The Nature of Faith Essay -- Psychology Religion Papers

The Nature of Faith Faith is an essential aspect of religious experience. Events can often be understood by some people as aesthetic or pleasant [1] rather than religious because their frame of reference rejects the spiritual connection for a more temporal one. However, of course, there are experiences that people have that by-pass any effort on their part to explain them naturally and clearly demonstrate a spiritual situation. One British scholar described his experience, like those of many others, that convinced him of the reality of God. He had "no religion," no "real sense of personal relationship to God." He went for a walk alone one day, without particular thoughts or intentions, when he "became conscious of the presence of someone else" and realized a feeling that the "being of God" surrounded him. "It was no longer a matter of inference, it was an immediate act of spiritual... apprehension." The experience changed his whole perspective of the world and himself. "I had not found God because I had never looked for him. But he had found me; he had, I could not but believe, made himself personal to me" [2]. The man could interpret this experience because faith had been "awakened" or become functionally directed in him. Some people, and many psychologists, deem faith to be something akin to wishful thinking. The great philosopher-psychologist William James defined faith as a "belief in something concerning which doubt is still theoretically possible," that the believer acts in faith by taking steps which are not guaranteed to turn out as he thinks they should [3]. If faith is not wishful thinking, or acting in hope that the right thing will happen, then it is non-rational self-affirmation. "Religious assertions... r... ..., Publ., 1968. Bregman, Lucy. The Rediscovery of the Inner Experience. Chicago: Nelson Hall, 1982. Brown, L.B. The Psychology of Religion. London: SPCK, 1988. Miller, Ed. L. Believing in God: Readings on Faith and Reason. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1996. Otto, Rudolf. The Idea of the Holy: An Inquiry into the Non- Rational Factor in the Idea of the Divine and its Relation to the Rational. John W. Harvey (transl). London: Oxford University Press, 1970. Schleiermacher, Friedrich. On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers. John Oman (transl). New York: Harper and Brothers, Publ., 1958. Strunk, Orlo (ed). Readings in the Psychology of Religion. New York: Abingdon Press, 1959. Whittaker, John H. Matters of Faith and Matters of Principle: Religious Truth Claims and Their Logic. San Antonio, TX: Trinity University Press, 1981.

Gandhi Concept of Development

GANDHI’S WAY Decentralization According to Gandhi, modern civilization was responsible for impoverishing the Indian villages, which occupied a pivotal position in the Indian situation. Gandhi has always been a critic of the centralization of economic and political power. Large scale production inevitably led to concentration of economic and political power. Labor and material, production and distribution became the monopoly of the few rich. Such a concentration of economic power resulted in corresponding centralization of political power.Aldous Huxley, in his  Science,  Liberty  and  Peace, drew attention to this universal tendency of modern technology: â€Å"The centralizing of industrial capacity in big, mass-producing factories has resulted in the centralization of a large part of the population in cities and the reduction of ever-increasing numbers of individuals to complete dependence upon a few private capitalists and their managers, or upon the public capitalis t, the state, represented by politicians and working through civil servants.So far as liberty is concerned, there is little to choose between the two types of bosses. â€Å"14   One of the recurring themes in the writings and pronouncements of Gandhi is this centralizing tendency of technology: â€Å"I want the concentration of wealth, not in the hands of few but in the hands of all. Today machinery merely helps a few to ride on the backs of millions. â€Å"15  Again he said, â€Å"What is industrialism but a control of the majority by the small minority? â€Å"16   The solution to the problem of centralization consists in decentralization of political and economic power.Small-scale, manageable techniques, capable of being handled by individual producers, the co-operatives in the villages or the region should be given priority and promoted on a mass scale for the benefit of the masses. Gandhi, though judged wrongly by many, was not advocating a return to medieval techniqu es. He vehemently opposed the indiscriminate multiplication of large-scale industries which obstructed village development. He wanted technological research to be village-oriented, perfecting the cottage and village industries. When every village should be able to own its own technology, economic power will be diffused and the illage will emerge in the Gandhian scheme as the nucleus of social life. Decentralization of economic power will result in the decentralization of political power. Modern technology will no more be in a position to exploit the village. A proper balance between agriculture and industry will be established and, in due course, the village will exert a transformative influence. Production will be regulated by the needs of the village. Pyarelal has very lucidly described this relationship: Agriculture in this set-up will go hand in hand with industry.Such products of the village, as they enter into the daily consumption of the villagers or as they are needed for th eir cottage crafts, will be processed in the village itself; the surplus alone being sent out to the cities in exchange for services and goods on a fair and equitable basis. Cities will serve as emporia for village products instead of the villages being used as a dumping ground for the manufactured goods of the cities. Machines will not be abolished. On the contrary, the people will have many more of them. But these machines will be simple machines which the people can themselves operate and own individually or collectively. 