A self religion (or self-religion) is a religious or self-improvement group which has as one of its primary aims the improvement of the self.[1] The term "self religion" was coined by Paul Heelas[2] and other scholars of religion have adopted/adapted the description. King's College scholar Peter Bernard Clarke builds on Heelas's concept of self religion to describe the class of "Religions of the True Self".[3]
The purpose behind a self religion is to encourage the individual to self improve. Self improvement becomes a spiritual endeavor. For example the act of wisdom building and the dedication to that could be considered a spiritual pursuit.
The critical examination and interpretation of yourself. What does this mean exactly? It could mean a life long dedication to better understanding what you are, where you came from, how you think, where you're going, but the whole of your focus is around personal examination. Regret minimization for example could be a kind of personal exegesis if you're examining the inner workings of your decisions and motivations.
Gnosticism may in fact be one of the first of these types of religions which focused on looking inward to find God rather than looking outward.
Key ideas of Gnosticism:
Kant mentions a concept called Noumenon. It is explained:
In metaphysics, the noumenon (/ˈnuːmənɒn/, also UK: /ˈnaʊmənɒn/; from Greek: νούμενον) is a posited object or event that exists independently of human sense and/or perception.[1][2] The term noumenon is generally used when contrasted with, or in relation to, the term phenomenon, which refers to anything that can be apprehended by or is an object of the senses. Modern philosophy has generally been skeptical of the possibility of knowledge independent of the senses, and Immanuel Kant gave this point of view its canonical expression: that the noumenal world may exist, but it is completely unknowable through human sensation.[3] In Kantian philosophy, the unknowable noumenon is often linked to the unknowable "thing-in-itself" (in Kant's German, Ding an sich), although how to characterize the nature of the relationship is a question yet open to some controversy.
Kant specifically introduces a concept called the categorical imperative. This concept states:
"Act according to the maxim that you would wish all other rational people to follow,"
Which simply means act in the way you want all others to act. This to me very much resembles the Golden Rule and in fact it shares a possible flaw. That flaw being that it focuses in on what you want from others (which must be in symmetry with what you want from yourself). This could also mean you shouldn't ask anyone to do something which you wouldn't ask of yourself. At the same time this concept is an interesting rule for self religion but does it work in practice?
The interesting thing about Tauchain is that Tauchain lets it's users decide the rules. In order for morality to scale the users themselves have to at least care about improving their ability to make decisions. What morality is; that is ultimately up to the individual to determine. The deontological approach (which I interpret to be what Kant's philosophy produces) is essentially self enforced rules (you place rules on yourself and enforce them).
The Kantian approach is not the only approach of course. For example there is the consequence based approaches as well where the practitioner simply wants to take the action which they believe produces the best consequences for their interests at any given time. This could be in the form of utilitarianism, or it could be egoistic. Anarcho egoism for example is a philosophy which puts the individual and the interests of the individual as sovereign. Utilitarianism in the classic sense is greatest good for the greatest number but it may not necessarily put the individual in priority.
Some additional examples of self religions:
