roe-strategy/

As our posts on issues of free will, soul, evolution and religion confront the obstacle that modern society has no institutions that can help man with his psychological or religious questions. None. The issue of soul for example cannot at any point reach public discussion in religious and secular orgs. It is cancel culture all the way. You can’t even exchange an email with Darwin fanatics or secular humanists. And yet I am close secular humanism myself, but not the cult of fanatics and narrowly cultists of humanism. There is no real method or standard here to a kind of open mind is essential.
It is might be time to consider some kind of upgrade of secular humanism: its views tend to be inverted religion. One should critique religion but not invert it. The issue is not two opposites but three or four. If we reject religion we may or may not reject a spiritual domain. Or we might reject a spiritual domain and adopt the materialism of Samkhya as a basis of religion. We might be anti-religion and contemplate the soul of man in another sense. The discussion is vast and complex.

Secular humanists demand naturalism, but as Nagel discusses that in the book cited yesterday Mind and Cosmos the question of naturalism is not so simple and has confounded/confused the theory of evolution as Darwinism.
Secular humanists should have been more responsive to the problems with Darwinism, instead the cult of Darwin a la Dawkins is enforced like a religion.

Here is a curve ball: is the question of soul spiritual or naturalistic? The issue is undecidable so far, but to me the question of soul is naturalistic: man is a creature in an extended material comples with aspects that aren’t material, force fields, for example.  In fact I suspect the soul is one of materialism, but in a new mode. The question of what is ‘nature’ has been never been made definite. The spiritual can’t easily be defined and maybe the question should be abandoned and replaced with a general philosophy like Samkhya, which however has its own dualism. But at least here we don’t end up in useless debates that are schizophrenic: one part of man is material and some other part is spiritual. It has never worked and Christianity, in part responsible for the inverted stance of humanists, is the most confused and barren concoction of misunderstood teachings, where not lies outright. Small wonder humanists freak out, and then overrreact.

Neither side can find a reasonable view of anything, as the soul question might indicate.
The issue should stand on the nature of modernity, more or less, and the modern transition from 1500 to 1800 shows a massively rich constellation of rich cultural materials, almost all of which are simply amputated out of secular humanism with its rationalism that can’t even do justice to the Enlightenment, its Darwin evolutionism, its limited philosophic stance, and its lack of any sound ethical or aesthetic canon.

A key problem is the domination of reductionist physics and the elimination of any real chance of a psychologically sane view of man and his mind.

In any case the confusions of Christianity have been very tragic, but the solution is not the inverted views of the humanists who need to rethink all questions from scratch…

so what, so can secular humanism…//Religious Trauma Syndrome: Former Christian explains how organized religion can lead to mental health problems 

I am not a christian, take atheism/theism in stride, and think that Christianity fading away is inevitable in the long term. But the condition of secular humanists, a flock tended by the new priesthood of by-the-hour psychologists, et al. is hardly an advance beyond the simple exit from religion. It is hard to grasp the depth of shallowness and cunning in the therapy racket, and the ‘theory’ claiming science of ‘psychology’. I once faked a lab result in a Skinner psychology college course in behaviorism that required electric shocks given to a rat in a ‘skinner box’. I have felt alive ever since and will NEVER trust psychologists again. Anti-science. There is no science of psychology and the real science of physics has my admiration.
The delusive character of Christianity undermined what often was a more intelligent psychology than anything the secular humanist can muster, in its strange superstitions of scientism, behaviorism, darwinism, psychology as a credentialed hustle. Does man have a soul? Does man have a will? What about ghosts? Is there a canon of ethics of any value in a humanism so contracted it can’t handle a figure like Kant who actually saved modernity from Old Testament pseudo-ethics.
The secular humanist is in danger of being swamped by clever psychopaths slowly but surely taking over culture, in politics mostly a fait accompli, where lying is considered the norm, even taken to extravagant extremes, parodied now in the super-idiot Trump. Secular humanists are victims of the rank scientism of the kind that vitiated marxism with a fantastical failure to grasp the nature of man. Part of the problem is the effect of Darwinism, which is a pseudo-science that has indoctrinated the whole of the army of Richard Dawkins idiots preaching social Darwinism in disguise without realizing what they are doing. It is worth studying the degration of the human in the Roman empire, slowly degrading from the era of the Athenian world. That fate is coming in some new form to the secular humanist in a culture losing even its semblance of democracy. Sadly, the marxist world trying to resolve these evils produced something worse. But they at least saw one aspect: here capitalism has added to the confusion in the rote conditioning taken up by governments et al to create a secular cripple.

