It makes me so happy this message is being spread more effectively lately. This should be taught in every home, in every school, compassion should be a core value than doesn't ever get skewed and deformed.
I love Ms. Karen Armstrong. Her books are amazing, and her seminars are just great!! .. God bless her, and may she continue to spread love and light wherever she goes!! .. I'm all for a postive change and will do everything in my power to help spread God's message on earth: Love, mutual respect and peace.
Yes, placing yourself in anothers position is a great way of connecting to that compassionate place. I also think we need to spend time strengthening our heart by accepting the generosity of others as well. So much is said about how we "do" compassion for others, but I feel we actually lack an ability to do this because we fail to fully enter the space of gratitude that comes from receiving a good deed from another... ie accepting and noticing the grace of God.
Thank you very much for your clarification and huge efforts in studying religions. Hope someday everyone gets your point to not attack one another based on different beliefs.
This I think was Karen Armstrong's finest hour. This talk includes the following aphorisms, "Apply it (the Golden Rule), as Confucius said, "All day and every day", not just as your a good deed for the day." "Dethrone yourself from the center of your world" "Compassion lies at the root of all art." "Religious teaching must always lead to action." She resolves to do until her dying day, "two things, to educate and stimulate compassionate thinking. You don't really understand compassion if you just think about it. You also have to do it." The job of the press is to show that compassion demands acute intelligence, not just a gooey feeling. She calls upon scholars to "encourage a sensitivity about uncompassionate speaking, so that because people have this Charter, whatever their beliefs or lack of them, they feel empowered to challenge uncompassionate speech, disdainful remarks from their religious leaders, their political leaders, from the captains of industry." C.S. Lewis wrote one thing that stuck in my mind ever since I read it when I was a schoolgirl. It's in his book "The Four Loves." He said that he distinguished between erotic love, when two people gaze, spellbound, into each other's eyes. And then he compared that to friendship, when two people stand side by side, as it were, shoulder to shoulder, with their eyes fixed on a common goal. We don't have to fall in love with each other, but we can become friends. And I am convinced. I felt it very strongly during our little deliberations at Vevey, that when people of all different persuasions come together, working side by side for a common goal, differences melt away. And we learn amity. And we learn to live together and to get to know one another."
i admire Karen Armstrong she is the pinnacle of religions role in the 21st century. she opened my eyes to the golden rule. i respect Karen, so much so that i have made a shrine of miss Armstrong and every night before i slumber and every morning when i awake i spend my time sharing my feelings with my life size cut out of karen. she calms me down and whenever i start to doubt myself i fall back onto her and she quides me in the right direction. thank you karen i love you xx
When everyone awakens to the Truth of Oneness they will realize that whatever they do to another they are doing it to themself. When you love another, when you treat another with kindness, compassion and love you are giving love, kindness and compassion to yourself.
The golden rule has a nice sentiment but sometimes it becomes ineffective. If 2 people or groups have different standards or cultures then they will both continuously behave a certain way hoping in vain that they will be treated in like fashion. Am I missing something?
I liked her goal for us to practice the golden rule all day everyday and not just on our good days. I completely agreed with her statement that the golden rule is the true Torah (or whichever religion you follow) and everything else is just commentary and how many religious leaders don’t practice the golden rule because they get so caught up in the dogmatic and intolerant aspects of their faith.
i love karen armstrong.. she open my eyes so much ever since i watch her in BBC documentary - life of Muhammad. I need more people like her to look up in life, Amin
I love this woman! I believe the message she speaks is essential to humanity's ability to survive and thrive. And she admits it's not easy. Gotta love honesty!
"Submit or burn" is a human distortion of the golden rule. There are influences from human beings who distort the many "golden teachings" for whatever reasons (such as power and control). The key point she is emphasizing is that people need to be able to recognize these influences/distortions and not to get distracted by them. some who propagate certain distortions (
I think this is exactly the message that needs to be spread, Not the message of hell and damnation. In the Bible Jesus said to his followers "Go into all the world and preach the Good News'. He didn't say, confine yourself within your churches and condemn people by telling them they're going to hell for not following you're religion. He also said, "Give hope to the hopeless". Not, tell people who aren't Christians that their life is worthless and meaningless.
I think you might want to listen to it again. She's not ignoring negative aspects of religion at all, and she's not promoting religion. She's saying 'be nice, recognise the basic guidelines of decent behaviour, which you find in so many of the worlds religions, but is the basic starting place of all moral codes'.
I totally agree with her, the truthful way to value and love the other is to love for him what we love for ourselves, love the other as ourselves, equaling them as us, because logically you won't like something bad for yourself and if you do something to the other you don't like it for yourself, there is no love in there.
