Persuasive Speech

Large congregations of devout, religious people scurry towards a place of worship at a designated time. Upon entering the sacred area, the individuals are permitted to worship. Additionally, unified worship is offered; a head member of the religious establishment is present, spelling out and relaying the ever-important teachings of the faith. Children, helmed by an immature and underdeveloped machine of thought and movement, play games with each other, unintentionally disrupting the serene and enveloping environment.

 

Two thousand years before this event, in an entirely different part of the world, a group of unified individuals surround a campfire, telling magnificent stories of deities and creation that help to explain not only how, but also why they exist. Surrounded by the pellets of white lights in the infinitely large night sky, these individuals use this area, coupled with their experience, to foster their own beliefs: beliefs of purpose, beliefs of existence, beliefs of the hereafter. Endlessly swirling in the cosmos, these beliefs were expressed through the oral tradition that unified and consummated them. The method of oral tradition by which cultural information was spread continues to affect religions of today, such as with the religious character Abraham and his appearance in many world religions. However, unintentionally, this raises the question: “Are all religions the same?”

​

While it might be to some, the religions of the world, both past and present, are not the same. Each religion possesses unique and vastly differing ideologies that guide the followers of each faith. For example, most religions, such as Christianity, consist of, or are split into, various different branches that, while believing in the same core beliefs, such as God, have distinct methods of worship and study (“Christianity”). However, the more intriguing question, as opposed to questioning the mimicry of religions, is the question of “What can be found in various religions, originating in vastly different geographical locations, that possibly may also be found in another?” While this does seem like cherry picking, this is not the case. Religions, all around the world, originating in vastly different environments and cultures, eerily share many similarities. Whether it be the sociological doctrines governing the actions of individuals or the goal of a peaceful afterlife, many religions display common threads of belief. All religions, in fact, despite being founded at different places and times, have similarities, such as concerning the concept of the afterlife or of good and evil, that can possibly be explained through inherent qualities of human nature.

​

The recurring appearance of good and evil in various but differing religions is subject to a person’s interpretation. The idea of relativity, concerning good and evil, is alluded to by the Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky, where, according to Gary Morson, the author suggests that the “belief in good and evil is itself sheer prejudice, a mere relic of religion, and that, morally speaking, there is no such thing as crime.” Dostoevsky suggests that both good and evil, or the labeling of subjects as good and evil as seen in religion is detrimental as neither concept holds value. Good and evil are inexorably bound to one another as, if you deny the existence of one, you therefore deny the other (Morson). Good and evil, such as referring to good or bad actions, are fundamentally tied to religion. Human thought, defining good and evil differently, helps to explain the relativity of the concepts. For example, according to Phillip Phenix, “all judgments which are made on the conduct of persons, either ourselves or others, require some ethical measure.” The assigning of good and evil to a variety of different causes, as Phenix suggests, are natural. Still, what are the concepts of good and evil and their apparent affiliation with religion? (Phenix).

​

Attributed to and affiliated with religion, the concept of goodness is concerned with subjects or ideas a group may deem favorable or desirable (Phenix). Concerning religion, the concept of good is attributed to subjects such as morally-correct deeds that vary depending on the belief. However, goodness is not strictly defined as actions, words, or other subjects and can be viewed differently depending on the belief, such as with the relativity of goodness concerning Satanism in contrast to Christianity. Goodness is a staple of religion. While not necessarily bound to religion, goodness is often affiliated with key, overarching principles of a faith. For example, according to Phillip Phenix, “one of the persistent themes of religious thought has been the problem of good and evil” (Phenix). Whether it be the physical embodiment of goodness such as seen with the Christian God that is infinitely good and powerful, or various and varying different codes of ethics that religions often abide by, such as with the Ten Commandments of the Abrahamic religions or Karma of the Indian religions that set parameters for a person’s actions, the concept of goodness is deeply imbedded to religion. These “codes of ethics,” such as, for example, the noble eightfold path of Buddhism, help regulate and facilitate the livelihoods of individuals (“Ethics & Religion”). 

​

In contrast to goodness, evil, while also depicted in varying ways, is concerned with subjects a group may deem undesirable or lacking ethical or moral value. Still, at variance with the terms provided, one can seemingly desire evil. However, evil, much like goodness, lacks the value of contrast as an individual can desire what another may regard as evil and vice versa. So, according to Phillip Phenix, “‘desired evil’ is really apparent good.” As Phenix suggests, the definition of both good and evil are only as valuable as what an individual attributes the concepts to (Phenix). In a religious sense, defining evil according to what one may consider unfavorable or undesirable, evil and the concepts that represent it are majoritively seen as the repugnant, profane, moral, or ethical boundary that a person may not cross. For example, religions possess codes of ethics that a person must follow such as in the Abrahamic religions. Abstaining oneself from following this code is call for heresy or potentially favoring evil. However, evil is depicted differently through various religions. For example, according to Mark Larrimore, “different traditions define different things as evils (as they do goods), and prescribe different kinds of responses” (Larrimore). The Greek God of the underworld, Hades, while governing a land of suffering, Tartarus, is not depicted as evil (“Greek Gods”). Additionally, the Norse Goddess of death, Hel, is not presented as evil (McCoy). Religion, while depicting evil differently, holds it as a core concept that is often the basis of multiple beliefs. In addition to dealing with the concepts of good and evil, religions share common threads concerning the afterlife.

