In my previous post, I wrote about how religion is a “language” for communicating about the transcendent — a language that uses a bundle of methods including ritual, parable, metaphor, song, and more. Think of it this way. Say you were moved to tears during a beautiful scene in a film and wanted a close friend to have the same cathartic experience. You wouldn’t say, “I cried during a movie” and expect them to be moved to tears. Instead, you’d take them to the movie. In this way, the movie is a “language” that communicates the cathartic experience far better than any information about your experience could.
This really resonated with me as an atheist who is in search of ritual and feeling more tethered to earth. It got lonely for a while not having a community. I have put out feelers and have only met one other casual atheist in my life. 20 years and only one face on the road. Amazing.
I still celebrate some holidays, only stripped of religiosity and imparted with the spirit of togetherness, but special occasions mark time’s passage and helps us through troughs in life. Glad to put Sagan’s book on my reading list to hear her perspective. Thank you.
Oh I love Sasha’s quote! And your expansion of it! That’s such a perfect way to put it. And now I’m wondering if we do have shared celebrations and rituals but we just don’t think about them that way: watching a football game every Sunday, perhaps. Or attending a Taylor Swift concert and belting out all the songs together. What does “secular sacred” look like? (If it doesn’t have to look like “religious sacred”).
Yes! Watching a football game — especially in a stadium — or attending a Taylor Swift concert can totally induce feelings of awe and transcendence for "believers" and "nonbelievers" alike. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if many religious adherents who attended a Taylor Swift concert experienced more awe there than at any church service they've been to. (Personally, I'll say that many of my most transcendent experiences have occurred at concerts — Bon Iver, Sufjan Stevens, Sigur Ros, and others who, in my opinion, directly engage the concept and feeling of transcendence.)
For what it's worth, I also think that our approach to such settings matters tremendously. If we're watching a football game and find ourselves pissed at the other team or pissed at the refs or craving a win for our team, we're almost certainly not going to have a transcendent experience. From my perspective, transcendence is about sensing into a shared connection that's bigger than craving or ego or teams.
I didn't understand these opinions. If you are a religious person, I guess it's no surprise if you see god in other people's explanations. And I've never read the word secular used in this manner outside of right wing fundamentalism. Secular is not atheist, as I understand. It's tolerance and equality for other faiths.
To understand atheism, in my opinion, maybe look outside of Western ideas. Buddhism and Jainism are both atheistic, and much older than Christianity.
Love this comment, Nishant. Thanks for weighing in.
I am indeed using "secular" in a manner that's similar to how many American Christians use it, as that's a big portion of my intended audience. Your definition is likely more valid as it's the way that George Holyoake, who coined the term, intended it to be used. I'll work to be more precise with the term. (Language is slippery!)
You're also right to point to Buddhism and Jainism — though I'd personally classify them both as non-theistic rather than atheistic. That is, my understanding is that at the center of those religions isn't a declaration that the gods do not exist, rather those religions are primarily just mute on the whole debate.
I learned recently about words having both synchronic and diachronic meanings. That the big words especially have long trains of diachronic meaning across time and place. A lot of my understanding comes from growing up in India as a Jain, but the words to express that understanding are English.
I practice Buddhist Tereveda Vipassana, and find inspiration in both Buddhist Dharma Jainism.
The language of atheism (I call it secular) contains great wisdom.
And btw, I am not religious at all, but I find practical daily life wisdom in Hindu writings - for example the creation mythology of Krishna/Shiva/Vishnu tracks better with scientific evidence about The Big Bang than the Biblical account in Genesis. Not too shabby for 5,000 - 10,000 year old writings in the Vedas and the ‘Gita. lol
Au contraire. The language of transcendent human experience, written in non-theistic language, aka "Atheism" has several authors - Shakespeare, Nietzsche, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Alain De Botton, Noam Chomsky, Carl Sagan, Ken Wilber, Jack London, Jon Krakauer, and Daniel Dennet to name just a few. And there are literally thousands of alternative philosophies to "theism" claiming transcendent experience - secular humanism, scientific materialism, modern psychology, secular Buddhism, chaos theory, and a wide range of books, classes and courses taught in the arts and humanities schools at Universities - including, notably, the study of "The Bible as Literature". Languages of inspiration and descriptions of transcendent human experience without a theistic "god" in them is very very prevalent - in fact I would argue that the language of non-theistic human transcendent experience is MORE prevalent than theistic sacred scripture.
