religion and spirituality

[Ivo Banaco]

Regina,
About Marx. Even in a side (and funny) remark as you did about Marx, it's
important to notice that when he says that religion is the opiate of the
people he put himself out of the question. Is it football his opiate, is it
reading books all day long his opiate, or is it opiate itself? The
meta-theoretical problem is that we always leave human beings outside of the
meta-theory that We, as human beings, create. For instance, Marx derived
consciousness from the production forces. He takes that as given and derive
"people" from it. So is he Marx, a part of it? If so how can he possible
meta-theorize about that. With Freud the same thing. He takes society as
given and defines what is wrong with human beings from that, always a
pre-ego infantile problem to solve, nothing more complex and undefinable to
assume. Evolution simply doesn't exist in this models. I believe that this
theoretical problem is not clearly solved yet, although much progress is
being made.

Moreno saw this very clearly, communicate in his own way very clearly to
those ready to open their minds. What lacked at the time, I speculate, was
the Moreno's inability to hold the predominant cultural conserves, even to
respect that cultural conserves to "destroy" those paradigms from within. If
he were to do that, We weren't be here discussing this. All of you (me one
day who knows) probably were a modern type of psychoanalysts, I guess.

That being said, what have religion and spirituality got to do with it?

Ivo

PS: I'm enjoying so much this conversation that I am only sorry that the
connection with IAGP (the psychodrama section) was lost somehow.

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:59 AM, REGINA SEWELL <sewell.2 at osu.edu> wrote:

> Ivo,
>
> The issue that you bring up...  it reminds me of Marx's declaration that
> religion is the opiate of the people.  I live in Columbus, Ohio and have a
> sense that Marx is wrong...  the Opiate isn't religion, it's football....
> except when the buckeyes lose, which they just did...
>
> But seriously, you raise the issue of religion/spirituality, but I think
> that the issue is broader...  it has to do with people getting stuck in a
> cultural conserve.  And while the downside of religion as cultural conserve
> of choice are easy to point out (you did in the example of John Travolta's
> son, and on the surface, we can blame religion for much of the blood that's
> being shed all over the planet), my sense is that people flock to religion
> and stay with it because it works for them somehow.  It gives meaning to
> what may otherwise be a frightening, overwhelming, pointless existence.  It
> gives them what Joseph Campbell dubbed "Myths" to help them navigate their
> world.  And it gives them rules for living.  Though we break them all the
> time, it's easy to see how the "thou shalt nots" of the Abrahamic religions
> helped to keep societies from killing each other...
>
> Campbell also notes that perhaps the problem with religions today is that
> they myths have not caught up with the economic and social realities of the
> world in which we live.  Perhaps what we need are new myths.  Oddly enough,
> some of the new science and new religion is backing up what the Mary Baker
> Eddy prosletyzed to her masses -- the power of prayer, of "energy" and
> intention.
>
> So perhaps we should take to heart the words of Bruce Springstein on his
> album "war"  "Blind faith in anything will get you killed."
>
> According to the press:
>
> "A post-mortem examination determined last night that John Travolta's
> chronically ill son died of a seizure, as controversy erupted over the
> Scientologist actor's handling of the boy's medical condition. According to
> the family, Jett, 16, suffered a seizure and hit his head on a bathtub at
> their holiday home in the Bahamas, where he was found dead on Friday."
> ...Travolta
> and his wife, Kelly Preston, issued a statement saying they were
> "heartbroken that our time with him was so brief. We will cherish the time
> we had with him for the rest of our lives." The couple said that Jett
> suffered from Kawasaki disease, a condition that causes inflammation of
> small and medium-sized arteries. The disease affects the lymph nodes, skin
> and the mucous membranes in the mouth, nose and throat. Experts said that
> the disease was rarely fatal and seldom affected children over the age of
> 8....Critics of Scientology suggested yesterday that Jett may have been
> suffering from autism, a condition that the church does not recognise
> because it considers mental illness to be psychosomatic and argues that it
> should be treated through spiritual healing...." From The Times January 6,
> 2009
>
> Well, I will not discuss the way this church or others deal with humans. I
> think that the problem is deeper than this and deserves an urgent and
> serious consideration. My question is: What are the political consequences
> of spirituality? I will not bother you with this historical problem, but
> with the clear fragmentation between Governments and Institutions related
> to
> "faith" and "Spirituality" a big and increasing hole is there for we all to
> see if we want and have the courage to see it. The consequences can be
> disastrous if all remains the same. Governments can not pretend that the
> New
> Age Movement doesn't exist as a genuine mode of discourse or other types of
> movements that are pupping up now. With post modernism the respect for all
> kinds of truth are being mistaken for all truths are equal. And We all know
> this is simply not truth in our relative world.  Note the paradox. They say
> "All kinds of truth are equal" forming in that very moment another kind of
> truth. I will attempt to say that in our relative world there are not only
> various types of truths but various degrees of truths. I will call this
> degrees simply Evolution, defined as a truth that emerge, transcend and
> include the previous truth (but the topic is too complex to expose it here,
> I think, because it would divert from the real intention of my e-mail)
>
> Spirituality have to enter in the political discourse again, I believe,
> simply because spirituality, by whatever name is an intrinsic part of a
> human being, and the bad use of it makes the world poorer. By political
> discourse, I mean in the broadest sense of the world, including the
> explicit
> consequences of the work and the understanding of science, of arts, of
> culture, etc that have to result in a better informed political decisions.
> This, I believe, can only be met by a real transdisciplinary approach. Is
> Sociatry Era coming at last?
>
> regina sewell, Ph.D.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20090108/31e60146/attachment.html>