Great points. I've maintained that religion is more of a psychology than a theology. When people ditch the structure they're at the whim of turning anything into a religion, often without the beneficial outcomes.
Humans need the structure that religion provides. It's also aspirational which helps.
Yes, it does seem like many atheists are just so certain, almost messianically so! Personally, I just find having reservations about most things to be a smarter operating principle, and I'm immediately turned off by people who are incredibly certain about which they have little evidence one way or another.
"Is what you believe, and where you place your faith, enabling you to become a better person and allowing you to add positive energy to the world around you?" — What you wrote is a good question for humans. Is this operating system making me a better?
100% agree. I left theistic religion and now see zealots everywhere. I like the way you framed religion like an operating system. Is it helping you be better or are you constantly crashing the mainframe. :)
Really interesting points, and I think there’s a lot of truth to it. The point of “anything is fine so you can be happy doing whatever you want to do” likely will lead to some sort of unfulfilled life or a feeling that something is missing. However, I don’t totally believe that religion or spirituality is the answer. I think it can be AN answer, but not for everyone. Those with strong determination or beliefs to a different cause may be fulfilling enough to not necessitate religion or spirituality. Religion though does seem to be a simple guiding force that works for most, which explains some of its popularity throughout history.
I would agree, but I think if we examine people who have "strong determination or beliefs to a different cause," who are very active on the local or national or international stage, we would find that most:
1) Operate in at least some spheres of life with strict rules, very akin to religion, or the "mast" we've discussed this article
2) Act with a background metaphysical/cosmological underlying belief system or vision that they may or may not be able to explicate. The humanitarian or the businessman or the scientist might embrace something akin to humanism, or utopianism, or any old-style religion, and it's just running in the background, driving them and framing all their actions in a way they find meaningful or pleasing.
That could be true. But either of those seem very different than religion in the traditional sense. You could argue that certain driving “rules” become akin to a religion, and they may be “religious” to those principles in which case you could say they are religious. But to me it seems like a different thing than normal spirituality.
Great post. “ Recapture the Rapture” by Jamie Wheal is a fascinating deep dive into this question. “valued practice more than dogmatic belief” is a perfect description of my position. It can be very hard to find a church that drops the dogma, but they are out there. Attending church feels like pulling a compass out of my pocket and giving some thought to whether I’m on course.
Religion has accountability? Seems to me what gets ditched when you unyoke spirituality from religion is a) dogma b) misogyny c) spurious reasons to murder ‘unbelievers’ or followers of competing religions.
I'm reminded of my experience getting my M.S. at Penn. The degree required a thesis. The program had a huge dropout rate. Over half of the participants would get their 10 class credits just fine but be unable to produce a thesis. Most people need structure and a lot of handholding, even at such an advanced level as this.
My observation from college was that many people couldn't extrapolate from one piece of literature, historical observation, or psychological/scientific fact and apply it to another to make something new. It was just an alien mode of operation for them. I have no great insight into why so many lack this ability.
I can't read your article, but I'd say the siren song is not bad. It's not evil. It has value. But like many things of great worth, it can be dangerous. We can drown in it. So having a framework for interacting with it can be helpful, sometimes even lifesaving. Religion/ritual often serves that purpose.
At what point is it no longer helpful, or even self destructive, to sail your ship one more time through the churning waters off the sirens' isle for the pleasure of getting another listen?
Whether the Eleusinian Mysteries were a drug trip or an ecstatic ritual — or more likely some combination — I find it interesting that it was a thing people did once or twice, and it apparently affected them profoundly, removed their fear of death, and changed the way they lived.
Compare that to some of my psychonaut friends, who keep going back to that well again and again. It seems to me that they're losing something of themselves that they can't get back, because they're incapable of self restraint and have no restriction imposed by any sort of religion/culture/decision making framework.
It seems we have a problem these days. We’ve encouraged people to find their own bliss, to pursue their authentic selves, but most who try end up making a mess of things.
There was a Russian mystic Daniil Andreev who, while in a Soviet concentration camp, wrote *The Rose of the World*. The book is difficult to read, and I can't say I fully understood it, but the metaphor itself—that all religions aren't opposed to each other but are simply parts of a whole—stuck with me.
