2
3

AllReligious practitioners (Theistic and Atheistic), what is your "Ultimate Concern"? And how do you practice it? (self.DebateReligion)

hyasbawlzCatholic Mysticism が 投稿

Hello everyone, I would like to start a casual conversation for all people of any faith on this sub. Be it theistic or non-theistic. Below I'll define some basic concepts of religion to start. I please ask that non-religious users refrain from replying directly to the OP, but I would be interested to hear your opinions on other's comments.

During my time briefly studying religion in college, my professor referred to the different (major) world religions as "methods of reconciling oneself with the outer reality".

To define "outer reality" for the sake of this discussion: the reality that each individual experiences that they do not have control over. This is opposed to the "inner reality" (or stream of consciousness) that every single human being experiences. How do we reconcile ourselves (our inner reality) with the reality outside of ourselves? (This definition is not entirely precise on purpose, what do you think?)

This reconciling with reality leads to the "Ultimate Concern". This ultimate concern is the method by which a religion tends to reconcile. According to "Faith as Ultimate Concern" (Click here for a short summary of this and general discussion about religion) by Paul Tillich defines the ultimate concern as "that which demands the complete surrender of the person who faithfully accepts the Ultimate. It is important to note that "the Ultimate" does not necessarily refer to God or a divine being. As an example, Buddhism is an atheistic religion. The basic ultimate concern for Buddhism laid out by my world religions professor was the "ultimate and complete surrendering of the ego to achieve a permanent and intrinsic state of happiness *and exit the cycle of rebirth (enlightenment).

So this leads to my original question: What is your Ultimate Concern?

全 17 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]gdkmangosalsaeastern orthodox 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

My ultimate concern is to selflessly love others. God is αγάπη and calls us to live αγάπη (agápē); we are called to theosis, we are called to become like God in such a way.

And ultimately I would hazard to say that that is the only ultimate concern, and that it gets rephrased in a lot of different ways throughout the world, each "religion" being a rephrasing or reconception of the same basic truth.

The selfless love I described above requires a kind of surrendering of the ego that a Buddhist may feel very much at home with, for example. The view is not too different from the Taoist that sees a type of harmony or natural 'way' of the world either, if I would elaborate a little more. Even Platonic philosophy is a reiteration of the same (it is better and you are happier to suffer injustice than to commit injustice). Even the existentialist Dostoyevsky said his one worry was that he would not be worthy of his sufferings, that he would not be good enough in bearing them.

Ultimately this concern also goes back to the existence of an objective good. And that is ultimately the distinction between a religious person and a non-religious person, too: the religious person does acknowledge objective good.

[–]solxyzagnostic anaturalist 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

In many ways your response was better than mine, but to challenge you a bit: It seems to me that love, or specifically agape, is the ultimate answer to our emotional faculty, but beyond this we have two other key faculties - our wisdom/intellectual faculty and our will faculty. I would call the ultimate answer to our understanding faculty, Truth. The ultimate answer to our will is called goodness (although this should be taken to mean not just willing goodness but actually accomplishing it). However, the overarching ultimate that unites these three is simply called Being.

[–]TooManyInLitter 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

My religion is atheistic universal nihilism.

What is your Ultimate Concern?

In regard to my religion - 'minimize both actual and potential suffering; maximize both actual and potential happiness.'

How does this fit with the tenets of universal nihilism? I'll leave readers to noodle that on on their own.

Paul Tillich defines the ultimate concern as "that which demands the complete surrender of the person who faithfully accepts the Ultimate.

"complete surrender"?

Surrender 1. to agree to stop fighting, hiding, resisting, etc., because you know that you will not win or succeed, 2. to give the control or use of (something) to someone else, 3. to allow something (such as a habit or desire) to influence or control you

Sounds like a complete and total dismissal and abstention of personal responsibility to one's "the Ultimate." I bet that rationalization can come in handy. /s

[–]hyasbawlzCatholic Mysticism[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm sorry, but you completely disregarded my OP. I asked that non-religious people not directly reply to the OP. Secondly, "'minimize both actual and potential suffering; maximize both actual and potential happiness" is not an ultimate concern. That is a means by which one could potentially achieve their ultimate concern, akin to "help the needy", but that in and of itself does not fit the definition that I have outlined above.

Sounds like a complete and total dismissal and abstention of personal responsibility to one's "the Ultimate." I bet that rationalization can come in handy. /s

Also, please see this for a more appropriate definition of surrender for this conversation.

[–]TooManyInLitter 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I asked that non-religious people not directly reply to the OP.

