Blog Posts

How Stoicism Helps

Blog Posts

This week I’ll discuss a few ideas from Stoicism and how they helped me during my deconstruction and eventual deconversion.

Before I do, I’d like to follow up on something I wrote earlier. In “Intro: Stoicism for Deconstructors,” I wrote:

It’s not my goal to “convert” you or convince you but to inform you. Stoicism is not one-size-fits-all, and I can’t know you like you know you. But having some conscious philosophy of life is essential.

I want to backpedal a bit: I’m not prepared to say that coming to some concrete philosophy of life is essential. It may be that for a long while, we need to spend our energy recovering from a lifetime of unreasonable expectations while being the best people we can be without overthinking it.

I will say that having a conscious philosophy of life can make answering some questions much easier, add richness and depth to your life, and help you on your way to tranquility.

Now on to Stoicism.

What is Philosophy?

At some point, I realized I needed to leave church, but I didn’t know where to begin. It seemed so overwhelming. Thankfully, I had already started reading the Stoics, and they have opinions on where to begin.

The Stoics and other ancients believed that philosophy was the “art of living.” People who lived deliberately and reflected on their lives were philosophers. Very different from the current perspective that treats philosophy as a purely academic discipline.

The art of living requires knowledge, so they encouraged learning theory, but it didn’t matter until you put it into practice.

Why does this matter?

Many of us grew up in a context where we were told the rules and expected to follow them. Losing that set of rules can be bewildering, to say the least. Learning to think differently about the art of living can help us make sense of an uncertain and constantly changing world.

Excellence of Character

When I was in the throes of deconstruction, especially after I realized I would have to leave the church, I can’t say I was thinking much about meaning. I was in survival mode. However, after I finally resigned my church membership, I realized I had to learn how to build community for myself and make my own meaning. For me, the Stoics provided a great starting place.

The Stoics believed that excellence of character, being the best human you can be, was the goal of life. They thought you would achieve eudaimonia, or flourishing, if you pursued this goal.

In Intro: Stoicism for Deconstructors, I wrote:

Humans are rational and social, so to be the best human we can, we must pursue excellence of character first by getting better at thinking clearly, and by practicing living well, especially in the context of the people and world around us.

This means to live a fulfilling life, we need to develop our character in the service of those around us and, ultimately, humanity.

It also means ethical action is centered around our character, not some rules handed to us thousands of years ago and interpreted by other people. Ethics, not mere obedience.

Why does this matter?

Since Stoicism is a kind of Humanism, it gives us a place in this world and provides us a tribe. At a fundamental level, there is no Us and Them. We’re all in this together. Stoicism gives us a practical way of working through that reality and helps us adopt all of humanity as our own.

All this gives us something significant to live for: the betterment of the human race. It’s actionable and direct. As we work on our character, we can see the benefits immediately as we benefit the people around us. In the words of the band Gojira, “When you change yourself, you change the world.”

Making the growth of my character a primary goal has been very fulfilling, not to mention clarifying.

Sorting Emotions

In my circles of Christianity, emotions weren’t talked about much except to warn about how untrustworthy they were. Making sense of these emotions was not a thing that was taught very much other than to direct people to prayer.

The Stoics distinguished between some key concepts:

  • Impressions. These are mental representations of the world around you. Things like “That cake would be good to eat.” or “That person is angry at you.” You can’t control these impressions.
  • Response to the impressions. These are either “yes,” “no,” or “maybe.” You can control this response.
  • Emotions. These result from that response and push you to some action. Sometimes this action is only to get upset. You can control these emotions.

Like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Stoics believed that your emotions are often the result of underlying beliefs.

Also, having a concept like “impressions,” which aren’t up to you, gives you a place to put intrusive thoughts, knee-jerk reactions, and other emotional-related things that aren’t under your power.

Why does this matter?

This one has been so powerful for me. I no longer feel guilty for intrusive thoughts (like unwanted sexual thoughts or imagining pushing someone over a cliff). These days I just roll my eyes and move on. No longer do I feel completely helpless to address my emotional difficulties. I can rely on the practices of Stoicism and problem-solving from Cognitive Behavioral Therapy to address the underlying issues leading to the emotions that I am having trouble with.

