I wonder, as a matter of tactics, whether the 9/11 Truth movement or the scholars who study the trajectories of bullets that killed JFK or the epidemiologists who investigate the public health consequences of mRNA vaccination would want to be sanctioned as a "protected religion". In my opinion, the problem is that the imprimatur of "science" has become so valuable in today's America that it is often stolen by those who have huge $$ resources and can afford to pay researchers to publish pseudoscience.
That's a good point. If the Conspirituality community does form an organization and begins to list sources we consider worthy of notice or endorsement or writers and other content creators we would deem valuable, it will be important to include some standard disclaimers regarding the non-transitivity of endorsements. Namely: (1) The endorsed individuals or organizations are not represented as having "accepted" our endorsement in any way, (2) are not represented as having endorsed this community or organizations and (3) are not represented as having endorsed any of the other entities in our endorsements list. Aside from that, they're stuck with our endorsement whether they like it or not :-), as a matter of free speech.
This is an important, thoughtful and original article. It can be expanded in many directions. A large portion of America is "spiritual but not religious". Is this a new religion? Is it too diverse to be a religion, or is it no more diverse than the Big Tents of Christianity, Islam, and, for that matter, Buddhism? I have long thought that Materialism is a religion, and perhaps there is political value in registering it as such, just to establish my right to NOT believe in it. Scientism may be a related religion, with the added twist that its adherents (I don't want to callthem "scientists") tend to believe any claim that authorities tell them is "settled science", (even if it changes from month to month.)
As I envision Conspirituality as a religion, their "statement of faith", or core beliefs, would focus more on the journey, the process of discovering and discerning truth. It is exactly when we believe that we absolutely know THE truth that we stop making progress toward whatever the ultimate truth(s) might be. As with science, a conspiritualist's views would be that all "knowledge" is really just the current working provisional hypotheses accurate to within so many orders of magnitude and subject to replacement by better explanations at any time new data may indicate it's needed. Those of us who've been pursuing these kinds of topics for a number of years are, by now, well acquainted with the idea that it can be embarrassing to look back on how little we knew and how much we took for "settled" five or ten years ago. Do we want to be part of a religion that would have excluded a younger version of ourselves? I'm thinking not. The alternative is to be committed not to a particular set of "truths", but, instead, to a necessarily ongoing process of seeking, discovering, vetting and discerning truth. There will be a body of content that represents the current, sometimes conflicting, collection of information deemed important by some form peer review process within the organization, but it is best if it is all seen as "provisional" -- a snapshot in time, of the community's best understanding of the world. The map is never the territory.
As I envision it, yes, it would be a new religion, for several reasons which I hope to elucidate in further articles:
1. People who are outspoken about Conspiritualist topics need to have their rights to believe, speak and act on (faith AND practice) Conspiritualist ideas protected under the first amendment's freedom of religion clause.
2. Conspiritualists are often shunned and ostracized (persecuted) by the larger community and will benefit from having a real community (partly online and partly in person) to discuss their ideas with. Without an organized religion, the need for social interaction can often go unmet, given how, for example, the unvaccinated are often shunned by family, friends, co-workers and so on. It has become a matter of personal health.
3. Organized religions have historically served as primary social institutions when, such as during the dark ages, governments and other social systems fail. Humanity is facing very serious challenges in the coming years-- environmental, political, economic, health, etc. and having an additional level of social organization, at least as a back-up or short-stop for social needs that would otherwise fall thru the cracks can't hurt.
I wonder, as a matter of tactics, whether the 9/11 Truth movement or the scholars who study the trajectories of bullets that killed JFK or the epidemiologists who investigate the public health consequences of mRNA vaccination would want to be sanctioned as a "protected religion". In my opinion, the problem is that the imprimatur of "science" has become so valuable in today's America that it is often stolen by those who have huge $$ resources and can afford to pay researchers to publish pseudoscience.
That's a good point. If the Conspirituality community does form an organization and begins to list sources we consider worthy of notice or endorsement or writers and other content creators we would deem valuable, it will be important to include some standard disclaimers regarding the non-transitivity of endorsements. Namely: (1) The endorsed individuals or organizations are not represented as having "accepted" our endorsement in any way, (2) are not represented as having endorsed this community or organizations and (3) are not represented as having endorsed any of the other entities in our endorsements list. Aside from that, they're stuck with our endorsement whether they like it or not :-), as a matter of free speech.
This is an important, thoughtful and original article. It can be expanded in many directions. A large portion of America is "spiritual but not religious". Is this a new religion? Is it too diverse to be a religion, or is it no more diverse than the Big Tents of Christianity, Islam, and, for that matter, Buddhism? I have long thought that Materialism is a religion, and perhaps there is political value in registering it as such, just to establish my right to NOT believe in it. Scientism may be a related religion, with the added twist that its adherents (I don't want to callthem "scientists") tend to believe any claim that authorities tell them is "settled science", (even if it changes from month to month.)
As I envision Conspirituality as a religion, their "statement of faith", or core beliefs, would focus more on the journey, the process of discovering and discerning truth. It is exactly when we believe that we absolutely know THE truth that we stop making progress toward whatever the ultimate truth(s) might be. As with science, a conspiritualist's views would be that all "knowledge" is really just the current working provisional hypotheses accurate to within so many orders of magnitude and subject to replacement by better explanations at any time new data may indicate it's needed. Those of us who've been pursuing these kinds of topics for a number of years are, by now, well acquainted with the idea that it can be embarrassing to look back on how little we knew and how much we took for "settled" five or ten years ago. Do we want to be part of a religion that would have excluded a younger version of ourselves? I'm thinking not. The alternative is to be committed not to a particular set of "truths", but, instead, to a necessarily ongoing process of seeking, discovering, vetting and discerning truth. There will be a body of content that represents the current, sometimes conflicting, collection of information deemed important by some form peer review process within the organization, but it is best if it is all seen as "provisional" -- a snapshot in time, of the community's best understanding of the world. The map is never the territory.
As I envision it, yes, it would be a new religion, for several reasons which I hope to elucidate in further articles:
1. People who are outspoken about Conspiritualist topics need to have their rights to believe, speak and act on (faith AND practice) Conspiritualist ideas protected under the first amendment's freedom of religion clause.
2. Conspiritualists are often shunned and ostracized (persecuted) by the larger community and will benefit from having a real community (partly online and partly in person) to discuss their ideas with. Without an organized religion, the need for social interaction can often go unmet, given how, for example, the unvaccinated are often shunned by family, friends, co-workers and so on. It has become a matter of personal health.
3. Organized religions have historically served as primary social institutions when, such as during the dark ages, governments and other social systems fail. Humanity is facing very serious challenges in the coming years-- environmental, political, economic, health, etc. and having an additional level of social organization, at least as a back-up or short-stop for social needs that would otherwise fall thru the cracks can't hurt.