Author Topic: Pantheism  (Read 37342 times)

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15639
Pantheism
« on: February 19, 2016, 12:31:48 PM »
I've been threatening to start a thread on pantheism (a subject that fascinates me intensely and has for a long time) for a while now. One thing that held me back slightly was where to put it - the Christian topic is obviously out; Ethics and Freethought perhaps not quite right ... Since for some there can be a certain amount of overlap between pantheism and paganism (and because posts on the Pagan topic are always welcome, IMHO), the Pagan topic it is, although I'm more than happy for it to be moved if Ver Management think it would be more appropriate elsewhere.

*

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has a long entry on pantheism which typically covers a great deal of ground in great depth. As far as a working definition is concerned, it states:

Quote
At its most general, pantheism may be understood positively as the view that God is identical with the cosmos, the view that there exists nothing which is outside of God, or else negatively as the rejection of any view that considers God as distinct from the universe.

However, given the complex and contested nature of the concepts involved, there is insufficient consensus among philosophers to permit the construction of any more detailed definition not open to serious objection from some quarter or other. Moreover, the label is a controversial one, where strong desires either to appropriate or to reject it often serve only to obscure the actual issues, and it would be a sad irony if pantheism revealed itself to be most like a traditional religion in its sectarian disputes over just what counts as ‘true pantheism.’ Therefore pantheism should not be thought of as a single codifiable position. Rather it should be understood as a diverse family of distinct doctrines; many of whom would be surprised — and, indeed, disconcerted—to find themselves regarded as members of a single household. Further, since the concept has porous and disputed boundaries there is no clear consensus on just who qualifies, no definitive roll-call of past pantheists. Given this situation the range of things that may be usefully said about all pantheisms is perhaps limited, but nonetheless a variety of concepts may be clarified, the nature of contentious issues explored, and the range of possible options more precisely mapped out.
(1)

A simpler, less ponderous definition comes from www.naturepantheist.org:

Quote
The word Pantheism comes from two Greek words "pan" = all + "theos" = god.  In Pantheism, "all is god."

Many Pantheists define "god" as Nature and its creative forces.  God and Nature are one and the same.

In contrast, many Monotheists (from "mono" = one+ "theos" = god) define "god" as a supernatural individual. God and Nature are separated.
(2)

And then of course there is a very long Wikipedia article on the subject, of which this is the capsule definition:

Quote
Pantheism is the belief that the Universe (or nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity, or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent god. Pantheists thus do not believe in a distinct personal or anthropomorphic god
(3)

Pantheism shouldn't be confused with panentheism, which is a wholly distinct concept:

Quote
Panentheism (meaning "all-in-God", from the Ancient Greek πᾶν pân, "all", ἐν en, "in" and Θεός Theós, "God"), also known as Monistic Monotheism, is a belief system which posits that the divine – whether as a single God, number of gods, or other form of "cosmic animating force" – interpenetrates every part of the universe and extends, timelessly (and, presumably, spacelessly) beyond it. Unlike pantheism, which holds that the divine and the universe are identical, panentheism maintains a distinction between the divine and non-divine and the significance of both.
(4)

And again:

Quote
A second important difference between pantheism and traditional theistic religions is that pantheists also reject the idea of God’s personhood. The pantheist God is not a personal God, the kind of entity that could have beliefs, desires, intentions, or agency. Unlike the traditional God of theism, the pantheistic God does not have a will and cannot act in or upon the universe. These are the kind of things that only a person, or a person-like entity, could do. For the pantheist, God is the non-personal divinity that pervades all existence. It is the divine Unity of the world.
(5)

Therefore in pantheism there is no personal, personalistic deity; God is entirely and wholly immanent - God is Nature and vice versa; God simply is the universe and vice versa. God is viewed not as a person, as in monotheism; there is no thing to which anyone can pray any more than one can pray to a table or a mug of coffee. God is the term that pantheists use to refer to the entirety of nature or the cosmos.

