REL 205 Zoroastrianism

Cosmogony

Creation of the universe

According to the Zoroastrian story of creation, Ahura Mazda existed in light in goodness above, while Angra Mainyu existed in darkness and ignorance below. They have existed independently of each other for all time, and manifest contrary substances. Ahura Mazda first created seven abstract heavenly beings called Amesha Spentas, who support him and represent beneficent aspects, along with numerous yazads, lesser beings worthy of worship. He then created the universe itself in order to ensnare evil. Ahura Mazda created the floating, egg-shaped universe in two parts: first the spiritual (menog) and 3,000 years later, the physical (getig). Ahura Mazda then created Gayomard, the archetypical perfect man, and the first bull.

While Ahura Mazda created the universe and humankind, Angra Mainyu, whose instinct is to destroy, miscreated demons, evil yazads, and noxious creatures (khrafstar) such as snakes, ants, and flies. Angra Mainyu created an opposite, evil being for each good being, except for humans, which he found he could not match. Angra Mainyu invaded the universe through the base of the sky, inflicting Gayomard and the bull with suffering and death. However, the evil forces were trapped in the universe and could not retreat. The dying primordial man and bull emitted seeds. From the bull's seed grew all beneficial plants and animals of the world, and from the man's seed grew a plant whose leaves became the first human couple. Humans thus struggle in a two-fold universe trapped with evil. The evils of this physical world are not products of an inherent weakness, but are the fault of Angra Mainyu's assault on creation. This assault turned the perfectly flat, peaceful, and ever day-lit world into a mountainous, violent place that is half night.

Zorostrianism Creation Story, 1:32

https://youtu.be/TgPlkg6N8ok



What Is? 1:33

https://youtu.be/xsWvxIE649U



Zoroastrianism,[n 1] or more natively Mazdayasna,[1] is one of the world's oldest religions, "combining a cosmogonic dualism and eschatological monotheism in a manner unique... among the major religions of the world."[2] Ascribed to the teachings of the Iranian Prophet Zoroaster (or Zarathustra),[3] he exalted their deity of wisdom, Ahura Mazda, (Wise Lord) as its Supreme Being.

Leading characteristics, such as messianism, heaven and hell, and free will influenced other religious systems, including Second Temple Judaism, Gnosticism, Christianity, and Islam.[5] With possible roots dating back to the second millennium BCE, Zoroastrianism enters recorded history in the 5th-century BCE,[4] and including a Mithraic Median prototype and Zurvanist Sassanid successor it served as the state religion of the pre-Islamic Iranian empires from around 600 BCE to 650 CE.



Zoroastrianism was suppressed from the 7th century onwards following the Muslim conquest of Persia.[6] Recent estimates place the current number of Zoroastrians at around 2.6 million, with most living in India and Iran.[7][8][n 2] Besides the Zoroastrian diaspora, the older Mithraic faith Yazdânism is still practised amongst the Kurds.[n 3]



The religious philosophy of Zoroaster divided the early Iranian gods. The most important texts of the religion are those of the Avesta. In Zoroastrianism, the creator Ahura Mazda, through the Spenta Mainyu (Good Spirit, "Bounteous Immortals") is an all-good "father" of Asha (Truth, “order, justice,") in opposition to Druj (“falsehood, deceit”) and no evil originates from "him". "He" and his works are evident to humanity through the six primary Amesha Spentas and the host of other Yazatas, through whom worship of Mazda is ultimately directed. Spenta Mainyu adjoined unto "truth" oppose the Spirit's opposite,] Angra Mainyu and its forces born of Akəm Manah (“evil thinking”).

What Do Zoroastrians Believe? 5:36

Who are the Zoroastrians and what do they believe? Their faith is one of the oldest surviving religions on Earth, predating Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - and is actually (some say) the inspiration for all three... MUSIC: Lord Taylor - Until There's More Many thanks to artist Mitchell Nolte for his kind permission to use his Zarathustra (Zoroaster) artwork.

https://youtu.be/kLzsXLBD2rI





Zoroastrianism has no major theological divisions, though it is not uniform; modern-era influences having a significant impact on individual and local beliefs, practices, values and vocabulary, sometimes merging with tradition and in other cases displacing it. In Zoroastrianism, the purpose in life is to "be among those who renew the world...to make the world progress towards perfection". Its basic maxims include:


Humata, Hukhta, Huvarshta, which mean: Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds.


There is only one path and that is the path of Truth.



Do the right thing because it is the right thing to do, and then all beneficial rewards will come to you also.


