“...if the universe is beautiful, we’re part of that beauty.” – A “Neither Religious nor...

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

1

2 223 “…if the Universe Is Beautiful, We’re4 Part of that Beauty.”—A “Neither5 Religious nor Spiritual” Biography6 as Horizontal Transcendence

7 Thomas J. Coleman III, Christopher F. Silver and8 Ralph W. Hood Jr.

10 Abstract11

12 27-year-old Isabella grew up with her parents on the Eastern Coast of the13 United Sates. She describes her life as “pretty boring” and “normal.”14 However ‘boring’ and ‘normal’ her life may have appeared to her, it is the15 worldview that Isabella takes—and has always had by her count—that16 draws great interest. Typically, many individuals who currently identify as17 an ‘atheist’ also used to identify as ‘religious’ in their youth (Silver 2013).18 Isabella stands out in this regard, she has never believed in a god or gods.19 What Coleman et al. (2013b) have termed as “religio-spiritual frame-20 works” played no part in Isabella’s worldview. As this chapter shall21 demonstrate, Isabella was able to ask questions about life, make sense of22 her environment, and find meaning and purpose not in the confines of a23 religious or spiritual worldview, but, in a worldview that retained a similar24 sense of awe, wonder and meaning in the absence of any spiritual or25 religious structure—a worldview we term as ‘horizontal transcendence.’26 This chapter will situate the role of the Faith Development Interview in the27 context of the ‘faithless’ while drawing attention to the role of narrative in28 horizontal transcendence.

29

From interact 86 of Isabella’s FDI. The interviewtranscript in full length for Isabella is available inAppendix B (B.10).

T.J. Coleman III (&) ! C.F. Silver ! R.W. Hood Jr.The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga,Chattanooga, USAe-mail: [email protected]

AQ1

AQ2

Layout: T4 Unicode Book ID: 314011_1_En Book ISBN: 978-3-319-21244-9

Chapter No.: 22 Date: 30-6-2015 Time: 2:56 pm Page: 1/18

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016H. Streib and R.W. Hood, Jr. (eds.), Semantics and Psychology of Spirituality,DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_22

1

Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

3031 “…as an Atheist, no One Hands You32 a Book that Says Here’s the Meaning33 of Life … You Kind of Have34 to Figure It Out for Yourself…”1—35 Isabella I

36 The case of Isabella I. has been selected because37 she may serve as an exemplar of a worldview38 that, among our sample, best illuminates an39 individual who self-identifies as “neither reli-40 gious nor spiritual.” Despite self-identifying as41 neither religious nor spiritual, Isabella can be42 located (as noted in Fig. 14.5 in Chap. 14) above43 the mean scores on openness to experience but44 low on mysticism. While she does not use the45 term horizontal transcendence, it is appropriate,46 we think, to characterize Isabella as a person with47 an established worldview of horizontal tran-48 scendence (c.f. Coleman and Arrowood, in press;49 Coleman et al. 2013a; Streib and Hood 2013).50 As she makes clear, Isabella’s life story takes51 place outside of the acceptance, or need for, any52 religious or spiritual frameworks. Yet, this does53 not mean that, having been exposed to religious54 and spiritual frameworks, her life escapes their55 influence. In this sense, Isabella’s story falls56 under the category of a “special thing” that she57 could, but chooses not to, associate with either58 “religion” or “spirituality” (Taves 2009).2 As59 Isabella recalls several times throughout the60 interview, she has never believed in a God, and61 from the moment such a choice (to accept or62 reject belief in God) was presented to her at age63 8, such a belief has remained largely unintelli-64 gible to her. We may therefore take her repeated65 emphasis as a ‘neither nor’ throughout her life to66 be an important self-defining memory (McAdams67 2008; Singer and Salovey 1993). In fact, once

68"she learned what the word atheist meant, she69"finally had a label to describe the view that had70"always seemed so natural and intuitive to her. If71"Isabella sees belief in God as ‘unintelligible,’72"viewing her life experiences through her claim73"that she is neither religious nor spiritual is inte-74"gral to our understanding of her. Additionally,75"not viewing Isabella through a religious or76"spiritual lens prevents us from “artificially sta-77"biliz[ing]” (Taves 2013) religion and spirituality78"while avoiding obfuscated arguments as to what79"may constitute ‘religion’ (McCutcheon 1997) or80"‘religious experience’ (Taves 2009, 2013). Our81"intent here is not to mold the labels of spirituality82"and religion around Isabella, but to allow83"espoused nonbelief to be understood on her own84"terms, yet recognize that she certainly has ‘spe-85"cial experiences’ that are comparable to what86"others may identify as ‘religious or spiritual87"experience.’88"Isabella’s life contains special and deeply89"meaningful experiences—experiences (and a90"worldview) we may label fairly as horizontal91"transcendence. Both Isabella’s biographical nar-92"rative, and her psychological characteristics,93"provides data for the study of meaning, values,94"and exceptional experiences in nonbelievers95"understood as horizontal transcendence, a term96"Isabella never uses. Before exploring Isabella97"further, the following section will briefly outline98"horizontal transcendence as a means of99"understanding Isabella in light of her self-100"identification, which is “neither religious nor101"spiritual.”

102103"Horizontal Transcendence

104"Horizontal transcendence is a concept mentioned105"only briefly by Hood et al. (2009). It has received106"little exploration in the social scientific literature.107"This concept has been used in an effort to bring108"individuals who do not identify as ‘religious’109"and/or possibly ‘spiritual’ under the theoretical110"purview of the social scientific study of religion.111"Ideally, it sets the stage for looking past the one112"thing an atheist or nonbeliever doesn’t believe in

1From interacts 100, 102.2Taves’ (2009, p. 3) building block approach allows forscholars to avoid setting “religious experience up as theepitome of something unique or sui generis”. Althoughher “ascriptive approach” (p. 18) is focused on the studyof ‘religion’, Taves’ framework allows the researcher“free to compare things that have features in common,whether they are deemed religious or not” (p. 19). Thus,this allows us to compare (in our case explore) things thatmay be ‘relgio-spiritual like’ (i.e. Horizontal transcen-dence) with explicit religion or spirituality.

