An Introduction to “An Introduction to ‘Philosophy’:
A Personal Exploration of the Nature of a Religious Cult(?)”

	This essay is an introduction to the paper An Introduction to ‘Philosophy’… by Marc Marusic.

	In this essay I hope to explore a concept of mine developed over twenty years ago, namely, that of a cognitive rift and use it as a framing device to introduce this very interesting paper written by Marc Marusic sometime in the 1980’s. I would also like to question whether it is possible for us to do a phenomenological-like description of our encounter with a religious, or religious-like, organization, and, whether Marc’s descriptions of how this phenomenon was to appear to him, in this light, to some degree, could be classified as phenomenological? Indeed, to ask ourselves whether it is possible to perform a transcendental suspension of what is observed in that type of situation?!

	I will then formulate a few questions for us to keep in mind when we hear this paper being read to us.

	No doubt there is a breed of gardener who, on seeing into someone else’s garden, and finding therein a beautiful plant hitherto unknown to them, on seeing the same, would want to grow just that type of plant. Moreover, if it were close to hand, and of a type that would suggest it might grow from a cutting, and not seeing the gardener of this delight or anyone else there might then and there take a small sample of the same to rear in their own patch of this small world that we all tend in our own individual way. And what true gardener might not have that type of thought cross the chaotic flux that simulates the inner firmament of their own mind….

	Even if not directly acted upon, envy is a human trait that we all possess and, hopefully, one that we should recognize as lurking within our own breast. And by this type of mechanism I can explain some of the more superficial patterns of religious change, e.g., the phenomenon of conversion. For instance, if I lived in a tribal context and our tribal land was being subjected to a drought and that type of weather phenomenon had never taken place in our reception of our own history, factual and mythical, and members of another tribe who were passing through told us about a ritual for rain making that they would swear by as being efficacious then, undoubtedly, human nature being what it is, we would like to know how to conduct such a ritual, or, at least have it performed on our own behalf. In essence we feel we are missing out on something and that lack is felt as a form of cognitive dissonance. The more superficial contours of the process of religious conversion would seem to be mapped out for us by an observance of this type of phenomenon. I am not suggesting that the phenomenon, or phenomena, of conversion can be ‘reduced’ to such an explanation only that some of the less essential features seem to take this type of format, follow this type of formula, namely: the feeling of a particular need and the resolution of that need. Or put less succinctly: the indirect experience of a novel religious feature not presently accounted for in the religious life of an individual or group; the experience of a sense of lack from such an observation; and, the crossing of this cognitive rift by the importation of such measures from that observed domain,  through the mental and cultural lens of that individual and/or community, that lessen this self-perceived sense of a religious deficiency. Let me illustrate this type of phenomenon.

	The Christian religion, in my mind, has carved out for itself a niche in the overall religious psyche by its special attention, among other things, to its sense (or various senses) of sin. In young people, in potential converts, in those wishing to be converted, in congregations of the ostensively committed, a sense of sin is often imparted and induced that creates in its incorporation into the psyche a profound sense of human unworthiness. But do not despair, various measures are also taught for overcoming this self-perceived sense of a self-deficiency; measures in keeping with the nature of that denomination or sect, etc., e.g., through the demand for, and a recognition of, a ‘relationship’ with ‘Christ;’ or prayer; the need for faith, good works; forms of ritual purification, mediation upon scripture, etc. 

The point I am making here is that all religions maintain and promulgate themselves in this world through the use of such basic mechanisms, namely, the induction of a sense of need, and, at the same time, the means for overcoming this sense of a cognitive rift between what is ‘being experienced now’ and that which ‘should be desired’ as a substitute for the former. In essence, a particular religion having created a sense of need then fills that need, and by such means find itself promulgated.

	In the Buddhist religion, e.g., a sense of ignorance, or self-ignorance, among a number of other factors, is induced in a similar fashion that parallels the way the concept of sin operates in the Christian world.

	We might well ask ourselves how these more universal oriented religions could have spread if they could not have carved out for themselves such new territory in the psyche of the individual and that of the community. Otherwise we would all still be pagans, or even more likely, mere animists. However, don’t think for a moment that the religious conversion of our ancestors, or of ourselves for that matter, has obliterated the cultural accumulations of our historic and pre-historic past. The first serious book I ever read as a child was a miscellany of fairy stories. Even before I could read I was privy to a past through nursery rhymes and various customs and superstitions handed down from family and other folk. I was told about ghosts and spirits, even if such entities were not ostensibly believed in by the speakers of such subjects. Even though I did not put down ‘animist’ on my census forms I have been informed by such attitudes, wittingly or unwittingly, along with many others that, in total,  reflect the sedimented, sandwich-like nature of the individual-cultural psyches of each and everyone of us. Consequently we might say “nothing was lost,” or if anything was lost, “it was only lost in the detail.”