The most important texts of the religion are those of the Avesta, which includes the writings of Zoroaster known as the Gathas, enigmatic poems that define the religion's precepts, and the Yasna, the scripture. The full name by which Zoroaster addressed the deity is: Ahura, The Lord Creator, and Mazda, Supremely Wise.


He proclaimed that there is only one God, the singularly creative and sustaining force of the Universe. He also stated that human beings are given a right of choice, and because of cause and effect are also responsible for the consequences of their choices.



Zoroaster's teachings focused on responsibility, and did not introduce a devil, per se. The contesting force to Ahura Mazda was called Angra Mainyu, or angry spirit. Post-Zoroastrian scripture introduced the concept of Ahriman, the Devil, which was effectively a personification of Angra Mainyu.[23]




Biography, 1:22



https://youtu.be/NXCMpXqh2vU











Zoroaster



Zoroastrianism was founded by Zoroaster (or Zarathustra), later deemed a prophet, in ancient Iran. The precise date of the founding of Zoroastrianism is uncertain. Zoroaster was born in either Northeast Iran or Southwest Afghanistan. He was born into a culture with a polytheistic religion, which included animal sacrifice[69] and the ritual use of intoxicants, quite similar to early forms of Hinduism in India. Zoroaster's birth and early life are little documented. What is known is recorded in the Gathas—the core of the Avesta, which contains hymns thought to be composed by Zoroaster himself. Born into the Spitama clan, he worked as a priest. He had a wife, three sons, and three daughters.



Zoroaster rejected the religion of the Bronze Age Iranians, with their many gods and oppressive class structure, in which the Karvis and Karapans (princes and priests) controlled the ordinary people. He also opposed animal sacrifices and the use of the hallucinogenic Haoma plant (possibly a species of ephedra) in rituals, but held the rooster as a "symbol of light"[70] and associated it with "good against evil"[71] because of his heraldic actions.
Vision of Zoroaster



According to Zoroastrian belief, when Zoroaster was 30 years old, he went into the Daiti river to draw water for a Haoma ceremony; when he emerged, he received a vision of Vohu Manah. After this, Vohu Manah took him to the other six Amesha Spentas, where he received the completion of his vision.[72] This vision radically transformed his view of the world, and he tried to teach this view to others. Zoroaster believed in one creator God, teaching that only one God was worthy of worship. Some of the deities of the old religion, the Daevas (Devas in Sanskrit), appeared to delight in war and strife. Zoroaster said these were evil spirits, workers of Angra Mainyu.



Zoroaster's ideas were not taken up quickly; he originally only had one convert: his cousin Maidhyoimanha.[73] The local religious authorities opposed his ideas, considering that their faith, power, and particularly their rituals, were threatened by Zoroaster's teaching against over-ritualising religious ceremonies. Many did not like Zoroaster's downgrading of the Daevas to evil spirits. After 12 years of little success, Zoroaster left his home.



In the country of King Vishtaspa in Bactria, the king and queen heard Zoroaster debating with the religious leaders of the land and decided to accept Zoroaster's ideas as the official religion of their kingdom. Zoroaster died in his late 70s. Very little is known of the time between Zoroaster and the Achaemenian period, except that Zoroastrianism spread to Western Iran. By the time of the founding of the Achaemenid Empire, Zoroastrianism was already a well-established religion.




6:33



Cartoon Zoroastrianism




A video that the life of the Iranian prophet Zoroaster and the essence of his teachings.



This is a product of Mexus Education Pvt. Ltd., an education innovations company based in Mumbai, India.
http://www.mexuseducation.com, http://www.ikenstore.in



https://youtu.be/oIEmmndKRSs











Brief History of Zoroastrianism, 3:28





https://youtu.be/6y8BZONPmiM











The roots of Zoroastrianism are thought to have emerged from a common prehistoric Indo-Iranian religious system dating back to the early 2nd millennium BCE.[33] The prophet Zoroaster himself, though traditionally dated to the 6th century BC, is thought by many modern historians to have been a reformer of the polytheistic Iranian religion who lived in the 10th century BC.[34] Zoroastrianism as a religion was not firmly established until several centuries later. Zoroastrianism enters recorded history in the mid-5th century BCE. Herodotus' The Histories (completed c. 440 BCE) includes a description of Greater Iranian society with what may be recognizably Zoroastrian features, including exposure of the dead.



The Histories is a primary source of information on the early period of the Achaemenid era (648–330 BCE), in particular with respect to the role of the Magi. According to Herodotus i.101, the Magi were the sixth tribe of the Medians (until the unification of the Persian empire under Cyrus the Great, all Iranians were referred to as "Mede" or "Mada" by the peoples of the Ancient World), who appear to have been the priestly caste of the Mesopotamian-influenced branch of Zoroastrianism today known as Zurvanism, and who wielded considerable influence at the courts of the Median emperors.