AQ3

2 T.J. Coleman III et al.



Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_14

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

113 (i.e. a God) and towards positive affirmations of114 personal experience and identity formation that115 an individual does not frame religiously.116 Hood et al. (2009) conceive of horizontal117 transcendence as sharing the qualities of “inter-118 connectedness” (p. 282) and a search for119 ‘meaning’ (p. 286). Streib and Hood (2013) build120 on this approach yet consider horizontal tran-121 scendence to be a “variant of religion” (p. 142).122 In terms of our explicit discussion in Chap. 14,123 we can locate Isabella within the two dimen-124 sional space created by her mysticism and125 openness scores and see that her relationship to126 transcendence requires neither us, or her, to make127 reference to God or to explicit spiritual claims.128 Thus, as we try to understand her own under-129 standing of herself, and as has been argued130 before (Coleman et al. 2013b), referring to hor-131 izontal transcendence in discussing Isabella132 ought not be seen as forcing her under the133 umbrella of ‘religion’ (either explicit or implicit)134 or of fuzzy notions of ‘spirituality’ (Zinnbauer135 et al. 1997).136 Streib and Hood (2013) provide a formative137 starting point for exploring horizontal transcen-138 dence noting that it refers to “key concepts” such139 as “transcendence and ultimacy” (p. 139,140 emphasis in original)—‘transcendence,’ meaning141 going beyond the everyday world, the mundane,142 and ‘ultimate concern’ as that which one is ulti-143 mately concerned with. While Streib and Hood144 take these conceptual starting points as underly-145 ing the ‘religious field,’ these concepts, as the146 authors’ note, are not in and of themselves147 ‘religious concepts.’ And as such, we argue that148 when combined, these concepts do not necessi-149 tate the label of ‘religion’—implicit or otherwise.150 Building on Taves’ “ascriptive approach” in151 Religious Experience Reconsidered (2009,152 pp. 17–55), there is no such thing as ‘religious153 experience’, only experiences deemed to be154 ‘religious’ by an individual. This enables religion155 to be compared with other ‘like things,’ or, to use156 her terminology, “special things.” In this sense,157 we argue for horizontal transcendence as being a158 priori neither religious nor spiritual, but as indi-159 cating a spatial location of something special.160 A special thing may be conceived as ‘spiritual

161"like’ or ‘religion like,’ but, itself is a concept that,162"true to the very title of this chapter, is ‘neces-163"sarily neither spiritual, nor religious.’ We feel164"this ‘neither-nor’ conceptualization of horizontal165"transcendence best adheres to calls for “meth-166"odological agnosticism” (Hood 2012), moving us167"away from ‘methodological theism’ or “the will168"to religion” (Beaman 2013), and as we will argue169"below, best captures Isabella’s own refusal, and170"need, to identify herself as either religious or171"spiritual. Thus, our case study of Isabella will172"build on Streib and Hood (2013), and identify173"Isabella’s own experiences in terms of horizontal174"transcendence. As we shall see, they reflect a175"profound sense of interconnectedness that is both176"exceptional, and wondrous, while requiring no177"religious, spiritual, theistic framework or narra-178"tive (Coleman and Arrowood, in press; Coleman179"et al. 2013b). Isabella’s own narrative reflects180"this, in that she rejects religious and spiritual181"discourse as she narrates her own life.

182183"Isabella—Biographical Outline

184"Isabella’s mother was a “pretty staunch”185"Lutheran who made her “go to church every186"Sunday.” Her mother did not explicitly force her,187"but the persuasion and norm was implied. In fact,188"on Sundays, she was “just [there] because [she]189"had to be.” She was “jealous of the other kids190"who were just allowed to go to Sunday school191"while their parents were in church.” But her192"mother made her attend both. She had a “Chris-193"tian background but it never…caught on.” Even194"as young as eight, she “had this idea… [that195"belief in God] …just doesn’t make sense to196"[her].” When confronted with the possibility that197"she could either believe or not believe in God at198"the age of 8, for her, not believing was the199"obvious position. As she recalls, it required little200"to no reflection to arrive at—it just made sense.201"Although it is almost a rule that children adopt202"the religion of their parents at a young age (Beit-203"Hallahmi 2015), she was “really one of the few204"ones who, …although [she] was raised in a205"church community, [she] …just- never bought

22 “…if the Universe Is Beautiful, We’re Part of that Beauty.” … 3



Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_14

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

206 it.” Thus, despite her own claim that religion207 didn’t make sense, she appears to have under-208 stood something meaningful about the religion209 that she rejected.210 During her formative teenage years, Isabella211 went through what she characterized as “the212 normal adolescent turbulence… like, ‘you don’t213 get me. You don’t understand [me, speaking214 about her parents]’.” However, she had a strong215 relationship with her parents and they were very216 active and supportive as far back as she can217 remember.218 She was never really big on dating but started219 to date during her high school years. Over the220 course of this time she had 2–3 boyfriends but221 they were more of what she describes as222 “semi-boyfriend”—“are we dating? I guess.223 Maybe. We’ve gone some places.” She only224 considers what was to be “her first real boyfriend”225 at the very end of her senior year in high school.226 Throughout college, Isabella had a steady and227 committed relationship with one boyfriend.228 Although they broke up in her senior year, it was229 amicable, or, as she said they had “just lost the230 spark.” Waiting almost two years after her231 graduation to begin dating again allowed Isabella232 time to plan her post college steps carefully. She233 moved back closer to her parents and saw this234 time (which was spent securing a job and place to235 live without the stressors of a relationship) as236 having a significant impact on herself allowing237 her to “get her life in order” after college.238 Through her careful planning, Isabella felt this239 contributed to the ability to have a stable and240 healthy relationship in the future, such as the one241 she shares with her husband at the time of the242 interview.243 Upon graduating college, and now an adult,244 she was ready to take another important life step245 —Isabella got married. True to her independent246 and self-reliant nature, which was continually247 emphasized during the interview, she did not248 require a boyfriend and could choose her rela-249 tionships as she saw fit. Likewise, she did not250 wait for (or require) a man to ask for her hand in251 marriage. Ever the action taker and decision252 maker, Isabella proposed to her boyfriend instead253 of waiting for him to propose to her.

