Please post at least two comments (of at least two paragraphs) prior to class each week, preferably by Wednesday, indicating your reflections on any aspect of the reading and subject matter. Week 1's reading assignment is William James's Varieties of Religious Experience, preface and Lectures 1 & 2. Feel free to comment on anything in the book, not only the reading assignment. Respond to my discussion questions (or to your classmates' or your own), by scrolling down and clicking on "comments" below. Or skip the discussion prompts entirely if you don't think you need them to frame your comments.
Meanwhile, to get us started...
I always begin a new semester by asking students to post an Introduction, responding to these questions:
- Who are you?
- Why are you here?
Interpret those questions any way you'd like.
Discussion Questions. After posting your introduction, post at least two comments pertaining to Varieties (VRE).
- Have you had experiences you would characterize as religious? What made them so? What was/is their significance to you?
- Do you agree with WJ's remark in the preface that acquaintance with particulars makes us wiser than the possession of abstract formulas? How does that apply to religious experience and religious doctrines?
- Do you think "the inner experiences of great-souled persons" are worth pondering and have a value, even when extreme, "eccentric," or "pathological"? Do you agree that "a religious life...does tend to make [a] person exceptional and eccentric"? 15 (page references to the Library of America's edition of William James-Writings, 1902-1910... if you don't have this edition and are reading the etext, use the search function and keywords to find these passages)
- WJ says he's not talking about "your ordinary religious believer, who follows the conventional observances of his country" and whose religion thus "has been made for him by others" rather than issuing from "original experience"... Why do you think most people's religion is not "original" in that sense? Should it be? Should anyone ever take anyone else's word for what's theologically (OR philosophically) correct? Put another way: should everyone think for themselves, if not by themselves, in arriving at their religious (or irreligious) beliefs and practices?
- WJ says the Quaker religion is founded on "veracity rooted in spiritual inwardness" (15) but declares its founder George Fox "pathological" (17). What do you make of this?
- What do you think WJ is saying about the status of Alfred's, Fanny's, and William's beliefs, and about "medical materialism"? 18-20
- Do you agree with WJ about "immediate delight" and "good consequential fruits for life"? 22
- Should religious opinions be tested in the same way that scientific opinions are, "by logic and experiment"? 24 Wouldn't that have the effect of discrediting many religious traditions?
- In light of the preceding question, what do you think of the late Stephen Jay Gould's ideas about religion and science being "non-overlapping"? (Stay tuned for further consideration of this question next week, when we turn to Carl Sagan's own Gifford Lectures and The Varieties of Scientific Experience...)
- What do you think of WJ's definition of religion as "the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual(s)..."? 36
- Do you like the "Emersonian religion"? 36-9
- Must religion in some sense be "serious" and "solemn"? 41-2 (Guess that would rule out the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, aka Pastafarianism, or L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology... But maybe not the Church of Baseball?)
- Is WJ fair to Marcus Aurelius, and to stoicism generally? 46-7
- Is it true that only religion delivers "happiness in the absolute and everlasting"? 50 But what if nothing is absolute and everlasting, in the religious sense?
- If "we are in the end absolutely dependent on the universe," is it possible for a secular perspective to treat that dependency in spiritual terms? What, for instance, do you think of Bertrand Russell's "A Free Man's Worship"? And again, we'll revisit the question when we turn to Sagan's The Varieties of Scientific Experience.
- Questions/comments on other parts of WJ's Varieties, or any of the excerpted texts below?
Scroll to the bottom of this post, click on "comments," and share your thoughts.
See you on Sep 1, 6 pm in WPS 310. I'll do my best to arrive on time, my Environmental Ethics class in the James Union Building concludes at 5:45.
Happy reading and thinking! (Varieties, and some other writings by and about James, are below.)
jpo
phil.oliver@mtsu.edu.
==
From my Atheism & Philosophy course last Spring: Cosmic Philosophy as Anti-Authoritarianism... WJ's Pragmatism... Tough & Tender... Pragmatism and Religion... Varieties of Experience...
Hi, my name is Tamara (Tammy) Costello. I am a non-traditional returning student that completed undergrad almost 20 years later than expected (I graduated Dec. 2021). I have a 22-year-old son who is also attending MTSU (as an undergrad). I pursued a master's, truthfully, because I wanted to expand my knowledge further and make a difference in the community. I chose a Master's in Liberal Arts because I appreciate the interdisciplinary and flexible approach that allows for the integration of fundamentally related courses of interest.
ReplyDeleteThe Varieties of Religious Experience by William James, commentary.
