6.5.3 |
A NEW DENOMINATIONAL PARADIGM |
The crucial point with respect to the issue of denominational
liberty and equality is: if the nonreligious in a country
where supernaturalism or
theodemonism
(particularly monotheism)
is still more or less the state ideology want to be put on the
same footing as their religous fellow-citizens, then, at least,
they will have to offer something which can be put on the same
footing as the traditional, supernaturalist or theodemonist
paradigm. Only in that case is it theoretically possible that
they will not just be tolerated but included as equals.
Irreligious doctrines which are not much more than antireligions
(if not exclusivist antireligions) may temporarily
develop such a strength that an almost equal position could be
reached, but such antireligions will always exist by the grace
of religion, and will mainly have a destructive nature instead
of a constructive one. In the relationship with those of another
persuasion they are bound to lapse into the same faults as the
religious ideologies they oppose, used to lapse into. And no-one
who means well by humankind wants that in countries in which
'nonbelievers' do or will make up the bulk of society supernaturalists
and theodemonists will be disqualified as witnesses,
will be withheld membership of parliament, and will be described
in the dictionaries as "immorally living" and "godly" (in the
combined sense of theistic and wicked). Psychiatric
hospitals which have been, or still are, often abused to dispose of
people who do not act, feel and believe as a majority of the
population or a government prefer, have already been ordered to
treat people because of their religious or other ideological beliefs.
No society, however, will become more inclusive (that is less
exclusivistic) by replacing the one type of ideological exclusionism
with the other, whether denominational or political.
The lordship of religionist organizations and the dictatorship
of undemocratic political systems over those who do not
support the religious administration or party in power can never
be permanently overcome by some form of unsubstantial atheism,
of vapid humanism or of egocentric liberalism. To get rid of
both religious and political subordination one needs the force
and spirit of a doctrine which is at least as strong as the form of
religionism
and of party-political exclusivism which has to be combated.
The yoke of religious and party-political oppression
and discrimination can only be thrown off, if people unite
themselves under the denomination of a doctrine with a clear and
lucid, normative substance and with a symbolic besides a basic
component, a doctrine which is both informing and inspiring. No
wishy-washy nonreligion and no lack of denominational or political
interest will ever be a challenge to any religionist or
dictatorial political power. Only by means of a denominational
doctrine as explicit as the classic religions, but now guided by
the principles of
truth,
relevance and
neutrality can
nonadherents of the traditional paradigm in a religion-dominated
or religiogenic society win the battle for recognition as equals,
for an alternative way of life, for a liberty of conscience and
behavior free from
exist
curtailments and symbol impositions. It
is such a normative doctrine which must do away, not only in
theory but also in practise, with the values and disvalues which
have caused so many of the real and illusory problems of the
past.
Comprehensive ideologies
have always existed, and will continue
to exist, so long as the world is not good in every respect,
because of people's need to relate concrete and abstract
things, events, attitudes and ideas to one another (including
themselves) and to a normative frame of reference. Perhaps, the
first objective of human beings is the satisfaction of primary
needs like safety, nutrition and shelter, and of secondary needs
like friendship and sexuality, but everywhere where those needs
are at least partially satisfied, human beings have felt the
need to express, and to be part of, supra-individual ideals.
(It could be argued that this need is even more urgent in cases
that secondary, and possibly also primary, needs are not
satisfied.) It is the timeless interest in supra-individual
ideals which is ideological (or 'idealogical' ) and normative.
Where it concerns comprehensive ideals and conceptions, religion
is the institutionalized system which has traditionally always
tried to evoke and mould them. But where more and more people
fall away from religion because they can no longer believe in
its supernaturalist fancies and dogmas, and because they can no
longer share responsibility for its sexual, marital, age-based,
ethnocentric, monarchical, territorial and other exclusivist
theories and practises, the need of denominationalism itself
remains. This is the tragedy of societies in transition: while
the influence of the traditional denominational paradigm fades
away, many people have the feeling that they are destined for a
state of anomie. Having lost their old faith, they have also
lost their hope for the future, that is, their old hope for the
future. In such a time the voluntary or forced retreat of religion
and the severance of the social ties originating in it engender
a considerable increase in egoistic individualism, loneliness
and disillusion among people. A symptom of such a time
can be the disorientation or a growing aimlessness of the arts;
it can also be a reactionary reorientation by a part of the
population towards a period in the past when the authority of the
(still-)paradigmatic world-view was not seriously challenged.
