The “Limit Experience” and What It Can Achieve

The Limit Experience in Regarding Henry: A Limit Experience Resulting in Ethical Awakening

Thinking about “Limit” Experiences and Situations

     The film Regarding Henry (1991 starring Harrison Ford and Annette Benning) [Cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regarding_Henry ] can be considered nowadays a rather unremarkable film that is too sappy and corny for an audience, many of whom are “jaded” and used to more glitzy films. I consider it though a chance to reflect on the concept of “limit.” One of my favourite theologians, the University of Chicago theologian David Tracy, considers “limit situations/experiences” a major key for understanding and reflecting about the most important questions of human life and existence and how these relate with God, spirituality, and religion.

     According to Tracy, the concept of “limit situation” refers “to those human situations wherein a human being ineluctably finds manifest a certain ultimate limit or horizon to his or her existence.” Tracy distinguishes two main kinds of existential situations: “Either those ‘boundary’ situations of guilt, anxiety, sickness and the recognition of death as one's own destiny, or those situations called 'ecstatic experiences'... intense joy, love, reassurance, creation.” (David Tracy [1975], Blessed Rage for Order, p. 105).

     Let me explain “limit” in my words. A “limit experience or situation” can be described as an intense moment when something major (either positive or negative)—be it an event, an overwhelmingly magnificent or evil person, extraordinary beauty or ugliness, a serious crisis or extraordinarily beautiful moment, or the like—so powerfully discloses the limits of human beings to understand the mysteriousness of human existence. It forces us who experience this event as “a limit” to nevertheless make at least some sense of this event’s mysteriousness that transcends the ordinary limits of human understanding. How to do that? By attempting to do an interpretation of the experience (“interpretive understanding”). That’s just a fancy way to say: When faced with a limit situation, we try to put forward a possible explanation of the event. Of course, it is obvious that the effort to make sense of limit experiences often takes place in the midst of many strong positive or negative emotions, such as hope, faith, love, anxiety, sadness, anger, fear, despair, etc., elicited by such powerful experiences.

The Limit Situation in Regarding Henry

     Let’s go back to Regarding Henry. First point for consideration: At the beginning of the film, we see that New York lawyer Henry Turner is at the top of his game. He is a tremendously successful lawyer who “has everything” in terms of worldly success. At this point, take note first that in order to reach such success in one’s career, Henry has had to work and study hard, hone his rhetorical and reasoning skills, have the right connections, and pursue everything with drive and perseverance. Being successful in life is itself an impressive feat that could not be reached without much sacrifice. Being university students, most of you are in that “struggling” stage now.

     But Henry’s life and success are obliterated in a single moment because of a seemingly random and senseless shooting that almost kills him and tragically reduces him to the state of a helpless person who has lost even the most basic of human capabilities such as walking or speaking, let alone reading or writing. This is the story’s BIG limit experience and situation. How can a whole life of hard work culminating in great success be gone in a few seconds? Such tragic experiences make us come face to face with our limits to comprehend life’s utter mysteriousness. Henry himself as well as his family and colleagues think of the whole situation as a tragedy. But is it really? (see the Zen story below)

The Change that Happens in Henry: Before & After the Limit Situation

     In the course of becoming a successful lawyer, Henry’s humanity (we understand little by little as we go on with the film) became severely compromised: He prosecuted without adequately considering the ethical rightness or wrongness of the causes he was promoting; he didn’t value much his family; he had an extramarital affair going which affected the people he loved; he didn’t have any concern for poor and marginalized people.

     But being reduced to a helpless state sort of wiped his slate clean. All the former bad, unethical habits he had as a successful lawyer were gone. Being humbled by the experience, he became a decent human being who had a high ethical sense, was connected with the joys of life (symbolized by the puppy), deeply loved his wife and daughter, cared nothing for worldly success but instead for human connection, had time for the little significant things in life that make it so much richer. It is all summarized in the words that the Turner family Latina housekeeper, Rosalina, tells him after his recovery, “I like you much better now, Mr. Henry.”

 

Wisdom (Spirituality / Philosophy of Life) in order to Face Life

     How do we react to such limit situations/experiences, particularly, negative ones? Most of us are hoping that life would go on smoothly or “good enough” for us. But real life is not so. If it isn’t already, life definitely becomes tough and hard. What can we do in order to survive and also flourish in the midst of the many setbacks and tragedies of life? This is something that we have to prepare for in order to be not completely taken by surprise by the difficulties of life.

     One message that this course on perplexing issues will emphasize is this: In order to be prepared for life (especially its suffering), we must acquire true WISDOM (not only knowledge!). (In more religious terms) We have to develop some kind of spirituality; (in more philosophical terms), we have to acquire a robust PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE (both of those expressions are contained in the word “WISDOM”) so that we could develop resiliency for the sufferings and “curve balls” of life and even find authentic flourishing, fulfillment, and happiness as human beings.