Thomas Aquinas, when listing the objections to his arguments in Summa Theologica, included: "Objection 2. Further, he alone is competent to interpret the law who can make the law. But those who are subject to the law cannot make the law. Therefore they have no right to interpret the intention of the lawgiver, but should always act according to the letter of the law. " The power to interpret the law is essential, but the power to interpret it is the power to change it for one's own purposes.
"Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same" George Bernard Shaw (Maxims for Revolutionists; 1903)
So I guess my main point now is that we understand a lot more how to create harmony and it appears to be that providing basic necessities and giving oppurtunities for personal growth is a far better method than preaching doctrine. When you grow up seeing nothing but people helping people, what option is there? Hope is a far better tool than religious doctrine, and when you're provided for, which science helps provide, it's hard to fight against anything.
I agree, I like humble. I think the largest part of being humble is empathy, putting yourself in someone else's shoes is a sure path to peace. I have a very difficult time however, in putting myslef in the shoes of the religious. We all die and no-one knows what happens after that. I think that our consciousness dies but I have been wrong before. Would a person of religion admit that perhaps their God isn't true and that maybe they are wrong? Many won't, and I dislike arrogance in this manner.
Inspiring talk and as a non-theist also encouraging. ***** If I could make an amendment to the golden rule though, I would make it read "Do unto others as THEY would like to be done unto." The egotism of conformity and standardisation to our selfishly held preconceptions also needs to be broken and I feel that this may even be the harder task.
That positive one is not enough. The more important n it is the kEY is the negative one, that is don't do unto others what u don't want others do unto u. If all beings can abide by this negative one, then all will be able to live in peace n respect all beings n universe.
wheel - as i said earlier, i LOVE karen armstrong. precisely because she did not cut the corners in the past that she appears to be flaunting now. if our ultimate human commonality is the point of this new crusade then why even bother couching it in terms of 'historical' religiosity or variants on the 'golden rule'? before we learned to live in societies & write, the golden rule was "don't get killed & reproduce" - for a million years. 'compassion' is the new kid on the block. (cont)
i don't think this was a bad talk. but i have to wonder if avoiding pain and trying to achieve happiness should be our common goal. sometimes we have to make sacrifices and painful decisions, and sometimes we have to put ourselves first. like some users have already said, there's really no such thing as a common goal. but the golden rule is probably the best, and simplest one.
The problem with those regimes was less that they were atheist, and more that the leaders had so much power that a single person had the authority to change the entire society's ethics within a few years to suit their own purposes. What happened with the atheistic communist revolutions in Asia is the same thing that happened with the secular revolution of Robespierre, the Christian communist revolutions in Latin America, and the deeply religious Iranian revolution in 1979.
i agree with you. Religion is a source of ethics. It contains a lot of wisdom and as long as you are aware, that religions all over the world collected common knowledge rather than creating it, there is nothing wrong with it. But as soon as people start to believe that this knowledge comes from god and god alone, not allowing any other view from anyone, it starts getting bad... and the stronger the blind faith, the worse it gets. or: "god gave you a brain. use it."
I grew up in a parochial school and church which emphasized the Golden Rule. I was surprised many years later to find individuals who were unfamiliar with the Golden Rule, and even some who misinterpreted verbal references to it.
Shimon says: all my days i have been raised amongst the Sages and i found nothing better for ones self than silence; not study, but practice is the main thing; and one who talks excessively brings on sin. Yehoshua says: accept a teacher upon yourself; acquire a friend for yourself; and judge everyone favorably. Hillel says: be among the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving people, and bringing them closer to the Torah.
nope, hate or the removal of it was what this talk was about. I think she did well to communicate within the constraints here, and shorter is sometimes better (less is more). You are correct, it's a broad subject... religion, morality, civilizations and societies/cultures. How they can all fit and retain their identity in mutual cooperation and respect. She did well, like the Rabi on one foot. Good talk IMO.
I can accept that religious people believe that without acknowleding that it is the correct or even the moral thing to do, which was what I was trying to get at. You are right about morality not being fixed, but that is a cultural or psycological thing. I think it boils down to good fences make good neighbors or if you wish to be part of a greater collective you have to put aside your difference. I think humanity is already doing a better job of this than they have ever done in history.
I don't consider myself to be a Christian, but do agree strongly with many of the things Jesus had to say, as well as some other wise people such as Confucius. I think any religion or group of people that spread a message of love and compassion, being above all other things, are focused on the right thing.
while i greatly respect ms. armstrong's wide-ranging scholarship & great writing, i can't help but think this new direction she's trying to take us all in isn't just "pie in the sky". unflagging compassion, smashing the ego, building a better world, yada yada yada ... all just rhetoric. sublimate my [illusory] ego to indulge someone else's? that just perpetuates delusion & leads to an abdication of agency. compromise? absolutely. bottomless compassion? i'm not so sure.