Another cause of denominational crisis is the discrepancy
between the scientific-technological development of a society
and the mental state of the average citizen and politician
when it ideologically resembles that of people who lived several
thousands of years ago. Science and technology are largely meant
to take care of the material aspects of the satisfaction of
human needs, and yet progress in these fields --assuming that it
is 'progress'-- will eventually have an impact in all fields.
Human civilization is not exclusively a question of advancement
or 'new ideas' in science and technology as exponents of the
traditional paradigm may be but too eager to suggest. If
people's philosophy of life, their treatment of women or girls,
of men or boys, and of minorities, their symptoms of alienation,
compulsion and inhibition, or their linguistic systems, to name
but a few examples, are the same as they were millenniums
before, when they visit the moon or other planets, then their
machinery may have undergone a revolutionary change, but they
themselves will, in such a case, not have evolved at all. This
can be specially disastrous when the same people have (been
given) the military power to destroy whole countries or continents.
A future nuclear holocaust does then seem but too likely.
Where religion does lose its preponderant influence believers
or ex-believers will estrange more and more from the old lights
and (dis)values. So long as no new standards have taken the
place of the traditional ones, the feelings of belonging to
something that gives spiritual and social security disappear.
Also in such a case people speak of "alienation". But while this
form of alienation will be experienced as uncomfortable too (in
addition to the pleasure of being liberated from the old
dogmatizers), it is one of the few forms of alienation which
will benefit humanity; that is, so far as it concerns the
estrangement from (dis)values incompatible with
the right to personhood, the
veridicalist
interpretation of the principle of truth and
the norms of inclusivity and
neutrality. With the
estrangement from traditional authoritarian, supernaturalist,
exclusivist and
extremist
attitudes and beliefs, a world free
from oppression, obscurantism, discrimination and inequality, a
world free from the threat of nuclear or chemical warfare,
violence, hunger and unjust dispossession, has a chance to
arise eventually.
Where religious or theodemonist ideologies lose more and more
of their followers, while a new denominational doctrine has not
yet been accepted by a sufficient number of people, a society
will gradually drift into a spiritual vacuum. But in such a
period when the old denominational paradigm has exhausted its
fertility, the suction force which carries the immutable norms
and values of the new doctrine is bound to become irresistable.
And what else can this doctrine be than postreligious,
post-theodemonistic and
neutral-inclusivistic
if it is to be a truly new paradigm, and not the nth
variation on the old one?
So long as there is a need of denominationalism in human
society --that is, something more profound than political
ideology-- there will be a need of a comprehensive system of
disciplinary thought which is compatible with modern science and
secular philosophy. So long as truth and relevance are not both
recognized as indispensible values, so long as so many human
beings are still in want of the most essential things in life,
so long as the threat of discrimination and inequality stalk
society, there will be a need of a form of denominationalism
which leads people not to the peace of the most efficient mode
of oppression or exploitation but to the peace of neutral-inclusivity.
Even where there is evidence of an evolution in a
great number of fields where exclusivist institutions are being
replaced by more inclusive ones, the vigorous assistance of a
wholly neutral-inclusive doctrine will be required to continue
and expand this
nanapolar
process until at least all state
exclusivisms and all exclusivisms in which people's extrinsic
rights are violated have been removed.
The DNI
unites several movements for liberty and equality or emancipation,
several movements for the abolition or reform of exclusivist
institutions or practises, and several movements for the betterment
of people's lives under one ideal. The objectives of these
anafactive
movements and endeavors should not be
dissociated from one another. For together we have to build a
more neutral and inclusive society, if necessary by means of
nanaicity;
for together we will have to live in such a society
even tho our personal needs, preferences and capacities may
differ.
After the gestation and emergence of the new denominational
paradigm there need be no talk of alienation from old norms and
values anymore. So far as the DNI is concerned they will be
replaced with the values of truthfulness, sincerity and
nondiscrimination and all other values comprehended by the
veridicalist principle of truth and the norm of inclusivity; and
they will be replaced with well-being and equality and all other
values comprehended by the norm of neutrality. The arts will
find a renewed inspiration; and friendships will be formed which
would or could not be formed before. Above all,
the paradigmatic Norm
will give us a new ideal and a new hope which at once
include and transcend our individual being.
|