ReplyDeleteAdmittedly, I had a little difficulty at times interpreting the reading. I re-read it and believe I was able to briefly sum it up below.
My understanding/summary of the first portion of Williams James's lecture is that he presents a non-theological study from a psychological perspective. He is seeking an understanding and connective pattern of religious experiences. He asks the question, "What are the religious propensities?" Moreover, "What is their philosophic significance?" James notes that the information gathering is to understand the "origins" of experiences despite "his" interpretation of their "value" (04). James proceeds to discuss differentiating biblical references through two different lenses. Either accept them as spiritually perceived purpose of spiritual guidance despite their "scientific errors" or look at them through a scientific lens that would likely provide a less than satisfactory judgment because of their scientific errors. I believe the intent is to compel the reader to take notice of these two perspectives as an observable dilemma. Next, James discusses deeply committed individuals to their faith to clarify his initial point further. Presumably, he is referring to leaders such as those that lead the church, i.e., a priest or pastor. James assesses that many are considered "religious geniuses" based on their visions and perceivably dramatic interpretations, which often strengthen their positions (07). In contrast, from a psychological perspective, James illuminates that these same individuals would be considered "pathological." I feel that James highlights a vital observation here that I agree is interesting while considering as he explains that his objective is not to create animosity but to interpret and understand varying spiritual experiences through a psychological lens.
In the second portion of the lecture, William James seeks to compare an individual's feelings of spirituality with philosophical concepts by designating a definition of what it means to have a spiritual experience versus philosophical views. In his efforts, he wants to break down each perspective and discusses observing the commonalities of "sentiments" between both concepts (27). I found this part of the lecture fascinating. I have often pondered the similarities between religion and philosophical inferences and their commonalities, i.e., religion/philosophy/atheistic views. For example, Confuscious, the Chinese Philosopher, "Respect yourself and others will respect you." Likewise, in the Bible, Mark 12:31, Luke 10:27 (Bible), "Love your neighbors as yourself." Moreover, a possible Atheistic view as common sense is that "kindness is inherent in human beings." I admire Jame's approach, as he analyzes each sentiment's connectivity from different perspectives. It helped me realize that my personal bewilderment is not unique.
Sources:
Biblical
Aptaker, J. (2011, February 5). The "Do unto others" bible verse. Owlcation. Retrieved August 30, 2022, from https://owlcation.com/humanities/Do-Unto-Others-Bible-Verse-Golden-Rule-Bible Verse#:~:text=Mark%2012%3A31%2C%20Luke%2010,most%20beautiful%20things%20religion%20offers.
Possible Atheistic View
The science, theory and practice of kindness: A brief overview. UNESCO MGIEP. (n.d.). Retrieved August 30, 2022, from https://mgiep.unesco.org/article/the-science-theory-and-practice-of-kindness-a-brief-overview
The Varieties of Religion Experiences
The project Gutenberg ebook of the varieties of religious experience by ... (n.d.). Retrieved August 30, 2022, from https://gutenberg.org/files/621/621-h/621-h.html
Confucious Philoshical View:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucius
Wow, Tammy! What a great synopsis of these two chapters! I think you knocked it out of the park. I have finished the reading, but I'm still organizing my thoughts. I'm really appreciating how you concisely honed in on the meat of the arguments. Your comments are very helpful to me.
DeleteThank you so much for this Tammy! This reading had my head spinning, but you helped me organize my thoughts on it all.
DeleteTammy, I certainly appreciate your in-depth breakdown of the reading. I had a difficult time collecting and categorizing my thoughts after reading; your perspective helped me reflect on the contrasts and similarities between the spiritual and philosophical aspects. I find those interesting as well.
DeleteMy name is Gabrielle Venn. I'm in the MALA program to perhaps find another discipline than what I got my bachelor's in. I also thought that maybe going wide with my studies would help me narrow my interests down if I do choose to stay in the discipline of RS.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI, honestly, am not a big fan of the author, I think the age of this work makes it incredibly one sided in its approach and painfully obvious that the author speaks from a perspective of thinking that aspects of religious life, across the board, are comparable to the aspects found within Christian religious life.
