Syncretism consists of the attempt to reconcile disparate or contrary beliefs, often while melding practices of various schools of thought. The term may refer to attempts to merge and analogise several originally discrete traditions, especially in the theology and mythology of religion, and thus assert an underlying unity allowing for an inclusive approach to other faiths.

It also occurs commonly in literature, music, the representational arts and other expressions of culture. Syncretism may occur in architecture as well. There also exist syncretic politics, although in political classification the term has a somewhat different meaning.

Overt syncretism in folk belief may show cultural acceptance of an alien or previous tradition, but the other cult may survive or infiltrate without authorized syncresis nevertheless. For example, some Conversos developed a sort of cult for martyr victims of the Spanish Inquisition, thus incorporating elements of Catholicism while resisting it.

Some religious movements have embraced overt syncretism, such as the case of the adoption of Shintō elements into Buddhism as well as the adoption of Germanic and Celtic pagan elements into Catholicism during Christianity’s spread into Gaul, the British Isles and Germany. Others have strongly rejected it as devaluing precious and genuine distinctions; examples of this include post-Exile Judaism and Islam.

Syncretism tends to facilitate coexistence and constructive interaction between different cultures, a factor that has recommended it to rulers of multi-ethnic realms. Conversely the rejection of syncretism, usually in the name of piety and orthodoxy, may help to generate, bolster or authorize a sense of cultural unity in a well-defined minority or majority.

Religious syncretism exhibits blending of two or more religious belief systems into a new system, or the incorporation into a religious tradition of beliefs from unrelated traditions. This can occur for many reasons, and the latter scenario happens quite commonly in areas where multiple religious traditions exist in proximity and function actively in the culture, or when a culture is conquered, and the conquerors bring their religious beliefs with them, but do not succeed in entirely eradicating the old beliefs or, especially, practices.

Religions may have syncretic elements to their beliefs or history, but adherents of so-labeled systems often frown on applying the label, especially adherents who belong to revealed religious systems, such as the Abrahamic religions, or any system that exhibits an exclusivist approach. Such adherents sometimes see syncretism as a betrayal of their pure truth. By this reasoning, adding an incompatible belief corrupts the original religion, rendering it no longer true. Indeed, critics of a specific syncretistic trend may sometimes use the word syncretism as a disparaging epithet, as a charge implying that those who seek to incorporate a new view, belief, or practice into a religious system actually distort the original faith. Non-exclusivist systems of belief, on the other hand, may feel quite free to incorporate other traditions into their own.

In modern secular society, religious innovators sometimes create new religions syncretically as a mechanism to reduce inter-religious tension and enmity, often with the effect of offending the original religions in question. Such religions, however, do maintain some appeal to a less exclusivist audience.

Courage, also known as bravery and fortitude, is the ability to confront fear, pain, danger, uncertainty, or intimidation. Its accompanying animal is the lion. Often, Fortitude is depicted as having tamed the ferocious lion, as in the Tarot trump called Strength. It also is a symbol in some cultures as a savior of the people who live in a community with sin and a corrupt church or religious body.

The Tao Te Ching states that courage is derived from love and explains: “One of courage, with audacity, will kill. One of courage, but gentle, spares life. From these two kinds of courage arise harm and benefit.” In Roman Catholicism, courage is referred to as Fortitude, one of the four cardinal virtues along with prudence, justice, and temperance. In both Catholicism and Anglicanism, courage is also one of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.

As a virtue, courage is discussed extensively in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, where its vice of deficiency is cowardice and its vice of excess is recklessness. Soren Kierkegaard opposed courage to angst, while Paul Tillich opposed an existential courage to be to non-being, fundamentally equating it with religion.

Courage is the self-affirmation of being in spite of the fact of non-being. It is the act of the individual self in taking the anxiety of non-being upon itself by affirming itself in the anxiety of guilt and condemnation. Every courage to be has openly or covertly a religious root, for religion is the state of being grasped by the power of being itself.

Courage appears as the first of ten characteristics of religion the Hindu scripture, with the remaining characteristics being forgiveness, tolerance, not to steal, control of senses, cleanliness, intelligence, knowledge, truth, and not to get angry. In Islam, courage is seen as an important attribute to combat evil like the Prophet and to make the sacrifice required, to stand up to evil like the Prophet said and defend the brothers and sisters.

Civil courage, sometimes also referred to as social courage, is defined by many different standards. In general, the term is usually referred to when civilians stand up against something that is deemed unjust and evil, knowing that the consequences of their action might lead to injury or some other form of significant harm.