​

Throughout the ages, individuals have pondered the question, “What happens when I die?” While differing in interpretation, religions have attempted to answer this question, usually by positing a potential plane of existence that resides beyond the mortal realm. The afterlife is a major question of concern among various religions due to not only the fear of death but also the ability of humans to question their future. As Dorice Webster Havice explains, “apparently from the very beginning, death has presented a problem to humankind. It is likely also that of all animals only human beings have had the equipment with which to foresee death and to try to understand it.” Humans, given the god-like power to question their own existence and fundamental purpose, are bound to question and fear their own death. The problem of death, coupled with human questioning, as Havice explains, help to offer an explanation for the appearance of the afterlife in various religions (Havice). 

​

The concept of heaven is seen and interpreted in various different religions, largely tied to concepts of morality and good and evil. For example, each of the Abrahamic religions allude to a “heaven-like” afterlife where individuals may be rewarded for their good deeds and devotion to the faith. Additionally, the concept of heaven can be seen in ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian cultures. Despite a lack of written accounts of a heaven, the depictions of the afterlife among these cultures can be interpreted through the various monuments, tombs and potentially art. For example, the Egyptian Heaven, according to Darity, was a “stage or place for pharaohs and other exalted humans.” Additionally, concerning a Mesopotamian Heaven, “people believed that heaven was ‘above.’” The evidence for a Mesopotamian Heaven lies in the depictions of ritual as seen in various tombs. The similarities between the afterlife concept of heaven between various religions are also mirrored with other concepts, such as hell (“Heaven”).

​

Concepts of the afterlife embodying negative, evil attributes are often found in various faiths. For example, the afterlife concept of hell is seen in all the Abrahamic religions as a place where individuals are punished for their misdeeds and actions during their lives. Still, outside of the concepts of heaven and hell that are seen in many of the major religions today, such as seen with the Abrahamic and ancient religions, lies other interpretations, such as the concepts of samsara, the continuous cycle of reincarnation based on Karma, which is referred to as action or the process of doing as seen in the Indian religions of Buddhism and Hinduism (“Nirvāna”). The continuous cycle of samsara ends when one reaches Nirvana, a concept that is mistakenly associated with the concept of heaven (“Heaven”). Despite interpretations of the afterlife often differing among various religions, the afterlife or a possible hereafter is a commonality shared among religions. Still, why do religions share common threads? (Zaleski).

​

The seemingly apparent commonalities regarding the afterlife, doctrines of belief, morality, and the concepts of good and evil are especially apparent at face value. However, there is debate surrounding whether the assumption that religions share commonalities is a result of confirmation bias, or, according to Bettina J. Casad, “the tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with one’s existing beliefs.” In other words, are these commonalities based on biased or selective information that validates a pre-existing assumption? While religions are vastly different from one another, such as through different interpretations of a concept or natural anomaly, religions do, majoritively, share core beliefs (Casad).

Religions from all across the globe, such as the Abrahamic religions, the Indian religions, Taoism or Confucianism, despite conveying vastly differing concepts of afterlife, do deal with or are concerned with the topic at large. Even Atheism, despite a disbelief in an afterlife and other subjects such as a diety, still deal with the concepts by denying them. Religion, after all, is a product of experience. During past generations, the life expectancy of individuals was quite low, resulting in the early death of both parents and children. As suggested by William Darity Jr., “in the face of this sense of loss, it was only natural that human yearning for meaning and reward focused on some sort of heaven.” To deny the commonalities of religion is to deny the nature of human thought. These commonalities are deeply tied to human thought and experience as the beliefs that are conjured reflect them heavily (“Heaven”).This is especially prevalent through societies that believe in multiple gods or goddesses, such as the Greek deities that each represent a core aspect of the world. For example, the Greek God Poseidon is the god of the sea (“Poseidon”). Additionally, the concepts of psychoanalysis help explain the rudiments of human thought, providing insight into possible explanations for these commonalities (“Heaven”).

