In your opinion are atheism and pantheism compatible? (xpost from ER&A)

[GliderGuider]

After 56 years of being a "strong atheist" I've recently begun to self-identify as a pantheist. I've written about the background to this change in an article here on my web site. Basically, it was a response to my growing comprehension of the terrifying box humanity has gotten itself into. The walls of this box have been constructed of our wanton over-use of the planet's resources, the extent to which resource depletion and waste buildups threaten both human and non-human life, our burgeoning population and our apparent inability to change our course even in the face of our potential extinction.

This acute concern with the rest of the planet prompted a couple of significant changes in my perspective. I've gone from seeing the universe as consisting essentially of things that have connections between them, to a universe composed of connections that link the things that exist in it. In addition, I've expanded my philosophy beyond the ineluctably anthropocentric viewpoint of secular humanism. My understanding now is that humanity exists within the universe simply as one of its elements. The fact that humans are to some extent sapient, sentient and self-reflective still allows secular humanism to be used as a framework for understanding specifically inter-human actions. Considered in a wider context, however, humans are simply another part of the natural universe, different from other elements of it in the same sense that stars are different from termites, but not significantly more so. Pantheism is considered by most to be a nature-centered philosophy, but given the insight above, humanity assumes a comfortable position within nature, with the result that cities can be seen as no less "natural" than forests.

The key idea of pantheism is the apprehension of the unity of all that exists. The rub for an atheist comes with the further attribution of sacredness to that unity. This can be seen as simply an extension of scientific wonder in face of the huge, complex and unknown aspects of the universe, but it seems to be more than that. The feeling could be described as awe, but the first realization of it, for me anyway, was a decidedly numinous experience that differed qualitatively from simple wonder and awe. Now, that's perhaps neither here nor there - there are many things that can induce such feelings, from temporal lobe epilepsy to oxygen deprivation to drugs, but the aftereffects seem quite profound. Just the change in perspective from the importance of things to the importance of connections (or as my girlfriend jokingly put it, "What matters is the immaterial") prompts radically different processes of analysis and decision-making, potentially leading to quite different outcomes in the real world as well as just different responses to it.

So, given that I still maintain my strong atheistic stance that there are no gods in the traditional sense of supernatural beings that are apart from and transcendent over the natural universe, how am I to understand this newfound sense of sacredness? And there is the even thornier question of worship. The universe obviously doesn't need to be worshipped. It just is, and it cares not a whit about worship or anything else (in this way pantheism is very different from the Gaian philosophy of James Lovelock). However, it now seems important to me to make some expression of reverence toward the universe. I suppose the purpose is to reinforce within myself a consciousness of the importance of behaving in harmony with the universe: avoiding typical anthropocentric excesses and trying to remediate the planetary damage already caused by those excesses.

What form should this expression of reverence take? Meditation is one obvious avenue, as are some of the nature-centered rituals of neopagan faiths. I'm personally satisfied that such expressions can be made without crossing the line into worship or personifying any aspect of the universe.

I'm finding tremendous personal value in this shift in perspective, and thought I'd throw it up here for comments.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Hello!

I've a couple of answers for you-one from the Dalai Lama. A group of Sufis had a personal audience with him at his lamasary in India, and one asked the difference between Sufism and Buddhism. His Holiness answered, "In Sufism, everything is. In Buddhism, nothing is. Same thing, no difference."


Now my answer. I think the sense of sacredness you feel is a part of your own self, which is, of course, interconnected to everything and everyone. When I remember to look, I have the feeling of being very loved in a very gentle and peaceful way. Is it God? The Sufis call It The Beloved. Our practices are designed to take away all illusions so that we can be at one with It. We do this by meditating, but also by various practices-a walk in nature could be one, being in the present moment is another. The main practice shared by all Sufis is zkr, which is a ceremony of remembrance. Again, the point is not how, but what -- experience.

[Why Syzygy]

2. I'm afraid I don't think so.

Except the way you explain atheism leaves the door open.
I still maintain my strong atheistic stance that there are no gods in the traditional sense of supernatural beings that are apart from and transcendent over the natural universe, how am I to understand this newfound sense of sacredness?

I have given this much thought because I really identify with the paradigms of humanistic atheism. Tonight I read about folks who call themselves "Spiritual Humanists". That sits pretty well. For the most part I don't like labels due to what they leave out of a concept.

Even though I mostly agree with your statement above, I have seen Shamans who really can transcend "nature". They do that by being at one with Nature in all her forms. So is it really transcendence or just seems so because we have limited our experiences? I think the latter. I believe a transcendent quality exists in all of us and All.

In my practices I do call on the 'gods' or spirits of the directions, earth, sun, moon, etc. And the deities I feel comfortable with are ones who are strongly tied to a concept I want to work with. It is more about energy than 'god'. When I walk through nature and stop to watch the spring water dripping from the cliffs and admire the moss growing and how quiet it is and totally focused on being great moss, I feel a sense of awe and wonder. Is that worship? I think so.

Are all atheists spiritual skeptics? I'm sincerely curious. It's only called spiritual because it has to do with things beyond what we consider physical. So, perhaps your answer depends on how you believe in things we don't 'see'.