I agree that there are multiple competing visions of Solstice, but I don’t see the religious ritual format and community gathering format in as much of a conflict as you.
As I said in another thread, I see the purpose of Solstice, and rationalist holidays generally, as community values affirmation. Borrowing some traits of religious ceremonies is a powerful but dangerous tool for this purpose. Size and fellow-feeling is another tool. Theatricality is another, but definitely secondary. For the established arc and values of “The world is dangerous and fragile, but we have overcome impossible challenges and can do it again” for the Brighter Than Today, they seem like the correct tools. Other holidays, mine and other people’s, use different tools and affirm different values; ideally, we would have all the central values of the community attached to at least one regular event.
I definitely do not think that Solstice as theatrical event is good or valuable. If it isn’t serving a higher purpose than entertainment, it’s just bad political art.
I think that what you read as “borrowing some traits of religious ceremonies,” I read as, in effect, equivocation on whether you are doing a religious ceremony or not. But it’s possible that you’re thinking of different features than I am. Can you be more specific?
I have a sense that we’re talking at cross-purposes about the category “theatrical event,” and that this is related to our disagreement on what a religious ceremony is. By me, it would be possible to have an actual ritual in which people in community with one another gather to affirm their commitment to a shared narrative which implies certain values and practices. In other words, a religious ritual. It is also possible to sell that as a consumer experience. If you’re doing that, you’re doing participatory theater instead.
Fellow-feeling seems weird to call a tool, here, rather than an outcome. Can you say more about how it’s a tool?
Well, an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms. Observing religious ceremonies to see what mechanisms they use to reinforce beliefs and group identity, and which of those can be extracted to use in a way that respects good epistemics, is not. That is what I try to do in holiday design and what I think Solstice should do.
I don’t understand what you’re saying about theatrical events but a consumer experience would also be bad and not worth supporting.
Fellow-feeling is a tool because the Asch Conformity Experiment works.
Well, an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms.
That’s just plain not true, unless you construct your definition of “religion” to exclude a pretty substantial chunk of world religion. I claim that such a definition doesn’t cut reality at the joints.
A Zen monastery, a Reconstructionist Jewish wedding, a Quaker* meeting.
*Not all Quakers, of course, some are overtly Christian, but it’s worth noting that the whole thing works just as well for just about any level of belief-in-god.
I mean “atheist” is just “without god” and all the things Ben mentioned are in fact without god as far as I know, and I can specifically confirm the case that western Zen practice is atheistic. But I’m guessing you’re trying to say something more like “aspiritual” or “without spirituality”.
“Spiritual but not religious” is a separate category from “Atheist”, to the government and to the people who identify as it. Glossing atheist as “without god” is a literal translation, not a true one.
For what it’s worth, I downvoted this reply because it comes across to me as inappropriately hostile. If it wasn’t meant that way, I can explain why if desired.
I was being aggressively argumentative, because it seems to me like you’re at least tacitly claiming that your view is canonical so the burden of proof is on me. But, interpretive labor claims are really hard to adjudicate, so most likely we’re each gonna have to do more than we think is fair if we’re gonna resolve this.
Are we talking about Atheist Religious Ceremonies or atheist religious ceremonies? The former does exist but the exemplars are few and not-great.
For the latter: weddings, birthdays, graduation ceremonies, funerals, certain kinds of concerts. I’m guessing this is the sort of thing Benquo was talking about although I’m not that confident.
Weddings and funerals are not religious? (You are right that bithdays and graduation ceremonies are not. “Certain kinds of” concerts had a lot of work being done by “certain kinds of”, but there are concerts that are absolutely religious. I assume you’ll call them “not atheist”.
You were the one that first brought up “an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms” and I’m not really sure what your goal with the sentence was.
Religious weddings and funerals are common because most people are religious. Most weddings and funerals of atheists I know of were not atheist, because the principals weren’t antitheist enough to care and their families wanted a religious ceremony. But, for example, Ozy and Topher Brennan’s wedding was not religious.
And I don’t know what kinds of concerts you’re referring to at all, but yes, I expect so. Religious and atheist are antonyms.
As a short argument: Good is to Evil as Atheist is to Religious. It’s as weird to say that an atheist ceremony is religious as to say that an evil person is good.
I don’t think this argument is especially worth continuing, but my short rebuttal is “no. The opposite of theism is anti-theism. Religion != Theism, and atheism is not even obligated to have a strong opinion on theism apart from “not true.”
I agree that there are multiple competing visions of Solstice, but I don’t see the religious ritual format and community gathering format in as much of a conflict as you.
