Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Spectrum »

Frost wrote: March 12th, 2018, 12:44 am In the Gita, liberation is not a psychological state at all. Once a person returns to normal consciousness from realization, there are psychological manifestations, but realization itself is nothing at all psychological.
I meant psychological in general because the brain/mind literally is still involved because the person is not physically dead.
In a way I agree a 'liberated state' is not the typical psychological state because there is no "I-ness".
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Frost
Posts: 511
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Frost »

Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 12:55 am
Frost wrote: March 12th, 2018, 12:44 am In the Gita, liberation is not a psychological state at all. Once a person returns to normal consciousness from realization, there are psychological manifestations, but realization itself is nothing at all psychological.
I meant psychological in general because the brain/mind literally is still involved because the person is not physically dead.
In a way I agree a 'liberated state' is not the typical psychological state because there is no "I-ness".
Liberation is the same process as death. That's why realized persons were called "twice born." The realization of the Absolute has nothing to do with psychology or any cognitive processes. With the return to regular consciousness, there are psychological effects, of course, but liberation itself is not psychological. I think westerners have taken liberation to be a type of psychological freedom, which does occur, but that's not its about in Advaita Vedanta because liberation is the realization of the Absolute (atman = brahman).
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Spectrum »

Frost wrote: March 12th, 2018, 12:14 am
Count Lucanor wrote: March 12th, 2018, 12:02 am Self-actualization is not mysticism. As we can see in the texts you quote, Maslow is actually reducing religion to its basic psychological constituents and the last quote is particularly revealing about its nature: there are "peakers" and "non-peakers" and they all belong to the same organized social practice of religion. If mysticism was an essential part of religious experience at the level of individuals, then you would expect all religious members having mystical experiences, but that's not the case. So, self-actualization might translate mysticism in psychological terms, but it will do the same with other forms of enlightenment, not necessarily related to theistic views, because what matters for Maslow is the psychological experience itself, from which the content can be "peeled away".
Perhaps you are right on the psychological aspect, although I would honestly have to reread his books. He is a psychologist, after all, but that's also not to say that he may think those experiences are merely a matter of psychology. If that is the case, then I disagree with him since those experiences are not reducible to psychology and I think the Indian hierarchy of life values is more complete.

However, when you say that one "can do without the mystical aspect," this may be true once the religion is established, but since it is the very basis of the religion, if you do without the mystical revelation, you do away with the religion in the first place.
Maslow is a psychologist so his studies has to be confined to psychology thus the exclusion of mysticism [the mysterious].

I have read Maslow's "The Farther Reaches of Human Nature" and his approach tend toward the attempt to be more objective. Based on the principles he expounded we can expound them more objectively when the Human Connectome Project reaches a certain critical stage of progress.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Spectrum »

Frost wrote: March 12th, 2018, 1:05 am
Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 12:55 am I meant psychological in general because the brain/mind literally is still involved because the person is not physically dead.
In a way I agree a 'liberated state' is not the typical psychological state because there is no "I-ness".
Liberation is the same process as death. That's why realized persons were called "twice born." The realization of the Absolute has nothing to do with psychology or any cognitive processes. With the return to regular consciousness, there are psychological effects, of course, but liberation itself is not psychological. I think westerners have taken liberation to be a type of psychological freedom, which does occur, but that's not its about in Advaita Vedanta because liberation is the realization of the Absolute (atman = brahman).
  • Psychology is the science of behavior and mind, including conscious and unconscious phenomena, as well as thought. -wiki


In general as long as the person is still alive and his brain is still active [conscious or unconscious], I believe in accordance to the above definition, it is covered within psychology.
Even with your "realization of the Absolute" by a person who is alive, neuro-psychology can come into the picture by studying the brain patterns and neural activities of that person using fMRI imaging or other advance machines. Also note the Human Connectome Project which can facilitate such psychological studies.

