The SpiritWiki - User contributions [en-gb]

Connection Experience

2026-09-21T15:02:32Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Connection Experience''' (a.k.a. '''Connection Event''') is a discrete, short-term psychological, emotional, and physical experience of [[Connection]] that is sufficiently above one's average daily [[Consciousness Quotient|CQ]] (i.e., [[Normal Consciousness]]) as to be perceived as a ''qualitatively'' different state of awareness, consciousness, and being. Phenomenologically, it is often felt as a connection to something outside the boundaries of the physical body.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[Human Development]] > [[Seven Components of Human Development|'''Seven Components of Human Development''']] > {{#ask:[[Is a component::Human Development]]
|sort=Has sort order
|format=ul}}

[[Lightning Path Human Development Framework]] > [[LP Connection Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::LP Connection Framework]]|format=ul|has sort order}}

[[Connection]] {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Experience]] {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Connection Experience]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Connection Experience]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Connection Experience]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

==List of [[LP]] Connection Experience Types==

[[Connection Experience Types]] > {{#ask: [[Is a::Connection Experience Type]]|format=ul}}

==List of Connection Outcomes==

[[Connection Outcomes]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Connection Outcome]]|Limit=1000}}

==Notes==

[[File:Connection Experience.png|alt=A mind map of the concept of the LP Concept of Connection Experience|thumb|Connection Experience]]

This connection could be to anything—to God, to the Gods, to demons, the devil, natural spirits, guides, ancestors, the cosmos, or even the mouse in the house.

George Harrison's Song "That Which I Have Lost" is about somebody's connection experience (https://open.spotify.com/track/5WFyiX3E0BgTgN6YKFID7O?si=838657bbf1ea4418)

Thomas Roberts provides a slide that outlines the value shifts brought about by [[Connection Experience]]<ref>See https://www.academia.edu/98105142/Value_Shifts_During_Nonpsychedelic_Mystical_Experiences_2023_slide</ref>

Grof, after Jung and Otto, note that connection experiences often have the quality of [[Numinosity]]

The [[LP]] identifies several different [[Connection Experience Types]] and many different [[Connection Outcomes]] (see below). We also recommend analyzing Connection Experience along five [[Connection Axes]].

Many consider Connection Experience to be the core of human spirituality, at the authentic root of every religion.
[[Ralph Waldo Emerson]] suggests "Every where the history of religion betrays a tendency to enthusiasm. The rapture of the Moravian and Quietist; the opening of the Internal sense of the Word, in the language of the New Jerusalem Church; the ''revival'' of the Calvinistic churches; the ''experiences'' of the Methodists, are varying forms of that shudder of awe and delight with which the individual soul always mingles with the universal soul." <ref>Emerson, Ralph Waldo. “The Over-Soul.” In The Complete Essays and Other Writings of Ralp Waldo Emerson. New York: Modern Library, 1950. p. 170.</ref>

R. A. Naulty: R. A. Naulty<ref>Naulty, R. A. “J L Mackie’s Disposal of Religious Experience.” Sophia 31, no. 1 (July 1992): 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02772348.</ref> says "...there [is] something wonderful and powerful about them [connection experiences]" which places them beyond ordinary experience."

There is an issue with [[Nomenclature Confusion]], many different names for the same experience. Linda Bourque and Kurt Back note there is "descriptive coincidence" between different types of transcendent/"aesthetic" and drug experiences and wonders if this "indicates there may be a complex of phenomena derived from different conditions which have a common expression and which may have a common function in human action."<ref>Bourque, Linda, and Kurt Back. “Values and Transcendental Experiences.” Social Forces 47, no. 1 (1968): 34. https://doi.org/10.2307/2574709. 34.</ref>

Shear notes that there is considerable congruence between the connection experiences reported in various cultures and traditions concluding "we now, I think, have good reason to think that these experiential accounts reflect congruent experiences." <ref>Shear, Jonathan. “Mysticism and Scientific Naturalism.” Sophia 43, no. 1 (May 2004): 83–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02782439.</ref>

Connection experiences may be positive (i.e. [[Zenith Experience|zenith experiences]]) or negative (i.e. [[Nadir Experience|nadir experiences]]). Whether or not a connection experience is a zenith experience or a nadir experience depends in large measure on how the individual receives the revelation/expansion/insight from the experience. Even very glorious truths and insights can be experienced with terror if the physical unit is unprepared or if the thinking processes have been corrupted by [[indoctrination]] and [[Toxic Socialization]].

Dreams can be connection events. "It is not denied...that a divine influx could take place in dreams..." ([[References|Jung, 1938: 22)]]

The [[Q-Scale]] may be used to estimate the intensity and quality of a connection event.

A connection event may occur spontaneously under conditions of relaxation and deep contentment. [[R. M. Bucke]]: "His mind...was calm and peaceful. He was in a state of quiet, almost passive enjoyment. All at once, without warning of any kind, he found himself wrapped around as it were by a flame-colored cloud."<ref>Bucke, Richard Maurice. Cosmic Consciousness (Kindle Locations 350-351). Book Tree. Kindle Edition. See [[Talk:Glimpse]] for the full account.</ref>

A connection experience may be facilitated via [[Connection Technique]], possibly with the help of a [[Connection Appliance]], and often by exploiting naturally occurring [[Connection Supplements]].

Connection Experiences can bring profound [[Healing]] and [[Transformation]]. As Grof notes, connection experiences (he calls them [[Holotropic States]] can, if correctly understood and supported, "have an extraordinary healing, transformative, and even evolutionary potential."<ref>Grof, Stanislav. ''When the Impossible Happens.'' Boulder, CO: Sounds True, 2006.</ref>

Connection experiences may be understood neurologically, as what occurs when the [[Default Mode Network]] (otherwise known as the [[Bodily Ego]] of the individual's brain releases control and allows [[Consciousness]] to flow into the [[Physical Unit]] (Sosteric, SOA1). Release may occur naturally, under conditions of [[alignment|aligned]] safety, or it can be forced by exploiting powerful [[Connection Supplements]].

'''TRIGGERS''' (old research) Hood <ref>Ralph W. Hood, Jr. “Differential Triggering of Mystical Experience as a Function of Self Actualization.” Review of Religious Research 18, no. 3 (1977): 264. https://doi.org/10.2307/3510214.</ref> provides a classification of triggers to mystical experience, including natural triggers (all aspects of nature), sexual triggers (sexual intercourse, note he restricts this to "heterosexual" intercourse), drug triggers, religious triggers (religious settings and religious activities, rituals, and prayer).

'''Triggers'' see Laski <ref>Laski, M. Ecstasy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 192AD.</ref> for additional conceptualization of triggers.

Hood <ref>Ralph W. Hood, Jr. “Differential Triggering of Mystical Experience as a Function of Self Actualization.” Review of Religious Research 18, no. 3 (1977): 264. https://doi.org/10.2307/3510214.</ref> notes that [[Self Actualized]] individuals are more likely to have a connection experience.

Taylor provides a list of triggers that include psychological turmoil (23.6%), nature (18%, meditation (13%) and watching or listening to arts performance (dance, music, play (13%). <ref>Taylor, Steve. “Spontaneous Awakening Experiences: Beyond Religion and Spiritual Practice.” ''Journal of Transpersonal Psychology'' 44, no. 1 (June 2012): 73–91.</ref> Notes the majority of triggers are NOT spiritual or religion (only 21.7% in his sample),and over 78% were spontaneous. Only 8% noted a felt encounter with God<blockquote>Nevertheless, the high incidence of 'spontaneous awakening experiences' strongly discredits the view that awakening experiences are only valid in a religious context. Surely awakening experiences become religious by virtue of post-experiential interpretation, through a conceptual application of a religious interpretation to a non-conceptual experience. As a consequence, the inclusion of such experiences under the umbrella term of 'religious experiences' (e.g., by Alister Hardy and the Religious Experience Unit) is surely misleading and inappropriate.<ref>Taylor, Steve. “Spontaneous Awakening Experiences: Beyond Religion and Spiritual Practice.” ''Journal of Transpersonal Psychology'' 44, no. 1 (June 2012): 73–91.</ref></blockquote>

===Causes===

'''Neurological/Biological'''

Leary: "those aspects of the psychedelic experience which subjects report to be ineffable and ecstatically religious involve a direct awareness of the processes which physicists and biochemists and neurologists measure."<ref>Leary, T. “The Religious Experience: Its Production and Interpretation.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 3, no. 1 (1970): 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.1970.10471364.</ref>. Also "We considered the hypothesis that the human being might
be able to become directly aware of energy exchanges and biological processes for which we now have no language and no perceptual training."<ref>Leary, T. “The Religious Experience: Its Production and Interpretation.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 3, no. 1 (1970): 345. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.1970.10471364.</ref>

==Incidence==

"Forty-ﬁve percent of participants reported experiencing non-pharmacologically induced EP at least once in their
lives, including derealization (17%), unitive experiences (15%), ecstatic thrills (15%), vivid perceptions (11%), changes in
perceived size (10%), bodily heat or electricity (9%), out-of-body experiences (8%), and perception of non-physical lights
(5%). Respondents reported a mix of positive and negative well-being outcomes following EP, with 13% claiming moderate
or greater suﬀering and 1.1% claiming life-threatening suﬀering. Of those who experienced suﬀering, 63% did not seek help."<ref>Wright, Malcolm J., Julieta Galante, Jessica S. Corneille, Andrea Grabovac, Daniel M. Ingram, and Matthew D. Sacchet. “Altered States of Consciousness Are Prevalent and Insufficiently Supported Clinically: A Population Survey.” ''Mindfulness'' 15, no. 5 (May 1, 2024): 1162–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-024-02356-z</ref>

67% of psychotherapists surveyed indicated having seen at least one client during a twelve month period who had reported a [[Connection Experience]].<ref>Allman, Lorraine S., Olivia de la Rocha, David N. Elkins, and Robert S. Weathers. “Psychotherapists’ Attitudes toward Clients Reporting Mystical Experiences.” Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training 29, no. 4 (Win 1992): 564–69.</ref>

Sosteric<ref>Sosteric. “Everybody Has a Connection Experience: Prevalence, Confusions, Interference, and Redefinition.” Spirituality Studies 4, no. 2 (2018).</ref> suggests connection experiences are a ubiquitious feature of human existence and that they occur naturally in healthy individuals.

As researchers have found, a remarkably high number of scholars identify themselves as having spiritual orientations and aspirations. <ref>Lindholm, Jennifer A., and Helen S. Astin. “Understanding the ‘Interior’ Life of Faculty: How Important Is Spirituality?” Religion & Education 33, no. 2 (2006): 64.</ref>

Bart Ehrman mentions his "born again" experience, which occurs after "asking Jesus into my heart... <ref>Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. Harper One, 2007. p. 3.</ref>

==Quotes==

===Aldous Huxley===

"The mystical experience is doubly valuable; it is valuable because it gives the experiencer a better understanding of himself and the world and because it may help him to lead a less self-centered and more creative life."<ref> Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Thirty-Two: 1961 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref>

"Alas, that is quite bad enough. We love ourselves to the point of idolatry; but we also intensely dislike ourselves—we find ourselves unutterably boring. Correlated with this distaste for the idolatrously worshipped self, there is in all of us a desire, sometimes latent, sometimes conscious and passionately expressed, to escape from the prison of our individuality, an urge to self-transcendence. It is to this urge that we owe mystical theology, spiritual exercises and yoga—to this, too, that we owe alcoholism and drug addiction."<ref> Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Thirty-Two: 1961 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref>

"Those who are offended by the idea that the swallowing of a pill may contribute to a genuinely religious experience should remember that all the standard mortifications—fasting, voluntary sleeplessness and self-torture—inflicted upon themselves by the ascetics of every religion for the purpose of acquiring merit, are also, like the mind-changing drugs, powerful devices for altering the chemistry of the body in general and the nervous system in particular. Or consider the procedures generally known as spiritual exercises. The breathing techniques taught by the yogi of India result in prolonged suspensions of respiration. These in turn result in an increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the blood; and the psychological consequence of this is a change in the quality of consciousness. Again, meditations involving long, intense concentration upon a single idea or image may also result—for neurological reasons which I do not profess to understand—in a slowing down of respiration and even in prolonged suspensions of breathing."<ref> Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Thirty-Four: 1961 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref>

{{template:endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Connection| ]]
[[Has sort order cc::1| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Authentic Core| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Guide Network| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Womb Room| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Transcending Self-Actualizers| ]]

Connection Experience

2026-09-21T13:04:15Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Connection Experience''' (a.k.a. '''Connection Event''') is a discrete, short-term psychological, emotional, and physical experience of [[Connection]] that is sufficiently above one's average daily [[Consciousness Quotient|CQ]] (i.e., [[Normal Consciousness]]) as to be perceived as a ''qualitatively'' different state of awareness, consciousness, and being. Phenomenologically, it is often experienced as a connection to something more than the isolated, individuated, ego, i.e., a connection to nature, other people, God, and all that.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[Human Development]] > [[Seven Components of Human Development|'''Seven Components of Human Development''']] > {{#ask:[[Is a component::Human Development]]
|sort=Has sort order
|format=ul}}

[[Lightning Path Human Development Framework]] > [[LP Connection Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::LP Connection Framework]]|format=ul|has sort order}}

[[Connection]] {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Experience]] {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Connection Experience]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Connection Experience]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Connection Experience]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Connection Experience]]|format=ul}}

==List of [[LP]] Connection Experience Types==

[[Connection Experience Types]] > {{#ask: [[Is a::Connection Experience Type]]|format=ul}}

==List of Connection Outcomes==

[[Connection Outcomes]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Connection Outcome]]|Limit=1000}}

==Notes==

[[File:Connection Experience.png|alt=A mind map of the concept of the LP Concept of Connection Experience|thumb|Connection Experience]]

George Harrison's Song "That Which I Have Lost" is about somebody's connection experience (https://open.spotify.com/track/5WFyiX3E0BgTgN6YKFID7O?si=838657bbf1ea4418)

Thomas Roberts provides a slide that outlines the value shifts brought about by [[Connection Experience]]<ref>See https://www.academia.edu/98105142/Value_Shifts_During_Nonpsychedelic_Mystical_Experiences_2023_slide</ref>

Grof, after Jung and Otto, note that connection experiences often have the quality of [[Numinosity]]

The [[LP]] identifies several different [[Connection Experience Types]] and many different [[Connection Outcomes]] (see below). We also recommend analyzing Connection Experience along five [[Connection Axes]].

Many consider Connection Experience to be the core of human spirituality, at the authentic root of every religion.
[[Ralph Waldo Emerson]] suggests "Every where the history of religion betrays a tendency to enthusiasm. The rapture of the Moravian and Quietist; the opening of the Internal sense of the Word, in the language of the New Jerusalem Church; the ''revival'' of the Calvinistic churches; the ''experiences'' of the Methodists, are varying forms of that shudder of awe and delight with which the individual soul always mingles with the universal soul." <ref>Emerson, Ralph Waldo. “The Over-Soul.” In The Complete Essays and Other Writings of Ralp Waldo Emerson. New York: Modern Library, 1950. p. 170.</ref>

R. A. Naulty: R. A. Naulty<ref>Naulty, R. A. “J L Mackie’s Disposal of Religious Experience.” Sophia 31, no. 1 (July 1992): 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02772348.</ref> says "...there [is] something wonderful and powerful about them [connection experiences]" which places them beyond ordinary experience."

There is an issue with [[Nomenclature Confusion]], many different names for the same experience. Linda Bourque and Kurt Back note there is "descriptive coincidence" between different types of transcendent/"aesthetic" and drug experiences and wonders if this "indicates there may be a complex of phenomena derived from different conditions which have a common expression and which may have a common function in human action."<ref>Bourque, Linda, and Kurt Back. “Values and Transcendental Experiences.” Social Forces 47, no. 1 (1968): 34. https://doi.org/10.2307/2574709. 34.</ref>

Shear notes that there is considerable congruence between the connection experiences reported in various cultures and traditions concluding "we now, I think, have good reason to think that these experiential accounts reflect congruent experiences." <ref>Shear, Jonathan. “Mysticism and Scientific Naturalism.” Sophia 43, no. 1 (May 2004): 83–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02782439.</ref>

Connection experiences may be positive (i.e. [[Zenith Experience|zenith experiences]]) or negative (i.e. [[Nadir Experience|nadir experiences]]). Whether or not a connection experience is a zenith experience or a nadir experience depends in large measure on how the individual receives the revelation/expansion/insight from the experience. Even very glorious truths and insights can be experienced with terror if the physical unit is unprepared or if the thinking processes have been corrupted by [[indoctrination]] and [[Toxic Socialization]].

Dreams can be connection events. "It is not denied...that a divine influx could take place in dreams..." ([[References|Jung, 1938: 22)]]

The [[Q-Scale]] may be used to estimate the intensity and quality of a connection event.

A connection event may occur spontaneously under conditions of relaxation and deep contentment. [[R. M. Bucke]]: "His mind...was calm and peaceful. He was in a state of quiet, almost passive enjoyment. All at once, without warning of any kind, he found himself wrapped around as it were by a flame-colored cloud."<ref>Bucke, Richard Maurice. Cosmic Consciousness (Kindle Locations 350-351). Book Tree. Kindle Edition. See [[Talk:Glimpse]] for the full account.</ref>

A connection experience may be facilitated via [[Connection Technique]], possibly with the help of a [[Connection Appliance]], and often by exploiting naturally occurring [[Connection Supplements]].

Connection Experiences can bring profound [[Healing]] and [[Transformation]]. As Grof notes, connection experiences (he calls them [[Holotropic States]] can, if correctly understood and supported, "have an extraordinary healing, transformative, and even evolutionary potential."<ref>Grof, Stanislav. ''When the Impossible Happens.'' Boulder, CO: Sounds True, 2006.</ref>

Connection experiences may be understood neurologically, as what occurs when the [[Default Mode Network]] (otherwise known as the [[Bodily Ego]] of the individual's brain releases control and allows [[Consciousness]] to flow into the [[Physical Unit]] (Sosteric, SOA1). Release may occur naturally, under conditions of [[alignment|aligned]] safety, or it can be forced by exploiting powerful [[Connection Supplements]].

'''TRIGGERS''' (old research) Hood <ref>Ralph W. Hood, Jr. “Differential Triggering of Mystical Experience as a Function of Self Actualization.” Review of Religious Research 18, no. 3 (1977): 264. https://doi.org/10.2307/3510214.</ref> provides a classification of triggers to mystical experience, including natural triggers (all aspects of nature), sexual triggers (sexual intercourse, note he restricts this to "heterosexual" intercourse), drug triggers, religious triggers (religious settings and religious activities, rituals, and prayer).

'''Triggers'' see Laski <ref>Laski, M. Ecstasy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 192AD.</ref> for additional conceptualization of triggers.

Hood <ref>Ralph W. Hood, Jr. “Differential Triggering of Mystical Experience as a Function of Self Actualization.” Review of Religious Research 18, no. 3 (1977): 264. https://doi.org/10.2307/3510214.</ref> notes that [[Self Actualized]] individuals are more likely to have a connection experience.