The Zoroastrian Achaemenid Empire at its greatest extent was the largest ancient empire in recorded history at 8.0 million km2 (480 BCE).[35]



Following the unification of the Median and Persian empires in 550 BCE, Cyrus the Great and, later, his son Cambyses II curtailed the powers of the Magi after they had attempted to sow dissent following their loss of influence. In 522 BCE, the Magi revolted and set up a rival claimant to the throne. The usurper, pretending to be Cyrus' younger son Smerdis, took power shortly thereafter.[36] Owing to the despotic rule of Cambyses and his long absence in Egypt, "the whole people, Persians, Medes and all the other nations" acknowledged the usurper, especially as he granted a remission of taxes for three years (Herodotus iii. 68).



Darius I and later Achaemenid emperors acknowledged their devotion to Ahura Mazda in inscriptions, as attested to several times in the Behistun inscription, and appear to have continued the model of coexistence with other religions. Whether Darius was a follower of Zoroaster has not been conclusively established, since devotion to Ahura Mazda was (at the time) not necessarily an indication of an adherence to Zoroaster's teaching. A number of the Zoroastrian texts that today are part of the greater compendium of the Avesta have been attributed to that period. This calendar attributed to the Achaemenid period is still in use today. Additionally, the divinities, or yazatas, are present-day Zoroastrian angels (Dhalla, 1938).



According to later Zoroastrian legend (Denkard and the Book of Arda Viraf), many sacred texts were lost when Alexander the Great's troops invaded Persepolis and subsequently destroyed the royal library there. Diodorus Siculus's Bibliotheca historica, which was completed circa 60 BCE, appears to substantiate this Zoroastrian legend (Diod. 17.72.2–17.72.6). According to one archaeological examination, the ruins of the palace of Xerxes bear traces of having been burned (Stolze, 1882). Whether a vast collection of (semi-)religious texts "written on parchment in gold ink", as suggested by the Denkard, actually existed remains a matter of speculation, but is unlikely. Given that many of the Denkards statements-as-fact have since been refuted among scholars, the tale of the library is widely accepted to be fictional (Kellens, 2002).



The religion would be professed many centuries following the demise of the Achaemenids in mainland Persia and the core regions of the former Achaemenid Empire, most notably Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and the Caucasus. In the Cappadocian kingdom, whose territory was formerly an Achaemenid possession, Persian colonists, cut off from their co-religionists in Iran proper, continued to practice the faith [Zoroastrianism] of their forefathers; and there Strabo, observing in the first century B.C., records (XV.3.15) that these "fire kindlers" possessed many "holy places of the Persian Gods", as well as fire temples.[37] Strabo furthermore relates, were "noteworthy enclosures; and in their midst there is an altar, on which there is a large quantity of ashes and where the magi keep the fire ever burning."[37] Through and after the Hellenistic periods in the aforementioned regions, the religion would be strongly revived as a major thing.



Most of the Sassanid Empire was overthrown by the Arabs over the course of 16 years in the 7th century. Although the administration of the state was rapidly Islamicized and subsumed under the Umayyad Caliphate, in the beginning "there was little serious pressure" exerted on newly subjected people to adopt Islam.[43]



Because of their sheer numbers, the conquered Zoroastrians had to be treated as dhimmis (despite doubts of the validity of this identification that persisted down the centuries),[44] which made them eligible for protection. Islamic jurists took the stance that only Muslims could be perfectly moral, but "unbelievers might as well be left to their iniquities, so long as these did not vex their overlords."[44]



The Arabs adopted the Sassanid tax-system, both the land-tax levied on land owners and the poll-tax levied on individuals,[44] called jizya, a tax levied on non-Muslims (i.e., the dhimmis). In time, this poll-tax came to be used as a means to humble the non-Muslims, and a number of laws and restrictions evolved to emphasize their inferior status.



Under Abbasid rule, Muslim Iranians (who by then were in the majority) increasingly found ways to taunt Zoroastrians, and distressing them became a popular sport. For example, in the 9th century, a deeply venerated cypress tree in Khorasan (which Parthian-era legend supposed had been planted by Zoroaster himself) was felled for the construction of a palace in Baghdad, 2,000 miles (3,200 km) away.



In the 10th century, on the day that a Tower of Silence had been completed at much trouble and expense, a Muslim official contrived to get up onto it, and to call the adhan (the Muslim call to prayer) from its walls. This was made a pretext to annex the building.[45]



Another popular means to distress Zoroastrians was to maltreat dogs, as these animals are sacred in Zoroastrianism. Such baiting, which was to continue down the centuries, was indulged in by all; not only by high officials, but by the general uneducated population as well.



