Thursday, May 29, 2008
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
"Lovelock believes global warming is now irreversible, and that nothing can prevent large parts of the planet becoming too hot to inhabit, or sinking underwater, resulting in mass migration, famine and epidemics. Britain is going to become a lifeboat for refugees from mainland Europe, so instead of wasting our time on wind turbines we need to start planning how to survive. To Lovelock, the logic is clear. The sustainability brigade are insane to think we can save ourselves by going back to nature; our only chance of survival will come not from less technology, but more.
Nuclear power, he argues, can solve our energy problem - the bigger challenge will be food. “Maybe they’ll synthesise food. I don’t know. Synthesising food is not some mad visionary idea; you can buy it in Tesco’s, in the form of Quorn. It’s not that good, but people buy it. You can live on it.” But he fears we won’t invent the necessary technologies in time, and expects “about 80%” of the world’s population to be wiped out by 2100. Prophets have been foretelling Armageddon since time began, he says. “But this is the real thing.”
What would Lovelock do now, I ask, if he were me? He smiles and says: “Enjoy life while you can. Because if you’re lucky it’s going to be 20 years before it hits the fan.”
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
It seems that the fear of being fired, of being sacked, unemployed, or of even being rendered unemployable, eg,. “You will never work in this town again,” is the threat that made our Congressman accept their servile position with the lobbies. We can now substitute the term “master” for lobbies and “servant” for our Congressman.
Where is the courage to change this situation? Perhaps only the necessity of basic, outright survival can bring the courage to stand up to the lobbies and return to our original Constitution ( see Ron Paul.)
A better solution would be to put property and the means of production in the hands of as many local families as possible, but this is the more difficult solution and people usually prefer the easier socialist solution—led on by those who supposedly gain from socialism.
This is how we can blame the neoconservatives (never really conservative) and global capitalists for the coming servile socialist state. Perhaps the flexibility of our system of two parties allows for a give and take, and true localism will one day return. The return to our original Constitution (again, see Ron Paul) is the Conservative option, other options seem too radical and usually lead to another servile state.
Monday, May 19, 2008
The “alchemy of God” could describe evolution of the phenomenal world to Godhood, we may dimly know the process, but our “philosopher's stone” does not know the “supersubstance” which defines God.
And we need to know the “Cause.” The urge for rejuvenation or the need for anything else is not the cause since God needs nothing.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Regarding "Empire" in this scheme, the Roman Empire seems to have transformed into the Catholic Church, the Empire-that-became-the-Faith shrunk down to a small core in the Dark Ages, and rose again and fell again, to this day. We are not speaking here of the capitalist global “empire,” which is, for the most part, an aberration in the long history of Western Civilization. Now it seems that our future will see Europe and America eventually split into small states and ethnostates to survive the ongoing destruction of the Western world. Should this mean the end of Empires?
When "Empire" is defined as small, separate, states lightly guided by Subsidiarity or light Federalism, this is an Empire we can affirm—some insist that this was the scheme of the Roman Empire, which continued with the Church. This can harmonize with the American Constitution. Small states can cause broken down Globalism to yield to small agriculture and small manufacturing, which can be guided by the ethics of the Church.
But we would go further, and slowly, transform the Church, as the Church transformed the Roman Empire, to reconcile religion with science, by combining the Outward Path of Evolution with the Traditional Inward Path of the Soul.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
The environment is not merely “forcing adaptation” on living things as if it were an outside force, the environment is made up of living and past living things, with all of them nevertheless in competition, all driven by the same will to live, or more precisely, the will to Godhood, and this helps define what the Soul does. There is not a duality here between that which forces adaptation and that which evolves.
Who will attain Godhood? God seems to “wait” to see, like a Kosmic coach, and perhaps God sometimes helps those along who find or follow the better paths to Godhood.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Monday, May 12, 2008
If returned to, our Constitution would eventually return the ownership of government and property to the people, as power is Constitutionally split and local, and State power and Capitalist power is kept light and distributed among the regions, the states and the people. Contrary to the Socialists and Capitalists (no matter what they may claim to support their elitism), power and property are not evil, nor are they God, it is control and ownership of power and property by a very few---be they Capitalist, the State, or a combo of both---which causes our dangerous disequilibrium.
Are the global capitalist forces too great to permit a return to our Constitution and thus a return to morality? The Ron Paul movement thinks not. More power to them.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
We can say, with some scholarly proof, that the Vedas of the Hindus retained the largest surviving elements of the ancient Perennial religion. We can then ask, why would one who sought the Perennial religion not affirm the Vedas and Hinduism? Here other considerations enter.