254"As an adult, Isabella bares little resemblance255"to a stereotypical solitary and isolated atheist256"persona of years past. There are no faulty social257"relationships to be found and she is an excellent258"communicator of her thoughts and ideas. At the259"time of the interview Isabella was working as a260"research coordinator for a tier-one research uni-261"versity on the Eastern Coast of the United States.

262263"Mapping Isabella I.’s Case Based264"on Questionnaire Responses

265"Isabella occupies a rather unique position when266"placed in relation to other respondents on our267"coordinate system of “spirituality.” As detailed in268"Chap. 14, mysticism and openness to experience269"have been used for mapping the cases in a270"two-dimensional space. In this map (see Fig. 17.271"2), Isabella is located in the 4th quadrant, which272"indicates her low mysticism scores as well as273"above average scores on openness to experience.274"Isabella is no mystic, as she scores well below275"not only her group mean (FG6), but also the276"sample as a whole. Therefore, to the extent that277"Hood’s Mysticism Scale (1975) correlates highly278"with self-identification as “spiritual” in our study,279"Isabella is not that “spiritual”—no doubt, and280"true to her own self-identification, she is a “nei-281"ther religious nor spiritual” individual.282"Table 22.1 presents Isabella’s scores on the283"most important scales in comparison with the284"“neither religious nor spiritual” respondents in285"our study. Isabella’s high score on environmental286"mastery is important for a more in-depth under-287"standing of Isabella. Here, she scored 8 points288"higher than the average score in every focus289"group in our sample, and almost two standard290"deviations higher in her own focus group. When291"combined with a Faith Development score of a292"stage 5 for ‘decision making,’ this indicates she293"felt extremely comfortable operating and navi-294"gating the choices and possibilities present in her295"world. Isabella’s life decisions were seldom the296"result of accidents and coincidences; they were297"the result of careful planning and consequen-298"tialist reasoning.




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_14

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_17

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_17

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

299 Isabella’s high score on purpose in life is also300 important to note. Here, it is significant to rec-301 ognize that she scores over one standard devia-302 tion above the mean for her focus group (FG6),303 while also well above all other means for the304 individual focus groups. Furthermore, this mat-305 ches up nicely with the repeated emphasis in306 Isabella’s narrative that explicates the307 self-creation of purpose and meaning as a308 something inherently subjective and personal,

309"while rejecting any Transcendent teleological310"purpose to life. In other words, and when taken311"in conjunction with her narrative, Isabella’s312"scores on purpose in life can be used to dem-313"onstrate that a horizontally transcendent view of314"the world, that is one without reference to a315"vertically Transcendent reality, can have an316"exceptionally high amount of purpose and317"meaning—a purpose and meaning that exists at318"least on par with those worldviews commonly

Table 22.1 Comparison of Isabella I. with respective focus group on the most important scales in the questionnaire

Single case variablevalues for Isabella I.

Mean values for“neither religiousnor spiritualatheists/non-theists”focus group in theUSA

M SD

Personality (NEO-FFI)

Neuroticism 13 21.1 9.6

Extraversion 25 25.2 7.2

Openness to experience 39 35.4 5.6

Agreeableness 35 29.9 5.5

Conscientiousness 39 29.8 7.4

Mysticism (mysticism scale total) 57 81.2 30.0

Introvertive mysticism 17 29.6 13.4

Extrovertive mysticism 13 19.1 9.5

Interpretation 27 32.5 9.7

Psychological well-being

Autonomy 24 27.6 4.5

Environmental mastery 32 24.0 4.6

Personal growth 26 28.7 4.2

Positive relations with others 33 26.3 4.9

Purpose in life 31 25.5 4.6

Self-acceptance 33 25.2 5.0

Generativity (loyola generativity scale) 57 56.2 9.6

Attitudes toward god 49 46.5 8.0

Religious schema scale

Truth of texts and teachings 6 6.5 2.9

Fairness, tolerance and rational choice 23 21.9 2.5

Xenosophia/inter-religious dialog 13 13.7 3.5

Note All mean values are based on covariance analyses with the variables for country and focus group as predictors,while controlled by sex, age, cultural capital, and per-capita income




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

319 expressed through explicit religious and spiritual320 frameworks and language.

