Lets look at the relationship between philosophy, religion and science. It is best to clear the semantics first since the meanings of words can become blurred in the process of winning arguments. Science is a collection of conclusions based on the scientific method. The scientific method is the process of using strict criteria for experiments to get repeatable results with tangible things. Philosophy is the study of hows and whys, or the intangible things; this would include questions of existence, why things are and where they should be heading. Religion is the branch of philosophy that deals with questions about a higher power or the driving force behind it all.

Philosophy supersedes science. The scientific method is one philosophical approach to studying objects and theories. Philosophy is also the way we determine the use of scientific facts and theories that we discover. For instance, Hitler felt his desire to clear the human gene pool of Slavic and Jewish genes was scientific. We don’t throw out genetic science because his philosophical application was diabolical. It is a little know fact that many tried to do so after the war. Our philosophies determine the use of science in the same way our philosophies influences how we drive a vehicle. The mechanics always stay the same but using it wrong can have damaging effects. It is common today, as in those times, to try and equate one’s philosophy with science in order to appear credible.

A person’s philosophy can lean toward naturalism with the goal of harmony in the earth’s ecosystems. It can have a negative view of man and want to use science to minimize his effect on the earth. One humanistic approach could put man in the forefront as the earth’s steward. Another might go further and say the earth exists to give happiness to mankind and should only be preserved for that means. Each philosophy has an extreme application and can become detrimental to mankind and unjust. Each one will claim to have a solid scientific basis.

Religion comes out of one’s philosophies about authority and a higher power. We see this throughout history. Even if someone considers the higher power a loving creator of everything, they may or may not value other humans more. A humanist may have destructive philosophies as well as we said earlier. This is an area of broad applications because it can be used wrongly in the same way as science can be used for diabolical means. A person can have a strong faith in God yet be a good scientist. In the same way an Atheist can be a good scientist. It is how they apply the science for the good of man that is important. An organized religion will have a mixture of good and bad philosophies. As we mature, we learn to sort them out. A person who wants to discredit another philosophy will always showcase the worst cases. An Atheist will point to religious wars while a Deist will point to communist deaths and the French Revolution as examples of godlessness. But in the end, they will all have certain philosophies, good and bad and will claim to hold the only true science and true belief in the existence or absence of a higher power.

Everyone has a sense of justice within themselves. The fact that everyone shares the desire for equality and respect hints toward the existence of some kind of common spirit that we all share. This is called natural law and it can be corrupted by circumstance and abuses. When we say someone has lost his way, that is what we are referring to. We use this natural sense when confronting religious dogma and off base philosophies. That is why many make the claim that they don’t follow any man or organized group. It means simply that they will not be compliant to those who violate natural justice. Justice means equality in transactions whether they are emotional or material. We call a person with this courage and drive someone with good character.

I ascribe to a personal Christian view of higher authority because it makes more sense when applied to unknowns. Concerning origins, single cells are too complex to have come into existence by a chance static and protein encounter. Something intelligent had to organize the molecules to do those complex things. The idea of a loving God who values human life is also a solid basis for good philosophy toward fellow humans. I hate when it is presented with meanness and dogma. Most organized groups, in order to increase loyalty, require their members to agree on certain dogma and statements. Some leaders are interested in manipulation and enriching themselves by making dependents. I like the flexibility of being my own person concerning religious beliefs since I am the only one in the end who will answer for them. I have a lot of respect and interest in other people’s philosophical beliefs. I won’t change someone’s life stories and ridicule them. Neither will I be that way toward their beliefs. The only time I would challenge someone is if their beliefs violate natural rights and justice. At times I have beliefs that need challenged too and when the challenge comes from from people who are respectful and have good character, I listen closely.

Lets take a stroll through a surreal world

The world is whirring in my head

When two share a deep passion

The purpose of having authority is to preserve creativity in others. When we apply this to governing, the priority is to find the best way to protect a community from upheavals within and being taken over by those outside. Contentment is achieved internally when the people have sufficient wealth and honor. It is hard to equalize these within a country since everyone has varying levels of passions and ambition. Ideally, a country will have a strong middle class; those who have sufficient supply and are well respected. If these are a majority, there is little likelihood for a revolution regardless the type of government they choose. Having good treaties and a strong military make it less likely an invasion will occur from outside. Treaties should be beneficial to both parties for trade and protection. To make any social structure work, the participants must have good character, but our passions can lead us astray. This is where we get the word tyranny. A tyrant is someone who does well at making himself appear to have concern for the public good but uses authority to enrich himself, gain notoriety, and fulfill his own desires. Opposing parties always try to characterize each other as such.

