What Constitutes a Religion?

The necessary features which constitute a religion are a great deal less in magnitude than one might think.  There are only two necessary ingredients which are folded into the recipe formulating a religion; a body of tenets which are both compulsory and prohibited testing for falsification.  The ingredients of a religion have nothing to do with truth, deities or ceremony.  The role of priest can be played by both scientist and credulous alike.
Religion is the process of a power wielding group abusing the rights of individuals through the desire to make compulsory, that which cannot be held to account.

religionTwo necessary components form the fabric of doctrines which can be used to herd the faithful and control the fold.  The components have little to do with the subject at hand, its veracity, nor the presence of a supreme personality or ethereal spiritual principle.  By pretending that religions only involve supernatural elements and worship of deities, SSkeptics divert attention from the fact that they are priests of a specific religious order, which targets a set of non-falsifiable and highly compulsory belief requirements mandated before one is allowed to be called ‘rational.’ Fortunately, not all scientists agree with the SSkeptics and quietly go about their research, contrary to the desires of the Cabal. There are penalties for such scientists if they are caught researching/discussing unauthorized subjects.  Heavy penalties.  As a result, what scientists say in public  is a bit different than what they will tender in private.  This is the key symptom of an enforced religion.

The two features which render a person bound, and unable to extricate themselves from a belief construct (religion) are that its key tenets be characterized by the following.

1.  Prohibited Falsification (or is Pseudo-Theory)

The key doctrine of a religion, first must pass muster in that it be non-falsifiable.  That is to say, that the founding theory, construct or philosophy not be approachable by direct application of the scientific method.  The founding idea must be so untouchable, subjective or abstract in its formulation that man, in his current technological state is ill equipped to prove or disprove the contention at hand.  Non-falsifiable, of course is not synonymous with un-falsifiable.  The mathematical statement 2 + 2 = 4 is an un-falsifiable construct, in that it is proven true in finality. In fact, non-falsifiability pertains more to an idea’s status as pseudo-theory, and the eight profiling characteristic traits which distinguish psuedo-theory from real probative hypotheses.

1.  Can be developed in full essence before any investigation even begins

2.  Never improves in its depth, description nor falsifiable or inductive strength despite ongoing research and increases in observational data

3.  Possesses no real method of falsification or distinguishing predictive measure which is placed at risk

4.  Employs non-Wittgenstein equivocal/colloquial terminology or underlying premises (possibly pseudo-theory itself) where the risk of conjecture is not acknowledged

5.  Is employed primarily as a symbolic or fiat excuse to dismiss disliked or competing explanations

6.  Can explain a multiplicity of observations or even every non-resolved question (Explanitude)

7.  Is artificially installed as the null hypothesis from the very start

8.  Attains its strength through becoming a Verdrängung Mechanism (a power combination of the Lindy Effect and pluralistic ignorance)

Non-falsifiability simply pertains to our current inability to address the topic in an evidential discovery frame of reference, regardless of whether it is indeed true or not true.  This does not mean that the construct at hand cannot ever be dis-proven, rather simply that the religious priest knows that currently, it would constitute a tough challenge for the construct to be placed by our level of technology under the scrutiny of the scientific method; long enough to buy them some important time.  Moreover, the condition of ‘cannot be falsified’ includes the condition where SSkeptics block research so that falsification and predictive testing are not permitted because the subject threatens the SSkeptics’ power or Cabal teachings.  This also constitutes a condition of ‘cannot be tested for falsification.’  Albeit simply by religious enforecment itself.  Examples of religious tenets include

  • There is an old man with a long white beard and a 20 year-old’s athletic body, who is infallible and omnipotent, who created and rules the entire universe and will soon whisk me away leaving you to rot on this planet in fire and brimstone
  • Life emerged from the primordial ooze (oozeolution)
  • Life only emerged on earth
  • The bad events and the evil state of the universe are all your fault (Original Sin)
  • There is life in the galaxy but it is all microbial and none of it travels the stars
  • Raising interest rates is necessary when the economy heats up
  • Science has proved that nothing exists outside of those things which are physically and socially acceptable for measurement
  • Evolution originates from a base of solely random allele drift, culled by other environmental factors
  • The organs of the body are the result of pure accidents and may possess no current biological function whatsoever
  • The systems in the body are perfect designs of a creator and only go wrong when we do something wrong
  • The universe goes on forever and ever
  • Angels are all around us
  • Consciousness is only the firing of neurons and the interactions of chemistry
  • Our person is a soul which resides separate from and lives on after the machine of our body.

