World Without Christianity

When I was watching the Joan of Arc film, I noticed the immense power that the Catholic Church had over the lives of the people back then, and the state. If you stop to consider how immensely influential the Catholic Church had over the history of that time period, and by extension, Christianity, it's almost immeasurable.

There is a certain genre of fiction that I am particularly fond of: Alternate History. Basically, it's as its name implies, a narrative involving the history of the world if something in history had happened differently. For an example, take the lack of Christianity. Whoa. Needless to say, that change would be immense. I've been thinking about the incredible potential of such a change. 

While not going into how, the differences of such a world would be enoromous. For one thing, one could argue that the Roman Empire would not have been so weak against German invaders because of Christianity's weakening of traditional Roman military values with a focus of a kingdom in heaven. However, it could be said that Christianity, being a more advanced religion than most pagan ones, fulfills a certain internal need, so Roman religion might eventually evolve to involve these things. I would imagine that it evolve into something like the Greco-Roman Mystery Religions, especially the ones involving Dionysus and the Egytian Osiris.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystery_Religion

I would imagine that without any Christianity, there may not have been the Dark Ages for Europe, as the Roman Empire would have remained intact to an extent, and intellectual development could have continued as they had for the pas thousand years. That could have made the modern world extremely advanced. The defining feature, I think, though, of this Modern Roman society would be its morals. It would not have any concept of the Christian idea of 'love one another' or a 'kingdom in heaven'. It would have been extremely unequal and hedonistic (pleasure loving). All in all, it would be fascinating to see, I think.

Even more fascinating though, would be how the Germanic (and by extension, Norse) races would have developed without Christianity. I can think that a society that developed that already valued glory in battle and violence (remember Beowulf?) would have that same need to have a more advanced religion as the Romans. This could lead to some interesting scenarios. I think that perhaps the Germanic tribes would have eventually been unified into a Nazi-like state worship, emphasizing above all the the glory of dying for the nation (I could see a leader claiming to be Odin incarnate or something). Maybe instead it would be less organized and would resemble extremist Islam with the concept of Jihad. The morals of this society would be drastically different than it is in our society.

I am not sayin that my ideas definitively would happen. These are just my ideas. What do you think? What do you think would happen if there were no Christianity in the world? To the Romans? To the Germans? To the Middle Easterns? Feel free to speculate.

Freedom?

In my recent explosion of personal reductionist thought, I am beginning to analyze my political opinions and their causes. I  came to the conclusion that I want as much freedom as possible in a society (before I go any further, I will define freedom here as the leeway to do what you want in various ways). If I would take away any freedoms, I would take away freedoms for the few to preserve the freedoms of the many (for me, an example is economics). While expecting some to disagree with me on the last part, I assumed that the general consensus would be that the more freedom there is, the better. Analyzing prevalent opinions in the area proved otherwise.

What do you think? Is more freedom always a good thing? Why or why not?

Ultimately, I'd like for us to be able to reduce differences in our opinions down to the most basic opinions in belief. When you answer the above questions, really think about what you believe. 

Evil: What is it?

After an interesting discussion through the comments on a post of Jack Loveland's on his blog, it brought me to an interesting question: how does one define evil? The closest one can definitively say about that is that evil is the opposite of good. 

Can one define evil? Some would say that good and evil is relative and depends on circumstances and the individuals concerned. Others would say that good and evil do not exist at all, being merely a flawed construct of our collective minds. Some of the more interesting ones I've heard include the utilitarian idea that evil is what does the most harm to the most people (as opposed to the most good to the most people), and, one that I've come up with, the idea that evil is what takes away one's free will. 

None of these definitions seem to 'hit the spot', for me to define what evil really is. What do you think?

Myers-Briggs Personality Types

Today in class, the topic of the true self was brought up, and it reminded me of something I had read about: the Myers-Briggs Personality Types. Basically, there are 16 archetypal personalities based on 4 variable factors: Introversion/Extraversion, iNtuition/Sensing, Thinking/Feeling and Perceiving/Judging. Your type is the first letter of one of each pair. I, by my latest test, am an INFP:  an Introverted, iNtuitive, Feeling and Perceiving person. INFPs, according to Wikipedia, "focus much of their energy on an inner world dominated by intense feeling and deeply held ethics. They seek an external life that is in keeping with these values. Loyal to the people and causes important to them, INFPs can quickly spot opportunities to implement their ideals. They are curious to understand those around them, and so are accepting and flexible except when their values are threatened."

There are actually a good number of people at Maeser I know the types of based on a Facebook quiz, but I won't reveal it here.

Here's a link to a quiz page:

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

And here's a humorous interpretation of all 16 types

http://www.wanderings.net/notebook/Main/REALMyers-BriggsPersonalityTypes

Now, keep in mind also that by clicking on these links, you are leaving this blog and any expectations that may be on it concerning content. You have been warned.

History of Evil

This is a video I was reminded of in class today when I was talking about class conflict, feudalism and capitalism. It's basically a satirical interpretation of evil in western civilization that's supposed to make you question what evil really is.

Oh, and the God-is-dead quote is just quoting Neitzsche. Look him up.

The Future

So, I've been thinking. Regardless of your opinion on what's happening in the stock market, it can generally be argued that this is worthy of the history books. That makes me think another thought. If it does turn into a depression, what next? What would the long-term effects of something like that be? Would people be fed up with capitalism, making way for a socialist revolution? Would it take another World War to end it? 

Basically, what I'm asking you to do is hypothesize about the future, and how this century will turn out.  When people talk about the future, at least for me, the image of the Jetsons and perhaps a hoverboard comes to mind. I know for a  fact that it will be more than just that. Take this oppurtunity to hypothesize madly about the future, the more unique they are the better. Imagine it not just politically, but technologically and culturally, if you feel the urge.

Alan Watts

After realizing my comment on Jack's post was quite Dharmic in nature, I decided to share with you one of my favorite modern thinkers.

Alan Watts is mainly thought of as a presenter of Eastern Religion sto a Western Audience (Buddhism, Taoism, etc). As a member of the LDS Faith, often I am (wrongfully, I admit) paranoid to pro-atheist media (videos, articles, etc). Stumbling on one a video of a talk of his, I originally thought that that's what it was. But as I listened, I began to realize that, even though it defied traditional Western thought in a revisionist manner, it was religious. Not Christian, mind you, but extremely enlightening. Listening to this man's talks has brought a new type of thought to my mind and thinking (or at least given a name and reality to something already there.)

Also, Alan Watts died of alcohol poisoning, and had used hallucinogenic drugs in his lifetime, leading to a first impression of an 'unrighteous', 'immoral' person (perhaps one that had gone astray). But as I thought about it, I began to realize that this man has done much more good, at least for me, than most of the general authorities of the LDS Church (that may just be my relative lack of obsession over the Church compared to this). It really changed my opinion over what 'good' and 'doing good' is.

This is a (rather long) video of Watts talking about the nature of time. One of the main themes in everything he presents is that our perception of the world as made up of separate 'things' is flawed and that everything is just part of a whole. Don't be daunted by the video length (I would be). You can skip around if you want to.