In some countries civil courage is enforced by law. This means that if a crime is committed in public, the public is obliged to act either by alerting the authorities or by intervening in the conflict. If the crime is committed in a private environment, those who witness the crime must either report it to the authorities or attempt to stop it.

Satyagraha is a philosophy and practice of nonviolent resistance developed by Mahatma Gandhi. He deployed satyagraha in campaigns for Indian independence and also during his earlier struggles in South Africa. Satyagraha theory also influenced Martin Luther King, Jr. during the campaigns he led during the civil rights movement in the United States.

In traditional violent and nonviolent conflict, the goal is to defeat the opponent or frustrate the opponent’s objectives, or to meet one’s own objectives despite the efforts of the opponent to obstruct these. In satyagraha, by contrast, these are not the goals. The Satyagrahi’s object is to convert, not to coerce, the wrong-doer. Success is defined as cooperating with the opponent to meet a just end that the opponent is unwittingly obstructing. The opponent must be converted, at least as far as to stop obstructing the just end, for this cooperation to take place.

The essence of Satyagraha is that it seeks to eliminate antagonisms without harming the antagonists themselves, as opposed to violent resistance, which is meant to cause harm to the antagonist. A Satyagrahi therefore does not seek to end or destroy the relationship with the antagonist, but instead seeks to transform or purify it to a higher level. A euphemism sometimes used for Satyagraha is that it is a silent force or a soul force, a term also used by Martin Luther King Jr. during his famous I Have a Dream speech. It arms the individual with moral power rather than physical power. Satyagraha is also termed a universal force, as it essentially makes no distinction between kinsmen and strangers, young and old, man and woman, friend and foe.

Gandhi contrasted satyagraha, or holding on by truth, with duragraha, or holding on by force. He wrote: “There must be no impatience, no barbarity, no insolence, no undue pressure. If we want to cultivate a true spirit of democracy, we cannot afford to be intolerant. Intolerance betrays want of faith in one’s cause.

Civil disobedience and non cooperation as practised under Satyagraha are based on the law of suffering, a doctrine that the endurance of suffering is a means to an end. This end usually implies a moral upliftment or progress of an individual or society. Therefore, non cooperation in Satyagraha is in fact a means to secure the cooperation of the opponent consistently with truth and justice.

This post was contributed by Holly McCarthy, who writes on the subject of Christian dating sites. She invites your feedback at hollymccarthy12@gmail.com

The pursuit of happiness is one goal that’s common to almost every single one of us — perhaps it’s only very young children who are able to be truly happy without being conscious of the emotion. The psychology of happiness is not easily understood, because each of us is unique, and what makes one person happy need not necessarily induce joy in another. But there are a few things in life that do bring happiness universally — a loving family, supportive friends, a job that you love, a nice pay packet, an understanding boss, a great relationship, passionate sex and burgeoning romance, healthy and smart children, achievements in various activities like sports and performing arts, and so on. 

It’s simple enough to figure out why people feel happy when they have one or more of the above-mentioned aspects in their lives on a continued basis. What’s quite hard to understand is why some of us need to feel extreme thrills (like bungee jumping) or near-the-edge experiences (like adventurous sports) in order to feel happy. And what’s even more difficult to grasp is the idea that some human beings have brains so perverted that they take pleasure in hurting and torturing others. 

Happiness is an elusive concept, one that varies not just according to the kind of person we are, but according to the kind of mood we’re in. It’s a common enough reaction to find pleasure in the antics of a child when you’re totally relaxed and feel equally irritated by the same actions when you’re in the middle of an important discussion that’s not going too well. 

There are many people who believe that happiness comes from doing something for others — altruism is said to be a great mood elevator, but from what I’ve seen, people who help others often expect something in return, even if it’s just gratitude. If you help someone out and they’re not openly grateful to you, you’re likely to feel slighted and irritated that you’ve “wasted” a good deed on someone who did not deserve it. 

In my book, there’s only one way to be truly happy at all times and in all situations — and that is to have no expectations at all and be totally content with what you have. When you don’t expect anything, you cannot be disappointed that it hasn’t happened. And when you’re satisfied with what you have, you don’t feel sad when you try to gain something more and fall short of your goals. 

That being said, it’s up to each of us to take care of our own happiness. There’s no use in placing the blame on all and sundry for our woes and misery when the truth is that true happiness comes from within. A large part of being happy involves taking each day as it comes, not building castles in the air, and learning to appreciate even the smallest blessings that are being showered on us. I’d like to conclude with a song we were taught when I was growing up — Happiness is like a circle of dancers in a ring; you have to keep it moving, or it doesn’t mean a thing. So be happy, and spread the good cheer around so that it comes back to you sooner or later. 