	Be that as it may our conscious, cognitive, in depth appreciation of our world did undergo a severely traumatic period during the Reformation (an occurrence echoed to varying degrees during the passage of our own adolescence). Let me very briefly elaborate. With increasing economic prosperity (from the importation of silver from the New World to the importation of more sound agricultural practices, etc., from the East, notably China, along with the advent of a pre-industrial and industrial eras) the luxury of education could be given to a wider segment of the population. With increased education and the imposition of relatively deeper powers of critical reflection the psyche was increasingly felt to be in a state of cognitive inconsistency within itself. On one hand how could one be a Christian, e.g., and on the other hand still maintain animist-pagan-like attitudes towards our very own passage through this world. This experience of anomaly had to be resolved and unfortunately in extreme times this often took the form of a period of destructiveness that savagely attacked both cultural items and persons that did not seem to be in a state of conformity with politically prevailing ideologies. The net result of all this ‘destruction’ is a psyche that has impoverished itself in certain spheres of interest, namely, in emotional, affective and perceptual terms of reference. Emotions contrary to certain standards are to be suppressed! Indeed, emotions themselves are to be devalued or, rather, dis-valued!! Cultural icons themselves are to be attacked literally, not just in language but in fact too!!! And persons representative of ‘old ways’ were also subjected to attack!!!! Consequently, new forms of religious life had to be later re-realized; new and not so novel forms of re-evaluation that re-instated the emotional, overall affective and perceptual facets of our psyche. Our individual psyches, each from their own perspective, reflecting this sedimented snapshot of our entire cultural history. New forms of religious life can never simply return to the past but had to still reflect, or pay lip service to, this sense of an idelological conformity, or hegemony, just alluded to, to some degree or other. Hence current religious preoccupations with religious experience (rather than just belief and faith), an emphasis on religious emotions, perceptual illustrations, emotional rapport with others, a sense of communal re-embracement of the individual….

	I would like to introduce the following anecdote, a form of puzzle, told to me about twenty five years ago when I was studying at Otago University in New Zealand to illustrate some of these points just made.

	In Nigeria the Christian missionaries at first followed the river valleys in spreading their message to the animists of that region. The Roman Catholics, apparently, came a little later and followed the train stations that had just been built. From the North Moslem missionaries converted the top third of the country to Islam. In the middle of the country, at that time, the population generally remained animists. Now we have this puzzle that has excited a number of phenomenologists of religion. How was it that in the North the people remained faithful to one and only one form of Islam whereas in the South a bewildering number of sects also competed with the main denominations working there. On some counts there were as many as six thousand new denominations and sects in the South. Why, given the same type of peoples with the same type of prior religious beliefs this bewildering fragmentation should occur in the South, and only in the South?

	My own resolution of this problem noted that the cultural background of the Northern Moslems converting the Northeners was approximately the same, whereas in the South, the cultural distance between the missionaries and their potential flock was quite disparate. Moreover, being products of the Reformational era and post-Reformational developments along with a consequent attitude that was severely critical of the various lifestyles of these native peoples, it was no surprise that these native peoples would have re-created for themselves what they felt they needed and consequently did not conform to what was being offered to them supposedly on their behalf. E.g., the ability to have two or more wives reflected your current wealth and status. On finding in a translation from the Old Testament that Abraham had four wives they quite logically reasoned that they too could have four wives if they so choose. And a new sect would be formed, etc.

	The adoption of a new point of view, religious or otherwise, is always seen through your own cultural lens upon the world. The adoption of new ideas is always, at first, an adaptation of that apparently on offer. Only in time can the original basis of those ideas reassert themselves in a form more closely approximating that ‘adopted’ source.

	In the following essay I would like the listener to ask themselves some of the following questions.

	Entering a novel religious situation how can we comprehend that situation beyond the apparent novelty of that situation?

	Can our ‘appreciation’ of our involvement with a novel religious situation be subjected to a state of a relatively non-biased transcendental suspension? What positive role can we give, or rather, must we give, to our own prejudices in order to comprehend what is apparently motivating that situation, in order to discover its religious intent?

	Is it not the case that we discover a sense of freedom through the practice of being appropriately critical? Was Marc fair in his criticisms of this organization or sect? Did he not find his own freedom to disassociate from this sect by the use of such means? 

Are we not right to believe that this organization mis-represented itself in the title of their organization as a School of Philosophy? What was the religious motivation of this sect if it was religious in complexion? And, lastly, what types of cognitive rifts did this organization appear to be addressing and perhaps manipulating?
						
							         Noël Tointon, Sydney, 24.2.00.