Global warming and religion - an attempt to define post-secular

I was watching the Oscar nominated documentary Jesus Camp, in which, the radio talk show host Mike Papantonio gives some remarks about creationism and its view on global warming:
"Why our kids thought that global warming doesn't exist?
Ok, why?
Look, rape this world,take everything you want from her, because, you know what?
It doesn't matter.We are not here for very long. Christ is coming to take us away from Earth so cut down our trees,use all of our oil take advantage of everything that the Earth has to offer..."

Due to the fact, that Vatican Bishop Gianfranco Girotti issued a new list of "social" capital sins, in which environmental pollution is amongst, the question is, what is the relation of belief and environmental change.

The End of the Times have become a pop culture icon in the last few decades, maybe due to the fact that we are in fact capable to inflict these dire conditions to ourselves in the form of a sudden nuclear conflict or by process of living up our environment and resources.

So, the question is, if we perceive the process from the point of view of an eschatological narrative, and "let it go", or remain to a secular position, and start to deal with the problem by recognizing it as "ours".

And this leads exactly to the point of define the notion of secular: an issue becomes secular, as soon as it effects "us" rather then "them", "I", and "we" have to deal with them. By the same logic, post-secular comes when the "we" can no longer cover a consensual body of the society, which regulates our common ground by its laws and agreements.

As soon as a party of citizens can withdraw from a public debate by telling that they are not willing to take part of the debate, as it is not "their's" as citizens of the secular state, since there is a law above the state constitution they have to obey for, in this case, the laws of the religion they have to obey to.

Which in fact is a question of technology and its usage. From fuel consuming automobiles to websites many "inventions" of the enlightened, modern, secular society are being used as tools of "separation" from it. People use them, and in most cases also taking the legal, moral, technical, environmental responsibilities with the process.
Terrorism, for example is working exactly to the logic of this separation in the usage and appropriation of technology, as it is using elements of our "technology" to implement as much "terror" as possible.
So do global warming. We producing global warming, by the simple fact we are living in a post-industrial, high-standard, energy consumer society, and not "they" are producing over there, just next door. If we are producing it, and either does not admit it or do, we also have to face the consequences, like if we were signing a legal document after our birth to be the member of a given state.
And here is the point - we are becoming members of a state - an organization which is meant to deal with the major issues of our life, like pollution, rights, preserving of freedom, press, etc in a more or less inherent way. All matters which is considered to be regulated by the state are done so, and all which is not, kept out, free to be practiced until violates the before. Of course, the personal belief is one of these, as it is kept to
The conflict emerges from the point when we can't relate to the consensual system of the state, because the "other" does not recognizes our right to do it - by questioning the scientific, moral, social standards we are built our system on.
Therefore in this case creationism which, in junction with traditional religious belief questions a scientific standard - in this case, the fact of global warming and its effect biological, social on us and the environment.
And the secular can no longer step up and announce these views "obsolete", "un-enlightened", "anit-modern", since the very essence of secular idea, the secular notion of science, which is working for "humaity", is no longer a firm background behind him/her.
You might argue it, or not, make a documentary on it or not, it is a situation we must face.
Read more!

The O project - atheism and religion

Another website to check out -intended to start a dialog between seculars and religious people.
The O project. Read more!

Is critique secular?

Please, check out the blog The Immanent Frame, and the answers provided by academic researchers to the question: Is critique secular? Read more!

Charming Burqa

An innovative example to use technology in a religious context as a form of resistance- questioning the dogmatic tradition - by German designer Markus Kison. Check out the other projects too, since they are dealing with the same issues.

The CharmingBurka deals with Freud's idea that all clothes can be positioned between appeal and shame. The Burka was chosen, because it is often perceived in the west as a symbol of repression. A digital layer was added so that women can decide for themselves where they want to position themselves virtually. The Burka sends an image, chosen by the wearer, via Bluetooth technology.