321322 Isabella’s Semantic of “Spirituality”323

324 I think spirituality is just for people who say I want325 to believe in something, but I don’t know what.326 (interact 265)

327 In the interview, as well as on the survey, Isa-328 bella takes great care to reiterate that she is nei-329 ther religious nor spiritual. While she did not330 respond in the survey portion of our study when331 asked to give her definition of “religion” and332 “spirituality,” the interview portion proved most333 telling. Isabella views both “religion” and “spir-334 ituality” as identical categories, going on to state335 that she doesn’t “even understand what the dif-336 ference in spirituality is” when compared with337 religion. Moreover, to Isabella, “spirituality” is338 actually “religion-lite.” She views “religion” and339 “spirituality” as categories or labels that are340 applied to things we don’t yet understand, and as341 such, these concepts stifle empirical and intel-342 lectual inquiry as one can always end up saying,343 “Oh, God did it. The end.” when attempting to344 explain the world around us. In Isabella’s mind,345 “spirituality” is “a failing” of “thinking through346 things and analyzing them.” In one sense, it347 appears that Isabella may have little room for a348 sense of mystery, and, perhaps demands too349 much that reality be fully intelligible in a purely350 rational manner.351 Whereas Isabella presents no explicit contrast352 between “religion” and “spirituality” in the353 interview, her survey responses to the Contextual354 Semantic Differential (see Fig. 22.1)3 for “reli-355 gion” and “spirituality” indicate a slight and356 subtle softening of that position. Here, “spiritu-357 ality” appears to be associated with slightly more358 favorable adjectives than “religion” (e.g. liberat-359 ing, tolerant, modern). However, Isabella makes360 it clear that “religion” and “spirituality” are to be361 thought of as equally—and strongly—boring,

362"otherworldly, irrational, and subjective. In this363"sense, Isabella rejects “religion” precisely364"because she does understand that it makes claims365"she believes to be false. “Spirituality” remains366"more positive perhaps, because for Isabella it is367"less specific, perhaps even more so because it is368"more a matter of feeling than cognition (for369"comparison with results of her focus group, see370"Appendix A, Figure A.27).371"Isabella’s understanding of “spirituality”372"appears to overlap substantially with her under-373"standing of “religion.” She claims to make no374"distinction between the two in her interview.375"Both appear to her as labels that function by376"default to limit the types of questions humans can377"ask, and answer about the world around us. Isa-378"bella’s ‘semantic of spirituality’ (and by exten-379"sion religion in her case) only has meaning and380"significance in so far as other individuals in381"society use them. She doesn’t use or include382"these terms in her life because she feels they do383"not accurately describe it in any meaningful way.384"In other words, the term “spirituality” resembles385"an extra puzzle piece in Isabella’s worldview—386"life is complete without it. As such, it is unlikely387"that any deeply meaningful and moving experi-388"ences Isabella has, or will have, will ever be389"expressed in terms of “religion” or “spirituality.”390"In other words, the experiences—awe, wonder,391"etc.—are there, they will just not receive any392"supernatural framing. Yet, this interpretation is393"incomplete without noting that, for Isabella,394"“spirituality” does differ from “religion”—if only395"as a contrast between that which is closed,396"inflexible and even wounding, as opposed to that397"which is flexible, creative and healing.

398399"Faith Development in the ‘Faithless’

400"The Faith Development Interview (FDI) has seen401"great success in eliciting an abundance of rich402"autobiographical narrative material in religious403"and spiritual populations since its introduction by404"James Fowler in 1986 (Fowler et al. 2004).405"However, its use in populations and individuals406"who identify as ‘neither spiritual nor religious’ is

3Isabella did not complete Osgood’s SemanticDifferential.




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

407 a much more recent—and welcome—phenome-408 non (e.g. Streib et al. 2009). Thanks to Fowler’s409 broad and rather ecumenical and liberal concep-410 tualization of ‘faith’ (Fowler 1981, pp. 92f), this411 has allowed the FDI to address not only religi-412 osity and spirituality, but also ‘worldviews’ that413 are not accurately represented in terms of spiri-414 tuality or religion (Keller and Streib 2013). Fur-415 thermore, the FDI offers a unique view at the416 intersection of religion, spirituality and the sec-417 ular as some questions in the “Religion and418 Worldview” section of the FDI contain explicit419 theological concepts such as ‘sin.’ For example,420 interview question number 23 asks, “What is sin421 to your understanding?” (Fowler et al. 2004).422 What proves most interesting here is how

423"individuals who identify as ‘neither spiritual nor424"religious’ (such as Isabella in the case study425"given here) accept, reject, or reinterpret such a426"question with a theological concept such as ‘sin’427"or ‘God.’ In this sense, does the FDI require428"adjustment for use in nonbelieving populations?429"While some researchers have had great success in430"slightly revising the FDI for use in explicitly431"atheist populations (e.g. Silver et al. 2014), the432"FDI certainly does not require a reformulation for433"use in nonreligious nonbelieving individuals as434"evident here. The few FDI questions that include435"theological notions are not to be understood as436"any sorts of methodological dilemma that require437"accounting for. They can be conceived of as a438"methodological advantage. For example, such a

Fig. 22.1 Isabella’sassociations to“spirituality” on thecontextual semanticdifferential

B&

WIN

PRINT




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

439 centering on the acceptance, rejection or refor-440 mulation of belief or unbelief may act as the vary441 point of stipulation from which to approach the442 psychology of religion (e.g. Coleman and Arro-443 wood, in press; Coleman et al. 2013b; Streib and444 Hood 2013; Vergote 1986, 1997).445 Faith development in the ‘faithless,’ such as446 Isabella, allows a narrative window with which447 we may view first hand accounts of the role that448 seminal theological concepts such as God, Faith,449 Sin and prayer may or may not factor into non-450 religious worldviews from a diachronic per-451 spective. Exciting research opportunities for the452 future are made possible by the growing use of453 the FDI in “neither religious nor spiritual”454 respondents (e.g. Streib et al. 2009; and this455 current project) as scholars will have narrative456 accounts of how some theological notions are457 accepted, rejected or reinterpreted as the debate458 over secularization (Bruce 2011; Coleman 2013)459 and notions of the ‘post-secular’ (Habermas460 2008) continue to play out.461 Taking Isabella as an example, when the FDI462 asks about her image of God or the Divine (FDI463 question 4), she responds with the following: “I464 am an atheist, so I don’t believe in any particu-465 larly personal god.” (interact 60) Although it is466 made clear that she does not believe in a God467 throughout the interview, Isabella appears to be468 communicating, at least in this instance, that if469 one defines the idea of God in broad enough470 impersonal terms (e.g. such as an ‘unmoved471 mover’, the laws of the universe, or as panthe-472 istical) she might possibly assent to such a473 ‘belief’, however and pragmatically speaking,474 her life would be lived as is—without the need475 for such a God belief. Here, Isabella is clearly476 able to conceive of something ‘grander,’ how-477 ever she will not frame this in religious language.478 Thus in this instance, the FDI has elicited the479 reformulation of a theological concept (God) and480 neither an ‘acceptance’ nor a ‘rejection’ from481 Isabella.482 Elsewhere, when Isabella is asked to define483 ‘sin’ to her understanding, she does not refor-484 mulate such a theological concept as in the pre-485 vious instance—she rejects it. Isabella states, “I486 don’t believe in sin.” She goes on to explicate,