ReplyDeleteThe use of the term "Mohammedans" (Pg. 6 in ebook) was incredibly disturbing and uncomfortable to read, I know this is because of the time period this is written, but the casual othering of Muslims and use of vocabulary similar to the way the U.S. has historically othered New Religious Movements (i.e. calling a NRM's followers by the name of the leader/founder to demonstrate them as following men and not a valid belief system but rather a "cult") made my skin crawl a little. I also had a bit of an issue with the approach being from a psychology based evaluation of the topic. I'm sure that there is some value to certain aspects of a psychological approach, but I firmly believe that religion should be approached from a purely philosophical or sociological perspective. Viewing religion and religious people as pathological, was incredibly disrespectful to deeply held beliefs. It hearkens back to when colonizers and early scholars would preserve some knowledge of a faith system, while still drawing on the pre-conceived notion that the indigenous people and practices they observed where that of the "uncivilized" or the "savage" and ultimately needed to be "civilized" by the culture said colonizer came from. This is simply more directed towards religion as a whole with the implication being that the secular is "civilized" and the religious "barbaric", or at the very least deeply religious individuals are framed as "mentally unstable" compared to the more "secular" religious individual. So, I found the casual othering to be really problematic.
I do think that there is a difference between the believer that chooses the faith and the one that inherits it, but his description made it seem as though those born in a faith, as opposed to one who chooses to convert to a faith, do not experience extraordinary religion and fall exclusively into the category of ordinary religion, with extraordinary religion and extraordinary religious experience belonging wholly to the convert. Personally, I would hypothesize that most religious people, go through waxing and waning phases of extraordinary religion, and that ordinary religion and the practices associated helps to prompt the extraordinary religious experience. I think that there is most certainly people, who never experience extraordinary religion and simply follow what is conventional, but the way in which this is written reads as though the one who follows conventional practice is a large majority of individuals in any faith system and you must seek out to study someone who is seemingly categorized as "mentally unwell" in comparison to those who never experience extraordinary religion. (Because to me while reading, he implies that without being neurotic and pathological, a person would never experience extraordinary religion).
I have felt for a while that sometimes the older theorists and scholars used in Religious Studies are far too outdated for the globalizing world we live in. I'm not a huge fan of anything that was written pre- Orientalism by Edward Said, because it seems like othering and gross generalizations were casual and ran rampant throughout secular religious scholarship. Respect for the fact that our human experience would just the same as the "others" we observe (had we born in their positions) and the humble way a Religious Scholar ought to approach the topic of religion, culture or any other deeply held belief, doesn't seem to be developed at all prior to Edward Said's contributions to academia.
James, William. The Project Gutenberg Ebook of the Varieties of Religious Experience by ... https://gutenberg.org/files/621/621-h/621-h.html.
Thank you for sharing, Gabby. I never heard of the term before I read this essay, but it felt icky. Also, I agree with your statement about deeming religious persons with a "pathological" is a strange concept. It seems the intellectual way to explain things or people that we don't understand is to call it/them "abnormal" which likens them to being mentally diseased. It's such an exclusionary term and it not only devalues people's experiences, but their contributions as well. I enjoyed your post.
Delete-Katt
Hi Gabby, you provide a lot of valuable insight. I agree; the era likely influences the terminology of the time. I felt James was attempting to warn the reader, in many respects, that his psychological perspective might make some uncomfortable, just as the debate over the scientific age of the Earth vs. the Earth's age in "Creationism." Also, I agree with you regarding the differences between being born into the religion vs. choosing. I wonder if James was implying that if one is born into a religion, it becomes hardwired (like muscle memory) into the psyche and maybe a more profound connective religious experience than if you chose a new religion later in life, for example. Somewhat like learning a new language in your adult years? The gravity of the nuances is not entirely embedded. I am not sure; I found it thought-provoking how he measures the experiences though.
DeleteHi all! I really do hate doing these introductory posts, I never know what to say.
ReplyDeleteWho am I? Well, my name is Lauren Maddox. My job is an eligibility counselor with the food stamp office. My hobbies are reading, D&D, and digital art. I’m originally from a small town in Georgia but moved to Lebanon in 2018. My undergrad was at Shorter University where I majored in International Studies and minored in Missions. I consistently win at the game of two truths and a lie because I’ve been lucky enough to collect some wild travel stories. All of those facts are certainly part of me, but I like to think that I’m more than the sum of my parts. So I guess the best answer to “who am I?” would be that I’m still learning the answer.
Why am I here? The short answer is because I have to be, but I think this deserves a little more depth. I put off getting my graduate degree because of financial reasons and then life happens and goals change. Having a Masters was always part of my plan and one thing I’ve learned is that the time will pass, no matter how you fill it. I’m taking the time now to pursue this goal, even though it is daunting to be back in the classroom after so long and having lectures in subjects I’ve never really studied is nerve-wrecking. I’m here for the challenge, and to grow from this experience.