Of course, but at the core of religion is religious & mystical experience; and at the core of that is a deep questioning of the truth. People who don't question aren't actually practising their faith, they're just paying lip service to it. So, critical thinking is a key part of any authentic religious practice.
I hope this message becomes a dominant force in the ongoing "debate", it certainly deserves to be. What could be a better comeback to all the conservative politics mixed with religion these days than to ask these people who have no empathy whether they believe in the "Golden Rule". It should make them pause at least a minute before they begin back in again with their antagonistic messages.
It's not just sophistry. The point you're missing is that love is hard work. You can't just say it and make it so. You need to take it seriously (hence rituals), but also be gentle about it... and that itself is hard work. You have to constantly check yourself, whether you are religious or not... and from time to time you're going to fail at love. That's what religion is about. As she said, quoting Hillel, "all the rest is commentary."
This has already been addressed in earlier comments. I called it both a "lowest common denominator" ethic and a high ideal, because it shared by many religions and philosophies but isn't easy to practice. *I* was not the one who gave the speech, nor is Rabbi Hillel quoted in the Tanakh.
Гарні думки з деякими погоджуюсь, а деякі виглядають утопічно. Співчуття, або емпатія присутня в люській природі, тобто це закладено в нас від народження. Інше питання - як ми його глушимо через жорстокість. Інша думка була, що релігії які мішаюсь МИРУ. Тут, на мою думку, знайшли цапа відбувайла - релігії. Що мішає миру? Дуже просто АМБІЦІЇ І ВЛАДОЛЮБСТВО. Тепер далі, щодо ЄДНОСТІ, в Новому Завіті є цікавий уривок : "...немає ні грека, ні юдея, ні обрізання, ні необрізання, ні скіфа, ні варвара, ні вільного, але й у всьому - Христос...Кол 3, 11. І на останок, відкинувши старі доктрини, ми створюємо нову, з іншим акцентом...
Wow! A lot of what she said really spoke to me. I think I'm guilty of the feeling sorry brand of compassion. I will take the challenge she gave and search my heart for ways to make my compassion active. IMO Christ is central to true compassion. I learned a new word... amity. Her C.S. Lewis quote about friendship really spoke to me also and wonderfully articulated why the coexistence movement struck a chord with me. There will always be people who choose power over compassion but great message.
on some level i agree, yet i hope that at least SOME people who DO have faith in certain religions pray in the hopes of gaining some power, or positive influence and motivation that will help them to become a compassionate person. As oppose to just thinking if i do THIS (like praying) then the following will definitely occur. religion is just a means to cope with daily life, if it works for them... and it doesn't bring harm to others, i don't see the fault in that.
Religion is One, spiritual teachings are the the same but social teaching differ according to the age... "Lay not on any soul a load that you would not wish to be laid upon you, and desire not for anyone the things you would not desire for yourself." ~ Baha'i Faith
I think religion will always have an impact on society and so finding ways to speak with each other over, around, or through religion is important. That it hasn't yet been accomplished with any sort of success doesn't mean it's useless. Simply saying that the answer is to tell everyone to throw away their religion will not be acceptable for billions of people. She gave no answers here, but I think it's right that the topic stay in people's minds.
Do unto others as you would have them. If I was incorrect or going down a wrong path, I wouldn't want others to be kind and accepting of it. I'd want them to correct me and put me back on course.
Yes, I agree that she has her work cut out for her, but then, it's the same work that all religions and philosophies that exhault some form of the Golden Rule have always had cut out for them.
As a future educator I'm going to take this on board. Though I don't see it coming up in a science lesson, perhaps there'll be space in a morning tutorial.
cpt - how does breaking anything (especially something as iffy as 'ego') comport with a philosophy of absolute compassion? how does willfully subtracting the self add to a human collective? "do unto others" has a nice ring to it & is a good, righteous message. it's just not the final word on the subject.
This is true, because a person is atheist, doesn't mean we can group them together in anyway other then their lack of belief. I find though that it is often the case that people become atheist as they learn more. I think that having a higher set of morals is proportionally related to your education. So it seems to reason an atheist will often have higher morals. There is the exception to both rules though. A Christian can have high morals, but only if they evolve them past the level cont...
Seven traits characterize a learned person. A learned one doesnt begin speaking before one who is greater than he in wisdom or in years; he doesnt interrupt the words of his fellow; he doesnt answer impetuously; he questions with relevance to the subject and replies accurately; he says first things first and last things last; about something he hasnt heard he says, 'i havent heard'; and he acknowledges the truth. the reverse characterize an unlearned person. all quotes from Pirkei Avos. goodbye
by having faith, you commit to accepting a truth, you do not understand or question. Therefore critical thinking is reduced to a minimum level. On the other hand, there are no good deeds of religion, that people without religion wouldn't make. On the other hand, there are a lot of bad things, like fanatism that people without faith, wouldn't do, because they require a certain level of commitment to something without questioning it (aka. faith)
That's EXACTLY *my* opinion of it! It's only "lowest common denominator" in that it is the one moral that seems to be found even in religions I've never heard of (and I've heard of many). There used to be a video here on UA-cam with quotations from each religion. When trying to APPLY it, it is revealed to be a very HIGH ideal. Why denigrate something that would be for the world's good?
