The Goat Man (rituals, Earth, mission, atheist, pagans)

[Kungfuzed]

Willamena told me I should add Pantheism to my Religion title so I decided to look into it. I've really never heard of it. When I hear Pan I think of that little goat man dancing around with his pipes. I'd imagine Pantheism would be the worship of a little goat man. I think the word PanAtheism or Pannaturalism would be better. That way I can at least be a little goat man with no belief in God or just a natural little goat man.



I've been reading some of the links provided in the thread by Lux et Umbra. What I've learned so far is that Pantheism does agree a great deal with many of my ideas. I do believe that we are one with the universe. We are completely natural physical beings. I do have a reverence for nature and do feel especially spiritual when I witness some of the beauty it is capable of.



There are also some differences. I do not refer to nature or this world or the universe as "God". Nature is just nature. The universe is just the universe. I do not personify it. It is not an intelligent living being. For me nature is not always warm and beautiful. Nature can be very ugly and make me miserable sometimes. It is not always a spiritual high to be out in nature.



There also seems to be some confusion among Pantheists when it comes to determinism and free will. I still stand firm on the side of causal determinism.

For the time being I still don't know much about Pantheism. Natural Pantheism seems to be closest out of all the categories of Pantheism. For now I'll change my Religion title to Naturalism while I look into things further. I can definitely identify with Naturalism and I'm still an Atheist.

[Willamena]

Wow! I've never been the first word in a post before.

Originally Posted by Kungfuzed

I've been reading some of the links provided in the thread by Lux et Umbra. What I've learned so far is that Pantheism does agree a great deal with many of my ideas. I do believe that we are one with the universe. We are completely natural physical beings. I do have a reverence for nature and do feel especially spiritual when I witness some of the beauty it is capable of.

There are also some differences. I do not refer to nature or this world or the universe as "God". Nature is just nature. The universe is just the universe. I do not personify it. It is not an intelligent living being. For me nature is not always warm and beautiful. Nature can be very ugly and make me miserable sometimes. It is not always a spiritual high to be out in nature.

That's cool. "God" can simply be that which supports existence and still be God.

Originally Posted by Kungfuzed

There also seems to be some confusion among Pantheists then it comes to determinism and free will. I still stand firm on the side of causal determinism.

For the time being I still don't know much about Pantheism. Natural Pantheism seems to be closest out of all the categories of Pantheism. For now I'll change my Religion title to Naturalism while I look into things further. I can definitely identify with Naturalism and I'm still an Atheist.

Causal determinism need not be contradictory to free will unless you maintain a particular view of the world. For every way, there is a means, grasshopper.

[Kungfuzed]

I don't hug trees or dance around campfires or celebrate the new moon or the solstice or equinox. I have no prayers or rituals or ceremonies. I wouldn't even know about daylight savings time if it wasn't for my computer. I'm not quite sure where people draw the line between Pantheism and Paganism.

I do drive a car with ultra low emissions. I don't litter. If I see a recycle bin instead of a trash can, I use it. But to me, that's just all part of being a responsible human being. I do it out of consideration for others and also for myself. As far as my actions go, I don't seem to revere the earth much more than average.

I do believe that we came from the earth (we were the earth before we were born) and are an inseperable part of it, and will continue to be the earth after we die. People are born and die every day. I don't believe in a soul, some invisible supernatural being inside me that lives on after I die. The earth is not living or consious, but it is full of life. You can't go anywhere on this planet without finding some living thing.

Am I a Pantheist? What's the difference between a Naturalist and a Pantheist? I know you can also combine the two. It seems to me that Pantheism is a more romanticized version of Naturalism.

[bflydad]

I'm not familiar with Naturalism. But I think what you are describing is pantheism. Pantheism does not require an intelligence; in fact, some would argue that intelligence implies a separateness that implies panentheism.

