“Hanging with the Humanists #2”
The question I’m asked on arriving at my first Central London Humanists social is whether I am ‘running from religion’ or ‘merely indifferent to it?’. These are, I’m told, the two main reasons new members give for wanting to join the humanists.
I am not sure if either of those apply to me. I answer instead that after recently attending and enjoying one of their lectures I’m simply curious to find out more. If truth be told, I am also nervous. I’m feeling that ‘edginess’ that comes from stepping outside one’s habitual territory.
Dealing with differences
Historically, I’ve had a bad habit of hiding what I really think and feel when in the company of people I deem different to me. If I think they are likely to be sceptical or hostile to my views I often choose to ‘keep shtum’.
The upside of this is I spare myself unpleasant encounters with ignorant belligerent types who argue for their own entertainment. The downside is I deprive myself (and others) of opportunities to learn and to discover things in our differences.
I suppose I’ve never felt that confident (or arguably, interested) in explaining and debating my beliefs with a scientifically-minded, scrutinising sceptic.
‘Scientific’ and ‘sceptical’ are not words I have tended to use to describe myself – although that’s probably more to do with perception than reality. Biology, chemistry and physics were my worst subjects at school and I dropped them at the earliest opportunity. My strongest subjects were always languages and the arts. In adult life I’ve always leaned towards the creative, the alternative and the ‘otherworldy’.
On the other hand, I’ve also had an unquenchable curiosity about life which leads me to do all sorts of things in the name of learning.
That is one of the reasons I’m here.
And I’m in good company.
Religious identities
As a newbie I am made to feel very welcome by the diverse bunch of people I meet: all intelligent, open, questioning types – albeit rather serious, at least in this context.
So I decide to come clean.
“I’m not actually an atheist or an agnostic.”
Raised eyebrows.
“And I’m definitely not religious either.”
Raised friendly eyebrows.
“I would describe myself as spiritual, not religious.”
My confession is met with the following responses:
Firstly – to reassure me that everyone is welcome, provided they don’t come to preach and proselytize (posh word for trying to shove your beliefs down someone else’s throat).
Secondly – to reassure me that the group does include people of varying degrees of faith and no faith. Like most things, of course, it’s rarely black and white.
One quietly-spoken man in his early 30s tells me about a graph he often refers to in conversations on the nuances of belief.
Atheist, theist, agnostic, gnostic
I later find this in a blog post by Peter Brietbart, published in Freethinker magazine in October 2015.
Peter Brietbart discusses definitions in Freethinker
(Click on the link to view the graph or see quick table summary below.)
In the graph the four main terms (atheist, theist, agnostic, gnostic) are arranged with their opposites across from them, allowing for ‘a very rough placement of one’s theological position’.
| BELIEF | KNOWLEDGE |
| ATHEIST:
no belief in God | AGNOSTIC:
thinks we cannot know if God exists or not |
| THEIST:
belief in God | GNOSTIC:
thinks we can know if God exists or not |
According to Brietbart, the 2 most common positions are:
‘An atheist agnostic is someone who does not believe in a god/gods and also thinks that the existence of gods cannot be known. This might mean that they don’t believe (…) because they haven’t seen any evidence that supports their existence.
A theist gnostic is someone who believes in a god/gods and thinks that the existence of gods can be known. This position is usually referred to as just ‘theist‘, since people who believe in gods, usually also think that their existence can be known.’
I ask the man where he would position himself on the graph and wonder how I might respond to the same question.
Spiritual, not religious
I’m quite surprised that none of the people I’m chatting with ask me what I mean by ‘spiritual’. After all, it has become such a banded-about term, interpreted so differently by those who identify with it and those who don’t.
Their responses are gentler and more respectful than I had imagined.
This is good.
It makes me want to go back for more.
It also leaves me wanting to scrutinise myself: to question my own beliefs and definitions; to apply that more rigorous, scientific method to my own ‘madness’ – at least as a way of preparing for my next night down the pub with the humanists.
QUESTION: Where would you position yourself on Peter Brietbart’s graph?
If you enjoyed this post – please rate it above, share it via icons below, subscribe via right sidebar, or post a comment!