I agree with you that moderate religion is not evil, But that's not the problem, the problem is the texts themselves, they are self-contradictory and interpretable for any means. Religons seem innocuous at first but then grow to represent that intolerance which is the exact opposite of the golden rule is. Giving someone a choice, or a majority dictating what is good for everyone else are two different things. Religion always pervades a society or skews that in/tolerance in a bad way.
Yes,very important is dont do unto others what u dont want others do unto u. This is mire important than do unto others what u like others do unti u. So, do always dont forget that negative ones; this is of course really the key of peace n harmonious livings with all beings n the universe 👍👏💪😍♥️🙏
@theBadaman To understand how others feel from your own actions (i.e. to know from an outside perspective if what you are doing is good or bad) you must place yourself in their position. This imaginative act helps others understand how to treat everyone in a way where finding love is much easier, not only to yourself but to everyone.
Well, as a fellow atheist I can tell you that it looks like and sounds like it's impossible to determine if God is real or imaginary. While there is little evidence to support the claims in religious texts, the idea of a God itself was best said as the following "That you cannot prove God’s nonexistence is accepted and trivial, if only in the sense that we can never absolutely prove the nonexistence of anything" - Richard Dawkins
It wasn't religious, that's just it. She was looking at the commonality in religions, she's clearly not a religious person, she opposes dogma. Why would you unsubscribe from the wealth of knowledge that is TED just because of one video? That's crazy.
Elazar HaKappar says: against your will your were created, against your will you were born, against your will you live, and against your will you die. Yehoshua says: an evil eye, the evil inclination, and hatred of other people remove a person from the world. Hillel says: If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And if i am for myself, what am i? And if not now, when? Shammai says: Make your Torah study a fixed practice, say little and do much, and receive everyone with a cheerful face.
If I were to hate anyone for my personal reasons that's one thing. But instilling intolerant prejudice is another. I am actually quite grateful that there are not many true religious adherants in the sense that they actually read and comply with their holy books. The ones that do are considered to be wingnuts. Then why are those who believe in angels, demons, and devils, heaven or hell not regarded in the same light. Fairies are as unlikely as angels, one is acceptable for adults, one isn't.
And just to clarify, I don't think that the religious are amoral or don't contribute. I just think they could do better than accepting that we will never know. Try to know, and see how far you get. I don't expect to know everything by the time I die, but scientifically speaking, I will understand the universe far better than one who answers every question with "God did it."
To what study or studies do you refer which accounts for other factors and to which factors do you believe could skew the results of this study by Greg Paul? And don't quote a Baylor study or I'll laugh at you.
This has nothing to do with Religion guys. I'm not here to judge. If anyone passes by a Bookstore, go inside and look for the book The Secret: The Power or The Secret: The Magic. Golden Rule to do the world, is all about Gratitude. Once you finish reading the book then you'll understand. :) Godbless and Godspeed to all! :D
I watching this for school who else
SNHU?
Me 😂
Same
It's that sad.
SAME
Karen is one of the leading intellectual of our time. May God bless her
Mars Segev Proof?
It makes me so happy this message is being spread more effectively lately. This should be taught in every home, in every school, compassion should be a core value than doesn't ever get skewed and deformed.
I love Ms. Karen Armstrong. Her books are amazing, and her seminars are just great!! .. God bless her, and may she continue to spread love and light wherever she goes!! .. I'm all for a postive change and will do everything in my power to help spread God's message on earth: Love, mutual respect and peace.
Yes, placing yourself in anothers position is a great way of connecting to that compassionate place. I also think we need to spend time strengthening our heart by accepting the generosity of others as well. So much is said about how we "do" compassion for others, but I feel we actually lack an ability to do this because we fail to fully enter the space of gratitude that comes from receiving a good deed from another... ie accepting and noticing the grace of God.
Thank you very much for your clarification and huge efforts in studying religions. Hope someday everyone gets your point to not attack one another based on different beliefs.
This I think was Karen Armstrong's finest hour. This talk includes the following aphorisms,
"Apply it (the Golden Rule), as Confucius said, "All day and every day", not just as your a good deed for the day."
"Dethrone yourself from the center of your world"
"Compassion lies at the root of all art."
"Religious teaching must always lead to action."
She resolves to do until her dying day, "two things, to educate and stimulate compassionate thinking. You don't really understand compassion if you just think about it. You also have to do it."