487"“Sin is defined as something that is against what488"God has set down.” Isabella doesn’t “have the489"Ten Commandments in stone to have to follow.490"So, [she’s] sinless.” (interact 285) In this491"instance, the FDI has elicited a rejection of a492"theological concept from the individual and we493"might expect as much when looking at a person494"who never saw the idea of God as a plausible495"framework. However, there is one way that Isa-496"bella’s understanding of religion belies her claim497"that it never made sense to her. It appears that the498"sense religion made to Isabella at age 8, is the499"very sense of religion that Isabella continues to500"reject and find meaningless as an adult nonbe-501"liever. Lastly, when Isabella is asked if there are502"any ideas or symbols from the religious or503"spiritual community that are important to her, or504"that have been important to her she responds505"with, “in a way, yes.” In fact the one thing she506"misses “from not being religious is not having507"rituals.” (interact 267) She enjoys the repetition508"and sense of comforting efficacy that rituals509"provide knowing that they are “very deep seated510"in the human psyche,” just as scholars such as511"Boyer (2001), Xygalatas (2012) have indicated.512"As seen here, Isabella accepts the role that some513"theological concepts such as religious ritual have,514"or can contribute to, even in the life of a ‘neither515"nor’ atheist such as herself. We regret that we did516"not explore more fully Isabella’s participation in517"rituals, whether explicitly recognized as religious518"or not.519"While a more in-depth analysis of Isabella’s520"case will be provided in the following sections,521"as argued here, the Faith Development Interview522"may provide methodologically important infor-523"mation in not only the Faithful but, especially in524"the ‘Faithless.’ The FDI can provide narrative525"data that elucidates the acceptance, rejection, or526"reformulation of certain theological concepts as527"presented in the FDI.

528529"Faith Development in Isabella I530

531"I think of myself as a pretty strict rationalist.532"(interact 265)




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

533 Based on the faith development evaluation of the534 interview with Isabella I., for which we have535 followed closely the Manual for Faith Develop-536 ment Research, Isabella’s interview predomi-537 nantly shows a ‘mutual religion style’ (stage 3)538 overlapping significantly with the ‘individuative-539 systemic religious style’ (stage 4) (Streib 2001).540 Contra the advantage of the Faith Development541 Interview in the previous section, this sort of542 transitional space between these two styles seems543 to be a reflection, perhaps limitation, of using a544 religiously orientated developmental perspective545 to explore individuals who are neither spiritual546 nor religious. For example, when asking a nei-547 ther-nor about their ‘image of God’ in general,548 and Isabella in specific, we might expect answers549 precisely like the one Isabella gave. Does Isa-550 bella have an ‘image of God’? Well, and as she551 responds, “in general, no.” If we attempt, as the552 faith development interview does, to impute a553 religious framework on Isabella, she, in a sense,554 ‘shuts down.’ There is just nothing for her to555 speak about. She doesn’t believe in God, and has556 never. However, she is certainly able to conceive557 of the idea of something larger and grander than558 her, i.e. the very impersonal universe. You might559 be able to stretch, mold, and bend the concept of560 ‘God’ enough to suit Isabella, but it would be (at561 the least) an emical misnomer if we were to call562 this ‘God,’ in the vulgar of common sense that563 Isabella has never found acceptable.564 Here, an important theoretical question pre-565 sents itself for future investigation: what exactly566 is the impact of belief/religious praxis on the567 images of god? Does actually believing in God568 produce different ‘images’ than merely being569 asked to entertain an image of an entity that is not570 believed in, and therefore without relevance?571 Moreover, we should expect some nonbelievers572 to have sophisticated concepts of god, and others573 to have ones that range from ‘poor’ to nonexis-574 tent depending on whether or not the idea/notion575 was found plausible enough to entertain and576 explore in the first place. Perhaps just as the577 sciences have consulted theology in understand-578 ing god concepts and the religious human579 (Altınlı-Macić and Coleman 2015), they might

580"want to consult with atheology (Shook 2014)581"when considering the ontology of god concepts582"that nonbelievers will surely be asked about as583"research presses forward.584"To that point, the FDI is not measuring an585"individual’s personally held ‘image of god’;586"rather, it is measuring (upon the interviewee587"choosing to answer the question) the intervie-588"wees’ reconstruction of how they view other589"individuals’ conceptualization of God. This is an590"important distinction to make when using Faith591"Development Theory in “neither religious nor592"spiritual” respondents. In other words, Isabella593"doesn’t have an ‘image of God’ in the same594"ontological sense as a believer. Isabella must595"engage in cognitive pretense just to form such an596"image, presumably drawing on culturally avail-597"able notions of what God might ‘look like.’ This598"distinction is important as it may explain why a599"‘neither-nor’ would score relatively low (or600"refuse to answer) on areas of the FDI that601"explicitly ask about religious or spiritual con-602"cepts. This is not to say that the cognitive pro-603"cesses and structural logic of ‘neither religious604"nor spiritual’ respondents is necessarily different605"from other groups, but it is a question that awaits606"further investigation. Faith development theory,607"according to Fowler, is supposed to attend to608"structural logic. The difference, however, lies in609"what object the structural logic is being applied610"to. That is, we shouldn’t be too surprised when a611"lifelong nonbeliever does not have a very elab-612"orate, complex, or rich image of a God—a God613"they have never believed in, never worshipped,614"never prayed to, and that has no relevance in615"their own worldview. After all, gods that go616"unworshipped are gods that are impotent (Nor-617"enzayan 2013).618"As one might expect, Isabella typically scores619"low on FDI questions that espouse religious or620"theological concepts with scores ranging from a621"stage 2 when she was asked about her model of622"‘mature faith,’ to a steady stage 3 when asked623"about her image of God, or if she considered624"herself a religious/spiritual person, or had any625"religious/spiritual ideas that were important to626"her. Of course Isabella scores low on these