I can remember the urban legend that during the last days of the Ottoman empire, when Muslim people allegedly drunk alcohol on trains - because the train is moving, and in the same time has a roof, so Allah can't peer into it.
Defining technology as a main product of a secular, enlightened, modern society means that we can use it to overcome rules which oppress ones freedom of expression - this could have been the summary of this works message.
Is the usage of technology makes us more secular, or the notion of using it in order to obtain a certain social environment?
Read more!

Manga Bible

From the strange fusion of the typical Japanese manga imaginary and devout Christianity, the Manga Bible was created.

Unlike the highly satirical and critical Brick Testament, which is the largest project of biblical themed illustration, this work is intended to be serious.
Using the familiar manga characters, effects, narrative, the creator of these book tells us the stories we might or might not know from the bible, but not only copying the stylish manga graphics, but also the all assorted materials coming with the style: dynamic, violent graphics, action packed scenes spotted with short, quasi philosophical monologues.
Read more!

Letters form Heaven

An except taken from the website The Post-Rapture Post:

"Just write your letter and it will be hand-delivered immediately following the exodus of the pure from the Earth. But you must be thinking to yourself, "How can the letters be delivered after the Rapture?" The answer is simple. The creators of this site are Atheists. That's right, we don't believe in God. How else would we be able to deliver your correspondence after the Rapture?"

Regarding of the nature of this civic initiative, I recommend to check out the FAQ they provide. First might be a joke to laugh on, but on the second, it seems rather to be a satirical attempt to shake people, and raise some money on real charity - which is an interesting shift from being a mocker to being a critique of a social interaction.
Another satirical attempt by atheist, misused by believers, but still interesting example of satire in action.
Read more!

No porn

I am including this website - http://www.no-porn.com/ - as a perfect example of new media usage by a traditional religious group. There is many I could comment on, but let an Anonymous commenter do this for me, taken from the main page of this website:

“Thank you. When I used the software with your affirmation 'I never use porn or masturbate now,' my life was changed. I have been porn free for over a year. God bless you for this site.”
- Anonymous -

The Christian thread of the site might be not striking at first, you have to dig deeper into the site to find it out - I recommend the Survey or the Forums section.
Interesting website, really professional, subtle, commercial looking, yet in the same time, offers you a product like many of the other commercial websites, but with an assorted surplus, you might not be familiar with.
The question is, if it is possible to deal with moral issues like this, without the religious background, or, anyway, should we?
Secular means no to intervene until a certain point, is this before or after this certain point - the question lives on since it was included into our media space by the time of Victorian England, and many different answers were given in the last few centuries.
Lust, desire, pornography were ever juxtaposed by religious morals - the only question is if we feel fine with not deal with the cultural heritage of this phenomenon, but rather accept the very same answers, commonplaces fabricated centuries ago.

To depart form the average language of my blog, I have to admit, that these sites seem to be a little eerie for me from the perspective of Biopolitics. As biopolitics is one of the fundamental issues of secularism, we should form questions regarding of the possible intrusion of church into this, already much debated issue.
Read more!

Updated capital sins

The Vatican issued a new, updated list of the capital 7 sins this week. By this strange, in fact really confusing list, the Vatican aims to define the main issues the church is ready to fight against. As this list of wrongdoings is actually a political statement, let's take a closer look.


This in the new list:

1. "Bioethical" violations such as birth control
2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research
3. Drug abuse
4. Polluting the environment
5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor
6. Excessive wealth
7. Creating poverty

and the old list, (maybe familiar from the movie Se7en by David Fincher),

1. Pride
2. Envy
3. Gluttony
4. Lust
5. Anger
6. Greed
7. Sloth

The reason I am including this new list into my blog is, that I consider this act - the reissue of the new capital sins - as a shift in the public policy, and none the less, imaginary and communiaction of one of the major religious bodies of the Western word.