The job of the press is to show that compassion demands acute intelligence, not just a gooey feeling.
She calls upon scholars to "encourage a sensitivity about uncompassionate speaking, so that because people have this Charter, whatever their beliefs or lack of them, they feel empowered to challenge uncompassionate speech, disdainful remarks from their religious leaders, their political leaders, from the captains of industry."
C.S. Lewis wrote one thing that stuck in my mind ever since I read it when I was a schoolgirl. It's in his book "The Four Loves." He said that he distinguished between erotic love, when two people gaze, spellbound, into each other's eyes. And then he compared that to friendship, when two people stand side by side, as it were, shoulder to shoulder, with their eyes fixed on a common goal. We don't have to fall in love with each other, but we can become friends. And I am convinced. I felt it very strongly during our little deliberations at Vevey, that when people of all different persuasions come together, working side by side for a common goal, differences melt away. And we learn amity. And we learn to live together and to get to know one another."
i admire Karen Armstrong she is the pinnacle of religions role in the 21st century. she opened my eyes to the golden rule. i respect Karen, so much so that i have made a shrine of miss Armstrong and every night before i slumber and every morning when i awake i spend my time sharing my feelings with my life size cut out of karen. she calms me down and whenever i start to doubt myself i fall back onto her and she quides me in the right direction. thank you karen i love you xx
I would call Karen Armstrong a Religious Humanist with her wonderful inclusiveness and all embracing love for all faiths.
When everyone awakens to the Truth of Oneness they will realize that whatever they do to another they are doing it to themself. When you love another, when you treat another with kindness, compassion and love you are giving love, kindness and compassion to yourself.
The golden rule has a nice sentiment but sometimes it becomes ineffective. If 2 people or groups have different standards or cultures then they will both continuously behave a certain way hoping in vain that they will be treated in like fashion. Am I missing something?
"Dethrone yourself from the center of your world". I love that.
I liked her goal for us to practice the golden rule all day everyday and not just on our good days. I completely agreed with her statement that the golden rule is the true Torah (or whichever religion you follow) and everything else is just commentary and how many religious leaders don’t practice the golden rule because they get so caught up in the dogmatic and intolerant aspects of their faith.
i love karen armstrong.. she open my eyes so much ever since i watch her in BBC documentary - life of Muhammad. I need more people like her to look up in life, Amin
There is one person who will lift you up in life and that is the person of Jesus Christ. If you allow Him, you will have no need for any one else
@@deannavaters35 STFU
wow ... this talked made me cry...
some people simply don't agree with the golden rule. Sad but true.
Brian D no really
She talks about progress in Singapore and Malaysia too... So nice... Nov.2018
I love this woman! I believe the message she speaks is essential to humanity's ability to survive and thrive. And she admits it's not easy. Gotta love honesty!
Well said, Miss Armstrong. :)
"Submit or burn" is a human distortion of the golden rule. There are influences from human beings who distort the many "golden teachings" for whatever reasons (such as power and control). The key point she is emphasizing is that people need to be able to recognize these influences/distortions and not to get distracted by them.
some who propagate certain distortions (
Thanks Madam Armstrong, people like you are consciousness of humanity, wish there were more people like you today
Why are there so many thumbs down? She talking about compassion. Can someone help me understand why there over half thumbs down?
I think this is exactly the message that needs to be spread, Not the message of hell and damnation. In the Bible Jesus said to his followers "Go into all the world and preach the Good News'. He didn't say, confine yourself within your churches and condemn people by telling them they're going to hell for not following you're religion. He also said, "Give hope to the hopeless". Not, tell people who aren't Christians that their life is worthless and meaningless.
I like reading comments
I think you might want to listen to it again. She's not ignoring negative aspects of religion at all, and she's not promoting religion. She's saying 'be nice, recognise the basic guidelines of decent behaviour, which you find in so many of the worlds religions, but is the basic starting place of all moral codes'.
I totally agree with her, the truthful way to value and love the other is to love for him what we love for ourselves, love the other as ourselves, equaling them as us, because logically you won't like something bad for yourself and if you do something to the other you don't like it for yourself, there is no love in there.
Thomas Aquinas, when listing the objections to his arguments in Summa Theologica, included:
"Objection 2. Further, he alone is competent to interpret the law who can make the law. But those who are subject to the law cannot make the law. Therefore they have no right to interpret the intention of the lawgiver, but should always act according to the letter of the law. "
The power to interpret the law is essential, but the power to interpret it is the power to change it for one's own purposes.
Karen is a precious jewel.
She is brilliant.
"Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same" George Bernard Shaw (Maxims for Revolutionists; 1903)
So I guess my main point now is that we understand a lot more how to create harmony and it appears to be that providing basic necessities and giving oppurtunities for personal growth is a far better method than preaching doctrine. When you grow up seeing nothing but people helping people, what option is there? Hope is a far better tool than religious doctrine, and when you're provided for, which science helps provide, it's hard to fight against anything.
I agree, I like humble. I think the largest part of being humble is empathy, putting yourself in someone else's shoes is a sure path to peace. I have a very difficult time however, in putting myslef in the shoes of the religious. We all die and no-one knows what happens after that. I think that our consciousness dies but I have been wrong before. Would a person of religion admit that perhaps their God isn't true and that maybe they are wrong? Many won't, and I dislike arrogance in this manner.
Inspiring talk and as a non-theist also encouraging. *****
If I could make an amendment to the golden rule though, I would make it read "Do unto others as THEY would like to be done unto."
The egotism of conformity and standardisation to our selfishly held preconceptions also needs to be broken and I feel that this may even be the harder task.
That positive one is not enough. The more important n it is the kEY is the negative one, that is don't do unto others what u don't want others do unto u. If all beings can abide by this negative one, then all will be able to live in peace n respect all beings n universe.
wheel - as i said earlier, i LOVE karen armstrong. precisely because she did not cut the corners in the past that she appears to be flaunting now.
if our ultimate human commonality is the point of this new crusade then why even bother couching it in terms of 'historical' religiosity or variants on the 'golden rule'?
before we learned to live in societies & write, the golden rule was "don't get killed & reproduce" - for a million years. 'compassion' is the new kid on the block. (cont)
Very helpful with my depression
Egg man is that u
@@Santagmk0 lmao
i don't think this was a bad talk.
but i have to wonder if avoiding pain and trying to achieve happiness should be our common goal.
sometimes we have to make sacrifices and painful decisions, and sometimes we have to put ourselves first. like some users have already said, there's really no such thing as a common goal.
but the golden rule is probably the best, and simplest one.
The problem with those regimes was less that they were atheist, and more that the leaders had so much power that a single person had the authority to change the entire society's ethics within a few years to suit their own purposes. What happened with the atheistic communist revolutions in Asia is the same thing that happened with the secular revolution of Robespierre, the Christian communist revolutions in Latin America, and the deeply religious Iranian revolution in 1979.
Love, love, love this!
Beautiful and inspiring!
The ending quote couldn't be more true, good lecture.
No hate ... just wondering ~ how in the world did she get on TED talks?
i agree with you. Religion is a source of ethics. It contains a lot of wisdom and as long as you are aware, that religions all over the world collected common knowledge rather than creating it, there is nothing wrong with it. But as soon as people start to believe that this knowledge comes from god and god alone, not allowing any other view from anyone, it starts getting bad... and the stronger the blind faith, the worse it gets.
or: "god gave you a brain. use it."
I grew up in a parochial school and church which emphasized the Golden Rule. I was surprised many years later to find individuals who were unfamiliar with the Golden Rule, and even some who misinterpreted verbal references to it.
Shimon says: all my days i have been raised amongst the Sages and i found nothing better for ones self than silence; not study, but practice is the main thing; and one who talks excessively brings on sin.
Yehoshua says: accept a teacher upon yourself; acquire a friend for yourself; and judge everyone favorably.
Hillel says: be among the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving people, and bringing them closer to the Torah.
the problem with the golden rule is that it goes against human nature
Merci Madame Thanks!!!!!!!!!
from palestine
nope, hate or the removal of it was what this talk was about.
I think she did well to communicate within the constraints here, and shorter is sometimes better (less is more).
You are correct, it's a broad subject... religion, morality, civilizations and societies/cultures. How they can all fit and retain their identity in mutual cooperation and respect.
She did well, like the Rabi on one foot. Good talk IMO.
sadly many feel that whoever has the gold makes the rules.
I can accept that religious people believe that without acknowleding that it is the correct or even the moral thing to do, which was what I was trying to get at. You are right about morality not being fixed, but that is a cultural or psycological thing. I think it boils down to good fences make good neighbors or if you wish to be part of a greater collective you have to put aside your difference. I think humanity is already doing a better job of this than they have ever done in history.
The Golden Rule:
"He who has the gold makes the rules"
Hardly needs reviving :-)
I don't consider myself to be a Christian, but do agree strongly with many of the things Jesus had to say, as well as some other wise people such as Confucius. I think any religion or group of people that spread a message of love and compassion, being above all other things, are focused on the right thing.
while i greatly respect ms. armstrong's wide-ranging scholarship & great writing, i can't help but think this new direction she's trying to take us all in isn't just "pie in the sky".
unflagging compassion, smashing the ego, building a better world, yada yada yada ... all just rhetoric. sublimate my [illusory] ego to indulge someone else's? that just perpetuates delusion & leads to an abdication of agency.
compromise? absolutely. bottomless compassion? i'm not so sure.