Taylor provides a list of triggers that include psychological turmoil (23.6%), nature (18%, meditation (13%) and watching or listening to arts performance (dance, music, play (13%). <ref>Taylor, Steve. “Spontaneous Awakening Experiences: Beyond Religion and Spiritual Practice.” ''Journal of Transpersonal Psychology'' 44, no. 1 (June 2012): 73–91.</ref> Notes the majority of triggers are NOT spiritual or religion (only 21.7% in his sample),and over 78% were spontaneous. Only 8% noted a felt encounter with God<blockquote>Nevertheless, the high incidence of 'spontaneous awakening experiences' strongly discredits the view that awakening experiences are only valid in a religious context. Surely awakening experiences become religious by virtue of post-experiential interpretation, through a conceptual application of a religious interpretation to a non-conceptual experience. As a consequence, the inclusion of such experiences under the umbrella term of 'religious experiences' (e.g., by Alister Hardy and the Religious Experience Unit) is surely misleading and inappropriate.<ref>Taylor, Steve. “Spontaneous Awakening Experiences: Beyond Religion and Spiritual Practice.” ''Journal of Transpersonal Psychology'' 44, no. 1 (June 2012): 73–91.</ref></blockquote>

===Causes===

'''Neurological/Biological'''

Leary: "those aspects of the psychedelic experience which subjects report to be ineffable and ecstatically religious involve a direct awareness of the processes which physicists and biochemists and neurologists measure."<ref>Leary, T. “The Religious Experience: Its Production and Interpretation.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 3, no. 1 (1970): 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.1970.10471364.</ref>. Also "We considered the hypothesis that the human being might
be able to become directly aware of energy exchanges and biological processes for which we now have no language and no perceptual training."<ref>Leary, T. “The Religious Experience: Its Production and Interpretation.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 3, no. 1 (1970): 345. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.1970.10471364.</ref>

==Incidence==

"Forty-ﬁve percent of participants reported experiencing non-pharmacologically induced EP at least once in their
lives, including derealization (17%), unitive experiences (15%), ecstatic thrills (15%), vivid perceptions (11%), changes in
perceived size (10%), bodily heat or electricity (9%), out-of-body experiences (8%), and perception of non-physical lights
(5%). Respondents reported a mix of positive and negative well-being outcomes following EP, with 13% claiming moderate
or greater suﬀering and 1.1% claiming life-threatening suﬀering. Of those who experienced suﬀering, 63% did not seek help."<ref>Wright, Malcolm J., Julieta Galante, Jessica S. Corneille, Andrea Grabovac, Daniel M. Ingram, and Matthew D. Sacchet. “Altered States of Consciousness Are Prevalent and Insufficiently Supported Clinically: A Population Survey.” ''Mindfulness'' 15, no. 5 (May 1, 2024): 1162–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-024-02356-z</ref>

67% of psychotherapists surveyed indicated having seen at least one client during a twelve month period who had reported a [[Connection Experience]].<ref>Allman, Lorraine S., Olivia de la Rocha, David N. Elkins, and Robert S. Weathers. “Psychotherapists’ Attitudes toward Clients Reporting Mystical Experiences.” Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training 29, no. 4 (Win 1992): 564–69.</ref>

Sosteric<ref>Sosteric. “Everybody Has a Connection Experience: Prevalence, Confusions, Interference, and Redefinition.” Spirituality Studies 4, no. 2 (2018).</ref> suggests connection experiences are a ubiquitious feature of human existence and that they occur naturally in healthy individuals.

As researchers have found, a remarkably high number of scholars identify themselves as having spiritual orientations and aspirations. <ref>Lindholm, Jennifer A., and Helen S. Astin. “Understanding the ‘Interior’ Life of Faculty: How Important Is Spirituality?” Religion & Education 33, no. 2 (2006): 64.</ref>

Bart Ehrman mentions his "born again" experience, which occurs after "asking Jesus into my heart... <ref>Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. Harper One, 2007. p. 3.</ref>

==Quotes==

===Aldous Huxley===

"The mystical experience is doubly valuable; it is valuable because it gives the experiencer a better understanding of himself and the world and because it may help him to lead a less self-centered and more creative life."<ref> Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Thirty-Two: 1961 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref>

"Alas, that is quite bad enough. We love ourselves to the point of idolatry; but we also intensely dislike ourselves—we find ourselves unutterably boring. Correlated with this distaste for the idolatrously worshipped self, there is in all of us a desire, sometimes latent, sometimes conscious and passionately expressed, to escape from the prison of our individuality, an urge to self-transcendence. It is to this urge that we owe mystical theology, spiritual exercises and yoga—to this, too, that we owe alcoholism and drug addiction."<ref> Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Thirty-Two: 1961 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref>

"Those who are offended by the idea that the swallowing of a pill may contribute to a genuinely religious experience should remember that all the standard mortifications—fasting, voluntary sleeplessness and self-torture—inflicted upon themselves by the ascetics of every religion for the purpose of acquiring merit, are also, like the mind-changing drugs, powerful devices for altering the chemistry of the body in general and the nervous system in particular. Or consider the procedures generally known as spiritual exercises. The breathing techniques taught by the yogi of India result in prolonged suspensions of respiration. These in turn result in an increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the blood; and the psychological consequence of this is a change in the quality of consciousness. Again, meditations involving long, intense concentration upon a single idea or image may also result—for neurological reasons which I do not profess to understand—in a slowing down of respiration and even in prolonged suspensions of breathing."<ref> Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Thirty-Four: 1961 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref>

{{template:endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Connection| ]]
[[Has sort order cc::1| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Authentic Core| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Guide Network| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Womb Room| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Transcending Self-Actualizers| ]]

Religion of Humanity

2026-09-19T14:58:36Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
The '''Religion of Humanity''' is August Comte’s proposed secular and scientific replacement for traditional theology. It is the spiritual and moral dimension of his [[Comprehensive Framework]], intended to unify humanity under a rational, ethical, and empirically grounded moral order.<ref name=":0">Auguste Comte, ''The Catechism of Positivism; or, Summary Exposition of the Universal Religion,'' trans. Richard Congreve (London: John Chapman, 1852).p. 274. https://archive.org/details/artofcreationess00carp</ref> According to Comte, the "practical sphere of religion is the improvement of human order, its physical, intellectual, and moral improvement."<ref name=":0" /> Religion is the cohesive glue which helps implement a [[Comprehensive Framework]] because it "regulates each one’s individual nature” and “forms the rallying point for all the separate individuals.'''”<ref name=":0" />
</blockquote>
<center><blockquote>"'''Love as our principle, Order as our basis, Progress as our end'''"</blockquote></center>

==Concept Map==

===Key Term===

[[SpiritWiki]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::SpiritWiki]]|format=ol|sort=Has sort SW}}

[[Comprehensive Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Comprehensive Framework]]}}

===Comte's Terms===

{{#ask:[[Is a term::August Comte]]}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Religion of Humanity]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Religion of Humanity]]}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Religion of Humanity]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Religion of Humanity]]}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Religion of Humanity]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Religion of Humanity]]}}

==Notes==

==== Comte’s Religion of Humanity ====
Comte’s '''Religion of Humanity''' was conceived as a secular spiritual system designed to provide the moral, intellectual, and emotional cohesion once supplied by traditional religion. It formed the ethical, ritualistic, and intellectual core of Comte’s [[Comprehensive Framework]], creating and harmonizing [[Moral Order]], [[Intellectual Order]], and [[Social Order]] into a unified social philosophy that could be practiced like a religion.

For Comte, religion (it's definition) comes in three parts.

* '''Essence:''' religion = ''state of unity'' (not belief in God).
* '''Scope:''' applies to '''individual''' and '''society'''.
* '''Operation:''' makes all human faculties “converge” on one purpose (which, for him, will be Humanity

According to Comte, religion represents the “the state of perfect unity which is the distinctive mark of man's [sic] existence,both as an individual and in society, when all the constituent parts of his nature, moral as well as physical, are made habitually to converge towards one common purpose.” (Catechisms, p. 46-7) Religion si thus the institution with the rituals, doctrine, and function that ''binds feeling, thinking, and living into one convergent orientation'' (worship → doctrine → regime).

xxx (add three orders here and show how religion glues em together

Religion is important to Comte, obviously. It forms the skeleton, organs, and skin of his [[Comprehensive Framework]], religion sits '''above/through''' the three orders as the integrative layer that:

# names the supreme object (Humanity / Great Being),
# supplies the affective engine (love → altruism),
# authorizes the hierarchy of knowledge,
# and institutionalizes the conduct rules.

According to Comte, the Religion of Humanity would replace faith in God with reverence for the collective human species — “Humanity” personified as a moral ideal.

> “In the final order, Humanity becomes the true Great Being, the supreme object of all our affections and our reverence.” — *Comte, Catechism of Positivism*, p. 17

The Religion of Humanity would maintain many of the social and emotional functions of religion — ritual, symbols, priesthood, moral instruction — but reoriented toward human progress and social cohesion rather than divine authority.

==== Comte’s Core Reasons for Creating a New Religion ====

=== 1. Religion Fulfills Essential Social Functions ===
Comte argued that religion is indispensable because it serves core civilizational roles:
{| class="wikitable"
!Function
!Explanation
|-
|'''Unifies Belief'''
|Religion creates a shared worldview — a cosmology — that binds society together.
|-
|'''Regulates Emotion'''
|It channels emotion (especially love, awe, duty) toward socially constructive ends.
|-
|'''Structures Time'''
|Religious calendars and rituals coordinate collective time, memory, and moral rhythm.
|-
|'''Provides Moral Discipline'''
|It curbs egoism and cultivates altruism and duty through emotional training.
|-
|'''Stabilizes Society'''
|It offers cohesion in times of crisis, change, or fragmentation.
|}

==== To Replace God with Humanity (The Great Being) ====
Rather than worship a supernatural deity, Comte proposed '''reverence for Humanity itself''' — past, present, and future — as a collective, evolving moral being.

* This was not metaphysical. Humanity was real.
* It evoked awe, love, and service.
* It provided a “higher” to serve — a psychological need.

<blockquote>“We must adore the Great Being Humanity, serve her, live for her, and even die for her, if necessary.” — ''Catechism'', p. 23</blockquote>

==== To Establish a Stable Moral Order ====
Comte believed '''morality must be institutionalized''' — not just taught, but embedded into social rituals, symbols, and education.

* Pure science cannot bind people emotionally.
* Pure politics cannot cultivate altruism.
* Philosophy without sacred structure is weak.

He wanted to give '''positive morality''' (rooted in sociology and science) the same social '''power and authority''' that Christianity once had.<blockquote>“Morality is the most important of all sciences… and it must be the foundation of any durable social order.” — ''Catechism'', p. 35</blockquote>

==== The Collapse of Traditional Religion Created a Dangerous Vacuum ====
Comte witnessed first-hand how the destruction of feudal and theological order left people ideologically '''adrift'''.

* '''Theological systems''' were discredited by science.
* '''Metaphysical systems''' (liberalism, romanticism) were vague and unstable.
* '''Capitalism''' offered no moral compass.
* '''Revolutions''' erupted without direction or coherence.

He saw this as a '''social emergency''':<blockquote>“We have destroyed the old faith; we have not replaced it... Men are now governed by opinions without principle, by desires without duties.”

— ''Catechism'', p. 15</blockquote>Hence, the need for a '''scientific religion''' to fill the vacuum left by God — a ''Religion of Humanity'' grounded in sociology, altruism, and planetary ethics.

==== Core Elements of the Religion of Humanity ====
{| class="wikitable"
!Element
!Description
|-
|'''Great Being'''
|Humanity itself, conceived as a collective moral organism — the living sum of all human beings past, present, and future.
|-
|'''Cult'''
|A structured ritual system emphasizing gratitude, moral duty, and service to Humanity rather than worship of a deity.
|-
|'''Calendar of Great Men'''
|A secular liturgical calendar celebrating scientists, philosophers, artists, and moral exemplars who advanced human progress.
|-
|'''Priesthood of Humanity'''
|A moral and intellectual elite (see [[Sociocrats]]) responsible for spiritual and educational guidance.
|-
|'''Altruism'''
|The central moral principle, expressed in Comte’s maxim: “Live for others.”
|-
|'''Social Function'''
|To bind society emotionally and ethically around shared scientific truth and collective purpose.
|}

==== Comte’s Vision of Purpose ====
Comte’s Religion of Humanity sought to stabilize society after the collapse of theological faith and aristocratic power. It aimed to channel human emotion and moral energy into service of the collective good, replacing transcendent divinity with immanent social duty.

> “The object of Positive Religion is to regulate the heart by directing it towards Humanity, the only real and complete object of our affections.” — *Comte, Catechism*, p. 23

Comte explicitly rejected atheism and pure materialism as socially destructive, arguing instead for a unifying moral cult grounded in science and benevolence.

==== Problems with Comte’s Vision (LP Critique) ====
While Comte’s Religion of Humanity anticipated the need for a global moral synthesis, it remains limited by its 19th-century materialism and lack of inner psychology or spirituality. The [[Lightning Path]] recognizes several key shortcomings:
{| class="wikitable"
!Problem
!LP Rebuttal
|-
|'''Material Reductionism'''
|Comte’s system erases the experiential, spiritual dimension of Connection, treating morality as intellectual discipline rather than conscious integration.
|-
|'''Authoritarian Priesthood'''
|The [[Sociocrats]] could easily harden into a bureaucratic elite, replacing one form of dogma with another.
|-
|'''Suppression of Individual Spirituality'''
|No provision for direct Connection to the [[Fabric of Consciousness]] or the [[Spiritual Ego]].
|-
|'''Ritual Without Energy'''
|Rituals serve sociological rather than transformational functions; they lack the neuropsychological activation associated with genuine Connection Experience.
|-
|'''Cultural and Colonial Bias'''
|Rooted in Eurocentric “civilizing” assumptions that fail to respect indigenous and non-Western modes of spirituality.
|}

==== LP’s Alternative: Authentic Spirituality and the Symbiotic Religion of Humanity ====
The [[Lightning Path]] advances Comte’s vision by re-integrating the spiritual and experiential dimensions of human development. Its modern analogue of the Religion of Humanity is a '''Symbiotic Religion of Consciousness''', founded on Connection, Healing, and Co-Creation.

* '''Moral Dimension:''' Anchored in the [[No-Violence Rule]], [[Seven Pillars of Authentic Spirituality]], and [[Seven Essential Needs]].
* '''Intellectual Dimension:''' Grounded in the [[SpiritWiki]] and broader [[Symbiotic Knowledge System]], ensuring empirical, decolonized, and coherent knowledge structures.
* '''Social Dimension:''' Embodied through [[Connection Practices]], [[Healing Frameworks]], and [[Connection Coach Certification]] programs that operationalize moral and spiritual integration.

Where Comte envisioned sociocrats leading Humanity by science, the LP envisions **connected individuals leading through consciousness**. The result is not a technocratic religion, but a **living spiritual science** — grounded in Connection, directed toward healing, and oriented toward planetary symbiosis.

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a term::August Comte| ]]
[[Is a Key term::Comprehensive Framework| ]]
[[Is a::Connection Framework| ]]

Religion of Humanity

2026-09-19T14:57:36Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
The '''Religion of Humanity''' is August Comte’s proposed secular and scientific replacement for traditional theology. It is the spiritual and moral dimension of his [[Comprehensive Framework]], intended to unify humanity under a rational, ethical, and empirically grounded moral order.<ref name=":0">Auguste Comte, ''The Catechism of Positivism; or, Summary Exposition of the Universal Religion,'' trans. Richard Congreve (London: John Chapman, 1852).p. 274. https://archive.org/details/artofcreationess00carp</ref> According to Comte, the "practical sphere of religion is the improvement of human order, its physical, intellectual, and moral improvement."<ref name=":0" /> Religion is the cohesive glue which helps implement a [[Comprehensive Framework]] '''because it "regulates each one’s individual nature” and “forms the rallying point for all the separate individuals.'''”<ref name=":0" />
</blockquote><blockquote>"'''Love as our principle, Order as our basis, Progress as our end'''"</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Term===

[[SpiritWiki]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::SpiritWiki]]|format=ol|sort=Has sort SW}}

[[Comprehensive Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Comprehensive Framework]]}}

===Comte's Terms===

{{#ask:[[Is a term::August Comte]]}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Religion of Humanity]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Religion of Humanity]]}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Religion of Humanity]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Religion of Humanity]]}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Religion of Humanity]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Religion of Humanity]]}}

==Notes==

==== Comte’s Religion of Humanity ====
Comte’s '''Religion of Humanity''' was conceived as a secular spiritual system designed to provide the moral, intellectual, and emotional cohesion once supplied by traditional religion. It formed the ethical, ritualistic, and intellectual core of Comte’s [[Comprehensive Framework]], creating and harmonizing [[Moral Order]], [[Intellectual Order]], and [[Social Order]] into a unified social philosophy that could be practiced like a religion.

For Comte, religion (it's definition) comes in three parts.

* '''Essence:''' religion = ''state of unity'' (not belief in God).
* '''Scope:''' applies to '''individual''' and '''society'''.
* '''Operation:''' makes all human faculties “converge” on one purpose (which, for him, will be Humanity

According to Comte, religion represents the “the state of perfect unity which is the distinctive mark of man's [sic] existence,both as an individual and in society, when all the constituent parts of his nature, moral as well as physical, are made habitually to converge towards one common purpose.” (Catechisms, p. 46-7) Religion si thus the institution with the rituals, doctrine, and function that ''binds feeling, thinking, and living into one convergent orientation'' (worship → doctrine → regime).

xxx (add three orders here and show how religion glues em together

Religion is important to Comte, obviously. It forms the skeleton, organs, and skin of his [[Comprehensive Framework]], religion sits '''above/through''' the three orders as the integrative layer that:

# names the supreme object (Humanity / Great Being),
# supplies the affective engine (love → altruism),
# authorizes the hierarchy of knowledge,
# and institutionalizes the conduct rules.

According to Comte, the Religion of Humanity would replace faith in God with reverence for the collective human species — “Humanity” personified as a moral ideal.

> “In the final order, Humanity becomes the true Great Being, the supreme object of all our affections and our reverence.” — *Comte, Catechism of Positivism*, p. 17

The Religion of Humanity would maintain many of the social and emotional functions of religion — ritual, symbols, priesthood, moral instruction — but reoriented toward human progress and social cohesion rather than divine authority.

==== Comte’s Core Reasons for Creating a New Religion ====

=== 1. Religion Fulfills Essential Social Functions ===
Comte argued that religion is indispensable because it serves core civilizational roles:
{| class="wikitable"
!Function
!Explanation
|-
|'''Unifies Belief'''
|Religion creates a shared worldview — a cosmology — that binds society together.
|-
|'''Regulates Emotion'''
|It channels emotion (especially love, awe, duty) toward socially constructive ends.
|-
|'''Structures Time'''
|Religious calendars and rituals coordinate collective time, memory, and moral rhythm.
|-
|'''Provides Moral Discipline'''
|It curbs egoism and cultivates altruism and duty through emotional training.
|-
|'''Stabilizes Society'''
|It offers cohesion in times of crisis, change, or fragmentation.
|}

==== To Replace God with Humanity (The Great Being) ====
Rather than worship a supernatural deity, Comte proposed '''reverence for Humanity itself''' — past, present, and future — as a collective, evolving moral being.

