There’s a thread you follow. It goes among things that change. But it doesn’t change. People wonder about what you are pursuing. You have to explain about the thread. — William Stafford, “The Way It Is” [1] Human history is a cacophony of stories about people banding together over shared values to better pursue mutual goals, then splitting apart over disagreements and generally muddling along, over time, from natural tribes to city-states, regional monarchies, nation-states and modern superpowers. Through it all is woven a thread that speaks to the individual’s continuous balancing act, trying to hang onto the strength and opportunities offered by “the group” without losing sight of deeply held individual dreams and core values.
I wonder, as a matter of tactics, whether the 9/11 Truth movement or the scholars who study the trajectories of bullets that killed JFK or the epidemiologists who investigate the public health consequences of mRNA vaccination would want to be sanctioned as a "protected religion". In my opinion, the problem is that the imprimatur of "science" has become so valuable in today's America that it is often stolen by those who have huge $$ resources and can afford to pay researchers to publish pseudoscience.
This is an important, thoughtful and original article. It can be expanded in many directions. A large portion of America is "spiritual but not religious". Is this a new religion? Is it too diverse to be a religion, or is it no more diverse than the Big Tents of Christianity, Islam, and, for that matter, Buddhism? I have long thought that Materialism is a religion, and perhaps there is political value in registering it as such, just to establish my right to NOT believe in it. Scientism may be a related religion, with the added twist that its adherents (I don't want to callthem "scientists") tend to believe any claim that authorities tell them is "settled science", (even if it changes from month to month.)
I wonder, as a matter of tactics, whether the 9/11 Truth movement or the scholars who study the trajectories of bullets that killed JFK or the epidemiologists who investigate the public health consequences of mRNA vaccination would want to be sanctioned as a "protected religion". In my opinion, the problem is that the imprimatur of "science" has become so valuable in today's America that it is often stolen by those who have huge $$ resources and can afford to pay researchers to publish pseudoscience.
This is an important, thoughtful and original article. It can be expanded in many directions. A large portion of America is "spiritual but not religious". Is this a new religion? Is it too diverse to be a religion, or is it no more diverse than the Big Tents of Christianity, Islam, and, for that matter, Buddhism? I have long thought that Materialism is a religion, and perhaps there is political value in registering it as such, just to establish my right to NOT believe in it. Scientism may be a related religion, with the added twist that its adherents (I don't want to callthem "scientists") tend to believe any claim that authorities tell them is "settled science", (even if it changes from month to month.)