In addition to the advent of Jesus Christ, Christianity grew from the Perennial line in that it developed from Judaism, and Judaism was greatly influenced by Zoroastrianism during its exile (and also influenced by the Egyptian religion, another Perennial offshoot.) Zarathustra, the sage of Zoroastrianism, and his sacred work, the Gathas, was brother to the Indians and the Vedas, mentioned above, who had retained the largest surviving elements of the Perennial religion. Unlike the various Eastern Religions, Christianity, Judaism and Islam had also more or less embraced Greek and Roman Western Philosophy and Science, and this was best affirmed and synthesized in the Catholic Church through the work of Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas.
As it turns out, different places on earth evolved variations of the Perennial religion due to differences in the nature and nurture of the people and places and differences in the sages and saints among them. Conservatism, among other things, is based in the idea that one affirms the Traditions of one's own separated people and culture, for practical sociobiological reasons, as well as for religious reasons.
Now, putting this view of religious history together, when one is living in the West it is impractical to directly affirm Hinduism, for Traditional, conservative, sociobiological and religious reasons, yet by affirming Catholicism, and later, the Evolutionary Church, one does, in the way we just described, affirm the Perennial religion, as well as Western Philosophy and Western Science.
In the Evolutionary Church, evolution becomes a divine science, not included in Perennial religion, which is one of the main elements that separates us from the Traditional Perennialists. In the Evolutionary Church, evolution is seen as the Outward Path to God, which is included with the Inward Path of Perennialism. We cannot truly reach God without evolution, although we can learn to see and know God through the Traditional religious Inward Path.
This, in brief, is why we affirm the Evolutionary Church rather than Traditional Perennialism.
Monday, May 05, 2008
Evolution eventually can tie the material to the spiritual, the subjective to the objective, thinking alone cannot do this, and contrary to the New Age, true connection to the Soul-Within does not make us God. Only evolving to God allows us to join God. In this way we are not so much flawed as incomplete. God is Subjective-Objective-In-Himself, we are subjective-objective-becoming.
In the Evolutionary Christian Church the subjective is represented by involution, the Inward Path to Soul-Within, the objective is represented by evolution, the Outward Path to God activated by the Spirit within. This is how the incomplete subjective-objective reaches the complete Objective-Subjective-In-Himself through evolution.
Hegel thought that anguish is present only when there is opposition to what ought to be, to the real, to the affirmative, and we can agree with that thought.
In the Evolutionary Christian Church the sacred and secular disconnections are this way overcome. The community makes explicit in evolution what has been implicitly understood in religion. The extremes of the Enlightenment and Pietism are also overcome. And we see here how a people's concept of God reflects its concept of the state.
Sunday, May 04, 2008
The action is practical if it doesn't violate Tradition, it is impractical if it does.
However, something impractical is possible if it doesn't violate the laws of evolution.
This is related to predicting future technology, which is possible if it doesn't violate the laws of physics, although some things may take longer than others to happen. (see Michio Kaku on future technology, City University of New York.)
Therefore, the Evolutionary Christian Church is possible and even practical because it does not violate the laws of evolution or Tradition, since it combines evolution (science) and religion, joining the two paths: Outer and Inner Paths.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
( Here is a review of the “New Scientist” issue on the collapse from Slate. )
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Every movement has an “agenda.” Foucaultian criticism, which took over the Humanities Departments in our colleges and universities, sees only power agendas behind the great works of art. Yet the Foucaultians have their own agenda which is seen in how they interpret art works usually in more or less Marxist political directions, and often only for personal, professional advancement.
The traditional standards of beauty, handed down in the West for centuries, show principles of beauty that do not merely affirm the agendas of the Christian West, but affirm the agendas of the Classical world as well as other Traditional civilizations. To eject from our culture the traditional standards of beauty with their long human history in favor of a Marxist reductionist agenda makes no sense, unless one is virtually some sort of criminal.
We almost instinctively know the standards and principles of beauty found in what is generally lovely, handsome, pretty, fair, and which is more deeply described as balance, clarity, moderation, simplicity, restraint, proportion, and ultimately in affirming the sacred and the Divine. These principles of beauty must and will be recaptured, since they reflect the Kosmos itself.
(Here is a good essay on art, “Beauty as an Essential Characteristic of Civilized Culture” by Kevin Cope)