I found the discussion on the "exceptional and eccentric" nature of religious "geniuses" particularly interesting, especially when comparing their stature with geniuses in other fields. James states that "such individuals...like many other geniuses...have often shown symptoms of nervous instability." (p.15) And, he goes on to mention that for the religious genius "these pathological features in their career have helped to give them their religious authority and influence." (p.15) Often, followers of such "geniuses" take their pathological issues to be facts. Their visions are not seen as halucinations, but as proof in the existence of whatever was envisioned. James even adresses this when discussing how hard it is for some to hear his critique: "Such cold-blooded assimilations threaten, we think, to undo our soul's vital secrets, as if the same breath which should succeed in explaining their origin would simultaneously explain away their significance..." (p.17)
ReplyDeleteHowever, when thinking of other historic geniuses that possessed known pathological issues, whether artistic (Van Gogh), philosophic (Wittgenstein, Neitzsche), or scientific (Newton, Einstein), this was not the case. For these men, their "nervous instabilit[ies]" were seen as something to forgive about them. They were geniuses inspite of their conditions, not because of them. This is the primary concern with religious "genius" in my mind; what genius do they posses that is not pathological? (p.15)
Second point will be in another comment. :)
“Do you think "the inner experiences of great-souled persons" are worth pondering and have a value, even when extreme, "eccentric," or "pathological"? Do you agree that "a religious life...does tend to make [a] person exceptional and eccentric"?”
ReplyDeleteI do think that there is great value in studying the “inner experiences” of those persons that have been labeled as “extreme, eccentric, or pathological”. Every religion or organization has its fanatical outliers that take the set of beliefs that the majority interpret moderately, and push them to the extreme. There’s value in studying these extreme beliefs that are held and taught to others. Before doing this reading, and probably the reason I’m drawing this connection, I was listening to a podcast that started a series on Glenn Helzer and the Children of Thunder. I think that James would have thought this to be exactly what he was talking about by connecting the idea of a deeply religious person and extreme or exceptional religious beliefs. Helzer was held as an exceptional religious leader in his church, even while exhibiting some signs of psychosis, and ultimately created a cult of followers that held to his Twelve Principles of Magic even though they were partially antithetical to the teachings of the Church of Latter-day Saints. This is a prime example of intensely experienced religion becoming a sign of something pathological. I disagree with the idea that every ultra religious person is pathological, there are many profound followers of faith that never go on to create cults, commit mass murders, or some other extreme example. The reverse is also true in that there are many cultists, serial killers, and other extremists whose passion, or inspiration is not found within religion or faith. To force a connection between the two, for every instance of either, is a disservice to that person and ingenuine in the study of that person. Evil people often do evil things for no other reason than that they wanted to, not because of some experience with a higher power that urged them in that direction. More often than not, if such a person acts under the banner of their religion, it is not from some strong faith but rather the convenience of being able to manipulate people to their own ends. I think that religious organizations attract narcissistic personalities that take advantage of the practitioners’ willingness to grow in faith, rather than that these religions push radical experiences that create extremists.
Sources
James, William, 1842-1910. (1982). The varieties of religious experience : a study in human nature. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England ; New York, N.Y. :Penguin Books,
Schauer, P. (2016). The People Behind Cult Murders. United States: Enslow Publishing.
Scott, R. (2014). Unholy Sacrifice. United States: Pinnacle Books.
I struggled to find something to comment on in the second lecture, so I kept reading and landed on the following paragraph and the subsequent examples in the text.
ReplyDelete“The most curious proofs of the existence of such an undifferentiated sense of reality as this are found in experiences of hallucination. It often happens that an hallucination is imperfectly developed: the person affected will feel a “presence” in the room, definitely localized, facing in one particular way, real in the most emphatic sense of the word, often coming suddenly, and as suddenly gone; and yet neither seen, heard, touched, nor cognized in any of the usual “sensible” ways.” [pg 59 in the etext]
James describes hallucinations as a distorted sense of reality, and then lists several examples of almost paranormal experiences from friends. My question would be what differentiates a hallucination from a religious experience? What is the difference between an encounter with a messenger sent from a chosen deity and an encounter with a spirit that no longer walks among the living? Is the difference in the feelings created by such an encounter, or the senses that are engaged during the encounter? Is there a difference, in regards to the immediate response to such an encounter? Whether you’ve been sought out by a deity or ghost, I imagine the initial response would be essentially the same: fear and disbelief. I think the idea of taking this definition and applying to religious experiences would be interesting. An encounter with the Divine, or a religious experience, could easily be described as a moment of distorted sense of reality. These encounters often hold greater importance with religious followers because the described experience has roots in a related dogma.
