I'm reminded of 2 quotes from the American composer John Cage, both from around 1990. One I read in a bookstore: somebody put together one of those lazy projects where you go around asking a bunch of famous people the same question and record their answers. This one was titled *Why Are We Here?*, and Cage's answer was "No why. Just here."
Around the same time I attended a performance of his in a small space, and afterwards he walked through the crowd, and my friend, knowing his hobby was mycology, asked him "What is your favorite mushroom?" His answer was "The one I have."
Reminds me of something I've been thinking about. Every organization has multiple levels of participation/dedicatedness. There's some True Believers, who want to support, grow, and control it; they make the core. Outside them, there's the casual believers, who vaguely support it, but won't dedicate too much effort/time; their interest is fungible, and can switch to a similar cause or org. Then there are the social believers, who are mainly interested in having a good time/networking; their views on the ostensible purpose of the group are vague. Different groups have different percentages, and people may play different roles in the various groups they're in.
What we're seeing in religion is social believers leaving churches, since there's no longer any obligation, and they can get what they want elsewhere. Casual believers move from church to church, trying to find one that gives them meaning without too much obligation. And true believers are left clinging to what's left, and either doubling down (evaporative distillation) or breaking apart.
Of course, there's also traditions, and social obligations, and the insistence of every parent that their child be as much like them as possible, and logistics, the creation of new types of community thanks to the Internet, plus other factors. Also, Americans take more of a cafeteria (or buffet) approach to things; individual self-fulfillment is our highest good.
Personally, I don't know what I am. Grew up Christian cause my parents were, tried actually believing that for a couple years, but it didn't hold up. Was an existentialist for a decade, just finding my own meaning (or not caring). Now? Maybe I'm just not able to find meaning in what I do (or don't do) in life; all I do is consume. Casting around for some kind of more rigorous philosophy that's compatible with my existentialism. Still secular in practice, but more spiritual in thought.
Your hypothesis inspired me to look it up. As per Gallup, the percentage of people who attend religious services "every week" has declined more than any other category in the past 20 years. Those who say they attend "about once a month" or "seldom" have declined only a couple points. Only the people who say they attend "*almost* every week", the second most religious group, has stayed the same, which is curious. The "never" group more than doubled.
Your story is interesting. I think spirituality is more of an action than a set of ideas or principles. It's the practice of cultivating connectedness, living in the present, and exploring your own mind from the first person. I wrote a bit about it here: https://americandreaming.substack.com/p/believers-atheists-and-the-unexamined
My hypothesis was inspired by the essay "geeks, MOPs, and sociopaths." It's a look at a different type of group, but similar dynamics. The actual degree of belief and participation in religion is obscured by doctrine that requires people to at least act like they're True Believers, plus social stigma (light) for lukewarm believers and (heavy) for non-believers. Also, I wonder where the tipping point is; if organizations patrol their boundaries and demand greater internal consistency, does that keep their numbers up, or mean that their members fall below the "don't care" point faster and leave?
I like that you actually think, and that you are approaching a fundamental issue. We need to get back to basics. Some people grew up in families where they experience no certainty and utter neglect, so they are highly tuned to seek certainty. Other people grew up in families that provided great certainty and care, but were not able to reproduce that surety outside their birth family: So, they are searching for a return to certainty.
Of course, the answer to, "How do we help people to find meaning?" is to point out that externally there is only chaos with incidents of passing certainty. Then, show them that every individual creates their own concept of the world, and assigns their own meaning. Go shopping for what you personally find coherent and helpful in life. Be yourself. Trust yourself. Practice that.
Adopting somebody else's religion or politics is a step in that direction, but too many people think the Bible is the Word Of God or that a political platform is the only right solution. They get stuck in this instant solution to their search for meaning, and fail to exercise their power to choose. They stop growing.
> The longer term goal is figuring out why American culture produces more meaning junkies than other prosperous nations, and how we might nudge it in other, more meaning-sensitive directions. Instead of distributing meaning methadone across society, maybe we ought to.
That's the 1st level thought; not long term. Your retarded rant is <1 level thought.
"Hey guys, buncha magicians are tricking you with card tricks!!"
Cool? Who the fuck are you talking to?
As if you think you need to inform people, that Hitler's claims on Jews being rats, is incorrect.
Shut the fuck up on this toddler shit, and actually fucking say something.
The fundamental problem here, is that your vaunted claims of your sanguine stance forged in the the banalities of life (which no one would seek to deny in a vacuum), is subsequently, in immediacy, contradicted, in the revelation that you think caricatured clowns is a valid prism by which to to contrasted?