Pantheism has been a feature of a number of religions and philosophies (and those uncategorisable worldviews that seem to straddle the two) for thousands of years. Taoism is essentially pantheistic. A great many forms of native American spirituality likewise. It can be found in strands of Hinduism, and as noted at the outset, most certainly in various varieties of paganism. Of the sundry varieties of pantheism, the one that engages my interest the most is that kind most often known as naturalistic or scientific pantheism:

Quote
Naturalistic pantheism is a phrase referring to a kind of pantheism, and has been used in various ways ... The term "naturalistic" derives from the word "naturalism", which has several meanings in philosophy and aesthetics. In philosophy the term frequently denotes the view that everything belongs to the world of nature and can be studied with the methods appropriate for studying that world, i.e. the sciences. It generally implies an absence of belief in supernatural beings.
(6)

Naturalistic pantheism is the underpinning of the World Pantheist Movement, arguably the largest pantheist organisation in existence, which lists its stances in a short version:

Quote
The WPM Statement of Principles of Naturalistic Pantheism is not like most religious creeds. It is not intended to be recited by rote or read out in meetings nor is subscription to every word of the statement a requirement of joining the World Pantheist Movement or its forums.

We know that people are not zombies. Everyone has a slightly different slant on the world: if they didn't, there'd be nothing to talk about, nor would ideas advance. But people associate into social and spiritual groups because they share certain beliefs, so it is best to have a good idea of what those basic beliefs are before joining a group.

The basic concepts comprise:

Reverence for Nature and the wider Universe.

Active respect and care for the rights of all humans and other living beings.

Celebration of our lives in our bodies on this beautiful earth as a joy and a privilege.

Strong naturalism, without belief in supernatural realms, afterlives, beings or forces.

Respect for reason, evidence and the scientific method as our best ways of understanding nature and the Universe.

Promotion of religious tolerance, freedom of religion and complete separation of state and religion.
(7)

and in a longer mission statement:

Quote
1. We revere and celebrate the Universe as the totality of being, past, present and future. It is self-organizing, ever-evolving and inexhaustibly diverse. Its overwhelming power, beauty and fundamental mystery compel the deepest human reverence and wonder.
2. All matter, energy, and life are an interconnected unity of which we are an inseparable part. We rejoice in our existence and seek to participate ever more deeply in this unity through knowledge, celebration, meditation, empathy, love, ethical action and art.
3. We are an integral part of Nature, which we should cherish, revere and preserve in all its magnificent beauty and diversity. We should strive to live in harmony with Nature locally and globally. We acknowledge the inherent value of all life, human and non-human, and strive to treat all living beings with compassion and respect.
4. All humans are equal centers of awareness of the Universe and nature, and all deserve a life of equal dignity and mutual respect. To this end we support and work towards freedom, democracy, justice, and non-discrimination, and a world community based on peace, sustainable ways of life, full respect for human rights and an end to poverty.
5. There is a single kind of substance, energy/matter, which is vibrant and infinitely creative in all its forms. Body and mind are indivisibly united.
We see death as the return to nature of our elements, and the end of our existence as individuals. The forms of "afterlife" available to humans are natural ones, in the natural world. Our actions, our ideas and memories of us live on, according to what we do in our lives. Our genes live on in our families, and our elements are endlessly recycled in nature.
6. We honor reality, and keep our minds open to the evidence of the senses and of science's unending quest for deeper understanding. These are our best means of coming to know the Universe, and on them we base our aesthetic and religious feelings about reality.
7. Every individual has direct access through perception, emotion and meditation to ultimate reality, which is the Universe and Nature. There is no need for mediation by priests, gurus or revealed scriptures.
8. We uphold the separation of religion and state, and the universal human right of freedom of religion. We recognize the freedom of all pantheists to express and celebrate their beliefs, as individuals or in groups, in any non-harmful ritual, symbol or vocabulary that is meaningful to them.
(7)

Paul Harrison, a writer chiefly associated with pantheism, offers this commentary on naturalistic/scientific pantheism:

Quote
Why "scientific" pantheists?

Scientific pantheism is called scientific not because it claims to be a science, but because it adopts a scientific approach to reality to complement its religious and aesthetic approach:

1. It accepts the results of science, while being fully aware that science is not static, and that facts and theories change.
2. It respects empirical evidence and is based on evidence rather than faith in improbabilities and impossibilities.
3. It is based on investigation of reality rather than on revelation in ancient books.
4. It has a basically materialist paradigm, which is also the basis of science. (But see below for the definition of matter).
5. It respects Occam's razor by not multiplying unnecessary entities. Where two theories have equal predictive power, it would prefer the simpler theory.
6. It remains in principle revisable in the light of new evidence and theory.

