I've found a new way to describe myself philosophically: mystic atheist. Along with agnostic, humanist,Taoist, and existentialist.
Maybe I'll make up a non-business card with this title, since it fits with my non-belief system. The card would stimulate some interesting conversations when I handed it out, I bet.
Thanks for discovering mystic atheist go to two people: one guy who emailed me about another guy. The first wanted to tell me about "Kissing Hank's Ass," a marvelous irreligious fable that I'd already blogged about several years ago.
The second is James Huber, who wrote the piece. When I followed the email link to his web site, I noticed a couple of other writings that looked interesting. "Mystic Atheism" then led me to "Materialistic Enlightenment."
Interestingly, I'd mentioned "Mystic Atheism" in my 2006 blog post about "Kissing Hank's Ass." But I guess I wasn't ready to appreciate it's profundity back then.
Now that I've reached a higher stage of mystic atheist materialistic enlightenment, I'm better able to resonate with Huber's insights -- an excerpt from which you can read a few paragraphs down in a continuation to this post.
I love how he speaks about a "presence" that he sensed when he was experiencing some form of religiosity or spirituality. Eventually he realized that this presence was the common denominator between all religions and spiritual paths:
Everyday physical reality.
What I understood in that shining moment were that all the mystic experiences I had ever had could easily be unified with a single, simple principle: they're all 99.9% bullshit. What truth they hold is simple, ordinary, reality. They look exotic and mysterious because they go to great lengths to hide reality. The truth at the center of all religion shines through despite the metaphysical trappings, not because of them.
Read on, and you'll find out that God spoke to Huber, revealing that God doesn't exist. Ah, that's my kind of enlightenment.
Excerpt from "Materialistic Enlightenment" by James Huber:
------------------------------------------
Over the next few years I studied a number of other paths, including ceremonial magick, a couple of different flavors of Wicca, some more Eastern mysticism, and a couple of different types of Shamanism. I didn't delve very deeply into any of them, I didn't have to; by this time my grasp on reality was pretty weak.
Time and time again I bombarded my mind with the most ridiculous barrages of crap ever devised by man. Time and time again I would experience that familiar sense of presence. It got to the point where I was sure I was on the verge of discovering the great truth that lay at the center of all religion.
Somewhere along the way I found a quote (I can't remember who said it) that was something like "Truth is like a shining mirror that's been shattered. Each philosopher, priest, and mage regards his small piece and thinks he sees the whole." I intended on collecting religions until I had the whole set, and could reassemble the "mirror".
I was pretty far gone. I was consulting oracles, talking to voices in my head, and getting answers. I could still tell the differences between reality and fantasy, I just couldn't tell which was supposed to be more important.
My penultimate mystical experience (Here I'm using penultimate in the original sense of "second to last") came during another Christian phase. This one was one of the flower-child varieties of Christianity that didn't take the Old-Testament very seriously and advocated two-way conversations with God.
I found a quiet place and put myself in the proper frame of mind. I reached out and invited God into my life. I managed to disconnect. I felt what I took to be God's presence.
I asked if I was speaking with God. I got the answer "Yes". I asked how I could know it was really God. I knew, in a way that those of you who haven't had a similar experience just can't understand. I asked if He was my Creator. I got the answer "Yes". I asked if the creation account in the Bible was correct. Have you ever heard God laugh? I did. It was a deep, good-natured laugh that made it clear that the Bible was not correct in this regard. I asked if evolution was correct. The answer was something like "It's closer" or "in part".
Clearly my rational mind was reasserting itself, I moved to shut it down. I asked if he was a figment of my imagination, or part of my sub-conscious. The answer was "No". I asked if He existed. He said "No." Thinking I might know the answer to this paradox I asked if I should believe in him anyway. He said "No", not the answer I expected.
So there I was, facing the great grandfather of all paradoxes. God Himself telling me he didn't exist. How could I possibly resolve this? I was already deep in cognitive dissonance. There was no where for my mind to retreat, no Truth being presented for it to accept to replace the one it just lost.