None of these items can be proven or dis-proven in our current state of technological practice.*  Each may indeed turn out to be true or not true one day – but in the meantime, it is what we do to others with these ideas which demarcates the threshold of whether or not one is seeking to establish or adhere to a religion.   Which introduces the second key component comprised by a religion, the ‘doing to others.’

*Notice here however, that Evolution is not a religion under this context, because it CAN be tested for falsification.  Were we to find an out of place genome which broke the cladistic progression history, then a component or all of Evolution could be falsified in theory.  This has not been the case; however it is this tenable exposure, the risk to be vetted under the experimental looking glass of science, which renders Evolution a science and not a religion.  Nihilism ( Big-A Atheism) on the other hand, makes a whole series of claims which are non-falsifiable under the scientific method and is contended to be an essential conclusion on the part of a rational person or by science.  Regardless of what one calculates as the likelihoods involved, as such, Nihilism (Big-A Atheism) constitutes a religion.

2. Compulsory

The key construct must constrain you of course in that you possess an abject lack of ability to disprove it, through our current limited state as man, or through active blocking of research by policing clubs – even if our technology can address the issue.  But as well, commensurate with this non-falsifiability constraint, is the door to the same cage, in that the idea must be made compulsory for membership in or entry into a formal or informal club.    This does not mean that a governing  body need enforce the tenet being pushed,  although that applies as well; only that any form of undue pressure be applied on individuals to accept it, through some subjective personal approval means.  You are irrational if you do not accept what I am saying.  A non-falsifiable construct held for personal inspiration may constitute a faith of sorts, but it only becomes a religion when one begins to require adherence to that construct in order for others to stand approved for entry into my club.  Such compulsory enforcements include

  • Considerations as enlightened
  • Allowing club membership
  • Accusations of being stupid
  • Media bullying and campaigns
  • Religious confirmations
  • Career penalties
  • To get to heaven or avoid the apocalypse (notice how there is always an apocalypse)
  • Mandatory methods of apologetics
  • Pat and authorized approaches or answers
  • Because it is the ‘simplest explanation’
  • Withholding assignments of tenure or position
  • Public ridicule, wink and nudge
  • Unfavorable personal categorization
  • Threats of being ostracized
  • Dissertation approval
  • Conforming with peer review.

Our dance from this point on more involves tactics, arguments and smoke screens targeting hiding the fact that we are indeed a religion to begin with.  One might consider that the third necessary element of being a religion would involve the requirement that the club ironically cite evidence that it is not a religion.  But some clubs are not so surreptitious, admitting freely that they are indeed a religious order.   Having a religion which requires faith in the admittedly unknown or unknowable is OK.  But it is pseudoscience, to create a religion and pretend that it has resulted from application of the scientific method. All of the pressures which are applied in order to bind the club together, are the compulsory sinews of a religion. Once combined with enforcing an idea which our victim is patently unable to disprove, we have done our job.

To stand as true hypothesis, a construct must possess testable mechanism; that is, it must place some element of conjecture at risk. It must have skin in the game. A religion never bears any skin in the game. Indeed you will find, that a religion’s greatest philosophical skill, is in avoiding this specific burden.

A theory which places nothing at risk, yet can explain everything – does not need to have a symbolic bearded grandfather icon stenciled onto it in order to qualify as a religion. Nihilist-Atheism is just as guilty of religious activity as is Abrahamism.

Religion is the process of a power wielding group abusing the rights of individuals through the desire to make compulsory, that which cannot be held to account.