On the first glance, it might a good idea to update officially the capital sins of the catholic church, since the old ones hardly fit into the complex structure of everyday life in a post-industrial society. Yet, many of the "new" capital sins are even more abstract and unclear as the previous ones were. As I am aware, that the major sins are in a way formulating the overall identity of the church - who day are stand against for - I can see a reason for them to be up-to-date to the nowadays political, moral debates, yet, I have no idea what "morals" could mean for a religious body in case of stem research projects? Whose morals? Ours?
An old moral standard of a secular society might resemble some of the new capitals, as they are becoming less "private" sins as "social" ones, marking an important step between the two set of sins.
It is highly impossible to commit some of the "new" sins on your own, unlike the "old" ones. Most of the new list sins are better attributed to social groups as "enviromental polluters stem cell researchers etc., rather then a lone glutton, who could have been much easier to identify, than these new target groups.
For example, how can you "Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor" as an individual, and what does it mean to "create poverty"? It seams that the Roman Catholic church is really angry with some of the political, social symptoms of our times, and deceided to put more pressure on them.
It might be odd to say, but it seems that the cardinals assayed the "needs" of the main target groups in the Second, Third World when they have chosen the new articles. Which is not bad at all regarding to the spiritual life of the believers, but I have to admit, that "ethics", "morals", "pollution", or the definition of "drugs" are not theological questions. By formulating their new sins against political issues, the church updates its political viewpoint, and ready to act as a political entity against these phenomenons - becoming suddenly radical green, social, and non-the-less worldly in some aspects.
(for example, what does pollution mean in a religious context, if sustainability is hardly an issue, since it does not relates to the Final Judgment any way...

Update 1:
An article on the subject in the America - The National Catholic Weekly
Read more!

Computer games and religion - part 1 - Atheist games

Computer games is a special media by many sense: first of all, due to the relative freshness of the media, it is much more open mouthed then many other genre, hence we can find much more radical statements in these works then many we encounter today. The second is, that the performative act of (playing) the games give infinite opportunity to both missionary work by religious groups and the opposite, satirical usage by secular minds.


Unlike cinema, which is a rather passive media, and the full content of the artistic product unveils for the audience, - who still have the freedom to interpret or misinterpret it as she/he likes - computer games need you active participation to explore the full message, capacity of the media, which, we might see later a crucial point for understanding satire in these games.

Direct, satirical anti-religious content is quite rare, yet many of these games circulate in the blog sphere, like the fighting game Bible Fight (Macromedia flash required) in which we can compete for example Noah with the Holy Mar or with Satan in single fight, each of them with unique special attacks and moves. Ofcourse the hidden character is god, but you can only play him after you have defeated all the other biblical celebrities. I have to admit, that this game should be set in parallel to the other famous fighting game portraying past dictators and present state rulers in a satirical way.


Faith Fighter and Operation Pedopriest by the Italian multimedia art group Molleindustria are another two examples of satirical portrayal of church/belief - much the same way and with the same aesthetics of for example as South Park does. Even the notion that religious "powers" can compete against each other is a highly atheist, pragmatist idea, yet the satiric approach needs no further explanation in this case. Molleindustria is very well know for their radical, political games in the media/blog culture, and these works fully expose the games ability to speak about a moral/belief issue by involving the "viewer" in this case the player. In Faith Fighter, for example, anything we do with the mighty prophets during the game, destroys buildings and cars in enormous quantity in the background, hence anything we do is harmful to humanity one way or another. In case of Operation Pedopriest there is no goal for the game, other then convince the media and police constantly to not report/investigate in sexual crimes which is committed by unattended priests - an circular loop, which has no solution.

As artist has the freedom to hide the context into the processes of accessing the media, rather then to insert into the direct text of it, games seems to be an ideal tool of critique of dogmatic thinking. Lets keep on an eye on it, as the media becomes widespread, it might be an excellent tool of not aimed only amusement but political discussion.
Read more!

Computer games and religion - part 2

Computer games are an emerging media, like cinema was back, one century ago. As the media is open to any interpretations, we might also consider its religoius useage, or its involvment in theist-atheist debates, which is somehow deeply woven into the issue. Lets see, how.