7 This relationship between agriculture and industry, village and city, will stop exploitation and bring self-sufficiency. For him it was imperative that sufficiency should start from below, i. e. , from the village and then upward to the regional level. In Gandhi’s own words: My idea of village  Swaraj  is that it is a complete republic, independent of its neighbors for its own vital wants, and yet interdependent for many others which dependence is a necessity. Thus, every village’s first concern will be to grow its own food and cotton for its cloth. It should have a reserve for its cattle.Then, if there is more land available, it will grow useful money crops, thus excluding ganja, tobacco, opium and the like. 18 His village is self-sufficient in vital wants, but interdependent in many other spheres. Interdependence, while maintaining the independence of the village, is the keynote of Gandhi’s approach to village life. Society: Not a Pyramid, but an Oceanic Circle Gandhi described the organization of the society in the form of an ‘oceanic circle’. In this structure composed of innumerable villages, there will be ever-widening but never-ascending circles.Life will not be a pyramid with the apex sustained by the bottom. But it will be an oceanic circle whose center will be the individual always ready to perish for the village, the latter ready to perish for the circle of villages, till at last the whole becomes one life composed of individuals, never aggressive but ever humble, sharing the majesty of the oceanic circle of which they are integral units. Therefore, the outmost circumference will not wield power to crush the inner circle, but will give strength to all within and derive its own strength from it. 19He believed that all power resided in the people and that it should also originate from the people. The dynamo of power in a country like India should be the village. The village was to be a knot in a system of oceanic circles in which the remotest circle derived its strength from the center, i. e. , the individual. This would mean that sovereignty was not to remain concentrated at any one level. It was to be diffused among units rising horizontally till they reached the national level. In terms of political science, the residuary power remained with the village and the center was there to co-ordinate the work.Gandhi believed in Thoreau’s saying, â€Å"that governmen t is the best which governs the least. â€Å"20 Charkha (Spinning-Wheel): Hope of Rural Masses The message of the spinning-wheel is to â€Å"replace the spirit of exploitation by the spirit of service. The dominant note in the West is the note of exploitation. I have no desire that our country should copy that spirit or that note. â€Å"21   Gandhi again maintains: â€Å"I do feel that it [Charkha] has a message for the U. S. A. and the whole world. But it cannot be until India has demonstrated to the world that it has made the spinning-wheel its own, which it has not done today.The fault is not of the wheel. I have not the slightest doubt that the saving of India and of the world lies in the wheel. If India becomes the slave of the machine, then, I say, heaven save the world. â€Å"22   Hence, the message of the spinning-wheel is â€Å"much wider than its circumference. Its message is one of simplicity, service of mankind, living so as not to hurt others, creating an indi ssoluble bond between the rich and the poor, capital and labor, the prince and the peasant. That larger message is naturally for all. 23   Gandhi felt convinced that â€Å"the revival of hand-spinning and hand-weaving would make the largest contribution to the economic and the moral regeneration of India. The millions must have a simple industry to supplement agriculture. Spinning was the cottage industry years ago, and if the millions are to be saved from starvation, they must be enabled to introduce spinning in their homes, and every village must repossess its own weaver. â€Å"24  He wanted to make the spinning-wheel the center of all handicrafts. The spinning-wheel was a symbol of hope to the masses.The masses lost their freedom, such as it was, with the loss of the  charkha. The  charkhasupplemented the agriculture of the villagers and gave it dignity. It was the friend and solace of the widow. It kept the villagers from idleness. For the  charkhaincluded all the an terior and posterior industries B ginning, carding, wrapping, sizing, dyeing and weaving. These in their turn kept the village carpenter and blacksmith busy. The  charkha  enabled the seven hundred thousand villages to become self-contained. With the exit of the  charkha  went the other village industries, such as the oil press.Nothing took the place of these industries. Therefore, the villages were drained of their varied occupations and their creative talent which brought them meager income to supplement their limited source of income. Hence, it was suggested that the revival of  charkha  would result in making the villages economically self-sufficient. Gandhi had no doubt in his mind that the wheel could serve as the instrument of earning one’s livelihood and, at the same time, enable the worker to render useful service to his neighbors. In order to ply the wheel intelligently, he should know all the processes that precede and succeed spinning.This conviction d awned upon Gandhi even before he came to India, that the revival of hand-spinning alone could restore India to its pristine glory. He compared the spinning-wheel to the sun around which the solar system of the village economy revolved. It provided the