Those who know me (and I'd like to think i was one of those) would have to agree that my life has been fraught with religion. Now becareful here. Reflections of the self run amok. For Those who are atheist know me as conservative, religious. And Those Christians (not to be exclusive of other religions, but this is the one I have closes ties) that know me, see me as quite liberal and even anti-religious, anti-christian even.
How interesting this is. Partially, it is my nature. My nature to always come from the other end. Socratic or was it Plato's? dialectics. I speak for the other side when no one will. Why? because the other side is as equally valid as this side. I can't help it. I'm not ecstatically RARARA even if I agree. But I do believe that besides this partiality, which is minimal at best (confined to rational discourse with the goal of coming to some in between point thru the rigid societal binaries).
Most of the fault lies in the perceptions of others. I am guilty of this as well, but I do step back most of the time. And if I have stepped forward, I'll take two steps back. So in all, I'd say it's your fault! haha.
Back to religion. My life is fraught with religion. I guess it would serve us better to qualify that statement by saying that religions have influenced my life from the time i was born, to the time i was indoctrinated into the christian church... to the time i left the church and the time i came back somewhat to the church, and to the time i just can't be bothered (i'm bothered a little) by the church anymore.
i will not qualify the church, because my fingers are tired. another day.
But where was I going with this? I have been influenced mostly by elements of christianity, buddhism, hedonism and post-modernism. the -isms seem to outnumber the -anities. in variety anyway. these elements have shaped the way i think about life, and the actions to which i back up with my rational-sentimental-conservative-liberal thoughts with. Now, that's a lot of isms and one big anity that lend much influence to my actions as well as my conscience. a little much for that cricket of consciousness squatting on my right shoulder if you ask me.
Post-moderns, constructivists and feminists argue, all, that all these values have no natural basis. constructions that can be deconstructed, and reconstructed. well, that's great. so everyone can be accepted and happy and all that rest (i sound cynical in this sentence, but i don't mean to be, i'm just tired of praising deconstruction). One the one hand, we (when i say we i mean I me and those around me) are immersed in a great conurbation which espouses all these values. lovely pluralism.
but even in a field of flowers, where the soil accepts all types, pansies, roses, tulips, daffodils and petunias, the flowers still compete for nutrients. not all survive. some seeds that fall are decimated by the sun, others are given life. the rains quench the thirsty and flood the rest. hobbe's state of nature in nature. hahahaha. i am somewhat a geek as well as all the rest.
it's so hard to be a votary to any specific vein of thought. is it kosher to use christianity as salvation and lament, a hint of hendoism for pleasure-seeking, buddhism when i get tired of God, and post-modernism to make non-sense of it all.
identity pluralism. i am all put into one. but none at all.