Planning for Setbacks

I think people generally don’t do a lot of planning for setbacks, so when they happen, they are often caught flatfooted. I don’t think Christianity is unique regarding this lack of preparation.

Because the Stoics realized it was difficult to address emotional issues in the moment, they took as much action as they could to prepare for future challenges. One way they did this was through the premeditatio malorum, or premeditation of ills.

The idea was to imagine vividly some negative thing happening, then imagine yourself handling it successfully. By the time the event came around, you’d have taken some of the sting away and bought yourself some space to manage it more wisely.

(This can be abused. If a company CEO is planning unjust layoffs and uses this technique to reduce the sting of feeling bad about hurting a bunch of fellow humans, that CEO is not being virtuous, even though they might be imitating something the Stoics did. They are not practicing Stoicism.)

Why does this matter?

This premeditation is an example of the pragmatism that I like about Stoicism. Christianity tends to spiritualize everything and, therefore, often doesn’t have consistent or reliable ways of addressing real-life issues.

Conclusion

There’s so much more, but my main goal here has been to introduce you to some of the ways Stoics think about life. Hopefully, this has been helpful to you!

We are nearly done with Stoicism for now, but I would like to spend a couple of posts talking about some practical, specific Stoic ideas.

Finding Secular Community

Blog Posts, Communities of Unbelief, Deconversion, Secular Community

This week we have a post from a Deconversion Anoymous community member.

Every deconvert with an experience of lost, lapsed or damaged relationships over matters of faith has another–likely ongoing–story about the challenge of finding community and friendships afterwards.  There are headwinds here.  While faith change is a growing demographic, it’s still a  niche experience to expect to bond over, and societal trends make socialization more difficult for everyone, especially as adults.

There’s not a prescriptive solution.  Everyone has different personalities, abilities, motivations and circumstances.  Someone with religious trauma or other deficits might need the support of a mental health professional before they feel comfortable moving forward.  Someone in a precarious personal situation might need to prioritize stability.  Someone with a family will have to navigate unique tensions and responsibilities.  Success isn’t equitable, may be hard to recognize and may not come early or predictably.  But curiosity and a flexible mindset can help weather disappointment.  Some of it does come down to luck, but self-understanding and persistent determination improve the odds.

In practical terms, here are some things worth considering:

Podcasts

Podcasts are not tailored to our individual needs, and the parasocial affinity we may feel with creators is not a true relationship.  But a collection of trusted, predictable voices can be comforting and provide a sense of inspiration or solidarity when things feel lonely and bleak.

Online Communities

The best podcasts attract likeminded people, and attached online communities are a great way to meet them.  Book clubs and other topical online groups can be similarly selective.  Be adventurous…these spaces may exist on platforms you might not regularly use (reddit, discord, etc.).

This isn’t a panacea.  Not everyone has the technical comfort or time/patience to systematically hunt for new spaces.  Privacy/safety may be a concern.  Demographics aren’t always a good fit.  It can take a lot of effort to participate to a sufficient degree to understand whether something is worthwhile.

It can also feel like there’s a ceiling to the benefit of online interaction.  Chatting with random people is less connecting than with people you recognize.  Text can be impersonal compared to audio or video.  It’s good to consider the constructive social bandwidth of a medium relative to the time we invest in it.

Conferences / Retreats

The national conferences of groups like American Atheists, American Humanist Association, Americans United, etc. (as well as many regional conferences) are great places to put faces to names you might have only met online.  Even if you only meet someone once or if you only run into them at conventions, that can still greatly enrich the sense of connection in interactions continued online.  Travel and expense are considerations, but it’s often worth the effort if it means being able to expand your circle.  Retreats and get-togethers organized by smaller groups can also be worthwhile, though it can be intimidating to trust people you haven’t met.

Meetup / Nextdoor

The quality and relevance of local community listings varies drastically.  Finding something that’s relevant to deconstruction, active and interesting can feel incredibly random, but it’s important to check and keep checking.  Groups form all the time, and widening your criteria to things that may not be specific but still adjacent to other interests can yield unexpected connections.  Keep in mind that people may be organizing under a variety of terms.  Try: atheist, agnostic, freethinker, humanist, deconversion, etc.  Also, look for local groups and forums on more general social platforms.  If it’s focused on your area, then others are finding it too, and if you don’t see what you want, post yourself to see if it connects with anyone.