​

Carl Jung, a swiss psychiatrist, suggests that commonalities between religions can be explained through his collective unconscious theory. Jung’s theory, according to Jacqeline Longe, “gathers together the experiences of previous generations and even animal ancestors, preserving traces of humanity's evolutionary development over time.” Given that cultures of the world share commonalities regarding tradition and varying beliefs, Jung suggests that there must be a certain programming of thought that all human minds share. According to Jung, the human mind is but a product of many, consisting of characteristics that have been acquired through evolution and the experience of various ancestors. However, Jung’s collective unconscious theory is but one part of Carl Jung’s system of psychoanalysis, called analytical psychology, that examines the individual and shared thought (“Carl Jung”).

​

Through analytical psychology, an individual’s personality or psyche can be separated into three distinct levels: the ego, the personal unconscious, and the collective unconscious. The ego, according to Jung, represents consciousness and the awareness of it. Containing the perception of feelings such as identity, the ego contains key aspects of an individual, such as intuitions or memories. The personal unconscious contains aspects that define each individual, such as unique beliefs, behaviors, or repressed memories. Containing these personal aspects, according Jung, are complexes. Complexes are singular topics by which personal, unique qualities are stored, influencing a person depending on the amount of concepts attached to a complex. Additionally, a key aspect of the collective unconscious are archetypes, which are natural tendencies that guide human thought and behavior. The collective unconscious is practically a repository for these archetypes. These archetypes are expressed as symbols or images from past generations, guiding thought by emerging in dreams. The three layers of Carl Jung’s analytic psychology, analyzing the conscious and unconscious, help to understand the innate characteristics of human thought, offering an idea of collective thought. Positing an explanation, Jung’s analytical psychology helps to explain the several commonalities between religions, both past and present (“Carl Jung”).

​

Religions of the past become that of the future. Despite the disappearance of past religions, the ideologies expressed within them are markedly seen in the present. All religions, despite originating from different areas of the world and at different times, undeniably share common threads. Religions are often defined by the concepts of good and evil, using them as a basis for religious doctrines that determine how a person should act through codes of ethics. Additionally, religions deal heavily with the concept of the afterlife. Each religion, even those denying the concept, are fundamentally concerned with the potential existence of it. Religions across different continents and time share core similarities between various afterlives concerning good and evil. Using Carl Jung’s theory of the unconscious mind, the apparent commonalities between religions may be explained through human experience. Humans, sharing similar experiences, are bound to form similar beliefs based on the natural world; beliefs of morality that guide an individual's view of right and wrong, beliefs of ethics that set parameters for various actions, and beliefs of explanation that interpret not only the existence but also the underlying purpose of all subjects, both conscious and unconscious. In the future, as seen in the past and currently in the present, humans will continue to challenge the unanswerable questions that have lingered over the minds of intrepid, pensive individuals for countless generations.
 

Bibliography

​

"Carl Jung." The Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology, edited by Jacqueline L.                         Longe, 3rd ed., vol.1, Gale, 2016, pp. 619-620. Gale In Context: High                     School. Accessed 28 Oct. 2021.

 

Casad, Bettina J. "confirmation bias". Encyclopedia Britannica, 9 Oct. 2019.                         Accessed 28 Oct. 2021.

 

“Christianity.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 13 Oct. 2017. Accessed                     28 October. 2021. 

 

“Ethics & Religion.” pages.stolaf.edu. Accessed 28 Oct. 2021.

 

“Greek Gods.” Gale In Context Online Collection, Gale, 2019. Gale In Context:                   High School. Accessed 9 Oct. 2021.

 

Havice, Doris Webster. “A Religious Naturalist Looks at Death.” Religion                               Online. Accessed 28 Oct. 2021.

 

"Heaven." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, edited by William                   A. Darity, Jr., 2nd ed., vol. 3, Macmillan Reference USA, 2008, pp.                           445- 446. Gale In Context: High School. Accessed 28 Oct. 2021.

 

Larrimore, Mark. "Evil." New Dictionary of the History of Ideas, edited by                             Maryanne Cline Horowitz, vol. 2, Charles Scribner's Sons, 2005, pp.                       744-750. Gale In Context: High School. Accessed 14 Nov. 2021.

 

McCoy, Daniel. “Hel (Goddess).” Norse-Mythology.org, 9 July 2017. Accessed                     28 Oct. 2021.

 

Morson, Gary Saul. “Fyodor Dostoyevsky.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 7 Nov.                           2021. Accessed 28 Oct. 2021.

 

"Nirvāna." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, edited by William                   A. Darity, Jr., 2nd ed., vol. 5, Macmillan Reference USA, 2008, pp.                           504- 505. Gale In Context: High School. Accessed 28 Oct. 2021.

 

Phenix, Phillip H. “Chapter 9: Good and Evil.” Religion Online. Accessed 28                        Oct. 2021. 

 

“Poseidon.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 24 Mar. 2021. Accessed 28 October 2021.

 

Zaleski, Carol. "Hell.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 30 Aug. 2021. Accessed 28 Oct                    2021.