Feb 6
Dear Jesper,
Thanks for yours.
I agree that my initial tone was off-putting, and I am sorry for it.
I would never claim that religious folk, or folk generally, actually act consummately rationally. Indeed, this is one of the main criticisms of rational choice theory, which made its mark in economics and has long since spread to religious studies. Economists have rejected it for a more psychologically sophisticated view of human beings.
I would claim only that, whatever the reasons persons join a religion or any other group possessing what can roughly be called an ideology, they will either offer a justification for the superiority--in fact, not just for them--of their newly acquired beliefs and practices or else assume that there is one.
Rational choice theory may be a one-sided view of human beings, but all of us consider ourselves consummately rational when it comes to convictions. We think things and do things because they are, in our opinion, justified, and not just for us.
Anyway, I have learned lots about Wicca, including just now from Mogg, and I genuinely thank everyone who has participated.
With best wishes,
Robert
________________________________________
From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jesper Aagaard Petersen [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 11:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] How to Cure a Witch...
Dear Robert,
I think the fuss had a lot to do with your dismissive tone. I wonder if this is in fact an experiment to see when the fabled tolerance of Wiccans break...
Anyway, this discussion might have taken a different route if your position was a bit less dogmatically formulated and words like silly and pompous didn't start off the conversation. What you call logic and logical are seldom so on the ground, and I do think your underlying rational choice argument is wrong. On the other hand, there is certainly some truth to your problematization of many Wiccan's unreflected sense of tolerance and plurality, which is basically a misrecognition of judgement shared by many 'spiritually' inclined.
Good luck on the classes.
All the best,
Jesper.
> Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 08:43:43 +0000
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] How to Cure a Witch...
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Feb 6
>
> Dear Sam,
>
> So now we all seem to agree that Wiccans may be no different from adherents to other religions. Then I fail to fathom what the fuss has been about. Converts to Judaism and to Roman Catholicism often stress noncognitive factors--e.g., attention to the family and the richness of practices. Not all by any means cite beliefs. My point nevertheless remains that part of being religious is having beliefs and thereby rejecting other beliefs, in which case other beliefs are deemed illogical or erroneous or simply inferior.
>
>
> Robert
> ________________________________________
> From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Samuel Wagar [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 7:46 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] How to Cure a Witch...
>
> I must now start preparing for this week's classes at the University of Aberdeen on my course on Theories of Religion.
>
> Impressive list of publications, Professor Segal.
>
> I was just rereading Jonathan Z. Smith's collection of essays "Imagining Religion" for the online course I'm teaching in ritual theory, and I liked his discussion of taxonomy in discussing Judaism. It's the idea of a polythetic taxonomy that bears on the current question - if it's not an either/or but a yes/but kind of distinction then we can see the happy grey area of tolerance. In logic terms the difference between a cogent and valid argument.
>
> Wicca has a set of beliefs, but not all of us hold to exactly the same set of beliefs. In fact, as Ms. Magliocco pointed out, people may have the same practices but extract quite different personal meanings from them. Just as there are Jews ranging from the very orthodox to secular who all consider themselves, and, with varying degrees of tolerance, each other, to be Jews, so with Wiccans. And with other religions, also - the taxonomic problem is there in the same way as it is with "race" - differences between members of the same group are often as large as the differences between groups.
>
> So, I tolerate others' beliefs and practices as working for them while not being as likely to work for me. Not because they are, in many cases, better or worse, but because of personal taste and style - if there are a few dozen choices which are morally equivalent and I select a half dozen to concentrate on that does not mean I reject the others as invalid, just not to my taste. The rest may fit into a taxon of Wicca, or a larger one of 'religions I like' but just not suit my style or personal taste. Or else must condemn those unfortunate souls that don't like Miles Davis and MIA like I do to the Outer Darkness?
>
> At some point, we have to embrace a fuzzy grey area. I agree with you, by the way, that Wiccans pride ourselves on tolerance beyond what we deserve - I'm not a relativist and I believe that some ideas in religion, and elsewhere, are simply wrong, and in extreme cases like racism, sexism, homophobia, immoral.
>
> But my reasons for being Wiccan have to do with personal style and attraction, not rejection.
>
> Blessed Be
>
> Sam Wagar (3rd degree HP, MA)
>
>
> The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.
The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.
|