Norway is a monarchy. We have a history as a Christian country, our traditions and culture is largely based in Christianity, something which is also stated in our constitution. Our king, a nice guy but completly powerless and only functioning as a symbol, is also Christian. Despite all this we do have complete freedom of religion in a society growing more and more sekulare. Sounds all nice and open-minded right?
The only thing is that in Norway, despite the idea of full freedom of religion etc, our state religion and the traditions we have built our society on are being discriminated.
This is portrayed quite accuratly by a statement our king made a couple of days ago that he thinks Norway should have a Christian king. His phrasing might not have been too good, but fact is that this tiny, insignificant personal statement created a huge fuss among the growing sekulare movement in Norway, accusing the king for discrimination and favoring of his own religion etc. But why on earth should one not favour ones own religion? That`s the whole point of religion isn`t it, that you believe in something over something else. One cannot be a Muslim and say "but of course, Buddha is also equal to Allah, I don`t want to discriminate". It seems in sekulare circles that there is this growing fear of religious brainwash, because the moment someone mentiones Mohammed, Jesus, Ganesh, Jehova or anything related to religion, they are pin-pointed as preachers, discriminators and manipulators. But where has the belief in human beings gone? These people must have very little faith in our ability to think citically, or think at all, on issues presented to us. As if humans are helpless, all-consuming creatures that will turn to Islam as soon as someone whispers Allah, or Christianity when a completly powerless person as the king mentiones that he believes the king in a Christian country should be Christian.
The funny thing about this is that the king got complete support from the other religious communities in Norway, like the Jewish and the Islamic, who stated that it is a completly reasonable statement, while the sekulare community went bananas with accusations of no tolerance, discrimination etc. I think that the witch-hunt for religion in countries where the population is becoming more and more sekulare is a danger much greater than if someone were to say that they prefer one religion over another. To their information, we are not a herd of sheeps waiting to be brainwashed by whoever decides to share their oppinions, religious or not. In that case we would all be atheists, wouldn`t we, since that`s where the largest amount of propaganda comes from...
tirsdag 20. oktober 2009
lørdag 17. oktober 2009
"Hell is - other people"
After being sentenced to burn in hell with Rosie and Alex in Sartre`s extistentialist play "No Exit" I`ve been thinking about this main idea of the play that humans create hell for each other so in that way we don`t need torture or burning flames to suffer. I think, as showed in the play that the worst torture we experience as human beings is the need for affirmation and reassurance from other people. The constant need for different sorts of approval can drive people crazy. In the play this is portrayed through all the characters where Gracin seeks affirmation to the fact that he`s not a coward, Estelle seeks the approval of Garcin to confirm her beauty and Inez tries to seduce Estelle to concinve herself that she`s capable of making her love women and despise men as she does.
This notion is present everywhere in society, the need for other people to approve of us and the torture it can be when they don`t. This need can manifest itself in many ways, like in MUWCI, where the need for approval is not for the oppinion you present, but the fact that you have an oppinion. I think we are scared to death in this place not to have an oppinion on something while in "the real world" you might hide your oppinion in fear of it not being approved. Of course you have radicals and extremists that seem not to care about approval of others, but they always have someone to support them in their cause even if it`s an insignificant minority.
Even in religion, where your main goal is supposed to be Gods approval, many people still seek out for the approval of their fellow men rather than God. In practicing religion they might seek more towards the approval of the religious community rather than the laws of God.
In the end we are completly dependant of other people for their approval and affirmation, so then to spend eternity in one room with two other people who doesn`t give you any affirmation would be the ultimate torture...
This notion is present everywhere in society, the need for other people to approve of us and the torture it can be when they don`t. This need can manifest itself in many ways, like in MUWCI, where the need for approval is not for the oppinion you present, but the fact that you have an oppinion. I think we are scared to death in this place not to have an oppinion on something while in "the real world" you might hide your oppinion in fear of it not being approved. Of course you have radicals and extremists that seem not to care about approval of others, but they always have someone to support them in their cause even if it`s an insignificant minority.
Even in religion, where your main goal is supposed to be Gods approval, many people still seek out for the approval of their fellow men rather than God. In practicing religion they might seek more towards the approval of the religious community rather than the laws of God.
In the end we are completly dependant of other people for their approval and affirmation, so then to spend eternity in one room with two other people who doesn`t give you any affirmation would be the ultimate torture...
torsdag 15. oktober 2009
What`s my potential?
Sorry for posting this so long after our discussion on this. Wrote it in word and forgot it existed
“A look at the real world, demonstrates that some men are smarter than others” - John Cobbs(from Chomsky`s article)
After reading Chomsky`s article on equality and especially equality of endowment, I started thinking about something I previously took for granted; the fact that you have the potential to do almost whatever you want(excluding physical inabilities of course) as long as the want is strong enough and certain environmental conditions are present . Chomsky`s article raised the question; Are we all given certain conditions at birth that we cannot run away from, that determines where we go in life?
Obviously we have environmental factors that largely determines what opporutinties we are given - me being in a UWC is a result of opportunities given to me like education and access to information about the movement. But though it is hard, there are so many cases where people have gone completly against their external conditions and turned their lives around. I guess what I`m wondering is weather these people already have something innate that makes them capable of turning their situation around that other people don`t have. Are we all given a certain and different amount of potential that we can use as we wish, someone wasting it and someone taking advantage of it? Here in MUWCI, I can`t help of feeling that there is, if not a clear divide but rather a vague notion, a separation between people who have a lot of potential and those who have less potential and therefore have to work harder to achieve what they want. Of course there are differences in intellegence, education etc, but even in identical twins, sharing the same genes and environment seem to turn out very differently potential-wise.
It scares me, and I refuse to believe (for my own benefit) the idea that no matter how hard we work, we can only reach to a certain point that our potential allows us to. I guess we can never know weather it is like that or not but even if all you can do is maximizing your given potential, the belief of a limit to your potential, I feel would demotivate one even to maximize the potential given.
“A look at the real world, demonstrates that some men are smarter than others” - John Cobbs(from Chomsky`s article)
After reading Chomsky`s article on equality and especially equality of endowment, I started thinking about something I previously took for granted; the fact that you have the potential to do almost whatever you want(excluding physical inabilities of course) as long as the want is strong enough and certain environmental conditions are present . Chomsky`s article raised the question; Are we all given certain conditions at birth that we cannot run away from, that determines where we go in life?
Obviously we have environmental factors that largely determines what opporutinties we are given - me being in a UWC is a result of opportunities given to me like education and access to information about the movement. But though it is hard, there are so many cases where people have gone completly against their external conditions and turned their lives around. I guess what I`m wondering is weather these people already have something innate that makes them capable of turning their situation around that other people don`t have. Are we all given a certain and different amount of potential that we can use as we wish, someone wasting it and someone taking advantage of it? Here in MUWCI, I can`t help of feeling that there is, if not a clear divide but rather a vague notion, a separation between people who have a lot of potential and those who have less potential and therefore have to work harder to achieve what they want. Of course there are differences in intellegence, education etc, but even in identical twins, sharing the same genes and environment seem to turn out very differently potential-wise.
It scares me, and I refuse to believe (for my own benefit) the idea that no matter how hard we work, we can only reach to a certain point that our potential allows us to. I guess we can never know weather it is like that or not but even if all you can do is maximizing your given potential, the belief of a limit to your potential, I feel would demotivate one even to maximize the potential given.
Abonner på:
Innlegg (Atom)