Humanistic paganism

[Rick O'Shez]

I've been doing some exploring and came across humanistic paganism, which looks rather appealing:
http://humanisticpaganism.com/humanistic-paganism/

What are your thoughts on it? Has anyone here had any experience of it?

 

[Sees]

I think of it as Philosophical Paganism similar to Philosophical Taoism...I don't object to it at all but dislike the description - don't think it is any more humanistic or naturalistic than most traditional pagan traditions. Many of the "spiritual but not religious" people would fall under the umbrella.

For a lot of pagans who do acknowledge, celebrate, etc. what would be considered magical, supernatural, metaphysical, non-material...it is sorta like the stepping stone where they started out. Primarily because they had to reprogram their way of perceiving those concepts or anything seen as "religious" altogether. I would also say a good amount stay with that way of seeing things though and they fit right in amongst the others because orthodoxy isn't a big deal. Theological beliefs and such are more of a personal matter.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

For a lot of pagans who do acknowledge, celebrate, etc. what would be considered magical, supernatural, metaphysical, non-material...it is sorta like the stepping stone where they started out. Primarily because they had to reprogram their way of perceiving those concepts or anything seen as "religious" altogether.

I'm generally a pretty sceptical character, though I also find that relentless rationality is quite limiting, and that imagination has an important role to play. I'm not that keen on belief, but I also recognise that disbelief can be a hindrance to exploring possibilities.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

I don't object to it at all but dislike the description - don't think it is any more humanistic or naturalistic than most traditional pagan traditions.

I'm glad to hear someone else say this. Using naturalism as a synonym for materialism/physicalism really irritates me because it assumes a certain worldview about the non-physical that many pagans don't have. I'm not a "naturalist" because I believe in paranormal stuff and I'm (agnostically) theistic. But I'm not a "supernaturalist" either because those things are forces of nature imo. Matter and spirit are not opposites in my worldview, they're part of a continuum. A deity is not a supernatural creator predating the universe; they are a force of nature linked to certain aspects of the universe.

 

[Sees]

I'm generally a pretty sceptical character, though I also find that relentless rationality is quite limiting, and that imagination has an important role to play. I'm not that keen on belief, but I also recognise that disbelief can be a hindrance to exploring possibilities.

I think that is a good thing as long as it is open-minded skepticism. A lot of people have the strange conception of skepticism as some sort of closed-minded denialism -which really won't work in my opinion...and it isn't skepticism truly. If you don't have experiences or data you've came into contact with pointing to Gods, spirits, ghosts, etc. being legit then you really can't believe in such things in any real way. To feign belief because others believe isn't a very pagan thing in my opinion. Follow the kalama sutta advice by all means.

Even if only the material exists and we perceive old ways as metaphorical and poetic, pagan traditions are extremely rewarding and they are internally and externally consistent (uniquely so, I feel ) We still live on in multiple ways - through our family, the biological circle of life, the way we touched and impacted this world, etc. Our values and way of life as a whole benefit and enrich this life and future lives, not just human either. Paganism is arguably more about that than it is any difficult to grasp metaphysical beliefs.

 

[Sees]

I'm glad to hear someone else say this. Using naturalism as a synonym for materialism/physicalism really irritates me because it assumes a certain worldview about the non-physical that many pagans don't have. I'm not a "naturalist" because I believe in paranormal stuff and I'm (agnostically) theistic. But I'm not a "supernaturalist" either because those things are forces of nature imo. Matter and spirit are not opposites in my worldview, they're part of a continuum. A deity is not a supernatural creator predating the universe; they are a force of nature linked to certain aspects of the universe.

I definitely don't see it as separate and I think it is hard for people to grasp because we are taught a certain type of classical duality from such a young age.

A way I think pretty well puts across how I see the world:

Imagine a look-out point overseeing a town, at the top of a huge hill. Reality as it truly is would be represented best by someone who uses a huge wall to paint a mural over a couple weeks time of all the little details he can see. Our day to day perception would be more along the lines of a couple minutes sketching on a pocket-size notebook page - by comparison. Add our tools and instruments to explore the world, maybe making that into a sheet of printer paper and an hour

Everything we try to describe past what fits on the pocket-size notebook page, and especially the printer paper sheet, is the stuff that doesn't fit what we would call the material world - even though it is really the same.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I'm glad to hear someone else say this. Using naturalism as a synonym for materialism/physicalism really irritates me because it assumes a certain worldview about the non-physical that many pagans don't have. I'm not a "naturalist" because I believe in paranormal stuff and I'm (agnostically) theistic. But I'm not a "supernaturalist" either because those things are forces of nature imo.

