In a comment on the last post, Andrea wrote:

I understand outgrowing things. I was a self proclaimed Pagan for 13 or so years. Recently after much study, therapy and self reflection I knew I had to take the plunge and drop the label. I can no longer label myself as a pagan. Doing this felt amazingly liberating. Who would have thought? Now this wasn’t necessarily a rejection of Paganism. I still find great value in many things deemed Pagan. This was just a moving forward from the need to put myself in a “box” that was stifling my growth. Now I know that this could be very offensive to some and I understand that.

The reason that I bring it up is that I am very interested in how you and Mandy came to this very different conclusion. Why Atheism?

I guess I should preface this by saying I’m only speaking for myself (deò) as I don’t want to speak for Mandy on this issue. My indication that we were “practicing atheists” in the last post was partly a joke (what kind of practice is that, exactly?), and partly not—I no longer consider myself religious, and it would be a stretch to call me “spiritual”. Why is that? Why go from a public voice for Paganism to completely non-religious? I’ve outlined the reasons for stepping away from Paganism before (see the “About” section of this website), but why not replace it with some broader or alternate religious or spiritual perspective?

I was raised Christian and my transition to Paganism was long and filled with Christian guilt. Eventually I moved through the stages… from guilt, to resentment of Christianity, to indifference toward Christianity. By the time I was publishing this podcast I had completely washed myself clean of my Christian roots—no longer feeling any association with the religion, not even on the subtlest emotional level. For this, I owe Paganism; it happened to be in the right place at the right time to get me away from Christianity.

Having subsequently dropped Paganism, the question would seem to be: why not replace it with another spiritual perspective? I submit that this is the wrong question. The question ought to be: What accounts for anyone ever taking up another belief system having dropped a previous one? I think there are probably two good reasons for holding a belief. The first is evidence. The second is training. When it comes to religious belief, we lack the first independently of the interpretations furnished by the second. “Training” could mean simply being raised in a particular religious culture. Or it could mean being brainwashed by a cult… or, less ominously, being immersed in a religious culture that eventually becomes second-nature.

When I chose Paganism, it was a radically free choice: I had no evidence for its truth, nor was I trained into it. In retrospect, I don’t think that I had a good reason for choosing Paganism. I don’t think I had a good reason for adopting those beliefs. Looking back, I wonder if I ever actually “believed” anything at all. My entire time in Paganism was dedicated to making it more palatable to the skeptic (hence most of the philosophy discussions on the show). Many Pagans are as skeptical as I was, and I think a lot of them found and enjoyed the show because of this. There are others, however, who profess a faith in the gods as strongly as Christians profess a faith in theirs. I find this interesting: These people seem to have genuine belief. But what a strange set of beliefs to choose! Pagan religious cultures haven’t been around in thousands of years in most cases, and even then they took on quite different forms. Although more and more people are being born into Pagan families, at one time in recent history everyone came to Paganism through the same radical choice as I did: Without evidence or training. There is an interesting question about why they chose Pagan beliefs… but a more preliminary question is: Is it even possible to radically choose your beliefs? Can you arbitrarily pick a set of propositions and just as arbitrarily believe them without evidence or training? Are such “beliefs” genuine beliefs? I suppose that once you have chosen a set of propositions you could eventually train yourself to genuinely believe them—especially if they come complete with a religious culture in which to immerse yourself. But what about the initial choice? This is a “fake it ’till you make it” approach to belief, and I am curious as to why people are motivated to fake it in the first place. In my case the reasons were not good ones.

You might think I’m picking on Paganism here, but the same holds for any religion. If I were to adopt any other spiritual perspective after having left Paganism, I would be faced with the same dilemma: What would motivate me to adopt another set of “beliefs” without evidence or training? In the case of Paganism, I realize now that it was its romantic tone, fantastical escapism, and promises of deep dark secrets that attracted me to it. Having realized that, I don’t agree that those are good reasons to join a religion, and I wouldn’t allow myself to do anything similar again.