The book describes how all religions, like the petals of a rose, come together to form one beautiful flower, all connected by a single stem. Maybe there isn't a multitude of masts after all, but rather just one?
Personally, I find it difficult to have multiple criteria and principles, so I use Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative as my compass and guide: "If everyone were to always do X, would it lead to good or harm?" Overall, it works well for most situations.
I jettisoned religion long ago in my youth. It began when I was bounced around between two Christian religions -- one of one parent, another of the other parent. I got a bit weary of the two dogmas and being in between. So I started investigating world religions, but didn't subscribe to any -- to any great extent . There are some truths in most great religions. So yes, I'm spiritual, but not religious. I don't practice any religion, I go my own way. And, I have not lost my way at all. I'm philosophical, not religious. I'm happy in my own personal place. I have not lost my way, I have my own belief system I'm satisfied with. I have no need of religion. So yeah, I guess I am weird.
>They continuously make bad financial, relational, and career decisions that would have baffled their grandparents equipped with a “non-weird,” compass.
It does not mean their grandparents were right, tho. The basic problem is that their grandparents believed in "shoulding". You should do this, you should not do that, you should save money, you should not get hooked on substances etc.
Why? Worst case you die and then nothing hurts. There are no shoulds. Yes, different choices can result in different outcomes, but they can all be livable.
What Stoics would tell you is that virtue is what matters, and what being virtuous or acting with vice does to your character. Other religions might hang their hat on purity or sin or whatever.
So it's not the state that's the problem. You don't judge the state, or shame a bad living situation someone has gotten themselves into.
But if you're continuously making decisions that are not moderate, Stoics would point out that this is erosive to your character, and because of their cosmology, they think this is a mistake.
The Farandolae must root, else the body dies. The book *A Wind In The Door* explains it. And Pinocchio. The entire tradition.
Great Faith in the Unknown we can only call God is what drives us. Catholic Truth is catholic, even if people don’t want mitres and robes or chrism and incense.
Great points. I've maintained that religion is more of a psychology than a theology. When people ditch the structure they're at the whim of turning anything into a religion, often without the beneficial outcomes.
Humans need the structure that religion provides. It's also aspirational which helps.
https://www.polymathicbeing.com/p/religion-as-a-psychology
Yes, it does seem like many atheists are just so certain, almost messianically so! Personally, I just find having reservations about most things to be a smarter operating principle, and I'm immediately turned off by people who are incredibly certain about which they have little evidence one way or another.
"Is what you believe, and where you place your faith, enabling you to become a better person and allowing you to add positive energy to the world around you?" — What you wrote is a good question for humans. Is this operating system making me a better?
100% agree. I left theistic religion and now see zealots everywhere. I like the way you framed religion like an operating system. Is it helping you be better or are you constantly crashing the mainframe. :)
Really interesting points, and I think there’s a lot of truth to it. The point of “anything is fine so you can be happy doing whatever you want to do” likely will lead to some sort of unfulfilled life or a feeling that something is missing. However, I don’t totally believe that religion or spirituality is the answer. I think it can be AN answer, but not for everyone. Those with strong determination or beliefs to a different cause may be fulfilling enough to not necessitate religion or spirituality. Religion though does seem to be a simple guiding force that works for most, which explains some of its popularity throughout history.
I would agree, but I think if we examine people who have "strong determination or beliefs to a different cause," who are very active on the local or national or international stage, we would find that most:
1) Operate in at least some spheres of life with strict rules, very akin to religion, or the "mast" we've discussed this article
2) Act with a background metaphysical/cosmological underlying belief system or vision that they may or may not be able to explicate. The humanitarian or the businessman or the scientist might embrace something akin to humanism, or utopianism, or any old-style religion, and it's just running in the background, driving them and framing all their actions in a way they find meaningful or pleasing.
That could be true. But either of those seem very different than religion in the traditional sense. You could argue that certain driving “rules” become akin to a religion, and they may be “religious” to those principles in which case you could say they are religious. But to me it seems like a different thing than normal spirituality.
Great post. “ Recapture the Rapture” by Jamie Wheal is a fascinating deep dive into this question. “valued practice more than dogmatic belief” is a perfect description of my position. It can be very hard to find a church that drops the dogma, but they are out there. Attending church feels like pulling a compass out of my pocket and giving some thought to whether I’m on course.
