My meta-religious belief

[sqbr]

This conversation about the definition of atheist got me thinking about exactly what I believe, and I was curious to know if anyone else has a similar POV, since afaict I differ from most atheists. I went into it a bit here but I feel like having another go at describing it. I've used a God-believer/atheist dichotomy here but it applies just as much to other forms of spiritual experience.

So, I think we all have flawed perceptions of the world, and the best we can do is talk to other people and try to reconcile all our POVs into a semi-consistent description and hope we're not too far off the truth. (Thus, science)

The way I perceive the world, it makes no sense, there's no higher power, etc. But the way other, equally intelligent and reasonable, people see the world there is some sort of higher meaning, some Thing they connect with when they pray etc. So I think the most plausible explanation is not they we are interpreting the equivalent inputs in different ways, but that we are working from different perceptions. Since there is no reason to think my perceptions are more accurate than anyone else's or vice versa, any explanation should take both POVs equally seriously.

This negates both of the usual explanations for the difference in perceptions between believers and non-believers. Atheists will say "Religious people are just unwilling to admit the truth to themselves". Religious people will say "Atheists are just denying the self-evident presence of God" etc.

I say: we're both somewhat delusional, and our perceptions do not accurately reflect the underlying reality. All we can say for certain is that any religious doctrine which says that everyone experiences God is wrong..which is most of them :) In general I reject any belief system which says that I'm delusional/sinful etc for not experiencing/"acknowledging" God/spiritiuality or implies that my perceptions are more flawed than religious people's (which cuts out every religious belief system I've encountered)

My personal theory (based on a mixture of Ockham's razor and the fact the only perceptions I feel really secure in are my own) is that there is nothing supernatural going on, but religious people are pattern matching in a different way which implies it is. This does imply I'm more factually correct than theists but I'm willing to admit their POV may be more useful in some contexts. My second choice is that there is something going on beyond the obvious and material, but noone understands it very well, though some people are able to make use of it via religion etc. My third choice is that one of the religions is right, but I don't like that one :)

So, do you all think I'm crazy? :)

Comments

[babalon-93.livejournal.com]

My second choice is that there is something going on beyond the obvious and material, but noone understands it very well, though some people are able to make use of it via religion etc.

That is about where I sit--though I would replace "noone" with "afaIct not many people", and then add to the end "and I am very happy making use of what I can from a variety of sources".

So in conclusion, no, I don't think you are crazy at all, and I am really liking these thinky posts of yours.

i believe in my culture. does that make sense?

[elaran.livejournal.com]

I like your first and second choices of personal theory. I'm more inclined towards the second even though I'm in my I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD phase. Not the third. Uh, the most [only?] religious-y related post I made is this one (http://elaran.livejournal.com/350067.html#cutid1).

I reject any belief system which says that I'm delusional/sinful etc for not experiencing/"acknowledging" God/spiritiuality or implies that my perceptions are more flawed than religious people's
I agree with this. Though, uh, I'm not so much for the rejecting*, just that I really disagree with that part.

* Damnit, I still have trouble admitting that I don't believe in God because it's so ingrained to do so. I dunno.

[gyges-ring.livejournal.com]

Perceptually different because you are working with genuinely different sets of sense-datum, or perceptually different because you are using the same data differently?

[distantcam.livejournal.com]

I suppose I fall into the first category. My personal theory is that I have never encountered or heard of someone else encountering something that had a plausible scientific explanation behind it.

I suppose where I differ from people of faith is that when I experience something I'll reach for the scientific explanation first whereas the faithful will reach for the supernatural explanation. Some see Jesus in a cloud whereas I see a pattern my brain has decided to see as a face because the brain is a pattern matching machine. I'm not saying their explanation is wrong, because both are equally valid, and in alot of cases both hypotheses are equally unprovable.

The way I like to put it is that I have faith in science. But I am willing to have my faith challenged. And so far, nothing has changed that.

[yalovetz]

My perspective on this: I am an atheist who did a theology degree and who went on a trip to the holy land with some very religious people (including monks and priests). At the end of each day of visiting religious sites we all sat round and talked about what we'd felt and what the day's sites had meant to us.

I found that a lot of the time we were basically talking about the same thing, but using different words. Where I would talk about finding an experience awe-inspiring, or overwhelming, or moving, they would talk about finding it deeply spiritual. I think we had the same experiences and feelings, but interpreted them differently depending on our religious beliefs or lack of them.

I think my science fictional sensawunda is someone else's spirituality.

[babalon-93.livejournal.com]

My second choice is that there is something going on beyond the obvious and material, but noone understands it very well, though some people are able to make use of it via religion etc.

That is about where I sit--though I would replace "noone" with "afaIct not many people", and then add to the end "and I am very happy making use of what I can from a variety of sources".

So in conclusion, no, I don't think you are crazy at all, and I am really liking these thinky posts of yours.

i believe in my culture. does that make sense?

[elaran.livejournal.com]

I like your first and second choices of personal theory. I'm more inclined towards the second even though I'm in my I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD phase. Not the third. Uh, the most [only?] religious-y related post I made is this one (http://elaran.livejournal.com/350067.html#cutid1).

I reject any belief system which says that I'm delusional/sinful etc for not experiencing/"acknowledging" God/spiritiuality or implies that my perceptions are more flawed than religious people's
I agree with this. Though, uh, I'm not so much for the rejecting*, just that I really disagree with that part.

* Damnit, I still have trouble admitting that I don't believe in God because it's so ingrained to do so. I dunno.

[gyges-ring.livejournal.com]

Perceptually different because you are working with genuinely different sets of sense-datum, or perceptually different because you are using the same data differently?

[distantcam.livejournal.com]

I suppose I fall into the first category. My personal theory is that I have never encountered or heard of someone else encountering something that had a plausible scientific explanation behind it.

I suppose where I differ from people of faith is that when I experience something I'll reach for the scientific explanation first whereas the faithful will reach for the supernatural explanation. Some see Jesus in a cloud whereas I see a pattern my brain has decided to see as a face because the brain is a pattern matching machine. I'm not saying their explanation is wrong, because both are equally valid, and in alot of cases both hypotheses are equally unprovable.

The way I like to put it is that I have faith in science. But I am willing to have my faith challenged. And so far, nothing has changed that.

[yalovetz]

My perspective on this: I am an atheist who did a theology degree and who went on a trip to the holy land with some very religious people (including monks and priests). At the end of each day of visiting religious sites we all sat round and talked about what we'd felt and what the day's sites had meant to us.

I found that a lot of the time we were basically talking about the same thing, but using different words. Where I would talk about finding an experience awe-inspiring, or overwhelming, or moving, they would talk about finding it deeply spiritual. I think we had the same experiences and feelings, but interpreted them differently depending on our religious beliefs or lack of them.

I think my science fictional sensawunda is someone else's spirituality.