Karl and Leonard,
I want to thank you both for your frankness and courtesy in sharing these ideas. Karl, your last post or two on the Theology and Science thread were very good, and I wish I could respond as quickly and as copiously as you seem to be able to. And I really appreciate your honest attempt to understand and see from a perspective that is not yours. I agree with much in your last two posts. And Leonard, I likewise appreciate your passionate and generous nature, even though we seem to be at opposite ends of the spectrum on a lot of things.
I want to continue looking carefully at these 3 specific wv’s which I have called by various names: the Cross, Clock and Circle, or the view from Jerusalem, Athens, and India…or still a solar, lunar and the Christian view, or alternatively, Christian Theism, Deism, (the Enlightenment) and Romanticism. Again, sorry for the too many names, but I think you are getting the idea of how I use them interchangeably. And all three of these views can be distinguished on the way they understand the relationship of Creator to the creation. And it is only in Christian theism, and of course the other monotheistic religions, that we see the idea of the absolute separation of the Creator from the creation…and we can deal with the specifics of these three…Judaism, Christianity, and Islam later.
But given these three views of the Cross the Clock and the Circle, I would like to focus for simplicity sake on what they mean for epistemology and politics. And of course by politics I’m speaking of the connection to human rights, and liberty. I want to look at what each of these 3 views means for liberty and tyranny.
I’m jumping ahead here but Karl I will be making the case that slavery was overcome due to the influence of the Judaeo-Christian view, and the values expressed in the Declaration of Independence, which are connected in a indissoluble bond. M.L. King, made this argument as did early abolitionists Mariaha Stewart and David Walker.
But I am jumping ahead. For now please consider the following quote from a chapter by Joseph Campbell, which I’ve already sent to Karl, and Leonard you’ve seen it before too, and even commented on the part I’m about to share. But with your indulgence, I’d like to discuss this entire chapter in more detail to make my point.
I’d like to know if you guys agree with this statement I’m about to share first. Is it true or not, in your opinions. Secondly, if you think it is true, then which world view of the three can we attribute these results to.
Here is the opening paragraph to Joseph Campbell’s chapter, “The Separation of East and West.
The Separation East and West
It is not easy for Westerners to realize that the ideas recently developed in the West of the individual, his selfhood, his rights, and his freedom, have no meaning whatsoever in the Orient. They had no meaning for primitive man. They would have meant nothing to the peoples of the early Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Chinese, or Indian civilizations. They are, in fact, repugnant to the ideals, the aims and orders of life, of most of the peoples of this earth. And yet—and here is my second point—they are the truly great “new thing” that we do indeed represent to the world and that constitutes our Occidental revelation of a properly human spiritual ideal, true to the highest potentiality of our species.