* This was not metaphysical. Humanity was real.
* It evoked awe, love, and service.
* It provided a “higher” to serve — a psychological need.

<blockquote>“We must adore the Great Being Humanity, serve her, live for her, and even die for her, if necessary.” — ''Catechism'', p. 23</blockquote>

==== To Establish a Stable Moral Order ====
Comte believed '''morality must be institutionalized''' — not just taught, but embedded into social rituals, symbols, and education.

* Pure science cannot bind people emotionally.
* Pure politics cannot cultivate altruism.
* Philosophy without sacred structure is weak.

He wanted to give '''positive morality''' (rooted in sociology and science) the same social '''power and authority''' that Christianity once had.<blockquote>“Morality is the most important of all sciences… and it must be the foundation of any durable social order.” — ''Catechism'', p. 35</blockquote>

==== The Collapse of Traditional Religion Created a Dangerous Vacuum ====
Comte witnessed first-hand how the destruction of feudal and theological order left people ideologically '''adrift'''.

* '''Theological systems''' were discredited by science.
* '''Metaphysical systems''' (liberalism, romanticism) were vague and unstable.
* '''Capitalism''' offered no moral compass.
* '''Revolutions''' erupted without direction or coherence.

He saw this as a '''social emergency''':<blockquote>“We have destroyed the old faith; we have not replaced it... Men are now governed by opinions without principle, by desires without duties.”

— ''Catechism'', p. 15</blockquote>Hence, the need for a '''scientific religion''' to fill the vacuum left by God — a ''Religion of Humanity'' grounded in sociology, altruism, and planetary ethics.

==== Core Elements of the Religion of Humanity ====
{| class="wikitable"
!Element
!Description
|-
|'''Great Being'''
|Humanity itself, conceived as a collective moral organism — the living sum of all human beings past, present, and future.
|-
|'''Cult'''
|A structured ritual system emphasizing gratitude, moral duty, and service to Humanity rather than worship of a deity.
|-
|'''Calendar of Great Men'''
|A secular liturgical calendar celebrating scientists, philosophers, artists, and moral exemplars who advanced human progress.
|-
|'''Priesthood of Humanity'''
|A moral and intellectual elite (see [[Sociocrats]]) responsible for spiritual and educational guidance.
|-
|'''Altruism'''
|The central moral principle, expressed in Comte’s maxim: “Live for others.”
|-
|'''Social Function'''
|To bind society emotionally and ethically around shared scientific truth and collective purpose.
|}

==== Comte’s Vision of Purpose ====
Comte’s Religion of Humanity sought to stabilize society after the collapse of theological faith and aristocratic power. It aimed to channel human emotion and moral energy into service of the collective good, replacing transcendent divinity with immanent social duty.

> “The object of Positive Religion is to regulate the heart by directing it towards Humanity, the only real and complete object of our affections.” — *Comte, Catechism*, p. 23

Comte explicitly rejected atheism and pure materialism as socially destructive, arguing instead for a unifying moral cult grounded in science and benevolence.

==== Problems with Comte’s Vision (LP Critique) ====
While Comte’s Religion of Humanity anticipated the need for a global moral synthesis, it remains limited by its 19th-century materialism and lack of inner psychology or spirituality. The [[Lightning Path]] recognizes several key shortcomings:
{| class="wikitable"
!Problem
!LP Rebuttal
|-
|'''Material Reductionism'''
|Comte’s system erases the experiential, spiritual dimension of Connection, treating morality as intellectual discipline rather than conscious integration.
|-
|'''Authoritarian Priesthood'''
|The [[Sociocrats]] could easily harden into a bureaucratic elite, replacing one form of dogma with another.
|-
|'''Suppression of Individual Spirituality'''
|No provision for direct Connection to the [[Fabric of Consciousness]] or the [[Spiritual Ego]].
|-
|'''Ritual Without Energy'''
|Rituals serve sociological rather than transformational functions; they lack the neuropsychological activation associated with genuine Connection Experience.
|-
|'''Cultural and Colonial Bias'''
|Rooted in Eurocentric “civilizing” assumptions that fail to respect indigenous and non-Western modes of spirituality.
|}

==== LP’s Alternative: Authentic Spirituality and the Symbiotic Religion of Humanity ====
The [[Lightning Path]] advances Comte’s vision by re-integrating the spiritual and experiential dimensions of human development. Its modern analogue of the Religion of Humanity is a '''Symbiotic Religion of Consciousness''', founded on Connection, Healing, and Co-Creation.

* '''Moral Dimension:''' Anchored in the [[No-Violence Rule]], [[Seven Pillars of Authentic Spirituality]], and [[Seven Essential Needs]].
* '''Intellectual Dimension:''' Grounded in the [[SpiritWiki]] and broader [[Symbiotic Knowledge System]], ensuring empirical, decolonized, and coherent knowledge structures.
* '''Social Dimension:''' Embodied through [[Connection Practices]], [[Healing Frameworks]], and [[Connection Coach Certification]] programs that operationalize moral and spiritual integration.

Where Comte envisioned sociocrats leading Humanity by science, the LP envisions **connected individuals leading through consciousness**. The result is not a technocratic religion, but a **living spiritual science** — grounded in Connection, directed toward healing, and oriented toward planetary symbiosis.

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a term::August Comte| ]]
[[Is a Key term::Comprehensive Framework| ]]
[[Is a::Connection Framework| ]]

Inherent Potential

2026-09-19T14:21:06Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
'''Inherent Potential''' is .
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Inherent Potential]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Inherent Potential]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Inherent Potential]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Inherent Potential]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Inherent Potential]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Inherent Potential]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Inherent Potential]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Inherent Potential]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::Aligned| ]]

Good

2026-09-19T14:19:47Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
'''Good''' is that which supports [[Full Actuation]] of [[Inherent Potential]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Aligned]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Aligned]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Good]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Good]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

[[System Agents]] use the word "good" in a moral context to build up guilt, shame, and other [[Emotional Distortions]].

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightninpgath]]
[[Is a key term::Full Actuation| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::Aligned| ]]

Inherent Potential

2026-09-19T14:16:31Z

Michael: Created page with "{{navmenu}} <h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> <blockquote class="definition"> '''Inherent Potential''' is . </blockquote> ==Concept Map== ===Key Terms=== World System > {{#ask:Is a key term::World System|format=ul}} Human Development Framework > {{#ask:Is a key term::Human Development Framework|format=ul}} Full Actuation > {{#ask:Is a key term::Full Actuation|format=ul}} ===Syncretic Terms=== Inherent Potential > {{#ask:..."

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
'''Inherent Potential''' is .
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Inherent Potential]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Inherent Potential]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Inherent Potential]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Inherent Potential]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Inherent Potential]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Inherent Potential]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Full Actuation| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::Aligned| ]]

Good

2026-09-19T14:16:26Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
Good is that which supports [[Full Actuation]] of [[Inherent Potential]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Aligned]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Aligned]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Good]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Good]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

[[System Agents]] use the word "good" in a moral context to build up guilt, shame, and other [[Emotional Distortions]].

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightninpgath]]
[[Is a key term::Full Actuation| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::Aligned| ]]

Good

2026-09-19T14:15:17Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
Good is that which supports [[Full Actuation]] of [[Inherent Potential]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Aligned]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Aligned]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Good]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Good]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

[[System Agents]] use the word "good" in a moral context to build up guilt, shame, and other [[Emotional Distortions]].

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a key term::Full Actuation| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::Aligned| ]]

Evil

2026-09-19T14:15:02Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Evil''' is that which stunts growth and undermines and prevents [[Full Actuation]] on [[Inherent Potential]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

==Related Terms==

[[Evil]] > {{#ask: [[Is a related term::Disjuncture]]}}

==Syncretic Terms==

[[Disjuncture]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Disjuncture]]}}

==Notes==

In the popular mind, evil is often associated with a cosmic level, existential force or personified bad dude. These beliefs emerged relatively recently, specifically in the teachings of Zoroaster who is the first person to postulate a cosmic level evil force.<ref>Boyce, Mary. ''A History of Zoroastrianism: Volume One The Early Period''. New York: E. J. Brill, 1996. Also, ———. ''Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices''. Routledge, 2001. Messadie, Gerald. ''A History of the Devil''. New York: Kodansha, 1996.Wach, Joachim. ''Sociology of Religion''. Routledge Library Editions, Volume 16. New York: Routledge, 2019. </ref> Prior to this, notions of cosmic evil did not exist. Those that did were typically personifications of chaotic and hard to control natural forces, or projections of hostile social situations. <blockquote>
“."the pagan Iranians, like the Indians of old, felt their world to be inhabited by innumerable lesser spirits, some kindly but many malignant. Some of these evil powers sought to enter a man's body and harm him directly. Others lurked about his homestead and fields, ready to make him stumble and fall, or to harm his cattle or blight his crops; and beyond, the untamed forest and plain were full of menace. 1 Evil threatened everywhere, but could be warded off by proper precautions, such as banning formulas or propitiatory gifts; and some men were held to have acquired power over these dark forces, to compel them to serve their own ends” <ref>Boyce, Mary. ''A History of Zoroastrianism: Volume One The Early Period''. New York: E. J. Brill, 1996. p. 85.</ref> </blockquote>

'''Sufism''': Rumi takes a relativist position on evil, suggesting that in certain cases an evil act may be good, and vica versa. "The snake's poison is life for the snake, but death in relation to man. Creatures of water see the ocean as a garden, creatures of earth see it as death and torment. <ref>Chittick, William C., and Rumi. ''The Sufi Path of Love: The Spiritual Teachings of Rumi''. Rumi SUNY Series in Islam. New York: SUNY Press, 1983. (M IV 65-69)</ref>" "The benefit and harm of each depends upon the situation. For this reason knowledge is necessary and useful. <ref>Ibid. (M VI 2597-99). </ref> Also that one needs evil to manifest and appreciate the good. Rumi appears to go through considerable distortions in an attempt to bring logic to the question of evil.

'''Maslow -''' evil as the result of unmet needs "As far as I know we just don’t have any intrinsic instincts for evil. If you think in terms of the basic needs; instincts, at least at the outset, are all good’-or perhaps we should be technical about it and call them ’pre-moral,’ neither good nor evil. We do know, however, that out of the search for fulfillment of a basic need-take love in the child for example-can come evil. The child, wanting his mother’s exclusive love, may bash his little brother over the head in hopes of getting more of it. What we call evil or pathological may certainly arise from, or replace, something good. Another example is the little squabbles among children; all the fighting they do about who should do what, about dividing up the chores, ultimately can be seen as a distorted expression of a very powerful need for fairness and justice."<ref>Abraham H. Maslow, “Eupsychia—The Good Society,” ''Journal of Humanistic Psychology'' 1, no. 2 (1961): 1. p. 8</ref>

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a key term::Full Actuation| ]]|
[[Is a related term::Disjuncture| ]]

Good

2026-09-19T14:12:35Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
Good is that which supports [[Full Actuation]] of [[Inherent Potential]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Aligned]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Aligned]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Good]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Good]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

[[System Agents]] use the word "good" in a moral context to build up guilt, shame, and other [[Emotional Distortions]].

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a term::Full Actuation| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::Aligned| ]]

Good

2026-09-19T14:11:52Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
Good is that which supports [[Full Actuation]] of [[Inherent Potential]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort order}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Aligned]] > {{#ask: [[Is a syncretic term::Aligned]]}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Good]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Good]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Good]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

[[System Agents]] use the word "good" in a moral context to build up guilt, shame, and other [[Emotional Distortions]].

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a term::Full Actuation| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::Aligned| ]]

Full Actuation

2026-09-19T14:09:28Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Full Actuation''' is the complete realization of an individual's [[Human Potential]], made possible by the full and consistent satisfaction of the [[Seven Essential Needs]]. When needs are met, the individual moves toward growth, development, and the progressive unfolding of their innate capacities. When needs are unmet, the individual experiences the [[5Ds of Toxic Existence]]. Full Actuation thus represents the telos or natural endpoint of healthy [[Human Development]], a state in which the physical, psychological, emotional, social, intellectual, creative, and spiritual dimensions of the self are all operating at their highest possible expression.</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort order}}
===Related LP Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

It is important to note that, given the current condition of [[Humanity]], it is not possible to know with certainty what [[Full Actuation]] would actually look like. The vast majority of human beings presently alive have been subjected to [[Toxic Socialization]] and live under the [[Regime of Accumulation]]—a global [[Social System]] organized around [[Profit]], [[Exploitation]], and [[Domination]] rather than human [[Needs]]. This systemic damage suppresses [[Human Potential]] at every level, from the individual psyche to collective cultural expression. Consequently, our empirical observations of "healthy" human functioning are drawn from a population that is, to varying degrees, wounded, constrained, and incompletely developed.

What a fully actuated human being—or a fully actuated human civilization—would actually look like in a healthy [[Eupsychia]] (a [[Harmonic Social Order]] organized around devotion to humans and the satisfaction of [[Needs]]) remains an open question. However, we can infer from [[Developmental Psychology]], [[Transpersonal Theory]], and the [[LP]] framework that such beings would likely exhibit extraordinary [[Creativity]], [[Empathy]], [[Cognitive]] flexibility, [[Emotional Intelligence]], and [[Connection]]. They might possess capacities for [[Intuition]], [[Healing]], [[Collaboration]], and [[Consciousness]] expansion that are presently rare or entirely latent in the damaged population. The boundaries of [[Human Potential]] in a genuinely nurturing environment have never been tested at scale, and may exceed anything we can currently imagine.

===Related LP Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Full Actuation]}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Full Actuation]]}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Toxic Socialization| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Seven Essential Needs| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Eupsychia| ]]
[[Is a related term::Humanistic Psychology| ]]
[[Is a related term::Transpersonal Psychology| ]]
[[Is a related term::Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs| ]]

Full Actuation

2026-09-19T14:09:09Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Full Actuation''' is the complete realization of an individual's [[Human Potential]], made possible by the full and consistent satisfaction of the [[Seven Essential Needs]]. When needs are met, the individual moves toward growth, development, and the progressive unfolding of their innate capacities. When needs are unmet, the individual experiences the [[5Ds of Toxic Existence]]. Full Actuation thus represents the telos or natural endpoint of healthy [[Human Development]], a state in which the physical, psychological, emotional, social, intellectual, creative, and spiritual dimensions of the self are all operating at their highest possible expression.</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[World System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::World System]]|format=ul}}

[[Human Development Framework]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework]]|format=ul}}

[[Full Actuationl]] > {{#ask:[[Is a term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort order}}
===Related LP Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Full Actuation]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

It is important to note that, given the current condition of [[Humanity]], it is not possible to know with certainty what [[Full Actuation]] would actually look like. The vast majority of human beings presently alive have been subjected to [[Toxic Socialization]] and live under the [[Regime of Accumulation]]—a global [[Social System]] organized around [[Profit]], [[Exploitation]], and [[Domination]] rather than human [[Needs]]. This systemic damage suppresses [[Human Potential]] at every level, from the individual psyche to collective cultural expression. Consequently, our empirical observations of "healthy" human functioning are drawn from a population that is, to varying degrees, wounded, constrained, and incompletely developed.

What a fully actuated human being—or a fully actuated human civilization—would actually look like in a healthy [[Eupsychia]] (a [[Harmonic Social Order]] organized around devotion to humans and the satisfaction of [[Needs]]) remains an open question. However, we can infer from [[Developmental Psychology]], [[Transpersonal Theory]], and the [[LP]] framework that such beings would likely exhibit extraordinary [[Creativity]], [[Empathy]], [[Cognitive]] flexibility, [[Emotional Intelligence]], and [[Connection]]. They might possess capacities for [[Intuition]], [[Healing]], [[Collaboration]], and [[Consciousness]] expansion that are presently rare or entirely latent in the damaged population. The boundaries of [[Human Potential]] in a genuinely nurturing environment have never been tested at scale, and may exceed anything we can currently imagine.

===Related LP Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Full Actuation]}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Full Actuation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Full Actuation]]}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Human Development Framework| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Toxic Socialization| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Seven Essential Needs| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Eupsychia| ]]
[[Is a related term::Humanistic Psychology| ]]
[[Is a related term::Transpersonal Psychology| ]]
[[Is a related term::Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs| ]]

Silent Worship

2026-09-18T15:46:20Z

Michael: Created page with "{{navmenu}} <h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> <blockquote class="definition">'''Silent Worship''' is an unprogrammed Connection Technique practiced in the Quaker tradition, in which participants gather in expectant waiting, laying aside worldly distractions in order to hear God's "still small voice" (1 Kings 19:12) and access the Divine presence within and among them.<ref>Holliday, Marsha D. "Silent Worship and Quaker Values." ''Friends General Conference..."

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Silent Worship''' is an unprogrammed [[Connection Technique]] practiced in the Quaker tradition, in which participants gather in expectant waiting, laying aside worldly distractions in order to hear God's "still small voice" (1 Kings 19:12) and access the Divine presence within and among them.<ref>Holliday, Marsha D. "Silent Worship and Quaker Values." ''Friends General Conference,'' 2000. https://www.fgcquaker.org/2000/06/01/silent-worship-and-quaker-values/</ref></blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Connection]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Practice]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Procedure]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Procedure]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Procedure]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===List of Connection Techniques===

[[Connection Technique]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Silent Worship]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Silent Worship]]}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Silent Worship]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Silent Worship]]}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Silent Worship]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Silent Worship]]}}

==Notes==
In unprogrammed Quaker worship, participants take the Psalmist's advice literally: "Be still and know that I am God" (Psalm 46:10). Friends meet in plain, unadorned rooms because, in such places, they are less distracted from hearing that still small voice. There are no pulpits, because all present minister to each other; benches face each other because all are equal before God. There are no prearranged prayers, readings, sermons, hymns, or musical orchestrations, because participants wait for divine leadings (guidance and direction) and power.

Silent Worship is not an empty silence but an active and expectant one. Each person pays attention to what they are feeling, learning, or being led to understand. During worship, a message may come to an individual — for personal reflection, for sharing on another occasion, or as a leading to stand and speak in vocal ministry. Spoken messages come from the heart and are prompted by the Spirit; following a message, the group returns to the silence to examine themselves in the Light of that message. Meeting for worship ends when one Friend, designated in advance, shakes hands with his or her neighbors.

The practice rests on the Quaker realization that "there is that of God in everyone." Related values include: life is sacred; God's inward presence is experienced universally; revelation is continuous; simplicity, integrity, community, and diversity are essential in the search for truth.

Practitioners report the practice as centering — a way to lay aside the narrative voice of the mind, make space for the Divine, and feel deeply connected to one another and to the sacred.