golden bridge between the rich and the poor. Swadeshi: Antidote to Modernization Gandhi said that  Swadeshi  would mean that one should not serve one’s distant neighbor at the expense of the nearest. It is never vindictive or punitive. It is in no sense narrow, because it buys from every part of the world what is needed for our growth.We must refuse to buy from anyone anything, however nice or beautiful, if it interferes with our growth. Gandhi bought useful and thought provoking literature from every part of the world. One could buy surgical instruments from England, pins and pencils from Austria and watches from Switzerland. But one should not buy an inch of the finest cotton fabric from England or Japan or any other part of the world, because it could be easily made in India and to buy it from elsewhere would hurt the sentiments of those who work for their livelihood.Hence, Gandhi held it to be sinful for anyone to refuse to buy the cloth spun and woven by the needy millions of India’s paupers and to buy foreign cloth, although it may be superior in quality to the Indian hand-spun. â€Å"My  Swadeshi, therefore, chiefly centers round the hand  Khaddar  and extends to everything that can be and is produced in India. â€Å"25 Soul-Force: The Secret of Success Gandhi wanted to popularize the use of soul-force, which is but another name for the force of love, in place of brute-force. â€Å"Having flung aside the sword, there is nothing except the cup of love which I can offer to those who oppose me.It is by offering that cup that I expect to draw them close to me. I cannot think of permanent enmity between man and man, and believing as I do in the theory of rebirth, I live in the hope th at, if not in this birth, in some other birth, I shall be able to hug all humanity in friendly embrace. â€Å"26   Chapter 17, the most important chapter in the whole book of  Hind Swaraj  starts with the question whether there is any historical evidence of â€Å"any nation having risen through soul-force. â€Å"27  According to Gandhi, Tulsidas is a better guide here than are the Indian princes.Tulsidas and such other Acharyas taught that  daya(compassion) is the true ultimate basis of  Dharma  (duty) and, therefore, also of the  Dharma  that should govern the  Praja  (the ordinary people). However widespread the use of brute-force may have been in history, it is no reason to doubt the validity of the counter thesis. If the story of the universe had commenced with wars, not a man would have been found alive today. . . . Therefore, the greatest and the most unimpeachable evidence of the success of this force is to be found in the fact that, in spite of the w ars of the world, it still lives on. . . Hundreds of nations live in peace. . . . History is really a record of every interruption of the even working of the force of love or the soul. 28 Gandhi believed that Indian civilization had the potential to give to the world a way to achieve freedom without bloodshed and violence. To achieve this we have to develop the right relationship between  daya  (compassion) and national interest. The error of modern nationalism had been to take for granted that national interest divorced from  daya  is the ultimate principle of national conduct.He sees the distinct possibility of the national elite B the doctors, the lawyers, and the modern professional class taken as a whole B acting in their own interest, and exploiting, deceiving and oppressing the people at large in the name of the nation. They would be able to act in the interest of the  Praja  only if their nationalism is founded on the principle of  daya. For this one has to und ergo a process of inner liberation  (chhutkara). Gandhi shows how one can achieve this inner liberation. He now identifies the nation with the elite who are eager to have Home Rule.He insists that the elite have to undergo genuine moral transformation. For this they have to be imbued with a deep sense of real nationalism which is different from what the modern nationalism depicts. He wants them to be imbued with real love and to experience the soul-force within themselves. Only those who have undergone such interior transformation can speak to the English without fear or hatred. Only such transformed Indian nationals can really understand the threat posed by modern civilization and the promise held by Indian civilization. Swaraj: An Eternal Quest and Perennial ChallengeOne has to understand the true meaning of  Swaraj. In the first place,  Swaraj  is a mental condition of: (i) inner liberation from the temptations of greed and power offered by modern civilization, (ii) freed om from hatred towards the national ‘enemy,’ the British, and (iii) active love for the Indian  Praja, a love that can conquer the temptations of greed and power. Secondly,  Swaraj  is an external condition of: (i) political independence from alien domination, and (ii) life-long dedication to the task of improving the material conditions of poverty and caste oppression of the Indian  Praja.In concrete terms,  Swaraj  requires one to take a stand on brute-force and soul-force. â€Å"If there be only one such Indian,† Gandhi affirms, â€Å"the English will have to listen to him. â€Å"29   Attaining national liberation is not so much a matter of getting rid of the British as getting rid of the fascination for modern civilization which teaches the Indian elite to exploit and oppress the Indian  Praja  and establish their superiority.We have to liberate ourselves from the evils of modern civilization and fill our hearts with  daya,satya  (trut h) and  ahimsa  (non-violence). Only then would we become morally fit to deal both with the British and with the Indian people. Unless and until we are healed of the chronic sickness of imitating the West, ignoring our own age old tradition and cultural heritage, we will not be able to face any one else.