In the other version of this essay, I say that if Truth is like a shining mirror that's been shattered, then all the pieces I'd ever seen, and then some, were before me. The pieces were joined, the cracks sealed. The mirror was incomplete, and it held for only one brief moment. But when the moment was over, and the mirror again shattered, I knew I had seen clearly the whole of what the mirror of Truth normally reflects only in small parts.
What I understood in that shining moment were that all the mystic experiences I had ever had could easily be unified with a single, simple principle: they're all 99.9% bullshit. What truth they hold is simple, ordinary, reality. They look exotic and mysterious because they go to great lengths to hide reality. The truth at the center of all religion shines through despite the metaphysical trappings, not because of them.
I knew I had been given a gift that few others had been given. I was glad and I was grateful, but I was also sad. I enjoyed my explorations of religions, mysticism and philosophy, but now they were closed to me. I spent some weeks savoring the bitter-sweetness of my experience, but in time it became just another part of my life, as even the most exotic events will.
Time passed. One day I happened to glance into a real, physical mirror that one of my sisters had left on a coffee table. It was leaning against some bit of clutter, and it was angled oddly. Reflected in that mirror was something so extremely odd and terribly exotic that I flat-out could not wrap my mind around it. After a few moments of trying to puzzle it out I did the natural thing, and looked around to see what was being reflected.
I wish I could remember what it was. I suppose I could make something up to illustrate my point, something that would tie up the narrative nicely; but I'd rather be as honest as possible. Whatever it was it was so completely mundane that I've completely forgotten what it was.
The parallels between what I had just seen and what I had experienced during my mystical wanderings was obvious. At that moment I felt the shift of perceptions that I had felt so many times before, and I began my very last mystic experience, which continues to this day.
Neither the mirror nor the mundane object were the esoteric image I saw reflected. Both the mirror and the object were real. Looking at the mundane at the twisted angle offered by the mirror made for a much more interesting experience, though one that was less real.
I realized that my mystic experiences had all been real, taken on their own terms. I had turned them into illusions by thinking that they had some greater significance. As long as I kept myself from taking it too seriously, there was no reason to abandon the hobby I had enjoyed for so long.
While I don't take it completely seriously, I also don't consider it a joke. I view religion, philosophy, and metaphysics as something like art forms. It's occasionally moving, or inspiring or whatever, but is mostly worthwhile for its entertainment value.
And that is why I sometimes look like a mystic when I'm really an Atheist, and a Materialist.
Everyday, ordinary reality is what we've all been looking for...that's it! That's it!!! That's what "enlightenment" is. Enjoy!
Posted by: Suzanne Foxton | March 01, 2010 at 04:03 AM
You might someday consider another alternative definition to the string-- agnostic mystic. That means you don't know, don't try to understand what is there but you use the energy in ways that improves your life, you recognize the coincidences when they happen and build on them for your benefit. To me, (and I understand you guys have your own set of definitions) atheist means you know there is no god and hence can be nothing behind those events. Agnostic mystic acknowledges they happen but doesn't try to assign a power behind them to anything other than knowing they happen and can be useful when one takes advantage of them. As an agnostic, one doesn't give up on the possibility of knowing more about from where they come, but an atheist has already decided and doesn't look for that option.
Posted by: Rain | March 01, 2010 at 06:34 AM
Everyday, I am looking for ordinary reality and that's it? That's what "enlightenment" is? Enjoy that? --- I myself prefer the ultra high quality enlightenment stuff, please nothing cheap. So, I am looking and shall find my high class reality, I'm deserving of such.
Posted by: Roger | March 01, 2010 at 08:01 AM
Rain, I've come to the conclusion that there isn't much difference between the meaning of "agnostic" and "atheist." I quoted Dan Barker in an earlier post:
-----------------
Agnosticism addresses knowledge; atheism addresses belief. The agnostic says, "I don't have a knowledge that God exists." The atheist says, "I don't have a belief that God exists." You can say both things at the same time. Some agnostics are atheistic and some are theistic.
