What are atheists' objections, if any, to pagan religions and its followers? (Anyone can reply)

[TLK Valentine]

If you look back through the last 10, 20, or 30 pages of Debates, you'll probably read enough posts to get an idea of what atheists might think of people of Abrahamic faith, their objections to the ideas and certain involvements of its followers, etc.

But it makes me wonder... what do atheists think of paganism and followers of pagan religion in general?

Paganism - Wikipedia

...

By the way, I posted this as a debate.

As an agnostic, not an atheist, I'll be happy to add my two cents:

My objection is: none at all.

My objections are not to religious beliefs, but religious proselytizing.

I know quite a few Pagans, and thus far:

• No Pagan has ever used coercion, threats, or shaming tactics to attempt to convert me.
• No Pagan has ever used their religious beliefs to compel me to act against my interests.
• No Pagan has ever attempted to seize social or political power as a means to advance their religion.

Pagans, in my experience, tend to be of the "live and let live" mentality insofar as their faith is concerned... and that suits me just fine.

Perhaps one day in the future that will change, and then I'll have some objections... but for the moment, they don't bother me in any way.

 

[syo]

what do atheists think of paganism and followers of pagan religion in general?

They think we are modern christians.

 

[Ella S.]

I was under the impression it was more New Agers that engaged in pseudohistorical rhetoric. Though a person can be both pagan and New Age. Or be pagan and take on New Age beliefs. I mean, I do.

Common Wiccan historical myths include the Witch Cult Hypothesis (which has luckily fallen mostly out of favor today), their exaggerations of what they call the "Burning Times," and their explanations for various religious ceremonies or folk magic practices such as Stonehenge. I've seen Alexandrians do these, so it's not just relegated to the New Agers.

Obviously, not all Wiccans do this. As I said, none of my objections are universal to all pagans. It's just a popular enough trend that it's worth mentioning.

As an atheist, it would be kind of like including the fact that many atheists also engage in wild exaggerations of, for instance, the technological and scientific progress during the so-called "dark ages." I object to that, too.

Some things about it could be. But it could also be dangerous to insist everyone stop magical thinking, and not provide an alternative to it for them to express themselves, or another area where they can work things out for themselves, without involving the wider public. Life is full of unexplained things, etc, and people tend to want to talk about them. Sure, some beliefs may be bad for one's mental health, but still others, like spiritual thinking in general, does seem to make some people happier from what I can tell. Including me.

I'm really not convinced that it would be dangerous to put an end to magical thinking. I think it would be a straightforward benefit to our species.

Except for the case where "magical thinking" is sometimes used for cognitive heuristics, which are irrational but they help us extrapolate from incomplete data or make split-second decisions. In that case, I don't think we should get rid of them entirely, but build an awareness of them and try to train them to be a bit more in-line with rationality.

Although most of this is subjective and depends on what the individual values, so you can take everything I'm saying here with a grain of salt. The question was what my objections are as an atheist, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with them.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'm really not convinced that it would be dangerous to put an end to magical thinking. I think it would be a straightforward benefit to our species.

I'm not fully convinced either, but I was reading a Psychology article awhile back which suggested that if a person was "cured" of their fantasies, their fallacious thoughts, that they didn't always do better, and I'm just kind of holding out judgement on the subject until I have a chance to research it a bit more. If I ever make a thread about my research into articles on the matter, I'll @ you. But for now, I'm taking more of a "Let people have their thoughts" approach to life than what I once did.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'm not fully convinced either, but I was reading a Psychology article awhile back which suggested that if a person was "cured" of their fantasies, their fallacious thoughts, that they didn't always do better, and I'm just kind of holding out judgement on the subject until I have a chance to research it a bit more. If I ever make a thread about my research into articles on the matter, I'll @ you. But for now, I'm taking more of a "Let people have their thoughts" approach to life than what I once did.

Here's an example of one such writing, @Ella S. :

Delusion, Productivity, and Success

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If you look back through the last 10, 20, or 30 pages of Debates, you'll probably read enough posts to get an idea of what atheists might think of people of Abrahamic faith, their objections to the ideas and certain involvements of its followers, etc.

But it makes me wonder... what do atheists think of paganism and followers of pagan religion in general?

Paganism - Wikipedia

...

By the way, I posted this as a debate.

I'm not sure what "pagan religion in general" means. Do you mean something like European indigenous, non-Christian religions (or their modern recreations)?

As far as theism in general goes, I just think it's contrary to the available evidence. IMO, any theist has committed at least one - but more likely many - mistakes of logic.

... but here's the thing about all the religions that make up "paganism": none of them are mainstream today.

When it comes to someone who believes in the majority religion of their culture, I'll generally assume that social and familial pressure guided them to the religion they adopted. It's very possible to end up a believing member of a mainstream religion without ever putting much thought into whether you have good reason to believe that what you believe is true. Everyone around you is telling you to believe it, so you can just kind of go with the flow.

