Naturalistic Paganism
The HPedia: Responsibility
Your help is needed! Please critique this entry from the HPedia: An encyclopedia of key concepts in Naturalistic Paganism. Please leave your constructive criticism in the comments below.
Responsibility is an important aspect of Naturalistic Paganism, including intellectual and moral responsibility.
The naturalistic and humanistic roots of Naturalistic Paganism suggest that humans are able to respond to life’s challenges without recourse to supernatural aid or explanations. Those who follow an HP path accept 1) that we cause many if not most of our problems, in whole or in part; and 2) that we are capable of solving our problems. We have no need of divine or supernatural aid; the power is ours. And, as the old saying goes, with power comes responsibility. The types of problems we may respond to are many and varied, but involve at least environmental, social, and psychological problems.
The Pagan side also contributes significant ethical inspiration. Ancient Pagan ethics were often couched in terms of virtues, as developed in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. Contemporary Pagan traditions have developed similar models, such as the Nine Noble Virtues of Asatru or Nine Virtues of ADF. The most widespread Neopagan ethical maxims are probably the Wiccan Rede (“Harm none, do as you will”) and the Law of Return (“Whatever you send out will return to you threefold”). Both emphasize the consequences of actions. This is perhaps encapsulated even more simply and eloquently in a line from Ursula Le Guin’s Earthsea Trilogy: “To light a candle is to cast a shadow.”
Ethics is, of course, a huge and tangled topic, and it is up to the individual to decide what virtues and principles seem best. Whatever ethics are adopted, they ought at least to be consistent with other key aspects of Naturalistic Paganism. For example, to be consistent with naturalism, one ought to strive to meet life’s challenges without recourse to supernatural causes and explanations (note that this does not necessarily entail that contrary acts are unethical, only that a path involving such acts cannot be called naturalistic).
David Suzuki, in The Sacred Balance, writes:
We have to know we’re immersed in nature. This doesn’t conflict with science! For most of human existence we knew we were part of nature and dependent on it. That’s what many of our prayers, our dances and rituals were all about and we knew we had responsibilities to act properly to keep it all going. But now our world is shattered, and we no longer see the connections. If we don’t see that everything is interconnected, then any action has no consequences or responsibility. So the challenge is to reconnect ourselves to the world.
See also “Fourfold Path.”
Check out other entries in our HPedia.
Call for submissions: “Death and Life”
Our late autumn theme is “Death and Life”.
“Death and Life” by Gustav Klimt (1916)
Ernest Becker wrote in The Denial of Death:
“The idea of death, the fear of it, haunts the human animal like nothing else; it is a mainspring of human activity — designed largely to avoid the fatality of death, to overcome it by denying in some way that it is the final destiny of man.”
What place does death have in a Naturalistic Pagan practice? What meaning does the fact of our mortality give to our lives? What depth does it bring to our spirituality?
Send your writing and art to humanisticpaganism [at] gmail.com. Submissions need to be received by November 6.
Addenda
Two items I inadvertently left off of the announcements for October:
Oct 12 International Observe the Moon Night (external link)
Oct 18 Penumbral Lunar Eclipse (external link)
To what should I aspire? by Thomas Schenk
The theme for the rest of this month at HP is “Finding Meaning”.
What do the limits of artificial intelligence tell us about human aspirations?
The limits of artificial intelligence
The success of artificial intelligence, though limited, suggests that intelligence is a rather mechanical operation. To the extent that we humans have prided ourselves, or felt ourselves set apart by our intelligence, this should be a bit of a blow.
It is apparent, however, that the goal of making machines intelligent is a human one. It has never been a computer’s goal to beat people at chess or Jeopardy; developing computer programs that can accomplish those feats is a distinctively human aspiration. Computers have yet to set their own goals. Artificial intelligence, it would seem, is a tool for achieving ends; since there seems to be little difference between artificial and organic intelligence, we might infer that any intelligence is a tool for achieving ends.