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a::Connection Technique| ]]

Affirmation

2026-09-18T15:41:12Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''affirmation''' is a verbally repeated statement designed to focus and maintain [[Intent]] on a specific creative goal. Affirmations may be used to facilitate [[Healing]], [[Connection]], or any other creative (or destructive) goal.</blockquote>

</blockquote>
==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Connection]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Practice]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Procedure]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Procedure]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Procedure]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===List of Connection Techniques===

[[Connection Technique]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===List of LP Affirmations===

List of LP Affirmations > {{#ask:[[Is an::LP affirmation]]}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Affirmation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Affirmation]]}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Affirmation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Affirmation]]}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Affirmation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Affirmation]]}}

==Notes==

Affirmations are [[Connection Techniques]] designed to initiate, strengthen, and purify connection.

{{courses}}

{{lp150}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a related term::Intent| ]]
[[Is a related term::Visualization| ]]
[[Is a::Connection Technique| ]]

Connection Technique

2026-09-18T15:40:52Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
A '''Connection Technique''' is any single technique, such as meditation, writing, etc., that helps one strengthen and purify [[Connection]].<ref>———. Lightning Path Workbook Three - Connection. Vol. 3. Lightning Path Workbook Series. St. Albert, Alberta: Lightning Path Press, 2017. https://press.lightningpath.org/product/the-lightning-path-book-three-connection/.</ref> Connection techniques, along with [[Connection Appliances]] and [[Connection Supplements]], constitute the [[Connection Procedure]]s that an individual may use to initiate, maintain, and strengthen [[Connection]].

</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Connection]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Practice]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Procedure]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Procedure]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Procedure]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===List of Connection Techniques===

[[Connection Technique]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Connection Technique]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Connection Technique]]> {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms==

[[Connection Technique]]> {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Connection Technique]]}}

==Notes==

[[Connection Techniques]] are one of three different [[Connection Procedure]]s

"A core aspect of shamanism identiﬁed by Eliade was “ecstasy,” an altered state of consciousness (ASC) that was used to enter the spirit world. The ASC was induced through the effects of drumming, singing, chanting, dancing, and a variety of other procedures, including in some cases the use of psychoactive substances. These ASC are thought to enable them to enter the spirit world and acquire supernatural powers through a vision quest experience. Other procedures used to induce these experiences included fasting and water deprivation, exposure to temperature extremes, extensive exercise and painful austerities, sleep deprivation, sleep and dreams, and social and sensory deprivation.<ref>Winkelman, Michael. “The Shamanic Paradigm: Evidence from Ethnology, Neuropsychology and Ethology.” ''Time and Mind'' 3, no. 2 (January 1, 2010): 159–81.. p. 161, <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.2752/175169610X12632240392758</nowiki>.</ref>

Grof speaks of various "mind-altering techniques," like breathing, drumming, dancing, fasting, social and sensory isolation..." that can induce connection (or [[Holotropic States]], as he says).<ref>Grof, Stanislav. “Psychology For the Future: Lessons from Modern Consciousness Research.” ''Spirituality Studies'' 2, no. 1 (2016): 3–36. p. 5.</ref> He also speaks of "systematic spiritual practice" like meditation, concentration, breathing, and movement exercises,'<ref>Grof, Stanislav. “Psychology For the Future: Lessons from Modern Consciousness Research.” ''Spirituality Studies'' 2, no. 1 (2016): 3–36. p. 5.</ref> but separates these from "mind-altering techniques' which are presumably not systematic and not spiritual?? Perhaps this is Grof attempting to assert a Eurocentric boundary. See "The Sociology of Religion: A Decolonizing Approach" for more on this [[Boundary Problem]].<ref>Sosteric, Mike. The Sociology of Religion - A Decolonizing Approach,” n.d. https://www.academia.edu/80934448/</ref>

George Harrison's early albums appear to be experiments in using music as a technique to facilitate [[Connection Experience]] in self and others.

* The Album '''Wonderwall Music''' https://open.spotify.com/album/4dzKcTYMoSVsMfAxrreptk?si=4Sf8AVJBRfSs0JR-0VS8gQ
* Some early experiments with synthesizers - https://open.spotify.com/album/4l8peRbZAgWcXRkRIdDunO?si=4wo2_yyxTSOvRuvVjh1yHA
{{courses}}

{{lp150}}

{{template:endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Connection Procedure| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Connection Preparation| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Boundary Visualization| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Affirmation of Self| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Connection Framework| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Negative Energy Insertion| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Archetypal Revision| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Dance| ]]
[[Is a::Connection Procedure| ]]

Connection Technique

2026-09-18T15:39:13Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
A '''Connection Technique''' is any single technique, such as meditation, writing, etc., that helps one strengthen and purify [[Connection]].<ref>———. Lightning Path Workbook Three - Connection. Vol. 3. Lightning Path Workbook Series. St. Albert, Alberta: Lightning Path Press, 2017. https://press.lightningpath.org/product/the-lightning-path-book-three-connection/.</ref> Connection techniques, along with [[Connection Appliances]] and [[Connection Supplements]], constitute the [[Connection Procedure]]s that an individual may use to initiate, maintain, and strengthen [[Connection]].

</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Connection]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Practice]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Procedure]]s > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Procedure]]|format=ul}}

===List of Connection Techniques===

[[Connection Technique]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Connection Technique]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Connection Technique]]> {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Connection Technique]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms==

[[Connection Technique]]> {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Connection Technique]]}}

==Notes==

[[Connection Techniques]] are one of three different [[Connection Procedure]]s

"A core aspect of shamanism identiﬁed by Eliade was “ecstasy,” an altered state of consciousness (ASC) that was used to enter the spirit world. The ASC was induced through the effects of drumming, singing, chanting, dancing, and a variety of other procedures, including in some cases the use of psychoactive substances. These ASC are thought to enable them to enter the spirit world and acquire supernatural powers through a vision quest experience. Other procedures used to induce these experiences included fasting and water deprivation, exposure to temperature extremes, extensive exercise and painful austerities, sleep deprivation, sleep and dreams, and social and sensory deprivation.<ref>Winkelman, Michael. “The Shamanic Paradigm: Evidence from Ethnology, Neuropsychology and Ethology.” ''Time and Mind'' 3, no. 2 (January 1, 2010): 159–81.. p. 161, <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.2752/175169610X12632240392758</nowiki>.</ref>

Grof speaks of various "mind-altering techniques," like breathing, drumming, dancing, fasting, social and sensory isolation..." that can induce connection (or [[Holotropic States]], as he says).<ref>Grof, Stanislav. “Psychology For the Future: Lessons from Modern Consciousness Research.” ''Spirituality Studies'' 2, no. 1 (2016): 3–36. p. 5.</ref> He also speaks of "systematic spiritual practice" like meditation, concentration, breathing, and movement exercises,'<ref>Grof, Stanislav. “Psychology For the Future: Lessons from Modern Consciousness Research.” ''Spirituality Studies'' 2, no. 1 (2016): 3–36. p. 5.</ref> but separates these from "mind-altering techniques' which are presumably not systematic and not spiritual?? Perhaps this is Grof attempting to assert a Eurocentric boundary. See "The Sociology of Religion: A Decolonizing Approach" for more on this [[Boundary Problem]].<ref>Sosteric, Mike. The Sociology of Religion - A Decolonizing Approach,” n.d. https://www.academia.edu/80934448/</ref>

George Harrison's early albums appear to be experiments in using music as a technique to facilitate [[Connection Experience]] in self and others.

* The Album '''Wonderwall Music''' https://open.spotify.com/album/4dzKcTYMoSVsMfAxrreptk?si=4Sf8AVJBRfSs0JR-0VS8gQ
* Some early experiments with synthesizers - https://open.spotify.com/album/4l8peRbZAgWcXRkRIdDunO?si=4wo2_yyxTSOvRuvVjh1yHA
{{courses}}

{{lp150}}

{{template:endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Connection Procedure| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Connection Preparation| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Boundary Visualization| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Affirmation of Self| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Connection Framework| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Negative Energy Insertion| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Archetypal Revision| ]]
[[Is a related LP term::Dance| ]]
[[Is a::Connection Procedure| ]]

Connection Practice

2026-09-18T15:37:57Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
The term '''Connection Practice''' refers to the regular and disciplined daily practice of [[Connection]]. Connection Practice consists of the [[3Ps of Connection Practice]], [[Connection Preparation]], [[Connection Procedure]]s, and [[Connection Processing]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==
===Key Terms===

[[Connection]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection]]|format=ul}}

[[Connection Practice]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

===Key Figures===

[[Connection Practice]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key figure::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Connection Practice]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Connection Practice]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Connection Practice]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Connection Practice]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

"Chants, spells, dancing around a fire, burning candles, the smoke and smell of incense, are all means to awaken the 'deep mind'--to arouse high emotions, enforce concentration, and facilitate entry into an altered state. Again, Bonewits has said some of the most sensible words on this subject, observing that 'mandalas,' 'sigils,' 'pentacles,' and 'yantras' are all pictures to stimulate the sense of sight; 'mudras' or 'gestures' stimulate the kinesthetic sense; 'mantras' or 'incantations' [and prayers] stimulate the sense of hearing. The use of props, costumes, and scenery can also be seen as a method of stimulating the senses. In addition, drugs, alcohol, breathing exercises, and sexual techniques can serve to alter one's state of consciousness. According to Bonewits, these techniques function in the same way for a Witch or a ceremonial magician as for a Native American shaman or a Catholic priest. To say that these methods never cause psychic and psychological change ni the people involved is as absurd as other common attitudes--that certain religions have a monopoly on these experiences and that certain religions worship 'God' while others worship 'demons.' These techniques have existed for thousands of years and were developed by human beings for the purpose of widening their perceptions of reality, and changing their relationship to the world."

Mystics often use language and metaphor in a special way, in an effort to trigger enlightenment in others.<ref>Organ, Troy. “The Language of Mysticism.” The Monist 47, no. 3 (1963): 417–33.</ref>

Connection Practices combined with [[Connection Appliances]], like the [[TOSAS]], and the careful and guided use of [[Connection Supplements]] can facilitate transformative [[Connection]]

"The central features of those domains are not only experienceable, they are public, because consciousness can be trained to apprehend those domains (this training is called meditation or contemplation), and a trained consciousness is a public, shareable, or intersubjective consciousness, or it couldn’t be trained in the first place. Simply because religious experience is apprehended in an “interior” fashion does not mean it is merely private knowledge, any more than the fact that mathematics and logic are seen inwardly, by the mind’s eye, makes them merely private fantasies without public import. Mathematical knowledge is public knowledge to all equally trained mathematicians; just so, contemplative knowledge is public knowledge to all equally trained contemplatives. The preposterous claim that all religious experience is private and noncommunicable is stopped dead by, to give only one example, the transmission of Buddha’s enlightenment all the way down to the present-day Buddhist masters."....virtually all the Eastern texts on meditation and yoga, and virtually all the Western texts on contemplation and interior prayer, can legitimately be called scientific treatises dealing (principally) with levels 4 and 5; they contain rules and experiments, which, if followed correctly, disclose to consciousness phenomena (or data) of the classes we have called D and E, phenomena that can be as easily checked with (confirmed or refuted by) equally trained peers as geometric theorems can be checked with (confirmed or refuted by) other equally trained mathematicians.<ref>Ken Wilber, ''Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World’s Great Physicists'' (New York: Shambhala, 2001)</ref>

{{courses}}

{{lp101}}

{{lp135}}

{{lp150}}

{{template:endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term::Connection| ]]
[[Is a key term::Connection Therapist| ]]

Identity Ritual

2026-09-11T17:17:32Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Identity Ritual''' </blockquote>

==Concept Map==

=== Key Terms ===

[[Regime of Accumulation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of The Regime > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the [[Mode of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

Key Terms [[Mechanisms of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Mechanisms of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Identity Ritual]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Identity Ritual]]}}

=== Related LP Terms ===
[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Identity Ritual]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Identity Ritual]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term of::Mechanisms of Reproduction| ]]

Identity Ritual

2026-09-11T17:16:59Z

Michael: Created page with "{{navmenu}} <h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> <blockquote class="definition">'''Identity Ritual''' </blockquote> ==Concept Map== === Key Terms === Regime of Accumulation > {{#ask:Is a key term::Regime of Accumulation|format=ul}} Components of The Regime > {{#ask:Is a component of::Regime of Accumulation|format=ul}} Components of the Mode of Reproduction > {{#ask:Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction|format=ul}} Key Terms Mech..."

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Identity Ritual''' </blockquote>

==Concept Map==

=== Key Terms ===

[[Regime of Accumulation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of The Regime > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the [[Mode of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

Key Terms [[Mechanisms of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Mechanisms of Reproduction]]}}

[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Identity Ritual]]}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Identity Ritual]]}}

=== Related LP Terms ===
[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Identity Ritual]]}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Identity Ritual]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Identity Ritual]]}}

==Notes==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a key term of::Mechanisms of Reproduction| ]]

Relations of Reproduction

2026-09-11T16:44:15Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Relations of Production''' are the social and institutional ties that enable the reproduction of the Regime and its labour force.

</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

=== Key Terms ===

[[Regime of Accumulation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of The Regime > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the [[Mode of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

Key Terms [[Relations of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Relations of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Relations of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Relations of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Relations of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Relations of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Relations of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Relations of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

* '''Parent-Child Relations''': The primary site where class position, obedience, and worldview are transmitted. Parents reproduce in children the skills and subjection required by the Regime.<ref>Althusser, "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses" (1971).</ref>
* '''Teacher-Student Relations''': The hierarchical pedagogical bond in which knowledge is dispensed selectively and in forms that ensure respect for the socio-technical division of labour and class domination.<ref>Althusser, "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses" (1971).</ref>
* '''Clergy-Congregant and Media Producer-Consumer Relations''': Asymmetrical bonds in which meaning, morality, and normality are defined by elites and consumed by masses. Hollywood, Bollywood, Capital Records, Twitter, CNBC, Fox, etc.
* '''Patriarchal and Gendered Relations''': The social organization of reproduction around binary gender roles that subordinate reproductive labour and ensure the domestication of women’s bodies for the production of future workers.<ref>Federici, ''Caliban and the Witch'' (2004).</ref>
* '''Intergenerational Wealth and Debt Relations''': The legal and familial ties that bind descendants to the accumulated advantages or disadvantages of their ancestors, reproducing class stratification across time.

==Quotes==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction| ]]

Conceptive Ideologist

2026-09-11T16:43:49Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Conceptive Ideologist''' is an individual who uses the [[Means of Mental Production]] — the universities, presses, churches, publishing houses, and journals in which a society's ideas are produced and distributed — to construct, package, and circulate the ideas that control human thought and behaviour, typically in the service of a ruling class.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

=== Key Terms ===

[[Regime of Accumulation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the Regime > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the [[Mode of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

Key Terms [[Means of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Means of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[System Architect]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::System Architect]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}
===Karl Marx Terms===

[[Karl Marx]] > {{#ask:[[Is a term::Karl Marx]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

The concept originates with Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in ''The German Ideology'': "The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the Means of Mental Production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the Means of Mental Production are subject to it."<ref>Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, ''The German Ideology'' (1845–46; repr., New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm.</ref> The ruling ideas, Marx continues, "are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships... grasped as ideas," and the individuals composing the ruling class "rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch."<ref>Ibid.</ref> His example is the doctrine of the separation of powers, proclaimed an "eternal law" in an age when royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie were contending for mastery.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The Conceptive Ideologist is thus the human instrument of this regulation — the theologian, scholar, textbook writer, or curriculum designer who draws the boundaries his class needs drawn and packages them as neutral, even eternal, description.

In the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]], the term marks the pivot from passive bias to active ideological manipulation. [[Ontological Bias]] names the closed mind produced by rigid worldview adherence; [[Epistemic Attachment]] names the identity-level investment behind it; the [[Boundary Fetish]] names the structural result. But the boundaries of the academic study of religion, the book argues, are not merely the product of blindness — they are also the product of work, done by identifiable people, with beneficiaries. When the overt triumphalism of Tylor, Frazer, Comte, and Malinowski became embarrassing after the moral catastrophes of the twentieth century, "what Karl Marx would have called Conceptive Ideologists repackaged it in a fancy 'world religions' wrapper"<ref>Mike Sosteric, ''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion'', draft v.095, introductory unit for Athabasca University Sociology 231: ''The Sociology of Religion'' (manuscript in preparation; E.T.A. 2027), 13. Page references herein are to the draft PDF. Hereafter cited as Sosteric, ''RSGR draft''.</ref> — preserving the hierarchy "by other means" in the neutral-sounding language of pluralism (Masuzawa). Whether any given scholar is conscious of his service to empire is beside the point; a conceptive ideologist need not be cynical to be useful.

The concept also frames the book's account of elite interference in spiritual systems: Tanser, high priest to the autocrat Ardashir, who selected a single Zoroastrian tradition, declared Ardashir "the final arbiter of the Zoroastrian doctrine," and suppressed the rest with "excessive bloodshed";<ref>Ibid., 50–51, citing Mary Boyce, ''Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices'' (London: Routledge, 2001).</ref> the elite bishops and scribes who, under Constantine, determined the Christian canon and later edited it in the interests of patriarchy;<ref>Ibid., 52–55, citing Bart D. Ehrman, ''Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why'' (New York: HarperOne, 2007).</ref> A. E. Waite, Freemason and architect of the modern tarot, whose system scholars have called "the most successful propaganda campaign ever launched";<ref>Ibid., 55–56, citing Mike Sosteric, "A Sociology of Tarot," ''Canadian Journal of Sociology'' 39, no. 3 (2014), doi:10.29173/cjs20000.</ref> and Helena Blavatsky, scion of the Russian Dolgorouky dynasty and matriarch of the Theosophical Society.<ref>Ibid., 56, citing Meera Nanda, "Madame Blavatsky's Children" (2010), https://www.academia.edu/27289493/Madame_Blavatskys_children_pdf.</ref> In each case the pattern is the same: control of the Means of Mental Production, construction of a boundary or narrative, and the presentation of interested ideas as the ruling ideas of the epoch.

