Pages tagged ""

Lard Buddha vs Chocolate Jesus

Posted on 10th December, 2008 by Heather

Spot the difference between a relatively-godless religion and a god-heavy one.

Gurkha chefs won a silver medal in some military cooking competition with a lard Buddha. Well, not really much of a news item, but 100 hours of solid and “boring” lard-sculpting must count for something. At least some Gurkha Buddhists can obviously mix comedy, creativity and philosophy in a way that could shame the monotheists.

Compare and contrast this appealing effort with the hysteria over chocolate Jesus in 2007, which sparked a response the BBC, perhaps hyperbolically, described as an “outcry.” (A bit strange, given how much more appealing chocolate is than lard, when measured only by the criterion of edibility.)

A New York art gallery has decided to cancel an exhibit of a chocolate sculpture of Jesus Christ after protests by a US Catholic group…..
We’re delighted with the outcome,” said Kiera McCaffrey, spokeswoman for the League.
Ms McCaffrey had called the exhibit “an assault on Christians”.

The chocolate fuss was as nothing compared to the Piss Christ issue. Although to be honest, it seems as if the artist was blatantly taking the piss. $15,000 of funding for a plastic crucifix and a cup of urine. (Then again, Damien Hirst can get sums exponentially larger for pieces of “art” that are physically created by his workforce and his work doesn’t even make you laugh. So, good luck to Serrano.)

That one actually made it to the Congressional record. I started counting the rant words (”outrage”, “shock”, “indignity”, and so on) but got distracted by the idea that it was obviously some game of outrage bingo. With congressmen trying to outdo each other in their plundering of an imaginary Rhetorical Rage Dictionary.

Do I even need to mention the Mohammed cartoons furore? And so on,

So congratulations, Gurkha chefs, for your charming lardtastic efforts.

Popularity: 8% [?]


Popularity: 8% [?]

Religious Intolerance

Posted on 27th January, 2007 by TW

As I said before, Christianity is a hard target to avoid when it comes the black humour provided by intolerant, bigoted religious crackpots. This time I may have been able to hit two religions with one post though. (The pictures are nothing to do with the text they are just here to make the blog look pretty :-) )

Part of the problem seems to stem from Religions, being inherently “faith” based (surely by definition) superstition cults, trying to bring themselves into the modern, post-Renaissance era of logic and reasoned thought.

Popularity: 20% [?]


Popularity: 20% [?]

A bit mellower ….. mentioning metaphors

Posted on 9th January, 2007 by Heather

This source for part of the blog (i.e. me) must confess to being too pompous and argumentative in recent posts, so I’m hoping this will be mellower.

So, in diametric opposition to my normal posts, I am going to list what’s good in religions.

Almost all religions meet our need for a philosophy of existence. We all feel a sense of wonder at the universe. As far as I can see human beings will never grasp the nature of being, just because we  only have our human capacity for thinking.  This is not an argument against pushing our capacity to know things to its limit.   From our perspective, the universe can only know itself through us.

The best of religion provides a language by which we can conceive of our existence.  (In this sense only, I agree that science acts in the same way as religion.)

I suppose that’s saying the main value of religion is in its contribution to philosophy. There are plenty of other valuable things that religion can provide, such as a sense of community, rites of passage, rituals to help us deal with the unbearable.   But we would barely be able to conceieve of anything in philosophical terms without concepts that have been refined over thousands of years.

Religion provides metaphors for the knowledge that is always hanging outside our grasp.

Thought alone is not enough to express the complexity of our experience. 

Where religion - and any magical belief systems -  are distinct from raw philosophy is that they let us interact with the knowledge. They can integrate wonder into our logical-thought knowledge of the nature of  the universe. They offer ways to express this physically - good works, prayer, dance, song, exercise, observing fasts, taking part in pilgrimages, meditation or, even, fighting as in the case of kung fu.

Buddhism, taoism, hinduism, African pantheism and so on all seem to achieve this much more creatively than the God-of- Abraham religions. However, I suspect that may be partly because, in the West, we tend to know them only after any dubious social content has been filtered out (e.g. the caste system) and their philosophy has been interpreted for us. There are also plenty of brilliant things in the God-of- Abraham-style religions.

In that sense, even those of who can admire myth and metaphor without taking it as literally true can play with the ideas. This is a bit like being the kids who know there isn’t really a tooth fairy but will take the coin the tooth fairy leaves. 

The problems with religion are to do with power and ideology. The more powerful the religion, the grubbier it becomes. Religions are not just collections of insights and myths. They are forms of social organisation. They amass resources. They hold power or provide support to the powerful.

I disagree with Dawkins where he treats religion as if it, in itself, has power to cause social effects. I feel that this ignores the ideological role of religion, i.e. the power to influence opinions in favour of particular social groups. (Just because something serves as ideology doesn’t mean it’s not true.) Social change and religion are inextricable, each feeding on and shaping each other.   I don’t think it matters what we actually believe about the nature of the universe or morality.  It matters what we do about it. Specifically, what we do to people who think using a different set of metaphors.

The trend towards fundamentalism in several religions can be explained in a million ways, and although i am obviously more than tempted, (Curse this hubris [note use of religious metaphors])  I’ll have to pass on that now, or this blog will never get published. The relevance here is that  you can’t just dismiss it as silly nonsense (OK, you can)  We need to think about what people are expressing when they hold to those beliefs and try to address the causes. 

(Tough on religion, tough on the causes of religion, following Blair.)

Sorry, I was blatantly lying about not being so pompous and argumentative. I promise to try harder in the next blog.

Popularity: 13% [?]


Popularity: 13% [?]

Fast Follow Up

Posted on 30th December, 2006 by TW

It seems I posted the last article in haste as there is a new contender for the most “off the wall” philosophy tagged blog.

Take a look at this blinder (from Enigma, another MySpace user…)

As a Buddhist, I practice Nichiren Daishonin’s buddhism. I’ve been quite open about it up until a few months ago. Where I work, there are a few other people who I recently found out practic the same type of buddhism. However, there is one person - who I don’t know at all who has been imposing what I can only describe as anonymous guerrilla tactics to get other people to become aware of this practice. They have been posting magazines to the work place, which has annoyed some members of staff and leaving books around to people with messages like ‘lord knows, you bloody need it!’ That sort of shit. Not necessary. I have tried to find out who it is but to no avail.In this practice, it is through forging genuine friendships with people and showing some sort of example yourself as a human being that you introduce others, not by force or by some underhand tactics or other. It annoyed me…

ps - Anyone have any questions about Nichiren Buddhism, just ask me….:)

That is it. The wonders of MySpace seem to prevent me from looking at any other posts made to try and put this into context.

It really has left me stumped as to what “she” is going on about.

Popularity: 30% [?]


Popularity: 30% [?]