... but none of those social factors apply to pagans. Whatever else we can say about pagans, they're members of religious minorities... often solo practitoners. Often, any social or familial pressures they feel would be trying to push them away from paganism.

... and that's what I don't get. I can't understand a mindset that would be dissatisfied with mainstream religion but still care deeply about religion to delve into it in enough detail to immerse themselves in some obscure aspect of it like Heathenry or Kemeticism, and still think that theism is reasonable.

So in one sense, I think that pagan polytheists and mainstream monotheists are equally wrong, but in general it seems like the pagans have put so much effort into being wrong that it leaves me scratching my head.

... but all this is just because you ask. None of this is stuff that I'd say to a pagan unprompted. Pagans don't hassle me or my loved ones, so I'm fine with leaving them to be wrong in peace.

 

[dybmh]

I took it. I'm 14.324598457609935738% pagan.

Or maybe that was Jewish.

Now I need to retake the quiz.

14%? Your mohel must have been very precise

 

[Ella S.]

Here's an example of one such writing, @Ella S. :

Delusion, Productivity, and Success

I'm actually familiar with some of the studies this article seems to be pulling from.

I'm not a psychologist, so I'm not qualified to dismiss their findings, however I think it's worth mentioning that I think there are better alternatives to the form of delusion set forward in this article.

Notably, this is a trend and does not hold in all individual cases. It's also a trend that, prior to reading these studies, I had already hypothesized from my own observations of people and my understanding of the self-fulfilling prophecies of "depressive realism" and the issue of people settling for something easier to obtain than striving for something more ideal in their lives.

In essence, I do not think that delusion is necessary for that level of happiness and productivity. The actual results of this study (and studies like it) show this, too. These are wide correlations.

I think we should be more motivated to figure out how realists are able to obtain these same levels of happiness and productivity, that way we can have our cake and eat it, too. I have my ideas about how to do that, but we'll see if psychology comes up with better (or at least more supported) methods.

 

[fantome profane]

I'm not fully convinced either, but I was reading a Psychology article awhile back which suggested that if a person was "cured" of their fantasies, their fallacious thoughts, that they didn't always do better, and I'm just kind of holding out judgement on the subject until I have a chance to research it a bit more. If I ever make a thread about my research into articles on the matter, I'll @ you. But for now, I'm taking more of a "Let people have their thoughts" approach to life than what I once did.

Here's an example of one such writing, @Ella S. :

Delusion, Productivity, and Success

if you don’t mind me saying (if you do mind stop reading now)

it seems to me that you are putting yourself in a tenuous position to try to believe something is true without being concerned whether or not it actually is true. It could lead to cognitive dissonance.

If you are afraid to pull back the curtain it is because you already believe the Great Wizard is a huckster from small time circus. You can pretend otherwise but it just doesn't work, it is like trying to give yourself a placebo,






And on a different topic. Han shot first!

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm not fully convinced either, but I was reading a Psychology article awhile back which suggested that if a person was "cured" of their fantasies, their fallacious thoughts, that they didn't always do better, and I'm just kind of holding out judgement on the subject until I have a chance to research it a bit more. If I ever make a thread about my research into articles on the matter, I'll @ you. But for now, I'm taking more of a "Let people have their thoughts" approach to life than what I once did.

That's probably the case in the short term, at least.

When the training wheels first come off the bicycle, you have to expect a few wipeouts.

 

[Alien826]

I don't think atheists are atheists because it makes them happy. In fact, most of us would take the red pill fully knowing it would lead to less happiness.

Of course in the movie we know that the Matrix was not set up with the well being of the participants in mind. What though, if it was? If you had a choice between a life of genuine happiness that harmed nobody else, but was delusional, and a life (say) in this world as it is now.

Which pill? I know my answer.

Years ago I saw an interview with Woody Allen. This was before everyone hated him. He was asked if there was anything that he believed in. He thought about it and then said "the power of distraction". He went on to explain that much happiness is derived from our suspension of disbelief when watching or reading fiction. In short a temporary escape from the reality of this world. I have to say that made sense to me.

 

[Alien826]

Well, I make happiness a part of choosing my beliefs and factor it in. The thing is, I don't really understand the "pursuit of correctness" I seem to come across sometimes. Sure there are some things, like one's beliefs on medicine and vaccines, that can be dangerous to believe incorrectly about. But still there are others, like whether Greedo or Han Solo shot first, that are much more gray, and people can have their own opinions on.

But there are a few people I have talked to on here before, where they made it seem like they were suggesting about themselves, "I must have all correct beliefs or bad things will happen", and I just didn't really understand that.

