Formalizing the Religion
How can we save Earth?
I wonder about this constantly.
I find it deplorable and disgraceful that we are destroying Earth.
I've often wondered if it is time to formalize a religion which was scientifically structured to create a culture of compassion and sustainability.
There are certain aspects and institutions of religions that seem particularly useful in saving Earth. As Sharon Astyk points out in her essay "The Church Model for Environmental Groups", the ability of organized religion to respond quickly to the needs of community are outstanding.
I find this idea of formalizing a religion as intriguing as the idea of formalizing a new language, and perhaps the two would go together, although I'm not sure if one would need to go first, or if they could be developed together. Perhaps first together, and then on second and third iteration, they would become mutually consistent.
Another thought I've had is that developing a nation around these principles could a powerful force for change. The nice thing about both a religion and a nation is that people don't have to be physically together for either to function. Given our ability to communication quickly, vividly, and across long distances, a religion could have a number of members from around the world, and so could a nation.
Exclusivity, that a person could belong to only one religion, is also not necessary, although all current religions seem to have that as a tenet. For example, I don't see any reason that a person couldn't be a practicing Christian religion and this new formalized religion. That isn't implying that they can be ranked next to each other either. Perhaps the new religion would be more of a clarifier and enhancer. Perhaps the new religion would take the best out of all the religions and put them together under a cohesive and consistent vision and value system.
What would be the tenets of this new religion?
Most importantly, above all, that the goal is to stop our cultures ongoing destruction of Earth, and further, to restore Earth to its previous state.
If I think for a second, and use my imagination, I wish I could travel to another planet in some distant solar system. That planet would be inhabited by animals, and amongst them would be some of equal or greater understanding of the world than ourselves. This would would look pristine, in that the "people" would be living in harmony and balance with nature. To be amazing, that species would have to have the ability to destroy their planet, but have developed a way of living, perhaps a culture, which made that scenario beyond the realm of possibility.
For us, getting to that would look mean ending our devouring Earth, and restoring Earth to its former pristine state. My creation of Local Future is meant to be one step in that direction, but a small enough and manageable enough step that if is found to be headed the wrong way, that the course can be corrected before more damage is done.
The most important goal in this new religion would be to restore Earth.
I've heard it said that it might be good if all humans were totally gone from Earth, a total extinction of homo sapiens. While I agree that this would be good in the short term, it is quite likely that another species would evolve that would end up doing the same things that we are doing. In order to protect against that, it would make a lot of sense for us to NOT go extinct, so that we could help the future intellectual species from destroying Earth.
One question that arises is, how many of us should there be?
The current human population is destroying Earth. Is there a way for us to regain harmony with nature at this number?
If not, what is the proper number?
What in this new religion will help us to guarantee that our numbers do not exceed this?
Could we make it a dynamic number, or does it need to be a principle for living that itself creates a natural limit.
Daniel Quinn has written that "there is no one right way to live", but indeed there are certain "rules of nature" that all sustainable cultures follow.
How can a religion be designed that incorporates those essential understandings and principals?
It is probably true that a perfect religion can't be designed, but could we create one that would serve during the transition period, after which local cultures would evolve naturally on their own? Isn't it true that religion in itself is an attempt to change culture, and that is exactly what will be necessary for us to save Earth?
I think we could start.
I think there are enough of us and that the vision and value system are sufficiently clear that it is high time for us to create a religion, a nation, a language which reflects our ultimate goal to transition our global culture's of domination to one of compassion, sustainability, and the restoration and renewal of Earth.
I wonder about this constantly.
I find it deplorable and disgraceful that we are destroying Earth.
I've often wondered if it is time to formalize a religion which was scientifically structured to create a culture of compassion and sustainability.
There are certain aspects and institutions of religions that seem particularly useful in saving Earth. As Sharon Astyk points out in her essay "The Church Model for Environmental Groups", the ability of organized religion to respond quickly to the needs of community are outstanding.
I find this idea of formalizing a religion as intriguing as the idea of formalizing a new language, and perhaps the two would go together, although I'm not sure if one would need to go first, or if they could be developed together. Perhaps first together, and then on second and third iteration, they would become mutually consistent.
Another thought I've had is that developing a nation around these principles could a powerful force for change. The nice thing about both a religion and a nation is that people don't have to be physically together for either to function. Given our ability to communication quickly, vividly, and across long distances, a religion could have a number of members from around the world, and so could a nation.
Exclusivity, that a person could belong to only one religion, is also not necessary, although all current religions seem to have that as a tenet. For example, I don't see any reason that a person couldn't be a practicing Christian religion and this new formalized religion. That isn't implying that they can be ranked next to each other either. Perhaps the new religion would be more of a clarifier and enhancer. Perhaps the new religion would take the best out of all the religions and put them together under a cohesive and consistent vision and value system.
What would be the tenets of this new religion?
Most importantly, above all, that the goal is to stop our cultures ongoing destruction of Earth, and further, to restore Earth to its previous state.
If I think for a second, and use my imagination, I wish I could travel to another planet in some distant solar system. That planet would be inhabited by animals, and amongst them would be some of equal or greater understanding of the world than ourselves. This would would look pristine, in that the "people" would be living in harmony and balance with nature. To be amazing, that species would have to have the ability to destroy their planet, but have developed a way of living, perhaps a culture, which made that scenario beyond the realm of possibility.
For us, getting to that would look mean ending our devouring Earth, and restoring Earth to its former pristine state. My creation of Local Future is meant to be one step in that direction, but a small enough and manageable enough step that if is found to be headed the wrong way, that the course can be corrected before more damage is done.
The most important goal in this new religion would be to restore Earth.
I've heard it said that it might be good if all humans were totally gone from Earth, a total extinction of homo sapiens. While I agree that this would be good in the short term, it is quite likely that another species would evolve that would end up doing the same things that we are doing. In order to protect against that, it would make a lot of sense for us to NOT go extinct, so that we could help the future intellectual species from destroying Earth.
One question that arises is, how many of us should there be?
The current human population is destroying Earth. Is there a way for us to regain harmony with nature at this number?
If not, what is the proper number?
What in this new religion will help us to guarantee that our numbers do not exceed this?
Could we make it a dynamic number, or does it need to be a principle for living that itself creates a natural limit.
Daniel Quinn has written that "there is no one right way to live", but indeed there are certain "rules of nature" that all sustainable cultures follow.
How can a religion be designed that incorporates those essential understandings and principals?
It is probably true that a perfect religion can't be designed, but could we create one that would serve during the transition period, after which local cultures would evolve naturally on their own? Isn't it true that religion in itself is an attempt to change culture, and that is exactly what will be necessary for us to save Earth?
I think we could start.
I think there are enough of us and that the vision and value system are sufficiently clear that it is high time for us to create a religion, a nation, a language which reflects our ultimate goal to transition our global culture's of domination to one of compassion, sustainability, and the restoration and renewal of Earth.