The first edict, adapted from an Arsacid and Sassanid one (but in those to the advantage of Zoroastrians), was that only a Muslim could own Muslim slaves or indentured servants. Thus, a bonded individual owned by a Zoroastrian could automatically become a freeman by converting to Islam. The other edict was that if one male member of a Zoroastrian family converted to Islam, he instantly inherited all its property.



Despite economic and social incentives to convert, Zoroastrianism remained strong in some regions, particularly in those furthest away from the Caliphate capital at Baghdad. In Bukhara (in present-day Uzbekistan), resistance to Islam required the 9th-century Arab commander Qutaiba to convert his province four times. The first three times the citizens reverted to their old religion. Finally, the governor made their religion "difficult for them in every way", turned the local fire temple into a mosque, and encouraged the local population to attend Friday prayers by paying each attendee two dirhams.[48] The cities where Arab governors resided were particularly vulnerable to such pressures, and in these cases the Zoroastrians were left with no choice but to either conform or migrate to regions that had a more amicable administration.[48]


Due to Islamic oppression and bigotry, Zoroastrians have fled to India, Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Persia, and an expatriate community has formed in the United States (some from India), and to a lesser extent in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia.




Spread, 1:26 (watch)



See the spread of the religion known as Zoroastrianism. It also includes Manichaeism but not any of the other religions that are associated with Zoroastrianism.



https://youtu.be/CuEGCNw3S_8



Zoroastrianism is often compared with the Manichaeism. Nominally an Iranian religion, it has its origins in the Middle-Eastern Gnosticism. Superficially such a comparison seem apt, as both are dualistic and Manichaeism adopted many of the Yazatas for its own pantheon. Gherardo Gnoli, in The Encyclopaedia of Religion, says that "we can assert that Manichaeism has its roots in the Iranian religious tradition and that its relationship to Mazdaism, or Zoroastrianism, is more or less like that of Christianity to Judaism".[66]



They are however quite different.[67] Manichaeism equated evil with matter and good with spirit, and was therefore particularly suitable as a doctrinal basis for every form of asceticism and many forms of mysticism. Zoroastrianism, on the other hand, rejects every form of asceticism, has no dualism of matter and spirit (only of good and evil), and sees the spiritual world as not very different from the natural one (the word "paradise", or pairi.daeza, applies equally to both.)



Manichaeism's basic doctrine was that the world and all corporeal bodies were constructed from the substance of Satan, an idea that is fundamentally at odds with the Zoroastrian notion of a world that was created by God and that is all good, and any corruption of it is an effect of the bad. From what may be inferred from many Manichean texts and a few Zoroastrian sources, the adherents of the two religions (or at least their respective priesthoods) despised each other intensely.











Morgan Freeman's Story of God, 6:42



Zoroastrians believe that there is one universal, transcendent, supreme god, Ahura Mazda, or the "Wise Lord". (Ahura means "Being" and Mazda means "Mind" in Avestan language).[25] Zoroaster keeps the two attributes separate as two different concepts in most of the Gathas and also consciously uses a masculine word for one concept and a feminine for the other, as if to distract from an anthropomorphism of his divinity. Zoroaster claimed that Ahura Mazda is almighty, though not omnipotent.



Other scholars assert that since Zoroastrianism's divinity covers both being and mind as immanent entities, it is better described as a belief in an immanent self-creating universe with consciousness as its special attribute, thereby putting Zoroastranism in the pantheistic fold where it can be easily traced to its shared origin with Indian Brahmanism.[26][27] In any case, Ahura Mazda's creation—evident is widely agreed as asha, truth and order—is the antithesis of chaos, which is evident as druj, falsehood and disorder. The resulting conflict involves the entire universe, including humanity, which has an active role to play in the conflict.[28]



In Zoroastrian tradition, the "chaotic" is represented by Angra Mainyu (also referred to as "Ahriman"), the "Destructive Principle", while the benevolent is represented through Ahura Mazda's Spenta Mainyu, the instrument or "Bounteous Principle" of the act of creation. It is through Spenta Mainyu that transcendental Ahura Mazda is immanent in humankind, and through which the Creator interacts with the world. According to Zoroastrian cosmology, in articulating the Ahuna Vairya formula, Ahura Mazda made His ultimate triumph evident to Angra Mainyu. As expressions and aspects of Creation, Ahura Mazda emanated the Amesha Spentas ("Bounteous Immortals"), that are each the hypostasis and representative of one aspect of that Creation. These Amesha Spenta are in turn assisted by a league of lesser principles, the Yazatas, each "Worthy of Worship" and each again a hypostasis of a moral or physical aspect of creation.