Sources
James, William, 1842-1910. (1982). The varieties of religious experience : a study in human nature. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England ; New York, N.Y. :Penguin Books,
Lauren, very interesting perspective. I would gather that those intensely involved in their religion would have means to justify their experiences and rationalize, while catagorizing those not deep in religion as hallucatations and distorted. However, I agree with your thought, how can one differentiate the two; what makes the experiences vary? Is it faith, is it science?
DeleteI think that the supernatural component of belief is an interesting topic to concern oneself with, especially if coming from an outlook of a scientific/secular mind. I do feel that with religious experiences that could be comparable to hallucinations, everything should be examined and observed with great care, as there are vulnerable peoples within religious communities that may have hallucinations they interpret as religious, as well as individuals with complete clarity who have had an extraordinary religious experience which could be viewed from a secular lens as a hallucination. However, I don't feel that extraordinary religious experience always pertains to a supernatural religious experience that could be comparable to a hallucination, sometimes deeply religious individuals have simply trained their minds to view experiences with the lens of faith. They may have a dream that they interpret as coming from the supernatural component of their faith or they may have moments of extreme clarity about situations that they interpret as the supernatural component of their faith speaking to them in a way, either with feelings of calmness at the clarity their conscience has given them or by interpreting their state of mind changing, as a "supernatural" presence working through them. If a religious individual is plagued with these moments of supernatural experience, it does beg the question of whether or not a person is having hallucinations being interpreted as religious, however it feels immoral to paint with a broad brush that everyone experiencing a "supernatural" or "extraordinary" religious experience as having something pathologically wrong. Perhaps there is something underlying that causes these moments, or perhaps this is an individual who has trained themselves to view the world and their experiences through a religious lens. Drawing the line between these two seems to be something that would take the utmost care to do and may still end with the religiously minded being grouped as clinically unwell because their philosophical lens on life comes from religious doctrine and teaching, rather than what the secular world views as the great philosophers.
DeleteI liked your comment Lauren. I don't know how I would feel if a spirit visited me but I know of several people that say they have had this happen. And I know of a couple of people who have essentially died and been brought back. They say that where they went is of great beauty and have a warm and inviting feeling about it. I don't know what waits after we die but I'd like to believe that there is more to us then just blood and organs. I'm not a big fan of this author but he did make me want to speak to him and ask him a few questions about how and why he believed the way he did or does.
DeleteWho am I? -- I am a wife, mother, 2019 MTSU graduate in Philosohy and Global Studies, and enviromental advocate.
ReplyDeleteWhy am I here? -- I am wanting to fuse my love of philosophy and enviromental studies to, hopefully, break into the sustainability field.
Second point:
Though I am not an adherant to any established religion, I am a fan of "religions" such as Emerson's or Spinoza's. In defining Emersonian religion, James explains the belief in an underlying connectedness by letting us know that the "universe has a devine soul of order" that is "also the soul within the soul of man." (p.28) For myself, this connection between everything, God in everything if you please, seems to be something science could back. Everyday, in the field of science, they learn of some previously unknown connection between two random elements of the natural world. And, most scientist would agree that, though we cannot prove it yet, every single thing plays an intrigal role in a balanced natural world.
Additionally, the indecisiveness of Emerson's belief is admirable to me. James states: "whether this soul of the universe be mere quality...or whether it be a self-conscious life...is a decision that never unmistakably appears in Emerson's pages." (p.28) And, though this may seem an odd thing to admire, I think there is a neccessary humbleness that should accompany any statement of belief. For me, the most essential element to remaining respectful of others beliefs is for everyone to understand they are not facts and, by their very nature, cannot be known with certainty while we are able to discuss them.
Hi, my name is Valeri (Val) Buck, and I live in Fayetteville, TN. For the past 25 years I have homeschooled our four children from birth to college. Our oldest two children graduated from UT Knoxville and Tennessee Tech. One of our daughters is currently a junior here at MTSU majoring in graphic design and minoring in music. Our youngest son is turning 18 today, is currently is dual-enrolled at Motlow State Community College and will graduate high school in December. Upon his graduation my homeschool teaching responsibilities will conclude. This fall marks the beginning of a new season of life for me as I pursue a master’s degree in liberal arts. My undergraduate degree from The Ohio State University is in occupational therapy. Getting a master’s degree has been a personal goal ever since I left Ohio in 1995. I am interested in the possibility of teaching at the community college here in Fayetteville, and I believe MALA is an excellent way to explore and work toward that possibility.