Why the Sioux Oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline

As the Flint, Michigan, water crisis made national headlines in 2016, members of the Standing Rock Sioux  successfully  protested to protect their water and land from the Dakota Access Pipeline. After months on end of demonstrating,  the water protectors rejoiced when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decided on Dec. 4, 2016, to  prohibit the pipeline from crossing  Lake Oahe, effectively bringing the project to a halt. But the pipelines future is unclear after Obama leaves office, and the Trump administration enters the White House. Building of the pipeline could very well resume when the new administration takes over.   If finished, the $3.8 billion project would span 1,200 miles across four states to link the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota to an Illinois river port. This would allow 470,000 barrels of crude oil daily to be transported along the route. But the Standing Rock wanted construction on the pipeline stopped because they said it could devastate their natural resources. Initially, the pipeline would have crossed the Missouri River near the state capital, but the route was changed so that it would pass under the Missouri River at Lake Oahe, a half-mile upstream from the Standing Rock reservation. The pipeline was redirected from Bismarck because of fears that an oil spill would endanger the city’s drinking water. Moving the pipeline from the state capital to an Indian reservation is environmental racism in a nutshell, as this form of discrimination is characterized by the disproportionate placement of environmental hazards in communities of color. If the pipeline was too risky to be placed near the state capital, why wasn’t it deemed a risk near Standing Rock land? With this in mind, the tribe’s effort to stop  construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline isn’t simply an environmental issue but a protest against racial injustice as well. Clashes between the pipeline’s protesters and its developers have also sparked racial  tensions, but the Standing Rock have won support from a broad cross-section of the public, including public figures and celebrities.   Why the Sioux Are Against the Pipeline On Sept. 2, 2015, the Sioux drafted a resolution explaining their opposition to the pipeline. It read in part: â€Å"The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe relies on the waters of the life-giving Missouri River for our continued existence, and the Dakota Access Pipeline poses a serious risk to Mni Sose and to the very survival of our Tribe; and ...the horizontal direction drilling in the construction of the pipeline would destroy valuable cultural resources of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.† The resolution also argued that the Dakota Access Pipeline violates Article 2 of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty which granted the tribe the â€Å"undisturbed use and occupation† of its homeland. The Sioux filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in July 2016 to stop construction of the pipeline, which began the following month. In addition to concerns about the effects a spill would have on the Sioux’s natural resources, the tribe pointed out that the pipeline would course through sacred ground protected by federal law. U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg had a different take. He ruled on Sept. 9, 2016, that the Army Corps had â€Å"likely complied† with its duty to consult the Sioux and that the tribe â€Å"has not shown it will suffer injury that would be prevented by any injunction the court could issue.† Although the judge denied the tribe’s request for an injunction to stop the pipeline, the departments of the Army, Justice and Interior announced after the ruling that they would suspend building of the pipeline on land of cultural importance to the tribe pending further evaluation. Still, the Standing Rock Sioux said they would appeal the judge’s decision because they believe they were not sufficiently consulted when the pipeline was rerouted.    My nations history is at risk because the pipeline builders and the Army Corps failed to consult the tribe when planning the pipeline, and routed it through areas of cultural and historical significance, which will be destroyed,† stated Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II in a court filing. Judge Boasberg’s ruling led the tribe to ask for an emergency injunction to stop building of the pipeline. This led the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit  to state in a Sept. 16 ruling that it needed more time to consider the tribes request, which meant that all construction 20 miles in either direction of Lake Oahe had to stop. The federal government had already called for construction along that part of the route to be halted, but Dallas-based pipeline developer Energy Transfer Partners didn’t immediately respond to the Obama administration. In September 2016, the company said the pipeline was 60 percent complete and maintained it would not harm the  local water