It may be a question of semantics, but Wiki seems pretty clear about the distinction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Even if only the material exists and we perceive old ways as metaphorical and poetic, pagan traditions are extremely rewarding and they are internally and externally consistent (uniquely so, I feel )

I can certainly see the appeal, and I'm interested in exploring different ways of looking at things, allowing for possibilities. But it still has to make sense to me, at some level.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Reality as it truly is would be represented best by someone who uses a huge wall to paint a mural over a couple weeks time of all the little details he can see. Our day to day perception would be more along the lines of a couple minutes sketching on a pocket-size notebook page.

Clearly there are different modes of perception, or ways of looking at things. "Reality" I am less sure about.

 

[illykitty]

Well, I hope no one minds that I post here. I have explored those websites (Humanistic and Naturalistic Paganism), because I am very attracted to Paganism but I wasn't sure if my point of view fits so I was trying to find a bridge. It was a starting point to seeing that I could have something that can be more compatible with my mind but I don't use those terms to describe myself.

Like you I don't really have reason to believe in certain things and I decided to take a more metaphorical approach to things because I still value them. I don't see a point in discarding something outright if they are still of value. I have certain "beliefs", if you will, about an overarching pantheistic deity (more akin to a force of nature like gravity) and I'm somewhat animistic (I still have to read more to see if it's an accurate term for me). But I'm not trying to force myself to be polytheistic, for instance, because I don't really view the world this way and it's pointless to force myself into it. If it happens, it happens.

To me, my main focus is this life, nature and my connection to all of it. I created some simple short rituals that are nothing fancy but nonetheless meaningful, they remind me of all I care about and am thankful for. I celebrate, in a small way, the turn of the seasons. Also, I'm currently searching for symbols of my affinities towards nature and the virtues that are important to me, to put on an altar, they should go nicely with my short rituals. It's important for me to set the mood. And I don't have any tools yet (like runes for example). I view them as psychological tools, not literally magical. But the majority of the time, it is more like small, seemingly mundane things; I absorb a walk in a park, plant a tree, gaze at the night sky, etc. I don't know if these things are intrinsically Pagan, but it started from there.

Sorry if this seemed self-focused but I wanted to share this because it took me so long to realise I could have my own approach to things. Just try it out, see if it works out for you. Don't feel like you have to force yourself to believe in things. Hopefully this is useful in at least some way. You can take my word with a grain of salt, after all I have no where near the amount of experience some others here have.

But after all this said, I'm not sure what labels to use at all. I fear calling myself a Pagan. I'm often confused about who is and isn't Pagan (even after reading quite a few books and online resources) and I feel like I'm walking in a mine field when it comes to labels.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Like you I don't really have reason to believe in certain things and I decided to take a more metaphorical approach to things because I still value them. I don't see a point in discarding something outright if they are still of value.

I agree, and it's easy to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As for labels, I really wouldn't worry about them.

 

[Sees]

Well, I hope no one minds that I post here. I have explored those websites (Humanistic and Naturalistic Paganism), because I am very attracted to Paganism but I wasn't sure if my point of view fits so I was trying to find a bridge. It was a starting point to seeing that I could have something that can be more compatible with my mind but I don't use those terms to describe myself.

Like you I don't really have reason to believe in certain things and I decided to take a more metaphorical approach to things because I still value them. I don't see a point in discarding something outright if they are still of value. I have certain "beliefs", if you will, about an overarching pantheistic deity (more akin to a force of nature like gravity) and I'm somewhat animistic (I still have to read more to see if it's an accurate term for me). But I'm not trying to force myself to be polytheistic, for instance, because I don't really view the world this way and it's pointless to force myself into it. If it happens, it happens.

To me, my main focus is this life, nature and my connection to all of it. I created some simple short rituals that are nothing fancy but nonetheless meaningful, they remind me of all I care about and am thankful for. I celebrate, in a small way, the turn of the seasons. Also, I'm currently searching for symbols of my affinities towards nature and the virtues that are important to me, to put on an altar, they should go nicely with my short rituals. It's important for me to set the mood. And I don't have any tools yet (like runes for example). I view them as psychological tools, not literally magical. But the majority of the time, it is more like small, seemingly mundane things; I absorb a walk in a park, plant a tree, gaze at the night sky, etc. I don't know if these things are intrinsically Pagan, but it started from there.