Congregations

People who leave church usually aren’t immediately interested in another church, but the benefits of congregational organization are hard to replicate.  There may be church-like groups such as Unitarian Universalists that are worth considering.  Many have webcasts so you can see what you might be getting into before visiting.

There are also secular groups like Oasis or Sunday Assembly to be aware of, but their spread is limited.

Volunteering

Civic service, mutual aid and other goal-oriented involvement are great ways to meet new people in a constructive environment.  It can be hard if these seem dominated by religious groups (even if they’re “progressive”) but it’s worth looking at a directory like https://www.volunteermatch.org/ or secular organizations like https://www.recoveringfromreligion.org/ for opportunities.

Networking / Directories

The best source of information for local community is often locals who have already done that work.  It doesn’t hurt to try reaching out to any secular people you learn of in your area for advice.

There are secularly-oriented social media and directories that might help you find some of these connections:

Unlike church, secular community is rarely a one-stop destination.  You may need to rely on a more eclectic group of supports and validations than you expect, but in the process you’ll become a more rounded person with skills and perspective that will help surpass this change and ones yet to come.

Stoicism: History and Writings

Blog Posts

Following up from last week, let’s get into Stoicism. My goal is to apply it to deconstruction, especially from Christianity (which is what I know), but a general introduction may help.

Whirlwind History of Stoicism

Following is a somewhat tongue-in-cheek history of Stoicism.

Once upon a time, in the West, Socrates asked questions. The wrong kind, apparently, because the Powers That Be had him executed for them. The right kind, also apparently, because he got lots of other people to begin asking questions. One of those same pepple started the school of Cynicism, which said, Virtue is the only thing you need to live well. A while later, a Cynic student concluded Virtue may be the only thing you need, but having a house isn’t bad. His name was Zeno, from Citium (not this Zeno), and he started teaching to the public on a porch (“stoa” in Greek).

Time passed, and Stoicism came to Rome, where it was hip for rich kids to study Stoicism. Some of those rich kids turned out alright and, along with a formerly enslaved person, wrote valuable things for us..

Then Christianity came along, becoming the dominant life philosophy. In the 20th century, people began picking up virtue ethics as a way of living ethical lives—outside of religion—and Stoicism picked up steam again. Psychotherapists—inspired by Stoic psychology—developed Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and other cognitive therapies.

Key Writings

It’s probably better to read about Stoicism before reading the primary sources. See last week’s post for resources to get you started. Stoic technical language uses words we use in everyday speech; this can be confusing until you have a basic grasp of the terminology. That said, they’re pretty easy to read.

Seneca the Younger

Lucius Annaeus Seneca was a tutor, then advisor to the emperor Nero. He wrote letters and essays on anger, fortune/fate, grief, inner peace, friendship, and more. His writings are relatively easy to read, especially with footnotes (Which “Gaius” is he referring to this time??). Fun fact: Seneca died after Nero condemned him to death by suicide.

For a solid introduction to his letters, see Letters from a Stoic.

…hold every hour in your grasp. Lay hold of to-day’s task, and you will not need to depend so much upon to-morrow’s. While we are postponing, life speeds by.

Letters of Seneca 1.2

Epictetus

Epictetus was born into slavery in what is now western Turkey. Somehow he studied philosophy while enslaved and later gained his freedom. He became head of the Stoic school in Rome until all the philosophers were banished.

We don’t have any of his writings. However, Arrian, who studied under him, took (apparently?) excellent notes, and then translated them into lectures in the voice of Epictetus. These included the Discourses (4 of 8 books survive) and the Handbook (A.K.A. Enchiridion).

For a solid introduction to the writings of Epictetus, see Discourses and Selected Writings. You can also find a modernized version of the Handbook in A Field Guide to a Happy Life and The Art of Living.

People are troubled not by things but by their judgments about things. Death, for example, isn’t frightening, or else Socrates would have thought so. No, what frightens people is their judgment about death, that it’s something to fear. So whenever we are obstructed or troubled or distressed, let’s blame no one but ourselves—that is, our judgments.