As I said in another thread, I see the purpose of Solstice, and rationalist holidays generally, as community values affirmation. Borrowing some traits of religious ceremonies is a powerful but dangerous tool for this purpose. Size and fellow-feeling is another tool. Theatricality is another, but definitely secondary. For the established arc and values of “The world is dangerous and fragile, but we have overcome impossible challenges and can do it again” for the Brighter Than Today, they seem like the correct tools. Other holidays, mine and other people’s, use different tools and affirm different values; ideally, we would have all the central values of the community attached to at least one regular event.
I definitely do not think that Solstice as theatrical event is good or valuable. If it isn’t serving a higher purpose than entertainment, it’s just bad political art.
I think that what you read as “borrowing some traits of religious ceremonies,” I read as, in effect, equivocation on whether you are doing a religious ceremony or not. But it’s possible that you’re thinking of different features than I am. Can you be more specific?
I have a sense that we’re talking at cross-purposes about the category “theatrical event,” and that this is related to our disagreement on what a religious ceremony is. By me, it would be possible to have an actual ritual in which people in community with one another gather to affirm their commitment to a shared narrative which implies certain values and practices. In other words, a religious ritual. It is also possible to sell that as a consumer experience. If you’re doing that, you’re doing participatory theater instead.
Fellow-feeling seems weird to call a tool, here, rather than an outcome. Can you say more about how it’s a tool?
Well, an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms. Observing religious ceremonies to see what mechanisms they use to reinforce beliefs and group identity, and which of those can be extracted to use in a way that respects good epistemics, is not. That is what I try to do in holiday design and what I think Solstice should do.
I don’t understand what you’re saying about theatrical events but a consumer experience would also be bad and not worth supporting.
Fellow-feeling is a tool because the Asch Conformity Experiment works.
By fellow-feeling, do you pretty much mean social proof?
That’s just plain not true, unless you construct your definition of “religion” to exclude a pretty substantial chunk of world religion. I claim that such a definition doesn’t cut reality at the joints.
I don’t believe you. Please provide three examples of atheist religious ceremonies.
A Zen monastery, a Reconstructionist Jewish wedding, a Quaker* meeting.
*Not all Quakers, of course, some are overtly Christian, but it’s worth noting that the whole thing works just as well for just about any level of belief-in-god.
I wouldn’t term those atheist.
I mean “atheist” is just “without god” and all the things Ben mentioned are in fact without god as far as I know, and I can specifically confirm the case that western Zen practice is atheistic. But I’m guessing you’re trying to say something more like “aspiritual” or “without spirituality”.
“Spiritual but not religious” is a separate category from “Atheist”, to the government and to the people who identify as it. Glossing atheist as “without god” is a literal translation, not a true one.
For what it’s worth, I downvoted this reply because it comes across to me as inappropriately hostile. If it wasn’t meant that way, I can explain why if desired.
That seems fair. It was a reply to a comment I perceived as hostile.
I was being aggressively argumentative, because it seems to me like you’re at least tacitly claiming that your view is canonical so the burden of proof is on me. But, interpretive labor claims are really hard to adjudicate, so most likely we’re each gonna have to do more than we think is fair if we’re gonna resolve this.
Are we talking about Atheist Religious Ceremonies or atheist religious ceremonies? The former does exist but the exemplars are few and not-great.
For the latter: weddings, birthdays, graduation ceremonies, funerals, certain kinds of concerts. I’m guessing this is the sort of thing Benquo was talking about although I’m not that confident.
I don’t consider those religious.
Weddings and funerals are not religious? (You are right that bithdays and graduation ceremonies are not. “Certain kinds of” concerts had a lot of work being done by “certain kinds of”, but there are concerts that are absolutely religious. I assume you’ll call them “not atheist”.
You were the one that first brought up “an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms” and I’m not really sure what your goal with the sentence was.
Religious weddings and funerals are common because most people are religious. Most weddings and funerals of atheists I know of were not atheist, because the principals weren’t antitheist enough to care and their families wanted a religious ceremony. But, for example, Ozy and Topher Brennan’s wedding was not religious.
And I don’t know what kinds of concerts you’re referring to at all, but yes, I expect so. Religious and atheist are antonyms.
This is an argument about definitions, and I’m not sure what the point is.
As a short argument: Good is to Evil as Atheist is to Religious. It’s as weird to say that an atheist ceremony is religious as to say that an evil person is good.
I don’t think this argument is especially worth continuing, but my short rebuttal is “no. The opposite of theism is anti-theism. Religion != Theism, and atheism is not even obligated to have a strong opinion on theism apart from “not true.”