However, on the subject of so claimed life or activity after physical death of the soul, yes I agree that is not psychology.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Frost
Posts: 511
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Frost »

Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 1:25 am
  • Psychology is the science of behavior and mind, including conscious and unconscious phenomena, as well as thought. -wiki


In general as long as the person is still alive and his brain is still active [conscious or unconscious], I believe in accordance to the above definition, it is covered within psychology.
Even with your "realization of the Absolute" by a person who is alive, neuro-psychology can come into the picture by studying the brain patterns and neural activities of that person using fMRI imaging or other advance machines. Also note the Human Connectome Project which can facilitate such psychological studies.

However, on the subject of so claimed life or activity after physical death of the soul, yes I agree that is not psychology.
While I agree one can apply neuroscience to mystical experience, as Andrew Newberg has done, from the first-person perspective it is not a matter of psychology or neuroscience. Realization is neither conscious nor unconscious, nor even a non-conscious process. The brain being active does not mean that there is an active experience. It appears most likely that deafferentation occurs in which the mapping of the state of the organism is decoupled from the environment and its organism and progresses through increasingly purified states of awareness. There are processes going on in the body, but there is no experience of it whatever. True realization transcends experience itself.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Spectrum »

Frost wrote: March 12th, 2018, 1:34 am
Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 1:25 am
  • Psychology is the science of behavior and mind, including conscious and unconscious phenomena, as well as thought. -wiki


In general as long as the person is still alive and his brain is still active [conscious or unconscious], I believe in accordance to the above definition, it is covered within psychology.
Even with your "realization of the Absolute" by a person who is alive, neuro-psychology can come into the picture by studying the brain patterns and neural activities of that person using fMRI imaging or other advance machines. Also note the Human Connectome Project which can facilitate such psychological studies.

However, on the subject of so claimed life or activity after physical death of the soul, yes I agree that is not psychology.
While I agree one can apply neuroscience to mystical experience, as Andrew Newberg has done, from the first-person perspective it is not a matter of psychology or neuroscience. Realization is neither conscious nor unconscious, nor even a non-conscious process. The brain being active does not mean that there is an active experience. It appears most likely that deafferentation occurs in which the mapping of the state of the organism is decoupled from the environment and its organism and progresses through increasingly purified states of awareness. There are processes going on in the body, but there is no experience of it whatever. True realization transcends experience itself.
I believe the confusion is a case of semantics and sets.
I agree Spirituality is not equal to Psychology totally and vice-versa in term of their specific set.
But both do overlap in many areas.

Cannot find an exact image example, here is how Spirituality is not religion but they overlap. If you replace the 'religion' circle/set with psychology, that would be my point.

Image
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Frost
Posts: 511
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Frost »

Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 3:12 am I believe the confusion is a case of semantics and sets.
I agree Spirituality is not equal to Psychology totally and vice-versa in term of their specific set.
But both do overlap in many areas.

Cannot find an exact image example, here is how Spirituality is not religion but they overlap. If you replace the 'religion' circle/set with psychology, that would be my point.

Image
I guess I take issue with the superficiality of the categorization of religion and spirituality. They come across as merely a matter of morality and psychology. I come from the Advaita Vedanta tradition, and from there, spirituality is about finding your true nature, which is the true nature of reality itself. Certainly the questions in the chart are involved, but to miss out on this most important point is to miss the entire point of spirituality and religion.

I guess coming from the tradition I do, the distinction between spirituality and religion is also rather strange as well. Spirituality and religion pretty much go hand in hand. While there are some that are spiritual without being religious and some are religious without being spiritual, they are rather strange. If you are spiritual but have no practice, then it's difficult to consider this truly being spiritual, and if you have a practice then this involves some sort of religious tradition. If you are religious without being spiritual, then it is mere dogma.