Enchiridion of Epictetus, 5

Marcus Aurelius

Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was an emperor of Rome. He wasn’t a teacher of Stoicism but a practitioner, and part of his practice involved writing out philosophical ideas to force himself to think better. These have been published since then in the Meditations.

He has a way with words, as do his translators. My favorite translation is the one by Gregory Hays, but there are other good ones, as well.

The fraction of infinity, of that vast abyss of time, allotted to each of us. Absorbed in an instant into eternity.

The fraction of all substance, and all spirit.

The fraction of the whole earth you crawl about on.

Keep all that in mind, and don’t treat anything as important except doing what your nature demands, and accepting what Nature sends you.

Meditations 12.32

In my next post, we’ll get into some of the most important ideas of Stoicism, especially from a deconstruction perspective.

Intro: Stoicism for Deconstructors

Blog Posts

Several years ago, I realized I probably no longer believed. Nothing looked different on the outside, but internally, the bottom had dropped out of my world. Eventually, I settled into a steady state of teetering between trying to regain my faith and faking it to get by. My morning devotional times devolved to reading Ecclesiastes on repeat—the only book I could tolerate. At some point, I realized I really wasn’t going back and that, for my own sanity, I had to exit.

Around that time, someone close to me suggested reading the Stoics in the morning, which I did. I found a philosophy designed to be a way of life, a way of making sense of the world, providing community, and doing better. Most of all, I found a philosophy that helped me solve the immediate problems in my life.

When I’d been a Christian, there were several “besetting sins” in my life that I had made no headway on for years. When I started studying Stoicism, half of them disappeared (though that probably had more to do with chilling out instead of perseverating, which is the Christian way). For the other half, I started making serious progress. Coming out of a “pray and wait” mindset was a relief.

When I started trying to figure out how to exit my church context (not high-demand, but relatively intense nonetheless), having philosophy around helped me consider how to balance competing concerns (the need to get out and the need to be good to my family), how to be kind in my speech, how to prepare myself to reduce harm to my mental health, how to keep becoming a better person, etc. Stoicism was super helpful during one of my life’s most challenging times.

Intro to the Series

Last week I wrote about graceful life philosophies, “secular religions,” that help people make sense of a world without conservative religion. I’m planning to explore a few of them here on the blog, in hopes that they’ll be helpful to you.

It’s not my goal to “convert” you or convince you but to inform you. Stoicism is not one-size-fits-all, and I can’t know you like you know you. But having some conscious philosophy of life is essential.

What Is Stoicism?

First, Stoicism (the philosophy) is not stoicism (“indifference to pleasure or pain”). Like Epicureanism, Cynicism, and Materialism, everyday use has taken on a negative, or at least inaccurate, meaning.

Stoicism is a life philosophy aimed at becoming the best human you can be. Humans are rational and social, so to be the best human we can, we must pursue excellence of character first by getting better at thinking clearly, and by practicing living well, especially in the context of the people and world around us. Achieving this excellence of character involves learning three things: How the world works, how to think, and how to act. It also involves active training: How to want the right things, how to choose appropriate actions, and how to feel the best emotions.

This summary is “wrong” because it’s oversimplifying and missing a lot, but I think it’s a helpful start. I’ve purposefully omitted many things that people associate with Stoicism because while they might be recommended practices, they must be practiced in the context of excellence of character and cosmopolitanism. Without the core, they’re just life-hacks.

Why I Appreciate Stoicism as a Deconstructor

Most of all, it’s practical. It’s about being a better person and doing the work to get there without the level of idealism that Christianity has.

It’s also rich. Most of the original texts are long gone. Still, we have a large body of work available to read from across a couple hundred years, not to mention all the work that has followed in modern times. Getting into the Stoics has been an enriching adventure into the world of ancient philosophy. For those of us in the West, it’s had a massive influence on our history… people like Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and even the apostle Paul were influenced by Stoicism.

For those that need/want it, it does have a spiritual dimension. The word logos from John 1:1 is a Greek philosophical idea and is used all over the place in Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations. It refers to that pervading sense of order and unity in the universe. This idea doesn’t have to be accurate to be helpful, and I appreciate it.