ReplyDeleteI agree with William James’ statement in the preface, “ … a large acquaintance with particulars often makes us wiser than the possession of abstract formulas, however deep...” This can be seen in practical life situations where someone versed in theory (the professional) is stumped by a problem which is easily worked out by the employee (the technician) whose day in and day out experience equip him or her to solve the riddle. In the same way, holding tightly to an abstract religious theory or doctrine could result in seemingly unsolvable paradoxes that are more easily unraveled or accepted by someone who has practical working knowledge and experience in the faith realm. Knowing someone intimately and having a relationship with that individual allows one to speak with greater authority than the person who is merely acquainted with or has only heard of the individual in question.
In the second lecture, “Circumscription of the Topic,” I enjoyed thinking about the differences between institutional and personal religion (29). Personal religion seems to deal with man realizing a need and seeking an inward relationship and wholeness. By contrast institutional religion sounds more like corporate ritual and works meant to appease or draw God near by satisfying an outward requirement which is possibly set up by men. Institutional religion would seem to tend more toward formalities, rules, and structure. Personal religion would involve soul-searching, intimacy, and individuality.
James, William. The project Gutenberg ebook of the Varieties of Religious Experience by… https://gutenberg.org/files/621/621/-h/621.h.html
Good day all! You may see Gladys on my official documents, but please call me Katt or Kathy. This is my 3rd semester in MALA. I am originally from Louisiana and am trying to make Murfreesboro my new home. I am the mother of 2 grown daughters, and I have 1 grandson who is 10 years old (which is why I'm here). Gaining a masters is a dream of mine, and I chose MALA because of the interdisciplinary studies.
ReplyDeleteI think I finally figured it out. Good day all! You may see Gladys on my official documents, but please call me Katt or Kathy. This is my 3rd semester in MALA. I am originally from Slidell, Louisiana which is exactly 36 miles from downtown New Orleans (Geaux Saints) and am trying to make Murfreesboro my new home. I completed undergrad at Southeastern Louisiana University (Lion Up!). I have worked in Procurement and Strategic Sourcing for 20 years. I am the mother of 2 grown daughters, and I have 1 grandson who is 10 years old (which is why I'm here). I am an Army Veteran. Gaining a masters has been a dream of mine for over 20 years, and I chose MALA because of its interdisciplinary studies. I am not quite sure what I plan on concentrating in, but it appears that English and History are my top picks.
ReplyDeleteFun facts:
-favorite color is orange
-have 8 siblings (7 living)
-diehard Saints fan
-love drawing, dancing and reading
-ice cream is crack to me
love to dance
-diehard New Orleans Saints fan
-love to drawing, reading, dancing and traveling
Have I ever had a religious experience? Yes. As I stated in my introduction, I am from a large family. My parents were married exactly 50 years, 1 month and 11 days before my father suddenly passed away from a stroke. I remember being very angry with God and the entire world about my father’s passing, and it took me quite a while to move into the acceptance phase of the grieving process. One day coming home from church, I was distraught, and my anger brought me to tears and I’m not particularly sure why. As I approached a stop sign, I asked God “why did you take my father”? Almost immediately, I felt calmness came over my body and my entire spirit and I heard a voice plain and clear say “Your father is my child. I leant him to you for short time, and I’ve given your father’s strength to get your through. Heed the lessons you’ve learned from your father.” After I heard the voice, that sense of calmness became a sense of satisfaction for lack of a better term.
ReplyDeleteDo I consider this happenstance “divine”? I can’t explain it any other way. It was an irrational experience that I find difficult to explain rationally. It was a spiritual experience, because I felt my body and soul connected to something bigger than myself. With all that being said, I would have to agree with James’ definition of religion as "the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual(s)..."? 36, but I would have to add spirituality to the mix. Spirituality involves not only the recognition of feelings and experiences, but it includes an additive to the mix such as that connection with a greater cosmic or divine entity. Although I’ve had many angry feelings about other things in my life and have gained acceptance in those situations, I never heard that voice nor that cosmic connection that I had that day after church.
-Katt
Hi all! My name is Jennifer. I am not sure if this will come through correctly. I was in Dr. Oliver's course last semester and Couldn't figure out how to separate from that blog....Nonethelss. This is my second to last semester in the MALA program. I am also a non-traditional student by definition. I began my undergrad in 2003 and graduated in 2020 (life happens ya know) I graduated with my bachelors of science in dance pedagogy from MT in the fall of 2020 and immediately returned for my graduate studies in the spring of 21. If I took another break, I wouldn't get it done.
ReplyDeleteI am a mom of 2 boys, 5 and 10. Married for 12 years. I am an Artistic Director for a non profit organization for individuals with disabilities. I also teach integrated dance education, creative movement, and fitness classes to schools and a fitness studio downtown on the square. Although, currently for the past several months I have been on a medical leave. I was recently diagnosed with a movement disorder that (at random) affects my thought/coordination process. It has certainly slowed me down more than I'd like, but I am here and will do my best.
I am in this program to further my studies in integrated education and to peak my curiosity. I like creative interdisciplinary studies and the flexibility this career path has given me.
Here's to a great semester.
It has taken me some time to think through the text. I was not particularly fond of the way James spoke about varying religions. It seemed clear to me that his perception of religion was one-sided and narrow in view. Which has been my experience with many individuals who consider themselves religious Christians. Which leads me to answer the first question. Have you had experiences you would characterize as religious? What made them so? What was/is their significance to you? I have encountered/experienced religious interactions with people. I grew up in a home where we went to church steadily on Sunday morning "like you're supposed to do." This was the way my parents were raised and thus, they felt compelled to raise my sister in I in the same manne. However, In our highschool years we made the decision to stop attending church. For me the experience of organized religion, organized Christianity (the denomination we attended) did not practically live out the principles and values it was teaching. The Manners of the congregation would recite and express these deeply rooted, almost eccentric, slightly brainwashed, ideas and philosophies while also dismissing basic human decency and acceptance. They would shy away in the face of adversities while also crying out holy.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading I found that James made similar conflicting conversations. My first place of contemplation in the reading , was how does one decipher the difference between someone who has "his religion has been made for him by others, communicated to him by tradition, determined to fixed forms by imitation, and retained by habit; an ordinary religious believer," as he called it and a “geniuses” in the religious line. I am currently not affiliated with any particular religious organization, I would consider myself more spiritual/faith based rather than governed by religious practices...which in my opinion are passed down through centuries of practices and approaches; which can create eccentric ways of thinking and not at all a casual ordinary believer. I disagree with his view of a “geniuses” religious line and feel his outlook on this dismisses those individuals who encounter remarkable challenges in life that can lead them towards a stronger faith and/or religion if they so choose. The habitual religious person and the eccentric genius are one in the same in my experience. Often superficial. Whereas the “ordinary believer” has shown more compassion and zealousness towards their beliefs and overall deficiency towards human life.
Separately, I am not sure if I consider faith and science to be overlapping one another. I do believe both can have considerable proof to back their theories, however, they communicate in two very different rhythms. I would consider that spiritual experiences can manifest themselves in a physical form challenging the line between science and faith. Also challenging the historical aspects of religion being and ideology that is felt or one that is taught. If that makes sense.
I like your comment on religious zealous, with your experience being that the "ordinary believer" being the one more attuned towards their ideologies. I think that James presented a dichotomy of two different types of religious individuals that doesn't necessarily apply to the whole of a religious community and doesn't really describe faith systems outside of those James was familiar with, and I feel for many religiosity is seen almost entirely in the person who does the most community involved aspects of a religion, rather than religion being a practice for the self. My experience has been different than yours, perhaps due to belonging to a different faith system, with my experience being that those who may be considered religious geniuses (those educated deeply on their faith) and adhering to their faith the most, being the one's to show the most compassion and zealous behavior about their principles on how to exist in society. However, I do feel that often times the religious genius is not necessarily the one who leads the community, as I've met several religious leaders who are not as well educated as they probably should be in regards to their faith and I do believe that the structured aspect of a faith sometimes attracts people who want sway or power in their community rather than people who would be considered religious geniuses. I don't feel the religious genius would necessarily be regularly found among the larger community, either. I also would note that (not in all cases but in some) the religious genius may break away from dominant organizations in their faith or the institutions/"churches" due to their own interpretation of what the ethical codes of their faith is. Community is an important aspect of faith, but I feel that looking only at the community that is going through motions of religion, such as "church-going" regularly or other community based demonstrations of faith (which is not widely applicable as an important part of religion outside of Christianity) would be detrimental to trying to find the "religious genius" that James is concerned with studying, as this person may demonstrate ascetic lifestyle or a mystic's approach to faith rather than pursuing the habitual public practices.
DeleteThanks for all your very thoughtful comments. If you still don't think you care for William James, based on just these two lectures in VRE and perhaps on some dated or (by our lights) inappropriate nomenclature, I'd urge you to read around in some of the other James texts I've shared. He really was an exceptional philosopher, and as the English writer Alfred North Whitehead called him, "that adorable genius." Quick takes are not always reliable.
ReplyDeleteHere's his letter to his friend Frances Morse in which he declared
"my religious act," defending experience...