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

627 aspects of Faith Development Theory.4 Even628 with Fowler’s broad conceptualization of ‘Faith,’629 asking a neither-nor to entertain religious con-630 cepts is like asking an adult about how Santa631 Claus fits into their life, or if they find the632 motions of putting out cookies and milk for Santa633 to be an important ritual. This example is not634 meant to denigrate believers, only to highlight635 some of the conceptual problems that occur when636 applying a religious theory to a neither-nor.637 Inversely, and due to the ability of the FDI to638 capture not only religious relevance, but also639 secular, Isabella scores relatively high on aspects640 of ‘faith development’ that take into account641 non-religious structural aspects such as logic,642 perspective taking or locus of authority, more so643 than in the theological aspects for an individual644 at a relatively young age (27). This may, again,645 come as little surprise as atheists consistently646 demonstrate a thirst for knowledge (Schnell and647 Keenan 2011), tendency to employ analytical648 thinking skills (Gervais and Norenzayan 2012)649 and occupy far more positions in academia and650 science fields (Ecklund and Scheitle 2007) than a651 typical religious individual.652 When Isabella isn’t asked about religious653 concepts that bare no personal relevance to her,

654"her ‘faith development’ can be viewed as rather655"advanced. She was a stage 5 for ‘decision mak-656"ing’ as well as elucidating moral opinions and657"actions (Always right). Isabella is a stage 4 for658"‘meaning in life,’ ‘changes in self,’ and ‘crises’659"among several other interview themes.660"Taken together, the FDI has highlighted the661"role of rationality, logic, and decision making in662"Isabella’s life while demonstrating that she is, in663"her own eyes, certainly neither religious nor664"spiritual, as these concepts do not fit well into her665"worldview.

666667"The Narrative Structure and Content668"Aspects in Isabella’s Interview

669"

670"Life Review671

672"I have had a pretty boring, normal life. So, nothing673"all that exciting. (interact 12)

674"Attending to Isabella’s response to the “life675"chapters” (see Chap. 16 for a methodological676"discussion) question in the faith development677"interview, we see that Isabella breaks her life up678"into an ‘abstract’ that displays temporal coher-679"ence in keeping with Bluck and Habermas’680"(2002) cultural concept of biography. The life681"chapters are as follows (a better understanding of682"her explanation is added in brackets):

683"1. “Early childhood” (her parents always read to684"her)685"2. “Late childhood” (attended an arts and tech-686"nology magnet school)687"3. “Adolescence” (finally started to date)688"4. “College” (one boyfriend until the last year of689"college)690"5. “Adulthood” (spent some time reflecting and691"organizing her life, then decided she was692"ready to marry)

693"The systematic and thorough nature with which694"Isabella is able to reflexively divide up her life695"segments is noteworthy. Indeed, there was no

4Although the “Form of Moral Judgment” aspect of FaithDevelopment Theory is intended to be ‘secular’, half ofthe questions in this aspect can be easily interpreted asfairly religious. Isabella is a very bright interviewee; it iseasy to see how she could/did catch on that the interviewwas attempting to view her through a religious frame-work. For instance, right after Isabella is asked, “What issin to your understanding?” (sin clearly being a ‘religiousconcept’, which she refuses to answer because she doesnot believe in it) she is then asked “How do you explainthe presence of evil in our world”. Although she choosesto answer this specific question, which is arguably areligious question itself, her answer is very brief. In fact,this is a pattern that largely holds up for all other‘theological questions’ in the interview. When Isabellaanswers more ‘secular’ questions on the FDI, herresponses are much more in-depth and elaborate. Takingthis into consideration, and when given the overallframing of the interview, we suggest that it is likely thatIsabella was somewhat hesitant to answer the moretheological questions in the interview, which is one reasonher scores on these questions are (and perhaps should be)lower than others.

AQ4




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_16

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

696 need to rearrange Isabella’s life chapter in order697 to form a more coherent structure for review—it698 was already present. Isabella is a planner and699 never seems without an answer to a single700 question in the interview—provided they aren’t701 asking about a religious concept that is. As702 McAdams (2008, p. 257) writes, “life stories703 speak directly to how people come to terms with704 their interpersonal worlds, with society, and with705 history and culture.” As such, Isabella’s coherent706 and systematic life narrative details an individual707 (Isabella) who had a very happy and secure708 childhood, was able to prevail through the nor-709 mal teenage stressors, graduate college and710 obtain a well paying job conducting research,711 marry, enjoy time with her friends and family all712 the while being aware of extra ordinary moments713 of powerful experience and perspective that seem714 to perforate the mundaneness of everyday reality.715 Isabella is comfortable looking back on her life716 choices and is optimistic for the future.

717

718 Horizontal Transcendence in Narrative719

720 …life just happens. There’s no purpose. There’s721 no direction. I think, but it’s not like human life722 doesn’t have a purpose anymore than ants don’t723 have a purpose, that doesn’t mean that we don’t724 have a spot to be in or don’t deserve to live.725 (interact 253)

726 Of special interest are the narrative segments727 with a clear narrative-dynamic structure accord-728 ing to Labov and Waletzky (1967). The follow-729 ing quotations demonstrate important narrative730 segments indicative of horizontal transcendence731 with a trajectory from orientation, complication,732 evaluation and resolution focusing on the crea-733 tion of meaning and experience of awe, wonder,734 and interconnectedness.

735

736 Horizontal Transcendence: The Creation737 of Meaning738 In previous discussions of horizontal transcen-739 dence, Hood et al. (2009, p. 286) note that when740 God or religion is absent, the search for meaning741 may be sought in ways that are purely secular.

742"Likewise, when Isabella is asked in the FDI if743"she feels that life has any meaning at the present744"she responds stating that there is not any meaning745"that is “inherent to the cosmos” (i.e. there is not a746"‘meaning or teleological particle’), however, and747"true to the theorization of Hood et al. (2009), she748"notes there is meaning—“meaning [she] had to749"construct [herself].” This statement, and the750"narrative below, is also in line with, and sup-751"ported by, the principle component analysis of752"subjective definitions of “spirituality” in Chap. 9753"that further highlight horizontal transcendence to754"be associated with an individual search for755"meaning and truth. The following micro narra-756"tive, as told by Isabella, will explicate her jour-757"ney, or construction rather, of meaning in life.758"Throughout the narrative of Isabella, she rec-759"ognizes that atheists commonly experience pre-760"judice (Coleman 2014; Norenzayan 2013) and761"that traditionally, atheists have been stigmatized762"(Mann 2013) as lacking meaning, morality,763"guidance and absoluteness in life, as the foun-764"dational claims of these concepts are commonly765"thought to reside only within religious texts or766"beliefs. However, such a claim is not only767"without warrant—it is false (Blessing 2013;768"Wielenberg 2013). In the case of Isabella, she769"recognizes that meaning is not handed down by770"divine fiat, or found in a single book such as the771"Bible. Rather, meaning for her is something that772"involves a conscious choice, a personal decision.773"It may be sought after, or created by the indi-774"vidual, but it is not given by, or found in a god.775"As she indicates above, meaning is a philo-776"sophical question for Isabella, not a religious one777"(Table 22.2).778"Important in understanding the worldview of779"Isabella is to understand that she is not dismayed780"by the world being a “universal accident.” She781"seems to find an optimistic resolve in the chal-782"lenge to discover meaning for herself and on her783"own terms. In this sense, Isabella feels respon-784"sible and personally accountable for the meaning785"that is present in her life, after all it was her786"choice. However, such a choice is not without its787"strife as she does note that the construction and788"search for personal meaning can, at times, be a789"“struggle.” In fact, she seems to have developed

AQ5




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_9

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

790 an ingenious mechanism for dealing with the791 moments in life when contemplating meaning792 appears to be too much—she drops the pursuit793 entirely, only to revisit it at a later point. Isabella794 is comfortable not only finding answers to795 important questions, but also going without796 answers to those very same questions when797 necessary. Perhaps, just as believers have strug-798 gles with God and spirituality (Exline and Rose799 2013), so too can nonbelievers’ struggle with, at800 times, finding meaning and purpose in their own801 lives.802 Isabella may not have been handed a book803 “that says here’s the meaning of life,” but she804 certainly has no problem searching for, and805 answering questions of, meaning herself, and on806 her own terms.

807

808 Horizontal Transcendence: Awe,809 Wonder, and Interconnectedness810 The Faith Development Interview allowed Isa-811 bella to share breakthrough experiences that have812 changed her sense of life’s meaning. These813 consisted, specifically, of two profound moments814 she labels and considers not only important, but815 “life-affirming.” These were experiences where816 the distractions of the outside world ceased to817 exist and an object in one case (a plastic bag) and818 an animal in another (her cat) became the epi-819 center of her attention and focus. These experi-820 ences cultivated a sense of awe, wonder and821 interconnectedness in Isabella that stands out as a822 “special experience” (Taves 2009).

823"In her chapter titled Building on William824"James: The role of learning in religious experi-825"ence inMental Culture (Xygalatas and McCorkle826"2013), psychological anthropologist Tanya Lu-827"hrmann argues for absorption as “the broader828"name for the mental capacity common to trance,829"hypnosis, dissociation and probably to much830"spiritual experience” (2013, p. 149; emphasis831"added). Luhrmann notes this is not a religious832"capacity, but a “psychological capacity” (Luhr-833"mann 2012, p. xxii) that she has found in her834"research, “helps the Christian to experience that835"which is not materially present.” Furthermore, she836"argues that absorption facilitates spiritual experi-837"ence. According to Luhrmann (2013, p. 149),

838"(A)bsorption is the capacity to become focused in839"a non-instrumental way on the mind’s object (what840"humans imagine or see around them) and to allow841"that focus to increase while diminishing one’s842"attention to the myriad of everyday distractions843"that accompany the management of normal life.