Stoicism helps you come to terms with your own inevitable death and the death of others, which in turn helps free you from many fears.

Last but not least, it’s open to revision. There are core principles that make an idea Stoic, but at the same time, there’s nothing sacred about Stoicism itself. Many philosophers today are working through how to bring Stoic ideas to modern people in light of things we’ve learned in science and a worldview that tries to avoid magical thinking.

Next Posts

I’ll write at least a couple more posts on Stoicism. If you want to hear more, let me know in the comments. Also, let me know if you have specific questions, and I’ll try to answer them.

After that, I’ll be taking on Epicureanism.

Resources

  • My summary of Stoicism is heavily inspired by the work of Tanner Campbell and Kai Whiting (through Practical Stoicism) and Massimo Pigliucci (through his many books and articles). I recommend them heartily.
  • For books, I can recommend a couple as introductions:

Get You a Graceful Life Philosophy

Blog Posts, Philosophy

Without religion, how do you find meaning? How do you live well? How do you find out how to live well? What is life about, anyway?

Secular Religion

Throughout her book Doubt: A History, Jennifer Michael Hecht weaves the idea of a “graceful-life philosophy.” These life philosophies are formed after a region becomes more cosmopolitan—many cultures living next to each other. Since you can’t escape being confronted with challenges to your own beliefs, this confrontation of views leads to doubting whatever your accepted religion is. But losing your religion, eating, drinking, and being merry aren’t satisfying for most people. The graceful life philosophies provide that meaning. In fact, Hecht calls them “secular religions” since they serve many of the functions of religions.

This week I’d like to talk about these “graceful life philosophies.” In future posts, I’ll talk about how to go about adopting such a philosophy. If you’re anything like me, you might get overwhelmed by the quantity of choices. I recommend starting with curiosity. “Oh, that’s interesting,” instead of, “I need to get started now!!”

The following “secular religions” provide answers, or at least guidelines for:

  • Making sense of how the world works.
  • What life is about; what’s the big picture.
  • What we should spend our time doing.
  • What it means to live life well.
  • How to handle life’s challenges.
  • How to prepare for death.

Examples

Some philosophies of life are more fully-formed and can replace religion for most things. Not only how do you pursue a good life, but also how to live with others, how to eat, dress, etc. They may provide community and events. Examples include:

  • Stoicism: fulfillment and happiness come from living according to our nature as humans. This happens when we live as the best humans we can: thinking and acting rationally and living for the good of ourselves and others.
  • Non-theistic Buddhism: you should pursue the Eightfold Path toward a better life for you and those around you.
  • Epicureanism: pursuing pleasure and avoiding pain are natural and normal, so go with the grain and do that well. You can achieve ataraxia (mental and emotional tranquility) if you do.
  • Secular/atheistic versions of established religions, like Christianity, Islam, or Judaism

Some philosophies may be less fully formed but might form the solid core of a life philosophy you build yourself over time. The fact is, we all cobble together our own philosophies of life as we gain experience. These might provide fewer answers to mundane questions about how to eat, dress, etc., but they’re helpful places to begin. Examples of these partial philosophies include:

  • Secular Humanism: We’re human, so let’s work to develop and help humanity and the world around us.
  • The teachings of Ecclesiastes: There is no absolute meaning, no life after death, but life is still good, and one’s own work is good. (Doubt, a History, p78)
  • Existentialism: Ut is up to each individual to create her own meaning and values in life by engaging in the world, by pushing back against oppressions that threaten to limit our possibilities and by getting out there and doing things—not just contemplating what you might do. (How to Be Authentic, Skye Cleary, xii)
  • Absurdism: There is no intrinsic meaning, but we crave meaning anyway. We must face this absurdity by constantly keeping it in front of us and acting against it, living life to the fullest. (The Myth of Sysiphus, Albert Camus, throughout)
  • Pragmatism: What works is more important than what accurately reflects a complex, incomprehensible reality (How to Live a Good Life, p245 and following)
  • Effective Altruism: We should dedicate at least some of our resources to making the world a better place and ensure these resources get put to the best uses they can. (How to Live a Good Life, p256)
  • The Satanic Temple: “The mission of The Satanic Temple is to encourage benevolence and empathy, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense, oppose injustice, and undertake noble pursuits.” (The Satanic Temple website)

Even the teachings of Jesus could be included here if you ignore 2000 years of religious cruft. In his book Jesus for the Non-Religious (which I haven’t read), John Shelby Spong describes Jesus as breaking tribal and religious boundaries and prejudices.