Spirituality without religion is just religion without accountability
Religion has accountability? Seems to me what gets ditched when you unyoke spirituality from religion is a) dogma b) misogyny c) spurious reasons to murder ‘unbelievers’ or followers of competing religions.
I'm reminded of my experience getting my M.S. at Penn. The degree required a thesis. The program had a huge dropout rate. Over half of the participants would get their 10 class credits just fine but be unable to produce a thesis. Most people need structure and a lot of handholding, even at such an advanced level as this.
BTW, the song of the sirens was to reveal unknown truths: https://pyrrhonism.medium.com/the-lure-of-the-sirens-in-the-odyssey-isnt-what-you-think-it-is-5ab5218b5577
My observation from college was that many people couldn't extrapolate from one piece of literature, historical observation, or psychological/scientific fact and apply it to another to make something new. It was just an alien mode of operation for them. I have no great insight into why so many lack this ability.
I can't read your article, but I'd say the siren song is not bad. It's not evil. It has value. But like many things of great worth, it can be dangerous. We can drown in it. So having a framework for interacting with it can be helpful, sometimes even lifesaving. Religion/ritual often serves that purpose.
At what point is it no longer helpful, or even self destructive, to sail your ship one more time through the churning waters off the sirens' isle for the pleasure of getting another listen?
Whether the Eleusinian Mysteries were a drug trip or an ecstatic ritual — or more likely some combination — I find it interesting that it was a thing people did once or twice, and it apparently affected them profoundly, removed their fear of death, and changed the way they lived.
Compare that to some of my psychonaut friends, who keep going back to that well again and again. It seems to me that they're losing something of themselves that they can't get back, because they're incapable of self restraint and have no restriction imposed by any sort of religion/culture/decision making framework.
I copied the article onto Substack https://ataraxiaorbust.substack.com/p/the-lure-of-the-sirens-in-the-odyssey
It seems we have a problem these days. We’ve encouraged people to find their own bliss, to pursue their authentic selves, but most who try end up making a mess of things.
There was a Russian mystic Daniil Andreev who, while in a Soviet concentration camp, wrote *The Rose of the World*. The book is difficult to read, and I can't say I fully understood it, but the metaphor itself—that all religions aren't opposed to each other but are simply parts of a whole—stuck with me.
The book describes how all religions, like the petals of a rose, come together to form one beautiful flower, all connected by a single stem. Maybe there isn't a multitude of masts after all, but rather just one?
Personally, I find it difficult to have multiple criteria and principles, so I use Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative as my compass and guide: "If everyone were to always do X, would it lead to good or harm?" Overall, it works well for most situations.
I jettisoned religion long ago in my youth. It began when I was bounced around between two Christian religions -- one of one parent, another of the other parent. I got a bit weary of the two dogmas and being in between. So I started investigating world religions, but didn't subscribe to any -- to any great extent . There are some truths in most great religions. So yes, I'm spiritual, but not religious. I don't practice any religion, I go my own way. And, I have not lost my way at all. I'm philosophical, not religious. I'm happy in my own personal place. I have not lost my way, I have my own belief system I'm satisfied with. I have no need of religion. So yeah, I guess I am weird.
>They continuously make bad financial, relational, and career decisions that would have baffled their grandparents equipped with a “non-weird,” compass.
It does not mean their grandparents were right, tho. The basic problem is that their grandparents believed in "shoulding". You should do this, you should not do that, you should save money, you should not get hooked on substances etc.
Why? Worst case you die and then nothing hurts. There are no shoulds. Yes, different choices can result in different outcomes, but they can all be livable.
What Stoics would tell you is that virtue is what matters, and what being virtuous or acting with vice does to your character. Other religions might hang their hat on purity or sin or whatever.
So it's not the state that's the problem. You don't judge the state, or shame a bad living situation someone has gotten themselves into.
But if you're continuously making decisions that are not moderate, Stoics would point out that this is erosive to your character, and because of their cosmology, they think this is a mistake.
The Farandolae must root, else the body dies. The book *A Wind In The Door* explains it. And Pinocchio. The entire tradition.
Great Faith in the Unknown we can only call God is what drives us. Catholic Truth is catholic, even if people don’t want mitres and robes or chrism and incense.