We need look no further than the final seasons of the majority of one’s favorite television shows to realize the simple fact, what is newer is not necessarily better, in fact it is often far worse or more complicated. It is a common bias of modernity to assume superiority over any ways of thinking that ruled past cultures; however, particularly for a religiously-based course, that kind of thinking is highly problematic. For the purposes of this essay I will attempt to traverse the narrow line of objectivity and compare and contrast two worlds. These two worlds are the Old and New, and are heavily subjective and conventional in nature, but nevertheless this inquiry will continue as planned. The rise of soteriology and a new kind of guilt, …show more content…
In a world where your past, present, and future is perfect, it is shown through the sky and translated to you by your ruler, there is no need for questioning, reality is reality and truth is truth. The future shown by the oracle bones is always correct, any issues or misreading’s were just that, mistakes on the part of man not that of truth nor reality. That brings me to the inevitable discussion of science that comes with this topic, the fact that there are indeed two conflicting definitions. Science in its truest sense, is by definition what is true; the modern idea of logical explanation and inquiry defining science is an enlightenment invention. Science of the “Old World” is allegory, the simple fact that heaven is the sky and all order in the world is prescribed to us by the stars and that there is a time and place for everything in the stars. Truth is far more elegant and understandable in this sense, it is axiomatic, what was true today was true yesterday and will be true tomorrow. The harvest comes shortly before the great winged horse “Pegasus” reaches its zenith in heaven, it always has, and it always will (for at least a few hundred years this will almost always be true). This is science, and it will never change, but it is not as perfect as its elegance would seem. While it would indeed be perfect for dozens of generations there is a grave imperfection to this science, things eventually do change. The modern
Karen Armstrong, author of “Homo Religiosus,” claimed that without the physical rituals and traditions, religion morphed into a belief. Simply put, Armstrong argued that religion requires not only blind faith but also customs and practices that affect one’s physical and mental behaviors. It is through these rituals and taboos that the religions grows and forms, and yet also changes when deemed necessary. Additionally, Armstrong constantly compares religion to different art forms. She does this to convey the message that much like art, one must focus and study religion for lengthy periods of time to be properly understood. However, this connection also suggests that art and religion can perform an analogous role to humankind when required, as they both evolve and change when a society 's infrastructure does. Throughout her essay “Homo Religiosus,” Armstrong focuses on the similar role that both art and religion play in society to discuss her claim that religion is not just a belief, but rather has to do with changes in physical and mental behaviors that in return create change in society and the religion one needs.
Religion has existed for a significant portion of human history and continues to do so; however, even a single religion’s history, traditions, and popularity have not always been constant. On an individual level, religion can also play a huge role in a person’s life, although that may not always be a purely voluntary choice. Defense mechanisms may have to be utilized if a person wants to live as they please or else they will be forced to confront the jarring inconsistencies in their beliefs. Jerrold E. Hogle contemplates that these fluctuations in a culture’s (specifically the middle class, since they are a large audience of gothic media) value system over time, how they conflict, and how they are violently dealt with constitutes the essence of the Gothic in his piece, “Introduction: modernity and the proliferation of the Gothic”. His broader musings provide a window of insight into Margaret Atwood's story, "Lusus Naturae", in which the characters' Catholic morals appear at odds with their self-interests. Those Catholic morals include purity, kindness, and selflessness, whereas self-interests include greed, selfishness, vanity, and dishonesty. Hogle relevantly comments on how the “vestiges of ancient Catholicism had become symbols of mostly emptied out meanings” (5). And so Hogle’s analysis of the Gothic and Atwood's gothic story work together to illustrate the efforts of harmonizing two antithetical ideals, leading to the weaponizing of Catholic symbols against the very
The freedom of choice is humanity’s defining characteristic. Man possesses the ability to prioritize and manage, the capacity to consciously ignore or to focus, and the foresight to plan and shape its future. Limit or constrain man’s ability to freely think, and one destroys the very nature of humanity itself, that is, unless such limitations derive from tradition. Ever since the early days of human civilization, some traditions have been facades, excuses to hide more sinister motives and practices; customs such as human sacrifice, genital mutilation, and child brides continued on for civilizations, largely accepted by the populace due to the belief that such practices “ran in their blood.” Similarly, in the 19th century, family feuds
In this chapter, Kevin Reilly concentrates on understanding why the structure of family and the standing of elders is the way it is in modern society. He construes "we live in a world shaped largely by these ancient salvation religions. If, as a result the ancestors, the elders, and the family are no longer honored." Salvation can be described as an objective to escape from the world (Reilly,95). Essentially, salvation when associated with religion, is saving of the soul from the worldly sins and consequences; some of the earliest and most influential salvation religions were Christianity and Buddhism. Before the introduction of salvation religions, the earliest human societies gave prominence to the elderly; their experience and memories often
Matthew Distefano’s From the Blood of Abel is a provocative examination of the problem of human violence through the lenses of mimetic theory and Christian theology. Distefano marshals theology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, philosophy and history to lead readers through humanity’s horrifically violent past and present, and challenges us to look more closely at the ultimate hope Christianity can provide. Distilling insights from René Girard, Ernest Becker and Michael Hardin, Distefano offers a vibrant and astute assessment of humanity’s seemingly implacable violent tendencies and skillfully shows how the Bible effectively—and often surprisingly—addresses our most fundamental problem.