Starting to Get Started

As you’re coming out of religion, wondering what to do, it may be worth learning about various philosophies of life. Here are a couple caveats to bear in mind:

  • You are not behind! You’re not starting from scratch.
  • There’s no race to some finish line. This is about your life, so you can take the necessary time.
  • None of the philosophies are perfect. They all have limitations.
  • They are not one-size-fits-all. You will build your own philosophy of life anyway, and it may be cobbled together from multiple. My philosophy is a strong dose of Stoicism, plus a good helping of Christianity, Epicureanism, Buddhism, and Skepticism.
  • Learn to distinguish life-hack from a life philosophy. We’ll get more into this over time.

Resources

Jump in where you are!

Blog Posts

Think of yourself as dead. You have lived your life. Now take what’s left and live it properly.

Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, 7.56.

‘I wish it need not have happened in my time,’ said Frodo.
‘So do I,’ said Gandalf, ‘and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.’

Fellowship of the Ring, p43

You Are Not Behind! Jump in where you are!

FlyLady

Last week I talked about the fact that you have it within yourself to grow your character the way you want. Once you have accepted this, what comes next?

One of the things that overwhelmed me at the beginning of my deconstruction was the fact that so many years had gone by. Wasted. I felt like I was starting from scratch, having misspent my adolescence and adult life so far.

As I was deconstructing, I was exposed early to the philosophy of Stoicism. The Marcus Aurelius quotation above was one of the most helpful things that came up during my initial exposure.

The sunk cost fallacy is the idea that time or other resources already spent should not matter when it comes to decision-making. The fact that time has gone and you cannot get it back means there’s nothing you can do about it. In turn, those facts should not be used when making decisions.

A classic example is standing in line: say you’ve been in line for an hour. Sunk cost fallacy says you should keep staying in line.. you don’t want to “waste” the hour you’ve spent. But whether you stay in line or not, that hour is gone. The sunk cost fallacy leads to bad decision making.

If you can get out of line and achieve what you want even faster, that’s what you should do. It’s better to think, “Starting from here and now, what do I have to spend to achieve what I want?” as if you hadn’t spent anything at all yet.

This is a powerful idea to understand. Let’s apply it to our lives.

Marcus is doing what cognitive behavioral therapists call reframing: he’s choosing a helpful new way to view his current situation. All his life so far is sunk, and he can’t get it back. The decisions have been made and are set in stone.

The TV show “Alone” involves people being dropped into a survival situation with limited tools. It doesn’t do them much good to complain about all the tools they don’t have. Instead, what’s important is to figure out what to do with what they have right now.

Frodo wishes he wasn’t in the situation he was in. Gandalf wisely points out that he doesn’t get that choice, but he does get to decide what to do next.

When I look at my life as if it’s a series of successive moments, one event happening after another, I’m free to look at the past as history. It becomes something I can learn from instead of something that has to keep affecting my present life. The past becomes a kind of property, a thing I have–maybe even a thing I was given–rather than a thing I am. I can’t change the past, but I can make decisions that affect my future.

So as you go forward into the rest of your life, working on character, friendships, and all the things that go into a well-lived life, start with this: Begin again.

You Can Help Yourself

Blog Posts, Post Theism

It’s easy to see that we all have things we wish were different about ourselves. The hard part is figuring out what to do about it. One option is to do what we were raised to do: pray and read the Bible. But most of us no longer believe those things work since they are fake effort.

So what do we do? Let’s start with a simple idea:

You can help yourself.

You have it within you to do the work required to improve your character. It was there all along. After all, whenever you found yourself doing better as a Christian, you were doing the work.

You have the resources you need. You have the intelligence and wisdom to embark on whatever program will work for you, whether it involves reading, therapy, philosophy, or whatever.

