Yoism is an attempt at open-source religion. Right up front on their website they say:
Yoism wrote:Uniting Atheist, Skeptic, Agnostic, Realist, Enlightenment,
Humanist, Unitarian, Transcendentalist, Pantheist, and
Deist systems of belief to create the World's First
Open Source, Rational Religion,
Unlike Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, this seems to have a ring of genuine-ness to it. I've only read a little bit about it, and a search turned up no references to Yoism so I figured I'd share the link.
Starting with the freedom-focused, religious ideals found in the philosophy of John Locke and Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence, the 10 Sacred Principles flesh out a more complete, overarching vision for the fulfillment of the glorious American, social experiment.
It's a bunch of America wankers, replacing worship of Jesus with worship of John Locke and Thomas Jefferson. It's "rational" in name only.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Seems useless. I'm atheist not agnostic so I don't see why I would like to be United by them etc. And the concept of Yo seems to be as useless as God for explaining anything.
I don't get why anyone would take people at their word like that. Be it "non-partisan", "impartial to SWvST", or "rational", when people self-declare things like this my first instinct is not to believe them, but the exact opposite. Anyone can claim to be rational, or scientific, but how can they possibly expect anyone but the ignorant to believe them? Or are they just counting on the fact that the ignorant greatly outnumber the informed?
Zixinus wrote:Oh dear fucking god. This is like a bunch of people are have deconverted but still haven't grasped the idea of secularism.
The fact that they are calling it open-sourced is ridiculous.
This is *exactly* the way i felt when I read about the concept. De-conversion, insofar as I understand it, is giving up belief. And here these people are trying to come to a "majority rules" belief system. But, again, I hadn't read it through thoroughly enough to critique it.
Isn't this an oxymoron right to the hilt? If something is rational, doesn't the requirement for faith or belief go out the window? And doesn't that pretty much remove the central characteristic of religion?
I don't think what they aim to create is even possible. never mind necessary or useful.
A religion is irrational by definition. An open source religion is irrational on a level that a "closed source" one couldn't possibly hope to achieve. To have unshakable faith in something that you fully admit is under continuous revision requires enough doublethink to make the world's most devout Catholic explode in a shower of Hail Mary's.
Religion is already open source, so this doesn't make any sense. Rationality would dictate that since there is no overarching greater power, there's no need for a system of worship, and the first and last act of the rational open-source religion would be to disband itself on ethical grounds.