Zoroastrian theology includes a duty to protect nature. This has led some to proclaim it as the "world's first ecological religion." Scholars have argued that, since the protections are part of a ritual, they stem from theology rather than ecology. Others have responded that, since the scripture calls for the protection of water, earth, fire, air, as once of its strongest precepts, it is, in effect, an ecological religion: "It is not surprising that Mazdaism (another term for Zoroastrianism) is called the first ecological religion. The reverence for Yazatas (divine spirits) emphasizes the preservation of nature (Avesta: Yasnas 1.19, 3.4, 16.9; Yashts 6.3-4, 10.13)." [29]



https://youtu.be/s0K3vEBG3sk











Towers of Silence Trailer, 4:55



https://youtu.be/dMXvsg1bN-s











Selects from Zoroastrian Rituals (Towers of Silence): Rituals, 2:22



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtAFDN3I0oQ



https://youtu.be/rtAFDN3I0oQ







YASNA CEREMONY & ITS MEANING (©PARZOR), 3:34

A Persian Offering. The Yasna: a Zoroastrian High Liturgy

https://youtu.be/xS53HpX1De0



TOWER OF SILENCE (ZOROASTRIANISM FUNERAL & DISPOSAL), Ritual Funeral, 4:04

https://youtu.be/opSPc44s9_o





Zoroastrians Celebrate Fire Festival in Iran: Fire Festival, 2:31

One of the worlds last and largest communities of Zoroastrians celebrates its annual fire festival in Iran, where the government has recently been more accepting of its pre-Islamic Persian heritage. WSJ's Bill Spindle reports.

https://youtu.be/pB78CnYJfIY









Prayer, 2:31



"Zoroastrian rituals and prayers are solemnized in the presence of a Fire, which is scrupulously tended with sandalwood and frankincence and kept buning in a silver urn in the inner sanctum of every Zoroastrian "fire-temple" also called a Darbe Mehr (door of devotion). Fire is revered as a visual symbol of the Inner Light, the devine spark, that burns in each and every heart; a physical representation of the Illuminated Mind, Enlightenment and Truth. It is important to note that Zoroastirans do not "worship fire" as the religion denounces the worship of any idols or dieties." The mobed (priest) wears a mouth veil to prevent contamination of the fire.
"Ashem Vohu, vahishtem asti, Ushta asti, ushta ahmai Hyat ashai, vahishtai ashem
-To think a good thought, to speak a good word, to do a good deed, is the best. Everlasting happiness to those who follow the Path of Asha"
The World Religions class observing this prayer are wearing hats and head coverings as a sign of respect to the sanctity of the place of worship. It is very special and rare for nonpractitioners to be allowed into the inner sanctum.



https://youtu.be/EoZ1nFfUUpQ











Saving the Zoroastrians (The Feed): Saving 3:53





https://youtu.be/TePcJ6v5fpg











BBC News Keeping Zoroastrianism alive after 3,000 years: Keep Alive, 2:52



BBC News Keeping Zoroastrianism alive after 3,000 years



https://youtu.be/a4ezRTvDrqw









Zarathustra on Self Enquiry by Thinking (Zoroaster) Quotations, 2:36

https://youtu.be/tZUOdLy53tY





Puppet Show about Zoroastrian Mythology Judgement and Renovation, 8:33

https://youtu.be/NjVMr5H0pv0



Zoroastrianism Music, 14:37



Music from Feza Radio - http://fezaeu.net.
Fire loop by Michael Edwards - http://vimeo.com/53193776



https://youtu.be/2pKwrgw-PWk

PHI 101Free Will, Determinism, Libertarianism, Compatibilism

Do We Have Free Will? Does it Matter?

What makes us morally responsible? The answer most people would give is that we have free will. We are free to choose what we do, and that is why we can rightly be praised or blamed. Our actions are up to us. But are they? Some philosophers have argued that we are not in control of what we do, that we do not have free will.

In this lecture, we will look at the problem of free will and determinism. This is the problem that we cannot make sense of free will in a natural universe, because a natural universe must work in a deterministic way. Everything in it, including us, must be determined. I will start by explaining what determinism is and why many philosophers are convinced that we live in a deterministic world, and how it implies that we could not possibly have free will in the sense that we ordinarily think we do. We will then look at various philosophical responses to the puzzle. According to one philosophical camp, ‘libertarianism’, we do have free will after all. A second approach, compatibilism, argues that although we do not have free will, it does not affect whether we should hold people responsible for their actions. Compatibilists (so called because they think that moral responsibility is compatible with determinism) argue that we can make sense of moral responsibility without free will. The last group argues that we do not have free will, and we do not have moral responsibility either. These philosophers call themselves ‘hard incompatibilists’, or ‘hard determinists’. 