Hi, Kevin! I totally agree that certain passages from many of the writers you list are excellent examples of what I'm pointing to here — passages that embrace the experience of the transcendent, regardless of the "disbelief" of the writer. To call out just one of the examples you point to: Ken Wilber often switches from informative prose to poetic language near the end of his books as a way to communicate the essence of the ineffable transcendent. That switch to poetic language about the transcendent *is* the language I'm talking about. It's a perfect example.
I also agree that secular humanism, scientific materialism, modern philosophy, etc. *can* include "language" (again ritual, metaphor, story) about the transcendent. But in my experience it rarely has. Even my time in the humanities at university was rarely about trying to induce a transcendent experience. Instead, it was often more about approaching the humanities scientifically — who was the author, who were they responding to, what does the text say, what themes can we analyze. It was like cutting open a dead frog and inspecting the parts to put into jars.
I do remember one time when a professor broke into tears at the beauty of a passage from Milton and the moment felt transcendent, but, like I said, that feeling was extremely rare. For what it's worth, it certainly didn't happen in my Bible as literature class.
Now that I think about it, what I'm going for here is in some ways the exact opposite of the Bible as literature. Instead, among many things, I'm going for literature as scripture. That is, I'm going for an approach to texts — regardless of the "belief" or "disbelief" of the author — that induces a transcendent experience.
People create their own rituals,myths, and legends, whether for births, deaths, partners, designated public holidays (of a religious or non religious nature), anniversaries, Friday nights, weekends, entertainment, and so on, idiosyncratic rituals carved out over years of shared preferences, enjoyment, and personal meaning. That's what atheists do. No deity or religion needed. (The fairy bear for the top of the Xmas tree is as good as new after 35 years. I imagine she'll be around for at least another couple of generations.)
This really resonated with me as an atheist who is in search of ritual and feeling more tethered to earth. It got lonely for a while not having a community. I have put out feelers and have only met one other casual atheist in my life. 20 years and only one face on the road. Amazing.
I still celebrate some holidays, only stripped of religiosity and imparted with the spirit of togetherness, but special occasions mark time’s passage and helps us through troughs in life. Glad to put Sagan’s book on my reading list to hear her perspective. Thank you.
Oh I love Sasha’s quote! And your expansion of it! That’s such a perfect way to put it. And now I’m wondering if we do have shared celebrations and rituals but we just don’t think about them that way: watching a football game every Sunday, perhaps. Or attending a Taylor Swift concert and belting out all the songs together. What does “secular sacred” look like? (If it doesn’t have to look like “religious sacred”).
Yes! Watching a football game — especially in a stadium — or attending a Taylor Swift concert can totally induce feelings of awe and transcendence for "believers" and "nonbelievers" alike. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if many religious adherents who attended a Taylor Swift concert experienced more awe there than at any church service they've been to. (Personally, I'll say that many of my most transcendent experiences have occurred at concerts — Bon Iver, Sufjan Stevens, Sigur Ros, and others who, in my opinion, directly engage the concept and feeling of transcendence.)
For what it's worth, I also think that our approach to such settings matters tremendously. If we're watching a football game and find ourselves pissed at the other team or pissed at the refs or craving a win for our team, we're almost certainly not going to have a transcendent experience. From my perspective, transcendence is about sensing into a shared connection that's bigger than craving or ego or teams.
Maybe "a shared experience that's beautiful?"
I love your framing!
Read some Alain De Botton about this.
I didn't understand these opinions. If you are a religious person, I guess it's no surprise if you see god in other people's explanations. And I've never read the word secular used in this manner outside of right wing fundamentalism. Secular is not atheist, as I understand. It's tolerance and equality for other faiths.