Of course, but at the core of religion is religious & mystical experience; and at the core of that is a deep questioning of the truth. People who don't question aren't actually practising their faith, they're just paying lip service to it. So, critical thinking is a key part of any authentic religious practice.
I hope this message becomes a dominant force in the ongoing "debate", it certainly deserves to be. What could be a better comeback to all the conservative politics mixed with religion these days than to ask these people who have no empathy whether they believe in the "Golden Rule". It should make them pause at least a minute before they begin back in again with their antagonistic messages.
It's not just sophistry. The point you're missing is that love is hard work. You can't just say it and make it so. You need to take it seriously (hence rituals), but also be gentle about it... and that itself is hard work. You have to constantly check yourself, whether you are religious or not... and from time to time you're going to fail at love. That's what religion is about.
As she said, quoting Hillel, "all the rest is commentary."
This has already been addressed in earlier comments. I called it both a "lowest common denominator" ethic and a high ideal, because it shared by many religions and philosophies but isn't easy to practice.
*I* was not the one who gave the speech, nor is Rabbi Hillel quoted in the Tanakh.
Гарні думки з деякими погоджуюсь, а деякі виглядають утопічно. Співчуття, або емпатія присутня в люській природі, тобто це закладено в нас від народження. Інше питання - як ми його глушимо через жорстокість. Інша думка була, що релігії які мішаюсь МИРУ. Тут, на мою думку, знайшли цапа відбувайла - релігії. Що мішає миру? Дуже просто АМБІЦІЇ І ВЛАДОЛЮБСТВО. Тепер далі, щодо ЄДНОСТІ, в Новому Завіті є цікавий уривок : "...немає ні грека, ні юдея, ні обрізання, ні необрізання, ні скіфа, ні варвара, ні вільного, але й у всьому - Христос...Кол 3, 11.
І на останок, відкинувши старі доктрини, ми створюємо нову, з іншим акцентом...
saludos desde clases virtuales
Wow! A lot of what she said really spoke to me. I think I'm guilty of the feeling sorry brand of compassion. I will take the challenge she gave and search my heart for ways to make my compassion active. IMO Christ is central to true compassion. I learned a new word... amity. Her C.S. Lewis quote about friendship really spoke to me also and wonderfully articulated why the coexistence movement struck a chord with me. There will always be people who choose power over compassion but great message.
Sim, sem introjetarmos em nossos corações essa noção de amor e misericórdia, é impossível sonharmos com um mundo melhor.
If only compassion existed in every human being. Too often it's overrided by nationalism, religion, greed, poverty and on and on.
Spot-on woman! LOVE is everything, but be careful not to love that which is not love.
on some level i agree, yet i hope that at least SOME people who DO have faith in certain religions pray in the hopes of gaining some power, or positive influence and motivation that will help them to become a compassionate person. As oppose to just thinking if i do THIS (like praying) then the following will definitely occur. religion is just a means to cope with daily life, if it works for them... and it doesn't bring harm to others, i don't see the fault in that.
I do too. From an eclectic perspective. The writing is on the wall.
Karen Armstrong is a shining advertisement for the British dental system.
A person doesn't have to be a saint to enter into a philosophical discussion about ethics!
Religion is One, spiritual teachings are the the same but social teaching differ according to the age... "Lay not on any soul a load that you would not wish to be laid upon you, and desire not for anyone the things you would not desire for yourself." ~ Baha'i Faith
How and/or why could her message have so many dislikes?
Saludos desde Barrancabermeja Santander Colombia
I think religion will always have an impact on society and so finding ways to speak with each other over, around, or through religion is important. That it hasn't yet been accomplished with any sort of success doesn't mean it's useless. Simply saying that the answer is to tell everyone to throw away their religion will not be acceptable for billions of people.
She gave no answers here, but I think it's right that the topic stay in people's minds.
Great speech
a very beautiful speech and i hope to see the art of campassion spead :)
Do unto others as you would have them. If I was incorrect or going down a wrong path, I wouldn't want others to be kind and accepting of it. I'd want them to correct me and put me back on course.
She Never Drunk Her Water 😂
To love my neighbor does not mean that I approve of all of his behaviors. This is the opposite of genuine love.
Yes, I agree that she has her work cut out for her, but then, it's the same work that all religions and philosophies that exhault some form of the Golden Rule have always had cut out for them.
As a future educator I'm going to take this on board. Though I don't see it coming up in a science lesson, perhaps there'll be space in a morning tutorial.
cpt - how does breaking anything (especially something as iffy as 'ego') comport with a philosophy of absolute compassion?
how does willfully subtracting the self add to a human collective?
"do unto others" has a nice ring to it & is a good, righteous message. it's just not the final word on the subject.
What does TED stand for?