Sorry if this seemed self-focused but I wanted to share this because it took me so long to realise I could have my own approach to things. Just try it out, see if it works out for you. Don't feel like you have to force yourself to believe in things. Hopefully this is useful in at least some way. You can take my word with a grain of salt, after all I have no where near the amount of experience some others here have.

But after all this said, I'm not sure what labels to use at all. I fear calling myself a Pagan. I'm often confused about who is and isn't Pagan (even after reading quite a few books and online resources) and I feel like I'm walking in a mine field when it comes to labels.

As far as a defining belief/worldview goes - if you see Mother Nature as sacred and worthy of reverence, then it's pretty much enough for me.

I think that is the universal foundation of the huge umbrella. From there on it is juicy details about particular perceptions, expressions, values, etc. of self, culture, family, and so on. Stepping away from that core aspect though usually moves towards other paths and ideologies that don't really gel with paganism.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

It may be a question of semantics, but Wiki seems pretty clear about the distinction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)

I understand exactly what it is used to mean, I just completely disagree. The whole dichotomy presumes that "spirits, ghosts and deities" are "above" nature, which is rejected by a huge number of religions.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I understand exactly what it is used to mean, I just completely disagree. The whole dichotomy presumes that "spirits, ghosts and deities" are "above" nature, which is rejected by a huge number of religions.

I think you're wrong, but it's a DIR so let's leave it there.

 

[Mindmaster]

I've been doing some exploring and came across humanistic paganism, which looks rather appealing:
http://humanisticpaganism.com/humanistic-paganism/

What are your thoughts on it? Has anyone here had any experience of it?

I mostly laugh at this. Look, just because you personally cannot see something doesn't mean it isn't there. Paganism is generally about getting closer to the spirit of things directly -- directly working the magic, and directly speaking to the gods or spirits. This "humanistic" paganism takes everything that is beautiful about that concept and the practice and turns it into worthless pantomimed joke version covered in turds. We already have a worthless mockery of paganism -- it's called Christianity. (Nearly every holiday and symbol was stolen from the ancients in order to attempt to get them to join up.)

Paganism have already been created and devoted to faking it -- if one wants to be an atheist why waste your time? Are you really missing out on them kickin' Beltane Eve parties that much? I just don't get it....

Btw, the more "rational" you are the worse chances are you will have any direct experience of the "woo"... Closed-minds and magic are oil and water -- you can have magic and spirits or a stubborn know-it-all disposition, but not both.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Btw, the more "rational" you are the worse chances are you will have any direct experience of the "woo"... Closed-minds and magic are oil and water -- you can have magic and spirits or a stubborn know-it-all disposition, but not both.

I've suspected for some time that relentless rationality is quite limiting and that a more imaginative or intuitive approach is more revealing. Reading your post made me smile because I used to have much the same attitude towards Secular Buddhism, though of course that is now gaining in popularity.

Maybe it's a question of balance. Being attached to rationality is counter-productive, but so is being attached to a lot of woo.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I mostly laugh at this. Look, just because you personally cannot see something doesn't mean it isn't there. Paganism is generally about getting closer to the spirit of things directly -- directly working the magic, and directly speaking to the gods or spirits. This "humanistic" paganism takes everything that is beautiful about that concept and the practice and turns it into worthless pantomimed joke version covered in turds. We already have a worthless mockery of paganism -- it's called Christianity. (Nearly every holiday and symbol was stolen from the ancients in order to attempt to get them to join up.)

I just got to say, heire! heire! Or however you spell it. Okay. I shut up now.

 

[Mindmaster]

Maybe it's a question of balance. Being attached to rationality is counter-productive, but so is being attached to a lot of woo.

Generally, the forces the the world be as they may I think everyone gets their healthy double dose of hyper-rational and materialistically-oriented thinking. The intuitive side of things you have to actively work at -- everything in this world is designed to divert your attention from that area.

 

[Quintessence]

I understand exactly what it is used to mean, I just completely disagree. The whole dichotomy presumes that "spirits, ghosts and deities" are "above" nature, which is rejected by a huge number of religions.

As a comment to this, it's important to bear in mind that "naturalism" as written in that Wikipedia entry comes from the tradition of Western philosophy which, in spite of supposedly being "secular" is overwhelmingly influenced by classical monotheist thought. Because classical monotheism feeds into dualistic thinking, so too does Western philosophy on the whole. It's good to recall that Western philosophy particularly their take on naturalism, is not the be-all and end-all of thoughts on the matter.

At any rate, not sure what else I can add to top the remarks already given in this thread. Like @Sees, I find the description redundant, and largely symptomatic of needing to unlearn what one has learned about religion and a great many topics related to it.