Heraclitus of Ephesus was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher, a native of Ephesus on the coast of Asia Minor. He is known for his doctrine of change being central to the universe, and that the Logos is the fundamental order of all.

His great achievements were to have understood the nature of the infinite, which includes understanding the inherent contradictoriness and negativity of reality, and to have grasped that reality is constantly becoming or in process, and that being and nothingness are empty abstractions. Heraclitus’s obscurity comes from his being a true philosopher who grasped the ultimate philosophical truth and therefore expressed himself in a way that goes beyond the abstract and limited nature of common sense and is difficult to grasp by those who operate within common sense. 

Heraclitus considered that the being of all the universe is fire. According to him, the being is material and one, but at the same time he acknowledged that the world witnesses constant change. 

Motion of the archelement fire is discordant and unharmonious, even though harmony is the final result of the process. This change, the transformation of material from one state into another, does not happen by accident, but rather according to law within certain limits and within certain time. This law is named Logos by Heraclitus.

In addition to seeing fire as the most fundamental of the four elements and the one that is quantified and determines the state of the other three, Heraclitus presents fire as the cosmos, which was not made by any of the gods or men, but was and is ever living fire. This is the closest he comes to a substance, but it is an active one altering other things quantitatively and performing an activity he describes as the judging and convicting of all things. It is the thunderbolt that steers the course of all things.

A jester is a member of a profession that came into popularity in the Middle Ages. Jesters are always thought to have worn brightly colored clothes and eccentric hats in a motley pattern. Their hats were especially distinctive. Made of cloth, they were floppy with three points, each of which had a jingle bell at the end. The three points of the hat represent the donkey’s ears and tail worn by jesters in earlier times. 

The jester was a symbolic twin of the king. All jesters and fools in those days were thought of as special cases whom God had touched with a childlike madness; a gift, or perhaps a curse. Mentally handicapped people sometimes found employment by capering and behaving in an amusing way. In the harsh world of medieval Europe, people who might not be able to survive any other way thus found a social niche.

In societies where freedom of speech was not recognized as a right, the jester could speak frankly on controversial issues in a way in which anyone else would have been severely punished, and monarchs understood the usefulness of having such a person at their side. Still, even the jester was not entirely immune from punishment, and he needed to walk a thin line and exercise careful judgment in how far he might go, which required him to be far from a fool in the modern sense.

In Tarot, The Fool card represents the Spirit, God, and Absolute Being. The depiction includes a man juggling unconcernedly or otherwise distracted with a dog at his heels. This image represents a number of human conditions such as innocence, truth, confidence, freedom from earthly desires or passions but also perversity. Some versions of the dog on most interpretations of the card depict him biting at The Fool. The dog symbolizes the natural world, a path to knowledge and a valuable ally. The Fool is often shown walking off a cliff. This raises the question of whether The Fool is making a mistake or a leap of faith.

The Fool is the spirit in search of experience. He represents the mystical cleverness bereft of reason within us, the childlike ability to tune into the inner workings of the world. The sun shining behind him represents the divine nature of the Fool’s wisdom and exuberance. On his back are all the possessions he might need. In his hand there is a flower, showing his appreciation of beauty. 

The Four Noble Truths are one of the most fundamental Buddhist teachings. In broad terms, these truths relate to suffering’s nature, origin, cessation and the path leading to the cessation. They are among the truths Gautama Buddha is said to have realized during his experience of enlightenment.

The Four Noble Truths appear many times throughout the most ancient Buddhist texts, the Pali Canon. The early teaching and the traditional understanding in the Theravada is that the four noble truths are an advanced teaching for those who are ready for them. Mahayana Buddhism regards them as a preliminary teaching for people not ready for its own teachings. They are little known in the Far East.

Some may see truths as a mistranslation. One author cites realities as a possibly better choice, since they are things, not statements, in the original grammar. However, the original Tibetan Lotsawas who studied Sanskrit grammar thoroughly, did translate the term from Sanskrit into Tibetan as “bden pa” which has the full meaning of truth.

1. The Nature of Suffering (Dukkha):

This is the noble truth of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair are suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering.

2. Suffering’s Origin (Samudaya):

This is the noble truth of the origin of suffering: it is this craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there, that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination.