-----------------
And here's what James Huber says in the "About" section of his web site:
-----------------
Q. How can you be absolutely certain there is no God?
A. I don't need to be absolutely certain there is no God to be an atheist, I just have to be reasonably certain that when people pray that I get hit by lightning, they're really just talking to themselves.
Q. If you're not certain there is no God, doesn't that make you agnostic?
A. Sure, in some pointless, bullshit, technical sense of the word "agnostic". I'm also that kind of agnostic about the Earth being round.
Posted by: Blogger Brian | March 01, 2010 at 08:45 AM
well people can define words anyway they want but the average person likes to have a definition that makes sense to them and the use of one word, that means there is no god in that person's eyes and one word that means might or might not be one and open to either, is helpful for communicating with other people unless you spend a lot of time explaining your terms each conversation. Agnostics don't go on talk shows trying to defend their position as they don't have one. Atheists do. If an atheist is secretly a not-knower, they might consider redefining their title around other people...
Posted by: Rain | March 03, 2010 at 07:52 AM
Rain, I agree about the possibility of confusion. But I think Barker is pointing toward the meaning of agnosticism and atheism. The "a" in the words is a negation of gnosticism and theism.
Gnostics consider that they know about God. Theists believe in God. So a-theism is not believing in God, and a-gnosticism is considering that you don't know what God is (or if God is).
I realize that it sounds a bit strange, but I think Barker is correct in saying that someone could be a theist agnostic, or agnostic theist. That is, he/she could admit that God isn't known, while still believing that God exists.
After all, our minds and hearts, our thoughts and feelings, aren't always in sync.
Posted by: Blogger Brian | March 03, 2010 at 08:09 AM
So if he sticks to talking to people where he explained that, they will understand but most people see atheism as meaning something specific and we have seen that illustrated many times through atheists like Hitchens who write books and are quite adamant that there is no god and it's not good for the world to believe there is. I would guess Hitchens believes he knows as much as any believer in god believe they know. It's the agnostic who is content to not only not know but not have to convince others of their not-knowing either.
Posted by: Rain | March 04, 2010 at 12:32 PM
God as a Scientist : Ten Scientific Commandments.
==.
#
God Himself is Creator.
He/She/It created Everything.
So God must be Scientist and must use Physical/
Mathematical Laws and Formulas for His/Her/Its work.
#
For forty days and forty nights Moses wrote the tablets
of ‘ The Ten Commandments’.
Which Commandments are they?
They are moral, ethical Commandments.
Can be written ‘Ten Scientific Commandments’ ?
I think ‘ Yes’, God has given to us everything that necessary
to understand Him and His Genesis using Physical /
Mathematical Laws and Formulas.
===.
Scheme.
Ten Scientific Commandments:
Fundamental Theory of Existence.
1 The infinite vacuum T=0K. ( background energy space: E ).
2 The particle:
C/D = pi, R/N= k , E = Mc^2 = kc^2 , h = 0 , i^2= -1
3 The spins: h =E/t , h =kb, h* = h/2pi
4 The photon, the inertia
5 The electron: e^2 = h*ca, E = h*f , electromagnetic field
6 The gravitation, the star, the time and space
7 The Proton
8
The Evolution of interaction between Electron and Proton
a) electromagnetic
b) nuclear
c) biological
9
The Laws
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/mass
b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law
c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law
10
The test.
Every theory must be tested logically ( theoretical ) and practically
a) Theory : Dualism of Consciousness: (consciousness / unconsciousness)
b) Practice : Parapsychology. Meditation.
========.
Best wishes
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
============.
#
The secret of God and Existence is hidden
in the ‘ Theory of Vacuum & Light Quanta ‘.
