Religions and governments typically are though.
— praxis

You mean "Churches" (religious/spiritual leaderships), right? — Alkis Piskas

Any kind of brand that is supported by a particular group, I suppose. It could be a religious, political, or business brand. Any brand wants you to be as dependent on that brand as possible and therefore has an interest in its subscribers not developing, because self-development in morals or enlightenment, or even physical health, leads to independence. Just look at the animals that we literally brand. We want them to be tame, predictable, and just healthy and capable enough to service our needs.

A drug dealer (legal or illegal) or medical professional doesn't want you to get your act together and stop buying their product or service. A capitalist society wants to teach its citizens how to pursue status and material gain, not well-being. Religious leaders want to spoon-feed their followers' meaning. They don't want them to find it for themselves because then they'd lose their support and the tradition would collapse.

In religion, Zen is a good example of what I mean because it's regarded as an austere tradition that focuses on training (meditation) and experiential intuition. Some people don't even consider it a religion. If this were really true then why isn't the training better than it typically is?

I'm currently working through a book on Zen training called Hidden Zen, by Meido Moore. Best book on meditation techniques I've ever seen, with in-depth instructions on breathing, posture, the works. In the introduction of the book, he explains the reasons for publishing it, starting with the claim that many of the practices within it are not commonly taught. In one part he writes, "Aside from the sparsity of teaching resources, a real danger of incomplete Zen of this kind is that it can easily devolve into a mere collection of trappings largely stripped of their inner function. It may ultimately become a burden rather than an aid, a kind of vaguely Buddhist identity rather than a dynamic path of liberation." I've been involved with a few Zen sanghas and I can attest to this "incomplete Zen."

The title of the book refers to these withheld or forgotten techniques. WTF, right!? The same principle working as it does in the field of medicine. Cure the patient, or show them how to help themselves, and they stop showing up for treatment. Give them just enough so they'll keep coming back, hide the rest.

Any brand wants you to be as dependent on that brand as possible and therefore has an interest in its subscribers not developing — praxis

This is true for some coersive, suppressing institutions that try to prevent people's self-development, independent thought etc. Medicine is a typical example, as you said. Church too. But you cannot generalize it and apply it to all the groups ("brands as you call them) on earth!

Zen is a good example of what I mean because it's regarded as an austere tradition that focuses on training (meditation) and experiential intuition. Some people don't even consider it a religion. — praxis

Who says that Zen is a religion? It is a school of Mahayana Buddhism. I personally consider it a practical religious philosophy, as most of the Buddhist schools.

If this were really true then why isn't the training better than it typically is? — praxis

What do you mean by "better than it typically is" mean? What does "typically" represend and Where does it result from? Have you been trained in Zen quite a lot and are not satisfied with the results? And what about million people who live on Zen principles and are practicing it?

I'm currently working through a book on Zen training called Hidden Zen, by Meido Moore. — praxis

Reading a book about a subject is great but one cannot expect or even "see" results if this subject involves training, and particularly an intensive and long one. In this case, one has to find out what other people who have obtained results say about them.

Reading a book about a subject is great but one cannot expect or even "see" results if this subject involves training, and particularly an intensive and long one. In this case, one has to find out what other people who have obtained results say about them. — Alkis Piskas

Meido Moore has obtained results. He’s been practicing practically his whole life, in Japan and the US. And as I’ve said, in my experience with Zen centers in the LA area, what he says holds true.

ΟΚ

Sharing your views is a kind of mutual leading by example. I didn't say change people (that's their job, if and as much or as little as they want to), I said teach which is what we do when we do exactly what we do. To set a mutual example and pick a mutual example up from each other and give our contribution individual flavour. Why give up hope, when you already know this works? Essentially it's only tanks, lies, and mafia that most of us disagreed with you on. I was frightened by your lack of care for all the theists in your country because you think they deserve tanks, and mafia, and lies, rather than your sitting down with them discussing.

Even 180 Proof had constructive ideas. His message I think was to leave religion out of it if others want to leave religion out of it. Which was the central issue in your OP. When the tone is temporarily over the top you can come back to him later if at all. Normally most of us perhaps like Banno would assume that if you didn't react you had accepted our answers anyway. But you kept insisting that we were contradicting you. Your mode of discourse confused me and some others at some point or points.

I should have italicised Forgotten fatherland, it's Macintyre's book. Nietzsche's brother in law Forster sold plots of swamp in Paraguay. The Forsters' associates used twisted versions of Nietzsche's loose notes to drum up business for the Nazis, though Hitler himself is thought not to have bothered with either those, nor the real thing.