However, scientific pantheism is not blindly uncritical of science:

6. You do not have to be a scientist, or even to know anything about science to be a scientific pantheist. All you need is a reverential attitude to nature and the universe.
7. While we rely on science and the senses for a proper understanding of the world around us, we attach great importance to spiritual aspects of life such as emotions, religious, mystical and aesthetic feelings and experiences.
8. Scientific pantheism does not believe that science will necessarily be able to explain everything in the universe. Above all, the fundamental mystery of the sheer existence of matter/energy is likely to remain impenetrable.
9. Scientific pantheism condemns the pursuit of scientific knowledge by unethical means, including cruelty to animals and experiments on humans without fully informed consent.
10. Scientific pantheism does not unthinkingly endorse the products of modern technology - in particular, it wishes to see all technology that damages the environment replaced by non-damaging technology that is sustainable indefinitely.

"Universe"
"Universe" written with a capital U means the totality of existence past, present and future. It includes the universe known to us, but also includes parts of the universe not accessible to us at present, and any parallel universes that may be shown to exist.

"Matter"
The word "matter" here is used in its philosophical sense. Matter is defined to include all physical objects, forces and fields that have been or may in the future be detected by the senses or extensions of the senses, or that may reasonably be deduced as existing by established scientific methods, procedures, and evidence.

Use of the word is not restricted to forms of matter or energy known only at the present time. And implies all the discoveries about matter of quantum mechanics. In other words, matter is not dead, matter is not mechanistic, matter is not made of hard little Newtonian balls. Matter is unpredictable, restless, vibrant, creative, mysterious.

"Matter/energy"
Matter/energy indicates that these two aspects are completely interchangeable. Matter can be seen as frozen energy, energy as liberated matter.
(7)

Pantheism is monistic in that it views the universe as composed of only one kind of stuff, the same stuff as modern physics, i.e. matter-energy, but chooses to call this 'God' to express a religiously reverent attitude and reaction toward it.

One of the most common objections to pantheism is linguistic; namely, that to use a word such as 'God' when actually referring to the totality of nature/the universe is both misleading to others and superfluous, since words already exist for those concepts. Arthur Schopenhauer said: "To call the world 'God' is not to explain it; it is only to enrich our language with a superfluous synonym for the word 'world'."

Paul Harrison counters this by saying that for pantheists the word 'God' — the theos in pantheos — is appropriate to use because while it is entirely different from the theos of monotheism, it fulfils the same function; it is a focal point of awe, mystery, wonderment and reverence. Explaining the world is the proper business of science; pantheism is the emotional and aesthetic reaction to that endeavour. Pantheism is predicated upon an emotional reaction to and engagement with the natural world — a nature-based spirituality:

Quote
Love of nature is often associated with pantheism, but that does not seem to be a central tenet of the religion. Self-professed pantheists like Wordsworth, Whitman, and other Romantic poets certainly had a deep love of nature, but that was not necessarily the case for pantheists like Spinoza and Lao Tzu. Nevertheless, for some pantheists the idea that nature is something that inspires awe, wonder, and reverence is important. This attitude toward nature is perhaps what motivates many contemporary pantheists to identify themselves as such. It is no coincidence that there are strong ties between pantheism and the ecology movement.
(5)

This ties in with a thread started by Rhiannon on the sacred and the use of such a term outside of a traditionally theistic paradigm - what we hold to be of inherent, non-instrumental worth and of supreme value. For pantheists this is, as Spinoza (arguably the most famous pantheist ever) so often wrote, Deus, sive Natura - "God, or Nature." Unlike almost any other kind of theism it's not a set of propositional beliefs thrown out as purportedly objective facts about reality to be proven or disproven; an emotional/aesthetic reaction to nature no more admits of 'proof' or 'disproof' than does a preference for Alien Sex Fiend over Mozart. It's a constellation of intellectual, emotional and aesthetic impulses to the stimulus of the universe, personal, personalised, individual and subjective.

