|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 28, 2024 12:25:34 GMT
Imagine
John Lennon
Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us, only sky
Imagine all the people
Livin' for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Livin' life in peace
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one.
Arguably one of the most famous atheist and anti-religious poems in the world, Lennon's words also call for a radical transformation of society, as well as belief, in one's imagination. Perhaps because of the soothing accompaniment to the lyrics, and comforting familiarity, few find the sentiments objectionable.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Feb 28, 2024 15:52:49 GMT
Imagine John Lennon Imagine there's no heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us, only sky Imagine all the people Livin' for today Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion, too Imagine all the people Livin' life in peace You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one. Arguably one of the most famous atheist and anti-religious poems in the world, Lennon's words also call for a radical transformation of society, as well as belief, in one's imagination. Perhaps because of the soothing accompaniment to the lyrics, and comforting familiarity, few find the sentiments objectionable. Yes, but, the song also argues against countries as well as God. Tell me, FilmFlaneur, do you think the world would be a much safer place, without national borders, etc?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 29, 2024 21:01:56 GMT
Yes, but, the song also argues against countries as well as God. Tell me, FilmFlaneur , do you think the world would be a much safer place, without national borders, etc? The words actually argue for a brotherhood of man, a different emphasis which ironically, given the tenor of the piece brings to mind such Bible verses as 1 Corinthians 1:10, Psalm 133:1,1 Peter 2:17, and 1 John 4:20: "If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen.". (Elsewhere however God appears something of a fervent nationalist for His chosen peoples.) But as it happens I do think the world would be safer place without countries (and the aggressive patriotism often associated with them) and welcome the slow historical trend for more and more unification or Federalism (Italy, Germany, America, the EU etc). However I hope you are not making the mistake in thinking I ought to, or necessarily do agree with every sentiment in each poem I post.
|
|
jimmyboy
Sophomore
@jimmyboy
Posts: 148
Likes: 48
|
Post by jimmyboy on Mar 2, 2024 17:10:39 GMT
Yes, but, the song also argues against countries as well as God. Tell me, FilmFlaneur , do you think the world would be a much safer place, without national borders, etc? The words actually argue for a brotherhood of man, a different emphasis which ironically, given the tenor of the piece brings to mind such Bible verses as 1 Corinthians 1:10, Psalm 133:1,1 Peter 2:17, and 1 John 4:20: "If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen.". (Elsewhere however God appears something of a fervent nationalist for His chosen peoples.) But as it happens I do think the world would be safer place without countries (and the aggressive patriotism often associated with them) and welcome the slow historical trend for more and more unification or Federalism (Italy, Germany, America, the EU etc). However I hope you are not making the mistake in thinking I ought to, or necessarily do agree with every sentiment in each poem I post. Aggressive nationalism, greed to own all the resources and religion are the core sources for the vast majority of all wars throughout history. Lennon was speaking against that.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 3, 2024 1:26:23 GMT
Yes, but, the song also argues against countries as well as God. Tell me, FilmFlaneur , do you think the world would be a much safer place, without national borders, etc? The words actually argue for a brotherhood of man, a different emphasis which ironically, given the tenor of the piece brings to mind such Bible verses as 1 Corinthians 1:10, Psalm 133:1,1 Peter 2:17, and 1 John 4:20: "If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen.". (Elsewhere however God appears something of a fervent nationalist for His chosen peoples.) But as it happens I do think the world would be safer place without countries (and the aggressive patriotism often associated with them) and welcome the slow historical trend for more and more unification or Federalism (Italy, Germany, America, the EU etc). However I hope you are not making the mistake in thinking I ought to, or necessarily do agree with every sentiment in each poem I post. Correct. The brotherhood of man is actually a religious teaching. Most religions address the Almighty as Father (in some cases as Mother), thereby acknowledging a relationship with all of humanity (maybe even all of creation). In regards to countries: I take the opposite point of view. I think having different countries is a far safer option than not. This does not mean having a xenophobic attitude towards outsiders, nor cutting off other nations, but simply recognizing the personal space & safety of peoples of different nations, etc.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 3, 2024 17:42:52 GMT
The words actually argue for a brotherhood of man, a different emphasis which ironically, given the tenor of the piece brings to mind such Bible verses as 1 Corinthians 1:10, Psalm 133:1,1 Peter 2:17, and 1 John 4:20: "If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen.". (Elsewhere however God appears something of a fervent nationalist for His chosen peoples.) But as it happens I do think the world would be safer place without countries (and the aggressive patriotism often associated with them) and welcome the slow historical trend for more and more unification or Federalism (Italy, Germany, America, the EU etc). However I hope you are not making the mistake in thinking I ought to, or necessarily do agree with every sentiment in each poem I post. I think having different countries is a far safer option than not. Can you think of any year in history when two or more countries were not at war, somewhere?
