ABOUT ideologies and religions
Most of our thinking and our discussions are conducted on a level where
we repeat and repeat our habitual conceptions to each other. We assume
that there are no other conditions to decide whether something is right
or wrong, except that one does not contradict oneself nor is inconsistent
with facts. Beyond this there exists only more or less thoroughly grounded
subjective opinions. However, there is a level so basic that it normally
does not appear in our conscious mind, where everything does not revolve
around subjective opinions. At this level things are simply right or wrong.
Logical relations are the most basic and most overlooked phenomenon we
know. Logical relations mean that nothing of which we can talk rationally
can exist, can be identified or referred to, except through its relations
to other things. Logic is necessary relations between different factors,
and factors are what exist by the force of those relations. The decisive
thing about logical relations is that they can not be reasoned. Nevertheless,
they do constitute conditions necessary for any description, because they
can not be denied without rejecting the factors that are part of the relations.
Persons are, for example, totally different from their bodies. Persons
can go for a walk and they can make decisions. Bodies can not do that.
Nevertheless, we can not refer to persons without referring to their bodies.
If we say: here we have a person, but he or she unfortunately is lacking
a body, it does not make sense. Persons are totally different from the
concrete situations they are in. Nevertheless, we can not refer to persons
without referring to the situations they are in. If we say: here we have
a person, but this person has never been in a concrete situation, it does
not make sense. Language is totally different from reality. Nevertheless,
we have to perceive language as something that can be used to talk about
reality. If we say: here we have a language, but this language can not
be used to talk about reality, it does not make sense. Logical relations
have decisive significance. The absence of logical relations would mean
that nothing could be of decisive significance: as long as one does not
contradict oneself nor is inconsistent with facts, any point of view may
be as good as the next, one can say and mean anything. Logical relations
are conditions for talking rationally together. The part of the world
we can talk rationally about, can thus be defined as the part we can talk
about using logical relations. But we do not have any reason to assume
that the world is identical with what we can talk rationally about. Logic
is something more basic than language. Logical relations are what makes
language a language and what assigns meaning to words. Therefore, it is
impossible to learn a language, without learning to respect logical relations.
But as we grow up and learn to master language, logical relations are
not present on a conscious level. If we are conscious of logical relations,
it is possible for us to decide whether something is right or wrong and
not to allow ourselves to be ruled by for example habitual conceptions
and subjective opinions.
A person can be described in an infinite number of ways. None of these
descriptions can be completely adequate. We therefore can not describe
precisely what a person is. We do however have the possibility to point
out necessary relations between persons and other factors. We have to
respect these relations and factors in order not to contradict ourselves
and in order to be able to talk about persons in a meaningful way. One
necessary relation is the relation between persons and bodies. It makes
no sense referring to a person without referring to a body. If we for
example say: here we have a person, but he or she does not have a body,
it does not make sense. Furthermore, there are necessary relations between
persons and the rights of persons. Persons should be treated as persons
and therefore as having rights. If we deny this assertion it goes wrong:
here is a person, but this person should not be treated as a person, or:
here is a person, who should be treated as a person, but not as having
rights. Therefore we can only talk about persons in a way that makes sense
if we know that persons have rights.
Concentrations of power
Concentrations of power do not always respect the rights of persons. If
one denies this fact one gets: concentrations of power always respect
the rights of persons. This does not correspond with our experiences.
Concentrations of power characterize our society. Concentrations of power
force persons to concentrate on participating in competition and power
games, in order to create a social position for themselves. Concurrently
with the concentrations of power dominating our conscious mind and being
decisive to our situations, the significance of our fellow humans diminishes.
And our own significance becomes the significance we have for concentrations
of power, the growth of concentrations of power, and the conflicts of
concentrations of power.
It is clear that persons should be consciously aware of the rights of
persons and therefore must seek to organize the smallest concentrations
of power possible.
The fundamental purpose of politics is to protect the rights of persons.
If we deny this assertion we get: the fundamental purpose of politics
is not to protect the rights of persons. This suggests that one of the
basic tasks of politicians could be, for example, to renounce the rights
of themselves and of others. This has no meaning. Or that there is a more
important purpose to politics which does not have anything to do with
persons and therefore also has nothing to do with the rights of persons.
That is plain nonsense. Therefore, we now know that the basic purpose
of politics is to protect the rights of persons. In other words we can
not talk about politics in a way that makes sense without the assumption
that the fundamental purpose of politics is to protect the rights of persons.
Ideologies and religions
Ideologies and religions are systems of thought that shape and decide
the way persons and groups of persons think and act
Ideologies and religions don�t necessarily first and foremost respect
conditions for description, and hereby logical relations and facts, but
are also often the expression of subjective opinions, social conventions
and habitual conceptions. Because subjective opinions, social conventions
and habitual conceptions are not necessarily in compliance with conditions
for description, religious and ideological assertions are often a mixture
of right assertions and wrong assertions
This is a fundamental problem that is shared by for example ideologies
like representative democracy, anarchism, neo-liberalism, communism, capitalism,
nazism, and religions like christianity, hinduism, judaism, islam, etc.
Experience tells us that religions and ideologies usually don�t first
and foremost aim to respect conditions for description and hereby the
logical relation between persons and persons� rights.
Persons might have personal reasons to believe in ideologies or religions,
but ideologies and religions that don�t first and foremost aim to respect
persons� rights, should never be used as the basis of political action,
because the fundamental purpose of politics is to protect the rights of
Instead of using ideologies and religions as the basis of political action,
persons ought to use conditions for description as the basis of politics
and thereby first and foremost try to respect persons� rights.
Back to manual for DISCUSSIONS
Back to manuals
Back to HOME