Is God Sustainable?

IF 0.6 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Philosophies Pub Date : 2024-06-26 DOI:10.3390/philosophies9040093
Eugene Halton
{"title":"Is God Sustainable?","authors":"Eugene Halton","doi":"10.3390/philosophies9040093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay approaches the “God is dead” theme by offering a new philosophical history addressing what would make belief in divinity, in God, sustainable and unsustainable. I claim that the death of nature and the death of God in the modern era are manifestations of a progressive distancing from a religious philosophy of the Earth that guided human development until the beginnings of civilization. I outline within the space limitations here a new way of looking at the rise of civilization and the modern era by re-evaluating large-scale epochal beliefs and assumptions of progress within a context of sustainable ends and what I have termed sustainable wisdom. From an original evolved outlook I call animate mind, rooted in a religious philosophy of the living Earth, succeeding contractions of anthropocentric mind and machine-centric mind have regressively disconnected from the community of life. This trajectory courses the disconnect from the livingness of things as defining cosmos, to that of machine-centric mind in the modern era, a devolutionary elevation of the feelingless machine, of deadness, of what Erich Fromm described as cultural necrophilia. I propose rebalancing these later contractions of anthropocentric and machine-centric mind with that deeper reality of animate mind, forged as the human evolutionary legacy still present in the human body-mind today. The renewed legacy of animate mind provides a key to what a sustainable God might mean.","PeriodicalId":31446,"journal":{"name":"Philosophies","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9040093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This essay approaches the “God is dead” theme by offering a new philosophical history addressing what would make belief in divinity, in God, sustainable and unsustainable. I claim that the death of nature and the death of God in the modern era are manifestations of a progressive distancing from a religious philosophy of the Earth that guided human development until the beginnings of civilization. I outline within the space limitations here a new way of looking at the rise of civilization and the modern era by re-evaluating large-scale epochal beliefs and assumptions of progress within a context of sustainable ends and what I have termed sustainable wisdom. From an original evolved outlook I call animate mind, rooted in a religious philosophy of the living Earth, succeeding contractions of anthropocentric mind and machine-centric mind have regressively disconnected from the community of life. This trajectory courses the disconnect from the livingness of things as defining cosmos, to that of machine-centric mind in the modern era, a devolutionary elevation of the feelingless machine, of deadness, of what Erich Fromm described as cultural necrophilia. I propose rebalancing these later contractions of anthropocentric and machine-centric mind with that deeper reality of animate mind, forged as the human evolutionary legacy still present in the human body-mind today. The renewed legacy of animate mind provides a key to what a sustainable God might mean.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
上帝是可持续的吗?
本文探讨了 "上帝已死 "这一主题,提供了一个新的哲学史,探讨了是什么使得对神性、对上帝的信仰变得可持续和不可持续。我声称,现代社会中自然之死和上帝之死是逐渐远离地球宗教哲学的表现,而地球宗教哲学在人类文明开始之前一直指导着人类的发展。在此,我将在有限的篇幅内概述一种看待文明崛起和现代的新方法,即在可持续目的和我所称的可持续智慧的背景下,重新评估大规模的时代信仰和进步假设。从我称之为 "有生命的思想 "的原始进化观(植根于对有生命的地球的宗教哲学)出发,人类中心主义思想和机器中心主义思想的后继收缩已经倒退地与生命共同体脱节。这一轨迹从作为宇宙定义的事物的生命性脱节,到现代以机器为中心的思想的脱节,是对无感觉的机器、死气沉沉、埃里希-弗洛姆(Erich Fromm)所描述的文化恋尸癖的泯灭性提升。我建议用有生命的心灵这一更深层次的现实来重新平衡人类中心主义和机器中心主义心灵后来的收缩,有生命的心灵是人类进化的遗产,今天仍然存在于人类的身体-心灵之中。有生命的心灵的新遗产为可持续的上帝提供了一把钥匙。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Philosophies
Philosophies Multiple-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
122
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Horror as Film Philosophy Poetic Judgement in Everyday Speech Didier Eribon vs. ‘The People’—A Critique of Chantal Mouffe’s Left Populism Decolonial Philosophies and Complex Communication as Praxis Belarus’s Sound Body
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1