[Optional Reading]

The Zen-Daoist Tale about the Farmer and Good-Luck/Bad-Luck 

This is one of my favourite Zen stories. It tells us that what we perceive as “good luck” or “bad luck” is not often accurate because many things in life can be understood only with the passage of time and when put in the bigger context of a greater reality. This story sheds more light on the message of the film Regarding Henry.

(This version found in the public domain at: https://blog.mindfulness.com/meditation/are-these-bad-times-or-good-times-the-story-of-the-zen-farmer  )

There once was an old Zen farmer. Every day, the farmer used his horse to help work his fields and keep his farm healthy.

But one day, the horse ran away. All the villagers came by and said, “We're so sorry to hear this. This is such bad luck.” 

But the farmer responded, “Bad luck. Good luck. Who knows?”

 

The villagers were confused, but decided to ignore him. A few weeks went by and then one afternoon, while the farmer was working outside, he looked up and saw his horse running toward him. But the horse was not alone. The horse was returning to him with a whole herd of horses. So now the farmer had 10 horses to help work his fields.

All the villagers came by to congratulate the farmer and said, “Wow! This is such good luck!”

But the farmer responded, “Good luck. Bad luck. Who knows?

 

A few weeks later, the farmer's son came over to visit and help his father work on the farm. While trying to tame one of the horses, the farmer’s son fell and broke his leg. 

The villagers came by to commiserate and said, “How awful. This is such bad luck.” 

Just as he did the first time, the farmer responded, “Bad luck. Good luck. Who knows?” 

 

A month later, the farmer’s son was still recovering. He wasn’t able to walk or do any manual labor to help his father around the farm. 

A regiment of the army came marching through town conscripting every able-bodied young man to join them. When the regiment came to the farmer’s house and saw the young boy's broken leg, they marched past and left him where he lay.

Of course, all the villagers came by and said, “Amazing! This is such good luck. You're so fortunate.”

And you know the farmer’s response by now…

“Good luck. Bad luck. Who knows?”

 

---

The School of Life's "Eight Rules" and Some Annotations

 

JKK’s Annotations [#2] to the School of Life’s “Eight Rules”

"The School of Life" (henceforward, SOL) is an organization co-founded by British-Swiss “practical philosopher” (I’ll call him that way) Alain de Botton (ADB). It aims to help people to acquire “wisdom for life” through its various videos, classes, and resources. It has summarized its key teachings into "8
Rules" found here (text in the public domain).  Video version on youtube .

In brief the eight rules are:

1. We are imperfect; 2. Cultivate (True) Friendships, 3. [Be vulnerable] Know [admit] your Insanity, 4. Accept your idiocy, 5. (You’re) Good Enough, 6. (Go) Beyond Romanticism, 7. (Develop) Cheerful despair, 8. Transcend yourself

***

(The main text below is from the School of Life [=SOL]. The italicized parts are my own [jkk’s] annotations)

Eight Rules of The School of Life

The School of Life has produced 500 films and written 5 million words. This is an enormous problem. To stand any hope of remaining in anyone’s mind, ideas – even very good ideas – need to be brief and reduced to an essence. That’s why, for the sake of our followers, we’ve summarised everything we believe down to eight key points: the credo of The School of Life. 

1. ACCEPT IMPERFECTION

We are inherently flawed and broken beings. Perfection is beyond us.Despite our intelligence and our science, we will never stamp out stupidity and pain. Life will always continue to be – in central ways – about suffering. We are all, from close up, scared, unsure, full of regret, longing and error. No one is normal: the only people we can think of as normal are those we don’t yet know very well.

[jkk] This seems to be a reaction to the false, glitzy "perfection" that the mass media presents to us all the time. We are surrounded by seemingly perfect images of humans, things, and nature in the media all the time. This gives us a "false expectation” that life should always be beautiful and perfect (“Romanticism”). Hence, the SOL urges: we have to remind ourselves that we are imperfect, crazy, hurting, idiots because those aspects are, in many deep ways, the more usual and prevalent human characteristics.

2. Being VULNERABLE - the Foundation of True Friendship

Recognising that we are each one of us weak, mad and mistaken should inspire compassion for ourselves – and generosity towards others. Knowing how to reveal our vulnerability and brokenness is the bedrock of true friendship, which we universally crave. People do not reliably end up with the lives they deserve. There is no true justice in the way that rewards are distributed. We should embrace the concept of tragedy: random terrible things can and do befall most lives. We may fail and be good – and therefore need to be slower to judge and quicker to understand. Those who have failed are not ‘losers’; we may soon be among them. Be kind.

[jkk] This deals with the horizontal aspect of human life - our relationship with others. We usually wear metaphorical masks in front of people we don't know too well. We even do that with people we know well for fear that they would reject us! These metaphorical masks hide our struggles and give us a beautiful exterior. This is also true with things we post on social media. The SOL’s principle #2 tells us that only vulnerability (the ability to show who we really are, especially our not-so-good aspects) on our part and acceptance by the other (and vice-versa) will give birth to the authentic friendships that we deeply desire. 

3. KNOW YOUR INSANITY (jkk: I think “insanity” here means: the aspects of ourselves that depart from what is considered "normal" and "respectable")

We cannot be entirely sane, but it is a basic requirement of maturity that we understand the ways in which we are insane, can warn others we care about what our insanities might make us do—early and in good time and before we have caused too much damage—and take constant steps to contain rather than act out our follies.

[jkk] "Insane" is a strong word and it's deliberately being used for shock effect. That is, each one of us have pretty stark "deviations" from what is considered "normal" and "respectable" in conventional society.

We should be able to have a ready answer – and never take offence – if someone asks us (as they should): ‘In what ways are you mad’?

[Childhood] Most of the madness comes down to childhood, which will – in a way unique to our situation – have unbalanced us. No one has yet had a ‘normal’ childhood; this is no insult to the efforts of families.

[jkk] Childhood is an important theme for the SOL and I wholeheartedly agree with it. In order to understand ourselves well, we have to understand our past history, especially our "childhood" and the many formative and “deformative” (negative) experiences we've had in our growing-up years.

 

4. ACCEPT YOUR IDIOCY ([jkk] Bluntly speaking, this means: There is a lot of foolishness and stupidity in us)

Do not run away from the thought you may be an idiot as if this were a rare and dreadful insight. Accept the certainty with good grace, in full daylight. You are an idiot but there is no other alternative for a human being. We are on a planet of seven billion comparable fools. Embracing our idiocy should render us confident before challenges – for messing up is to be expected – comfortable with ourselves, and ready to extend a hand of friendship to our similarly broken and demented neighbours. We should overcome shame and shyness because we have already shed so much of our pride.

5. YOU ARE GOOD ENOUGH

The alternative to perfection isn’t failure; it’s to make our peace with the idea that we are, each of us, ‘good enough’. Good enough parents, siblings, workers and humans.

‘Ordinary’ isn’t a name for failure. Understood more carefully, and seen with a more generous and perceptive eye, it contains the best of life. 

Life is not elsewhere; it is, fully and properly, here and now. 

[jkk] This is the more sober kind of optimism that the SOL advocates, not founded on a facile and unrealistic optimism (Don’t forget: reality is often quite grim), but on a realistic assertion and upholding of an attainable ideal – TO BE just “Good Enough.” This realistic, sobering goal can actually be quite an accomplishment, given our human weaknesses and the world’s insanity.

 

6. OVERCOME ROMANTICISM

[jkk] “Romanticism” (as it is used by the SOL) refers to “the attitude that trusts in feeling and instinct as supreme guides to life, and a corresponding suspicion of reason and analysis” (The School of Life Dictionary, p. 201).

‘The one’ is a cruel invention. No-one is ever wholly ‘right’ nor indeed wholly wrong. 

True love isn’t merely an admiration for strength; it is patience and compassion for our mutual weaknesses. Love is a capacity to bring imagination to bear on a person’s less impressive moments – and to bestow an ongoing degree of forgiveness for natural fragility.

No one should be expected to love us ‘just as we are’. Learning and developing are at the core of love. Genuine love involves two people helping each other to become the best version of themselves.

Compatibility isn’t a prerequisite for love; it is the achievement of love.

[jkk] I think this is one of the truly insightful teachings of the SOL. It is brutally frank but that is necessary in this world that is usually overrun by romanticism. (Note that romanticism is experienced differently by the privileged and underprivileged) 

 

7. DESPAIR CHEERFULLY (a calm yet "cheerful" melancholy might be the best and most realistic attitude to life)

We are under undue and unfair pressure to smile. But almost nothing will go entirely well: we can expect frustration, misunderstanding, misfortune and rebuffs. We should be allowed to be melancholic. Melancholy is not rage or bitterness; it is a noble species of sadness that arises when we are open to the fact that disappointment is at the heart of human experience. In our melancholy state, we can understand without fury or sentimentality that no one fully understands anyone else, that loneliness is universal and that every life has its full measure of sorrow.

But though there is a vast amount to feel sad about, we’re not individually cursed and against the backdrop of darkness. Many small sweet things should stand out: a sunny day, a drifting cloud; dawn and dusk, a tender look. With the tragedy of existence firmly in mind, we can take pleasure in a single, uneventful day, some delicate flowers, or an intimate conversation with a friend.  We can learn how to draw the full value from what is good, whenever, wherever and in whatever doses it arises.

Despair but do so cheerfully: believe in cheerful despair. 

[jkk- To be honest, I feel conflicted about this principle because I feel that this message will often not stand the test of really tough and tragic life-experiences. Because it encourages us to be cheerful without suggesting a possible reason why we should be. Instead, it might eventually lead to depression, nihilism, despair and even suicide.]