So why atheism? The answer is that I simply don’t have a choice. I haven’t any proof of any other religion’s truth. Nor do I have the training in any other religion. I also will not “fake it ’till I make it” with another set of “beliefs” for the wrong reasons. The only remaining alternative is atheism.

Why not agnosticism? I was reading the blog of Colin McGinn (a famous philosopher) recently, and he wrote this:

We certainly do know that Santa Klaus does not exist, or goblins, or three-legged giants who live in the fridge; it would be daft to be “agnostic” about such questions—and even dafter to remain “open-minded” about them… We indeed don’t know everything, but some things we know quite well—and the complete falsity of religious doctrine is one of them.

I agree with him completely.

The universe is an amazing place, and I continue (as a career, even) to explore its wonders. However, I do this in a way that cannot be called religious or spiritual by any definition. Indeed, I found that trying to keep my philosophical endeavors consistent with some form of Paganism only served to hinder those philosophical endeavors. Having severed my religious allegiance I am now free to explore the wonders of the universe openly and honestly, and follow that path of inquiry wherever it goes. That path of inquiry, though, is constrained by reason and evidence. Religion, therefore, can simply play no part.

deò’s Shadow has officially been discontinued. For a while we held out hope that we would get at least one or two more episodes up, but so much time has passed (and the files for one of the special episodes became corrupt), that what we originally recorded is well past relevant. We’ve received a couple of inquiries as to the status of the show, and we’re very pleased that people continue to discover and enjoy it. The financial contributions that have been made (especially those particularly generous donations by a select number of patrons) are paying for our hosting costs (libsyn, domain and web hosting) to ensure that new listeners can discover the show and that everyone can continue to enjoy it.

Making deòs Shadow was usually a joy, and as the show grew more popular, we had many opportunities for new experiences which helped us to grow as people. One of the interesting side-effects of such growth is that one can end up growing out of that which induces the growth. We’ve moved on from Paganism and are now practicing atheists. We’re both in our 30s now, deò is half finished his PhD program (he began the show as an undergrad), Mandy is busy at a successful career, and we’ve got our eyes on the mundane things in life like securing a future and starting a family within the next few years.

It’s been a blast, and we’d like to thank everyone who has contributed in various ways to the show, especially Lucy Lawson-Duckett who tirelessly moderated our forums and helped in various other ways over the past couple years.

When deò’s Shadow began in 2005, there were only a handful of Pagan podcasts available (Lance and Graal having preceded us, and a few other startups occurring at the same time). Today there are dozens of Pagan podcasts, some of which have been around for years, and others that are fresh and new. Go to the iTunes podcast directory and do a search for “Pagan”—you’ll be amazed. There are plenty of shows to enjoy.

Happy New Year and all the best,
deò and Mandy

Have you ever noticed how there is something quite sexy about coffee? Hot, rich, velvety smooth coffee…Well it’s not just me. The use of the the Baubo siren on the Starbucks® logo, could be said to be using that lure of the siren to tempt you into their coffee houses.

The double-tailed siren, or Baubo siren, is described in The Woman’s Dictionary of Symbols and Sacred Objects as “a cross between a mermaid and a sheila-na-gig” and “Her suggestive pose, like that of the sheila-na-gig, referred to female sexual mysteries in particular.” In fact, Starbucks® was even forced to change their logo as it was thought to be too suggestive.

To read more about this, check out the article; Mermaid by Heinz Insu Fenkl

For a laugh, check out; The Charge of the Coffee Goddess, written by Sara Fisher on the Cardiff University Pagan society website.

