Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

    What's the difference between a humanistic pagan and an atheistic pagan? After a post by Thalassa (you mentioned you felt a blog post coming on, I forget what thread it was posted in, though) ...I started doing some research into Humanistic Paganism. What is it? Does it make sense to me? I was curious. After several hours of reading on a site called The Allergic Pagan I started to wonder.

    So, correct me if I'm wrong, but a humanistic pagan is a pragmatic pagan with belief in the natural world, and the gods as archetypes. As an archetype, they are of human design, and therefore, not real. Since they are not real, how does that make a humanistic pagan different from an atheistic one?

    Or is it just six of one, and a half dozen of the other?


    Mostly art.

    #2
    Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

    Well I'm not a Pagan. But I have experience with this very subject. I've been accused of not knowing what I am. I've been called a Humanist and not an Atheist. I guess because of my philosophy through Satanism. I would think maybe the different between humanist and pagan is the nature part perhaps? Humanists tend to follow nature etc etc (I'm being extremely general). Atheists. Well Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity ONLY. Atheists are Republicans, Democrats, poor and wealthy, Racists and Liberal. Atheism is a description of a non belief. While Humanism tends to involve alot more. Such as I am a Atheist Satanist. Which means I am an Atheist. The only thing that says it that I don't believe in deities. And I am a Satanist. Which says about 20 more things then just saying I'm an Atheist.

    Did I make sense? Or did I just make things tougher?
    Satan is my spirit animal

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

      To me, humanism always seemed to have a focus on lifting humans, as the 'only' animal capable of reasoning, explicit verbal/written communication, deep thought, etc., above and outside other organisms. It also seems to remove the concept of an outside divinity as being responsible for anything that inspires humans to do anything.

      Atheists might have an appreciation for humans as part of the natural world, and might remove the concept of deity from human existence, but might not necessarily place humans above and beyond the rest of the Universe.
      The forum member formerly known as perzephone. Or Perze. I've shed a skin.

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

        This actually illustrates why scholars are focusing more on the term "non-theist" for these types of things. Lots of confusion for folks about the atheism label.
        my etsy store
        My blog


        "...leave me curled up in my ball,
        surrounded by plush, downy things,
        ill prepared, but willing,
        to descend."

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

          Originally posted by Caelia View Post
          This actually illustrates why scholars are focusing more on the term "non-theist" for these types of things. Lots of confusion for folks about the atheism label.
          I am a redditor. And I belong to the subreddit r/atheism. It's full of 'Atheists' who get upset that 'A' is capitolized. Or that Atheists are all one type of people. Or that we are all 'thumbs up ONLY science!'. Or anti religion. Over and over...

          Atheism. The simple definition: no gods.

          It has nothing to do with every other belief under the sun. It has nothing to do with how you form your morals. It's a definition pertaining to your belief. 'a' 'theism' as in 'without god'. Nothing to do with any other beliefs.
          Satan is my spirit animal

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

            Originally posted by Medusa View Post
            I am a redditor. And I belong to the subreddit r/atheism. It's full of 'Atheists' who get upset that 'A' is capitolized. Or that Atheists are all one type of people. Or that we are all 'thumbs up ONLY science!'. Or anti religion. Over and over...

            Atheism. The simple definition: no gods.

            It has nothing to do with every other belief under the sun. It has nothing to do with how you form your morals. It's a definition pertaining to your belief. 'a' 'theism' as in 'without god'. Nothing to do with any other beliefs.
            Exactly, which is why scholars are trying to further the two regardless of reddit.
            my etsy store
            My blog


            "...leave me curled up in my ball,
            surrounded by plush, downy things,
            ill prepared, but willing,
            to descend."

            Comment


              #7
              Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

              Originally posted by Caelia View Post
              Exactly, which is why scholars are trying to further the two regardless of reddit.
              Honestly I think personal agendas get in the way. They want to some how form a 'block' of a certain type of people. Maybe to push all those weird laws they want. Like marking out IN GOD WE TRUST on money and other crap I don't have money to do and why don't you focus on my health care dummies. Arg. We aren't a block of voters. It's like women aren't a block of voters either. Women cross all social/economic/racial/religious lines. So do Atheists. I'm ranting. My bad.