Sorry but"
Dumb post: "Oh man people are so confused on why I'm so content" = Meaning-Pontificators: "Man why are all these orcs so confused about meaning???"
If you can't even offer a single, fucking, thought, of a pragmatic examination, and consider this BASIC FUCKING THING; and it its stead, offer some high-level-metaphysical-complexity-math-that-will-be-solved-by-future-historians, then why the fuck, would you think, your consideration is supposed to mean something on this matter?
*Hey guys, I like the color red; dunno what the fucks are bitching about tryna find colors.*
Charlatans they may be, but your smug, re-explaining, that says nothing about the reality that is being interacting with, doesn't provide you any currency in falsifying the confusions they are gameifying.
You're fucking staring at rabbits eating lettuce, asking a question of "man why they eating lettuce lol? I'm eating grass"; as if your incidental immunity to their neurotic concerns, is justified by your unconcern.
Fucking indulgent garbage. Even worse than them; and they're already fucking retarded.
You make a very good point that I, as someone that you would consider a junky, had not really understood. I think we all have things that are "sacred" whether they be our family, our friends, or just animals or inanimate things. To consider that you and others can live an entire life without anything being "sacred" but just good enough, seems a very shallow perception of human nature. Not trying to offend, just the view from my side of the bias. To think that every religion and political ideology was responsible for the evils in history is to miss the "human nature" side that religion teaches to struggle against. Being a human means to struggle and suffer. It may not seem like it to you, but it certainly has been written over and over by greater minds than mine. I find that the "meaning" is what allows humans to continue despite the suffering and to struggle mightily against it. If a Miller Lite with friends works for you, I am glad; but do not think that you can culture "Man's Search for Meaning" out of human nature.
I realize now that I did not properly differentiate spirituality from meaning in the piece. They are certainly related, but I do consider them separate. I am someone interested in spirituality, though my sense of spirituality is different from someone who needs meaning far more than me. I also would never claim that religion or political religions are the only source of ills, of course. Yeah, Viktor Frankl wrote most movingly about it in "Man's Search For Meaning."
Yeah, I noticed that you didn't distinguish religion and spirituality, too.
You wouldn't claim religion or politics as the only source of ills. But I could make a hugely solid argument in that direction, complete with deep history and modern examples.
I'm reminded of 2 quotes from the American composer John Cage, both from around 1990. One I read in a bookstore: somebody put together one of those lazy projects where you go around asking a bunch of famous people the same question and record their answers. This one was titled *Why Are We Here?*, and Cage's answer was "No why. Just here."
Around the same time I attended a performance of his in a small space, and afterwards he walked through the crowd, and my friend, knowing his hobby was mycology, asked him "What is your favorite mushroom?" His answer was "The one I have."
Reminds me of something I've been thinking about. Every organization has multiple levels of participation/dedicatedness. There's some True Believers, who want to support, grow, and control it; they make the core. Outside them, there's the casual believers, who vaguely support it, but won't dedicate too much effort/time; their interest is fungible, and can switch to a similar cause or org. Then there are the social believers, who are mainly interested in having a good time/networking; their views on the ostensible purpose of the group are vague. Different groups have different percentages, and people may play different roles in the various groups they're in.
What we're seeing in religion is social believers leaving churches, since there's no longer any obligation, and they can get what they want elsewhere. Casual believers move from church to church, trying to find one that gives them meaning without too much obligation. And true believers are left clinging to what's left, and either doubling down (evaporative distillation) or breaking apart.
Of course, there's also traditions, and social obligations, and the insistence of every parent that their child be as much like them as possible, and logistics, the creation of new types of community thanks to the Internet, plus other factors. Also, Americans take more of a cafeteria (or buffet) approach to things; individual self-fulfillment is our highest good.
Personally, I don't know what I am. Grew up Christian cause my parents were, tried actually believing that for a couple years, but it didn't hold up. Was an existentialist for a decade, just finding my own meaning (or not caring). Now? Maybe I'm just not able to find meaning in what I do (or don't do) in life; all I do is consume. Casting around for some kind of more rigorous philosophy that's compatible with my existentialism. Still secular in practice, but more spiritual in thought.