To understand atheism, in my opinion, maybe look outside of Western ideas. Buddhism and Jainism are both atheistic, and much older than Christianity.
Love this comment, Nishant. Thanks for weighing in.
I am indeed using "secular" in a manner that's similar to how many American Christians use it, as that's a big portion of my intended audience. Your definition is likely more valid as it's the way that George Holyoake, who coined the term, intended it to be used. I'll work to be more precise with the term. (Language is slippery!)
You're also right to point to Buddhism and Jainism — though I'd personally classify them both as non-theistic rather than atheistic. That is, my understanding is that at the center of those religions isn't a declaration that the gods do not exist, rather those religions are primarily just mute on the whole debate.
Language is indeed slippery!
I learned recently about words having both synchronic and diachronic meanings. That the big words especially have long trains of diachronic meaning across time and place. A lot of my understanding comes from growing up in India as a Jain, but the words to express that understanding are English.
I agree! That’s my point.
I practice Buddhist Tereveda Vipassana, and find inspiration in both Buddhist Dharma Jainism.
The language of atheism (I call it secular) contains great wisdom.
And btw, I am not religious at all, but I find practical daily life wisdom in Hindu writings - for example the creation mythology of Krishna/Shiva/Vishnu tracks better with scientific evidence about The Big Bang than the Biblical account in Genesis. Not too shabby for 5,000 - 10,000 year old writings in the Vedas and the ‘Gita. lol
Good to hear, Kevin!
(Btw I think you mean Brahma/Shiva/Vishnu.)
Au contraire. The language of transcendent human experience, written in non-theistic language, aka "Atheism" has several authors - Shakespeare, Nietzsche, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Alain De Botton, Noam Chomsky, Carl Sagan, Ken Wilber, Jack London, Jon Krakauer, and Daniel Dennet to name just a few. And there are literally thousands of alternative philosophies to "theism" claiming transcendent experience - secular humanism, scientific materialism, modern psychology, secular Buddhism, chaos theory, and a wide range of books, classes and courses taught in the arts and humanities schools at Universities - including, notably, the study of "The Bible as Literature". Languages of inspiration and descriptions of transcendent human experience without a theistic "god" in them is very very prevalent - in fact I would argue that the language of non-theistic human transcendent experience is MORE prevalent than theistic sacred scripture.
Hi, Kevin! I totally agree that certain passages from many of the writers you list are excellent examples of what I'm pointing to here — passages that embrace the experience of the transcendent, regardless of the "disbelief" of the writer. To call out just one of the examples you point to: Ken Wilber often switches from informative prose to poetic language near the end of his books as a way to communicate the essence of the ineffable transcendent. That switch to poetic language about the transcendent *is* the language I'm talking about. It's a perfect example.
I also agree that secular humanism, scientific materialism, modern philosophy, etc. *can* include "language" (again ritual, metaphor, story) about the transcendent. But in my experience it rarely has. Even my time in the humanities at university was rarely about trying to induce a transcendent experience. Instead, it was often more about approaching the humanities scientifically — who was the author, who were they responding to, what does the text say, what themes can we analyze. It was like cutting open a dead frog and inspecting the parts to put into jars.
I do remember one time when a professor broke into tears at the beauty of a passage from Milton and the moment felt transcendent, but, like I said, that feeling was extremely rare. For what it's worth, it certainly didn't happen in my Bible as literature class.
Now that I think about it, what I'm going for here is in some ways the exact opposite of the Bible as literature. Instead, among many things, I'm going for literature as scripture. That is, I'm going for an approach to texts — regardless of the "belief" or "disbelief" of the author — that induces a transcendent experience.
Well said, indeed!
People create their own rituals,myths, and legends, whether for births, deaths, partners, designated public holidays (of a religious or non religious nature), anniversaries, Friday nights, weekends, entertainment, and so on, idiosyncratic rituals carved out over years of shared preferences, enjoyment, and personal meaning. That's what atheists do. No deity or religion needed. (The fairy bear for the top of the Xmas tree is as good as new after 35 years. I imagine she'll be around for at least another couple of generations.)