 

8. TRANSCEND YOURSELF

We are not at the center of anything; thankfully. We are miniscule bundles of evanescent matter on an infinitesimal corner of a boundless universe. We do not count one bit in the grander scheme. This is a liberation.

[On the one hand, this can be a powerful, humbling thought that “puts things in perspective.” On the other hand, I don’t think it works all the time. It can push people over the brink of utter hopelessness and despair. Hence, I have quite a few reservations about this principle. Moreover, it conflicts with the assertions of most spiritual-wisdom traditions which firmly uphold that although the human being is a puny, little creature, every single one is precious in the eyes of the Divine Spirit -jkk]

Rather than complaining that we are too small, we should delight in being humbled by a mighty ocean, a glacier, or planet Kepler 22b, 638 light-years from earth in the constellation of Cygnus.

We should gain relief from the thought of the kindly indifference of spatial infinity: an eternity where no-one will notice, and where the wind erodes the rocks in the space between the stars. Cosmic humility – taught to us by nature, history and the sky above us – is a blessing and a constant alternative to a life of frantic jostling, humourlessness and anxious pride. 

***

[The Importance of Review and Repetition]  A final point: some of this may sound convincing. But that isn’t enough. We know – in theory – about all of it. And yet in practice, any such ideas have a notoriously weak ability to motivate our actual behaviour and emotions. Our knowledge is both embedded within us and yet is ineffective for us. 

 We forget almost everything. Our memories are sieves, not robust buckets. What seemed a convincing call to action at 8am will be nothing more than a dim recollection by midday and an indecipherable contrail in our cloudy minds by evening. Our enthusiasms and resolutions can be counted upon to fade like the stars at dawn. Nothing much sticks.

For this reason, we need to go back over things. Maybe once a day, certainly once a week. A true good ‘school’ shouldn’t tell us only things we’ve never heard before; it would be deeply interested in rehearsing all that is theoretically known yet practically forgotten. 

That’s why we should keep the eight rules in mind – and why the next step is to subscribe – and to return here often.

***********

(The comments below are jkk’s)

Some Critical Reactions and Reflections

The School of Life (SOL) is not "ideology-free" or completely "objective" as it claims to be; Nobody/no school is entirely objective. Everyone is advocating a particular point of view and that is, yes, an ideology. Let me express what I think are some central presuppositions and “agendas” of the SOL.

[Atheism - SOL's Presupposed Worldview]  With regard to God and the supernatural, the SOL presupposes that there is of course no real objective truth in the idea of God or the supernatural. However, religion is an important field to study in order to know humanity better and because it has some useful things to teach us apart from its mythological teachings (which are neither true nor useful anymore).

Alain de Botton (ADB), the SOL’s co-founder—I would say—lives in a universe that--he believes--is just physical. Therefore, he says that we humans are just "evanescent material without any significance" in a tiny corner of the vast universe. This is a good example of a post-Enlightenment, thoroughly secularized worldview - a worldview philosopher Charles Taylor calls "disenchanted" (not imbued with the supernatural).

[Existensialism]  Moreover, the philosophical position of existentialism is advocated. Existentialism is the point of view that claims that Life is, in the final analysis, "absurd.” Existentialism is an important foundational base of the SOL's general philosophy of life. 

For more on this, see its video on the philosopher AlbertCamus and the Flood.

An Alternative Worldview - That of the World’s Spiritual-Wisdom Traditions

In this course of study on life's various perplexing issues, in order to balance out the positions of the SOL, I will make frequent reference to “our ancestors.” (By “ancestors” I refer to the people who lived before us who had “more traditional” worldviews and were deeply religious.) Our ancestors saw life differently from the SOL. They lived in an "enchanted" (religious) universe. ....  The reality of Spirit was the most important and the greatest reality for them. They were part of some of the world’s great religious-wisdom traditions. These wisdom traditions still claim: If you live within that “Greater Reality,” life arguably has greater meaning. I personally also think that within such a religious outlook on life, it's harder to slip into nihilism and hopelessness. 

I would like to invite you to weigh both positions carefully and think critically about each one's merits and demerits.

My reflections on the 'School of Life within a Greater Reality' is found here.

---

The 'School of Life' within a Greater Reality

 

To note well: Atheism; Existential Questions and some examples; life as a mystery; limit situation; “religious-spiritual attitude” to life; trust in the goodness of life; a “Greater Reality”; the Enlightenment

(Before reading, please view first the "Eight Rules" of the School of Life. A text version of the "Eight Rules" with my extensive annotations-comments can be found here.)

[#1] The School of Life’s Wisdom and Its Atheistic Presupposition

We are about to engage in a study of different “perplexing issues” that come with life. These issues are also known as “ultimate questions” (they ask about the ultimate, most important things in life) or “existential questions” (deep questions that arise by the very fact that we exist as humans in this world). 