Perhaps this is why I tend toward the Indian purushartha system, since it is a harmony of all intrinsic values and acknowledges the highest reality. The psychological aspect is just one element in a much larger hierarchy of intrinsic life values.
Dark Matter
Posts: 1366
Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Dark Matter »

Everything is psychological. The prospect of having to answer to a higher power than one’s self can create psychological angst in a person to such an extent that the only way of dealing with it is to find every excuse and every little piece of information that can be imagined to be evidence against the higher power and use that to weave a security blanket of lies, distortion and misdirection behind which they can hide.
User avatar
Frost
Posts: 511
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Frost »

Dark Matter wrote: March 12th, 2018, 1:21 pm Everything is psychological. The prospect of having to answer to a higher power than one’s self can create psychological angst in a person to such an extent that the only way of dealing with it is to find every excuse and every little piece of information that can be imagined to be evidence against the higher power and use that to weave a security blanket of lies, distortion and misdirection behind which they can hide.
The realization of one's true nature is not psychological in any way shape or form. There are psychological effects upon returning to normal consciousness, but realization itself is nothing psychological.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Spectrum »

Frost wrote: March 12th, 2018, 11:39 am
Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 3:12 am I believe the confusion is a case of semantics and sets.
I agree Spirituality is not equal to Psychology totally and vice-versa in term of their specific set.
But both do overlap in many areas.

Cannot find an exact image example, here is how Spirituality is not religion but they overlap. If you replace the 'religion' circle/set with psychology, that would be my point.
I guess I take issue with the superficiality of the categorization of religion and spirituality. They come across as merely a matter of morality and psychology. I come from the Advaita Vedanta tradition, and from there, spirituality is about finding your true nature, which is the true nature of reality itself. Certainly the questions in the chart are involved, but to miss out on this most important point is to miss the entire point of spirituality and religion.

I guess coming from the tradition I do, the distinction between spirituality and religion is also rather strange as well. Spirituality and religion pretty much go hand in hand. While there are some that are spiritual without being religious and some are religious without being spiritual, they are rather strange. If you are spiritual but have no practice, then it's difficult to consider this truly being spiritual, and if you have a practice then this involves some sort of religious tradition. If you are religious without being spiritual, then it is mere dogma.

Perhaps this is why I tend toward the Indian purushartha system, since it is a harmony of all intrinsic values and acknowledges the highest reality. The psychological aspect is just one element in a much larger hierarchy of intrinsic life values.
Noted your points above.

My original point is;
Spirituality is not Psychology and vice versa. They are separate sets.
But they do overlap like the example given above.

Btw, I was into Advaita Vedanta for a LONG time then I 'graduated' to Buddhist's philosophies without being a Buddhist i.e. not conforming to some specific school of Buddhism.

Advaita Vedanta is very sound, strong and has good philosophies and practices but I do not agree with its ultimate, i.e. Brahman and the merging of Atman with Brahman. Psychologically there is a sliver of reification of what is essentially mere thoughts only.
Note the thread on DMT where the participants report their experience of going beyond 'somethingness' into absolute nothingness.
If one is in a state of absolute nothingness, why still have "somethingness" in terms of Brahman.

Buddhism emerged from the Vedas but did a 180 degree paradigm shift with a full focus on 'nothingness' (neti-neti) i.e. sunyata.
In Buddhism, even 'nothingness' is nothing, like even 'emptiness' is empty.

In Advaita Vedanta, there is the transcendence beyond which is nothingness in reference to materiality, but that nothingness-re-materiality is reified [subsconsciously] as a 'somethingness'-re-ultimate-reality.

I believe the person's inclination to either Advaita Vedanta or Buddhism at the highest level of consideration is dependent on one's psychological state leveraging on the existential crisis within at the bottom of the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Frost
Posts: 511
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Frost »

Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 11:41 pm Note the thread on DMT where the participants report their experience of going beyond 'somethingness' into absolute nothingness.
If one is in a state of absolute nothingness, why still have "somethingness" in terms of Brahman.

Buddhism emerged from the Vedas but did a 180 degree paradigm shift with a full focus on 'nothingness' (neti-neti) i.e. sunyata.
In Buddhism, even 'nothingness' is nothing, like even 'emptiness' is empty.

In Advaita Vedanta, there is the transcendence beyond which is nothingness in reference to materiality, but that nothingness-re-materiality is reified [subsconsciously] as a 'somethingness'-re-ultimate-reality.