Technology
Entertainment
Design
This is brilliant.
why so many dislikes this is a good speech
Yea folks watch the whole vid, but right about 4:03 is where she starts sounding more "religious neutral". Its not a bad talk.
Let us not blame but seek for truth.
Whoops typo ... I meant to say "... in regard to our desire to *enforce* OUR world VIEW on others ..."
Merci Madame Thanks!!!!!!!!!
This is true, because a person is atheist, doesn't mean we can group them together in anyway other then their lack of belief. I find though that it is often the case that people become atheist as they learn more. I think that having a higher set of morals is proportionally related to your education. So it seems to reason an atheist will often have higher morals. There is the exception to both rules though. A Christian can have high morals, but only if they evolve them past the level cont...
Seven traits characterize a learned person. A learned one doesnt begin speaking before one who is greater than he in wisdom or in years; he doesnt interrupt the words of his fellow; he doesnt answer impetuously; he questions with relevance to the subject and replies accurately; he says first things first and last things last; about something he hasnt heard he says, 'i havent heard'; and he acknowledges the truth. the reverse characterize an unlearned person.
all quotes from Pirkei Avos. goodbye
by having faith, you commit to accepting a truth, you do not understand or question. Therefore critical thinking is reduced to a minimum level.
On the other hand, there are no good deeds of religion, that people without religion wouldn't make.
On the other hand, there are a lot of bad things, like fanatism that people without faith, wouldn't do, because they require a certain level of commitment to something without questioning it (aka. faith)
That's EXACTLY *my* opinion of it! It's only "lowest common denominator" in that it is the one moral that seems to be found even in religions I've never heard of (and I've heard of many). There used to be a video here on UA-cam with quotations from each religion.
When trying to APPLY it, it is revealed to be a very HIGH ideal.
Why denigrate something that would be for the world's good?
I agree with you that moderate religion is not evil, But that's not the problem, the problem is the texts themselves, they are self-contradictory and interpretable for any means. Religons seem innocuous at first but then grow to represent that intolerance which is the exact opposite of the golden rule is. Giving someone a choice, or a majority dictating what is good for everyone else are two different things. Religion always pervades a society or skews that in/tolerance in a bad way.
Yes,very important is dont do unto others what u dont want others do unto u. This is mire important than do unto others what u like others do unti u.
So, do always dont forget that negative ones; this is of course really the key of peace n harmonious livings with all beings n the universe 👍👏💪😍♥️🙏
@theBadaman
To understand how others feel from your own actions (i.e. to know from an outside perspective if what you are doing is good or bad) you must place yourself in their position. This imaginative act helps others understand how to treat everyone in a way where finding love is much easier, not only to yourself but to everyone.
Well, as a fellow atheist I can tell you that it looks like and sounds like it's impossible to determine if God is real or imaginary. While there is little evidence to support the claims in religious texts, the idea of a God itself was best said as the following "That you cannot prove God’s nonexistence is accepted and trivial, if only in the sense that we can never absolutely prove the nonexistence of anything" - Richard Dawkins
It wasn't religious, that's just it. She was looking at the commonality in religions, she's clearly not a religious person, she opposes dogma. Why would you unsubscribe from the wealth of knowledge that is TED just because of one video? That's crazy.
You know what's better than arguing opinion vs opinion? Reading it and laughing. Have fun (:
Elazar HaKappar says: against your will your were created, against your will you were born, against your will you live, and against your will you die.
Yehoshua says: an evil eye, the evil inclination, and hatred of other people remove a person from the world.
Hillel says: If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And if i am for myself, what am i? And if not now, when?
Shammai says: Make your Torah study a fixed practice, say little and do much, and receive everyone with a cheerful face.
If I were to hate anyone for my personal reasons that's one thing. But instilling intolerant prejudice is another. I am actually quite grateful that there are not many true religious adherants in the sense that they actually read and comply with their holy books. The ones that do are considered to be wingnuts. Then why are those who believe in angels, demons, and devils, heaven or hell not regarded in the same light. Fairies are as unlikely as angels, one is acceptable for adults, one isn't.
And just to clarify, I don't think that the religious are amoral or don't contribute. I just think they could do better than accepting that we will never know. Try to know, and see how far you get. I don't expect to know everything by the time I die, but scientifically speaking, I will understand the universe far better than one who answers every question with "God did it."
To what study or studies do you refer which accounts for other factors and to which factors do you believe could skew the results of this study by Greg Paul? And don't quote a Baylor study or I'll laugh at you.
This has nothing to do with Religion guys. I'm not here to judge. If anyone passes by a Bookstore, go inside and look for the book The Secret: The Power or The Secret: The Magic. Golden Rule to do the world, is all about Gratitude. Once you finish reading the book then you'll understand. :) Godbless and Godspeed to all! :D