I had to stop yesterday.... Six months ago, I shouldn't have thought it possible that a life deliberately founded on pottering about and dawdling through the day would be endurable or even possible. I have attained such skill that I doubt if my days ever at any time seemed to glide by so fast. But it corrodes one's soul nevertheless. I scribble a little in bed every morning, and have reached page 48 of my third Gifford lecture—though Lecture II, alas! must be rewritten entirely. The conditions don't conduce to an energetic grip of the subject, and I am afraid that what I write is pretty slack and not what it would be if my vital tone were different. The problem I have set myself is a hard one: first, to defend (against all the prejudices of my "class") "experience" against "philosophy" as being the real backbone of the world's religious life—I mean prayer, guidance, and all that sort of thing immediately and privately felt, as against high and noble general views of our destiny and the world's meaning; and second, to make the hearer or reader believe, what I myself invincibly do believe, that, although all the special manifestations of religion may have been absurd (I mean its creeds and theories), yet the life of it as a whole is mankind's most important function. A task well-nigh impossible, I fear, and in which I shall fail; but to attempt it is my religious act...
--William James, To Miss Frances R. Morse. Apr 12 1900
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/38091/38091-h/38091-h.htm
Address at the Emerson Centenary in Concord (1903)
ReplyDeleteWilliam James
The pathos of death is this, that when the days of one's life are ended, those days that were so crowded with business and felt so heavy in their passing, what remains of one in memory should usually be so slight a thing. The phantom of an attitude, the echo of a certain mode of thought, a few pages of print, some invention, or some victory we gained in a brief critical hour, are all that can survive the best of us. It is as if the whole of a man's significance had now shrunk into the phantom of an attitude, into a mere musical note or phrase suggestive of his singularity — happy are those whose singularity gives a note so clear as to be victorious over the inevitable pity of such a diminution and abridgement.
An ideal wraith like this, of Emerson's personality, hovers over all Concord today, taking, in the minds of those of you who were his neighbors and intimates a somewhat fuller shape, remaining more abstract in the younger generation, but bringing home to all of us the notion of a spirit indescribably precious. The form that so lately moved upon these streets and country roads, or awaited in these fields and woods the beloved Muse's visits, is now dust; but the soul's note, the spiritual voice, rises strong and clear above the uproar of the times, and seems securely destined to exert an ennobling influence over future generations... (continues)
https://arisbe.sitehost.iu.edu/menu/library/aboutcsp/James/1903EM.htm
This is a very beautiful homage to Emerson. I can see why you like his letters and writings. He has an almost poetic way with words.
DeleteIndeed. I actually think he’s a far better writer than his brother the famous novelist. He thought so too, in one letter he tweaked Henry to write a clear straightforward declarative sentence “just for brother“…
DeleteThat was me, jpo. Only “anon” on my phone.
DeleteHi. James Martorana here. People just call me James. I was late to register due to things outside of my control. I am a non traditional student and I am here to get a Master's Degree and get my licensure to go on to teach middle and high school Government as I got my Bachelors in Political Science with a Pre-Law cognate back in 2014. I served in the U.S Army for 10 years and after I left the military I decided it was time to get further educated. Since I have always liked government and everything that goes along with that it seemed like a good thing to major in. I have a wife of 13 years and 2 sons, 11 and 9. That being said the first lecture of William James left me a little confused and distraught. It reads like a professor, but he speaks like a crazy person. I consider myself Christian and I believe in God but to say that certain things that are outside of our range of understanding it due to a disorder or disease to me it just nuts. I believe that certain people might have times in their lives where things might happen to them or thoughts might come to them from outside of the normal channels. I myself have experienced this incentive after a very close family member passed away. And a coworker who didn't know me from Adam and surely didn't know this family member of mine referred to me by a very unique and not known nick name this family member called me. This to me says that there is something more. Call me crazy but to blame miracles on disease or illness and to say you are a psychopath because something you said or how you believe is not something I would consider a very scholarly opinion.
ReplyDeleteHave you had experiences you would characterize as religious? What made them so? What was/is their significance to you?
ReplyDeleteI have had a fee yes. One in particular sticks out. I'll never forget one time I was in San Diego. I had just gotten off a greyhound bus and had nowhere to go. I started to follow this guy whom I had just met around SD. He told me he had a spot on the beach where him and a bunch of his friends lived. Seeing as I had no clue what I was going to do next on my own, having no friends or family around anywhere in sight, I decided to go with him.
As we leave downtown SD to head to the beach, we get on this trolley. This trolley has about 5 stops before its a 30 minute ride out to the beach. I was in a seat with my feet towards the aisle and no-one was sitting next to me. As we were about to post the last stop I heard a voice say, "Get off the train." I thought it was really weird because noone was sitting next to me. But I didn't question it because I knew, it was God's voice. And still to this day I believe that decision saved m y life.