Computer games, as the name suggests, are mathematical - computed recreations of situations, series of events taken in the form of modeling. As the modeling is in this case, creation of a virtual environment, the inherent question comes all the time - who is the supreme being in the simulation. Or the being in charge of the simulation process, but outside of the simulation - as a player, controller.
Yes, we are already at a theological question.

There is an entire genre of computer games, which is called god-level simulation micromanagement game, in which the players are given omnipotent, god like powers to manipulate the events, take Civilization series and Populous series or the famous Black and White series as an example.



Who are in charge of simulation, who is the omnipresent supreme being in these simulations? What power a chess player posses? Not being the omnipresent creator of the game, as these is another one, the opponent, who the player has no power upon, what is the role of the player in general?

In most cases, the statement about religion, belief, non-belief are not added directly into the elements of the game, the player have to construct themselves these ones by playing and constantly reflective the moral - ethical - theological questions hiding in the game mechanics. Yet, most strategic level simulations game do have included religion into the mathematical language of the game mechanics. Gods, belief, is merely a question of numbers in these cases - which can be taken a pretty secular statement on the first glance.

But reinterpreting the hidden - at least from the player - mathematical strings, algorithms behind the events of the game as a religious message is not a hard job to do, especially if the mythological basis of these games are drown from familiar sources like the Greek mythology or the bible.
Games take a stance on one side, or another, in this case, take a closer look on the religious reinterpretation of the games storyline and mechanics - which is an inherent part of the game, since the "to do" is the surplus what a game offers compared to the "to watch" of the traditional cinema.

There are a large number of games featuring escatological storyline, which can be added up to a huge list, which I don't want to do here, right now. Instead, I am trying to run trough some of the aspects of these games, and point out a few interesting example.

The role-playing-strategy game Wizardry 8, the final installment of a highly successful series of games, questions the existence of gods in every possible notion, and doing it on a such subtle way, that even the avarage players are not fully aware of the process.
In a 100 hour playing time epic (in fact, it is similar to long soap operas rather then feature movies), full with lightening fast, breathtaking action, and interesting moral messages, some of the issues are really connected to religion, and our own notion of religion.
As with many other simulations - simulations of complex social systems - the idea of greater power is noticed. In the case of this game, the goal for the players to achieve is to find and use the 'cosmic forge', a sacral site used by the Cosmic Lords, to defeat the evil villain. Most of the players are not even aware of the theological, agnostic argument going on in the background of the game, take a small except from one of the websites detailing the game as an example:

Anselm and Carnap (Panrack spelled backwards) are both philosophers.

Anselm came up with the infamous proof of the existence of God argument, arguing that there is no being that can best God in terms of greatness, therefore no other being could be thought of to be greater. And since a God that exists is better than one that doesn't, then God must exist.

Carnap is famous for his insistence that only statements about life that can be true or false, not morally ambiguous or arguable like much of philosophy or metaphysics, are meaningful. Any statement that can be either true or false, therefore, should not be paid attention to, according to Carnap.

The characters are also on two sides of the philosophical fence... one praying and hoping for a miracle from the Cosmic Lords to save their besieged town, and the other using science, scouting and war as tools to protect themselves and defeat their enemies.

The notion of free will, and the absence or presence of god is a key element of a recent, 2007 game, Bioshock. A large number of articles try to explore the connection between on one of the main entrepreneur of the game, Andrew Ryan and Ayn Rand, the author of Atlas Shrugged, an Objectivist philosopher. Ryan, the objectivist leader of an dystopian society living in an underwater city, and creating a decentralized, liberal state by sharing technological innovations with the cities populace.
The game, which depicts the downfall and demise of this utopian society, refers to the relation of spiritual and earthly on many terms, and received hash critics from both sides.
An article on Objectivism in Bioshock.

Godly powers are merely becomes numbers, coefficients to influence some elements of the game, - the bolt of Zeus are compared to an atomic bomb, yet, the question remains, who are we, the controller, who governs the events or the game - and who is governed by the game itself.
Read more!