An additional trap exists inside the principle of Negative Reactance. If you are pissed at your former religious mates, and for the period of time in which you exit that religion and aggressively adopt its antithesis or some, pretense to cover its antithesis, as a form of catharsis or revenge: you are still acting under a religious set of practices.  Be very cautious therefore of bifurcation fallacies and philosophies adopted in disgust or disguise.  Be honest, calm and objective. If you hold enemies, be careful as you may be susceptible to:

Corollary: Negative Reactance

/religion by default/ : Negative Reactance –  an Aristotelian posturing wherein one, upon confrontation with objectionable principles, thereafter embraces the opposite of such objectionable principles, avoiding any possible middle path or other rational option – as a defensive reaction to such objectionable principles. If one adopts a set of tenets or a lie of allegiance, even if that set of beliefs does not qualify as a religion in and of itself, solely as a reaction to a religion one has departed from recently or in the past, and/or as a way of seeking revenge or retribution or cathartic reward over past hurts and regrets regarding one’s membership in the former religion – then one is simply operating inside a duality and indeed has simply adopted another religion.

To put it in the immortal words of Darth Vader “at last, the circle is now complete.” We have established a religion in two simple steps (and a caution).

Leveraging the Unknown

“For the love of money is the root of all evil:”

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.): 1 Timothy 6:10

We all value money.  A subset of us also pretends that they do not.  An interesting corollary, which falsifies its own theorem embodied by the above statement, is that many among humankind, take the literal and mutually exclusive construct framed by this statement to mean:  Since the love of money is the root of all evil, then to extricate myself from evil, and move to the mutually exclusive set of being perpetually and bona fide ‘not-evil,’ all one must do is not love money.  This simple action will bless every act I undertake henceforth.  It was so simple all along!  I will alter my appearance accordingly.  Although they would never dare articulate it in such fashion, thus in thinking, one initiates a horrible pathway of self righteous destruction and damage as a member of the self assured ‘not-evil’ among us.  It is the only other immoral pathway which parallels greed in its deleterious impact on the world.  The above one-liner constitutes another example of a statement’s “simplicity” (see Simplicity versus Straightforwardness) belying its errant nature.  SSkeptics learned this trick, the power of the simple moralistic one-liner, from their religious totalitarian fore running mentors.  This statement, one I found inspirational years ago when I was younger and much more clueless about the subtle nature of deception and control; this statement I have found to prove out to be false.

The ethical skeptic is not afraid to challenge this statement and regard it on a level playing field.  The pseudo-skeptic eschews the statement because of where it originated, and the religious uses it to condemn others and feel good about himself.

Both of these latter approaches are intellectually dishonest and imbalanced, in the eyes of the Ethical Skeptic.

The love of Money is not the root of all evil, but yes greed can be the “root of all sorts of evil.”  This tautology is obfuscating in its nature however, for as in many occulted philosophies it is the unstated implied or inferred complimentary principle which constitutes the deception (see Fact/Ambiguity DiPoles). Money is simply a measure and a tool of productive accountability.  The errant statement above is akin to the contention that “Traffic jams are cars stopped in front of me.” It actually is nonsensical, an utterance or thought of those who have not spent much time actually observing the world in which we live (or doing SPSS traffic flow queuing and arrival distribution simulation theory), in an ethical skeptic frame of mind.  In fact “Traffic jams are caused by a specific threshold of inattentive drivers” is the actual true statement.  But to a person who can only see as far as the car in front of him, the traffic jam is caused by an over presence of cars in front of him, and that is all he knows, or ever will care to know. It renders the world simple, his anger focused, and his conscience free from responsibility.  The false statement frees him to be inattentive, and thus create further traffic jams.

Money is simply the car sitting in front of us in the traffic jam

Money is a measure of the worst attributes or best attributes of mankind, not the cause of them.  It is the cars lined up in front of you on the highway.  Look past the obvious and into that which is hidden.  This is the mindset of the Ethical Skeptic.  Inflation is the rate of change in the value of money.  It is inflation which is the indicator evaluating the worth of a nation, economy or a people.  Inflation is the index of misery, as expressed in the rate of change in the currency.  Inflation is raised by corruption, inefficiency, skimming, fanaticism, anger and malicious activity, surreptitious activity, deceit, overcharging and gouging, catastrophes, hate, religion, excessive taxation, class warfare, lack of ingenuity and critical thought, programmed thought and fake skepticism.  It is not the money which is evil, rather the intent and deleterious actions on the part of the people who are the drivers of the money cars.