The work may be challenging, and it will take time, but you have what you need to get started; you always did.

Over the next several posts, I would like to share some of what I’ve learned about growing in character after Christianity. But the most important thing to remember is: You don’t need me. You need yourself. I don’t know you in all the ways you can know yourself, and you are the best person for this job.

Useful Terms and “Stupid” Questions

Blog Posts

What is “cognitive bias”? What’s the difference between “deconstruction” and “deconversion”?

Deconstruction has been a “thing” on the internet for several years. Joining a movement after it starts might mean there are terms people use all the time without explaining. Moreover, you may feel that asking what they mean will make you look stupid.

I want to try to define a few terms. These definitions may be incorrect in important ways, but they should be less wrong than not knowing. Knowing them may also get you a meaningful part of the way to fuller understanding.

Here goes!

Deconstruction

When I use deconstruction, I mean “digging into the hard questions about your worldview AND being willing to consider doing something different based on your answers.” It doesn’t necessarily result in a complete loss of faith, but it usually does result in some significant change in your beliefs.

I’m not sure I’ve ever heard the word used in a circumstance where somebody became more rigid or conservative. (If you have, please let me know in the comments.)

I have heard it used in place of deconversion. I’m guessing that this mainly has to do with the speed of conversation rather than using a precise definition.

Deconversion

This one is easier to define. It’s a loss of your current faith. Even if lose your faith, you could consider other religions or spiritual paths, not necessarily becoming an atheist or agnostic.

It can happen after a prolonged deconstruction or more quickly after something “clicks,” depending on the person and circumstances.

Cognitive Bias

This term doesn’t show up often, but you may hear the phrase, “confirmation bias.” This is a kind of cognitive bias.

A cognitive bias is a structural flaw in human reason. It has to do with how people think about certain things. Some examples are seeking evidence that supports our beliefs (confirmation bias), seeking evidence that refutes other people’s beliefs (disconfirmation bias), focusing on negative things (negativity bias), assuming that someone’s character is exemplified by a single action (fundamental attribution error), etc.

This is different from liberal or conservative biases, which have more to do with seeing things through our own worldview. Related, but worth keeping distinct.

The important thing is that it’s common to all humans. Super-smart, rational humans are prone to cognitive biases, just like the rest of us. We all have to fight them. Constant vigilance!

Fallacy

You also don’t hear this term often, but you may if you pay attention to counter-apologetics.

A fallacy is a flaw in an argument. For example, saying an argument is wrong because of where the proponent came from or who they are (genetic fallacy) or saying your argument gets to play by special rules that other arguments don’t (special pleading).

It’s definitely helpful to be familiar with the shapes of these fallacies.

“Stupid questions”

No definition… I want to point out that one of the joys of deconstructing is the pursuit of knowledge; knowledge that was once limited or forbidden. In fact, the even greater joy is the pursuit of knowledge in general, which is one of the most human things we can do.

As a result, it’s worth considering: Is sounding stupid for a moment worth cutting yourself off from these joys?

Suppose you ask “obvious” questions. In reality, you usually don’t sound stupid but curious. And you may do others the service of getting answers to these questions. Win-win!

A whole world of terms exist that I haven’t pursued myself–mostly around sexuality, race, and other topics of the day. I don’t know if it’s because I’m scared to ask or I’m afraid to know the answers.

Are there questions you’re afraid to ask? What other terms may be useful to define?

Resources

  • RationalWiki on Logical Fallacy—The tone of RationalWiki is less gracious than I’m going for, but it’s a helpful resource
  • Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman—One of the most important popular works on cognitive biases. It’s also relatively easy to read.
  • The Scout Mindset, by Julia Galef—A very easy and practical introduction into how cognitive biases show up, and what to do about them.
  • Deconversion—A resource on this site that David has put together.

Doubt Is a Superpower

Blog Posts, doubt, skepticism

Christians would like us to believe that doubt and skepticism are dangerous. But they’re superpowers, ways of making you a better human, not a worse one.

Over the last few weeks, we’ve talked about doubt, fundamentalism, and problems using words. I want to tie it together and talk about why doubt is safer, healthier, and better for your teeth (two truths and a lie).

