Paganism: A Naked Rebellion
What is paganism, and how is different from regular religions?
You should follow me on twitter here.
| Skeptoid #23 January 23, 2007 Podcast transcript | Listen | Subscribe |
|
Today we shed our arbitrary layers of corporate fabric and dance gaily through the forest glade wearing the suits we were born in — for the theme of the day is paganism.
Paganism is not well defined. The definition can be quite broad or progressively narrow. The broadest definition of paganism includes all religions but the Big Three: Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. To a member of the Big Three, a pagan can be anyone who is not a member of their particular church. As you tighten the definition, you first eliminate the Dharmic religions: Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism. Whittled down to just those who call themselves pagans, you have the Wiccans, Celtic Druids, witches, Goddess worshippers, and recreations of other ancient polytheistic religions like those from ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, and the Vikings. For this reason, the term neopaganism is really more accurate to describe modern pagans. Neopaganism typically does not include any Satan worshippers, which is a bit of a popular misconception. In this podcast I'm going to use the term neopaganism as if it's a religion by itself, which isn't really correct, but should generally emcompass the beliefs of most of those who consider their religion to be pagan.
Neopaganism is generally polytheistic, with gods ranging from divine beings to things in nature. Spiritualism and divinity are crucial aspects of neopaganism. Despite its separation from the world's major religions, neopagan faith is very much dependent upon supernatural beings or paranormal forces and energies. In some cases, neopagans have advertised their faith as a way to reject the inconsistencies and suspensions of science required by the major religions and yet still remain a spiritual person. However, this doesn't really hold water for me. The spiritual aspects of paganism are equally at odds with science. Pagan gods might be rocks or trees, or they might be Zeus and Athena, or they might be some other mystical force but they are still unmeasurable and undetectable paranormal entities. You can't have it both ways. If you maintain a belief in any spiritual entity, you are rejecting what science tells us about that entity.
Goddess worship is popular in neopaganism. The obvious question that the rest of us have is "Who is the goddess?" We've all seen the paintings of the dude with the beard, the white robe, and the Birkenstocks, but never of a goddess. The neopagan god and goddess are not necessarily specific beings. Many neopagans believe that whomever or whatever god is, is not necessarily knowable. But they also believe that the god has masculine and feminine aspects, which they call the god and goddess. Goddess worship is thus not the worship of a particular divine female being, it's a more general worship of femininity itself. Sometimes the goddess is linked to some of the ancient named gods like Athena, Ishtar, or Venus. Sometimes the goddess refers to divine spirituality that neopagans assign to maternity, fertility, and nurturing. Clearly the god and goddess concept is in direct contradiction with Christianity's Holy Trinity, so the absolute incompatibility of goddess worship and Christianity is an important distinction. This is another case where some neopagans try to have it both ways. But I'm not going to sit here and proclaim that this makes their religion invalid. Everyone is free to have whatever divine beliefs they want, and if they want to have a goddess that's compatible with Jesus or Mohammad, fine. It's no more or less valid than anyone else's concept of divinity.
One popular allure of paganism is its embracing of free sex and public nudity. I've always believed that more people secretly appreciate free sex and public nudity than are willing to admit it. Wiccans have even institutionalized nudity, calling it "skyclad."
Is there an obligation for those who are into skyclad self-expression and disestablishmentarianism to embrace the paranormal by joining a pagan religion? I don't see that there is. Go to Burning Man, if that's what floats your boat, or move to Los Angeles. You can have fun and indulge in individuality without adopting some form of supernaturalism. If the idea is to rebel against the straight lace church that your parents made you go to as a kid, rebel against it by recognizing that it's based on hooey rather than adopting some different but equally silly brand of hooey.
Another great way to buck the trend and be your own person is to use your own brain, by being rational and employing critical thinking, rather than using someone else's brain, and joining their organization, be it a neopagan religion, a radical environmental group, or a Republican campaign. Does the average modern Celtic Druid truly profoundly believe the doctrine of his religion, or does he just enjoy the company of a great group of people with a really neat philosophy? I'm all in favor of hanging out with great people with neat philosophy, even running around naked in the forest with them, but I don't need to adopt belief in occult magic and reincarnation — fundamentals of druid doctrine — to do it. It would be great if joining them would give me magical powers, but rationality and critical thinking tell me that it would not be so. This has saved me many full moons of streaking through forests hoping for enlightenment.
Self expression, iconoclasm, impatience with social convention, and free thinking are all great things, and something that more people should engage in. But switching from one brand of hooey to another does not accomplish any of them, and doesn't indicate that your thought process was truly critical and skeptical, and certainly not independent or unique.