supply. But if that were absolutely certain, then why wasn’t the Bismarck location an appropriate site for the pipeline? As recently as October 2015, a North Dakota oil well blew out and leaked more than 67,000 gallons of crude, putting a tributary of the Missouri River at risk. Even if oil spills are rare and new technology works to prevent them, they cannot be completely ruled out. By rerouting the Dakota Access Pipeline, the federal government appears to have put the Standing Rock Sioux directly in harm’s way in the unlikely event of an oil spill. Controversy Over Protests The Dakota Access Pipeline hasn’t attracted media attention simply because of the natural resources at stake but also because of clashes between protesters and the oil company in charge of building it. In Spring 2016, only a small group of demonstrators  had set up camp on the reservation to protest the pipeline. But in the summer months, Sacred Stone Camp ballooned to thousands of activists, with some calling it â€Å"the largest gathering of Native Americans in a century,† the Associated Press reported. In early September, tensions heightened as protesters and journalists were arrested, and activists accused the security firm tasked with protecting the pipeline of pepper-spraying them and letting dogs viciously attack them. This called to mind similar images of attacks on civil rights protesters during the 1960s.    In light of the violent clashes between protesters and security guards, the Standing Rock Sioux were granted a permit to allow the water protectors to legally rally on the federal lands that surround the pipeline. The permit means the tribe is responsible for the cost of any damages, keeping demonstrators safe, liability insurance and more. Despite this shift, clashes between activists and officers continued in November 2016, with police reportedly firing tear gas and water canons at protesters. One activist came dangerously close to losing her arm as a result of an explosion that occurred during the confrontation. Protesters say she was injured by a grenade thrown by police, while police say she was hurt by a small propane tank that protesters rigged to explode, according to CBS News. Prominent Standing Rock Supporters A number of celebrities have publicly expressed their support for the Standing Rock Sioux’s protest against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Jane Fonda and Shailene Woodley helped serve Thanksgiving 2016 dinner to the demonstrators.  Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein visited the site and faced arrest for allegedly spray-painting construction equipment during a protest. A former 2016  presidential candidate also stands in solidarity with the Standing Rock, leading a rally against the pipeline. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) said on Twitter, â€Å"Stop the Dakota Access pipeline. Respect Native American rights. And let us move forward to transform our energy system.† Veteran rocker Neil Young even released a new song called â€Å"Indian Givers† in honor of the Standing Rock protest. The song’s title is a play on the racial insult. The lyrics state: There’s a battle raging on the sacred landOur brothers and sisters have to take a standAgainst us now for what we all been doingOn the sacred land there’s a battle brewingI wish somebody would share the newsNow it’s been about 500 yearsWe keep taking what we gave awayJust like what we call Indian giversIt makes you sick and gives you shivers Young also released a video for the song that features footage of the pipeline protests. The musician has recorded songs about similar environmental controversies, such as his 2014 protest song â€Å"Who’s Gonna Stand Up?† in protest of the Keystone XL pipeline. Leonardo DiCaprio announced that he shared the Sioux’s concerns as well. â€Å"Standing w/ the Great Sioux Nation to protect their water lands,† he said on Twitter, linking to a Change.org petition against the pipeline. â€Å"Justice League† actors Jason Momoa, Ezra Miller and Ray Fisher  took to social media to announce their objections to the pipeline. Momoa shared a photo of himself on Instagram with a sign that said, â€Å"Oil pipelines are a bad idea,† along with hashtags related to the Dakota Access Pipeline protest. Wrapping Up While the Dakota Access Pipeline protest has largely been framed as an environmental issue, it is also a racial justice issue. Even the judge who denied the Standing Rock Sioux’s temporary injunction to stop the pipeline, acknowledged that â€Å"the United States’ relationship with the Indian tribes has been contentious and tragic.† Since the Americas were colonized, Native Americans and other marginalized groups have fought for equal access to natural resources. Factory farms, power plants, freeways and other sources of pollution are all too often erected in communities of color. The richer and whiter a community is, the more likely its residents have clean air and water. So, the Standing Rock’s struggle to protect their land and water from the Dakota Access Pipeline is just as much an anti-discrimination issue as it is an environmental one.