Would a person without faith or even an individual with faith be able to study a religion or a religion aside from his faith and yet be able to achieve an objective point of view? In so doing, one needs to be an outsider looking in. Implication would be that one need not be a scientist to study the history of science, one need not be religious to study religion as one is merely an outsider looking in. This could provide conflicts with the insiders or those who practise a particular religion or in the case of a studying the history of science, the insiders would be the professional scientists.
Insiders VS Outsiders
1. Outsides depend on the insight of the insiders, thus the information that he derived is second hand. He can only give an account based upon �observation and testimony from a third party.
2. Outsiders may only be able to rely on abstractions and generalisations, possibly from the sacred books as they do not or maybe could not participate in rituals in which they could have access to direct experience.�
3. Outsiders do not accept whole truth. They read them in context. For example, the truth of god or even the existence of god. They investigate as to how this claim exist.
4. Religion refers to a totally distinct unique discovery of human experience which is beyond human comprehension and thus outsiders being non practitioners are not able to experience it.
5.Being an outsider, one would be able to study religions and not just one religion.
6. Outsiders avoid premature judgements.�
What is Religion?
In answering this question, we need to look at the characteristics of religion. Would it be the same for all religion. For example, the believe of a supernatural being. Would the believe of the presence of a supernatural being be the main factor of a belief being a religion. Thus is this the reason as to why Scientology is not a religion? What effect would this supernatural being have on its devotees. Could that effect be derived from somewhere else?
Would any of the characteristics of religions be similar to an activity such as watching a soccer game? Thus would soccer be a religion? Why is it or it is not?
Many mainstream religions rely on the authority of a sacred book, the authority of which is not recognised by followers of other faiths or by people of no faiths. Thus under whose authority does the authority of the book is recognised? It is this fact, that does not allowed the outsiders to fully experience and understand the faiths.
Can religions be harmful?
Examples would be the mass suicides of various religious groups.
Does religions have boundaries? For example boundaries to state as to what is and what is not a religion? Or boundaries to state as to what is and what is not part of a particular religion.
To be continued after Friday prayers.
No comments:
Post a Comment