I think that the School ofLife (SOL) has many valid messages and deep insights about the different perplexing issues of life. However, I’ll point out clearly here at the beginning of this course of study that the SOL is explicitly atheistic (It does not believe in anything ‘beyond the natural world’), and it assumes this position just "as a matter of fact," without really examining well the question of whether atheism is the best philosophical stance to approach life. At the same time, it also maintains that we can still learn many practical and useful things from religions (apart from their false mythological claims).

In this course of study regarding different “perplexing issues” of life, I will use many of the insights of the SOL but will, at the same time, make important “additions” (or “annotations” – extra “notes”) of things that I (as a scholar of religion & spirituality) consider to be necessary if someone wants to respond more adequately to life’s most perplexing issues.

My (jkk's) First Annotations to the “Rules of the School of Life”

[#2] Life is a Great and Precious Mystery  

Let's begin with this first and foundational principle: We live in a big and vast universe full of mystery.

Even in our so-called scientifically and technologically "advanced" age in which humanity has reached a high level of knowledge about the scientific principles that govern how the material world works, the questions (perplexing issues) that matter most to us, humans, are so-called “existential questions.” These are questions that come from the very fact of existing or having a human life. Some examples of these are: 'What's the meaning of it all?', 'What are the values that we should have, uphold, and defend?', 'Why is it important to be compassionate rather than hateful?', 'Why is it better to be on the side of the good rather than evil?', and such questions that touch humanity's deepest core and encourage us all to go "beyond ourselves" and overcome our egoism. These more important existential questions cannot be answered by the advanced science and technology that we humans have achieved. (This is only my opinion…) They can be faced more adequately (although never answered conclusively) only when we have an open-minded attitude to--what I shall call--a "religious" or "spiritual" disposition or outlook on life. 

[#3] A “Religious-Spiritual” Attitude.  So, what precisely is a "religious" or "spiritual" approach/attitude to life? The following things—I think—are important components of it: It is basically an attitude of standing in front of the big and vast mystery that is life (some consider that "vast mystery" as “God”) ... and then ...

·         Humble ourselves by acknowledging that I am (or we are) so small and puny in front of this big mystery of life. (This is also called awareness of a “limit situation” – a situation in which we realize that life is so vast and we humans are so “limited” because we cannot understand many things about it. More on that later.) [optional: The SOL version of this attitude is in this clip entitled "Don't worry; no one cares"]

·         Accept this great mystery in its multiple dimensions --both its beautiful aspects as well as its ugly sides; its many joys as well as its many sufferings; its dazzling lights as well as its deep shadows-- yet through it all ...

·         Continue to trust that this mystery called "life" or "existence" is still worth living, treasuring, continuing, defending and, if need be, worth fighting for.

·         A “religious-spiritual” attitude then is, first and foremost, a kind of TRUST first of all in the goodness and worth of LIFE, not because one knows everything but because one deeply feels the worth of life and MAKES the optimistic DECISION to trust in the goodness of life. When one commits oneself to trust in the fundamental graciousness of life (reality, existence), then MEANING is born. Life begins to have a reason, a meaning. One knows why one gets up in the morning to begin one's day. (I get this from Catholic theologian Hans Küng)

·         In line with one's trust in the fundamental goodness and graciousness of life, one engages with life. This is the "dancing and wrestling" with life that is born because one trusts that life is worth living. 

·         Many (explicitly) religious believers give a name to the ultimate reason for why they trust in the goodness of life. In the Western religious traditions, it is usually known as "God." In the Eastern religious traditions, the names can be more impersonal such as “the Way” (道), “Heaven” (天), or “Nirvana”, etc.

[#4] A Bigger or Greater Reality.  To explain further, a "religious or spiritual attitude" to life includes an openness to the possibility that: REALITY (in the total sense) might be a lot bigger than "material reality" (the things that conventional science can verify or what we can access with our five senses); Reality might even be bigger than entities that have life (the Biosphere) or even animal and human minds (the Noosphere).  (below figure 1)

In other words, a religious or spiritual outlook in life is fundamentally an openness to the possibility that what the world’s religious-spiritual traditions claim might be true – namely, that there is some kind of “ultimate reality” which:

·         is the ground of everything;

·         is present in everything yet is bigger than any single thing; 

·         envelops and embraces everything as the biggest and most total reality of all (see figure 1) 

For the time being, let’s call this bigger/greater dimension – the dimension of SPIRIT (monotheistic religions call it “God”). It is a level that is not directly accessible at this point even to our advanced science or technology. But, in history, religious-spiritual practitioners (sages, saints, shamans, etc.) have claimed that they have experienced this Greater Reality by having a religious-spiritual openness which led to “religious-spiritual experiences” or “mystical experiences”. 

Of course, we cannot conclusively prove the existence of this realm. At this point, there has not been any way to conclusively prove the existence of this realm. But for most of humanity's history, humans have believed that this realm exists and that this realm is the most important reality of all. 

It is only with the European Enlightenment (from the 1600-1700s onward) and the rise of the scientific method that humans began to grow disenchanted with religious and spiritual things and have turned to material reality as the most important of all.