==Quotes==
<blockquote>The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the [[Means of Mental Production]], so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the [[Means of Mental Production]] are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. For instance, in an age and in a country where royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie are contending for mastery and where, therefore, mastery is shared, the doctrine of the separation of powers proves to be the dominant idea and is expressed as an “eternal law.”<ref>Karl Marx, ''The German Ideology'' (New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm</ref> </blockquote>

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a key term of::Relations of Reproduction| ]]
[[Is a term::Marxism| ]]
[[Is a term::Karl Marx| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::System Architect| ]]
[[Is a related term::Means of Mental Production| ]]

Means of Mental Production

2026-09-11T16:41:36Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Means of Mental Production''' is Karl Marx's term for the mechanisms by which the [[Accumulating Class]] control the thought and behaviour of the [[Working Class]]. The term is syncretic with the LP term [[Mechanisms of Compliance]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

=== Key Terms ===

[[Regime of Accumulation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the Regime > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the [[Mode of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

Key Terms [[Means of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Means of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Means of Mental Production]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Means of Mental Production]]}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Means of Mental Production]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Means of Mental Production]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Means of Mental Production]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Means of Mental Production]]|format=ul}}

==Marxism Terms==

[[Marxism]] . {{#ask:[[Is a term::Marxism]]}}
==Notes==

==Quotes==
<blockquote>The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the [[Means of Mental Production]], so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the [[Means of Mental Production]] are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. For instance, in an age and in a country where royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie are contending for mastery and where, therefore, mastery is shared, the doctrine of the separation of powers proves to be the dominant idea and is expressed as an “eternal law.”<ref>Karl Marx, ''The German Ideology'' (New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm</ref> </blockquote>

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a key term of::Means of Reproduction| ]]
[[Is a term::Marxism| ]]

Means of Mental Production

2026-09-11T16:40:22Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Means of Mental Production''' is Karl Marx's term for the mechanisms by which the [[Accumulating Class]] control the thought and behaviour of the [[Working Class]]. The term is syncretic with the LP term [[Mechanisms of Compliance]].
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

=== Key Terms ===

[[Regime of Accumulation]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the Regime > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::Regime of Accumulation]]|format=ul}}

Components of the [[Mode of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a component of::The Mode of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

Key Terms [[Means of Reproduction]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term of::Means of Reproduction]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Means of Mental Production]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Means of Mental Production]]}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Means of Mental Production]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Means of Mental Production]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Means of Mental Production] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Means of Mental Production]]|format=ul}}

==Marxism Terms==

[[Marxism]] . {{#ask:[[Is a term::Marxism]]}}
==Notes==

==Quotes==
<blockquote>The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the [[Means of Mental Production]], so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the [[Means of Mental Production]] are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. For instance, in an age and in a country where royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie are contending for mastery and where, therefore, mastery is shared, the doctrine of the separation of powers proves to be the dominant idea and is expressed as an “eternal law.”<ref>Karl Marx, ''The German Ideology'' (New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm</ref> </blockquote>

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a key term of::Means of Reproduction| ]]
[[Is a term::Marxism| ]]

Conceptive Ideologist

2026-09-11T16:30:53Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Conceptive Ideologist''' is an individual who uses the [[Means of Mental Production]] — the universities, presses, churches, publishing houses, and journals in which a society's ideas are produced and distributed — to construct, package, and circulate the ideas that control human thought and behaviour, typically in the service of a ruling class.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}
===Karl Marx Terms===

[[Karl Marx]] > {{#ask:[[Is a term::Karl Marx]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[System Architect]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::System Architect]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

The concept originates with Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in ''The German Ideology'': "The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the Means of Mental Production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the Means of Mental Production are subject to it."<ref>Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, ''The German Ideology'' (1845–46; repr., New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm.</ref> The ruling ideas, Marx continues, "are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships... grasped as ideas," and the individuals composing the ruling class "rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch."<ref>Ibid.</ref> His example is the doctrine of the separation of powers, proclaimed an "eternal law" in an age when royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie were contending for mastery.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The Conceptive Ideologist is thus the human instrument of this regulation — the theologian, scholar, textbook writer, or curriculum designer who draws the boundaries his class needs drawn and packages them as neutral, even eternal, description.

In the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]], the term marks the pivot from passive bias to active ideological manipulation. [[Ontological Bias]] names the closed mind produced by rigid worldview adherence; [[Epistemic Attachment]] names the identity-level investment behind it; the [[Boundary Fetish]] names the structural result. But the boundaries of the academic study of religion, the book argues, are not merely the product of blindness — they are also the product of work, done by identifiable people, with beneficiaries. When the overt triumphalism of Tylor, Frazer, Comte, and Malinowski became embarrassing after the moral catastrophes of the twentieth century, "what Karl Marx would have called Conceptive Ideologists repackaged it in a fancy 'world religions' wrapper"<ref>Mike Sosteric, ''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion'', draft v.095, introductory unit for Athabasca University Sociology 231: ''The Sociology of Religion'' (manuscript in preparation; E.T.A. 2027), 13. Page references herein are to the draft PDF. Hereafter cited as Sosteric, ''RSGR draft''.</ref> — preserving the hierarchy "by other means" in the neutral-sounding language of pluralism (Masuzawa). Whether any given scholar is conscious of his service to empire is beside the point; a conceptive ideologist need not be cynical to be useful.

The concept also frames the book's account of elite interference in spiritual systems: Tanser, high priest to the autocrat Ardashir, who selected a single Zoroastrian tradition, declared Ardashir "the final arbiter of the Zoroastrian doctrine," and suppressed the rest with "excessive bloodshed";<ref>Ibid., 50–51, citing Mary Boyce, ''Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices'' (London: Routledge, 2001).</ref> the elite bishops and scribes who, under Constantine, determined the Christian canon and later edited it in the interests of patriarchy;<ref>Ibid., 52–55, citing Bart D. Ehrman, ''Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why'' (New York: HarperOne, 2007).</ref> A. E. Waite, Freemason and architect of the modern tarot, whose system scholars have called "the most successful propaganda campaign ever launched";<ref>Ibid., 55–56, citing Mike Sosteric, "A Sociology of Tarot," ''Canadian Journal of Sociology'' 39, no. 3 (2014), doi:10.29173/cjs20000.</ref> and Helena Blavatsky, scion of the Russian Dolgorouky dynasty and matriarch of the Theosophical Society.<ref>Ibid., 56, citing Meera Nanda, "Madame Blavatsky's Children" (2010), https://www.academia.edu/27289493/Madame_Blavatskys_children_pdf.</ref> In each case the pattern is the same: control of the Means of Mental Production, construction of a boundary or narrative, and the presentation of interested ideas as the ruling ideas of the epoch.

==Quotes==
<blockquote>The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the [[Means of Mental Production]], so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the [[Means of Mental Production]] are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. For instance, in an age and in a country where royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie are contending for mastery and where, therefore, mastery is shared, the doctrine of the separation of powers proves to be the dominant idea and is expressed as an “eternal law.”<ref>Karl Marx, ''The German Ideology'' (New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm</ref> </blockquote>

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a term::Marxism| ]]
[[Is a term::Karl Marx| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::System Architect| ]]
[[Is a related term::Means of Mental Production| ]]

Conceptive Ideologist

2026-09-11T16:04:07Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Conceptive Ideologist''' is an individual who uses the [[Means of Mental Production]] to control human thought and behaviour.<ref>Karl Marx, ''The German Ideology'' (New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm</ref> </blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Conceptive Ideologist]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Conceptive Ideologist]]|format=ul}}
===Karl Marx Terms===

[[Karl Marx]] > {{#ask:[[Is a term::Karl Marx]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[System Architect]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::System Architect]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

<blockquote>The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the [[Means of Mental Production]], so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the [[Means of Mental Production]] are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. For instance, in an age and in a country where royal power, aristocracy, and bourgeoisie are contending for mastery and where, therefore, mastery is shared, the doctrine of the separation of powers proves to be the dominant idea and is expressed as an “eternal law.”<ref>Karl Marx, ''The German Ideology'' (New York: Norton, 1978), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm</ref> </blockquote>

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a term::Marxism| ]]
[[Is a term::Karl Marx| ]]
[[Is a syncretic term::System Architect| ]]
[[Is a related term::Means of Mental Production| ]]

Epistemic Attachment

2026-09-11T13:32:43Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''Epistemic Attachment''' is an emotional, professional, and identity-level investment in a particular object of knowledge — a theory, institution, discipline, or worldview — such that the object's continued existence and stability functions as a source of personal and professional legitimation, thereby limiting the knower's capacity to imagine alternatives, up to and including the object's transformation or disappearance.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==
===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The concept of epistemic attachment was articulated by anthropologist Jana Bacevic,<ref>Jana Bacevic, “Between Legitimation and Imagination: Epistemic Attachment, Ontological Bias, and Thinking about the Future,” Jana Bacevic, December 18, 2017, https://janabacevic.net/2017/12/18/between-legitimation-and-imagination-epistemic-attachment-ontological-bias-and-thinking-about-the-future/.</ref> who illustrates it with the failure of social scientists to predict the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Both Yugoslav and Western scholars "depended on Yugoslavia as a source of legitimation of their work, though for different reasons." For Yugoslav scholars, the exceptionality of the Yugoslav model grounded their authority as possessors of "local knowledge" in international scientific collaboration, and their personal and professional identities "depended on the continued existence of Yugoslavia as an object; they could imagine different ways in which it could be transformed, but not really that it could be obliterated." For Western scholars, Yugoslavia served as the perfect experiment proving either that market socialism could work (the left) or that market exchange could soften command economies (the right). "If no one foresaw the war, it was because it played no role in either of these epistemic constructs."

The counter-example is Bogdan Denitch, the one scholar who predicted the collapse in detail. His position provided "a sufficient degree of attachment to be able to look deeply into a problem and understand its possible transformations; and a sufficient degree of detachment to be able to see that the object of knowledge may not be there forever."

Epistemic attachment cannot be eliminated, only balanced. "Balancing between attachment and detachment is one of the key challenges in any practice of knowing the social world," and the challenge grows as the objects of study (climate change, artificial intelligence, the future of humanity itself) grow in complexity and centrality. Mark Carrigan<Ref>Mark Carrigan, “Ontological Bias and Social Knowledge in a Post-Truth Era,” Mark Carrigan, December 28, 2017, https://markcarrigan.net/2017/12/28/ontological-bias-and-social-knowledge-in-a-post-truth-era/</ref> adds that avoiding the bias produced by epistemic attachment may also require distancing from comfortable philosophical constructs — e.g., treating "prediction" as a philosophical designator rather than a sociological one — since such constructs can themselves become objects of attachment.

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]
[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]

Epistemic Attachment

2026-09-11T13:30:24Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''Epistemic Attachment''' is an emotional, professional, and identity-level investment in a particular object of knowledge — a theory, institution, discipline, or worldview — such that the object's continued existence and stability functions as a source of personal and professional legitimation, thereby limiting the knower's capacity to imagine alternatives, up to and including the object's transformation or disappearance.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==
===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The concept of epistemic attachment was articulated by anthropologist Jana Bacevic,<ref>Jana Bacevic, “Between Legitimation and Imagination: Epistemic Attachment, Ontological Bias, and Thinking about the Future,” Jana Bacevic, December 18, 2017, https://janabacevic.net/2017/12/18/between-legitimation-and-imagination-epistemic-attachment-ontological-bias-and-thinking-about-the-future/.</ref> who illustrates it with the failure of social scientists to predict the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Both Yugoslav and Western scholars "depended on Yugoslavia as a source of legitimation of their work, though for different reasons." For Yugoslav scholars, the exceptionality of the Yugoslav model grounded their authority as possessors of "local knowledge" in international scientific collaboration, and their personal and professional identities "depended on the continued existence of Yugoslavia as an object; they could imagine different ways in which it could be transformed, but not really that it could be obliterated." For Western scholars, Yugoslavia served as the perfect experiment proving either that market socialism could work (the left) or that market exchange could soften command economies (the right). "If no one foresaw the war, it was because it played no role in either of these epistemic constructs."

The counter-example is Bogdan Denitch, the one scholar who predicted the collapse in detail. His position provided "a sufficient degree of attachment to be able to look deeply into a problem and understand its possible transformations; and a sufficient degree of detachment to be able to see that the object of knowledge may not be there forever."

Epistemic attachment cannot be eliminated, only balanced. "Balancing between attachment and detachment is one of the key challenges in any practice of knowing the social world," and the challenge grows as the objects of study (climate change, artificial intelligence, the future of humanity itself) grow in complexity and centrality. Mark Carrigan<Ref>Mark Carrigan, “Ontological Bias and Social Knowledge in a Post-Truth Era,” Mark Carrigan, December 28, 2017, https://markcarrigan.net/2017/12/28/ontological-bias-and-social-knowledge-in-a-post-truth-era/</ref> adds that avoiding the bias produced by epistemic attachment may also require distancing from comfortable philosophical constructs — e.g., treating "prediction" as a philosophical designator rather than a sociological one — since such constructs can themselves become objects of attachment.

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]

Boundary Problem

2026-09-11T13:30:09Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Boundary Problem''' is the persistent scholarly problem of how to draw a defensible line, substantively, functionally, ontologically, or epistemologically, between religion and other human institutions and knowledge systems, such as magic, science, Hollywood, sports, or the New Age movement. The problem is insoluble, because the boundaries it seeks do not exist.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The Boundary Problem arises the moment scholars attempt to define religion by what distinguishes it from everything else. Every attempted boundary fails under empirical attention, at four successive lines of defense.<ref>Mike Sosteric, ''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion'', draft v.095, introductory unit for Athabasca University Sociology 231: ''The Sociology of Religion'' (manuscript in preparation; E.T.A. 2027). Page references herein are to the draft PDF. Hereafter cited as Sosteric, ''RSGR draft''.</ref>

'''1. Substantive boundaries fail.''' Defining religion by belief in supernatural beings runs into Buddha, who rejected gods and supernatural forces outright, yet Buddhism is clearly a religion.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16.</ref> Defining it by a sacred/profane distinction is a Western category imposition: the distinction is not made by the LoDagaa and other West African peoples studied by Goody,<ref>Jack Goody, "Religion and Ritual: The Definitional Problem," ''The British Journal of Sociology'' 12, no. 2 (1961): 142–64, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16–17.</ref> is not meaningful among the Azande,<ref>E. E. Evans-Pritchard, ''Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> and is meaningless for the Huichol of Mexico.<ref>Barbara G. Myerhoff, ''Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians'' (London: Cornell University Press, 1974), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

'''2. Durkheim's "solution" fails.''' Having failed to separate magic and religion from science by supernatural content — and unable to elevate Western religion above Indigenous magic on that basis either — Durkheim "solved" the Boundary Problem by suggesting religion was more social, while magic was more individualistic.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> "Unfortunately, like other ethnocentric boundaries, Durkheim's assertions are more wishful thinking than empirical fact."<ref>Ibid., 17.</ref> Ancient magical and ritual practices had social aspects and social intent — "fisherman who used magic to help with their catch were doing so with their families and communities in mind"<ref>Ibid., 17, citing Sir James George Frazer, ''The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion'' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990).</ref> — and modern magical systems like Wicca and Thelema are deeply embedded in the social fabric: witches have covens and cast spells "for the good of themselves and their community";<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17, citing Starhawk, ''The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Goddess'', 20th anniversary ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2011).</ref> Aleister Crowley, patriarch of Thelema, "was embedded in exoteric and elitist social networks."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

'''3. Functional boundaries fail.''' Functional definitions (religion as what provides cohesion, meaning, or answers to ultimate questions) are even worse at boundary work: as Scharf notes, "they are simply too broad and inclusive. If religion is defined as that which promotes unity or social cohesion, then anything which does this is religion."<ref>B. Scharf, ''The Sociological Study of Religion'' (London: Hutchinson, 1970), as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29.</ref> Communism, fascism, nationalism, capitalism, sports, and rock concerts all become religious events. Hamilton therefore advises abandoning functional definitions altogether<ref>Malcolm Hamilton, ''The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives'' (London: Routledge, 2001), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29–30.</ref> — but this is rejected in the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]: institutions are always functional, since "all institutions ... are instrumental means for the satisfaction of needs";<ref>Melford E. Spiro, "Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation," in ''Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion'', ed. Michael Banton (London: Routledge, 2004), 96, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref> "if we ignore the functions of religion, we might as well not bother studying it."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref>

'''4. Ontological/epistemic boundaries fail.''' With content and function unable to separate religion from science, the last line of defense is ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority and tradition).<ref>Ibid., 44–45.</ref> These too collapse: transpersonal and humanistic psychology cross the materialist line and even provide techniques for spiritual connection;<ref>Ibid., 44.</ref> scientists report mystical and "enlightenment" experiences — Kekulé's dream of the benzene ring, Darwin's "innumerable little illuminations,"<ref>Peter Caws, "The Structure of Discovery," ''Science'' 166, no. 3911 (1969): 1375–80; Howard E. Gruber, "On the Relation between 'AHA Experiences' and the Construction of Ideas," ''History of Science'' 19, no. 1 (1981): 41–59; both as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref> Einstein's awe before "the old one"<ref>Albert Einstein, ''Out of My Later Years'' (New York: Citadel Press, 2000), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25, 45–46.</ref> — and science itself behaves like a church when challenged: Kuhn showed it to be one of the most conservative institutions going,<ref>Thomas S. Kuhn, ''The Structure of Scientific Revolutions'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> and Yinger notes that many scientists "sanctify science just like priests sanctify religion, by presenting it as a superior path towards truth."<ref>Roy Rappaport, as quoted in J. Milton Yinger, ''The Scientific Study of Religion'' (London: Macmillan, 1970), in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> Rupert Sheldrake was publicly shamed and excommunicated by ''Nature''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s senior editor, who called his book "the best candidate for burning there has been for many years."<ref>Anthony Freeman, "The Sense of Being Glared At: What Is It Like to Be a Heretic?," ''Journal of Consciousness Studies'' 12, no. 6 (2005): 4–9, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 48.</ref>

'''The problem metastasizes.''' Smart's substantive elements — social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, plus healing — are found everywhere.<ref>Ninian Smart, ''The World's Religions'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); Ninian Smart, ''The Phenomenon of Religion'' (New York: Macmillan, 1973); as synthesized in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 18–23.</ref> Hollywood has its master narratives: Lucas "intentionally set out to awaken (some might say indoctrinate) children" with a monomyth that "echoes in nearly every belief system," admitting "I put the Force into the movie in order to try to awaken a certain kind of spirituality in young people."<ref>Bill Moyers, "Of Myth and Men," ''Time'', April 18, 1999, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 24.</ref> Sports has its sacred figures and superstitions; the Boy Scouts' oath requires affirmation of "belief and submission to God";<ref>Bryan Wendell, "About the 'Belief in God' Requirement in Scouting," ''Bryan on Scouting'', October 3, 2014, as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 42.</ref> science has its rituals, myths, martyrs, and mystical musings. "So what makes the institution of science different than religion? Where is the all-important boundary?"<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref>

'''LP resolution.''' The Boundary Problem cannot be solved because there is no boundary there. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose. They can make their institutions serve whatever needs they want."<ref>Ibid., 48.</ref> The continuing attempt to solve it is not scholarship but the [[Boundary Fetish]] — "not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age.... It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> The productive move is not a better boundary but no boundary: religion as "a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs," organized around answers to big questions with a core emphasis on alignment and connection,<ref>Ibid., 56.</ref> embraces the overlap of human institutions, breaks the study of religion open, and exposes centuries of elite interference in spiritual systems. Abandoning the boundary quest is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref>

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a term in::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]

Boundary Fetish

2026-09-11T13:29:56Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Boundary Fetish''' is the persistent, often compulsive scholarly drive to establish sharp, hierarchical boundaries between systems of knowledge and life, typically positioning Western science at the top, Western monotheism in the middle, and Indigenous spirituality and magic at the bottom. This drive is motivated not by empirical evidence but by a conscious or unconscious desire to assert the superiority of one's own European, patriarchal, and materialist identity.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The term is coined in the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]: scholars "have been trying to distinguish and elevate their own 'adult, civilized white man' European institutions (e.g., monotheistic religion and science) as superior against the 'savage,' primitive, pre-logical, narcissistic, and infantile character of the knowledge systems of the so-called 'inferior races.'"<ref>Sosteric, ''[[RSGR]] draft'', 6.</ref> The struggle to define religion is thus "the sometimes overt, sometimes covert, but always racist desire to establish boundaries between Indigenous systems of belief and Western systems of belief.... a boundary fetish."<ref>Ibid., 6.</ref>

