What is OSR? How is it different from traditional religion?

[The Kernel]

Generally a religion is defined in terms of a community of people who
share a common set of beliefs and understandings that are expressed
through communal rituals, various forms of worship and/or devotional
service. Each religious community is typically represented by one or
more teacher/priests whose job it is to interpret various facets of
the religious belief system according to a defined organizational
hierarchy and to counsel community members in terms of proper
religious observance and practice.

This discussion is intended to explore similarities and differences
between traditional religion 1.0 and emerging forms of OSR -
especially as they might be manifest through online digital
interaction.

For example, will OSR assume a defined organizational structure and
system of governance, similar to those of traditional religions - in
order to succeed? Will OSR be operationalized through some form of
teacher/priest authority? If OSR is to have a community base of
participation, is something needed to hold this community together?

[atypican]

Beautiful.

I hate to think of OSR as being ran by some person or committee.

>Generally a religion is defined in terms of a community of people who
>share a common set of beliefs and understandings that are expressed
>through communal rituals, various forms of worship and/or devotional
>service. Each religious community is typically represented by one or
>more teacher/priests whose job it is to interpret various facets of
>the religious belief system according to a defined organizational
>hierarchy and to counsel community members in terms of proper
>religious observance and practice.

I agree that the definition you give well describes the traditional
(Religion 1.0) communal aspects of religion.

I think OSR or Religion 2.0 should be thought of differently. I don't
think it's optimal to use the word religion to refer to a sect, or
church. Everybody has a belief/value system ...articulate or
not.....That's their religion. People's belief systems (their
religion) vary wildly in some senses, and are undoubtedly remarkably
uniform in most senses.

OSR is a self instruction method that doesn't require or rule out
disclipleship, worship or being a member of any religion as defined in
your opening paragraph. It's a self guided tour. It's about maturing
past being a devotee or follower (but not in every sense) and
concerning ourselves with the example we will set for those who are
learning from us.

>will OSR assume a defined organizational structure and
>system of governance, similar to those of traditional religions - in
>order to succeed?

My vote is no. I started my OSR project as a personal collection of
valuable recordings.

Just a collection of quotes *at first* that resonated with me. From
the places the branches of my unique (just like everybody elses) tree
of curiosity took me. My favorites I made record of in my memory and
in my religious binder. I don't want everyone to share every portion
or even most of the collection I've compiled and will publish. But I
would like to demonstrate and develop the method for philosophical
Self-criticism that I've stumbled upon, with the OSR expression I will
market and give away for free.

I thought about what an impressive publication I could make with
collaborators that "got it." But I realized that I wouldn't be able to
claim Free Press Bible was authentically non-sectarian or non-
denominational (Or as you defined it Non-religious) if I formed an
organization.

I had initially imagined creating a "canonization group" that could
vote on article inclusion issues. Then I realized, I can consult with
others without doing so. Plus I would prefer to consult with people
who were busy working on their own projects with similar aims. I don't
want to attract followers, I want to attract people who have their own
thing going on that don't mind taking a little time to offer their
scrutiny and imaginative input to a project they think is (or could be
with a little help) on the right track.

[The Kernel]

I believe that for anything to work (me, you, the universe) 3
components come into play - Content, Structure and Governance. The
OSR site would be a great example of a site which is collaborative
rather than authoritarian. Governance is minimal. For it to advance,
the system needs to be governed, be it collaboratively or
authoritatively, directive or non-directive, governance (laws,
principles, rules etc.). It seems like the universe works that way.
Without governance, the OSR structure is ad hoc and without some kind
of archiving feature of decisions, learnings, revelations etc the
group ends up rehashing. Without discussion group moderation, forums
go off track and sometimes loose their way. I'm not being
judgmental. I'm simply observing the way it is (IMHO). The seemingly
self-governing internet would not function without clearly defined
structures, rules, protocols and centralized governance. So think
some kind of OSR model will spontaneously emerge might be a bit naive.
Orchestration of some kind will be required before alignment and
advancement will be achieved - that is unless we believe in miracles.
Cheers.