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 3, 2024 20:23:21 GMT
I think having different countries is a far safer option than not. Can you think of any year in history when two or more countries were not at war, somewhere? Well, no but, partly because of invasions from one country on another. Eg: 9/11.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 3, 2024 22:14:31 GMT
Can you think of any year in history when two or more countries were not at war, somewhere? Well, no but, partly because of invasions from one country on another. Eg: 9/11. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 4, 2024 5:00:00 GMT
Well, no but, partly because of invasions from one country on another. Eg: 9/11. Exactly. Exactly is right. Invasion is a crime.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 4, 2024 22:54:39 GMT
Exactly is right. Invasion is a crime. Indeed, and as you say a lack of peace has often happened between countries. And still does. Ask Putin, who justifies his invasion with fake patriotic reasons.
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 933
Likes: 297
|
Post by transfuged on Mar 5, 2024 1:24:08 GMT
I suspect film flaneur has just led you into a trap, Clusium. Without plural nations, no borders, no in out, no possible invasions. Bottom line, this is again about St Augustin. Greed is a sin, violence, fraud, and the three others. And he designed the bloody notion of sin. Thank him, St A.
St Augustin advocates for the war that is fair...
I do not think a unified world would be ”safer”. Imho it would be more viable, better if you need to call it that. Imho there is no option. When there were no unified world, bottom line, there is not possibility of a ’world’.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by The Lost One on Mar 5, 2024 14:54:27 GMT
One interesting thing about Imagine is despite it being overtly anti-religion, the call to live in a communal world is quite religious in tone. It's like how secular humanism often has ideals in common with Christianity, but without the God-figure to back them up.
The limitation of course is it can only really appeal to someone who already agrees with it. If you're quite happy with possessions, national borders and inequality, the pleading of an extremely privileged couple probably isn't going to win you over without a threat of eternal damnation to back them up.
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 933
Likes: 297
|
Post by transfuged on Mar 5, 2024 23:56:20 GMT
I beg to differ. If you define religion in opposition to spirituality, religion working on fear and spirituality working on love, imho it’s spiritual, not religious. Imagine is not frightening.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by The Lost One on Mar 6, 2024 16:38:17 GMT
I beg to differ. If you define religion in opposition to spirituality, religion working on fear and spirituality working on love, imho it’s spiritual, not religious. Imagine is not frightening. I don't think it's that neat. Religion relies on spirituality to an extent. You could have spirituality without religion but I don't think the reverse is true. Putting aside religion vs spirituality, I think what I was getting at more is Imagine doesn't really go beyond 'wouldn't it be nice if the world were like this?', but not everyone would agree (I'm not sure I even agree - I mean what does 'no possessions' mean exactly? Are a pair of multimillionaire tax dodgers advocating people should literally have nothing of their own?). Christianity at least offers eternal life for giving up one's worldly goods and threatens damnation if you don't.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 7, 2024 0:44:40 GMT
I beg to differ. If you define religion in opposition to spirituality, religion working on fear and spirituality working on love, imho it’s spiritual, not religious. Imagine is not frightening. I don't think it's that neat. Religion relies on spirituality to an extent. You could have spirituality without religion but I don't think the reverse is true. Putting aside religion vs spirituality, I think what I was getting at more is Imagine doesn't really go beyond 'wouldn't it be nice if the world were like this?', but not everyone would agree (I'm not sure I even agree - I mean what does 'no possessions' mean exactly? Are a pair of multimillionaire tax dodgers advocating people should literally have nothing of their own?). Christianity at least offers eternal life for giving up one's worldly goods and threatens damnation if you don't. Exactly, The Lost One. I have never understood why people have such an aversion to the word religion. People like to say "I'm spiritual, but not religious," as if they are the closet about believing in God or gods, or something. Even some Christian groups (not mainline ones, such as Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Orthodox, etc), such as Evangelical or fundamentalist Protestants will often say "I do not have a religion. I have a relationship." All religion basically is, is a culture centred upon the worship Of God or gods. Religion is made up of the following components: a)The afore-mentioned SPIRITUALITY, b)Philosophy, c)Tradition, d)Rites, e)Rules, f)Community, g)Teachings, h)Deeds, i)Doctrine, & j)Creed. If anybody can think of anything else, please add on.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by The Lost One on Mar 7, 2024 16:13:35 GMT
I have never understood why people have such an aversion to the word religion. Eh, I can understand it to an extent - organised religion has done some pretty shady things over the years so I don't blame some people and groups from wanting to distance themselves from it without forsaking spirituality. I just don't agree that the two are opposed to one another. Religion to me seems an attempt to pull together people of similar spirituality into an organisation - not necessarily with sinister motivations, I think it's natural given the communal character of worship. Like all organisations of any level of significance, they accrue power which they sometimes abuse - and sometimes in a way completely at odds with the spirituality they supposedly represent. But there is still that core of spirituality in all religions in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 7, 2024 16:20:48 GMT
I have never understood why people have such an aversion to the word religion. Eh, I can understand it to an extent - organised religion has done some pretty shady things over the years so I don't blame some people and groups from wanting to distance themselves from it without forsaking spirituality. I just don't agree that the two are opposed to one another. Religion to me seems an attempt to pull together people of similar spirituality into an organisation - not necessarily with sinister motivations, I think it's natural given the communal character of worship. Like all organisation of any level of significance, they accrue power which they sometimes abuse - and sometimes in a way completely at odds with the spirituality they supposedly represent. But there is still that core of spirituality in all religions in my opinion. True, but then again, so has every group. Why, you ask? Because every single group is made up of people, & people can either a)screw things up, or b)as you already mentioned - do shady things. Identifying one's self as "spiritual," will not escape human error.