The relationship between pantheism, denying as it does any transcendent, personal, personalistic deity, leaving only a natural universe of matter-energy, and atheism is complex. For some like Richard Dawkins pantheism is merely "sexed-up atheism," though this doesn’t strike me as any kind of fatal criticism since Dawkins clearly recognises pantheism as a metaphorical or poetic synonym for nature/the cosmos. Pantheism is clearly non-theistic or atheistic (depending on taste) in much the same way that Buddhism is, so from the viewpoint of traditional (mono)theism it is clearly atheistic, but with certain other features — principally the religion-esque veneration for and reverence of nature — laid on top that atheism alone generally lacks. There is a reason that Wordsworth is so often quoted by pantheists and in any discussion on pantheism and that reason is to be found in a famous passage from Lines Composed a Few Miles above Tintern Abbey, On Revisiting the Banks of the Wye during a Tour. July 13, 1798:

                                       … I have learned
To look on nature, not as in the hour
Of thoughtless youth; but hearing oftentimes
The still sad music of humanity,
Nor harsh nor grating, though of ample power
To chasten and subdue.—And I have felt
A presence that disturbs me with the joy
Of elevated thoughts; a sense sublime
Of something far more deeply interfused,
Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns,
And the round ocean and the living air,
And the blue sky, and in the mind of man:
A motion and a spirit, that impels
All thinking things, all objects of all thought,
And rolls through all things. Therefore am I still
A lover of the meadows and the woods
And mountains; and of all that we behold
From this green earth; of all the mighty world
Of eye, and ear,—both what they half create,
And what perceive; well pleased to recognise
In nature and the language of the sense
The anchor of my purest thoughts, the nurse,
The guide, the guardian of my heart, and soul
Of all my moral being.

To me pantheism (particularly and especially of the naturalistic/scientific kind I've outlined here) would seem to offer a place - even a home - or perhaps a vehicle for emotional and aesthetic reactions to nature without requiring any form of 'faith' or the suspension of sceptical, critical faculties, the abandonment of reason and the adoption of quite staggeringly implausible beliefs about the nature of reality. On the downside it offers no form of community other than the one(s) that one seeks out for oneself (online, perhaps); it has no "sacred texts," only certain texts - the writings of Richard Jeffries; the poetry of Robinson Jeffers and so on - interpreted as pantheistic; and it offers nothing in the way of ritual or the commemoration of life events/rites of passage - pantheism is more of a philosophy/worldview than a religion in that sense. On the other hand it fits in with the picture of reality which science has built upon empirical observation, experimentation and methodological naturalism but also offers a place for an emotional and aesthetic vocabulary that atheism alone might lack. In Pale Blue Dot Carl Sagan wrote:

Quote
How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, "This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant?" Instead they say, "No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way." A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths.

The same old quibbles about whether there is really any justification for the theos in pantheism will continue, but just maybe naturalistic/scientific pantheism is that very thing.

References:

(1): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pantheism

(2): http://naturepantheist.org/

(3): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

(4): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism

(5): http://philosophytalk.org/community/blog/laura-maguire/2015/04/pantheism

(6): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_pantheism

(7): http://www.pantheism.net/manifest.htm
« Last Edit: February 19, 2016, 02:19:23 PM by Shaker »
Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back. - Al Swearengen, Deadwood.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64357
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2016, 03:06:55 PM »
Just to note my thanks to Shaker for the post which I will take some time to digest and think about rather than reply in haste. Given the scale I may concentrate on some specifics. One of those posts that justify the sort of indulgence for me.

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15639
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2016, 03:14:21 PM »
Thank you  :) The post ended up rather longer than I originally envisaged (to say the least) but I'd had it in mind for a fair while and wanted to cover lots of bases. If it provides some food for thought for a couple of folks, mission accomplished.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2016, 03:22:18 PM by Shaker »
Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back. - Al Swearengen, Deadwood.

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3870
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2016, 03:34:36 PM »
I need to digest a lot of what you have said here, Shakes. I have occasionally said to HT(who is a panentheist) when we have discussed such things at the pub, that if I was to become some sort of believer, then I would be drawn towards panentheism rather many other beliefs. Some of my most satisfying times have been associated with nature, especially since being a birder has brought me into juxtapostion with nature in a huge variety of ways. Anyway, thank you for this detailed essay on pantheism (and panentheism). There's a lot to be thought about here.
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

Sebastian Toe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7719
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2016, 03:43:23 PM »
Just to clarify, we are not talking about worshipping the great god, Tefal?  :-\
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends.'
Albert Einstein

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15639
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2016, 03:44:50 PM »
Just to clarify, we are not talking about worshipping the great god, Tefal?  :-\
Dearie me ::)

 ;D
Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back. - Al Swearengen, Deadwood.