Do you maybe mean "morality"?
(Morale is "the confidence, enthusiasm, and discipline of a person or group at a particular time" (common definition)) — Alkis Piskas

According to Julian Baggini morals are to do with morale (as I twigged before I read that). Not hubris or mania.

A "god" that was to do with morals with religious connotations would only be worthwhile if it / he was respectful of your morale that is to say good heart in your well-respected individual self - suppose you are a gentle person or grieving, or just plain honest and straightforward (and I'm all four) - and not one that wants to whip up hubris and mob mania (subtext: lies, tanks and mafia :rofl: ). The media have been full of the latter these 30 years and it's unsurprising some react sharply.

How do money-spinners want to de-moralise pretend christians or designer outlet "zen" customers? Sell them something that specifically isn't the real thing!

A material dialectic is a pincer movement. I was - so it happens - on the inside of one of those for 28 years! :rofl:

My personal description of discipline is that by bringing together:

- acutely perceptive analysis of what is practical (e.g if one has a physical handicap)
- identifying exactness as to issues involved
- a quality of attention to detail

then applying individual initiative . . .

we arrive at a discipline in specific affairs that works and carries on working (maybe with ongoing tweaks). People with specific learning differences may need more practice runs before "internalising" this enough for it to be semi-conscious. It can be enjoyable and good for self-respect to consciously and "mindfully" rehearse the procedures. It reminds me of the way my mum would chant "knit 1 purl 1" when knitting. Or piano learners call the notes as they play them. Ones faculties are like ducks - we can get them in a row!

A non-intense and non-scary view of initiative, and ample analysis beforehand, and refusal of any shame afterwards if needing to repeat the procedure umpteen times, are the keys. My workplace coach showed me to "chunk down" all issues to make them possible to handle mentally and physically.

According to Julian Baggini morals are to do with morale — Fine Doubter

I am afraid that you are trying to justify your mistake, making it much bigger than what it was, instead of just accepting the --again, minor-- correction I did. (Indeed, it looks like just a typo.)

Seems that money is one of the main reasons that chaos would be greater in societies without God — dimosthenis9

In the United States combined with other powers, money is the reason chaos has been made greater in societies claiming to have a "god" and my acquaintances are in grave danger in direct connection with this sort of thing. I have spent a lot of time looking into this. The detail would to have to be made suited to a worldwide largely agnostic readership.

People wouldn't need lies if they could follow Logic, but apparently they can't. — dimosthenis9

Aha, interesting point. This is where we need to expand on our own understanding, then others will catch hold of it when we are conversing with them.

Straight and crooked thinking by R H Thouless pubd 1953 inspired me. Also works on the thought of Husserl, and on semiotics, and on historical linguistics, geology and astronomy, as case studies.

your mistake — Alkis Piskas

https://www.julianbaggini.com/

Indeed did I not add three paragraphs in explanation?

Sharing your views is a kind of mutual leading by example — Fine Doubter

I try to do that in my real life and it's enough for me.

I was frightened by your lack of care for all the theists in your country because you think they deserve tanks, and mafia, and lies, rather than your sitting down with them discussing. — Fine Doubter

That's only your conclusion and I have no idea how you ended up there with all I have written. But anyway.

Even 180 Proof had constructive ideas — Fine Doubter

Yeah extra constructive I would add!

Normally most of us perhaps like Banno would assume that if you didn't react you had accepted our answers anyway. — Fine Doubter

But I reacted and responded. So what are you talking about again?

The Forsters' associates used twisted versions of Nietzsche's loose notes to drum up business for the Nazis, though Hitler himself is thought not to have bothered with either those, nor the real thing. — Fine Doubter

I have wrote it again in another thread. Nietzsche would spit on Hitler's face if he was alive.

Aha, interesting point. This is where we need to expand on our own understanding, then others will catch hold of it when we are conversing with them. — Fine Doubter

So you have to teach Logic into people. And the best place that to happen is schools. Education. For me as I told to javi also, classes like philosophy dealing with matters of logic, and working on yourself, happiness etc should have been since junior school! And never stop till University. Taken as the most serious lesson and not just like classes for "fun" like music. But the most important class. If we actually wanna change something in societies.

In the United States combined with other powers, money is the reason chaos has been made greater in societies claiming to have a "god" and my acquaintances are in grave danger in direct connection with this sort of thing. I have spent a lot of time looking into this. The detail would to have to be made suited to a worldwide largely agnostic readership. — Fine Doubter

Don't worry. At the end all humanity, theists atheists, one common God worship. Money!