They praised the murderous uncle for marrying his brother’s widow while condemning Hamlet for rejecting his new father by trying to avenge the late King’s death, thus showing that certain features of society are not universal but in fact differ depending on the culture that a person grew up in. A-level History helped to strengthen my impression that there are no universals by developing my understanding of how factors like war and technology transform our social attitudes. Religious Studies A-level adds another dimension to this awareness of radical cultural difference. Although Christianity has its origins in Judaism, its core assumptions are so different as to make the two incompatible, so I am not surprised that in former times these differences led to war and persecution. The sociology of religion and the influence of religious values on secular law is a particular interest of mine. A week’s work experience in the fashion industry sparked my interest in the sociology of fashion and led me to research the links between fashion and social forces. Especially interesting were the 1920’s androgynous flapper style and the 1960’s baby-doll style, both of which tell us something important about these decades. I am keen to pass on my enthusiasm for Sociology to others considering taking the subject. As a Sociology prefect, I ran introductory lessons for younger pupils, introducing them to the key concepts of sociology. I look forward to taking my understanding further at university in order to put my enthusiasm to good use a future
This will lead to the ultimate argument of a skeptic which indicates that in the past we were certain about things and turned out to be wrong. It can also be applied in the current situation where we are sure about other things but they can be
-People came to the Oracle to find out about their future and talk to spirits
According to Herodotus, “If the course of the future is within certain limits mapped out, it must be known by someone, somewhere, if not on earth, then by the gods.” (Hart 33) Oracles are one of the many forms of divination. Oracles are set, physical locations, in contrast
Events are traced in line with their historical evolution and this implies that the timing of the occurrence of the events get due significance. With the underlying knowledge areas of history and religion, the essay seeks to underscore the significance of appreciating the timing of the key events while tracing the historical evolution of these key events. Picking examples from the two knowledge areas, it is substantiated how the main argument of the essay holds together. I have read a lot about historical events like the world wars, great depression, colonial wars and the like. In all these instances, I have been able to underline the role of the protagonists who are leading these events as well as the time in which these events happened to
My name is Brett, son of Samuel am assuming the position of Apologist and I will be the best Apologist there is. In my teen years I readily discussed with intellectuals because of their disregard for knowledge when assigning tasks to me. I need to possess the knowledge of the objectives which I then accomplish. I proudly display my cross in public to show everyone that I am a Catholic and will always be one, just like early Christians I will not be persecuted to reject my faith and will die for it. My foundation, my father, was an accomplished businessman, who entertained me across the Mediterranean Sea. My travels
Euripide’s Bakkhai, described as “arguably the darkest and most ferocious tragedy ever written” does not change my sense of religion, however opens a new window for me to view religion in terms of
“Why was it virtually impossible not to believe in God in, say, 1500 in our Western society, while in 2000 many of us find this not only easy, but even inescapable?” Was it really an inevitable conclusion of uncompromising reality as Tom Hardy assumes? Charles Taylor doesn’t think so and his almost 900 page answer is an ambitious retelling of the process known as secularization. His narrative-style documentation of the massive cultural shift of the past several centuries demonstrates the inadequacy of Mainstream Secularization Theory and the spiritual complexity of our “cross-pressured” society. The culmination of this story lends voice to a hemisphere’s subconscious, diving beneath the “taken-for-granted” assumptions of the Western mind to hear the truth.
Finally, the third section will dwell on the controversial topic of faith, and human’s need for belief. Religion has done an excellent job in manipulating human’s need for trust. Therefore, the combination of these three sections should compel the reader to better understand why such a false belief, such as religion has had such success throughout history.
The first time I ever watched Mel Gibson’s 2004 biblical epic drama The Passion of the Christ was when I was seven years old. It wasn’t until being assigned this project that I once again chose to sit through two hours of watching an innocent man get brutally tortured and murdered. Watching this film for the first time in 12 years makes me think about what my grandma was thinking at the time she allowed me to watch this movie. Perhaps it was a learning experience to understand why Jesus died, however, it really didn’t do much but instill fear in me. And I didn’t quite understand the message at the time.