I believe the person's inclination to either Advaita Vedanta or Buddhism at the highest level of consideration is dependent on one's psychological state leveraging on the existential crisis within at the bottom of the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
The "nothingness" is a description of what comes along the progress toward self-realization. I think that is the fundamental mistake of Buddhism (not of Buddha, he was self-realized), where it seems to many have stopped at the void and went no further and did not achieve realization.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Spectrum »

Frost wrote: March 13th, 2018, 12:04 am
Spectrum wrote: March 12th, 2018, 11:41 pm Note the thread on DMT where the participants report their experience of going beyond 'somethingness' into absolute nothingness.
If one is in a state of absolute nothingness, why still have "somethingness" in terms of Brahman.

Buddhism emerged from the Vedas but did a 180 degree paradigm shift with a full focus on 'nothingness' (neti-neti) i.e. sunyata.
In Buddhism, even 'nothingness' is nothing, like even 'emptiness' is empty.

In Advaita Vedanta, there is the transcendence beyond which is nothingness in reference to materiality, but that nothingness-re-materiality is reified [subsconsciously] as a 'somethingness'-re-ultimate-reality.

I believe the person's inclination to either Advaita Vedanta or Buddhism at the highest level of consideration is dependent on one's psychological state leveraging on the existential crisis within at the bottom of the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
The "nothingness" is a description of what comes along the progress toward self-realization. I think that is the fundamental mistake of Buddhism (not of Buddha, he was self-realized), where it seems to many have stopped at the void and went no further and did not achieve realization.
The Buddha was originally into Vedas-based-Hinduism and tried many other spiritual approaches. So the Buddha was aware of what was in his perspective, the limitation of the highest level of Hinduism and thus overcame that limitation and introduced Buddhism.

The crucial difference between the philosophy of Hinduism and Buddhism is that of atman versus anatman [annata] which was propounded by the Buddha.
Since the existing Buddhism philosophy is still centered on anatman [annata], the present Buddhism's core principles did not deviate from that of the original Buddha.

Btw, have you done a thorough research and analysis to understand [not necessary agree] the difference between the Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism-proper.* This would be a very interesting exercise if you are into detailed research.

* note there are many schools of thought within Buddhism, those in the Pure Land School even believe in the idea of heaven akin [not exactly] to Christianity. Thus the need to understand Buddhism-proper is substance not its various forms.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Frost
Posts: 511
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Frost »

Spectrum wrote: March 13th, 2018, 12:29 am The Buddha was originally into Vedas-based-Hinduism and tried many other spiritual approaches. So the Buddha was aware of what was in his perspective, the limitation of the highest level of Hinduism and thus overcame that limitation and introduced Buddhism.

The crucial difference between the philosophy of Hinduism and Buddhism is that of atman versus anatman [annata] which was propounded by the Buddha.
Since the existing Buddhism philosophy is still centered on anatman [annata], the present Buddhism's core principles did not deviate from that of the original Buddha.

Btw, have you done a thorough research and analysis to understand [not necessary agree] the difference between the Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism-proper.* This would be a very interesting exercise if you are into detailed research.

* note there are many schools of thought within Buddhism, those in the Pure Land School even believe in the idea of heaven akin [not exactly] to Christianity. Thus the need to understand Buddhism-proper is substance not its various forms.
I have not done an in-depth comparison of all the Buddhist schools with Vedanta, although I am familiar with the various schools of Vedanta.

I'm not sure I follow you on the interpretation of Buddha with respect to Indian religion. In his time, the Vedas were already ancient, and there were surely many Vedantas. Buddha was rejecting the dogmatic orthodoxy of Vedic religion which had degenerated into caste by birth. This was a major part of the Dhammapada that went on at length about what truly constitutes an Arya. However, the Vedanta existed, and Buddha fulfilled the Vedanta while rejecting the ritualistic dogmatism that arose from the karma kanda portion of the Vedas. In this way I see him as fulfilling the scriptures that already existed, in the way Jesus fulfilled Judaism.