I have two main reasons for saying a posture of doubt should be preferred: the limitations of explanations and the fallibility of human reasoning.

Limitations of explanations

One of my mottos is, “All models are wrong, but some are useful.” (George Box). You might easily say, “All explanations are wrong,” but what does this mean?

An explanation is an attempt to describe something about the world in a way you can make sense of, even though the real world is overwhelmingly complex and impossible to understand fully.

The problem is that explanations have to simplify the world, which means you lose something in the process, making it “wrong” somehow. At the same time, we can’t live without these simplifications.

Communicators like Neil deGrasse Tyson and the late Carl Sagan face this tension in their presentation of science.

This tension even shows up in how we interact with others. How can you truly, deeply know someone when they’re constantly changing, growing, and aging? The best you can do is have a working model of who they are and continuously update it as time passes.

What to do?

Flaws in human reasoning

The more we learn about cognitive biases, prejudice, and the unreliability of memory, the more we should be suspicious of all human reasoning, especially our own. (Philosophers call this dynamic “Fallibilism.”)

And yet we find ourselves in a world where the pressure is on us to be overly confident. If we express uncertainty, people see us as fence-sitters, cowards unwilling to commit. Christianity taught us to have and crave certainty, especially about the most important issues.

What to do?

Tying it together

This is where skepticism comes in. If you hold an appropriately skeptical attitude, you can recognize the limits of explanations and human reasoning and allow yourself to take in new information. Being skeptical doesn’t mean you disbelieve everything you hear. Rather, it raises your standard of evidence. People don’t get to claim something is true without something to back it up. People don’t get to demand that you form an opinion when you’re not ready to.

So embrace skepticism! Embrace uncertainty! It’s part of being a clearer thinker.

Jimmy

Doing Better: The Problem of Words

Agnosticism, Atheism, Blog Posts

Should I have called last week’s blog post No More Fundamentalism, picked a different term, or unpacked it a bit?

I want to draw out one (of many) difficulties with words: The tensions between…

  • correctness and convenience,
  • writing something technically correct and writing something people will read,
  • having a genuine and thorough conversation and having a conversation people will actually participate in till the end.

Imagine the following two blog titles:

  • No More Attitudes Toward Knowledge That Allow for Areas of Belief That Are Untouchable and Therefore Leave Certain Areas of Knowledge Permanently Unfixable: A Manifesto for Myself
  • No More Fundamentalism: A Manifesto for Myself

I’m overstating the difference, but the tension should be obvious. On one end of the spectrum, there’s a simple, concise title that may make the wrong impression. On the other end, there’s possibly getting things so technically correct that nobody reads the whole thing.

The tension is real.

A reader rightly commented on my recent blog post that using terms like Fundamentalism can be problematic. There’s a real risk that if we label something “fundamentalist,” we take the emotion we feel for our former religion and transfer it onto that thing. And when that happens, we give ourselves permission to dismiss it. We halt rational thought we could have had. This is both dishonest and stops growth.

At the same time, I’m not sure what else to call it–especially in a post I’d like people to read. See the trouble?

This tension shows up in another place: Do you call yourself an atheist? Agnostic? Or do you avoid labels altogether?

So what to do? Here’s a list of ideas:

  • Embrace the work. Religion allows us to get away with sloppy thinking about complex issues. This can lead to harm and we have an opportunity to do better.
  • When in a conversation with someone, consider working with them to define terms. What is a “fundamentalist” to your interlocutor? If you’re writing, consider the word itself: Is “fundamentalism” too problematic to use?
  • Consider skipping the words or labels altogether. Maybe it’s better to not even use the word “fundamentalist” but instead use the words describing what you mean by it.

If anybody asked, I used the term “fundamentalist” in the previous post mainly because I didn’t think through the implications (oops!). On review, I’m still OK with the word, though I see the potential for misuse. I’m leaving it up to you, the reader, to learn with me as I’m on this journey out of Christian Fundamentalism–a way of thinking that has core tenets, assumed 100% correct and therefore, untouchable.

Jimmy

Top-right image: “Yellow Tree – Daily Tree day 2” by fireytika is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 3.