Your hypothesis inspired me to look it up. As per Gallup, the percentage of people who attend religious services "every week" has declined more than any other category in the past 20 years. Those who say they attend "about once a month" or "seldom" have declined only a couple points. Only the people who say they attend "*almost* every week", the second most religious group, has stayed the same, which is curious. The "never" group more than doubled.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1690/religion.aspx
Your story is interesting. I think spirituality is more of an action than a set of ideas or principles. It's the practice of cultivating connectedness, living in the present, and exploring your own mind from the first person. I wrote a bit about it here: https://americandreaming.substack.com/p/believers-atheists-and-the-unexamined
My hypothesis was inspired by the essay "geeks, MOPs, and sociopaths." It's a look at a different type of group, but similar dynamics. The actual degree of belief and participation in religion is obscured by doctrine that requires people to at least act like they're True Believers, plus social stigma (light) for lukewarm believers and (heavy) for non-believers. Also, I wonder where the tipping point is; if organizations patrol their boundaries and demand greater internal consistency, does that keep their numbers up, or mean that their members fall below the "don't care" point faster and leave?
I like that you actually think, and that you are approaching a fundamental issue. We need to get back to basics. Some people grew up in families where they experience no certainty and utter neglect, so they are highly tuned to seek certainty. Other people grew up in families that provided great certainty and care, but were not able to reproduce that surety outside their birth family: So, they are searching for a return to certainty.
Of course, the answer to, "How do we help people to find meaning?" is to point out that externally there is only chaos with incidents of passing certainty. Then, show them that every individual creates their own concept of the world, and assigns their own meaning. Go shopping for what you personally find coherent and helpful in life. Be yourself. Trust yourself. Practice that.
Adopting somebody else's religion or politics is a step in that direction, but too many people think the Bible is the Word Of God or that a political platform is the only right solution. They get stuck in this instant solution to their search for meaning, and fail to exercise their power to choose. They stop growing.
Anyway, good stuff. Keep writing.
> The longer term goal is figuring out why American culture produces more meaning junkies than other prosperous nations, and how we might nudge it in other, more meaning-sensitive directions. Instead of distributing meaning methadone across society, maybe we ought to.
That's the 1st level thought; not long term. Your retarded rant is <1 level thought.
"Hey guys, buncha magicians are tricking you with card tricks!!"
Cool? Who the fuck are you talking to?
As if you think you need to inform people, that Hitler's claims on Jews being rats, is incorrect.
Shut the fuck up on this toddler shit, and actually fucking say something.
The fundamental problem here, is that your vaunted claims of your sanguine stance forged in the the banalities of life (which no one would seek to deny in a vacuum), is subsequently, in immediacy, contradicted, in the revelation that you think caricatured clowns is a valid prism by which to to contrasted?
Sorry but"
Dumb post: "Oh man people are so confused on why I'm so content" = Meaning-Pontificators: "Man why are all these orcs so confused about meaning???"
If you can't even offer a single, fucking, thought, of a pragmatic examination, and consider this BASIC FUCKING THING; and it its stead, offer some high-level-metaphysical-complexity-math-that-will-be-solved-by-future-historians, then why the fuck, would you think, your consideration is supposed to mean something on this matter?
*Hey guys, I like the color red; dunno what the fucks are bitching about tryna find colors.*
Charlatans they may be, but your smug, re-explaining, that says nothing about the reality that is being interacting with, doesn't provide you any currency in falsifying the confusions they are gameifying.
You're fucking staring at rabbits eating lettuce, asking a question of "man why they eating lettuce lol? I'm eating grass"; as if your incidental immunity to their neurotic concerns, is justified by your unconcern.
Fucking indulgent garbage. Even worse than them; and they're already fucking retarded.
You make a very good point that I, as someone that you would consider a junky, had not really understood. I think we all have things that are "sacred" whether they be our family, our friends, or just animals or inanimate things. To consider that you and others can live an entire life without anything being "sacred" but just good enough, seems a very shallow perception of human nature. Not trying to offend, just the view from my side of the bias. To think that every religion and political ideology was responsible for the evils in history is to miss the "human nature" side that religion teaches to struggle against. Being a human means to struggle and suffer. It may not seem like it to you, but it certainly has been written over and over by greater minds than mine. I find that the "meaning" is what allows humans to continue despite the suffering and to struggle mightily against it. If a Miller Lite with friends works for you, I am glad; but do not think that you can culture "Man's Search for Meaning" out of human nature.
I realize now that I did not properly differentiate spirituality from meaning in the piece. They are certainly related, but I do consider them separate. I am someone interested in spirituality, though my sense of spirituality is different from someone who needs meaning far more than me. I also would never claim that religion or political religions are the only source of ills, of course. Yeah, Viktor Frankl wrote most movingly about it in "Man's Search For Meaning."
Yeah, I noticed that you didn't distinguish religion and spirituality, too.
You wouldn't claim religion or politics as the only source of ills. But I could make a hugely solid argument in that direction, complete with deep history and modern examples.