****

When the above-mentioned principles are in place, when we have this “greater” or “bigger” framework in place, then we can add other gems of wisdom (such as the different rules of the School of Life) and find that we will be better prepared—again, just my opinion—to face the different perplexing issues of life and respond more adequately to them.

Why Religion and Spirituality Matter as Part of One’s Education

Why not Take a Course on Religion-Spirituality?

[#1] The Meaning of Key Terms and Expressions Here

[A] When I mention religion here, I do not primarily mean <participating in an "organized religious tradition"> (such as being a member of Roman Catholicism or Islam - although that might be good for some people). By “religion” I refer, first of all, to what is the heart of all religion: spirituality. "Spirituality" is basically what is in our deepest core: it is the life-force that animates and drives us; it is not scientifically quantifiable. It is from one's spirituality that we draw the energy (“the spirit”) to pursue meaning in life. It is also in spirituality where—the great Traditions point out—we can find our fundamental goodness as humans. This is expressed for example as Imago Dei [Image of God] in Judaism and Christianity or “Buddha Nature” in Buddhism”. I will, therefore, use the term "religion-spirituality" (taken as one, singular entity) to emphasize all the things mentioned above.

[B] To explain further, by spirituality, I also mean the deep drive--hardwired in humans--to search for MEANING. There is a very strong drive found in humans to search for their deepest, most genuine, and authentically good desires (I’ll call this "Depth") and, at the same time, there is also an equally strong drive to pursue something bigger than themselves, something beyond our small and (often) selfish EGOs. I’ll refer to this as "Self-Transcendence." Spirituality then is: the human quest for meaning by acquiring greater depth and transcendence. That is actually also my working definition for “religion” itself because that could be a description of the heart and core of any authentic religion. This quest for meaning, depth and transcendence has been engaged in for most of human history within the context of concrete religious traditions, such as Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, etc. Today, however, more and more people do not feel the need to belong to a religious tradition to be on a spiritual quest.

[C] The “Open-Mindedness” I suggest for Studying Religion.  I think it would be optimal if a person who wants to study religion-spirituality is also a “seeker.” A seeker—we can say—is someone who seeks to live life not superficially (as many do) but at a deeper, more authentic level. In effect, that would mean—at the minimum level—not accepting an uncritical scientific dogmatism (the idea that “only what can be scientifically proven is true”) but instead being open to at least the possibility that there is Something Bigger (or Greater) than what conventional science can verify. I think that this is the best attitude to have as one takes a course on religion…

In other words, this is a position that deeply values modern science but rejects “scientism” (the quasi-dogmatic belief that the only truly real things are what science can prove). More proactively, it means making the effort to cultivate some kind of "spirituality" in oneself. For some, it means considering oneself an active adherent of a religious tradition.

If that is not possible for you, then, at the very minimum, I suggest a healthy curiosity and openness to study human religiosity and what positive and negative roles it has and continues to play in human society, culture, and civilization.

Resource: See Huston Smith’s thoughts on “the religious sense”

***

[#2] Our Primary Question: Why Does Religion-Spirituality Matter?

With that we can now ask: Why does religion-spirituality still matter? In a learning environment such as the university, this is connected with the question: Why is it good to study religion-spirituality or even, why is it beneficial to be religiously "literate"?

To make that more existential or more applicable to concrete life itself, we can also ask at a deeper level: Why is it a positive thing to have a "religious-spiritual" sense or a “religious outlook” on life? Why is it good to cultivate some kind of "spirituality" in oneself? Below are some responses to those key questions as we start this course in religious studies.

Let’s start with a sociological, historical, and cultural reason for studying religion.

[#3] Religion-Spirituality has been a vital and integral part of human reality for most of humanity’s history and across all human cultures. It continues to be so for the majority of people in the world today.

A religious outlook on life has been the standard worldview of almost everyone for most of human history in all human civilizations. It continues to be so today for most of the world’s population (according to some estimates, at least 70% of the world's inhabitants still consider themselves “religious”). However, it is in the so-called "developed" countries that religion is widely considered "unenlightened" or “backward” by an increasing number of people. Nevertheless, if one seeks to understand how almost all people who have lived in the past and how most people even in the present, think and view the world, one definitely has to study religion. So, do you want to understand the foundations of your culture and civilization (yes, that includes this supposedly “enlightened” Western culture and civilization!)? Studying religion and being religiously “literate” about the great world religions and their positive as well as negative effects on human civilizations, cultures, and societies is an essential task.

Resources: Former US Secretary of State John Kerry famously said that if he went back to College today, he would major in comparative religions. (In this LINK, it is found around the 10th minute mark) 

Let’s go now to a deeper, existential reason for pursuing a more serious engagement with religion-spirituality.

[#4] It is Religion-Spirituality (taken here as a single, holistic, and integral area) that can more adequately deal with the questions that are most important for humans, namely: What would
enable me/us to find higher meaning, genuine non-egocentric self-fulfillment, depth and transcendence?

