Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

The Nightline Face-Off- Does God Have a Future? [5/12]

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
I want to get back to answer your question, I want to get back to something that actually matters, 90% of people watching this on television will never have heard of non-locality and if we can explain it to them they are not going to care about it. They are worried about Jesus, they are worried about the collision about the Muslim world, they are worried about gay marriage. This is religion talking. We are talking about the future of God. >> DC: That's the past of God. >>SH: Ok, so, I'm happy to move on from that, but let's first acknowledge that that's the context why we're having this conversation. The reason why we're talking about God is for the last 4000 years people have been handed books to their children saying: All these other books were written by people but this is a magic book. It could not possibly have been written by human being and so now we're here talking about God and the future of God. >>You think that's the past of God, what is ... DC >> I think we can comfortably say that what Sam is talking about, one reason we're having this conversation is that this conversation will lead to other conversations, which can say: "Been there, done that. Let's move on" And the future of God is to understand how a new understanding of science, a new understanding of the perennial wisdom traditions, otherwise called 'Woowoo' actually can lead to more compassion, to more love, to more kindness, to more tolerance, to more peace, to more insight, to more inspiration, to more creativity, so we become the conscience beings through which the Universe will take its next leap in evolution. That's -- >> What sounds so bad about that future? >>All of that is good. You should be doing those things anyway, whether or not there's a god or a great spirit or a non-locality. (Applause) >>And I'm related to that. And that's a very good point but what we find is that -- I tends to attend to 'Thou' more than I attends to 'It'. And it's just that question of having that personal "I--Thou" relationship. I once studied with Martin Buber, who was BTW this tall and his beard was that long. And he talked about the sense of personal relationship being dynamic in the spiritual experience. Now, at the same time what we find it's fascinating. We are living in a time in which we set Zazen, we flirt with Sufism, and Buddhism, and its many, many different ideologies and is this cafeteria religion or is it people finding the great repast of spiritual knowings, the wisdom traditions many places finding their own place, slowly but surely in their own spiritual life. SH >> Ok, but, Jean, that scheme, I agree with you about that scheme. There're many people having these remarkable experiences in every traditional context. That, in and of itself, proves that all of these religions are wrong. All of these religions claim their exclusive validity. And the fact that you have Christians having deep experiences of peace, and you have Muslims, and you have atheists, and you have Buddhists -- -- it proves that that there is a deeper principle that should be talked about in a non-sectarian way that is not held hostage by iron-age literature. (Applause) >>No, no, now that's a very important point. SH >> The scientific discourse on the possibilities of human well-being-- And you can get as esoteric as you want there. You can talk about self-transcendence, you can talk about the ego being an illusion, you can ask what is the relationship between consciousness and the rest of the physical world. And the truth is when you get out to some of those fringe arias, you are getting to an aria of real scientific ignorance and the first thing you wanna do in the spirit of intellectual honesty is admit ignorance not claim that you, by closing your eyes, can realize your identity with the entire Cosmos, and the origin of -- you go get before the Big Bang with your unguarded intuition. That's just not how you discover what happens -- >> And it's also who you and I had been talking to -- very different perspectives on this. I think the big issue here, the future of God, is that the reset button of history has been hit. And that we are in times such as we have never had before. And that in such times I am finding people moving to a sense of radical empathy, not just with others' sensibilities and points of views, without which people could perish -- -- so you're taking a very different point of view -- but that we are also expanding our sensibility of what we have called transcendence, grace, love, compassion, and as we do this, I think that there's been created in the world in time today a very unique and emergent spirituality and with it a new story. I mean that's what I have to hold you in the work I do around the world: that there is a new story. Let's take myth, for example. Now I use myth differently than superstition. I think that the myth is something that never was but is always happening, almost like the coded DNA of the human mind-brain system. And I travel to countries where I see the story changing. For example, I was in India and they were showing that great Ramayana, the great core story of India, and as we watched people came in, they tied up the water buffalo, they set down, and here was the story of Rama and Sita and Sita being rescued, and the old Brahma lady sitting next to me she said: Oh, I don't like princess Sita, she's much too passive. We women in India are much stronger than that. We have to change the story. And I said: Madam, the story is at least 3000 years old. All the more reason, we have to change it. My name is Sita, my husband's name is Rama. He's a lazy bum. If anything happens I have to rescue him. I was watching the changing of the story in its mythic structure. The story is moving, I believe, from my experience around the world, I think is moving to men and women together as part of the heroic journey, I think it's moving to people in many, many different cultures, and it's about the saving if you will of this beautiful planet, and this is the most critical moment in human history. And that's the new story. (Applause) SH >> Jean, you know that nowhere in human discourse is there a grater impediment to changing the story than in religion. The story doesn't change. The Ramayana is not going to get re-written based on -- DC >> You're talking about cultural mythology not religion, not the religious experience. SH >> I'm talking about the Bible, the Koran, all the organizing doctrine by which 99% of the people on earth will call themselves religious. DC >> Still the past. We have the Internet, we have ABC News, we can change that conversation. SH >> That is the purpose of conversations like this, but it seems to me that the moment -- -- if you want to move forward and reinvent God and actually have it be relevant to people and have your word God -- I don't know why you'd be tempted to use the word god if you don't want to be -- DC >> Generation, Organization, Delivery. SH >> Please. It seems to me that you are happily being misunderstood in your use of the word 'god'. You know that vast numbers of people care about God for a multiplicity of reasons, both of which you don't want to defend on this stage. But why you the word 'god' ? Why not just talk about consciousness? DC >> I just told you, it's an acronym. SH >> No, Deepak. DC>> I have to say, sorry for being so combative, that was because of my cosherma, but I actually agree with almost everything you said, Sam. I have no disagreement with the deeper truth that you're hinting at. I'm just saying that this conversation needs to take place in a setting such as this where it can lead to other conversations so that this is not a debate but a dialectic where through these contradictory points of view we arrive at a greater truth. (Applause) SH>> But you are carrying around a tremendous amount of ballast from the past, and you're describing it as somehow necessary equipment. So for instance, you talk about this great wisdom traditions that he has so callously dismissed out of his own ignorance. You go to these great wisdom traditions -- right -- and you talking about changing the story -- So, what does it mean changing the story in Islam? Let's talk about facts. You open the Koran, in the 4th chapter it says disobedient wives should be wipped by their husbands. OK? So this is -- DC >> It says that in the old testament, in all kinds of things, in the Hindu book, ... SH >> Deepak, I'm just picking Islam as an example. DC >> Why? It's true of all religions. SH >> Ok, than I can pick Judaism. Would you be more comfortable if I pick Judaism as an example? It's the same. All of these books are litanies of barbarous practices. But the point is that the way Muslims are now constrained to change the story is they have to -- they can't change the Koran, the Koran's the perfect word of the creator of the Universe. They have to parse the word 'whipped' and the most enlightened of them have to say things like: "Well, it doesn't actually mean you take out the bow whip and you whip her, it could be a kind of a ceremonial padding. Just a brief chastisement that doesn't actually hurt. You get a range -- but nowhere in that range do you get real equity and real compassion, and real understanding between the sexes. And that's -- to get that you have to admit -- Ok, this is barbarous nonsense that we should just disregard. And religion doesn't give you the tools to do that. And God talk is either profoundly misleading or unhelpful or it's just part of the problem.

Video Details

Duration: 10 minutes and 32 seconds
Country: United States
Language: English
Views: 120
Posted by: ateistisrbije on Mar 24, 2010

Cela playlista: Sam Harris i Michael Shermer protiv Deepak Chopra i Jean Houston

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub to translate this video.