Mind The Gap: I Think

By Jo Nicholls-Parker

Religious beliefs exist because the religious authority has witnessed the value they give individuals in society in general. Nevertheless the ongoing purpose of 'religious beliefs' is not straight forward. On one level it is because 'religious beliefs' historically acquire moral and political atonements, and as these are being forged, that today the religious accordances that have been ascribed are the cause of the need for redress. On another level past 'religious beliefs' became judge and jury, or were becoming the subject of prejudicial scrutiny to suit ambitious society members, but today demands for political transparency has by and large transformed those 'religious beliefs' precedents. Today the moral worth of 'religious beliefs' are under question. What has come to light is that without the standardization of the 'rationality of human choice' seldom is the understanding of human choice fundamental enough to explain such a historically integrated platform as religiosity. This study unfolds where evidence of the compatibility of all known laws, interreligious and constitutional can be gathered, wherein isolationism is seen as the surest means to secure an identity and that by revealing the definition of pluralistic parallelisms in this thesis the mechanism to administer for 'order over doctrine' and 'doctrinal order' mandates in contemporary times can be appropriated. The formation of an identity is complex, but certainly an identity can be fashioned by a 'foundationalist comprehension of doctrines' and, similarly, an abstract religious traditions comprehension so that the challenge, that is securing an unchangeable identity factor and in the name of a particular religion, is achievable. The constitutional authority might sport an interest in securing an identity too, but, in actuality, the interreligious contribution is a proven worthiness of 'pervasive attitudes,' which is accompanied by the elucidation of effective posited purposefulness perspectives and from within the core multidisciplinary plight of society. Today the moral worth of 'religious beliefs' under question are due to the increasing tendency toward extremist isolationism. Legal or constitutional responses have limited success. 'Religious beliefs' cater for a greater breadth of complex religious, non-religious, and agnostic 'believers' than the constitutional order. Religiosity, this is to say, has delivered stable pervasive identities and for this deserves recognition.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Jo Nicholls-Parker
• Release date: Jul 1, 2015
• ISBN: 9781310649325

Jo Nicholls-Parker

Lady Jo Nicholls-Parker1) 'Canterbury University,' New Zealand: 'Bachelor of Arts in English Literature’ 1997-2000 (graduated 2002).2) 'Canterbury University,' New Zealand: 'Postgraduate Diploma in Art Curatorship' 2007 (graduated 2007).3) 'Massey University,' New Zealand: 'Postgraduate Diploma in Museum Studies' 2009 (incomplete).4) 'Victoria University of Wellington,' New Zealand: ‘Master of Arts in 'Religious Studies' 2013 (graduated 2014).

Book preview

MIND THE GAP:

I THINK

Why Should We Accord Religious Beliefs Privileged

Moral and Political Respect?

by

Jo Nicholls-Parker

Mind The Gap: I Think

by Jo Nicholls-Parker

Copyright 2015 Jo Nicholls-Parker

Smashwords Edition

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

Chapter One: We do seem to give religious beliefs privileged respect

1.a. Introduction

1.b. The human condition falls short of reaching it’s potential without work

1.c. The manifestations of others

1.d. Overruling outdated religious tenets

1.e. Isolating belief-in precedents from belief-that precedents

Chapter Two: The way religion is accorded privileged respect through law

2.a. The constitution and religious authority unitary

Chapter Three: Arguments for attributing religious beliefs respect

3.1.a. Legality

3.1.b. Clarifying the usage and reach of certain terms

3.1.c. The tasks of historic coercion

3.1.d. The evocation of the more subliminal religious traditions

3.1.e. A legislative semblance of grace

3.1.f. Where outcomes can be achieved the autonomy of a collective will sits

well

3.1.g. Human choice is complicit in conscious development

3.2.a. Truth

3.2.b. Discerning the more adaptive mental dynamism

3.2.c. The value of isolationism

3.2.d. When truthfulness is not apparent a weakness is

3.2.e. Holding beliefs on sufficient evidence

3.2.f. The intellectually informed secularism that can become pluralistic in

truth

3.2.g. The power of religious beliefs can be seen when the attitude that is

invocative and pluralistic eliminates the evocative

3.2.h. Perpetuating clarifications

3.3.a. Sceptical grounds

3.3.b. A full intermediation at the causal level of ones being

3.3.c. Abstract religious tradition credibility

3.3.d. God wins on both accounts

3.3.e. The issue with cynical scepticism

3.3.f. The exemplar

3.3.g. Spiritual integration and spiritual re-integration processes

3.4.a. Harm principles

3.4.b. Religion by definition is both exclusive and inclusive

3.4.c. Where egoism becomes a necessity evil will persist

3.4.d. The purpose of symbolism is to be sure to have had an effect

3.4.e. A formulaic transcendental style of governance

3.4.f. Knowing is believing

3.4.g. Satiated by the Sufi

3.5.a. Identity

3.5.b. Combining externalism and exclusivism

3.5.c. The remiss combination externalism and exclusivism

3.5.d. A special revelation

3.5.e. The lack of preparedness factor

3.6.a. Science

3.6.b. Historic exemplary standards

3.6.c. Meditation and matters of neuroscience

3.6.d. Isolating the self-referral type from the self-reverential type

3.6.e. Making those who accord religious beliefs respect all the more right

3.7.a. Morality

3.7.b. The making of a 'moral value' and to a more fundamental end than

ethical criteria

3.7.c. Advocacy for that 'merely possible kingdom'

3.7.d. Intuiting the purer form of morality 'by analogy'

3.7.e. Is the moral conscience more integral than the ethic and therefore

deserving of elemental consideration?

