Atheism is perfectly correct in that indeed there is not an actual being out there to be named or referred to as God. (111)You see what I mean... How about this:
In the past, people often thought of morality as bringing a particular individual life under general rules. Morality didn't at all help you to become your own unique self. Its concern was always to subordinate the particular to the universal. Rule-based morality is therefore dead, because it does not help one to become an individual. ... I am under a sacred obligation to find and follow the personal lifestyle through which, as I live it out, I can become a unique, individual, fully-expressed self. It is in that way, and not by confining myself to some set of rules, that I can make my best contribution to the human scene as a whole. (45-46)With which I at least partly agree. In fact, there's no doubt that this Anglican priest who doesn't believe in God has some valuable and incredibly perceptive things to say. The quotes don't begin to do justice to his overall argument about life, language and existence. Here's one that gets close.
Simply out of chatter we generated language, established values, built up our huge and elaborate knowledge systems and - strangest of all - we even generated our own consciousness, our own subjective life.
The bubble is unmoored, outsideless: as seen from inside it, there is no way out. (91)But there are nagging doubts. Cupitt is an old codger, and speaks with the plummy voice of an Oxford don - which is appropriate given that's what he is. But to be honest, being myself an only partly reformed Pietist at heart, the exaltation of rampant sexuality as an expression of "the new model" grates.
I like the new-model idea of the unity of religion and the sex drive: that is, I like the way libido flowing through us gives colour to the world, makes it dazzlingly beautiful, and turns into religious joy. That's redemption, new style. (129)Free-range bonking in the guise of Lebensgefühl seems in Cupitt's universe to be an indicator on the path ahead. Yeah, sure, we should all be comfortable with our own bodies, but Cupitt goes a tad beyond that.
But with reservations, it's an interesting if somewhat cerebral read. One final brief quote:
'Life', whatever it is, is bigger even than religion. (48)
“Rule-based morality is therefore dead, because it does not help one to become an individual. ... I am under a sacred obligation to find and follow the personal lifestyle through which, as I live it out, I can become a unique, individual, fully-expressed self. It is in that way, and not by confining myself to some set of rules, that I can make my best contribution to the human scene as a whole. (45-46)“
ReplyDeleteWhat if a
“unique, individual, fully-expressed self. “
person …. decides it’s their
“best contribution to the human scene as a whole”
to pillage and murder those who don’t agree with their
“sacred obligation to find and follow the personal lifestyle “
which makes them unique???
Just what the world needs……more old codgers that combine their “unity of religion and the sex drive:”
duh
Anoneemoose
In fine antidote to this linguistic postmodern drivel, Dostoyevsky wrote in The Brothers Taramazov, "If there is no God, then everything is permitted." That is to be the faith of the future?
ReplyDeleteCupitt's rejection of belief in an objective God, empty radical humanism,and claim that God is a human invention leave me empty and somewhat thirsty.
Time now for a Weizenbock.
Well, let's just say that the Cupitt quotes shared are thought-provoking. Considering the Don's take on God, you would expect his religious philosophy to be self-centered, rather than God-centered, and this inevitably leads to a lifestyle with no moral imperatives.
ReplyDeleteOften, one can discern right from wrong by examining the way in which things will be if a key ingredient is missing. To that extent, Cupitt provides a valuable service!
BB
I really, really, really don't know how you got "self-centred" from those provided quotes, Bob; "life is bigger" suggests an OUTWARD-looking perspective, not the inwardly-directed navel-gazing MEmeMEmeMEmeMEJebusSAVEDMEEEEEEE attitude that is sadly so typical of the vast majority of evangelizing Bible-beaters.
ReplyDeletePurple, your roots in philosophy are apparently quite different from mine. In terms of enlightenment, there are two general paths. One path, and you can include psychology into this one, involves looking within one's self for answers. Buddhism, and some other practices involve heavy use of this.
ReplyDeleteThe other approach, of course, would be to look outside of one's self, to a higher power, or spiritual entity. Christians focus on Father God and Jesus Christ as this external entity.
Cupitt appeared to be enigmatic in his comments, because as a Christian, he was advocating looking to the internal, actually apart from God.
BB
I think our perspectives on philosophy are quite different, Bob (not that there's anything wrong with that, quite the opposite), but unfortunately we both share the same "roots in philosophy", regardless of where those "roots" have led (and are continuing to lead) us.
ReplyDelete"The other approach, of course, would be to look outside of one's self, to a higher power, or spiritual entity. Christians focus on Father God and Jesus Christ as this external entity."
An "external entity" that can in no way, shape, or form, be proven to exist outside the Christian's (or the Muslim's or the Jew's) own self...therefore, any of the Abrahamic religions are just as inward-looking as (if not moreso than) Buddhism or psychology, or any of "the other paths".
Fundamentally, it comes down to this, Bob: You say you're talking to "an external entity" when you pray...but when you pray, outwardly, you don't look any different than I do, when I meditate. You're still looking inward. You just don't want to (or can't) acknowledge, that that's what you're doing.
Maybe it's a comfort thing? You don't want to think that the really cool insights and "revelations" (Nothing like the book, don't worry!) come from the three pounds of meat in your own head, so it automatically must be assigned the label of "external entity", just so you can handle it? (I don't know, I'm just speculating here.)
I like hacking my own brain, too (and I don't do it nearly often enough, anymore), but I don't delude myself into thinking that those things are somehow extrinsic to everything that I have ever known, and experienced, which is ultimately what has made me everything that I am.
(Which includes the church, BTW.)
Don is from cambridge uni - not oxford - the best intro to his work is the volumes by nigel leaves, Odyssey on the sea of afith and surfing on the sea of faith - well worth a read!
ReplyDelete