The philanthropic principle, really?

Dear Dino

I frankly don't understand where the "all-caring" part comes from.
Again, we seem to be dealing with an Abrahamic attribute that has sneaked in through the backdoor.
I would however subscribe to the attribute "benevolent". Merely the fact that we and the universe exist (rather than that nothing would exist at all) is according to both Spinoza and Zarathushtra evidence of benevolence.
But the all-caring requires almightyness, something which Ahura Mazda is clearly lacking (as I have repeatedly told Mehran who wants Ahura Mazda to be a copy of Allah).

This for two reasons:
1. Ahura Mazda is tied to asha as much as anything else, The Universe can not operate without its own inbuilt laws (asha). This is radically different from the Abrahamic divinities that are not only separated from The Universe but also are capable of overriding its own laws. There is no such room for supernatural activities in Zoroastrianism. Existence as such is sacred and perfect, precisely as it is.
2. Creation is in FLUX, is in constant re-creation, where we are divine co-creators ourselves. There can be no single almighty function anywhere in such a system. Ahura Mazda is the mind of existence, wherever mind appears. That's fine. It's just not Allah or God-Father at all.

I still see Zoroastrianism as the evolutionary religion par excellence. It always was. I would be very careful to attribute "philanthropic" to that though, let's just say it is Darwinian. Attributing meaning to before existence is dangerous, that's precisely where the Abrahamic religions come in through the backdoor. OK?

Ushta
Alexander

2008/12/8 Special Kain

Dear friends,

As far as I know, the philanthropic principle never made a serious impact on the scientific community for reasons that I don't recall, unfortunately. It means that this universe was created so that we could generally get along with it, that our minds and actions matter. Sounds like perfect harmony - and sounds like sarcasm when considering ecological disasters, pandemia and other tragedies. But the point I'd like to make is the following:
Ahura Mazda (as the whole of existence) is defined as benevolent and all-caring. As previously mentioned, there's no god in Zoroastrianism as in Abrahamic religions. Ahura Mazda is the universe, with and within us, all-encompassing and all-pervasive. And if Ahura Mazda is benevolent and all-caring, then Zarathushtra was the first philosopher to formulate the philanthropic principle!
Perhaps I didn't fully understand the philanthropic principle of cosmology. Perhaps I'm gravely mistaken, and the philanthropic principle means something completely different or has already been scientifically falsified. But it would make sense to couple Ahura Mazda (as the benevolent whole of existence) with the philanthropic principle.

My two cents,
Dino