IMO, Paganism implies practices although not necessarily worship or formal rituals. Also, practices are more about gettings things in the here-and-now. Although I think many (most?) Pagans are either pantheists or panentheists, this is not a requirement.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by bflydad

Pagans are either pantheists or panentheists, this is not a requirement.

I would think that there are also a fair number of pagans who are polytheists.

[bflydad]

[quote=lilithu;828028]

Pagans are either pantheists or panentheists, this is not a requirement.[\quote]

I would think that there are also a fair number of pagans who are polytheists.

I would completely agree. I would argue that you can be panentheistic and polytheistic.

Also, I didn't say that all pagans are either panetheists or panentheists, only that many/most are.

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by bflydad

I would completely agree. I would argue that you can be panentheistic and polytheistic.

Also, I didn't say that all pagans are either panetheists or panentheists, only that many/most are.

Panentheism is the essential monotheism. It's the idea of god as 'everything and nothing', the nothing part being an unknowable that supports the knowable everything part. It differs from any-theism in not having an 'imaged' god, that is a god with characteristics of any sort --the unknowable or 'great mystery' has no characteristics.

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by Kungfuzed

Am I a Pantheist? What's the difference between a Naturalist and a Pantheist? I know you can also combine the two. It seems to me that Pantheism is a more romanticized version of Naturalism.

I think only you can answer the first question; I'll take a stab at the second.

Naturalism holds that nature is everything, and it is explainable with science. If we understand 'nature' as all things, then pantheism is naturalistic. Pantheism holds that there is no "supernatural" to god, that god is everything that is in the universe. As I understand it, it finds unity in the 'Creation' --by being a part of the universe we are "one with god". But the description I linked to above goes on to point at the Vedas, Neoplatonism and mysticism, which suggests to me that there is more to pantheism than meets the eye. I'm still learning. This is what I've learned, though as always there is room for improvement:

From what I have seen, just about every '-theism' there is comes in two types that either takes into account the mystic view or doesn't acknowledge it at all (not incorporate it in the underlying philosophy). If it is left out, you are left only with God=Universe, period; if it is included, you have God=everything knowable and unknowable=universe.

If God=Universe, then you are looking at god as the actual forces and matter/energy that we are exploring though our science. God is also every thought everyone has thought, the meaning in everything, and everything we can imagine. In my opinion, if God=Universe, then you simply have two words for the same thing, and that is how some interpret it.

The other, God=everything knowable and unknowable=universe, incorporates the agnostic's view that holds that our perception of the universe is necessarily limited by the very nature of way we know things. This view also looks at the unity of 'all things' holding an idea of 'all things' that allows for the possibility of there being more than we can ever know with our science, because science is a product of our observation and experimentation, and those are part of the way we know things. In other words, 'God as the universe' is 'everything that is' even apart from the all things we can know --God is things in their 'true' state, not things as we perceive them to be.

The religions person then, such as the mystic Vedic, is the person who has taken a 'leap' of perspective, and views the world as unity from the perspective of things beyond what we know. This is where pantheism becomes panentheism, because when the mind makes this shift of perspective the idea of 'god' necessarily moves with it: 'God' is perspective dependent. God shifts from being 'all things' to being 'beyond time' and 'beyond our understanding'.

This description is made with the understanding, of course, that perspectives are part of the way we know things; which brings us full circle and creates necessary contradictions of language. It becomes like a Zen puzzle, with our own ignorance staring us in the face. The question then becomes, "What is language?"

[bflydad]

Originally Posted by Willamena

Panentheism is the essential monotheism. It's the idea of god as 'everything and nothing', the nothing part being an unknowable that supports the knowable everything part. It differs from any-theism in not having an 'imaged' god, that is a god with characteristics of any sort --the unknowable or 'great mystery' has no characteristics.

That's an interesting perspective. I hadn't thought of it like that. Personally, when I think of polytheism I think of the multiple Gods as different aspects/archetypes (which would be compatible with panentheism). I realize this is not a universal perspective on polytheism, just my own.