
Today, September 13th, is Defy Superstition Day. WeekendNotes.com says:
…if you’re one of the many who have superstitions you can’t seem to shake, this is the day you can let go of some or all of them by doing the exact opposite of what you’re told you should do regarding them.
They also give a few superstition-violating suggestions, which you may or may not have heard of:
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.
This notion, originated by Carl Jung, indicates an underlying pattern of meaning between events acausally related.
Synchronicity is the experience of two or more events that are apparently causally unrelated or unlikely to occur together by chance, yet are experienced as occurring together in a meaningful manner. The concept of synchronicity was first described in this terminology by Carl Gustav Jung, a Swiss psychologist, in the 1920s.[1]
The concept does not question, or compete with, the notion of causality. Instead it maintains that, just as events may be grouped by cause, they may also be grouped by meaning. A grouping of events by meaning need not have an explanation in terms of cause and effect. (Wikipedia) Read More

Cahoone describes a complex non-reductive view of nature which might better be called a “tropical rainforest ontology”
Analytical philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote in “A Free Man’s Worship” that the world which science presents to us is purposeless and void of meaning, and our lives are nothing but the “outcome of accidental collocations of atoms.” Similarly, 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.” These are bleak visions of reality. But is such a reductive materialism the only option for naturalistic Pagans?
Lawrence Cahoone, author of Orders of Nature (2013), draws on the work of philosopher William Wimsatt to create a systematic understanding of reality consistent with modern science that leaves room for the human mind and the experience of meaning. Ontology is the philosophy of the nature of existence or reality. Materialists favor minimalist ontology, one which is, in the words of philosopher, Daniel Dennett, “clean-shaven by Ockham’s razor”, or one that is, in the words of analytical philosopher, W.V.O. Quine, suited to those with an aesthetic “taste for desert landscapes”. In contrast, Cahoone describes a complex non-reductive view of nature which might better be called a “tropical rainforest ontology” (Wimsatt), because it describes reality in terms of a plurality of properties, rather than just one — matter. Cahoone’s non-reductive ontology is built on two premises: First, mind and matter are just two of many ontological properties of nature; neither is foundational, and neither may be reduced to the other. Second, these ontological modes or properties are emergent properties of complex systems in the evolution of the universe. Read More
In developing my own non-theistic or naturalistic spirituality, the issue of deity was one of the most difficult to address.
As I wrote in my first post, the idea of nothingness – or that which is beyond infinity – is something that really captures my imagination, and trying to contemplate it generates a very powerful sense of awe for me. I spent a lot of time thinking about what deity meant for me – I had turned to atheism when I decided that I did not believe in a creator or a conscious, controlling god, or any sort of being or entity in the way that most people seem to view deity. But in a philosophical sense, I found it hard to pinpoint whether there was some other essence that transcended these aspects which could be defined as “deity”. I eventually came to the understanding that for me, if there was to be such a thing as “deity”, it would be quite simply the essence of existence, or the force that propels it and makes it so. Read More