Additional Resources

Introductory

Beebee, Helen (2013) Free Will: An Introduction, Palgrave. (Opinionated Introduction to both compatibilism and incompatibilism).

Mason, Elinor (2005) ‘Recent work on Moral Responsibility’, Philosophical Books 46, 343-353. (Introductory survey of recent work on moral responsibility).

Talbert, Matthew (2016). Moral Responsibility: An Introduction. Polity. (Opinionated introduction, focussed mainly on compatibilist views).

Advanced

Pereboom, Derk, (2001) Living Without Free Will, Cambridge University Press. (A very clear defense of a hard determinist view).

Watson, Gary (ed.) (2003) Free Will, Oxford University Press. (Collection of essential readings on the topic, including the articles mentioned above by Strawson and Frankfurt).

Wolf, Susan (1990) Freedom Within Reason, Oxford University Press. (Influential defence of a compatibilist view).

Internet Resources

The Determinism and Freedom Philosophy Website, edited by Ted Honderich.

(Many useful articles, including the relevant sections from Hobbes, Hume and Kant can be found here).

In the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (edited by Tim Crane):

Duff, R.A. ‘Responsibility’.

Strawson, G. ‘Free Will’.

In the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (edited by Ed Zalta):

McKenna, M. and Coates, J. ‘Compatibilism’.

O’Connor, T. ‘Free Will’.

PHI 101 Hilary Putnam Computers & Functionalism

Finally, here is a clip of Hilary Putnam in (rather one-sided) conversation with Bryan Magee on computers and functionalism.

The mind as a function, 2:04

Brian Magee

PHI 101 Mind, Brains, Computers, Cartesian, Turing, Searle

What is it to have a mind? We are certain that anyone reading this text has a mind. But what are the special properties that beings with minds have? What sorts of things have those properties: animals? Infants? Computers? We will discuss some of the approaches contemporary philosophers have taken to the question of what it is to have a mind. We begin our discussion with Cartesian dualism, which claims that mind is immaterial, continue to identity theory, a view that mind is identifiable with physical matter, and finish with functionalism, according to which a mental state is essentially identifiable with what it does. Secondly, we concentrate on the problems that thought experiments of Alan Turing and John Searle pose to the functionalist account of mind.

PHI 101 Hume vs. Reid

David Hume's argument is that you

should never believe that a miracle has occurred on the basis of testimony.

Lots of ways you can challenge Hume's argument.

One way you could challenge it, you could challenge his definition of miracle.

You could say he's got that wrong.

But I think there's another interesting way to challenge the argument.

Challenge the assumption.

You should only trust testimony when you've got evidence.

Testifier is likely to be right.

And that's the premise of Hume's argument that his most important contemporary

critic, Thomas Reid took issue with.

So, Reid was a minister in the Church of Scotland and

a professor at the University of Aberdeen in Glasgow.

And he challenged this assumption of Hume's in a book called Inquiry into

the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense which was first published in 1764.

And the challenge comes in a section that Reid entitled,

of the analogy between perception and the credit we give human testimony.

So, Reid argued that trusting testimony is just like trusting your senses,

trusting what you see around you.

To believing something on the basis of what someone else says is just like

believing something on the basis of seeing it with your own eyes, Reid thought.

So, here's the interesting thing.

We don't only trust our senses when we've got evidence that they're likely

to be right.

Hume and Reid, one of the few things they agreed on was that we don't have any

kind of good evidence that our senses are likely to be right.

So, Hume and Reid both thought,

we don't trust our senses on the basis of evidence that they're likely to be right.

So, what Reid's gonna challenge is Hume's assumption that we should only trust

testimony on the basis of evidence of the testifier is likely to be right.

So, why does he think, you know, why does he think that?

What's his argument?

Well, Hume and Reid both thought,

there were innate principles that governed how we think and how we feel.

They wouldn't put it this way, but

they both thought that we were hard wired to think in certain ways.

So, they both thought, for example, that we were hard wired to trust our senses.

We're hard wired to believe what we see before our eyes, but

here's what Reid thought that Hume didn't think.

Reid thought that we're also hard wired to trust testimony.

He said there's a innate principle of credulity, he called it, and

here's what that principle was.

It's a disposition to confide in the veracity of others and

to believe what they tell us.