 

 #39 - Virtue - deo's Shadow: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Dr. Brendan Myers returns to talk about Virtue and preview his forthcoming book The Other Side of Virtue. You can hear Dr. Myers speak in person at his upcoming Earth Day lecture at Wilfrid Laurier University, entitled Ecology & Revelation. Dr. Myers will go beyond the slogans of the ‘activist party line’ to explore the spiritual significance of humanity’s relationship with the Earth. His books currently in print will be available for purchase and signing.
Where: Wilfrid Laurier University, room BA101 (Bricker Academic Building)
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
When: Saturday, April 19th from 3 to 5pm.
What to bring: Suggested donation $5

More information: Visit pebbia.com

Visit Dr. Myers’ home on the web: wildideas.net/cathbad

Check out a hot-off-the-press interview with Dr. Myers about his writing and life.

Their baby was born with two faces. But instead of listening to the doctors and running some potentially life-saving medical tests, father Vinod Singh thinks maybe it would be better for the village to worship the deformed girl as a goddess and get the government to pitch some money their way to build a temple. So what happens when your new alleged goddess dies of complications… oops. Maybe she wasn’t a goddess after all. We could always use the temple for parties…

Click here for full article.

Douglas Adams’ satire has never been more biting. In the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, Adams wrote about the Earth being destroyed to make room for an intergalactic highway. Now it’s happening for real, albeit on a smaller scale: Sacred land destroyed to alleviate rush hour traffic.

Click here for more info. Thanks to Calciumblue.

 

 #38 - Skepticism, Science and Scientology: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

deò and Mandy get personal in this episode, reminiscing about what drew them to Paganism. What changed in Thailand? Do they still believe in magic? Also, Heather is back with information about the stone Aventurine and you have a chance to win a Kellianna CD and wands from 2am Altars. Plus, can you see deò as a Scientologist? Hear the story of how it could have happened. And finally, what’s the deal with Quantum Mechanics? Does it really do what Oprah says?

Could the the Roman Catholic papal mitre be a Pagan vestige, borrowed from the Babylonian fish-god Dagon?

… Next came one
Who mourned in earnest, when the captive ark
Maimed his brute image, head and hands lopt off,
In his own temple, on the grunsel-edge,
Where he fell flat and shamed his worshippers:
Dagon his name, sea-monster, upward man
And downward fish; yet had his temple high
Reared in Azotus, dreaded through the coast
Of Palestine, in Gath and Ascalon,
And Accaron and Gaza’s frontier bounds.

- Milton’s Paradise Lost.

Dagon: described as god of the Philistines, is mentioned heavily in the Bible as “the Zeus of the plough.” The earliest mention of Dagon is from ancient Sumeria in 2500 B.C.E, translated from the Mari Tablets which discovered by French archaeologists in the 1930’s.

For more images, check out neocrisis.com

Yes it is stereotyping to the extreme, but you have to admit - it is pretty funny!
(Thanks for sending it our way Tahlea)

I’ve done a lot of research into the four elements (earth, air, fire water) in Paganism, Greek philosophy, and other ancient perspectives the world over. In some cases, people have taken the elements to be the basic building blocks of the physical world (rather like the modern elements that you’d find on the periodic table). Obviously, as moderns, we can no longer endorse such a perspective. However, many Pagans seem to keep the validity of the elements by saying that they represent the states of matter. This is fine and good, but it seems a bit ad hoc. There is a third way to interpret the elements, and that is as symbolizing phenomenological properties. This was always my favored approach. I was happy to find the following in Kalupahana’s “A History of Buddhist Philosophy”:

While it is true that the first four dhātu represent the basic material elements (mahābhūta), to which is added space, there is here no attempt to deal with them as purely objective phenomena; they are almost always defined in relation to human experience. Thus earth represents the experience of solidity, roughness, and so on; water stands for fluidity; fire refers to the caloric; and air implies viscosity. (p.73)

Of course, Pagans can add to this the experience of certain emotional states, both as felt from the first- and third-person perspectives, and the experience of various other correspondences. The elements, then, become a powerful symbol set of a phenomenological language. They are ambiguous enough (owed to their vast associations) that, when used in a ritual context, they speak to non-rational, purely experiential mind. They summon ‘feelings of feelings’, rather than explicit and well-defined concepts.