For the past month I’ve been thinking around thoughts of order in relation to nature and organized religion. I’ve been able to draw a lot of parallels between the two in how they function in regards to their laws and systems. I’m interested in how choice words and the flow of discourse differs based on who I am in conversation with. I plan to speak with --in a very relaxed interview style-- people of different racial, religious, and gender affiliations and how they interpret the ideas surrounding “order” as well as the rhetoric itself.
Key words in my word map include “law,” “freedom,” “collectivism,” “individualism,” “power,” and “cycles”. After collecting reoccuring imagery and phrases around the subject, here are my key questions:
How does order inform our thoughts about nature? Organized religion?
Why do they evoke different responses?
What does a connection to nature do for the mind? Body?
In what manner or instances does (organized) religious text mention science or nature? And to what effect?
Plans for research:
Collective unconscious - Carl Jung
William James’ Philosophy of Religion
UMBC’s Department of Sociology, Anthropology, etc. - Camee Maddox-Wingfield (religion)
Matthew Durington (anthropology)
To understand order in nature, we have ascribed scientific laws to how they operate. These laws are man-made in that we have structured its rhetoric, but are also based in fact (observed and proven through experiment) which make them divine in that they would happen with or without us putting a name to it (i.e. gravity, motion). Whereas other “divine” (or religious) laws come from man through revelation, a process none of us were present for therefore cannot be deemed based in fact and consequently, can be argued as man-made. The origin of laws and how they can be categorized become blurred in this process of understanding.