PHI 101 Gettier Problems

/gettier

PHI 210 PHI 101 Eryca Part 3 Knowledge

Eryca 

5:25

https://youtu.be/87heidlFqG4

New Books in Religion Podcast: Shinto, Buddhist, Kami, Japan

In her recent monograph, Assembling Shinto: Buddhist Approaches to Kami Worship in Medieval Japan (Harvard University Asia Center, 2017), Anna Andreeva focuses on a complex network of religious sites, figures, and texts to help us better understand the way in which Japanese deities were worshipped in medieval Japan. In so doing, she illuminates the medieval stages of a process that led to what was later called Shinto, and adds to the growing body of scholarship that challenges the relatively recent idea that Shinto is simply the native religion of Japan, unchanged since ancient times.

To tackle such a grand undertaking, Andreeva focuses on a mountain in central Japan called Mt. Miwa as well as on Ise, the location of the Ise shrines and the abode of the most important imperial deity. Beginning with the significance of Mt. Miwa as a religious site for pre-ninth-century Japanese rulers, Andreeva charts the decline of this mountain’s importance during the eighth-to-twelfth centuries and the subsequent revival of the site during the thirteenth century by non-elite practitioners of esoteric Buddhism stationed at small Miwa temples and by the Saidaiji lineage under the direction of the Buddhist monk Eison and his disciples. Continuing chronologically, she then shows how the thirteenth-century revival led some time later to the emergence of the so-called Miwa-ryu Shinto, an eclectic tradition which spread to different regions of Japan and whose influence continued until the early nineteenth century.

Central to Andreeva’s project is the world of Japanese esoteric Buddhist thought and ritual, for it was in this setting that the Japanese deities could be transformed from beings characterized by ignorance and desire into embodiments of Buddhist awakening. Throughout the book Andreeva addresses many religious elements, Japanese and not, that were incorporated into esoteric Buddhist traditions active at Mt. Miwa and Ise. These include the incorporation of deities from ancient Japanese mythology into medieval legends and esoteric ritual, serpentine and dragon imagery, initiation rites modeled on the enthronement of a king, pilgrimage, and the use of royal symbolism. In addition, she provides a number of detailed descriptions of rituals and translations of liturgical and exegetical works.

The book’s topic is very complex: Andreeva has opted out of the usual approach, which would be to trace the development of a single figure, text, idea, or institution. This makes the project far more difficult for the researcher, but has the invaluable advantage that it allows the reader to perceive and appreciate the fascinating networks that show how medieval Japanese religion actually existed and developed on the ground. Beyond its importance for understanding Japanese Buddhist intellectual history, esoteric Buddhist thought and ritual, and the development of Shinto, the book also serves as an example of how to study the intricate social, economic, and geographical networks that lie behind the development of religious ideas, practices, and institutions.

February 7, 2018 at 6:00 AM

36.1 MB (Audio)

HUM 111 Holy Roman Empire

When the various Germanic tribes found that they could settle on the lands once occupied by the Romans and their vassals, they were elated. Before the highly symbolic victory of Alaric, wandering tribesmen were in danger of being slaughtered by Roman border garrisons should they find themselves inextricably deep into Roman territory and without hope of withdrawal and retreat.

With the increasing incursions of the Huns into German lands, and the panic this caused, the tribes became ever more incautious, and in some cases the ancient councils decided on uprooting and migrating into Roman franchises defended by Roman forces, with all the risks that entailed.

The so-called Visigoths, or Western Goths were among the first of the Germanic peoples to survive for a prolonged period of time within Roman borders. After being confronted with the reality of annihilation through some unrecorded massacre of their tribal brethren by Hunnic invaders, the Visigothic warriors hoisted Alaric on their shields, and decided to enter Italy.

The great Vandal general Stilichus was charged by the Roman Senate with pursuing and destroying Alaric and his army, however in a whirlwind of military strategy Alaric saved his people and his soldiers sacked Rome, before the group escaped to first Aquitania and then Iberia.

Similar stories were repeated elsewhere, until all the major parts of the Western Roman Empire hosted substantial Germanic populations, such as the Franks, the Burgundians, the Suebi, the Vandals and others. These quickly learned to speak the dialects that the locals had created from proper Latin, and called themselves Romans, as well.

There is no evidence that these new Romans, who might be Christians, had any idea of the pagan and sometimes hedonistic Roman Imperial life-style that had been the unchallenged norm before Emperor Constantine embraced Christianity. They grew increasingly conscious that the Catholic religion, as led by the Pope of Rome, was extremely important in their new lives on Roman lands, and those who still followed traditional religious beliefs, whether Christian or not, would be persuaded to embrace Catholicism wholeheartedly before long.