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2016, 04:27:50 PM »
This probably sums up for me why I'm a pantheist and not an atheist.

 All matter, energy, and life are an interconnected unity of which we are an inseparable part. We rejoice in our existence and seek to participate ever more deeply in this unity through knowledge, celebration, meditation, empathy, love, ethical action and art.


Unlike other forms of religion I've not read much on pantheism. It isn't something that I understand with my head, but with my heart. I'm not particularly scientific to my approach to the world, but I am honest. I wanted to believe in a personal deity and it was hard to let that slip from my grasp and accept that when I look to the sky for help there isn't going to be an answer.

But this is bigger, and better. There's a gentleness to knowing that this is it - no need to fight it or look to more. If I am connected to ocean and sky and stone then what more is there to need for? And if that is what I return to then is there a finer ending? I don't think so.

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2016, 05:16:41 PM »
Reading through the idea that pantheism has no rituals interests me. My practices as a pagan are very loose and informal but indisputably they are a part of my pantheism. The most obvious I suppose is the marking of the seasons - the equinoxes and solstices in particular, but also the smaller things, the first snowdrops, the first wheat to be cut. When I light my firepit there's a connection between the flames and myself, how I feel. Offering bird seed on my walks is a ritual of gratitude, as is planting out hazel seedlings that grow from nuts buried by squirrels.

And my sacred texts are those that grab me and make me feel yes, this is it, this person gets it, expresses it. Hamilton, Mabey, McFarlane...

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33225
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2016, 05:36:34 PM »
This probably sums up for me why I'm a pantheist and not an atheist.

 All matter, energy, and life are an interconnected unity of which we are an inseparable part. We rejoice in our existence and seek to participate ever more deeply in this unity through knowledge, celebration, meditation, empathy, love, ethical action and art.


Unlike other forms of religion I've not read much on pantheism. It isn't something that I understand with my head, but with my heart. I'm not particularly scientific to my approach to the world, but I am honest. I wanted to believe in a personal deity and it was hard to let that slip from my grasp and accept that when I look to the sky for help there isn't going to be an answer.

But this is bigger, and better. There's a gentleness to knowing that this is it - no need to fight it or look to more. If I am connected to ocean and sky and stone then what more is there to need for? And if that is what I return to then is there a finer ending? I don't think so.
How is everything connected?

I think that question immediately separates certain materialists and pant heists.

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2016, 05:44:53 PM »
How is everything connected?

I think that question immediately separates certain materialists and pant heists.

Think of what you need to survive, Vlad. Then think about what those things need, or what else they support. Then think how many times those relationships are replicated. Then think where our matter originated from, and how long ago, and how vast that is in terms of space and time.

And that's a very simplistic version, just for starters.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33225
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2016, 05:58:52 PM »
Think of what you need to survive, Vlad. Then think about what those things need, or what else they support. Then think how many times those relationships are replicated. Then think where our matter originated from, and how long ago, and how vast that is in terms of space and time.

And that's a very simplistic version, just for starters.
Isn't that all adequately explained by science though. What does pantheism bring to the party?

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11106
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2016, 06:30:15 PM »
Dear Forum or maybe, Dear Mods,

Something is wrong with this forum, a tiny flaw, maybe it is an injustice, see! the thing is, I am a hero member on this forum, quite a number of posters are hero members and justly so but every so often a posters comes along and not only sparks my two remaining brains cells but makes them work so hard that they create a new brain cell, a new brain cell is born.

Dear Shaker,

I salute you, I will campaign on your behalf for title of SuperHero on this forum, not only for the time and effort you put into a very engaging OP but for showing that this forum is capable of more.

I to will have to have a reread but for now, for the remainder of this evening consider me a Pantheistic Christian :o :o

Quote
One of the most common objections to pantheism is linguistic; namely, that to use a word such as 'God' when actually referring to the totality of nature/the universe is both misleading to others and superfluous, since words already exist for those concepts. Arthur Schopenhauer said: "To call the world 'God' is not to explain it; it is only to enrich our language with a superfluous synonym for the word 'world'."

Paul Harrison counters this by saying that for pantheists the word 'God' — the theos in pantheos — is appropriate to use because while it is entirely different from the theos of monotheism, it fulfils the same function; it is a focal point of awe, mystery, wonderment and reverence. Explaining the world is the proper business of science; pantheism is the emotional and aesthetic reaction to that endeavour. Pantheism is predicated upon an emotional reaction to and engagement with the natural world — a nature-based spirituality:

Nature/Universe and more but the word God will do for now.

