Very interesting reading. You gave an approach to this that I think is quite correct.
It is a symbol of an ideal role model, it is free, so to speak, from greed and rage addiction as well as jealousy and competition through the purity of the spotless.
This is something important, because only when we can spread the vices and material issues can we be really free to act according to our will. Once I heard that we are only free when we can say no to ourselves, that is, self-control.
The reason why we start to trust the Buddhist abbeys in this context more than our Christian priests is that the religious office of Catholics or Protestants has become much more secular than it used to be (count in not the present but also the past). The pastors today, for example, can have families and do not live in celibacy or have houses with mortgages.
As you well describe, apparently Christianity lost weight or influence in society, many people lost trust in their institutions.
"According to statistics" atheism is increasing, especially in economically more developed countries, this is due to the inherent economism that these current economic models entail, on the other hand, scientism now occupies the space that Christianity once had. In other cases, people search answers in Buddhism, as you said.
You cannot just enter the scene and then demand to be a monk or nun. You must say yes to the rules set up. Those rules are not against you but set for a good reason.
This principle is the key to success in an organization, if it were applied more frequently in our societies, things would be something different.
I must say that it was interesting for me to read about the vision you have about this, I think it is enriching. Regards!
Thank you, I am pleased that you found it interesting to read my personal vision about this topic, as you are a deep and sharp thinker.
What you said about the statistics triggered a flash of a memory and I started to search for an article where - I guess - it is said that even though we think to become more and more atheistic that does not mean that we give up all what else is connected to spirituality. Unfortunately I cannot find it ... I also assume that not all the water is spilled out with the baby. But clearly disappointment with our Christian celestials is there.
... thinking about the term "a-theistic" it makes sense. As a non theistic worldview cause much less headaches:)
Headache I also get when I think how can rules be established in a company that, for example, already has an unethical business model from the ground up? I keep thinking about the activities of the common good economy. I think I already told you about it.
Again, questions must be asked in which form companies can test themselves in order to establish rules.
Here, I think you'll find that interesting:
https://www.ecogood.org/media/filer_public/5d/4d/5d4d17bc-156b-44ec-9115-fe6b37c63187/ecg_compact_balance_sheet_workbook.pdf
All the best!
Well, I have some objections to atheism, really since a few months ago I have an incomplete text about atheism stored in my folder dedicated to controversial post.
On the other hand, it's interesting that you remind me about Gemeinwohl-Ökonomie, I checked my blog a few days ago, and I saw that I had written down that concept a few months back when you mentioned it, so I did research on that precisely this week.
In the past I spent a lot of time studying all the principles that sustain the economy, I would say that it is one of the things that I have dedicated the most time, my conclusion is simple, we can not have a moral economy by making a change in the legislation and in the economic system, simply fail, the dominant culture and ideas are more important than the normative and material structure of the economic system, is the fundamental reason why everything that is not the current system ends up failing.
Many regulations can be implemented to control the economy, but then the illegal market will begin to emerge, and these can only be stopped by the use of force in a systematic way, and that will sooner or later lead to failure.
My conclusion is that we must change culturally, we must impose idealism above materialism, then, we will willingly do things without taking into account our material gain, the economy will adapt accordingly to our moral actions.
In this publication, although I don't propose it directly, I propose to replace the idea of homo economicus with that of homo honoris, the perception of what it means to win and lose would change radically, the change in the economic system comes later.
Likewise, I see that it is more a question of will and whose mind you are a child of, how things will change in the economy.
Nothing that is reformed or pushed from above can really reach the individual. The ideal always wants to be found first in myself, before I question and change my attitude and my perception of life.
So a "yes" to what you say about cultural change. It's all quite an intimate affair, isn't it? Because to develop culturally means to develop personally at the same time.
I'll see if I can read the article you suggested in a different way than I did last month :)