'''Classic inscriptions.''' Malinowski: science "is guided by reason and corrected by observation," open to all, "a common good of the whole community," while magic "is occult, taught through mysterious initiations" and "lives in an atmosphere of mysticism."<ref>Bronislaw Malinowski, ''Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays'' (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1948), 3, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 6–7.</ref> Frazer: magic's "fatal flaw" is "not in its general assumption of a sequence of events determined by law, but in presumed misconception of the nature of the particular laws which govern that sequence,"<ref>Sir James George Frazer, ''The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion'' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990), 49, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 7.</ref> while monotheism's "more perfect submission to the divine will... affects only those higher intelligences who have breadth of view enough to comprehend the vastness of the universe and the littleness of man."<ref>Frazer, ''The Golden Bough'', 59, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 8.</ref> Comte: the "law of three stages" casts Indigenous fetishism as the puerile belief of an "infant species."<ref>August Comte, ''A General View of Positivism'' (1856; repr., Marxist Internet Archive, 2005), 35, 185, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 8–9.</ref> Freud: animism corresponds to narcissism, religion to a child's attachment to his parents, science to maturity.<ref>Sigmund Freud, ''Totem and Taboo'' (New York: Routledge, 1913), 104, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 28.</ref> Tylor: religion as "belief in spiritual beings."<ref>Edward Tylor, ''Primitive Culture'' (London: John Murray, 1903), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 15.</ref>

'''Modern repackagings.''' The secularization thesis — articulated most forcefully by Peter Berger and Bryan Wilson — is Comte's law of three stages in postwar dress, positioning secular Western modernity as "the telos of human advancement" and non-secular societies as "backward holdovers."<ref>Peter Berger, ''The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion'' (New York: Anchor Books, 1969); as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 10–11.</ref> It persisted despite its empirical failure — explosive religious growth worldwide, which drove Berger himself to recant in favor of "desecularization."<ref>Peter Berger, ed., ''The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 10.</ref> After World War I made overt triumphalism embarrassing, the "world religions" framework preserved the hierarchy as pluralism: the scripture criterion demotes Indigenous systems to a residual "primal" category, Christianity becomes "first among unequals," and the Western scholar is installed as neutral arbiter.<ref>Tomoko Masuzawa, ''The Invention of World Religions: Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), 43–44, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 11–12.</ref> "The hierarchy was no longer written on the surface; it was woven into the very structure of the classification itself."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 12.</ref>

'''The fetish is structural, not incidental.''' "The boundary fetish... is not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age. It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> Every world religions syllabus listing a dozen "major" traditions and relegating the rest to "primal religions" draws a boundary and performs an identity ritual: "this is what we are, and this is what they are, and never the twain shall meet."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref>

'''Every boundary collapses under empirical attention.''' Hunter-gatherers are not especially animistic, and magic "is either reserved for special circumstances or is an adjunct to ordinary techniques," not mistaken for everyday causation;<ref>Malcolm Hamilton, ''The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives'' (London: Routledge, 2001), as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 9.</ref> Frazer's own evidence casts magicians as the "direct predecessors of our physicians, surgeons, and scientists";<ref>Frazer, ''The Golden Bough'', 62, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 7.</ref> the sacred/profane distinction is meaningless among the Azande, the Huichol, and West African peoples;<ref>E. E. Evans-Pritchard, ''Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937); Barbara G. Myerhoff, ''Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians'' (London: Cornell University Press, 1974); Jack Goody, "Religion and Ritual: The Definitional Problem," ''The British Journal of Sociology'' 12, no. 2 (1961): 142–64; as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> Wicca and Thelema are deeply social;<ref>Starhawk, ''The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Reli[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}
gion of the Goddess'', 20th anniversary ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2011), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> and Smart's substantive elements are found throughout Hollywood, sports, the Boy Scouts, the New Age movement, and science itself (see [[Boundary Problem]]).<ref>Ninian Smart, ''The World's Religions'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); as synthesized in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 18–25, 41–44.</ref>

'''LP resolution.''' The boundaries do not exist, and the definitional quest for them is itself part of the problem. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 48.</ref> Unless the goal is to demonstrate European, scientific, or patriarchal superiority, boundaries need not — and should not — be asserted. Abandoning the boundary fetish is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well"<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref> — a decolonization that also recovers the "much more nuanced and sophisticated view of human beings and their relations to self, community, earth, and the cosmos" found in Indigenous spiritual systems.<ref>Sonia Lucana and John Elfers, "Sacred Medicine: Indigenous Healing and Mental Health," ''The Qualitative Report'' 25, no. 12 (2020): 4482, as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 57–58.</ref> The fetish is the field-level expression of [[Ontological Bias]] and [[Epistemic Attachment]]: attachment to one's own knowledge system, hardened into worldview, mobilized as hierarchy.

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]

Epistemic Attachment

2026-09-11T13:28:57Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''Epistemic Attachment''' is an emotional, professional, and identity-level investment in a particular object of knowledge — a theory, institution, discipline, or worldview — such that the object's continued existence and stability functions as a source of personal and professional legitimation, thereby limiting the knower's capacity to imagine alternatives, up to and including the object's transformation or disappearance.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==
===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The concept of epistemic attachment was articulated by anthropologist Jana Bacevic,<ref>Jana Bacevic, “Between Legitimation and Imagination: Epistemic Attachment, Ontological Bias, and Thinking about the Future,” Jana Bacevic, December 18, 2017, https://janabacevic.net/2017/12/18/between-legitimation-and-imagination-epistemic-attachment-ontological-bias-and-thinking-about-the-future/.</ref> who illustrates it with the failure of social scientists to predict the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Both Yugoslav and Western scholars "depended on Yugoslavia as a source of legitimation of their work, though for different reasons." For Yugoslav scholars, the exceptionality of the Yugoslav model grounded their authority as possessors of "local knowledge" in international scientific collaboration, and their personal and professional identities "depended on the continued existence of Yugoslavia as an object; they could imagine different ways in which it could be transformed, but not really that it could be obliterated." For Western scholars, Yugoslavia served as the perfect experiment proving either that market socialism could work (the left) or that market exchange could soften command economies (the right). "If no one foresaw the war, it was because it played no role in either of these epistemic constructs."

The counter-example is Bogdan Denitch, the one scholar who predicted the collapse in detail. His position provided "a sufficient degree of attachment to be able to look deeply into a problem and understand its possible transformations; and a sufficient degree of detachment to be able to see that the object of knowledge may not be there forever."

Epistemic attachment cannot be eliminated, only balanced. "Balancing between attachment and detachment is one of the key challenges in any practice of knowing the social world," and the challenge grows as the objects of study (climate change, artificial intelligence, the future of humanity itself) grow in complexity and centrality. Mark Carrigan<Ref>Mark Carrigan, “Ontological Bias and Social Knowledge in a Post-Truth Era,” Mark Carrigan, December 28, 2017, https://markcarrigan.net/2017/12/28/ontological-bias-and-social-knowledge-in-a-post-truth-era/</ref> adds that avoiding the bias produced by epistemic attachment may also require distancing from comfortable philosophical constructs — e.g., treating "prediction" as a philosophical designator rather than a sociological one — since such constructs can themselves become objects of attachment.

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]

Epistemic Attachment

2026-09-11T13:28:00Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''Epistemic Attachment''' is an emotional, professional, and identity-level investment in a particular object of knowledge — a theory, institution, discipline, or worldview — such that the object's continued existence and stability functions as a source of personal and professional legitimation, thereby limiting the knower's capacity to imagine alternatives, up to and including the object's transformation or disappearance.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==
===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Epistemic Attachment]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The concept of epistemic attachment was articulated by anthropologist Jana Bacevic,<ref>Jana Bacevic, “Between Legitimation and Imagination: Epistemic Attachment, Ontological Bias, and Thinking about the Future,” Jana Bacevic, December 18, 2017, https://janabacevic.net/2017/12/18/between-legitimation-and-imagination-epistemic-attachment-ontological-bias-and-thinking-about-the-future/.</ref> who illustrates it with the failure of social scientists to predict the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Both Yugoslav and Western scholars "depended on Yugoslavia as a source of legitimation of their work, though for different reasons." For Yugoslav scholars, the exceptionality of the Yugoslav model grounded their authority as possessors of "local knowledge" in international scientific collaboration, and their personal and professional identities "depended on the continued existence of Yugoslavia as an object; they could imagine different ways in which it could be transformed, but not really that it could be obliterated." For Western scholars, Yugoslavia served as the perfect experiment proving either that market socialism could work (the left) or that market exchange could soften command economies (the right). "If no one foresaw the war, it was because it played no role in either of these epistemic constructs."

The counter-example is Bogdan Denitch, the one scholar who predicted the collapse in detail. His position provided "a sufficient degree of attachment to be able to look deeply into a problem and understand its possible transformations; and a sufficient degree of detachment to be able to see that the object of knowledge may not be there forever."

Epistemic attachment cannot be eliminated, only balanced. "Balancing between attachment and detachment is one of the key challenges in any practice of knowing the social world," and the challenge grows as the objects of study (climate change, artificial intelligence, the future of humanity itself) grow in complexity and centrality. Mark Carrigan<Ref>Mark Carrigan, “Ontological Bias and Social Knowledge in a Post-Truth Era,” Mark Carrigan, December 28, 2017, https://markcarrigan.net/2017/12/28/ontological-bias-and-social-knowledge-in-a-post-truth-era/</ref> adds that avoiding the bias produced by epistemic attachment may also require distancing from comfortable philosophical constructs — e.g., treating "prediction" as a philosophical designator rather than a sociological one — since such constructs can themselves become objects of attachment.

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]

Ontological Bias

2026-09-11T13:27:48Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''Ontological Bias''' is a bias that emerges from rigid adherence to a particular view of the fundamental nature of reality — a theological or philosophical worldview — such that the adherent's mind is closed to alternative explanations, and to the logic and evidence that might support alternative views. </blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}
===Syncretic Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

In the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]], ontological bias is defined as "bias that emerges from rigid adherence to certain theological and philosophical worldviews. Ontological bias closes our mind to alternative explanations and the logic and evidence that might support alternative views." Examples: a person who sees God as a white male patriarch will have a hard time listening to a Hindu who brings forward a more pantheistic vision of Consciousness; an atheist will dismiss out of hand evidence for spiritual realities and accounts of spiritual experience; a Catholic will see only the positive aspects of their religion and justify uncomfortable aspects (pervasive paedophilia in the church, for example); a Marxist will see only an opiate; a sociologist will see only the ecclesiastical component of religion and ignore religious experience. Because of these blinders, "neither group is capable of grasping the big picture."

The term is used in a closely related sense by Jana Bacevic (2017) and Mark Carrigan (2017), for whom ontological bias is essentially "epistemic attachment to the object of research" — the way a scholar's investment in a particular object of knowledge (see [[Epistemic Attachment]]) constrains what can be thought, predicted, or imagined about that object. In the LP framework, the two senses converge: ontological bias is what happens when attachment hardens into worldview, and worldview then filters evidence, experience, and imagination alike.

Ontological bias rarely travels alone. In the academic study of religion it is compounded by ethnocentrism, Eurocentrism, and flat-out racist attempts to dismiss anything that does not originate in white, European thought — producing the [[Boundary Fetish]]. Ontological bias is also the last line of defense when substantive and functional definitions of religion fail to separate science from religion: having failed to draw boundaries on content or function, scholars retreat to ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority) — boundaries that also collapse under sustained empirical attention, since scientists themselves report mystical and enlightenment experiences, transpersonal psychology crosses the materialist line, and scientific institutions display the same conservatism and heretic-excommunication dynamics as churches (cf. Rupert Sheldrake's excommunication by Nature editor John Maddox).

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]

Boundary Problem

2026-09-11T13:27:30Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Boundary Problem''' is the persistent scholarly problem of how to draw a defensible line, substantively, functionally, ontologically, or epistemologically, between religion and other human institutions and knowledge systems, such as magic, science, Hollywood, sports, or the New Age movement. The problem is insoluble, because the boundaries it seeks do not exist.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The Boundary Problem arises the moment scholars attempt to define religion by what distinguishes it from everything else. Every attempted boundary fails under empirical attention, at four successive lines of defense.<ref>Mike Sosteric, ''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion'', draft v.095, introductory unit for Athabasca University Sociology 231: ''The Sociology of Religion'' (manuscript in preparation; E.T.A. 2027). Page references herein are to the draft PDF. Hereafter cited as Sosteric, ''RSGR draft''.</ref>

'''1. Substantive boundaries fail.''' Defining religion by belief in supernatural beings runs into Buddha, who rejected gods and supernatural forces outright, yet Buddhism is clearly a religion.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16.</ref> Defining it by a sacred/profane distinction is a Western category imposition: the distinction is not made by the LoDagaa and other West African peoples studied by Goody,<ref>Jack Goody, "Religion and Ritual: The Definitional Problem," ''The British Journal of Sociology'' 12, no. 2 (1961): 142–64, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16–17.</ref> is not meaningful among the Azande,<ref>E. E. Evans-Pritchard, ''Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> and is meaningless for the Huichol of Mexico.<ref>Barbara G. Myerhoff, ''Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians'' (London: Cornell University Press, 1974), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

'''2. Durkheim's "solution" fails.''' Having failed to separate magic and religion from science by supernatural content — and unable to elevate Western religion above Indigenous magic on that basis either — Durkheim "solved" the Boundary Problem by suggesting religion was more social, while magic was more individualistic.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> "Unfortunately, like other ethnocentric boundaries, Durkheim's assertions are more wishful thinking than empirical fact."<ref>Ibid., 17.</ref> Ancient magical and ritual practices had social aspects and social intent — "fisherman who used magic to help with their catch were doing so with their families and communities in mind"<ref>Ibid., 17, citing Sir James George Frazer, ''The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion'' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990).</ref> — and modern magical systems like Wicca and Thelema are deeply embedded in the social fabric: witches have covens and cast spells "for the good of themselves and their community";<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17, citing Starhawk, ''The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Goddess'', 20th anniversary ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2011).</ref> Aleister Crowley, patriarch of Thelema, "was embedded in exoteric and elitist social networks."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

'''3. Functional boundaries fail.''' Functional definitions (religion as what provides cohesion, meaning, or answers to ultimate questions) are even worse at boundary work: as Scharf notes, "they are simply too broad and inclusive. If religion is defined as that which promotes unity or social cohesion, then anything which does this is religion."<ref>B. Scharf, ''The Sociological Study of Religion'' (London: Hutchinson, 1970), as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29.</ref> Communism, fascism, nationalism, capitalism, sports, and rock concerts all become religious events. Hamilton therefore advises abandoning functional definitions altogether<ref>Malcolm Hamilton, ''The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives'' (London: Routledge, 2001), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29–30.</ref> — but this is rejected in the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]: institutions are always functional, since "all institutions ... are instrumental means for the satisfaction of needs";<ref>Melford E. Spiro, "Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation," in ''Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion'', ed. Michael Banton (London: Routledge, 2004), 96, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref> "if we ignore the functions of religion, we might as well not bother studying it."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref>

'''4. Ontological/epistemic boundaries fail.''' With content and function unable to separate religion from science, the last line of defense is ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority and tradition).<ref>Ibid., 44–45.</ref> These too collapse: transpersonal and humanistic psychology cross the materialist line and even provide techniques for spiritual connection;<ref>Ibid., 44.</ref> scientists report mystical and "enlightenment" experiences — Kekulé's dream of the benzene ring, Darwin's "innumerable little illuminations,"<ref>Peter Caws, "The Structure of Discovery," ''Science'' 166, no. 3911 (1969): 1375–80; Howard E. Gruber, "On the Relation between 'AHA Experiences' and the Construction of Ideas," ''History of Science'' 19, no. 1 (1981): 41–59; both as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref> Einstein's awe before "the old one"<ref>Albert Einstein, ''Out of My Later Years'' (New York: Citadel Press, 2000), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25, 45–46.</ref> — and science itself behaves like a church when challenged: Kuhn showed it to be one of the most conservative institutions going,<ref>Thomas S. Kuhn, ''The Structure of Scientific Revolutions'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> and Yinger notes that many scientists "sanctify science just like priests sanctify religion, by presenting it as a superior path towards truth."<ref>Roy Rappaport, as quoted in J. Milton Yinger, ''The Scientific Study of Religion'' (London: Macmillan, 1970), in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> Rupert Sheldrake was publicly shamed and excommunicated by ''Nature''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s senior editor, who called his book "the best candidate for burning there has been for many years."<ref>Anthony Freeman, "The Sense of Being Glared At: What Is It Like to Be a Heretic?," ''Journal of Consciousness Studies'' 12, no. 6 (2005): 4–9, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 48.</ref>

'''The problem metastasizes.''' Smart's substantive elements — social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, plus healing — are found everywhere.<ref>Ninian Smart, ''The World's Religions'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); Ninian Smart, ''The Phenomenon of Religion'' (New York: Macmillan, 1973); as synthesized in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 18–23.</ref> Hollywood has its master narratives: Lucas "intentionally set out to awaken (some might say indoctrinate) children" with a monomyth that "echoes in nearly every belief system," admitting "I put the Force into the movie in order to try to awaken a certain kind of spirituality in young people."<ref>Bill Moyers, "Of Myth and Men," ''Time'', April 18, 1999, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 24.</ref> Sports has its sacred figures and superstitions; the Boy Scouts' oath requires affirmation of "belief and submission to God";<ref>Bryan Wendell, "About the 'Belief in God' Requirement in Scouting," ''Bryan on Scouting'', October 3, 2014, as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 42.</ref> science has its rituals, myths, martyrs, and mystical musings. "So what makes the institution of science different than religion? Where is the all-important boundary?"<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref>

'''LP resolution.''' The Boundary Problem cannot be solved because there is no boundary there. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose. They can make their institutions serve whatever needs they want."<ref>Ibid., 48.</ref> The continuing attempt to solve it is not scholarship but the [[Boundary Fetish]] — "not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age.... It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> The productive move is not a better boundary but no boundary: religion as "a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs," organized around answers to big questions with a core emphasis on alignment and connection,<ref>Ibid., 56.</ref> embraces the overlap of human institutions, breaks the study of religion open, and exposes centuries of elite interference in spiritual systems. Abandoning the boundary quest is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref>

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a term in::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]

Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion

2026-09-11T13:26:25Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion''' is an upcoming Lightning Path monograph by Mike Sosteric that provides a definition of religion which captures the phenomenon's complexity, stimulates thought and research, and sensitizes readers to the profound manipulation, colonization, and destruction of human spirituality by elites — and to how we have all participated in that colonization. <span style="color:#cc0000;">'''E.T.A. 2027.'''</span> For notifications of this and other LP materials, register at https://www.lightningpath.org/register..</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Rocket Guides]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Rocket Guide]]|format=ul}}

Terms in the book [[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

''TLDR:''' Religion is an institution set up to meet various and specific needs. What needs a particular religious institution meets depends on the intent of the people who set it up. If the founders are members of the [[Accumulating Class]], the religion will typically prioritize elite needs — an [[Elite Religion]]. If a religion is built up from the grassroots teachings of a charismatic avatar, it will typically prioritize the needs of the masses — an [[Authentic Religion]].