Any time a person or a group is given authority, the potential exists for them to do either good or bad. People can have good success and yet have poor character. Sometimes we associate squandering with successful athletes and successful business people who have lost the ability to control their passions. An unsuccessful person can also have poor character by resigning themselves to failure and giving themselves to vices. Success and failure can be dependent on circumstances as well as performance and outcome isn’t always an indication of character. An ideal leader will have both good performance and good character so they can be stable through success or failure. A person can start out with good motives then later succumb to the lure of vices. Since this commonly happens with normal people, the best way to insure it doesn’t is to limit the scope of powers to those we give authority to. This is why constitutions are written by the people where powers are divided and limited. The goal is to have good leaders and yet limit their powers so they don’t become corrupt.

When we have the best and the brightest in office as with a aristocracy or monarchy, the temptation is for them to become arrogant or focused on securing their own empire. With a democracy, demagogues who seek notoriety use rhetorical skills to impose their will on the whole by inciting the passions of a majority. Most dictators start out as demagogues. Everyone wants a strong lasting democracy where everyone has a say and enjoys freedom. Once corruption takes hold, it is hard to swing things back internally since tyrants do things to preserve what they have and have the power to do so. We will look at some of these things in the next post.

I love to see you glowing

“Hello,” she said and then they smiled

The heart champions feelings 

The pursuit of blame toward people can be a real annoyance because it is distracts from real issues. It is characteristic of the cult of personality we have today. Those who are obsessed with ego quickly take the shortcut of passing blame rather than taking the effort to objectively look at an issue. But realistically, most people are trying to do the best they can with what they know. We also have different passions and different things that are important to us. When we come together to make laws, they should cover common interests. But but if we allow ourselves to become crisis mongers and personality worshipers, we become ineffective at finding this common ground. Parents find out that the problem isn’t the kid who knocked over the lamp, it is the fact that all the kids were too rowdy and needed to take their energy outside. Each individual needs to tone it down and be considerate of their surroundings when we use principles over blame. Even in ourselves, it is only when we get past that unattainable perfect character we all expect to be and look objectively at what works best for us and what we enjoy, that life can become enjoyable. Guilt is the product of blame. Although we should be responsible for our actions and not blame others, it is counterproductive to beat ourselves up too. The same goes for those around us. We can recognize principles and the ramifications that usually follow but really don’t know their motives and circumstances. Examining other cultures works the same way.

The issues among people have striking similarities throughout history and that is what makes ancient writings and history fascinating. We can see how they dealt with things and what the outcome was for them. Since no one can see into the future and see the effects of what we put in place, we can at least look at what happened historically and avoid the pitfalls they ran into. Rather than looking for characters to assassinate as today’s custom is, we can observe actions and principles and see what happened.

The Greeks thought it important to record their history and perspectives so others could build on them. They are considered the ones who started looking objectively at governing systems that get the most out of human potential and writing down their observations. We see the fruit of their endeavors still today through their philosophy, writings and archaeological remains. The history of these regions is a fascinating one too. Traveling Europe can spark ones interest. Many areas were settled, conquered and resettled by different people at different times. Our minds like to think that everything stays the same, but history shows otherwise.

The eastern coast of Turkey along the Aegean sea was the stage for much of the Greek ancient history. Ancient Troy was located along that coast as was Constantinople. It is called Istanbul today. The Greeks first and then the Romans settled and controlled the area and it eventually became Christianized. Afterward, the Latin and Greek part of the Christian church separated. The area around the Aegean sea became a powerhouse and the Greek center of Christianity was Constantinople for a thousand years. The Muslim incursion into the east sparked crusades and help was given from the Latin side of Christianity. But power struggles broke their unity, Constantinople was sacked by the Latin side and the Muslims eventually took over the entire area and westward. The Muslim Ottoman empire lasted until World War one when it was broken up since they supported the Germans on their eastern border. This is a very vague summary. But you can see that conquering lands and taking them over happened over the years in every country. America’s natives were no less conquering each other before Europeans settled and took over themselves.

It was normal for the middle class in ancient Greece to own slaves. This was the practice for mankind for most of history. The reason was due to large projects that required little skill that needed to be completed. Mundane tasks that brought income to middle class people could best be done by servants so the owner could improve everyone’s lives by attending to management. It also made it possible for advances in writing, architecture and produce. The mindset was that slavery was better and held more hope than the barbaric or impoverished system they would otherwise be trapped in. Some ancient cities distributed food from central areas to feed their population. Certain foods were free such as grain. Slaves provided the backbone to have a city-state structure where citizens could give themselves to governing, science philosophy and protection. Today we have harnessed chemical energy from carbon to do the work that slaves used to do. But when we look at other civilizations, they didn’t have what we have today. This is something we have to consider today when we study other cultures.

In this quest to shake the mundane