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2016, 06:51:40 PM »
Isn't that all adequately explained by science though. What does pantheism bring to the party?

Read the OP.

SusanDoris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8265
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2016, 07:09:08 PM »
Well said, Gonnagle!
The Most Honourable Sister of Titular Indecision.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33225
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2016, 07:12:46 PM »
Read the OP.
I saw "Sexed up atheism" mentioned.

I would like to see what Sriram makes of "western Pantheism.

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2016, 07:15:09 PM »
I saw "Sexed up atheism" mentioned.

I would like to see what Sriram makes of "western Pantheism.

Ah, so you didn't understand the rest if it. That's ok, it does deal with some complex ideas.

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11106
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2016, 07:19:32 PM »
Dear Vlad,

Yer just jealous, love can have that effect.

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33225
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2016, 07:39:52 PM »
Dear Vlad,

Yer just jealous, love can have that effect.

Gonnagle.
I think Shaker has got bored of this thread already and as for the rest of "the love in "
No doubt Relate will have to be brought in at some time.

As for me I shall leave you all to get on with it but will observe what blossoms from Shakers latest deposit of compost with interest.

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11106
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #18 on: February 19, 2016, 07:45:55 PM »
Dear Vlad,

Quote
As for me I shall leave you all to get on with it but will observe what blossoms from Shakers latest deposit of compost with interest.

Course you will dear, nevermind, it's your round, mines a babycham :-* :-*

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15639
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2016, 07:47:10 PM »
I think Shaker has got bored of this thread already
Very far from it. I spent quite a lot of time writing a very long post this morning and making sure I got the quotes and references right - anybody else who wants to add anything is free to do so and I'll pick it up later, since I do have the odd few other, non-forum-related things to do.
Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair, or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back. - Al Swearengen, Deadwood.

Jack Knave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8690
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #20 on: February 19, 2016, 11:08:25 PM »
Wow, a threat with a vengeance. Plenty to read there; what a OP!!!

Jack Knave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8690
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #21 on: February 19, 2016, 11:16:32 PM »
This probably sums up for me why I'm a pantheist and not an atheist.

 All matter, energy, and life are an interconnected unity of which we are an inseparable part. We rejoice in our existence and seek to participate ever more deeply in this unity through knowledge, celebration, meditation, empathy, love, ethical action and art.


Unlike other forms of religion I've not read much on pantheism. It isn't something that I understand with my head, but with my heart. I'm not particularly scientific to my approach to the world, but I am honest. I wanted to believe in a personal deity and it was hard to let that slip from my grasp and accept that when I look to the sky for help there isn't going to be an answer.

But this is bigger, and better. There's a gentleness to knowing that this is it - no need to fight it or look to more. If I am connected to ocean and sky and stone then what more is there to need for? And if that is what I return to then is there a finer ending? I don't think so.
But if you are observing this, that is nature, then there has to be a dualism at work for something can't observe itself. In other words a one-thing can't be both object and subject, observer and observed, at the same time. So logically you would be a panentheist, as this implies a dualism.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33225
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #22 on: February 20, 2016, 07:26:50 AM »
I take it the a pantheist has no difficulty with the concept of a trinity since they must believe in a trillion in one.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33225
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #23 on: February 20, 2016, 07:28:14 AM »
But if you are observing this, that is nature, then there has to be a dualism at work for something can't observe itself. In other words a one-thing can't be both object and subject, observer and observed, at the same time. So logically you would be a panentheist, as this implies a dualism.
Good post.

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: Pantheism
« Reply #24 on: February 20, 2016, 08:21:51 AM »
But if you are observing this, that is nature, then there has to be a dualism at work for something can't observe itself. In other words a one-thing can't be both object and subject, observer and observed, at the same time. So logically you would be a panentheist, as this implies a dualism.

Well, pantheism isn't necessarily dual or non-dual. The unity doesn't mean there cannot also be a distinct self; of course that self and any separation could be illusory. As someone who once did identify as a panentheist the key belief is the separation between God and the created - God is in the created but also exists outside it. I no longer believe that there is anything outside the created, hence I am a pantheist and not a panentheist.