While we now share the domain of abstract intelligence with computers, the domain of intending remains unique to us. To intend is to reflect upon a range of possible ends, select one based on some criteria or standard, and develop strategies to achieve that end. Machines certainly don’t do this (though undoubtedly, based on some human’s intention, a computer program that simulates intentional behavior can be developed). Some animals seem to have a rudimentary intentionality, but at least for now the stress is on “rudimentary.”
The question no one can answer for us
As it is, we humans uniquely have the opportunity to ask the question “to what should I aspire?” We have the opportunity to think through the various possible ends available to us, to reflect on our life in relation to these possibilities, to make a choice, and to work toward the realization of that choice. We also have the ability to change our mind with the passage of time, and to re-envision our ultimate aspirations.
Intentionality itself can be either externally or internally directed. Wisdom can be worldly or spiritual. We can aspire to such external values as power, possessions, prestige; or we can aspire to internal values such as truth, beauty and virtue.
El Capitan, Yosmite National Park
To what end, ultimately, ought I aspire? There are no facts, no system of logic that can lead me to a clear answer. People may say “you ought to aspire to this!” and point to one or another value. This “ought to aspire,” however, will not be supported by logic. An “ought” only has logical force within the context of a goal. Thus, if you aspire to X, and it is necessary to do Y to achieve X, it logically follows that you ought to do Y. But in seeking an ultimate goal we are outside of a goal context. We’re on our own.
Seeking an answer to the question of ultimate aspiration is something of a lifelong quest; our imagination, our emotions, our intuition, our intelligence: each has something to contribute. The testimony of others may be of value as we seek answers — it is wise to be open to such testimony; it is also wise to be skeptical of it. Perhaps most important of all, we need to pay attention.
To be able to choose our ultimate goals is a wonderful freedom, but can also be rather time consuming and even frightening. It is not surprising that many people forsake that freedom and simply follow the herd. Not surprising, but I think unfortunate. We are each given but one life; why aspire to anything less than the highest values we can envision?
Don’t forget to comment below.
The author
Thomas Schenk: “If asked, I’d call myself a Space-age Taoist, Black Sheep Catholic, Perennial Philosophy Pantheist, Dharma Bum. In other words I am a kind of spiritual and philosophical mutt. I’m not out to change the world, for I believe the world has a much better sense of what it is supposed to be than I ever could. But I do try to promote the value of the contemplative life in these most un-contemplative of times. Thomas is also the author of the naturalistic spirituality blog Golden Hive of the Invisible.
Check out Thomas’ other articles:
- The mystery of being
- Bicycle meditation
- Encounters with the Goddess?
- Seton sitting: Something special may happen
- Matter thinking over mind
- Praying to the Goddess as good financial advice
Next Sunday
Next Sunday, we continue the theme of finding meaning with B. T. Newberg, “Naturalism: Every second of your life is meaningful”.
The theme for late autumn here at HP is “Death and Life”. Send your writing and art to humanisticpaganism [at] gmail.com by Nov. 6.
The HPedia: Mystery
Your help is needed! Please critique this entry from the HPedia: An encyclopedia of key concepts in Naturalistic Paganism. Please leave your constructive criticism in the comments below.
Mystery derives from the ancient Greek mysterion, referencing mystery religions such as the Eleusinian Mysteries (Oxford Dictionaries). The secrets into which participants were initiated could be aporrheton, meaning “forbidden”, and/or arrheton, meaning “unutterable, unspeakable, ineffable” (see Burkert).
From a naturalistic and scientific perspective, the aporrheton aspect no longer seems appropriate, but there would still seem to be a powerful place for the arrheton. For example, Ursula Goodenough describes an experience of mystery before the awesome cosmos in her book The Sacred Depths of Nature, excerpted here.