              But honestly scholars? It ain't rocket science here.

              Name any belief. It has a list of things to it.

              But Atheism has only one. Just one. Just look at Rok and look at me. He was (could still be, I haven't taken a closer look at his user info) an Atheist Pagan. And I am an Atheist Satanist. Hell I'm pretty sure FW is an Atheist ___. One thing we have in common. No god. But then the other word differentiates us.
              Satan is my spirit animal

              Comment


                #8
                Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

                Unless we get into soft and hard atheism...
                my etsy store
                My blog


                "...leave me curled up in my ball,
                surrounded by plush, downy things,
                ill prepared, but willing,
                to descend."

                Comment


                  #9
                  Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

                  Originally posted by Medusa View Post
                  Well I'm not a Pagan. But I have experience with this very subject. I've been accused of not knowing what I am. I've been called a Humanist and not an Atheist. I guess because of my philosophy through Satanism. I would think maybe the different between humanist and pagan is the nature part perhaps? Humanists tend to follow nature etc etc (I'm being extremely general). Atheists. Well Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity ONLY. Atheists are Republicans, Democrats, poor and wealthy, Racists and Liberal. Atheism is a description of a non belief. While Humanism tends to involve alot more. Such as I am a Atheist Satanist. Which means I am an Atheist. The only thing that says it that I don't believe in deities. And I am a Satanist. Which says about 20 more things then just saying I'm an Atheist.

                  Did I make sense? Or did I just make things tougher?
                  So I kinda get what you're saying. Atheism is just the nonbelief in the gods, but defines nothing else. So, an atheist pagan is someone who worships the natural world (perhaps worships is too strong a word?) but with no help or belief in any supernatural deity. Humanism then, is the belief that we are all connected to nature, and isn't reliant on the supernatural, but it doesn't label out a specific nonbelief in deity?

                  I found this quote here: "Humanism goes beyond atheism, agnosticism, skepticism, and other similar philosophies by introducing an ethical element. Not only must we invoke no deity to solve our problems, but also we must actively acknowledge our responsibility to solve these problems. Responsibility is a necessity if we hope to prosper as individuals and as a species on this planet." - from this description, I see very little difference, except the acknowledgement that if you eff the world up, you recognize it's your fault. But to be honest, that seems like common sense than any real sense of humanism.


                  Originally posted by perzephone View Post
                  To me, humanism always seemed to have a focus on lifting humans, as the 'only' animal capable of reasoning, explicit verbal/written communication, deep thought, etc., above and outside other organisms. It also seems to remove the concept of an outside divinity as being responsible for anything that inspires humans to do anything.

                  Atheists might have an appreciation for humans as part of the natural world, and might remove the concept of deity from human existence, but might not necessarily place humans above and beyond the rest of the Universe.
                  Hm. The little bit that I've been reading so far hasn't given me this impression, but I can see where you're coming from. Silly humans, you are just mammals too!


                  Originally posted by Caelia View Post
                  Unless we get into soft and hard atheism...
                  Is that even real? :P


                  Mostly art.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

                    A humanist can be an atheist, they can also be Christian, or Pagan, or Jewish, etc. Humanism (no matter how parts of the fundie would like to paint it otherwise) at its most simple is a ethical philosophy of putting people first over religion/spirituality. For some people this means emphasizing humanity over their own religious beliefs, for other, its a total rejection of religion, and for others, a total rejection of Divinity (and religion), and for others it is actually a religious philosophy that has its own religious practices... Most Unitarian Universalists are also humanists--TBH, to accept the 7 principles of the UUA, I'm not sure how you *couldn't* philosophically be one (and quite a few UUs are also Pagan).

