consider the materialism of…new age/archaic yoga….//Marx, Hegel, and the Critique of Religion: A Response

Update: We should be wary of critiquing Marx here on this point. The social condition of religion are clearly relevant and Marx was determined to analyze this in his own way.

Update: Having mentioned the eonic effect I should point out that the triangle of Kant, Hegel, Marx (in some ways Schopenhauer makes Kant clearer) is a spectacular moment in the eonic sequence itself at its modern divide (consult the eonic model) and that also explains why such a moment is repeatedly recalled and analyzed like an echo of that strange moment or generation. But it is only a brief moment in a large situation. Marx and Hegel are just at the limits of the eonic transition of modernity. Same for Kant who is well inside.

The so-called new atheism treats beliefs in isolation from their social conditions and does not link the persistence of religion to our alienated forms of life under capitalism.

Surely this is the wrong analysis. By restricting study to social context the gesture of reductionism fails. Religion is not an alienated form of life under capitalism. Bullshit. It might assume that demeanor in context. But religion emerges millennia prior to capitalism. Further, the rational critique of superstitions while entirely appropriate in one way misses the points that a spiritual domain is not a superstition. The problem is the destructive duality of western thought here. So it is not that spirituality is a superstition against materialism, but that both are a unity in a larger context, possibly of the universal materialism of ancient Samkhya revived in the new age movement by figures like Bennett (and his sources). The spiritual then, as an aspect of a larger material nature is real but subject to the Kantian limitations of metaphysics. It is real but can it be knowable? The materialist left was outplayed by a rightist clever piece to try and speak in materialist language: the figure Gurdjieff, that dark occultist, revived some bit of sufi interpretation of the classical India Samkhya with its materialism, atheism, and triadic dialectic. It was a clever piece taken up by Bennett. The point here is that while materialism is a good foundation but its western form is crippled by a false duality. Can anyone recall that the yoga now so popular in the new age wasteland was and is a materialist conception based on that very Samkhya? The great yogas of India were at one point materialist.
Anyway, the reduction of religious beliefs to material conditions just doesn’t work. It does not follow that we should not critique the drift into the superstition of much of this legacy.
The left should be wary of their own perspective. The strange and eerie triad of Kant, Hegel, and Marx is prone to dangerous confusions and sounds elegant in academic jargon in excelsis but is a lost thought in the actual reality invoked by ‘marxism’, which is the dangerous cadre ‘religion’ of Stalinist executioners.

Anyway the endless dialectic of Hegel and Marx is a lost cause now. If all this confusion could take five minutes to review Kant the useless and almost endless parade of marxist finery in those who are addressed by this left, might settle back into sanity. Marx and Hegel both are oblivious to Kant’s critique of metaphysics and both are extravagant metaphysicians of idealism, and materialism both.

This is all very interesting but the study of religion in the context of Marx, what to say of Hegel, is out of date now, despite its continuing interest as one aspect.
But the issue of religion is more than that of monotheism or the issue of ‘god’. It encompasses via the New Age movement, the hidden aspects of Christianity, the case of Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, the history of Hinduism, the Zoroastrian component and much else.

A study of the eonic effect can help to free the discussion from the idiotic straightjacket of ‘historical materialism’ which is entirely brain dead on all aspects of religion. The idea that socialist revolutionaries pegged Marxist are going to rewrite world culture via Marx’s confused theories and of historical materialism will cause an immense jackknife of the left against itself and turn the public to rightist fanaticism. But Marxists won’t listen. Their own ideology has all the characteristics of religion, and religion at its worst. Don’t go that route. The world has one last chance at socialism and Marxists will be there to spoil it.
The secular trend in world history is validated here but at the same time the secular humanist has been reduced to a sort of atheist worshipping at the altar of Newton and reductionist scientism. The secularist fails to understand his own historical position.
I have often recommend the model of the eonic effect as a better foundation : it approaches theory but then stands back and sees that historical theories and theories of religion are not so easy to come by and that basic outlines are enough: there we find a simple periodization of history and evolution and a context of empirical mapping instead of the now visibly amateurish nonsense of Marx and his epochs of production. The economic angle simply won’t work on the history of world culture and its regions.
Threatened with extinction by secular reductionists the immensely elusive world of esoteric Buddhism declared war on secular modernity and generated a fascist response while remaining hidden from view.
The left cannot go about these issues in the now archaic fashion of the era of the Marx/Hegel collision.
I recommend a close study of the ‘eonic effect’ as a warning against doing stupid things after the fashion of a now long gone left…

Source: Marx, Hegel, and the Critique of Religion: A Response

 Passing of the Axial Age religions

The passing of the Axial Age religions is not the same as the passing of
spirituality or the broader range of religious beliefs beyond ‘religion’.
A huge new age movement, often retrograde, but rapidly generating a new cultural force is creating a new kind of ‘non-religion’ in the middle of the secular sphere.
A Kantian perspective can be useful: the critique of metaphysics works both ways and secular beliefs are often crypto-metaphysical.

Our study of the eonic effect shows that the passing of the religions of an earlier era or epochal is inevitable, but that does not as such refer to all spiritual beliefs.

Religion’s Sudden Decline: What’s Causing It and What Comes Next,

Source: Watching Religion Die –

How fundamentalist religion has made the policy response to COVID-19 so much worse 

This spring, the novel coronavirus pandemic has raised the issue of the relationship between the blindest kind of religious faith and rational skepticism — this time in two countries that think of themselves as polar opposites and enemies: Supreme Leader Ali Khameini’s Iran and Donald Trump’s Ameri

Source: How fundamentalist religion has made the policy response to COVID-19 so much worse –

A just-so story about the origin of religious beliefs 

Given the evidence of the eonic effect (with its subsection on the Axial Age) we can see that even religions show a relationship to some mysterious source, invoking somewhat cautiously the idea of finetuning…The latter idea won’t convince at first…
we don’t need the idea of fine-tuning as such: it merely creates one possible connection with physics.
Study the idea of the ‘eonic evolution’ of civilization. Then look at the eonic effect with respect to emergent religions…The darwinian theory of evolution is completely hopeless here…

Source: A just-so story about the origin of religious beliefs – Uncommon Descent

 Confusions of terms ‘secular’, ‘religion’, and ‘spiritual;…

These discussions confuse religion, spirituality, occult ism and supernaturalism. The advance of science has been confused by reductionist science and wrong definitions of ‘secularism’. A secular field embraces at its best a huge totality, one far more conducive in principle to ‘spirituality’ than ‘religion’ (i.e, here monotheism).
Spirituality has vastly increased in a secular field. Even as traditional religions fade away

Social scientists predicted that belief in the supernatural would drift away as modern science advanced. They were wrong. Source: Why Religion Is Not Going Away and Science Will Not Destroy It

Source: Why Religion Is Not Going Away and Science Will Not Destroy It – The Gurdjieff Con

Religions, axial ages, and reformations

Stream and sequence: religions, axial ages, and reformations March 30th, 2015

Our analysis of world history in WHEE doesn’t honor ‘sacred’ and ‘secular’ distinctions. It has another more useful distinction of ‘stream’ and ‘sequence’: the Axial Age produces two monotheistic ‘sequence’ transitional areas, archaic Israel, and the hard to understand Zoroastrianism of Persia. We only see the Israelite succession in the West, but the Persian blending with Israelitism at the conclusion of the Continue reading “Religions, axial ages, and reformations”