'''Argument of the book:''' Our collective understanding of religion and human spirituality is inadequate, caricatured, and colonial. Scholarly attempts to define religion have been hamstrung by (1) religion's genuine complexity and an Occam-driven desire to reduce it to a sound byte (Marx's "opiate," Freud's "infantile delusion," Durkheim's "projection of society"); (2) [[Ontological Bias]] — rigid adherence to theological and philosophical worldviews that closes minds to alternative explanations and evidence; and (3) a [[Boundary Fetish]] — the structural, often racist Eurocentric drive to hierarchically bound Western science above Western monotheism above Indigenous spirituality, repackaged in the secularization thesis and the "world religions" framework (Masuzawa).

'''The definition developed in the book:''' Religion is a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs. Religions are organized around a core emphasis on providing answers to our big questions, with a usual emphasis on the satisfaction of alignment and connection needs as the institutional core. A religious institution itself consists of social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, and healing dimensions all geared towards the satisfaction of various human needs. Essential needs are those of the [[Circle of Seven Essential Needs]] (physiological, emotional, cognitive, psychological, environmental, alignment, connection); non-essential needs — an emperor's need for power, a patriarch's need for control of women, capital's need for a compliant workforce — are the hooks by which elites hijack authentic spiritual systems, as with Ardashir's seizure of Zoroastrianism and Constantine's co-optation and patriarchal editing of Christianity (Ehrman).

The book's deliberately boundary-free definition does not solve the boundary problem; it dissolves it. Substantively and functionally, science, Hollywood, sports, the New Age movement, and the Boy Scouts all bleed into religion — the boundaries simply do not exist. Putting aside the superiority project and embracing the complexity is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a::Rocket Guide| ]]
[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System| ]]

Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion

2026-09-11T13:26:16Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion''' is an upcoming Lightning Path monograph by Mike Sosteric that provides a definition of religion which captures the phenomenon's complexity, stimulates thought and research, and sensitizes readers to the profound manipulation, colonization, and destruction of human spirituality by elites — and to how we have all participated in that colonization. <span style="color:#cc0000;">'''E.T.A. 2027.'''</span> For notifications of this and other LP materials, register at https://www.lightningpath.org/register..</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Rocket Guides]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Rocket Guide]]|format=ul}}

Terms in the boo [[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

''TLDR:''' Religion is an institution set up to meet various and specific needs. What needs a particular religious institution meets depends on the intent of the people who set it up. If the founders are members of the [[Accumulating Class]], the religion will typically prioritize elite needs — an [[Elite Religion]]. If a religion is built up from the grassroots teachings of a charismatic avatar, it will typically prioritize the needs of the masses — an [[Authentic Religion]].

'''Argument of the book:''' Our collective understanding of religion and human spirituality is inadequate, caricatured, and colonial. Scholarly attempts to define religion have been hamstrung by (1) religion's genuine complexity and an Occam-driven desire to reduce it to a sound byte (Marx's "opiate," Freud's "infantile delusion," Durkheim's "projection of society"); (2) [[Ontological Bias]] — rigid adherence to theological and philosophical worldviews that closes minds to alternative explanations and evidence; and (3) a [[Boundary Fetish]] — the structural, often racist Eurocentric drive to hierarchically bound Western science above Western monotheism above Indigenous spirituality, repackaged in the secularization thesis and the "world religions" framework (Masuzawa).

'''The definition developed in the book:''' Religion is a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs. Religions are organized around a core emphasis on providing answers to our big questions, with a usual emphasis on the satisfaction of alignment and connection needs as the institutional core. A religious institution itself consists of social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, and healing dimensions all geared towards the satisfaction of various human needs. Essential needs are those of the [[Circle of Seven Essential Needs]] (physiological, emotional, cognitive, psychological, environmental, alignment, connection); non-essential needs — an emperor's need for power, a patriarch's need for control of women, capital's need for a compliant workforce — are the hooks by which elites hijack authentic spiritual systems, as with Ardashir's seizure of Zoroastrianism and Constantine's co-optation and patriarchal editing of Christianity (Ehrman).

The book's deliberately boundary-free definition does not solve the boundary problem; it dissolves it. Substantively and functionally, science, Hollywood, sports, the New Age movement, and the Boy Scouts all bleed into religion — the boundaries simply do not exist. Putting aside the superiority project and embracing the complexity is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a::Rocket Guide| ]]
[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System| ]]

Boundary Fetish

2026-09-11T13:25:52Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Boundary Fetish''' is the persistent, often compulsive scholarly drive to establish sharp, hierarchical boundaries between systems of knowledge and life, typically positioning Western science at the top, Western monotheism in the middle, and Indigenous spirituality and magic at the bottom. This drive is motivated not by empirical evidence but by a conscious or unconscious desire to assert the superiority of one's own European, patriarchal, and materialist identity.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The term is coined in the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]: scholars "have been trying to distinguish and elevate their own 'adult, civilized white man' European institutions (e.g., monotheistic religion and science) as superior against the 'savage,' primitive, pre-logical, narcissistic, and infantile character of the knowledge systems of the so-called 'inferior races.'"<ref>Sosteric, ''[[RSGR]] draft'', 6.</ref> The struggle to define religion is thus "the sometimes overt, sometimes covert, but always racist desire to establish boundaries between Indigenous systems of belief and Western systems of belief.... a boundary fetish."<ref>Ibid., 6.</ref>

'''Classic inscriptions.''' Malinowski: science "is guided by reason and corrected by observation," open to all, "a common good of the whole community," while magic "is occult, taught through mysterious initiations" and "lives in an atmosphere of mysticism."<ref>Bronislaw Malinowski, ''Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays'' (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1948), 3, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 6–7.</ref> Frazer: magic's "fatal flaw" is "not in its general assumption of a sequence of events determined by law, but in presumed misconception of the nature of the particular laws which govern that sequence,"<ref>Sir James George Frazer, ''The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion'' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990), 49, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 7.</ref> while monotheism's "more perfect submission to the divine will... affects only those higher intelligences who have breadth of view enough to comprehend the vastness of the universe and the littleness of man."<ref>Frazer, ''The Golden Bough'', 59, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 8.</ref> Comte: the "law of three stages" casts Indigenous fetishism as the puerile belief of an "infant species."<ref>August Comte, ''A General View of Positivism'' (1856; repr., Marxist Internet Archive, 2005), 35, 185, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 8–9.</ref> Freud: animism corresponds to narcissism, religion to a child's attachment to his parents, science to maturity.<ref>Sigmund Freud, ''Totem and Taboo'' (New York: Routledge, 1913), 104, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 28.</ref> Tylor: religion as "belief in spiritual beings."<ref>Edward Tylor, ''Primitive Culture'' (London: John Murray, 1903), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 15.</ref>

'''Modern repackagings.''' The secularization thesis — articulated most forcefully by Peter Berger and Bryan Wilson — is Comte's law of three stages in postwar dress, positioning secular Western modernity as "the telos of human advancement" and non-secular societies as "backward holdovers."<ref>Peter Berger, ''The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion'' (New York: Anchor Books, 1969); as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 10–11.</ref> It persisted despite its empirical failure — explosive religious growth worldwide, which drove Berger himself to recant in favor of "desecularization."<ref>Peter Berger, ed., ''The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 10.</ref> After World War I made overt triumphalism embarrassing, the "world religions" framework preserved the hierarchy as pluralism: the scripture criterion demotes Indigenous systems to a residual "primal" category, Christianity becomes "first among unequals," and the Western scholar is installed as neutral arbiter.<ref>Tomoko Masuzawa, ''The Invention of World Religions: Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), 43–44, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 11–12.</ref> "The hierarchy was no longer written on the surface; it was woven into the very structure of the classification itself."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 12.</ref>

'''The fetish is structural, not incidental.''' "The boundary fetish... is not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age. It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> Every world religions syllabus listing a dozen "major" traditions and relegating the rest to "primal religions" draws a boundary and performs an identity ritual: "this is what we are, and this is what they are, and never the twain shall meet."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref>

'''Every boundary collapses under empirical attention.''' Hunter-gatherers are not especially animistic, and magic "is either reserved for special circumstances or is an adjunct to ordinary techniques," not mistaken for everyday causation;<ref>Malcolm Hamilton, ''The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives'' (London: Routledge, 2001), as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 9.</ref> Frazer's own evidence casts magicians as the "direct predecessors of our physicians, surgeons, and scientists";<ref>Frazer, ''The Golden Bough'', 62, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 7.</ref> the sacred/profane distinction is meaningless among the Azande, the Huichol, and West African peoples;<ref>E. E. Evans-Pritchard, ''Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937); Barbara G. Myerhoff, ''Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians'' (London: Cornell University Press, 1974); Jack Goody, "Religion and Ritual: The Definitional Problem," ''The British Journal of Sociology'' 12, no. 2 (1961): 142–64; as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> Wicca and Thelema are deeply social;<ref>Starhawk, ''The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Goddess'', 20th anniversary ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2011), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> and Smart's substantive elements are found throughout Hollywood, sports, the Boy Scouts, the New Age movement, and science itself (see [[Boundary Problem]]).<ref>Ninian Smart, ''The World's Religions'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); as synthesized in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 18–25, 41–44.</ref>

'''LP resolution.''' The boundaries do not exist, and the definitional quest for them is itself part of the problem. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 48.</ref> Unless the goal is to demonstrate European, scientific, or patriarchal superiority, boundaries need not — and should not — be asserted. Abandoning the boundary fetish is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well"<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref> — a decolonization that also recovers the "much more nuanced and sophisticated view of human beings and their relations to self, community, earth, and the cosmos" found in Indigenous spiritual systems.<ref>Sonia Lucana and John Elfers, "Sacred Medicine: Indigenous Healing and Mental Health," ''The Qualitative Report'' 25, no. 12 (2020): 4482, as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 57–58.</ref> The fetish is the field-level expression of [[Ontological Bias]] and [[Epistemic Attachment]]: attachment to one's own knowledge system, hardened into worldview, mobilized as hierarchy.

==Book Terms==

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:rsgr]]
[[Is a key term::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]

RSGR

2026-09-11T13:21:43Z

Michael: Redirected page to Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion

#REDIRECT [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]

Boundary Fetish

2026-09-11T13:21:25Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Boundary Fetish''' is the persistent, often compulsive scholarly drive to establish sharp, hierarchical boundaries between systems of knowledge and life, typically positioning Western science at the top, Western monotheism in the middle, and Indigenous spirituality and magic at the bottom. This drive is motivated not by empirical evidence but by a conscious or unconscious desire to assert the superiority of one's own European, patriarchal, and materialist identity.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}
===Syncretic Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Boundary Fetish]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Fetish]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The term is coined in the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]: scholars "have been trying to distinguish and elevate their own 'adult, civilized white man' European institutions (e.g., monotheistic religion and science) as superior against the 'savage,' primitive, pre-logical, narcissistic, and infantile character of the knowledge systems of the so-called 'inferior races.'"<ref>Sosteric, ''[[RSGR]] draft'', 6.</ref> The struggle to define religion is thus "the sometimes overt, sometimes covert, but always racist desire to establish boundaries between Indigenous systems of belief and Western systems of belief.... a boundary fetish."<ref>Ibid., 6.</ref>

'''Classic inscriptions.''' Malinowski: science "is guided by reason and corrected by observation," open to all, "a common good of the whole community," while magic "is occult, taught through mysterious initiations" and "lives in an atmosphere of mysticism."<ref>Bronislaw Malinowski, ''Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays'' (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1948), 3, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 6–7.</ref> Frazer: magic's "fatal flaw" is "not in its general assumption of a sequence of events determined by law, but in presumed misconception of the nature of the particular laws which govern that sequence,"<ref>Sir James George Frazer, ''The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion'' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990), 49, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 7.</ref> while monotheism's "more perfect submission to the divine will... affects only those higher intelligences who have breadth of view enough to comprehend the vastness of the universe and the littleness of man."<ref>Frazer, ''The Golden Bough'', 59, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 8.</ref> Comte: the "law of three stages" casts Indigenous fetishism as the puerile belief of an "infant species."<ref>August Comte, ''A General View of Positivism'' (1856; repr., Marxist Internet Archive, 2005), 35, 185, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 8–9.</ref> Freud: animism corresponds to narcissism, religion to a child's attachment to his parents, science to maturity.<ref>Sigmund Freud, ''Totem and Taboo'' (New York: Routledge, 1913), 104, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 28.</ref> Tylor: religion as "belief in spiritual beings."<ref>Edward Tylor, ''Primitive Culture'' (London: John Murray, 1903), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 15.</ref>

'''Modern repackagings.''' The secularization thesis — articulated most forcefully by Peter Berger and Bryan Wilson — is Comte's law of three stages in postwar dress, positioning secular Western modernity as "the telos of human advancement" and non-secular societies as "backward holdovers."<ref>Peter Berger, ''The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion'' (New York: Anchor Books, 1969); as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 10–11.</ref> It persisted despite its empirical failure — explosive religious growth worldwide, which drove Berger himself to recant in favor of "desecularization."<ref>Peter Berger, ed., ''The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 10.</ref> After World War I made overt triumphalism embarrassing, the "world religions" framework preserved the hierarchy as pluralism: the scripture criterion demotes Indigenous systems to a residual "primal" category, Christianity becomes "first among unequals," and the Western scholar is installed as neutral arbiter.<ref>Tomoko Masuzawa, ''The Invention of World Religions: Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), 43–44, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 11–12.</ref> "The hierarchy was no longer written on the surface; it was woven into the very structure of the classification itself."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 12.</ref>

'''The fetish is structural, not incidental.''' "The boundary fetish... is not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age. It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> Every world religions syllabus listing a dozen "major" traditions and relegating the rest to "primal religions" draws a boundary and performs an identity ritual: "this is what we are, and this is what they are, and never the twain shall meet."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref>

'''Every boundary collapses under empirical attention.''' Hunter-gatherers are not especially animistic, and magic "is either reserved for special circumstances or is an adjunct to ordinary techniques," not mistaken for everyday causation;<ref>Malcolm Hamilton, ''The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives'' (London: Routledge, 2001), as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 9.</ref> Frazer's own evidence casts magicians as the "direct predecessors of our physicians, surgeons, and scientists";<ref>Frazer, ''The Golden Bough'', 62, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 7.</ref> the sacred/profane distinction is meaningless among the Azande, the Huichol, and West African peoples;<ref>E. E. Evans-Pritchard, ''Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937); Barbara G. Myerhoff, ''Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians'' (London: Cornell University Press, 1974); Jack Goody, "Religion and Ritual: The Definitional Problem," ''The British Journal of Sociology'' 12, no. 2 (1961): 142–64; as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> Wicca and Thelema are deeply social;<ref>Starhawk, ''The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Goddess'', 20th anniversary ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2011), as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> and Smart's substantive elements are found throughout Hollywood, sports, the Boy Scouts, the New Age movement, and science itself (see [[Boundary Problem]]).<ref>Ninian Smart, ''The World's Religions'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); as synthesized in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 18–25, 41–44.</ref>

'''LP resolution.''' The boundaries do not exist, and the definitional quest for them is itself part of the problem. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 48.</ref> Unless the goal is to demonstrate European, scientific, or patriarchal superiority, boundaries need not — and should not — be asserted. Abandoning the boundary fetish is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well"<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref> — a decolonization that also recovers the "much more nuanced and sophisticated view of human beings and their relations to self, community, earth, and the cosmos" found in Indigenous spiritual systems.<ref>Sonia Lucana and John Elfers, "Sacred Medicine: Indigenous Healing and Mental Health," ''The Qualitative Report'' 25, no. 12 (2020): 4482, as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 57–58.</ref> The fetish is the field-level expression of [[Ontological Bias]] and [[Epistemic Attachment]]: attachment to one's own knowledge system, hardened into worldview, mobilized as hierarchy.