==========..
#
I want to know how God created this world
I am not interested in this or that phenomenon,
in the spectrum of this or that element
I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details
/ Einstein /
==========.
Posted by: socratus | January 27, 2011 at 04:20 AM
"I want to know how God created this world."
quote Einstein
Einstein did very well in his young life.
But, only then. The concept of an orderly universe he worked so hard to prove, was disproven.
Another scientist proved the world chaotic.
And, came up with the laws to prove it.
The universe 'happened' by its inherent nature.
Not by a conscious Being making it happen.
Consciousness was the end product of evolution, not the cause of it.
Nature exists, not God.
Posted by: Mike Williams | January 29, 2011 at 05:37 AM
Hi Mike --
Well. Hummm.. Chaos is a concept. Chaotic (or unpredictable)is proved? Proved to whom? To us measly humans, of course. Ahh, maybe we be like poor ants crawling about, trying to grok a rusting Chevy.
http://tinyurl.com/4935yga
Are we talking an overarching deity type thing here. It may be something moving through itself experiencing all as itself using cape of time and space like hide and seek -- ant, man and rusty Chevy being equal.
Inherent *nature*?? Bro, Nature is also a concept oft employed as if explained everything. It is #only# nature? What IS nature? Then we lop the concept of evolution on top of the cone and viola, no need for superstitious wanderings anymore! But humans are storytellers basically, so before long Darwin will be a Saint Darwin.
The beauty of Nature is not the wonder of its alleged chaos in the imagination of humans, but its reassuring proclivity to order, be that order ever so temporary.
Posted by: jon weiss | January 29, 2011 at 10:13 AM
Hi Jon,
See the documentary The Elegant Universe.
Einstein and Planck made the assumption there was a God creating the force that makes matter.
Today we have Steven Hawkin and others
explain why no God was necessary to create
the universe.
Chaos and random theories derive from Neils Bohr and others. Einstein wasted
his older life in the persuit of a
a theory based on a wrong assumption.
He assumed the universe was orderly.
Posted by: Mike Williams | January 30, 2011 at 07:20 AM
/ By Tim Joseph /
==.
In the beginning there was Aristotle,
And objects at rest tended to remain at rest,
And objects in motion tended to come to rest,
And soon everything was at rest,
And God saw that it was boring.
Then God created Newton,
And objects at rest tended to remain at rest,
But objects in motion tended to remain in motion,
And energy was conserved and momentum
was conserved and matter was conserved,
And God saw that it was conservative.
Then God created Einstein,
And everything was relative,
And fast things became short,
And straight things became curved,
And the universe was filled with inertial frames,
And God saw that it was relatively general,
but some of it was especially relative.
Then God created Bohr,
And there was the principle,
And the principle was quantum,
And all things were quantified,
But some things were still relative,
And God saw that it was confusing.
Then God was going to create Furgeson,
And Furgeson would have unified,
And he would have fielded a theory,
And all would have been one,
But it was the seventh day,
And God rested,
And objects at rest tend to remain at rest.
http://www.randomjoke.com/funny/fieldtheory.php
=================== .
Posted by: socratus | May 23, 2011 at 06:43 AM
In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
/ John 1:1 /
#
In the beginning was the Word.
And the Word was written by formula: T = - 273,16= 0K.
T = 0K is an Absolute Reference frame.
Scientists call this Absolute Reference frame as an Aether (Vacuum).
But if in the beginning was T = 0K, can the T=0K take the functions of God?
Can T = 0K be an Absolute God?
To answer to this question we need to ask:
‘ Which kind of particles can exist in this Absolute Reference frame: T=0K?
#
And then "God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light."
/ Genesis 1:3 /
#
My conclusion:
The secret of God and Existence is hidden
in the ‘ Theory of Vacuum and Light Quanta ‘.
========.
Best wishes
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==========..
Posted by: socratus | July 30, 2011 at 07:31 AM