Ok so I thought I would Join project reason, and see if I can find any thoughtful people who can produce a reasoned objection to what I am trying to accomplish with the Free Press Bible Project. If not perhaps I could find some people to help me with it. It would be neat to get the endorsement of project reason. Hey a fella can dream right?

The project is a self guided, authentically non-denominational approach to religion. But for those who think of themselves as secular it can be considered strictly philosophical and non-religious. It involves creating a personalized collection of articles that the user finds appealing or valuable. The tag line I am going with is “Philosophical Self-Criticism Through Self-Canonization”

The way it works is that the website displays random articles from the user generated archive (which is under development). The new user can view random articles until something strikes their fancy or they can keyword search the archive and select articles for inclusion in their collection. They can also conveniently add articles and snippets of material found on the web or using a special browser plug in. Each article in the archive will have an associated debate where supporting and critical comments can be made by the public.

People can network with other people with remarkably similar or different collections and have stimulating conversations etc..

I intend to sell a printed binder product that contains the printable content of the “promotional release”. It is intended to be an amazingly useful (user serviceable) collection of content that generates buzz about whats possible when ideas are freely shared, while being careful not to be directly offensive to any religious or secular sensibilities.

I have thought this idea out pretty thoroughly and now I need to start having conversations about it so thanks in advance if you decide to help me make my vision a reality.

btw you can snoop at the website I’m trying to get going at http://www.freepressbible.net

This looks like an excellent idea for those who need religious instruction in their lives but do not find what they need in traditional religions because of the way these are structured. With the “self-canonization” aspect, which is perhaps an exact description of the intent of the project, it seems to me to be nothing more than a version of “the church of ME.”

For a secular non-theist who sees only historically captured human narrative as the content of the bible and other religious works, i.e., essential truths about the human condition can ONLY be captured outside of religious dogma, this site would serve whose who want to revel in historical claims about humanity but to me it would merely expose the placement of both the writers and the readers of such narratives somewhere inside the mythical worlds of preserved linguistics. 

I will admit that in a self-analytical sense this need for people to retain religious belief is itself a formidable exposing of the essential human condition.  However, once one realizes that whatever partial truths are captured in religious narratives can be better formalized outside of that supernatural context, then what need would one have to rehash the “near-truths” of our predecessors (if one could already grasp the necessary limitations of those articulated views)?

You appear to be caught up in this “pre-rational human perspective” and you retain the need for finding profundity in a maze of limitations. I admire your intent to include secular views within your mythical-narrative-driven researches, but I, for one, see no point in going there.

Anything that helps break up monopolies of power gets my vote.

This looks like an excellent idea for those who need religious instruction in their lives but do not find what they need in traditional religions because of the way these are structured.

If you think it’s an excellent idea for those who need religious instruction in their lives, who are these people who you have determined to have that need? I think everyone has a need to remain philosophically self critical. The process of self-canonization is about self guided instruction

With the “self-canonization” aspect, which is perhaps an exact description of the intent of the project, it seems to me to be nothing more than a version of “the church of ME.”

So you think that de-institutionalizing the religious experience, and getting people to “self-program” is a trivial goal?

For a secular non-theist who sees only historically captured human narrative as the content of the bible and other religious works, i.e., essential truths about the human condition can ONLY be captured outside of religious dogma, this site would serve whose who want to revel in historical claims about humanity but to me it would merely expose the placement of both the writers and the readers of such narratives somewhere inside the mythical worlds of preserved linguistics.

The project need not be regarded as religious at all. A user could include only articles they regard as having secular significance. Why can’t you view it as a philosophical endeavor?

I will admit that in a self-analytical sense this need for people to retain religious belief is itself a formidable exposing of the essential human condition.

Thank you

However, once one realizes that whatever partial truths are captured in religious narratives can be better formalized outside of that supernatural context, then what need would one have to rehash the “near-truths” of our predecessors (if one could already grasp the necessary limitations of those articulated views)?

That seems to imply that our predecessors were stuck with “near-truths” and today we are working with “complete” truths. It’s only your prejudice that supposes this project to be “inside” some supposed supernatural context.

You appear to be caught up in this “pre-rational human perspective” and you retain the need for finding profundity in a maze of limitations.

That’s just your baseless, hastily drawn suspicion

I admire your intent to include secular views within your mythical-narrative-driven researches, but I, for one, see no point in going there.

In other words you guess at my motivations, and prefer to remain ignorant. So be it. I am looking for respectful criticism but thanks for trying.

Brick Bungalow - 01 April 2012 09:25 AM

Anything that helps break up monopolies of power gets my vote.

Thanks

atypican - 01 April 2012 11:43 AM

In other words you guess at my motivations, and prefer to remain ignorant. So be it. I am looking for respectful criticism but thanks for trying.

Atypican, your thoughtful responses to my disrespectful critiques show the depth of your commitment to this project and I give you credit for not simply ignoring the ignorant. Of course I did not mean to demean your passions and your interests, but sometimes when one states as honestly as possible one’s impressions of someone else’s motivations (without any well established context of their projects) then misimpressions can occur.

Perhaps as I discover more about the “Free Press Bible” I will change my opinions, but I should also warn you that mine is an opinion on the matter, limited or otherwise.  What you see as ignorance might simply come from the clashing of very diverse thinking on subject at hand.

It’s actually pretty important for me not to put off secularly minded non-theists and just the word Bible does a good enough job at that. I need to have some public discussions about the project to clarify it’s purpose, and hopefully get the attention of people who would consider teaming up with me on it. If you have time or interest enough to grill me about it you would be doing me a huge favor. If not, I understand. I appreciate whatever help I can get.

I do not have all the skills necessary to complete the project on my own.

atypican - 01 April 2012 05:12 PM

It’s actually pretty important for me not to put off secularly minded non-theists and just the word Bible does a good enough job at that.

Exactly.  I was going to mention that perhaps I was initially biased by merely reading the word ‘bible’ in the title of your thread and again in your site name.

Is the content of this thread in the “Christianity” section here something like what you have in mind for a discussion topic?
http://www.project-reason.org/forum/viewthread/24073/

In the 7 years I’ve been on this forum and the SamHarris forum we have had many discussions about the meaning of scriptural passages especially critical ones like the Eden story.

Is the content of this thread in the “Christianity” section here something like what you have in mind for a discussion topic?
http://www.project-reason.org/forum/viewthread/24073/

In the 7 years I’ve been on this forum and the SamHarris forum we have had many discussions about the meaning of scriptural passages especially critical ones like the Eden story.

No. Not at all really. I like to discuss things that have something to do with improving the atmosphere (ie creating a healthier environment). Particularly ideologically. I do enjoy discussions about philosophical commonalities that are hidden by differing interpretations of metaphors, but the discussions I want to have about the Free Press Bible Project lean more toward wanting to be interviewed by someone who asks tough piercing questions. I want to respond to someone insightful who would take a somewhat adversarial skeptical position and expose anything I might not have considered very thoroughly.