Before the official text begins, I just want to tell you the overall structure of "Discussions on Philosophy": it is a seven-thousand word discussion on all the philosophical topics that I love. Today the topic is RELIGION & CULTS. I would have loved to post the 7,000 words all in one go, but I had to divide the essay into parts so that it would be easier to finish (each part is around 1,000 words). But don't worry, after posting all of the parts separately, I will post a final D&T with the complete 7,000 words so that you have a completer & more natural version of my original text, without it being divided into parts. I think this is the best thing I've ever written, so...yeah.😬

(Also I know that I have written about religion before, but this time it is different)

(Also, also, the introduction that you are about to read is the intro for the entire 7,000 words, not just for the religion topic)

Now the official text begins!!!!!!👇

It's amazing how out of a single sentence, "Everything is made of water", stems an entire branch of universal skepticism that winds back centuries and continues to push the boundaries of modern thinking now. We're talking about philosophy here.

Philosophy encircles every type of intellectual wonderment possible: phycology, morality, discovery, logic, paradox, religion, and even the origins and purposes of science and math. The earliest vein of this study could be traced back to Thales, the Greek philosopher who famously claimed that "everything was made of water". But as philosophy evolved, so did its debates, contradictions and heat, though one intellectually exhilarating truth remains: Philosophy is about concepts, and in her eyes, everything is a concept. This is why I love philosophy (for now), and why I'm writing this sentence. Because I want to explore, spontaneously, every single philosophical concept (around eight) that I am personally interested in, ranging from ethical dilemmas to perceptions of time, the core of religion, the meaning of color, beauty and love, evil and good, and finally to the word "Justice" for it carries a weighty promise. I want to explore my own thoughts and opinions upon these iconic topics, and I'm quite excited to dive into their interconnections and conceptual ingenuities.

Let's talk about it. (!!!!!)

The philosophy of God….and religion

Ah, religion. The bitter medicine, the sweet virus, the faulty promise, the spiritual release, the moral tradition, the paradoxical truth, the lie, the omniscience, the certainty, the reality, the perception and lens in which we harshly fight the world. All these are views that may or may not be true. But here's something definite: religion is one of the most heated vessels of philosophy.

I don't have a religion (yet). But I still want to talk about it. From books, movies, articles and videos that I have seen, here are the main reasons why someone would believe in a superior being/beings (strictly from opinion/observation):

Tradition. In the U.S, over 60% of its citizens are Christian, resulting in a moral and social longevity of this religion's upholding. Genuine or not, many offspring have been raised by their families to believe in Christianity, forming a somewhat generational obligation. Other religions follow the same pattern of communal expectation.

Faith. They believe in an alternate being/beings because they do. It might be influenced by social traditions, familial attachments, personal perceptions or just plain faith, which still exists. I suppose this isn't a reason of religion as much as it is a type of believer.

Trauma. Scarring experiences could physiologically lead people to seek the comfort of a stable pedestal, which multiple religions provide. I think Christianity, Buddhism and Judaism all convey a simplification of humanity, the promise of final justice and a spiritual fiber forged from unshakable morality, which altogether might provide an emotional blanket for the traumatized.

Wonderment. Opposite to number three, exceedingly beautiful or psychologically sweeping experiences could occasionally make its viewers regain their faith in life, inspiring the notion of believing in alternate being/beings.

Personally, it seems inexplicable that someone would wholeheartedly put their spiritual stability in something without proof, reason or logic, but I suppose that is the wrong way to think about religion. I'm thinking behind thickly science-tinted glasses: Glasses that ask for proof; as though religion, which is the birth and reign of an anti-dimensional being, was the same thing as evolution, the rather sluggish process of an ape evolving to a slightly less ape-resembling creature. No.

In my opinion, asking for "proof", "logic" or "reasoning" in religion is equal to asking for a formula in writing. After all, what makes religion...religion? Google tells me religion is the belief in superhuman power or powers, and there springs the keyword: Belief.

Belief and/or faith is the spiritual subscribing to a concept, a whole-hearted pouring of conviction into its system, even though it offers no modern/scientific proof & reasoning. The whole point of faith is to believe regardless of proof. If we had faith in something because it offered proof or logic, then that is not faith, that is a reasoning conducted from cold-shelled evidence. Scientific testimony is not inferior to spiritual release, but these two concepts are different vessels of the equal vein. Anti-faith, as we call it, isn't the belief in proof for a belief in proof remains a belief. The meaning of anti-faith lies in the icy rejection of conjecture of past/future, with/without logic, it lies in the most extreme form of pragmatism, the act of looking at the present and the present only. I think anti-faith, if it were to be graphic, would look like a balding man staring down at his toes for his whole life. It would be an affirmative and painless existence, but it would not be an unchained one.

Instead, belief in proof remains a belief, as does belief without proof.

At the end of the day, I suppose that what I'm trying to say is, religion is a subjective concept, and perhaps one of the most powerful branches of human connection.

But that leads me down a separate train of thought...If religion was so coveted, why are so many other religion-like concepts frowned upon or even illegal? More specifically, cults? What is the difference between a religion and a cult, anyway? Is it merely the mania and frenzy of cults that place them as inferior socially, or is it something else. What even are cults???

Religion vs. CULTS

According to Google, a cult is a relatively small group of people having beliefs or practices, especially relating to religion, that are regarded by others as sinister, controlling, oppressing or emotionally/psychologically manipulative.

On the other hand, reviewing what Google says about religion: it is a belief of supernatural powers, usually of a God or gods.

Number one difference that I noticed between cults and religions is that religion seems to offer a much broader frame. A cult has to be a)a low-key religion, b)oppressing/manipulative and c)a relatively small group of people. On the other hand, religion needs one criteria only: belief in supernature.

However, I have a question: Does the broad frame of religion encircle the narrow concept of cult?

After a bit of research, I believe that the answer is neutral: a cult could very much form resemblance to a religion, while a so-called religion might as well be a cult in disguise.

Still, the definition of a cult remains largely subjective: the perception of what a "small group of people" means, what behaviors count as "manipulative and oppressing" and how wide the sweeping net of "social acceptance" is supposed to reach, are all subjective concepts. If there were to be, say, a small and separate branch of Christianity led by an oppressive and manipulative leader, it would be called a cult. On the other hand, patterns of cultish behavior such as manipulation and domination are not exclusive to cults, and though the cores of religions are safe and dutiful, the execution of those belief systems could absolutely be threaded with recurring patterns of cultish leadership.

So what draws the line between religion and cult? The answer is social acceptance. Religions such as Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism are all ancient belief systems, passed on by generations of carefully maintained social navigation. Contrarily, cults are often modern and fetishized concepts that result in unhealthy behavior/consequences.

Is the answer to good and evil social acceptance too? Is everything down to social acceptance? I do not know, but let's talk about it.

To be continued... (next week's topic: good and evil & justice)

← Back to Blog