It appears you are disregarding my stated religion, that of atheistic universal nihilism. Yet you accepted, and used as an example, atheistic Buddhism. To wit:

As an example, Buddhism is an atheistic religion. The basic ultimate concern for Buddhism laid out by my world religions professor was the "ultimate and complete surrendering of the ego to achieve a permanent and intrinsic state of happiness *and exit the cycle of rebirth (enlightenment).

Is there a double standard in play here hyasbawlz?

Secondly, "'minimize both actual and potential suffering; maximize both actual and potential happiness" is not an ultimate concern.

Concern: 1. (verb) relate to; be about. 2. (noun) a matter of interest or importance to someone.

My tenet of "minimize both actual and potential suffering; maximize both actual and potential happiness' meets the requirements of a "concern". Your posited outcome example (e.g., to "help the needy") is merely a potential outcome resulting from a successful advancement of my concern.

While you may be justified in argument against my ultimate concern, as being worthy of the descriptor "ultimate," to argue that my stated opinion is not really my opinion is rather odd.

Also, please see this for a more appropriate definition of surrender for this conversation.

Ok. Let's see.... "To surrender in spirituality and religion means that a believer completely gives up his own will and subjects his thoughts, ideas, and deeds to the will and teachings of a higher power."

Yep, still sounds like the voluntary dismissal and abstention of personal responsibility against the "will and teachings" of whatever a "higher power" represents.

[–]solxyzagnostic anaturalist 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The thing about ultimate concern is that you cant really say what it is. You can make suggestions in its direction. You can describe methods of seeking to abide in it. But you cant really say what it is in itself entirety, because it is the whole project of life. Asking about ultimate concern is exactly the same as asking "what is the meaning of life," which I think is a very good question to be asking, but not because someone is going to be able to give a finally satisfying answer. The meaning of life is meaning itself - the fundamental meaningfulness of being here.

[–]MountainsOfMiami 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

The basic ultimate concern for Buddhism laid out by my world religions professor was the "ultimate and complete surrendering of the ego to achieve a permanent and intrinsic state of happiness *and exit the cycle of rebirth (enlightenment).

Or depending on the specific flavor of Buddhism, to ensure that all beings reach this state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva_vow#Mahayana

[–]PoppinJMilitant Agnostic/I don't know And NEITHER DO YOU :) 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Excellent addition to the definition....and a very important one.

[–]bunker_manMessian 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

As an example, Buddhism is an atheistic religion.

No its not. This is extreme western centrism and whitewashing of religions westerners don't understand.

[–]JaeilWhatever is moved is moved by another in bed 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Well, take the Father in The Theory of Everything:

I'm so close to the answer
A dazzling symphony of cosmic strings
I feel the pulse, vibrating just out of reach
The music of space

One single master equation
Unification of the great and small
I hear the notes but the arrangement is wrong
And I'm starting to doubt, but I can't give up now I'm so near

But, then, like, with mysticism and metaphysics instead of the Theory of Everything. Sometimes I feel like I can just see the outlines of it.

[–]hyasbawlzCatholic Mysticism[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

So then, what is your ultimate concern? Mysticism and metaphysics are related to but not ultimate concerns.

Thanks!

[–]JaeilWhatever is moved is moved by another in bed 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

That would be the quoted bit. Except about mysticism and metaphysics instead of physics.

[–]hyasbawlzCatholic Mysticism[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm sorry, I am not sure if I was clear in my previous comment. What do you surrender to to reconcile your inner reality with your outer reality? Metaphysics, physics, and mysticism have nothing to do with the concept of an ultimate concern. They can arise out of it, but they are not components of it. From what I am reading, you surrender to the power of natural knowledge?

[–]MountainsOfMiami 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

IMHO the terms that you've outlined in the OP are a good example of the tendency of philosophers and theologians to use obfuscating terminology that makes it very difficult to understand what the hell they're really trying to say.

IMHO the "Ultimate Concern" that you describe here either does not exist or is not actually an "ultimate" concern.

[–]penj3ignostic 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Agree, the question is not addressed at me, but if i were a theist (and i was at some point) I'm not sure what I would answer with nor what is expected.

[–]RuroniHSBelieves in the me that believes in me 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't acknowledge that there is an "outer" and an "inner" reality. There is only reality, and so the concept of ultimate concern does not make sense to me. I am an atheist now, but I held this opinion even when I was still a Catholic.

[–]mcapelloanti-theist -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

We are flotsam careening toward the shore of death. Our tumult is without meaning or purpose. Wave upon wave, it stops for no one. Ride, si sapis!