Cultivating the Unknown: The leveraging and grooming of FUD: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt

be very afraidOne key construct which fuels inflation is the contribution of UNCERTAINTY.  Uncertainty in economic theory contributes several destabilizing profiles into a currency and equity markets.  But more specifically for our purposes in this chain of thought, uncertainty leads in humans, to a desperate race and desire for excess.  As a hedge for retirement, for a rainy day, for our kids or our kingdom,  for our religion, institution or war, or to cover the feeling of inadequacy which nags for reasons undetermined, each of us covers for our fear of the unknown via differing pathways of undertaking excess.  More literally, take for example the top 3 consumer goods planning and Economic Order Quantity derivation packages offered on the open market in the United States.  The principal software companies managing finished goods buying inside the US have developed some of the most sophisticated buying software in the world.  These Economic Order Quantity Planning packages and the derivative algorithms which prompt the average 20-somthing year old buyer to submit an order for merchandise from China, are all driven by levels of the unknown and UNCERTAINTY.  Uncertainty cannot be fully resolved by forecasting, no matter how sophisticated our empirical data, model sophistication or stochastics.  The reaction to ordering merchandise, 2 years in advance, in order to obtain ‘lowest global cost’ and market dominance, is to effect product dumping inside our international trade and economics.  It does not matter that such merchandise is disposed of through exit strategies, it still produces the ensuing economic weakness entailed in product dumping.   Over-order anyway, because there are unknown wolves in the dark, two years from now, and you never know what we might need. Be Ye Afraid… especially of losing your job.

FEAR is one of the Key Contributing Elements to Inflation

“Cultivating the Unknown in order to manipulate others, is the basis of evil.”

    – TES

No, the love of money is not the root of all evil.  It is through a solid crop of the demon haunted unknown, that we are able to drive men to do irrational and extreme activities.  To blow themselves up, to scream headlong into an enemy’s line of fire, to kill women and children, to destroy wholesale economies and livelihoods – the motivation must be complete and extreme.  No, they will not conduct these same evil activities for money, and no they will not undertake them in order to have access to sex.  Most men grow to understand the destructive pathway involved in either of those philosophies, or hold the fate of others in higher regard than these basal pleasures. 

Rather, in order to completely possess a man, to own his very motivation to the depths of his soul, the controlling entity must access the mechanisms which feed his FEAR of the UNKNOWN. 

This, is the Orwellian rats-cage of the modern era.  Always has been as well.  That means – two goals enacted by a partnership of foes: 

  1. SSkeptic – Restrict his access to unauthorized information
  2. Religious – Fill the cultivated void with demons

This is what the religious states of the Levant and Southwest Asia perfected all so well, thousands of years ago.  The religion did not matter, only the persistent constrained message of fear ran common to all these control mechanisms. Make sure that your target is aware of many demons, and make sure that his access to information on that domain is limited.  Your job is done.  Two social entities who rule society currently, are the fabricators of this stretching rack of torture on mankind.  The Religious, and the Social Skeptic.  The straightforward truth is this (notice I did not say ‘simple’): The unethical among us leverage the unknown in order to obtain evil ends.  And the evil derived thereof, never ends:

The Religious Says about the great dark UNKNOWN

“When you die, you are gonna burn in hell forever, but not me. God said this.”

The SSkeptic Says about the great dark UNKNOWN

“This idea cannot be understood in a lab, so it does not exist; or at the very least is not worth investigating beyond that which I have told you is true.”

Each of these contentions is anathema to the Ethical Skeptic.  They are bookend lies. Their fruit on the tender planet Earth and in each and every one of our ancestral lives has been millenia of misery, ignorance, destruction, poisoning, hatred, and a pathway which cannot continue in the fashion in which it is now progressing for mankind.  The video at the link below, provided graciously by Free Domain Radio at http://www.freedomainradio.com is interesting in its summation of the effects of “The art of crafting power through pseudoscience, institutional doctrine and selective ignorance.”  It identifies Deskeption; certifies its outcomes.   Our collective ability to tolerate these errant understandings of uncertainty and the unknown, has run out.

To the Ethical Skeptic, one person pretending to represent God to another person, is absurd.  To the Ethical Skeptic, to maintain an aura of UNKNOWABILITY around a subject, with the end goal of defraying any interest in investigating the subject, is equally absurd.

Both are pseudoscience and Deskeption.