Many fear that introducing scientific explanation into traditionally religious or spiritual realms of experience will destroy the mystery. However, upon consideration, that does not seem to be the case. For all we discover about how the universe works, it still remains a breathtaking marvel that the universe is as it is. This is expressed, for example, in Richard Dawkins’ The Magic of Reality. To the extent that reality remains ineffable in its fullness no matter how much we say or attempt to say about it, arrheton endures.
This view is affirmed in Tom Clark’s essay Spirituality Without Faith:
When we confront the startling fact that existence isn’t subsumable under any overarching interpretation, but simply is, we are left with an irreducible mystery about why we are here, or exist at all; and mystery serves at least as well as purpose to inspire spiritual experience. Unable not to ask questions about ultimate purpose and meaning, but rebuffed by the logic which shows such questions unanswerable, we are caught in a cosmic perplexity, a state of profound existential astonishment. The realization that existence inevitably outruns our attempts to assign meaning and purpose can have the impact of a true revelation, stunning the discursive mind in the manner of a Zen koan. Like a koan or other practices in which thinking confronts its own limitations, such a cognitive impasse can serve as the gateway to the direct, non-discursive experience that the present is sufficient unto itself. After all, there is no place to get to, no goal toward which Being is moving.
A different use of “mystery” is invoked by Noam Chomsky when he distinguishes between puzzles, which are solvable in principle, and mysteries, which are by their very nature unsolvable. Whether mysteries exist in this sense is controversial at present. New mysterianism is one current approach to the hard problem of consciousness.
An idea similar to Chomsky’s is put forward by economist Kaplan, who distinguishes between problems, which may be overcome, and predicaments, which cannot be overcome but only confronted. The latter seems very close to Brendan Myers’ notion of an Immensity, though Myers himself does not use Kaplan’s terms. Death and the passage of time, for example, are existential realities with which one may only come to terms (barring future development of fantastic technologies, at least), and in coming to terms one’s identity and moral character are called into question (see “Immensity” below).
The relationships between these three concepts – Chomsky’s mystery, Kaplan’s predicament, and Myers’ Immensity – suggest there may be a moral quality to the sense of mystery before the cosmos: it demands a response that questions who you are and how you will live your life. As in the ancient mysteries, there is a sense in which one is changed, initiated if you will, by the experience. Thereafter, one lives in a different and expanded universe.
See also “Mystical” and “Immensity.”
Check out other entries in our HPedia.
What to look forward to in October at HP
Our theme for the rest of the month of October is Finding Meaning.
Steven Weinberg explains in his book on the Big Bang, The First Three Minutes: “The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless.” Is Weinberg right? Are understanding and meaning antithetical? Do we create meaning in spite of the inherent meaninglessness of the cosmos? Or is there perhaps some meaning to our lives to be found within physical nature? And what do our answers to these questions mean for us as Naturalistic Pagans?
This Month at HP
Oct 6 “To what should I aspire?” by Thomas Schenk
Oct 13 “Naturalism: Every second of your life is meaningful” by B. T. Newberg
Oct 16 Mid-Month Meditation
Oct 20 “Finding Purpose and Meaning” by NaturalPantheist
Oct 27 “A Meditation on the Ancestors” by Jon Cleland Host
Oct 31 Samhain Special with Telmaris Green
Humanistic Paganism Calendar for October
Oct 2 Gandhi’s birthday and International Day of Non-Violence
Oct 12 Cosmic Calendar: First photosynthesis occurs 3 bya
Oct 12 International Observe the Moon Night (external link)
Oct 16 World Food Day
Oct 18 Penumbral Lunar Eclipse (external link)
Oct 29 Cosmic Calendar: Oxygenation of atmosphere occurs 2.4 bya
Oct 31/Nov 1 Neo-Pagan autumn cross-quarter day (Samhain) / Halloween (Here at HP, we will be observing the Autumn Cross-Quarter in another week.)
Oct 31 Anniversary of the publication of The Spiral Dance and Drawing Down the Moon
Buy Godless Paganism (paperback)
Buy Godless Paganism (ebook)
Pagan Coming Out Day – May 2nd
Naturalistic Paganism 