The less religion one has, the more divine one becomes.
I believe that only rational exploration will produce justified truths. The right to believe only applies to those that inquire; to those that investigate; to those that analyze data. This is the right of the scientist to claim moral superiority because he has participated in the rigorous study of collected data.
Induction of quantifiable observances are the only grounds for truth. Do you hear that? The ONLY grounds for truth.
But I ask, What happened to the humanities? Have they fallen portside? The Leviathan of the deep, did it disappear? I ask this because I still see it. It doesn’t even try to hide anymore.
Those who claim: prophets are NOTHING but con men; religions exist for that sweet tithe; and divine experiences are synaptic misfires-–-seem to be the worst smugglers of all. I see wild emotions masked by veneers of cheap intellectual tricks. The more sophisticated the individual the more sophisticated the intellectual trick; but it’s still a trick.
Belief has died, and the old gods have evaporated; or so is thought… The flaw here is that gods are immortal. They do not die. One does not even need to take mind-altering substances anymore to access the Gods: You encounter them every day in waking life.
The less religion one has, the more divine they become: Imagine that.
This is post is a typical critique of the contemporary science dogma. I notice in my life that those who order scientific truths over their own individual experiences seem to be out of touch.
An artist may be described as feeling too much; whereas a scientist may be described as being absent-minded. We all know that archetype of an egghead who has his head in the clouds---missing the queues other people are putting out. Maybe a cute girl who likes the scientist may hint that she is interested, but the subtle human sign she throws his way just miss.
On the opposite side, we can imagine people who are glued to the senses; they like to hug and touch--maybe enjoy the occasional orgy. A youtuber I watch, Uberboyo, describes this kind of energy as the "yoga-girl, licking walls" kind of energy. The "right-brained" energy.
More than just exhibiting these opposites, I am trying to explain that a lack of internal acceptance tends to characterize the scientist. Someone who gets angry and does not at the same time know they are angry: This is a symptom of someone who does not acknowledge their own psyche. Its the unintegrated shadow; the overextension of the ego-----the refusal to tame the beast, because taming the beast requires staring yourself in the mirror.
Of course someone who has their head in the clouds and focuses their life on extroverted sense perceptions need not be so blind to their psyche. But certainly a focus on the extroversion takes away from the introversion. This is a hallmark of a modern-day, science-oriented society; and this leads to all sorts of problems. The Ego becomes too lopsided and so this ego tries to justify its existence through tribal affiliations. An ego who is justified by tribal affiliation may in fact act differently than a fully individualized human: We have seen the worst of this phenomena in World War 2 (which needs no description of the atrocities committed by ordinary people).
The complete idea of this post has been a call for integration from personal experiences with the existentialist philosophers----particularly Nietzsche. Jung's introverted pleas and Peterson's organized detail of the horrors of the 20th century are my citations for a post that was not entirely of my unconscious make up.