In psychologist Abraham Maslow's widely used "hierarchy of needs,” (School of Life version) the more basic needs of humans (such as physiological and safety needs) are located at the lower levels of the pyramid. This is not to say that they are unimportant. In fact, they are supremely important as a foundation because if these primary needs are not met, humans will not even realize that they have “higher” and more noble needs.

It is seldom mentioned that for all the importance given to the so-called STEM areas (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) in higher education today, these fields are meant to meet areas of human life that belong to the more basic, “lower” human needs in Maslow’s scheme. The fact of the matter is that science (and related areas) is largely incapable of responding to “higher” human needs such as love and belonging, emotional maturity, self-actualization (the highest need), as well as the deepest existential questions of life.

What then can respond more adequately to these “higher” or “deeper” perplexing issues? I must say that it is the humanities (philosophy, literature, history, art, psychology, etc.) that could deal in a better way with these questions. And within the humanities, it is obviously religion-spirituality as a more integral discipline that is—one can say—most capable of responding to humanity’s higher and deeper questions, needs, and aspirations.

 

[#5] Know the Limits of Science!  One important skill to learn at the university is how to more clearly discern different “domains” -- such as which domains of life are more proper to science (and related areas) and which ones are more proper to Religion-Spirituality and other fields in the humanities.  Although we live in a world that prioritizes empirical science (and its applications such as technology and engineering) above all else, it is rarely acknowledged that although science works wonderfully with the things that properly belong to its domain, it has severe limitations in areas beyond its domains, such as existential and ultimate meanings, purpose, values, etc. These questions are normally "beyond" science and "more properly" religious-spiritual and philosophical. 

The late scholar of religion, Huston Smith frequently decried "scientism" (not science itself!). Scientism is the intellectual position that holds that the only truly valuable things to learn and know in life can ONLY be taught by science. In other words, scientism is the fallacious thinking that what science has turned up or can turn up is the sum of all that is. That is simply not true, as any true scientist will admit.

Smith, for example, clarified that science cannot handle some of the following, crucially important matters for human life:

1. Values in their final and proper sense, for example, Why should we have integrity?
2. Existential and global meanings: for example, Why am I depressed? What is the meaning of life?;
3. Final causes: for example, What is the ultimate meaning of it all?;
4. The “Invisible”: We're not talking of "invisibles" that can affect matter (e.g., magnetism) but invisible entities such as thoughts, love, even spirits, ghosts, etc. (if those things exist). These are outside of the realm of science
5. Quality (not quantifiable quality such as the material indicators of the quality of life but ...) = spiritual, philosophical and existential "quality”, such as, the quality of my life in terms of love, contentment, happiness, purpose or meaning
6. Our "superiors" – this refers to anything superior to our material reality (no offence to materialists but it is considered the "inferior" realm in this scheme) that cannot be measured by our conventional scientific methods at this point (if such things exist) such as angels, God, non-bodily beings, etc. 

In another place, Smith clearly points out: "We have not discovered anything that conclusively proves that beings greater than us [our “superiors”] do not exist." This illustrates the principle that science cannot deal with its "superiors" – that is, possible realities that are greater than material reality. These beings (if they exist) are, at this point, beyond conventional scientific methods and even if they do exist, science cannot discover them at this point.

 

[#6] Epistemic Humility. One clear mark that someone has integrity is that they are aware of their limitations. That can be called “epistemic humility” – a humble acknowledgement of the limits of one’s knowledge. A true scientist is well aware of the limits of science. When someone claims that the only real things are limited to what we can see and touch, there is no epistemic humility there and, therefore, no integrity as well.

What field can handle the things that conventional science cannot deal with? Again, it is religion-spirituality taken as an integral discipline that includes not only religion in the narrow sense but also disciplines such as philosophy, art, literature, history, and psychology practiced within a worldview that is open to the possibility that the TOTALITY of REALITY is so much bigger and greater than the material realm.

 

[#7] The God Question.  The Abrahamic religions that we are more familiar with in the West (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) have historically given a central place to the question of “God”—believed to be an Omnipotent Being who created everything and continues to sustain them. When religion is discussed here in the West, therefore, foremost in people’s minds is usually the burning question: Does God really exist? 

It is noteworthy, however, that the discipline called the philosophy of religion teaches us that there is no 100% perfect or conclusive way to convince everyone about the reality of God’s existence. In fact, the plain truth is that, from a philosophical standpoint, although there are seemingly valid reasons for continued belief in God (for religious faith), there are also sufficient reasons for agnosticism and even atheism.

Agnosticism (the position that says: No one really knows for certain that God exists)—I personally think—can be a position of integrity. Moreover, a sincere “open to listen to different positions” kind of atheism can likewise be a standpoint of integrity. However, a vicious and intolerant atheism that is ironically "dogmatically held" goes against "epistemic humility" (Recall that this means: I am aware of the limits of my knowledge). I consider epistemic humility as a crucial indication of integrity in those seeking for truth and knowledge. I therefore consider this kind of atheism an unhelpful and even dishonest position.

