“The natural world that formed me… is my ‘sacred canopy.'”
In The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion, published in 1967, Peter Berger analyses religion as socially constructed knowledge. His description suggests to me that our body of knowledge about the history and evolution of life could serve as the basis for a religion.
Berger sees three steps in the process by which humans construct their society and are in turn constructed by it. Read More
Can knowledge of the evolutionary history of life on earth serve as a meaningful basis for religion?
Life on Earth as a religion? by Brock Haussamen
Appearing Sunday, April 28th, 2013
What are the potential social benefits of what we do?
Is Naturalistic Paganism beneficial to society? by B. T. Newberg
Appearing Sunday, May 5th, 2013
Is Naturalistic Paganism harmful to society? by B. T. Newberg
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.
The definition of religion is highly contested. One of the most widely recognized, but by no means the only, definition is that of symbolic anthropologist Clifford Geertz:
Religion is defined as (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic
Nothing in Geertz’ definition necessitates a supernatural force or agency. There are many, however, who propose that supernaturalism is the defining characteristic of religion, and those that lack it are not true religions. There are at least three problems with this view. First, “supernatural” is a Western concept developed in late Roman and early Medieval Europe (see Saler), and as such it may be inappropriate to apply it uncritically to other traditions. Second, not all traditions conventionally considered religions are supernaturalistic: witness monastic Theravada Buddhism, philosophical Daoism, Neo-Confucianism, Stoicism, Epicureanism, many forms of liberal Christianity, and more. Finally, the temptation to discount these traditions as “not true religions” may be circular reasoning that falls prey to the “no true Scotsman” fallacy. Whittle summarizes the “not true religion” reaction:
It seems a natural response from conventionally bright people encountering an idea they don’t easily comprehend; especially when it’s an uncomfortable one. It’s rather like reading an e. e. cummings poem and wondering why it doesn’t rhyme.
Today is Earth Day. This day has been gaining steam since its inception in 1970, and is now celebrated by over 175 countries. It’s intended to inspire awareness and appreciation for our natural environment. Google “how to celebrate Earth Day” to find no end of ideas for activities. Here’s a list of 15 ways to celebrate Earth Day. My personal favorite is to spend the day as a “trashmonk“, picking up trash as a form of meditation and devotion. I find it calming, centering, and rewarding. Sometimes I even chant a hymn to the Earth Mother as I go along.
Here are lyrics for an Earth Day Anthem set to Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy”:
Joyful joyful we adore our Earth in all its wonderment
Simple gifts of nature that all join into a paradise
Now we must resolve to protect her
Show her our love through out all time
With our gentle hand and touch
We make our home a newborn world
Now we must resolve to protect her
Show her our love through out all time
With our gentle hand and touch
We make our home a newborn world
Are we doing harm?
– by B. T. Newberg
The goal of this website is to promote naturalistic spirituality (check out our mission statement). But is it possible that, in the end, we’re doing harm to society?
By harm, I mean any substantial increase in anxiety or suffering, or decrease in progress toward whatever humanitarian goals you may support. Any such harm may well be outweighed by benefits, but let’s leave that for another discussion. Right now, let’s just consider potential harm at the social scale.
I’m going to be throwing up some arguments against what we support, some bad and some good. Before you read, please voice your opinion in this poll:
First, we need to be clear about what it is we do here at HP. By promoting naturalistic spirituality in Paganism, we publicly support:
If you’re unsure of any of the italicized terms, see their entries in our HPedia.
First, there are a number of arguments that are truly bad. Here are just a few:
Naturalistic Paganism
Naturalistic Paganism 