It just sounds like this atheist friend I once hung out with. I could tell him a joke, and he would well understand it was a joke, maybe even laugh at it, but he had about 10 questions he had to ask in order to make sure that the joke was realistically portrayed and the descriptions in the joke worked together well, and the way he talked about it, it almost sounded like he was scared to be wrong about anything.

I was going to start a thread on this, but as you've said it so well, I'll do it here. It's a question for atheists, including me.

You discover a group of people who follow what they call the Pink Cloud religion. It claims that there is an invisible pink cloud that influences our thoughts and actions towards good. You notice that their lives accord very closely with whatever you consider to be good (I've deliberately left that open). You also observe that they all seem to be very happy in their lives. What do you do?

- Point out that "invisible" and "pink" is a logical contradiction.

- Leave them in peace.

- Ask if you can join.

 

[SalixIncendium]

14%? Your mohel must have been very precise

Well, I'm no expert, but it appears he did a pretty good job.

 

[Heyo]

In short a temporary escape from the reality of this world. I have to say that made sense to me.

We'd all use the Holodeck for a good time every now and then if we could. Some might stay there forever. But I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't be the only one to chose to live in a world without holodecks than live in a holodeck simulation forever if that were the only options.

 

[Ella S.]

We'd all use the Holodeck for a good time every now and then if we could. Some might stay there forever. But I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't be the only one to chose to live in a world without holodecks than live in a holodeck simulation forever if that were the only options.

As a half-serious counter-point, I've seen Star Trek and I've seen my fair share of holodeck malfunctions. I think I'd rather choose to live in a world without holodecks than a world where a navy vessel could be overtaken by some rogue holodeck program that gained sentience.

 

[Heyo]

As a half-serious counter-point, I've seen Star Trek and I've seen my fair share of holodeck malfunctions. I think I'd rather choose to live in a world without holodecks than a world where a navy vessel could be overtaken by some rogue holodeck program that gained sentience.

Good point. But isn't that the risk with all delusions, no matter how happy they make you?

 

[CharmingOwl]

As a Lavenderist modern paganism is very sanitized. I am admittedly more age and people dislike that I believe in similar philosophies to them while not putting in the dogma or moral codes. Hindus and Buddhists don't like my practice and consider it a form of Left-Hand Path that is just meant for us to gain occult powers to advance our own lives. While admittedly this may be true I guess I even have objections to some pagan beliefs. Historically human sacrifice and deification of monarchs is problematic because it enforces social class.

But modern pagans who carefully research and do things to avoid "Appropriating" would not have issues with atheists because they don't proselytize. Unless an atheist has done research and tells from a tattoo on the person or something, they will be completely unknown as a pagan.

 

[Alien826]

Good point. But isn't that the risk with all delusions, no matter how happy they make you?

Yes, but that's changing my scenario. Would you rather live in guaranteed but delusional happiness (whatever that means to you), or a real world that contains a lot of misery? And please say why.

Incidentally, this works better in an atheistic world where there is no potential reward at the end of the misery. Is the "correctness" worth the misery?

 

[Heyo]

Yes, but that's changing my scenario. Would you rather live in guaranteed but delusional happiness (whatever that means to you), or a real world that contains a lot of misery? And please say why.

Incidentally, this works better in an atheistic world where there is no potential reward at the end of the misery. Is the "correctness" worth the misery?

Hmmm ..., tricky. Is a delusional world that has no risk of collapsing still a "matrix style world"? I'd call that a parallel universe.
I don't know. It would depend on how "fake" the world is and if I'd be still I in that universe.

 

[Ella S.]

I was going to start a thread on this, but as you've said it so well, I'll do it here. It's a question for atheists, including me.

You discover a group of people who follow what they call the Pink Cloud religion. It claims that there is an invisible pink cloud that influences our thoughts and actions towards good. You notice that their lives accord very closely with whatever you consider to be good (I've deliberately left that open). You also observe that they all seem to be very happy in their lives. What do you do?

- Point out that "invisible" and "pink" is a logical contradiction.

- Leave them in peace.

- Ask if you can join.

To me, the highest good is living in accordance with logic, so the followers of the Pink Cloud religion would automatically be violating that to some degree.

This isn't necessarily incompatible with the scenario. They may be otherwise logical aside from that single belief, possibly even more logical than I am.

In that case, I would try to point out that "invisible" and "pink" is a logical contradiction out of respect for their intellect and their obvious desire to be logical. It's what I would want someone to do for me if I was espousing a belief in something literally impossible. Subjecting myself to correction was my motivation for joining RF to begin with. If they have the same ideal of goodness, particularly if they are better at being good than I am, then they would welcome the disagreement in good faith.

Whether I can persuade them or not, I imagine I could learn many things from such a community. I don't think that would extend to the point that I would want to join a religion whose core tenets I disagree with, though that depends on what the requirements for joining the religion are and what I might stand to gain from it that I couldn't gain from merely conversing with its followers.