Pantheism and Taoism

=====I recently became interested in the ideologies that exist within Pantheism, and that research eventually led me to research Taoism. The two ideals are very similar, and they start out, on paper, as very good ideas. However, they both lose sight of some of their own ideals by creating "philosophies," "goals, "and "dogmas." I was enticed by some of the good ideas that can be found in both religions -- a term I am using loosely, though that is essentially what they are as they are suggestions for a way of life -- but ended up being turned off by the same nonsense one comes across in all of the better known religions.
=====The first wrench in the works is distributive organization. I don't really consider something a religion until it becomes organized and shared. That is to say, until more than one person is "striving" to achieve a goal or a principal of an ideology, I consider it to be one individual's natural state of mind. So, to me, the minute such an idea becomes shared, and a following grows, it ceases to be natural, because the only state of mind natural to a being is the one it knows on its own. The only ideologies natural to a person are the ones the person comes to on his or her own. In other words, how a person interprets and processes facts to perceive reality is their only true natural state of mind. The goals built from that perception are their only true natural goals. Those goals may not automatically include methods of suppressing certain emotions or actions. In this way, distributive organization pretty much destroys the "natural order" of any belief system.
=====Both Pantheism and Taoism are built around the idea that a natural order is sacred. Pantheism takes that a step further to say that the "Universe is divine." What they mean by that is that the Universe is the center and cause of all creation and being, and that, because we are all made of the same "star stuff," all things within it are eternally and invariably connected. That's an ideology I share almost to the word, so I was naturally drawn to read more about the ideology; however, the more I read, the more Pantheism went from a simple and unconditionally constructed ideology to a strict and well organized religion. The more pantheism read like a religion, the more it resembled Taoism.
=====There are very many versions of Pantheism, but they all seem to share the same tendency to embrace religious structure. Pantheisms various incarnations most often resemble preexistent Pagan religions and Taoism.
=====My problem with Pantheism and Taoism -- aside from my aforementioned problem with the contradictory 'dogma vs. natural perception' concept -- is the fact that they tend to be very flaky in nature and design. The American Heritage Dictionary defines flaky as "3. Slang Somewhat eccentric; odd," and that's basically what I mean, as well. More specifically, I think the two religions take basic scientific principals and nature and attach them to baseless spiritual fluff. If you claim that your "spirit" is "one with a tree," then you are no longer speaking my language, and you no longer exist within realms of physical science. If you say that your physical make up, as broken down into molecules and elements, connects you to a tree because it is made of all the same materials, and the matter that makes up those materials cannot be created or destroyed, so you are connected by means of your coexistence in the natural state of the Universe and the formation of the Galaxy, then I can appreciate that as a scientific and emotionally moving piece of information. When you start talking about elements of the super natural like "spirits" and "spiritual oneness," then you are removing yourself from a scientific, fact-based approach to understanding. I'm not saying that using flaky fluff to reach an understanding of the world around you is wrong or even unnatural to you; I'm just saying it isn't my thing.
=====Taoism goes much deeper into realms of spirituality, emotional suppression, and dogma. It is, in every sense, a religion. There are those that claim that it isn't a religion or a philosophy, but a way of life. That, of course, makes no conceptual sense, whatsoever. Religion is the means by which one gets people to follow and practice a philosophy. A philosophy is an idealized way of life. So, by that reasoning, to say "Taoism isn't a Religion or a Philosophy, but a way of life," you contradict yourself three times in the same sentence -- impressive, but not in the way I think the ideology is meant to be.
=====The contradictions that riddle both Pantheism and Taoism are so numerous and profound to the philosophies that one could say that the ideologies are basically founded upon them. Both religions call for a deep and necessary connection to nature, the earth, and the "natural order," in the same breath that they present to a practitioner the means by which the practitioner must work to achieving that connection. By telling a person to do something that they have to work to achieve, and so otherwise they would not be naturally inclined to do, you are asking them to fight against their own nature. An individual's nature, as defined by their individual perceptions, is already perpetuated and empowered by the "natural order"; otherwise, their perception wouldn't exist in the first place. With these kinds of contradictions at work, it is hard for me to lend any moral credit to either religion -- every good point is ultimately negated by the existence of dogma or elements of the supernatural.