I could go on and on, but it is worth remembering that Chistianity came into existence to rescue a population that had created the Roman games, what to say of the extremes of slavery. It has no second coming but it does deserve historical study, granting that the endgame of current religion in the US is descending into a mysterious form of evil, next to the zionist psychopathy.
Let me say that articles like this at Alternet have my support, don’t get me wrong. But Christians knew what hell was, then botched the whole myth.
Perhaps the modern case will be shocked the whole game all over again. Perhaps the myth of Faust can help. But Goethe changed the ending from Marlowe, so the warning has turned into a pat on the back. Now our modern Faust expects Goethe’s redemption. Best of luck.

Source: Religious Trauma Syndrome: Former Christian explains how organized religion can lead to mental health problems – Alternet.org

 Archaic Greece to the rescue…//The eonic effect and generated religion… 

Many readers will reject our brand of explanation here as speculative, and that’s completely OK. Our interpretations however are one thing and the basic eonic effect another. The latter is a rock-solid nonrandom pattern in world history and not speculation at all. Explaining it is quite another matter. It is probable that the category of ‘evolution’ is the right one, but not Darwinian evolution, which is so crackpot and speculative that we must rescue the idea of evolution to a new set of facts. The eonic effect, taken in the large foots the bill, minus our interpretations, perhaps. The eonic effect shows a global process, able to focalize on regions, effect or remorph species change according to unseen form factors and in time remorph repeatedly a set of basic blueprints. In the case of civilizations, we see how men create civilization but do so in the context of a related set of form factors.
Our previous post may seem speculative but the Old Testament is a dangerous ‘frenemy’ to a scientific project. Until we adopt a set of potentially scientific concepts in the process of explanation. Here is the challenge is simple to state: explain Israelite ancient history between Solomon and the Exile with naturalistic concepts without reductionist nonsense or causal sociology which clearly won’t work.

At the last minute we are saved from collapse of this project by the study of Archaic to Classical Greece. Archaic Greece (or in our model, Greece ca. 900 to 600/400 BCE) is a very unnerving but beautiful and ultimately very clear parallel variant to the case of the Israelites in the transition period. And the synchronous timing is uncanny. But the details which come in parallel are convincing. We see the collation of the Iliad and Odyssey in exact concert with the early manuscripts of the biblical corpus, we see the same fixation around a divide ca. 600 BCE, and we see an immense corpus of innovations, literary, philosophic, scientific and political. This is a huge study, but our basic point is made: we see a common dynamic behind the Israelite and Greek case and both in a short interval up to 600 BCE, with a 200-year extension as the early results try to manifest in stable form. We cannot say ‘god’ generated the Israelite case without the same for Archaic Greece and other cases, etc…
The Greek case doesn’t generate a religion but all the resources for a new kind of civilization, many of which barely survive only to reappear in the modern case (e.g.science). Greece remains polytheistic in a strange brand of aesthetic polytheism, but generates the seeds for future secular culture.

The eonic effect shows the way religions (and secularism, and philosophies, and science…) emerge in the context of ‘eonic transitions’, three times, at least: emergent ‘Isra…

Source:  The eonic effect and generated religion… – 1848+: The End(s) of History