3. Suffering’s Cessation (Nirodha):

This is the noble truth of the cessation of suffering: it is the remainderless fading away and cessation of that same craving, the giving up and relinquishing of it, freedom from it, nonreliance on it.

4. The Way (Marga) Leading to the Cessation of Suffering:

This is the noble truth of the way leading to the cessation of suffering: it is the Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

Why the Buddha is said to have taught in this way is illuminated by the social context of the time in which he lived. The Buddha was a Sramaṇa, a wandering ascetic whose aim was to discover the truth and attain happiness. He is said to have achieved this aim while under a bodhi tree near the River Neranjana. The Four Noble Truths are a formulation of his understanding of the nature of suffering, the fundamental cause of all suffering, the escape from suffering, and what effort a person can go to so that they themselves can attain happiness.

Brainstorming is a group creativity technique designed to generate a large number of ideas for the solution to a problem. The method was first popularized in the late 1930s by Alex Faickney Osborn, an advertising executive and one of the founders of BBDO, in a book called Applied Imagination. Osborn proposed that groups could double their creative output by using the method of brainstorming.

Although brainstorming has become a popular group technique, researchers have generally failed to find evidence of its effectiveness for enhancing either quantity or quality of ideas generated. Because of such problems as distraction, social loafing, evaluation apprehension, and production blocking, brainstorming groups are little more effective than other types of groups, and they are actually less effective than individuals working independently. In the Encyclopedia of Creativity, Tudor Rickards provides the article on brainstorming, summarizing the controversies. He also indicates the dangers of conflating productivity in group work with quantity of ideas.

There have been numerous attempts to improve brainstorming or replace it with more effective variations of the basic technique. Although traditional brainstorming may not increase the productivity of groups, it may still provide benefits, such as enhancing the enjoyment of group work and improving morale. It may also serve as a useful exercise for team building.

There are four basic rules in brainstorming. These are intended to reduce the social inhibitions that occur in groups and therefore stimulate the generation of new ideas. The expected result is a dynamic synergy that will dramatically increase the creativity of the group.

Focus on quantity. This rule is a means of enhancing divergent production, aiming to facilitate problem solving through the maxim, quantity breeds quality. The assumption is that the greater the number of ideas generated, the greater the chance of producing a radical and effective solution.

No criticism. It is often emphasized that in group brainstorming, criticism should be put ‘on hold’. Instead of immediately stating what might be wrong with an idea, the participants focus on extending or adding to it, reserving criticism for a later of the process. By suspending judgment, one creates a supportive atmosphere where participants feel free to generate unusual ideas.

Unusual ideas are welcome. To get a good and long list of ideas, unusual ideas are welcomed. They may open new ways of thinking and provide better solutions than regular ideas. They can be generated by looking from another perspective or setting aside assumptions.

Combine and improve ideas. Good ideas can be combined to form a single very good idea. This approach is assumed to lead to better and more complete ideas than merely generating new ideas alone. It is believed to stimulate the building of ideas by a process of association.

Electronic brainstorming is a computerized version of the brainstorming technique. It can be done via email. The chairman or facilitator sends the question out to group members, and they contribute independently by sending their ideas directly back to the facilitator. The facilitator then compiles a list of ideas and sends it back to the group for further feedback. Electronic brainstorming eliminates many of the problems of standard brainstorming, such as production blocking and evaluation apprehension. An additional advantage of this method is that all ideas can be archived electronically in their original form, and then retrieved later for further thought and discussion. Electronic brainstorming also enables much larger groups to brainstorm on a topic than would normally be productive in a traditional brainstorming session.

Directed brainstorming is a variation on electronic brainstorming. It can be done manually or with computer technology. Directed brainstorming works when the solution space, or the criteria for evaluating a good idea, is known prior to the session. If known, that criteria can be used to intentionally constrain the ideation process. In directed brainstorming, each participant is given an electronic form and told the brainstorming question. They are asked to produce one response and stop. At that point all of the forms are randomly swapped among the participants. Each has possession of someone else’s form containing a single response. The participants are asked to look at the idea in front of them and create a new idea that is better than that idea on the first criterion dimension. For example, if the first criterion was low cost, the participants might be asked to improve upon the idea in front of them by creating an idea that is lower in cost. The forms are then swapped again and respondents are asked to improve upon the ideas against the second criterion. The process is repeated for three or more rounds.

Use of the term brainstorming has been criticized on the grounds that it is politically incorrect and offensive to people with epilepsy. However, there appears to be little truth to this claim. A 2005 survey by the UK charity National Society for Epilepsy found that 93 per cent of people with the condition surveyed do not find the word offensive.