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]

Boundary Problem

2026-09-11T13:15:47Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Boundary Problem''' is the persistent scholarly problem of how to draw a defensible line, substantively, functionally, ontologically, or epistemologically, between religion and other human institutions and knowledge systems, such as magic, science, Hollywood, sports, or the New Age movement. The problem is insoluble, because the boundaries it seeks do not exist.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Boundary Problem]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Boundary Problem]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The Boundary Problem arises the moment scholars attempt to define religion by what distinguishes it from everything else. Every attempted boundary fails under empirical attention, at four successive lines of defense.<ref>Mike Sosteric, ''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion'', draft v.095, introductory unit for Athabasca University Sociology 231: ''The Sociology of Religion'' (manuscript in preparation; E.T.A. 2027). Page references herein are to the draft PDF. Hereafter cited as Sosteric, ''RSGR draft''.</ref>

'''1. Substantive boundaries fail.''' Defining religion by belief in supernatural beings runs into Buddha, who rejected gods and supernatural forces outright, yet Buddhism is clearly a religion.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16.</ref> Defining it by a sacred/profane distinction is a Western category imposition: the distinction is not made by the LoDagaa and other West African peoples studied by Goody,<ref>Jack Goody, "Religion and Ritual: The Definitional Problem," ''The British Journal of Sociology'' 12, no. 2 (1961): 142–64, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 16–17.</ref> is not meaningful among the Azande,<ref>E. E. Evans-Pritchard, ''Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> and is meaningless for the Huichol of Mexico.<ref>Barbara G. Myerhoff, ''Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians'' (London: Cornell University Press, 1974), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

'''2. Durkheim's "solution" fails.''' Having failed to separate magic and religion from science by supernatural content — and unable to elevate Western religion above Indigenous magic on that basis either — Durkheim "solved" the Boundary Problem by suggesting religion was more social, while magic was more individualistic.<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref> "Unfortunately, like other ethnocentric boundaries, Durkheim's assertions are more wishful thinking than empirical fact."<ref>Ibid., 17.</ref> Ancient magical and ritual practices had social aspects and social intent — "fisherman who used magic to help with their catch were doing so with their families and communities in mind"<ref>Ibid., 17, citing Sir James George Frazer, ''The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion'' (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1990).</ref> — and modern magical systems like Wicca and Thelema are deeply embedded in the social fabric: witches have covens and cast spells "for the good of themselves and their community";<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17, citing Starhawk, ''The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Goddess'', 20th anniversary ed. (New York: HarperOne, 2011).</ref> Aleister Crowley, patriarch of Thelema, "was embedded in exoteric and elitist social networks."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 17.</ref>

'''3. Functional boundaries fail.''' Functional definitions (religion as what provides cohesion, meaning, or answers to ultimate questions) are even worse at boundary work: as Scharf notes, "they are simply too broad and inclusive. If religion is defined as that which promotes unity or social cohesion, then anything which does this is religion."<ref>B. Scharf, ''The Sociological Study of Religion'' (London: Hutchinson, 1970), as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29.</ref> Communism, fascism, nationalism, capitalism, sports, and rock concerts all become religious events. Hamilton therefore advises abandoning functional definitions altogether<ref>Malcolm Hamilton, ''The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives'' (London: Routledge, 2001), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 29–30.</ref> — but this is rejected in the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]]: institutions are always functional, since "all institutions ... are instrumental means for the satisfaction of needs";<ref>Melford E. Spiro, "Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation," in ''Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion'', ed. Michael Banton (London: Routledge, 2004), 96, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref> "if we ignore the functions of religion, we might as well not bother studying it."<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 30.</ref>

'''4. Ontological/epistemic boundaries fail.''' With content and function unable to separate religion from science, the last line of defense is ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority and tradition).<ref>Ibid., 44–45.</ref> These too collapse: transpersonal and humanistic psychology cross the materialist line and even provide techniques for spiritual connection;<ref>Ibid., 44.</ref> scientists report mystical and "enlightenment" experiences — Kekulé's dream of the benzene ring, Darwin's "innumerable little illuminations,"<ref>Peter Caws, "The Structure of Discovery," ''Science'' 166, no. 3911 (1969): 1375–80; Howard E. Gruber, "On the Relation between 'AHA Experiences' and the Construction of Ideas," ''History of Science'' 19, no. 1 (1981): 41–59; both as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref> Einstein's awe before "the old one"<ref>Albert Einstein, ''Out of My Later Years'' (New York: Citadel Press, 2000), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25, 45–46.</ref> — and science itself behaves like a church when challenged: Kuhn showed it to be one of the most conservative institutions going,<ref>Thomas S. Kuhn, ''The Structure of Scientific Revolutions'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> and Yinger notes that many scientists "sanctify science just like priests sanctify religion, by presenting it as a superior path towards truth."<ref>Roy Rappaport, as quoted in J. Milton Yinger, ''The Scientific Study of Religion'' (London: Macmillan, 1970), in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 47.</ref> Rupert Sheldrake was publicly shamed and excommunicated by ''Nature''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s senior editor, who called his book "the best candidate for burning there has been for many years."<ref>Anthony Freeman, "The Sense of Being Glared At: What Is It Like to Be a Heretic?," ''Journal of Consciousness Studies'' 12, no. 6 (2005): 4–9, as discussed in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 48.</ref>

'''The problem metastasizes.''' Smart's substantive elements — social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, plus healing — are found everywhere.<ref>Ninian Smart, ''The World's Religions'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992); Ninian Smart, ''The Phenomenon of Religion'' (New York: Macmillan, 1973); as synthesized in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 18–23.</ref> Hollywood has its master narratives: Lucas "intentionally set out to awaken (some might say indoctrinate) children" with a monomyth that "echoes in nearly every belief system," admitting "I put the Force into the movie in order to try to awaken a certain kind of spirituality in young people."<ref>Bill Moyers, "Of Myth and Men," ''Time'', April 18, 1999, as quoted in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 24.</ref> Sports has its sacred figures and superstitions; the Boy Scouts' oath requires affirmation of "belief and submission to God";<ref>Bryan Wendell, "About the 'Belief in God' Requirement in Scouting," ''Bryan on Scouting'', October 3, 2014, as cited in Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 42.</ref> science has its rituals, myths, martyrs, and mystical musings. "So what makes the institution of science different than religion? Where is the all-important boundary?"<ref>Sosteric, ''RSGR draft'', 25.</ref>

'''LP resolution.''' The Boundary Problem cannot be solved because there is no boundary there. "Humans are complex and creative. They do not honour the boundaries scholars attempt to impose. They can make their institutions serve whatever needs they want."<ref>Ibid., 48.</ref> The continuing attempt to solve it is not scholarship but the [[Boundary Fetish]] — "not an accident or a relic of a less enlightened age.... It is structural. It is what the academic study of religion has repeatedly been mobilized to produce."<ref>Ibid., 14.</ref> The productive move is not a better boundary but no boundary: religion as "a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs," organized around answers to big questions with a core emphasis on alignment and connection,<ref>Ibid., 56.</ref> embraces the overlap of human institutions, breaks the study of religion open, and exposes centuries of elite interference in spiritual systems. Abandoning the boundary quest is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."<ref>Ibid., 58.</ref>

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a term in::RSGR| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]

Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion

2026-09-11T13:03:45Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion''' is an upcoming Lightning Path monograph by Mike Sosteric that provides a definition of religion which captures the phenomenon's complexity, stimulates thought and research, and sensitizes readers to the profound manipulation, colonization, and destruction of human spirituality by elites — and to how we have all participated in that colonization. <span style="color:#cc0000;">'''E.T.A. 2027.'''</span> For notifications of this and other LP materials, register at https://www.lightningpath.org/register..</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Rocket Guides]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Rocket Guide]]|format=ul}}

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::RSGR]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

''TLDR:''' Religion is an institution set up to meet various and specific needs. What needs a particular religious institution meets depends on the intent of the people who set it up. If the founders are members of the [[Accumulating Class]], the religion will typically prioritize elite needs — an [[Elite Religion]]. If a religion is built up from the grassroots teachings of a charismatic avatar, it will typically prioritize the needs of the masses — an [[Authentic Religion]].

'''Argument of the book:''' Our collective understanding of religion and human spirituality is inadequate, caricatured, and colonial. Scholarly attempts to define religion have been hamstrung by (1) religion's genuine complexity and an Occam-driven desire to reduce it to a sound byte (Marx's "opiate," Freud's "infantile delusion," Durkheim's "projection of society"); (2) [[Ontological Bias]] — rigid adherence to theological and philosophical worldviews that closes minds to alternative explanations and evidence; and (3) a [[Boundary Fetish]] — the structural, often racist Eurocentric drive to hierarchically bound Western science above Western monotheism above Indigenous spirituality, repackaged in the secularization thesis and the "world religions" framework (Masuzawa).

'''The definition developed in the book:''' Religion is a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs. Religions are organized around a core emphasis on providing answers to our big questions, with a usual emphasis on the satisfaction of alignment and connection needs as the institutional core. A religious institution itself consists of social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, and healing dimensions all geared towards the satisfaction of various human needs. Essential needs are those of the [[Circle of Seven Essential Needs]] (physiological, emotional, cognitive, psychological, environmental, alignment, connection); non-essential needs — an emperor's need for power, a patriarch's need for control of women, capital's need for a compliant workforce — are the hooks by which elites hijack authentic spiritual systems, as with Ardashir's seizure of Zoroastrianism and Constantine's co-optation and patriarchal editing of Christianity (Ehrman).

The book's deliberately boundary-free definition does not solve the boundary problem; it dissolves it. Substantively and functionally, science, Hollywood, sports, the New Age movement, and the Boy Scouts all bleed into religion — the boundaries simply do not exist. Putting aside the superiority project and embracing the complexity is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a::Rocket Guide| ]]
[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System| ]]

Spiritual Theory

2026-09-11T13:01:18Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">Spiritual theory is a philosophical line of inquiry that accepts as fact that we are more than our [[Physical Unit|physical body]]. Spiritual Theory starts from the observable fact that consciousness appears to be non-local and non-temporal,<ref>Sosteric, Mike. “The Shifting Paradigm in the Science of Consciousness.” ''The Peace Table'', 2025. https://medium.com/the-peace-table/25c8511a3641</ref> and builds out from there.
</blockquote>
==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

=== Syncretic Terms ===
[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

=== Related LP Terms ===
[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

=== Non-LP Related Terms ===
[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[category:spiritual theory]]
[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System| ]]
[[Has sort AG::8| ]]

Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion

2026-09-11T12:59:38Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion''' is an upcoming Lightning Path monograph by Mike Sosteric that provides a definition of religion which captures the phenomenon's complexity, stimulates thought and research, and sensitizes readers to the profound manipulation, colonization, and destruction of human spirituality by elites — and to how we have all participated in that colonization. <span style="color:#cc0000;">'''E.T.A. 2027.'''</span> For notifications of this and other LP materials, register at https://www.lightningpath.org/register..</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Rocket Guides]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Rocket Guide]]|format=ul}}

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Rocket Guide]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

''TLDR:''' Religion is an institution set up to meet various and specific needs. What needs a particular religious institution meets depends on the intent of the people who set it up. If the founders are members of the [[Accumulating Class]], the religion will typically prioritize elite needs — an [[Elite Religion]]. If a religion is built up from the grassroots teachings of a charismatic avatar, it will typically prioritize the needs of the masses — an [[Authentic Religion]].

'''Argument of the book:''' Our collective understanding of religion and human spirituality is inadequate, caricatured, and colonial. Scholarly attempts to define religion have been hamstrung by (1) religion's genuine complexity and an Occam-driven desire to reduce it to a sound byte (Marx's "opiate," Freud's "infantile delusion," Durkheim's "projection of society"); (2) [[Ontological Bias]] — rigid adherence to theological and philosophical worldviews that closes minds to alternative explanations and evidence; and (3) a [[Boundary Fetish]] — the structural, often racist Eurocentric drive to hierarchically bound Western science above Western monotheism above Indigenous spirituality, repackaged in the secularization thesis and the "world religions" framework (Masuzawa).

'''The definition developed in the book:''' Religion is a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs. Religions are organized around a core emphasis on providing answers to our big questions, with a usual emphasis on the satisfaction of alignment and connection needs as the institutional core. A religious institution itself consists of social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, and healing dimensions all geared towards the satisfaction of various human needs. Essential needs are those of the [[Circle of Seven Essential Needs]] (physiological, emotional, cognitive, psychological, environmental, alignment, connection); non-essential needs — an emperor's need for power, a patriarch's need for control of women, capital's need for a compliant workforce — are the hooks by which elites hijack authentic spiritual systems, as with Ardashir's seizure of Zoroastrianism and Constantine's co-optation and patriarchal editing of Christianity (Ehrman).

The book's deliberately boundary-free definition does not solve the boundary problem; it dissolves it. Substantively and functionally, science, Hollywood, sports, the New Age movement, and the Boy Scouts all bleed into religion — the boundaries simply do not exist. Putting aside the superiority project and embracing the complexity is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a::Rocket Guide| ]]
[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System| ]]

Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion

2026-09-11T12:58:33Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">
{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">The '''Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion''' is an upcoming Lightning Path monograph by Mike Sosteric that provides a definition of religion which captures the phenomenon's complexity, stimulates thought and research, and sensitizes readers to the profound manipulation, colonization, and destruction of human spirituality by elites — and to how we have all participated in that colonization. <span style="color:#cc0000;">'''E.T.A. 2027.'''</span> For notifications of this and other LP materials, register at https://www.lightningpath.org/register..</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Rocket Guides]] > {{#ask:[[Is a::Rocket Guide]]|format=ul}}

[[Rocket Scientist's Guide to Religion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Rocket Guide]]|format=ul}}

==Notes==

''TLDR:''' Religion is an institution set up to meet various and specific needs. What needs a particular religious institution meets depends on the intent of the people who set it up. If the founders are members of the [[Accumulating Class]], the religion will typically prioritize elite needs — an [[Elite Religion]]. If a religion is built up from the grassroots teachings of a charismatic avatar, it will typically prioritize the needs of the masses — an [[Authentic Religion]].

'''Argument of the book:''' Our collective understanding of religion and human spirituality is inadequate, caricatured, and colonial. Scholarly attempts to define religion have been hamstrung by (1) religion's genuine complexity and an Occam-driven desire to reduce it to a sound byte (Marx's "opiate," Freud's "infantile delusion," Durkheim's "projection of society"); (2) [[Ontological Bias]] — rigid adherence to theological and philosophical worldviews that closes minds to alternative explanations and evidence; and (3) a [[Boundary Fetish]] — the structural, often racist Eurocentric drive to hierarchically bound Western science above Western monotheism above Indigenous spirituality, repackaged in the secularization thesis and the "world religions" framework (Masuzawa).

'''The definition developed in the book:''' Religion is a complicated and flexible human institution set up to meet essential and non-essential human needs. Religions are organized around a core emphasis on providing answers to our big questions, with a usual emphasis on the satisfaction of alignment and connection needs as the institutional core. A religious institution itself consists of social, ritual/practical, experiential, narrative/mythic, doctrinal, ethical/legal, material, and healing dimensions all geared towards the satisfaction of various human needs. Essential needs are those of the [[Circle of Seven Essential Needs]] (physiological, emotional, cognitive, psychological, environmental, alignment, connection); non-essential needs — an emperor's need for power, a patriarch's need for control of women, capital's need for a compliant workforce — are the hooks by which elites hijack authentic spiritual systems, as with Ardashir's seizure of Zoroastrianism and Constantine's co-optation and patriarchal editing of Christianity (Ehrman).

The book's deliberately boundary-free definition does not solve the boundary problem; it dissolves it. Substantively and functionally, science, Hollywood, sports, the New Age movement, and the Boy Scouts all bleed into religion — the boundaries simply do not exist. Putting aside the superiority project and embracing the complexity is "the first step in any serious and authentic attempt to decolonize not only the study of religion and spirituality, but religion and spirituality as well."

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[category:lightningpath]]
[[Is a::Rocket Guide| ]]
[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System| ]]

Boundary Fetish

2026-09-11T12:54:04Z

Michael:

Ontological Bias

2026-09-11T12:44:40Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''Ontological Bias''' is a bias that emerges from rigid adherence to a particular view of the fundamental nature of reality — a theological or philosophical worldview — such that the adherent's mind is closed to alternative explanations, and to the logic and evidence that might support alternative views. </blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}
===Syncretic Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

In the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]], ontological bias is defined as "bias that emerges from rigid adherence to certain theological and philosophical worldviews. Ontological bias closes our mind to alternative explanations and the logic and evidence that might support alternative views." Examples: a person who sees God as a white male patriarch will have a hard time listening to a Hindu who brings forward a more pantheistic vision of Consciousness; an atheist will dismiss out of hand evidence for spiritual realities and accounts of spiritual experience; a Catholic will see only the positive aspects of their religion and justify uncomfortable aspects (pervasive paedophilia in the church, for example); a Marxist will see only an opiate; a sociologist will see only the ecclesiastical component of religion and ignore religious experience. Because of these blinders, "neither group is capable of grasping the big picture."

The term is used in a closely related sense by Jana Bacevic (2017) and Mark Carrigan (2017), for whom ontological bias is essentially "epistemic attachment to the object of research" — the way a scholar's investment in a particular object of knowledge (see [[Epistemic Attachment]]) constrains what can be thought, predicted, or imagined about that object. In the LP framework, the two senses converge: ontological bias is what happens when attachment hardens into worldview, and worldview then filters evidence, experience, and imagination alike.

Ontological bias rarely travels alone. In the academic study of religion it is compounded by ethnocentrism, Eurocentrism, and flat-out racist attempts to dismiss anything that does not originate in white, European thought — producing the [[Boundary Fetish]]. Ontological bias is also the last line of defense when substantive and functional definitions of religion fail to separate science from religion: having failed to draw boundaries on content or function, scholars retreat to ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority) — boundaries that also collapse under sustained empirical attention, since scientists themselves report mystical and enlightenment experiences, transpersonal psychology crosses the materialist line, and scientific institutions display the same conservatism and heretic-excommunication dynamics as churches (cf. Rupert Sheldrake's excommunication by Nature editor John Maddox).

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]

Epistemic Attachment

2026-09-11T12:42:43Z

Michael: Created page with "{{navmenu}} <h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> <blockquote class="definition">An '''Epistemic Attachment''' is an emotional, professional, and identity-level investment in a particular object of knowledge — a theory, institution, discipline, or worldview — such that the object's continued existence and stability functions as a source of personal and professional legitimation, thereby limiting the knower's capacity to imagine alternatives, up to and includi..."

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">An '''Epistemic Attachment''' is an emotional, professional, and identity-level investment in a particular object of knowledge — a theory, institution, discipline, or worldview — such that the object's continued existence and stability functions as a source of personal and professional legitimation, thereby limiting the knower's capacity to imagine alternatives, up to and including the object's transformation or disappearance.
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==
===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}

===Syncretic Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Epistemic Attachment]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Epistemic Attachment]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Epistemic Attachment]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

The concept of epistemic attachment was articulated by anthropologist Jana Bacevic,<ref>Jana Bacevic, “Between Legitimation and Imagination: Epistemic Attachment, Ontological Bias, and Thinking about the Future,” Jana Bacevic, December 18, 2017, https://janabacevic.net/2017/12/18/between-legitimation-and-imagination-epistemic-attachment-ontological-bias-and-thinking-about-the-future/.</ref> who illustrates it with the failure of social scientists to predict the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Both Yugoslav and Western scholars "depended on Yugoslavia as a source of legitimation of their work, though for different reasons." For Yugoslav scholars, the exceptionality of the Yugoslav model grounded their authority as possessors of "local knowledge" in international scientific collaboration, and their personal and professional identities "depended on the continued existence of Yugoslavia as an object; they could imagine different ways in which it could be transformed, but not really that it could be obliterated." For Western scholars, Yugoslavia served as the perfect experiment proving either that market socialism could work (the left) or that market exchange could soften command economies (the right). "If no one foresaw the war, it was because it played no role in either of these epistemic constructs."

The counter-example is Bogdan Denitch, the one scholar who predicted the collapse in detail. His position provided "a sufficient degree of attachment to be able to look deeply into a problem and understand its possible transformations; and a sufficient degree of detachment to be able to see that the object of knowledge may not be there forever."

Epistemic attachment cannot be eliminated, only balanced. "Balancing between attachment and detachment is one of the key challenges in any practice of knowing the social world," and the challenge grows as the objects of study (climate change, artificial intelligence, the future of humanity itself) grow in complexity and centrality. Mark Carrigan<Ref>Mark Carrigan, “Ontological Bias and Social Knowledge in a Post-Truth Era,” Mark Carrigan, December 28, 2017, https://markcarrigan.net/2017/12/28/ontological-bias-and-social-knowledge-in-a-post-truth-era/</ref> adds that avoiding the bias produced by epistemic attachment may also require distancing from comfortable philosophical constructs — e.g., treating "prediction" as a philosophical designator rather than a sociological one — since such constructs can themselves become objects of attachment.

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]

Boundary Fetish

2026-09-11T12:24:56Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">A '''Boundary Fetish''' is
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}
===Syncretic Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]

Boundary Fetish

2026-09-11T12:11:44Z

Michael:

{{navmenu}}
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
<blockquote class="definition">'''Ontological Bias''' is
</blockquote>

==Concept Map==

===Key Concepts===

[[Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System]]|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}}

[[Spiritual Theory]] > {{#ask:[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory]]|format=ul}}
===Syncretic Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Related LP Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

===Non-LP Related Terms===

[[Ontological Bias]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Ontological Bias]]|format=ul}}

== Notes ==

{{endstuff}}

[[category:terms]]
[[Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory| ]]
[[Is a related term::Religions| ]]
[[Is a related term::Spirituality| ]]