At the other end of the spectrum, a vicious, blind, "too convinced," and equally intolerant "faith stance" is also unhelpful and dishonest because it likewise goes against--the abovementioned--epistemic humility.

 

[#8] Religion and the human quest to understand the TOTALITY of things, “the Big Picture”

Personally, and as a scholar of religion and theology, I do not think that the question “Does God really exist?” is the most important issue in the study of religion. It is—I suggest—a secondary question in terms of importance. Besides, since there can be no conclusive way to answer this question, pursuing it endlessly is, in a sense, a futile endeavour.

Rather, the more helpful approach for me is studying the concept of “god” (or similar expressions such as “Spirit,” “the Real,” “the Holy,” “Nirvana,” etc.) as an important and key symbol of humanity’s ongoing effort to “relate to the total scheme of things” which—according to religion scholar Huston Smith—is the heart of the religious problem. In short, the idea of “god” (and parallel notions) is a crucial key to understanding the ways by which humans throughout history and in every milieu have tried to cope with, make sense of, shed light on, maintain hope and positivity about LIFE and EXISTENCE which nevertheless remain ultimately mysterious. In this sense, “god” (and parallel notions) is a crucially important theme to examine. It also follows that the human “faith in God” (or some other ultimate factor) that religion-spirituality examines is actually a study of one of the most important aspects of humanity.

Religion-spirituality is important because it studies this human quest to understand the “totality of things” by utilizing the idea of “god” (and parallel ideas). Huston Smith calls “God” the one who completes the jigsaw puzzle and shows the whole of reality to be a “panorama.” (in an interview with Robert Kuhn - Closer to Truth)

This, however, is being severely challenged in our postmodern world. The postmodern world dislikes “metanarratives” and religion is as perfect a metanarrative as one can get. We will deal with this theme in another essay on contemporary forms of religion-spirituality.

 

[#9] Theology Gives a Glimpse of a Believer's “Insider-Perspectives”   The main difference between two related fields of study, "Religious Studies" and "Theology" is this: "Religious Studies" aims to eplore religions and spiritualities from a humanistic standpoint and does not require religious faith. Theology, on the other hand, is based on religious faith but endeavours to support that faith by using various university disciplines such as history, literary criticism, philosophy, etc. 

If you go on further to study "Theology", you'll even be able to see history or religious belief systems, as it were, "from the inside" or from an "insider's perspective."  You'll come to understand better how believers' minds work, what makes them tick.

One good resource for this is this article by Tara Burton in The Atlantic titled "Study Theology, Even If You Don't Believe in God".

Link: https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/study-theology-even-if-you-dont-believe-in-god/280999/

 

[#10] The Religion of Life.  In our postmodern world, believing according to how the traditional religions define belief, is becoming increasingly difficult for more and more people. There seems to be a new kind of "religion" (or “spirituality”) that is arising and becoming dominant in the West today. The philosopher of religion Don Cupitt calls this "the Religion of Life." Its main point is that nowadays more and more people make "life" itself as the supreme value instead of "God." 

This is a fascinating development of people's religiosity/spirituality and many of you (I'm sure) identify with it already, whether you are conscious of it or not. To learn more about this, please refer to Don Cupitt's thoughts on "The Religion of Life" and this youtube lecture about this titled "Don Cupitt and the Religion of Life." To be honest, I do not completely agree with Don Cupitt when he claims that there is nothing else than this life here and now. I think that is a lack of epistemic humility! But I agree that life here and now should be our main focus. This is my position: If there is something else beyond this life, living this life well will be our best preparation for it!

You can also refer also to my essay titled, The Secularized West - Source of Immorality and Godlessness or (Flawed) Embodiment of the "Kingdom of God"? .

---

Resources:

Huston Smith, Why Religion Matters: The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Disbelief. Harper, 2001.

_____, The Soul of Christianity: Restoring the Great Tradition. Harper, 2005.

John Cottingham. Why Believe? Continuum, 2009.

Alain de Botton. “TED talk: Atheism 2.0.” January 17, 2012. https://www.ted.com/talks/alain_de_botton_atheism_2_0

Roger Walsh, Essential Spirituality: The 7 Central Practices to Awaken Heart and Mind. Wiley, 1999.

_____, The World’s Great Wisdom: Timeless Teachings from Religions and Philosophies. SUNY Press, 2014.

University of Northern Iowa. “Why Should I Study Religion?” Accessed December 29, 2020. https://philrel.uni.edu/why-should-i-study-religion

Dale Tuggy. “Why Study Religion?” Published: February 17, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmEWtEl0oPo&list=PLMCt15e8gG-j3nRRZlmhltadY8XDn4KAH

“Why Study Religion?” Accessed December 29, 2020.   http://www.studyreligion.org/why/leads.html

---