The Advaita Vedantic interpretation of Buddha is that indeed there is no self, but there is also nothing but self. This is the fullness, the purna, of the Absolute. It is empty because there are no attributes, but it is full because it is the potentiality of universes. The blankness of apparent void is along the path to realizing Saguna Brahman (pure awareness), but this must also be transcended to Nirguna or Para Brahman, the Absolute, which is neither existence or non-existence, neither awareness nor non-awareness.

Not that I have experienced these :) But that is my understanding from reading more books than I should on the subject which should have been spent actually practicing :) By the way, are you familiar with Shankara's arguments against Buddhism? His was an interesting time, where Buddhism almost overtook India, but Shankara traveled the country debating different schools, bringing back Vedanta by introducing the Upanishads to the masses and taking the Gita out of the Mahabharata for spiritual study.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Hierarchy of Needs - Religions?

Post by Spectrum »

Frost wrote: March 13th, 2018, 12:45 am
Spectrum wrote: March 13th, 2018, 12:29 am The Buddha was originally into Vedas-based-Hinduism and tried many other spiritual approaches. So the Buddha was aware of what was in his perspective, the limitation of the highest level of Hinduism and thus overcame that limitation and introduced Buddhism.

The crucial difference between the philosophy of Hinduism and Buddhism is that of atman versus anatman [annata] which was propounded by the Buddha.
Since the existing Buddhism philosophy is still centered on anatman [annata], the present Buddhism's core principles did not deviate from that of the original Buddha.

Btw, have you done a thorough research and analysis to understand [not necessary agree] the difference between the Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism-proper.* This would be a very interesting exercise if you are into detailed research.

* note there are many schools of thought within Buddhism, those in the Pure Land School even believe in the idea of heaven akin [not exactly] to Christianity. Thus the need to understand Buddhism-proper is substance not its various forms.
I have not done an in-depth comparison of all the Buddhist schools with Vedanta, although I am familiar with the various schools of Vedanta.

I'm not sure I follow you on the interpretation of Buddha with respect to Indian religion. In his time, the Vedas were already ancient, and there were surely many Vedantas. Buddha was rejecting the dogmatic orthodoxy of Vedic religion which had degenerated into caste by birth. This was a major part of the Dhammapada that went on at length about what truly constitutes an Arya. However, the Vedanta existed, and Buddha fulfilled the Vedanta while rejecting the ritualistic dogmatism that arose from the karma kanda portion of the Vedas. In this way I see him as fulfilling the scriptures that already existed, in the way Jesus fulfilled Judaism.
True the Buddha did not agree with the caste system but the core of Buddha's philosophy goes far beyond from Theravada to Mahayana to Vajrayana. Buddhism at its ultimate core [re anatta and sunyata] is totally different from Hinduism.
The Advaita Vedantic interpretation of Buddha is that indeed there is no self, but there is also nothing but self. This is the fullness, the purna, of the Absolute. It is empty because there are no attributes, but it is full because it is the potentiality of universes. The blankness of apparent void is along the path to realizing Saguna Brahman (pure awareness), but this must also be transcended to Nirguna or Para Brahman, the Absolute, which is neither existence or non-existence, neither awareness nor non-awareness.
In Buddhism there is no self all the way, i.e. from anatta to sunyata and no atman merging with Brahman at all.
Not that I have experienced these :) But that is my understanding from reading more books than I should on the subject which should have been spent actually practicing :) By the way, are you familiar with Shankara's arguments against Buddhism? His was an interesting time, where Buddhism almost overtook India, but Shankara traveled the country debating different schools, bringing back Vedanta by introducing the Upanishads to the masses and taking the Gita out of the Mahabharata for spiritual study.
I have read the counter arguments by Adi Shankara and others against Buddhism. The levels debated rise to very refined levels but I don't see those arguments overcoming the Buddhist's views.
Many reverted to Hinduism from Buddhism but it is not because they understood the essence of the arguments but due to various reasons, e.g. personal preferences to rituals, idols, etc.
Note Buddhism proper do not emphasize on rituals, idols, ceremonies, etc. but they have to compromise on this to meet the needs of the layperson.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021