Sept. 20, 2020
From Western to Orient and from Protestantism and Hinduism, the births of religions are symbols of a new worldview, which could thrive a party and pour vigor to society, as an inevitable new power. But the substance of the religion is neutral. It just gives a frame to people to build their own worldviews, support inspiration, and walk their own path. And that is why popes exist to explain the words of books to heal the negative emotion of people who are stuck in an unpleasant position and emboldened their body through belief and mind. That is the magic of the religious even then it does not have stronger resources to support it and rational theories to extend deeper. It could be a beacon for losers. As David Hume pointed out, we have a natural tendency to bewitched by wonder and mystery, which gives us a strong desire to believe tales of the extraordinary ( Atheism 45). When a society is rooted in this kind of fierce and unhealthy religion, it will arise out of control by erosion from the religious party. For an example of the sheer leverage and power of religion in 20 century, look no further than the German president, Adolf Hiter, who had launched War World II and written Mein Kampf which is a censored book in German right now.
From the Western to Orienthe East and from Protestantism andto Hinduism, the births of religions are symbols of a new worldview, one which could thrive a partyhelp a political party thrive and pour vigor into society, emerging as an inevitable new power.
"Western" is an adjective and needs a noun after it. "From Western society to the Orient". Or you can change it to "the West"
"The Orient" is a bit outdated
thrive is intransitive. Something can thrive, but you can't thrive something.
But the substance of the religion is neutral.
It just givprovides a frame to peoplwork for people to use to build their own worldviews, support inspiration, and walk their own path.
"provide" is a little more formal, less active than "give". It works well with abstract things like religion
"support inspiration" doesn't make much sense. Maybe you mean "support creativity", "have support in their inspiration", or "draw inspiration from"?
(also - love the list of three!)
And tThat is why popes exist: to explain the words of books, tohereby healing the negative emotions of people who are stuck in an unpleasant posituation and emboldeneding their minds and bodyies through belief and mind.
That is the magic of the religiousn, though even then it does not have stronger resources to support it andor rational theories to extend deeper.
Or did you mean:
"That is the magic of religion, that even without stronger resources to support it or rational theories to give it a foundation, it can still have such a profound effect on believers."
It couldan be a beacon for lthosers who feel lost.
"loser" is someone who has lost a competition, not lost their way/become lost. It also can refer to people who are incompetent and not seen as successful by society, but that is a pretty rude term then.
"could" here is more... uncertain or hypothetical. It sounds like you are guessing. "Can" here means sometimes and for some people.
"beacon" has a very positive connotation. If you are trying to transition here to saying something like "religion takes advantage of susceptible people", then don't use beacon. "Will-o-the-wisp" might be a better metaphor. Or you can simply say "It can lead astray the desperate"
As David Hume pointed out, we have a natural tendency to be bewitched by wonder and mystery, which gives us a strong desire to believe tales of the extraordinary ( Atheism 45).
When a society is rooted in this kind of fiercintense and unhealthy religion, it will arise out of control by erosion frombe destabilized by the corrosive influence of the religious party.
"fall out of control" is the usual phrase. You could also say "the corrosive influence of the religious party will cause it to fall out of control" but "fall out of control" doesn't sound natural with "by"
For an example of the sheer leverage and power of religion in 20the 20th century, look no further than the German president, Adolf Hiter, who had launched War World II and writoten Mein Kampf, which is a censored book in Germany right now.
Feedback
The individual sentences are very well written, but the overall paragraph is confusing. Your paragraph means that religion is neutral because it can give people hope and happiness, but people can also be easily misled by it, causing instability in society, right? Or did I completely misunderstand? Working on transitions between sentences and the connotations of individual words will help clear up this confusion a lot.
From Western tothe West to the Orient and from Protestantism and Hinduism, the births of religions are symbols of a new worldview, which could thrive a partyleader and pouradd vigor to society, as an inevitable new power.
It just gives a frame tofor people to build their own worldviews, support inspiration, and walk their own path.
For an example of the sheer leverage and power of religion in 20th century, look no further than the German presidentleader, Adolf Hiter, who had launched War World II and written Mein Kampf which is a censored book in German right now.
|
Religion |
|
From Western to Orient and from Protestantism and Hinduism, the births of religions are symbols of a new worldview, which could thrive a party and pour vigor to society, as an inevitable new power. From From the West "Western" is an adjective and needs a noun after it. "From Western society to the Orient". Or you can change it to "the West" "The Orient" is a bit outdated thrive is intransitive. Something can thrive, but you can't thrive something. |
|
But the substance of the religion is neutral. But the substance of |
|
It just gives a frame to people to build their own worldviews, support inspiration, and walk their own path. It just gives a frame It just "provide" is a little more formal, less active than "give". It works well with abstract things like religion "support inspiration" doesn't make much sense. Maybe you mean "support creativity", "have support in their inspiration", or "draw inspiration from"? (also - love the list of three!) |
|
And that is why popes exist to explain the words of books to heal the negative emotion of people who are stuck in an unpleasant position and emboldened their body through belief and mind.
|
|
That is the magic of the religious even then it does not have stronger resources to support it and rational theories to extend deeper. That is the magic of Or did you mean: "That is the magic of religion, that even without stronger resources to support it or rational theories to give it a foundation, it can still have such a profound effect on believers." |
|
It could be a beacon for losers. It c "loser" is someone who has lost a competition, not lost their way/become lost. It also can refer to people who are incompetent and not seen as successful by society, but that is a pretty rude term then. "could" here is more... uncertain or hypothetical. It sounds like you are guessing. "Can" here means sometimes and for some people. "beacon" has a very positive connotation. If you are trying to transition here to saying something like "religion takes advantage of susceptible people", then don't use beacon. "Will-o-the-wisp" might be a better metaphor. Or you can simply say "It can lead astray the desperate" |
|
As David Hume pointed out, we have a natural tendency to bewitched by wonder and mystery, which gives us a strong desire to believe tales of the extraordinary ( Atheism 45). As David Hume pointed out, we have a natural tendency to be bewitched by wonder and mystery, which gives us a strong desire to believe tales of the extraordinary ( Atheism 45). |
|
When a society is rooted in this kind of fierce and unhealthy religion, it will arise out of control by erosion from the religious party. When a society is rooted in this kind of "fall out of control" is the usual phrase. You could also say "the corrosive influence of the religious party will cause it to fall out of control" but "fall out of control" doesn't sound natural with "by" |
|
For an example of the sheer leverage and power of religion in 20 century, look no further than the German president, Adolf Hiter, who had launched War World II and written Mein Kampf which is a censored book in German right now. For an example of the sheer leverage and power of religion in 20th century, look no further than the German For an example of the sheer leverage and power of religion in |
You need LangCorrect Premium to access this feature.
Go Premium