Reviewing Steve Antinoff’s SPIRITUAL ATHEISM

April 28, 2013 at 4:38 pm 1 comment

If you trapse around this blog any, you may notice terms like spiritual atheism, authentic spirituality, ennoblement of the human spirit.  These same concepts are explored at some length in Religion is God’s Way of showing Us it’s a lot Earlier in Human Evolution than We Thought.  (Abbott Press will bring this book out for me in a month or two.)  And so, the book Spiritual Atheism had been on my radar for some time. 

After a few preliminaries from various writers and philosophers discussing the implications of God’s death, Antinoff introduces us to the Zen concept of a koan, a paradox stated as a terse dilemma.  Antinoff offers us a great one, “[T]he koan burning within the West, in western culture as a whole and in its individuals, has been given its most fundamental expression by Dostoyevsky, in the mouth of his great character Kirilov in the novel The Devils.  ‘God,’ says Kirilov, ‘is necessary, and so must exist… Yet I know that he doesn’t exist, and can’t exist.’ 

“These lines first spoken in 1873 will plague us for the next thousand years.  They form the koan that cannot be walked away from.”  Antinoff goes on to point out that this state of affairs leaves us dissatisfied and restless.

“The nonexistence of God does not diminish human beings’ spritual need, mortal, finite human beings, unable to be satisfied in what is mortal and finite, long for the infinite.  The most important question for the spritual atheist, therefore, is whether it is possible to acheive the infinite, to transcend our finite, mortal condition in a world without God.”  Or so Antinoff says.

“Nonetheless,” he says, “the death of God constitues a pivotal moment for the West.  For Neitzsche” [who pronounced God dead for western civilization], “God was the subconscious projection originating in the depths of the human need for spiritual preservation, the ‘antidote to practical and theoretical nihilism.’  The untenability of God forces the insufficiency of the finite, the insufficiency of the human, to center stage.”

Spiritual atheism seems to come out of a much darker place for Antinoff than it does for me.  He quotes quite a few observations on the inevitability of death from many religious traditions and points out our basic existential anxiety (the anxiety that because we exist, because we are alive, we will die).

OK.  We’ll grant him his historical perspective on the loss of God as a touchstone of sprituality.  BUT if we take a much longer perspective, say over evolutionarily deep time, we can see greater cause for celebration.  Humankind’s rising.  Yes, we’re out there, exposed.  We always were.  We took a detour into religion.  It may have been necessary; we may never know.  Now we are humankind emerging.  We are becoming.  It’s a continual process of improvement with no upper limit.  

Antinoff then explores through other thinkers how our consciousness was foisted upon us and not of our choosing.  He says this gives us a spiritual loneliness that can’t be overcome by love or sex as evidenced, he says, by the divorce rate.  Neither, Antinoff says, can artistic or creative accomplishment overcome this loneliness even when transcendence is the goal of such art.

As a prelude to Part 2 of Spritual Atheism, Antinoff sums up  that the individual is his own obstacle when he paraphrases twelfth century Zen master, Wu-men, “to attain the ‘wonderous awakening’ the barrier without a gate must be passed through.  The barrier is not an object.  The barrier is he or she who seeks to pass through the barrier–the ‘I.'”

At this point, Antinoff takes up in Part 2 his painfully slow development of his thesis that Buddhist enlightenment is the answer to the impasse and our eternal (or not) stuckedness as beings who can go nowhere.  Among his ideas for a way forward is this: with no God we must have an atheistic religion.

 Antinoff considers meditation as a path at some depth and how it deals with our intractable spiritual delimmas.  He talks about the mystical peak experiences that he says are possible despite widespread belief to the contrary, but warns that having that ecstatic peak isn’t a true obtainment of enlightenment even if exciting and entertaining. 

Obviously any writer can take his book anywhere he wants to go, but I was disappointed in where this one went.  I was hoping it would be all that spiritual atheism could be, all that it might encompass.  It does develop an origin of spiritual atheism, and follows a line of reasoning that leads to a narrow path.  That path is the authors earnest prescription for way forward and a destination, and although, it leaves me ambivalent, it might serve others well.

Entry filed under: freethought.

The Echo of the Eons Religion is God’s Way of showing us it’s a lot earlier in Human Evolution than We Thought

1 Comment Add your own

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Hello

I write for agnostics, freethinkers, atheists and humanists. In my nonfiction, the purpose is the celebration of our noble human spirit. The general pursuit may be Evolutionary Theology, though believers seem to populate that field (so maybe it's evolutionary Humanism). By looking at who we are and where we came from, we can derive much meaning, and perhaps more importantly, understanding, as well as some sense of where we could go.

Religion is God’s Way of Showing Us it’s Earlier in Human Evolution than We Thought

This title is an upcoming book at the publisher's now. I'd like feedback on this title. It's meant to make people think and feel something. And to hint at things for both believers and non- on multiple levels. The book is of a wider scope, though, one which is ultimately a way to grasp more meaning for ourselves. Believers are always telling us our lives don't have meaning without a god. We often counter that it's more meaningful to be looking for our own meaning than to be arbitrarily ascribed it by an imaginary supernatural being. Ultimately, and this is what I think is unique about this book, you'll see how we can be just as spiritual in our own way. Since we've inhertited a capacity for religion (some more than others) as an evolutionary adaptation, believers and non- are both potentially spritual in the same way--but it is an earthly, secular spirituality in which we all can share.

%d bloggers like this: