Abstract
In this paper, I present the concept of human centrality and its limitations, as well as the limitations of the opposing stance that rejects anthropocentrism and instead sanctifies the environment, mountains, rivers, tribes, nations, children, and so forth. I demonstrate that we tend to attribute unrealistic value to ourselves or other entities in the world due to our need for meaning and our desire for a sacred source from which all value in our world emanates. Without such a source, we are condemned to live absurd lives in a reality devoid of meaning. I argue that one way to find purpose and meaning in the things in our world, without sanctifying them, is to recognize that the source of value for things in our world, including ourselves, does not reside within our world. Our entire world is relative, and nothing within it can possess absolute value. Any identification of absolute value in our world, whether in humans or objects, will be unrealistic, excessive, and exaggerated – a bubble destined to burst. Finding realistic value in our world can result from belief in such a transcendent source and the search for it, acknowledging that it will never be fully revealed to us. One of the primary conditions for embarking on and persisting in this search is to constantly remember that neither the mountain nor the river is the center, but certainly, neither are we. We must remember that there is a center and that the center is transcendent.
Presenters
Arik SegevHead of the M.Ed. Program in Educational Leadership Development, School of Advanced Studies, Kaye Academic College of Education and Sapir Academic College, Israel
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
2025 Special Focus—Fragile Meanings: Vulnerability in the Study of Religions and Spirituality
KEYWORDS
Sources of meaning, Anthropocentric meaning, Transcendent meaning