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 933
Likes: 297
|
Post by transfuged on Mar 7, 2024 17:19:24 GMT
Clusium, I do think the missing reference to faith in your definition is due to your addition of spirit in the definition. What is a religion without faith ? Not a religion. Not everyone hates a word and imho haters hates the object more than the vocabulary... Either they have been taught that hate, either they have an actual ground. As for me, I wrote that atheism is not my copilot (film flaneur) as I go by agnosticism...
Things can get clear. It call for thoroughness. Verse one of the song. What was the... beat of the Beatles ? I would say they inclined toward Bouddhist kind of peace and love philosophy, as it is a tradition to consider that bouddhism is not a religion, because it is a materialist philosophy, hence it is a good philosophy.. I do not follow that tradition. There is a buddist church, and a cult. Saying that Buddha is not a god does not do anything against that. It is actual.
Verse 2 I wrote about that one above. Union or bust. War is hell. Nationalism sucks.
Verse 3 Yes ”possession” alone is unclear.
No hunger gets a hint about what it is about. Freddie (the late Freddie Mercury) asked same and dreamed same : à world where every child has food and shoes. Probably school, and à roof, too. It is not a political Bill of rights, and was not endorsed by the communist rallye.
The common materialistic credo is that war is grounded on greed. My humble opinion is that war is not based in greed. I think soldiers are by definition people with lethal weapons, and these people enjoy killing. They can be usefull in times of bad luck. So they are still around. (Bentham would never get rid of soldiers, would he ?) But that is a digression. A world to share, indeed. If it were not à song, but the manifest of the communist rallye, it should write, à world of utilities to share. The epolitical economic theory cleary defines that. What is not utility, you do not share, you swap or you exchange it. It’s like having two pies. One pie of dirt, the other one cheese cake. The pie of dirt is utility. One very small piece for every brother to deal with, in the bottom of the sharing act, the mud pie dissapear. It’s gone. That is socializing debts. Not socializing cheese cake. Cheese cake is produced and swapped or even sold, not ”shared”. No one will die for lacking cheese cake, provided cheese cake does not become a forged matter of life and death. It can happen that someone goes by never eating cheese cake (I never ate cheese cake, so...) One shares negative things, they dissapear. When they are subject of trade, it is wrong. Not greed. Just wrong logic. One does not share positive things.
Imho xxith journalists in book festivals sometimes lecture the customers with xxth songs seen calling them ”poetry” are wrong. Well, in the xxth century mho is that poetry was not dead.
Good sweet music, Imagine.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 7, 2024 21:20:36 GMT
Clusium, I do think the missing reference to faith in your definition is due to your addition of spirit in the definition. What is a religion without faith ? Not a religion. If by this you mean that no true religion lacks faith then there is name for that type of fallacy. Nontheistic religions are religions that do not focus on belief or faith in god(s). For instance three religions that focus on morals and ethics instead of a deity are Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism. These three religions are some of the largest religions in the world, after Christianity and Islam. But here you say that Buddhism is a religion after all. You are right now, it is just a non-theistic one. It is hard to define as a 'cult' though - which is a term, in most contexts pejorative, for a group which is typically led by a charismatic and self-appointed leader, who tightly controls its members, requiring unwavering devotion to a set of beliefs and practices which are considered deviant. Early Xianity was likely one. And today parts of it continue: christiananswers.net/q-aiia/aiia-top10cults.html War is caused by many different things, including competition over land, religious conflicts, and nationalism. Not, if that is what you are saying here, principally by people who enjoy killing (although no doubt there are those in armies who enjoy killing, especially the enemy). This last line perhaps tells us more about you than others. I have shared cheese cake with friends, and saw that as a positive. In fact it is arguably praiseworthy and entirely in line with Christian principles to share one's blessings with others (EG Proverbs 22:9: “The generous will themselves be blessed, for they share their food with the poor.”).. What cannot be done (and indeed Admin discovered this a while ago and saw it then as a great insight) is that one cannot still have one's cake while eating it, cheese or otherwise. Which was seen as argument against choosing cake in the first place. I attended the Frankfurt Bookfair over a number of years and must have missed this phenomenon.
|
|
transfuged
Sophomore
@transfuged
Posts: 933
Likes: 297
|
Post by transfuged on Mar 7, 2024 21:41:11 GMT
Film flaneur, thanks for the quote. The sentence was missing something.
Imho xxith journalists in book festivals sometimes lecture the customers with xxth songs seen calling them ”poetry”. Well, in the xxth century mho is that poetry was not dead.
I attended the Frankfurt Bookfair over a number of years and must have missed this phenomenon.
|
|