So while you're casting off your robe, cast off some of that joiner mentality and seek your own answers using your own brain.
You should follow me on twitter here.
Drop a tip in my tip jar? or become a supporter
© 2007 Skeptoid.com
References & Further Reading
Baring, Anne, Cashford, Jules. The Myth of the Goddess, Evolution of the Image. London: Penguin Books, 1993.
Johnston, Sarah Iles, editor. Religions of the Ancient World, a guide. Boston: Harvard University Press, 2004. 17-31.
Magliocco, Sabina. Witching culture: folklore and neo-paganism in America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. 23-92.
RF. "Comparison Chart of Wicca and Christianity." Religionfacts. Religionfacts, 30 Jan. 2007. Web. 17 Dec. 2009. <http://www.religionfacts.com/neopaganism/charts/wicca_vs_christianity.htm>
Robinson, B. A. "What do "Paganism" & "Pagan" mean?" Religioustolerance.org. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, 27 Jul. 2007. Web. 18 Dec. 2009. <http://www.religioustolerance.org/paganism.htm>
Strmiska, Michael F. Modern Paganism in World Cultures: comparative perspectives. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, Inc., 2005.
Reference this article:
Dunning, Brian.
"Paganism: A Naked Rebellion." Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media, Inc.,
23 Jan 2007. Web.
13 Mar 2010. <http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4023>
Discuss!
5 most recent comments | Show all 23 comments
Remember, you should always read with skepticism the comments of anyone too lame to put their real name & city.
Pj.
Let's go over your arguement, shall we?
1. Belief in a Diety requires rejection of what Science says about that Diety.
When does Science EVER make claims about what God is up to? That's giving God far too little ineffability and Science far too much power. If it were so, Science could inform us of what God was up to and we could, should we wish it, work to oppose God's plan. Also, what EXACTLY did Science get wrong about electricity?
2. You can be spiritual and still accept most of Science. Blindly accepting everything Science says is true is as bad as blindly accepting everything religion says is true.
Are science and religion interchangable? Only if religion has repeatable, measurable results that exist in the real world--do this ritual and see God's power move that coffee cup. Science is limited by truth, Religion is boundless due to being based on faith.
3. Scientists say different things.
Yes, they do. That's how ideas become facts. Everyone picks out a thesis and seeks to prove, disprove or alter it in the face of facts that arise from experiments. Forinstance, your ideas are unprovable, so they require more facts to back them up.
4. Look at all this wonder! It needs a God to be responsible!
Not neccessarily. If it did, awesome and wonderful, but if it was chance, equally awesome and wonderful. Not having a God behind it all is perhaps the more amazing choice of the two though.
Chris, Seattle
November 09, 2009 10:23am
fundamentalists and atheists are people who don't know what a metaphor is.
browny, harrisonburg, va
December 09, 2009 9:46am
To the pagans, Druids, and Wiccans who say nudity is uncommon among your covens or groups: I've done my research. I spent quite a bit of time among pagans in southern California, and there is most definitely a tendency towards nudity and silly beliefs. Maybe it's different in your area, but Brian probably got his firsthand experience from the California variety of pagans.
Abby, Austin, TX
February 18, 2010 12:02am
Actually, there are many pagans, or more rightly, heathens, who practice completely on their own with no membership in groups. As I do, following the gods of my ancestors and truly believe these beliefs are as valid as the Christian beliefs and in fact originally from the same sources. And I have never pranced naked through the forest. In case you think this is ignorant, I have three graduate degrees, own a successful business and consult for governments regularly.
Dave, Binghamton, NY
March 10, 2010 11:08pm
Make a comment about this episode of Skeptoid (please try to keep it brief & to the point). Anyone can post:
You can also discuss this episode in the Skeptoid Forum, hosted by the James Randi Educational Foundation.
Join the Skeptalk email discussion list.
What's the most important thing about Skeptoid?
![[Valid RSS]](/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed"){kind=small}
Yu're being inaccurate. To accept believe in a Deity may to be to reject what science appears to say about that Deity (but then science has said a lot of things in the past and has been proven wrong - e.g. electricity), but you can be spiritual and still accept most of science.
People get things wrong though, even scientists, so to blindly accept everything that science says as true, is just as bad as blindly accepting everything a religion says as true.
And who's science are we talking about anyway? Different scientists say different things.
And finally... if you look at the human body, if you look at the Earth, if you look at the way these things are designed, and you do this in detail, with an open mind, you would see that it is ludicrous to come to the conclusion that it all happened by accident. Science actually helps prove the existence of Deity.
PJ, England
November 09, 2009 7:46am