Minister friend, the Very Right Reverend Scott "I'm not Landry" Jones, Ph.D., has created a series of responses to the questions raised by Putnam and Campbell in their (sort of) new book, American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us. The book received a thorough and positive review in a recent issue of Books & Culture. Scott pulled the questions used to create the survey cited in the book, and he's answered them, some more thoroughly than others, but that has to do with definitions, which I completely understand. I've decided to answer them as well. I have no idea why, but it seems a good exercise. What follows is a conversation of sorts in my own brain. I'm happy to clarify points. Many of you will not be surprised by my answers, although I might be. I'm far better at being the questioner, it seems.
The first questions is:
Are you absolutely sure, somewhat sure, not quite sure, not at all sure, or are you sure you do not believe in God?With Scott, I insist on asking "What do you mean by God?" It's a fair clarification, as I learned at some point in grad school that God or god is a concept, and as such, requires definition. Many people use the word as if everyone clearly understands what it means. My mythology students will testify that I am as capable as anyone of making them wonder what the hell the word actually means. Do I believe in the omni, omni, omni Father God of Christianity? No. Jesus as God? No. God as person? No. Capricious YHWH of the Tanakh? No. I am unequivocally a nontheist. That's all the definition I have for my theological position vis-a-vis god at this point. I'm quite comfortable with that, as it allows the question to remain open but also directs my life to an ethic founded on nontheistic assumptions, which is to say, I need a good reason to say something is good or bad, not just a "thus sayeth the LORD."
As for the first part of the question, I have met those who are "absolutely sure" of their metaphysical claims. I tend not to like them, primarily because they seem too lazy or frightened to consider other possibilities. Certainty is the last refuge of the ignorant or intellectually lazy, a strong tower to buttress absurd, unverifiable claims against the siege of icky questions. Ignorance is no virtue, but you'll never convince them of that. At least twice during myth class I heard, "Why do you even care about this stuff?" as if questions of ultimacy don't impact the way we live and work and love (hate) together. The not quite sure part is fine, but I'm not quite sure how I ever get to absolutely sure, short of Jesus or Kali or YHWH or Ahura Mazda having a burger with me. For now, let's just say that I'm absolutely sure that I'm a nontheist, but I have zero certainty about the existence of a creature called, for lack of a better word, god. That troubles me not at all, because my life wouldn't be very much different if I had come to certainty in god's existence via epiphany.
Can I do this too? For a long time I thought it would be fun to hash out my beliefs but the task seemed too daunting. How many questions are there?
Posted by: Jessica Campbell | January 16, 2011 at 10:38 AM
I'd love to see your responses. Go to Scott's blog. He has the questions listed.
Posted by: Greg Horton | January 16, 2011 at 10:53 AM
My answers are pretty boring.
1) I'm sure I don't believe for almost any definition of "God." Though if you want to define "god" as some deep psychological experience like Jung's "true self" that is not part of the conscious experience of selfhood, then I would have to waffle on the definition of "believe," as I am pretty sure it is a part of me that exists, but it is not any more trustworthy than other faculties.
2) I think that life, in general, will continue to exist after I die, so in that sense I am not a solipsist. But I don't believe in any form of continuation of consciousness. It's not a particularly important issue for me.
3, 4) I don't believe in heaven or hell, nor are these questions I find interesting.
5) What does "the world" mean? The rock itself is on schedule to stick around until the sun goes nova in five billion years' time. The world as sustainable for human life? I want to say not indefinitely at its current levels, but I'm not competent to go into detail. But I don't see reason to assume the world won't be more or less habitable for some people for a long, long time.
6) I have never experienced the presence of any theistic God. I experience something like Jung's description of God all the time, but it isn't usually transformative.
7, 8) I have never experienced the love or judgment of "god" by any definition.
9-13) I don't have a religion as defined by anthropologists, so all these would have to read "not important at all."
14) I'm with Scott on this one; "spiritual" can mean five things to four people. I don't have a personal favorite definition of "spiritual" that would let me place myself on a spectrum, so I can't answer the question.
15) I don't think any text is sacred; from the perspective of other people, I read "holy scriptures" every couple of months on average, but from my perspective, I never do.
16) I never say grace, but I practice gratitude during meals and when drinking good beer and wine.
17) If thought-clearing meditation counts as prayer, I do it twice a day; if not, I never pray.
18) Disagree, regardless of how the terms are defined. There is no god to render judgment.
19) This survey really should come with a glossary. WTF do they mean by "morality?" I can't imagine the responses being meaningful otherwise. People obviously have different senses of what is or is not right, with usually more in common than different (except for sociopaths), but the extent to which we let those intuitions shape what society permits is an ongoing, complicated conversation. Moral intuition doesn't scale adequately to deal with the problems of society-sized groups of people.
20) I don't know what they mean when they say "good," "evil" or "clear," so I can't answer the question. If not having perfectly clear guidelines means we don't know anything about what is right or wrong, then I'm closer to the first view than the second (even though in that case the question would be criminally stupid). But if we can know what's right most of the time and still run into grey areas, I'm closer to the second than the first.
21) Option #3. Finally, a question I can answer simply.
22) Neither option is coherent. Who writes these questions anyway?
23) I don't understand the question; "salvation" isn't a meaningful concept for me.
Posted by: Leighton | January 16, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Alright, there's #1: http://articulatethelimb.blogspot.com/2011/01/murky-waters-of-what-i-believe-or-this.html
Posted by: Jessica Campbell | January 16, 2011 at 12:26 PM