3.7.f. Valuing the self-referral type and self-reverential type differently

3.7.g. The excesses available to the religious man today

3.7.h. The unconditional absolutes known to the 'moral value'

Chapter Four: Assessment of arguments

4.1.a. What works

4.1.b. The maintenance of measures of control and a moral compass

4.1.c. The danger of implosion for historically enriched countries

4.1.d. Moral enrichment

4.2.a. Costs

4.3.a. Is it a matter of where to draw the line?

4.3.b. Finalizing the removal of the 'moral virtue' from the ethical criteria

Chapter Five: What has been shown

5.1.a. Conclusion

5.b. It is fitting that religious tenets remain unexplainable to their cause

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Published

Unpublished

Electronic Journals

Web Source

Other titles by Jo Nicholls-Parker

WHY SHOULD WE ACCORD RELIGIOUS BELIEFS PRIVILEGED

MORAL AND POLITICAL RESPECT?

ABSTRACT

Religious beliefs exist because the religious authority has witnessed the value they give individuals in society in general. Nonetheless the ongoing purpose of ‘religious beliefs’ is not straight forward. On one level it is because ‘religious beliefs’ historically acquire moral and political atonements, and as these are being forged, that today the religious accordances that have been ascribed are the cause of the need for redress. On another level past ‘religious beliefs’ became judge and jury, or were becoming the subject of prejudicial scrutiny to suit ambitious society members, but today demands for political transparency has by and large transformed those ‘religious belief’ precedents. Today the moral worth of ‘religious beliefs’ are under question. What has come to light is that without the standardization of the ‘rationality of human choice’ seldom is the understanding of human choice fundamental enough to explain such a historically integrated platform as religiosity. This study unfolds where evidence of the compatibility of all known laws, interreligious and constitutional can be gathered, wherein isolationism is seen as the surest means to secure an identity and that by revealing the definition of pluralistic parallelisms in this thesis the mechanism to administer for ‘order over doctrine’ and ‘doctrinal order’ mandates in contemporary times can be appropriated. The formation of an identity is complex, but certainly an identity can be fashioned by a ‘foundationalist comprehension of doctrines’ and, similarly, an abstract religious traditions comprehension so that the challenge, that is securing an unchangeable identity factor and in the name of a particular religion, is achievable. The constitutional authority might sport an interest in securing an identity too, but, in actuality, the interreligious contribution is a proven worthiness of ‘persuasive attitudes,’ which is accompanied by the elucidation of effective posited purposefulness perspectives and from within the core multidisciplinary plight of society. Today the moral worth of ‘religious beliefs’ under question are due to the increasing tendency toward extremist isolationism. We need to generate stable identities to address this isolationism. Legal or constitutional responses have had limited success. ‘Religious beliefs’ cater for a greater breadth of complex religious, non-religious, and agnostic ‘believers’ than the constitutional order. Religiosity, this is to say, has delivered stable pervasive identities and for this deserves recognition.

Chapter One

WE DO SEEM TO ACCORD RELIGIOUS BELIEFS PRIVILEGED RESPECT

1.a. INTRODUCTION

The background to this research study is from the perspective that I realize human potential requires self-development and that this does not comply with any knowledge transfer or mainstream education. Instead self-development requires a variety of communicative strategies and experiences, and a dynamic mode of self-expression. This thesis addresses the possibility of redressing communication breakdowns and makes formats for decision-making available through interdisciplinary modes, in order to allow individuals to realise the potentialities for self-development. I will identify moral challenges and in so doing require distinctions to be made between the developing and the developed world, to achieve the aim of evaluating what it means for ‘religious beliefs’ to challenge the cause of civil unrest, insofar as it can be established that civil unrest is likely to fill the void left in the absence of a complete and developed spiritual societal acumen. The research intersects where the barrier to self-development appears to be the developing world's different set of circumstance to the developed world's, and asserts that the actual cause of problematic situations comes down to individuals’ unintentional non-compliance with self-realization techniques and therein the failure to centralize recognizable political commonalities. The broader communication breakdowns are glaringly obvious where seemingly disparate entities activate polarizing debates, yet have come into existence because their various modes of deployment sport potentialities that would otherwise benefit society as a whole. However I maintain, despite the developing world's religious unrest and the developed world’s complicity in the cause of spiritual deficits that exacerbate the developing unrest, it is possible to identify the requisite foundational commonalities so that the discourse on ‘religious beliefs’ can produce global stability again. The project, however, faces some immediate challenges. The individualistic and scientific culture in the developed world alienates us from communitarian values, and means that too often we fail to see that our individual responses are the result of pluralism in general.

1.b. THE HUMAN CONDITION FALLS SHORT OF REACHING IT’S POTENTIAL WITHOUT WORK

This thesis explores the nature of optimum moral and political potential, and similarly, the limitations of human choice. Religious tenets have a vital role here because they traverse a larger area of human consciousness than the sovereign state or constitutional rule of law alone. Moreover it is feasible the religious authority sees its interdisciplinary optimum potentiality as elucidated through its relationship with the ethical gearing of legality, truth, sceptical grounds, harm principles, identity, science, morality and the conscience of society in ways which allow them to find formulaic solutions as is required. Furthermore such a vision is designed to determine, for the individual and for the collective, what is counterproductive to self-development. Neglect of the mechanism for the transference of