                    Humanistic Paganism, as I understand it is pretty much as you put it--"a humanistic pagan is a pragmatic pagan with belief in the natural world, and the gods as archetypes". I would probably add that the belief in the natural world includes some idea of sacredness or sanctity (maybe not for everyone, but for most). But I would quibble over the idea that the gods as archetypes--as non-material and non-literal begins--makes them not real. I mean, yeah, it makes them a product of our consciousness and our imagination and our dreams...but it doesn't make them not important, or non-existent or without power. Real is a tricky idea to play with...

                    Have you found this site yet? It talks about the 4 main components that make them both humanist and Pagan. If you notice, there isn't really any statement on theological ideas...some humanists are some variety of theopanist (pantheist, panentheist, etc)...it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case here as well, or that a number of Humanistic Pagans are functionally atheist also.
                    Last edited by thalassa; 17 Apr 2012, 06:04. Reason: to fix code
                    Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of HistoryPagan Devotionals, because the wind and the rain is our Bible
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

                      Originally posted by volcaniclastic View Post
                      Hm. The little bit that I've been reading so far hasn't given me this impression, but I can see where you're coming from. Silly humans, you are just mammals too!
                      I guess I tend to get into debates with humanists that are all: "I don't care if the spotted owl is 'endangered', humans should be the dominant life form on this planet, we are entitled to those old-growth forests to use as we see fit, the owls can move, we need to spend more money on issues that people deal with and let the lower life forms go extinct as nature intended them to do when we developed opposable thumbs!" I also get a lot of responses like that when I get into discussions about over-population and long-term food security.
                      The forum member formerly known as perzephone. Or Perze. I've shed a skin.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

                        I always considered the term Humanist to mean "Concerned with the good of others",but perhaps a better term for me would Humanitarian in outlook. I think of ALL life with the same level of importance as any other.

                        Thinking about it,many say Animals have no soul,but I tend to think otherwise. Humans seem to use the concept of humans being the only one with souls as a way to demean other living things( I believe in some cultures it was used to demean the status of having a soul of other humans also) If anyone has information about this,please chime in here.

                        as in this quote from this site

                        "For a list of the seventy souls, turn to Genesis, chapter xlvi, where Dinah, Jacob's daughter, and Sarah, Asher's daughter, are mentioned among the seventy souls. It is certainly curious that there should have been only two daughters to sixty-eight sons. But perhaps the seventy souls refer only to sons, and the daughters are merely persons, not souls. It is not an uncommon idea with many nations that women have no souls. A missionary to China tells of a native who asked him why he preached the Gospel to women. "To save their souls, to be sure." "Why," said he, "women have no souls." "Yes they have," said the missionary. When the thought dawned on the Chinaman that it might be true, he was greatly amused, and said, "Well, I'll run home and tell my wife she has a soul, and we will sit down and laugh together." We find at many points that the Bible does not reckon women as souls. It may be that because there is no future for them is the reason why they punish them here more severely than they do men for the same crimes. Here it is plainly asserted that all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy in number. The meaning conveyed may be that the man supplies the spirit and intellect of the race, and woman the body only. Some late writers take this ground. If so, the phraseology would have been more in harmony with the idea, if the seventy souls had emanated, Minerva-like, from the brain of father Jacob, rather than from his loins."
                        Last edited by anunitu; 17 Apr 2012, 08:24.
                        MAGIC is MAGIC,black OR white or even blood RED

                        all i ever wanted was a normal life and love.
                        NO TERF EVER WE belong Too.
                        don't stop the tears.let them flood your soul.




                        sigpic

                        my new page here,let me know what you think.


                        nothing but the shadow of what was

                        witchvox
                        http://www.witchvox.com/vu/vxposts.html

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Re: Humanist Pagan VS Atheist Pagan

                          Originally posted by volcaniclastic View Post

                          Is that even real? :P
                          Yes, actually. http://www.religioustolerance.org/atheist4.htm
                          my etsy store
                          My blog


                          "...leave me curled up in my ball,
                          surrounded by plush, downy things,
                          ill prepared, but willing,
                          to descend."

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X