I am facinated with who is considered a great mind and who is considered eccentric. There are a great many minds out there (both eccentric and mundane) that are well revered. As in, their opinions and thoughts hold some weight in arguments. (Scientists, philosophers, drs, etc)
My question is, what religion/spiritual path was followed by whom?
Albert Einstein was a self proclaimed agnostic.
Aristotle held no religion, yet thought spiritually ("GOD is the unmoved mover. A metaphysical principal, the casual source of our world, not personally related to it and caring nothing for us or our worship")
(^ is there a name for that belief?)
Can you name a well revered mind, and what their religious/spiritual views are?
Tags:
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 13, 2012 at 12:20pm "Aristotle held no religion, yet thought spiritually ("GOD is the unmoved mover. A metaphysical principal, the casual source of our world, not personally related to it and caring nothing for us or our worship")
(^ is there a name for that belief?)"
Sounds like a Deist to me.
Permalink Reply by Barry J King on October 13, 2012 at 5:16pm I second that.
Thank you guys :D
do you know more of his 'religion mind'? (was he a diest or an athiest? Did he have a title for his own path?)
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 14, 2012 at 6:55am Freddie was an atheist.
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 15, 2012 at 2:21pm That's an interesting thought Sat., and goes a long way to fleshing out some of his thoughts.
Example: “Where I found the living, there I found will to power; and even in the will of those who serve I found the will to be master.”
Taken from a transcript of an essay I was reading.
I can see that a lot of his dialogue regarding overcoming this, that, or the other was acknowledging the spirits that populate all things.
Permalink Reply by Maris Hellfaerie (Maire) on October 14, 2012 at 7:12am (Friedrich Nietzsche) was [...] anti-Christianity in particular
No, he was mainly very upset about society and how it arranged Christianity for anything but profound spirituality, how hollow it was, and how false piety and moralism in combination with "empty" rationalism, was occupying the collective way more than the idea of greatness.
When he attacks Christianity, he attacks the shortcomings that society has encouraged individuals to cultivate, so that everyone had become a dull eunuch with the mind of a slave.
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 14, 2012 at 7:13am He rejected religion, and he denied God.
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 14, 2012 at 7:26am The thing about Nietzsche that I find fascinating is his dismissal of morality. That is what defines religious authority for so many of the faithful that I've argued with, well maybe stating as having had discussions is a better way of putting it.
I think those that use Nietzsche's writing as a foundation for their personal philosophy are often attracted to the concept that morality can be set forth from the strongest, not an abstract figurehead that has omnipotent ability but never displays the power.
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 15, 2012 at 2:31pm If he had a deeper understanding about the nature of a God, some God, somewhere, removed from the applications of mortals and devoid of mortal intention and morality, I am unaware as to where those expressions are noted. I do know he wrote, clearly enough for me to understand that he felt man made the God that the church ensconced, not the other way round.
I do not by any stretch attempt to portray myself as expert on Nietzsche, or as far as that goes as being exceptionally well read on his thoughts. I do feel though that on this there's no ambiguity.
I could be completely wrong, and if I am I'd be delighted to know where.
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 15, 2012 at 7:52pm That is an interesting question Sat. I've actually contemplated it; often. I try to envision the Godhead from different perspectives, what the insect world would seek from God, perhaps the Ocean, or a Mountain eco-system; the solitude of a tree rooted amongst many other trees forming a forest. would those trees see God in the singular or would they see a diversity of Gods to service the varied needs and pleas, prayers and confessions; as they arose? The conclusion always brings me round to finding the spirit, not the god; as fulfillment. I am a part, and apart - I am, like all that is; alone in my thoughts, singular amongst multitude, none greater or lesser, but all being, till there is no more.
All my thoughts always bring me back round to animism. It would be so convenient to shed responsibly for myself onto a greater being, wheedle and whinge for favor and have all that groveling pay off with "candy from the sky".
It's just not ever going to gel in my mind though, because I feel my eyes were opened at a very young age and what is seen can not be later denied.
Permalink Reply by Ritalin-Bunny on October 16, 2012 at 6:15am "So not a believer in the One Divine Mind behind it all, then?"
You are spot on there. Too many cross purposes, abounding indifference to the suffering and pain, endless consumption; and ultimately a degraded death.
Offset by the ability to know better, seek and give compassion, resolve dilemmas, share, and harbor life.
I see no organized omnipotent hand at work here. It's chaos and randomness from the multitude. Life, and spirit, awareness everywhere.
© 2013 PaganSpace.net
Powered by
Badges | Privacy Policy | Report an Issue | Terms of Service