When these new Roman citizens first came together for battle against an enemy of Rome, and Mohammad had declared himself such at an early date, it was natural that they should style themselves as Holy Romans, rather that simply Roman.

The label stuck, and the entire Gallo-German-Roman culture became an intertwinement of religious and military duties, where some of the Imperial Roman institutions (titles and duties) were preserved in one form, or another, but other things were done strictly through the offices of the Church, the Bishops, Priests and other Clerics.

In some senses the entire Holy Roman establishment was more unified, not less, than the Roman Empire that preceded it. This was because Clerics could keep accurate marriage records of the noble landowners, and advise marriages based upon these records, strengthening ties between the ruling families. It was even said on some occasion or other that all the nobles of Europe were related to Jesus Christ to some degree. Holding such a belief in these days might entitle you to an extended stay in a mental institution, and imitation of the religious fervor and depth of belief of those times is generally discouraged, much as would have had the “enlightened” instructors in the ages that followed.

Both the ancient Roman families and the Germanic newcomers were more or less satisfied with this system, which allowed some of the old Romans an excessive amount of influence in the distribution of entitlements through their long residency in the city of Rome, itself, while giving the Germanic settlers a chance to work the land and prove themselves through service to their feudal overlords, whether they be Roman or German.

The Medieval Age and the Holy Roman Empire are denigrated by the thinkers, or philosophers of the Enlightenment as “Dark Ages,” but they were as much a part of European History as the Renaissance and the Age of Discovery and might have been a fortunate way that the newcomers from the North were spared immersion in the greatest excesses of the pagan Roman world, including the gratuitous violence and blood-sport of the gladiatorial arenas, the prostitution of slaves and servants, as well as other exploitative and abusive practices known to have been ordinary business in the dark places and shadows of Ancient Rome, the Rome that existed as a pagan construct, replete with witches and their magic, gods and demi-gods and auguries of all sorts.

Mahattan Catholic Islamist College

manhattan-islamic-balkan

PHI 212 PHI 101 Robot Olympics

Olympics

HUM 111 Collapse and Fall of the Roman Empire

At-what-point-of-history-did-the-Roman-Empire-start-to-fall-apart

HUM 112 HIS 105 American Literature Mark Twain

American Lit

PHI 212 Stoic Philosophy for Moderns

/9-stoic-practices-that-will-help-you-thrive-in-the-madness-of-modernity

REL 212 HUM 111 Roman Jerusalem

Jerusalem

REL 212 World Religions Hinduism

What do Hindus believe? How do they see the world? What do Christians and Hindus have in common, and what are the major differences?

January 16, 2013 at 1:00 AM

70.9 MB (Audio)

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hinduism/id592632558?i=1000331995894&mt=2


Beaver Creek Nazarene Church

REL 212 Hora, Jewish Wedding Dance

Hora

what-gift-do-you-give-at-a-jewish-wedding

REL 212 Diwali

Hinduism Festivals Module for HUM 111

Learning Objective:

The student in the Hinduism Festivals module will understand Diwali and the Festival of Lights by answering the six prompts during the video.

Assessment:

The professor will verify the learning objective by responding individually to the student, correcting if necessary, and answering any additional questions the student has about Diwali.

REL 212 Zoroastrian

/culturalinstitute/beta/exhibit

REL 212 Hinduism: Rama, A God Among Humans

The story of “ Rama, A God Among Humans” is about a prince named Rama who was favored to reign on the throne of his father Dasaratha; but was banished to our world when his evil stepmother Kaikeyi wished that her son Bharata would rein in his place . His father could not refuse the request of his wife because he was a righteous king and this transgression would have looked bad in the eyes of his citizens. Dasaratha died of a broken heart after banishing Rama. Rama was sent to the forest of Dandaka where he was estimated to have killed fourteen thousand demons in battle. His brother Laksmana accompanied him along with Sita, “the model of a devout Hindu Wife.” Ravana, the king of demons, hearing about the slaughter of his kin, kidnapped Rama’s wife Sita and fled to his Kingdom of Linka. Hanuman the great monkey joined Rama in his quest to find Sita in the Kingdom of Linka. Hanuman burned the city down, but spared Sita in his fierce attack. Rama defeated Ravana when he travelled to the city and named Vibhisana as the lord of the demons in Lanka after. Sadly, Rama had to banish Sita from his kingdom because people began questioning if she had remained pure and faithful to him while staying in the castle of Ravana. This broke Ramas heart because he knew that she was faithful, but in order to maintain his reputation as a righteous kind he banished his wife.