844"Luhrmann’s definition of absorption may not845"only underlay religious or spiritual experiences,846"but seems to support notions of “transcending the847"everyday world” (Streib and Hood 2013) in848"general and is highly correlated with openness to849"experience (Roche and McConkey 1990), of850"which Isabella scores as above average across all851"focus groups. As such, it should be no surprise to852"identify what appears to be the mental capacity853"for absorption which plays a central role in Isa-854"bella’s experiences of awe, wonder and inter-855"connectedness which we term horizontal856"transcendence. However, it is important to note

Table 22.2 Isabella’s narrative segment “meaning of life”

Title The meaning of life

Orientation …as an atheist, no one hands you a book that says here’s the meaning of life. (interact 100)

Complication You kind of have to figure it [meaning in life] out for yourself which is probably a theme I’mgoing to touch on again. Um, and so I think definitely one of the philosophical questions thathumans have been dealing with this they learned to think was, “What’s the meaning of life? Whyare we here?” (interact 102)

Evaluation And I really think that there is absolutely not any inherent meaning. I mean, we’re kind of auniversal accident… (interact 102)

Resolution/coda …we can certainly make up a meaning ourselves and go with that. (interact 102)

And so, um, I mean, it’s certainly not an answer to everything. Sometimes I do certainly feel theennui of “crap. Why even bother?” (interact 102)




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

857 that no explicit measure of absorption was used858 in our current study, and according to Hood et al.859 (2009, p. 355), the only study to ever use both a860 measure of mysticism and absorption did not861 report the correlation between the two constructs.862 Measuring mysticism, absorption, and openness863 to experience in “neither religious nor spiritual”864 individuals awaits future empirical investigation.865 As Mircea Eliade once wrote, “he who has866 experienced the mysteries, is he who knows”867 (1959, p. 189, emphasis in original). When Isa-868 bella states, “the universe is just inherently869 beautiful on its own” we should listen. She870 knows, for Isabella, at times, has marveled at871 “the basic underlying physics of the universe.”872 The language Isabella uses in her mini nar-873 rative is also inline with, and supported by, the874 principle component analysis of subjective defi-875 nitions of “spirituality” in Chap. 9 that further876 highlight horizontal transcendence to be associ-877 ated with “(All-) Connectedness and harmony878 with the universe, nature and whole.”879 (Table 22.3).880 In this vignette from her life, Isabella presents881 us with a moment in her life (one of many she882 notes) where the noise of the myriad distractions883 from everyday life ceases to exist. She is with-884 drawn from the outside world, yet a part of the885 world in a more definitive and exceptional sense

886"that is out of the ordinary. Her attention focuses887"on the universe and its expression to her, and her888"understanding of it through the language of889"physics. She is absorbed into the beauty of the890"universe. Furthermore, she recognizes, in a rather891"discordian-paradoxical fashion, that even while892"the universe may not contain absolute meaning,893"there is still such a will to meaning that perme-894"ates life (Coleman and Hood, in press; Frankl895"1988). Isabella, lost in the moment and with a896"conscious focus on nature and the universe, finds897"resolve and comfort in its beauty. This comfort898"and beauty arrives at Isabella, just as it has to the899"more visible so-called ‘new atheists’ (cf. Cotter900"2011), not through a religious or spiritual path or901"framework, but through the very secular obser-902"vation and admiration of the world around her.903"Furthermore, Isabella’s experiences can occur in904"unexpected places and at any time: “bags floating905"in the wind moments can happen anywhere.”906"This profound experience, and others, touches907"Isabella, and triggers a feeling of interconnec-908"tedness with the universe, after all “if the uni-909"verse is beautiful, we’re part of that beauty.”

910"

911"Relationships912

913"…how your parents bring you up sets the foun-914"dation for absently everything… (interact 32)

Table 22.3 Isabella’s narrative segment “the universe is just beautiful on its own”

Title The universe is just inherently beautiful on its own

Orientation I think it was American beautya where the kid is filming this bag floating through the air… Ithink I’ve had a lot of small moments like that…

Complication …even like the bag floating through the air I’ve seen the same thing and thought, “That isbeautiful.” Not ‘cause the bag is inherently beautiful, but just like the basic underlying physics ofthe universe and how it expresses itself in even everyday motion of bags through the air being avisible sign of air vectors and turbulency is beautiful

Evaluation …I kind of find that life-affirming to me because when you’re an atheist you have this problemof, like, “Oh shit, what happens when you die?”

Resolution/coda Nothing has meaning. Well nothing has to have meaning. It can just be the universe is justinherently beautiful on its own

And it [the universe] doesn’t need to care a shit about humans ultimately, but if the universe isbeautiful, we’re part of that beauty. (interacts 82, 84, 86)

aAmerican beauty is a popular existential drama filmed in 1999 that satires what is seen as the mundane and benignnature of the uneventful American middle class life focusing on ‘Lester Burnham’ (Kevin Spacey), as he discovers hiscurrent uneventful life is but a façade of a much more beautiful and ‘real’ reality awaiting to be found by thosedisillusioned with the status quo. (c.f. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0169547/)




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_9

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0169547/

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

915 Through the course of Isabella’s narrative and916 life development, Isabella seems to have estab-917 lished, and maintained, healthy, secure, and918 meaningful relationships with numerous indi-919 viduals in her life. Focusing on content we see920 her parents (perhaps not surprisingly) as the921 primary relationship that resides at the center of922 Isabella’s world.923 Her parents loved her and they participated924 actively in her life. They read to her as a child925 and continually “set good examples for her.”926 Although they set such a “high bar and expected927 a lot” from her as a child, her parents were very928 engaged and “also enabled [her] to reach it [the929 high bar] by… being involved in school.”930 Although Isabella did not date much in high931 school, she includes her first boyfriend as an932 example of a meaningful and important rela-933 tionship. She notes that they eventually decided934 to “break up not because of any sort of argument935 or something. It was amicable, but because [they]936 had lost the spark.” (interact 44).937 Isabella goes on to list two other siblings, an938 older brother and a younger sister, as current939 relationships that are important to her, along with940 an emphasis on her husband, “obviously” she941 states.942 Isabella’s very systematic reasoning process943 likely contributed to secure romantic relation-944 ships in her life and in being comfortable with945 the choices she has made. As such, Isabella was946 able to demonstrate restraint and control in her947 choices ‘to date or not to date’, even remarking948 that not having a boyfriend enabled her to focus949 on herself as she matured into adulthood. Not950 rushing into relationships and being comfortable951 ‘single’ likely prepared her fairly well for mar-952 riage, which, as she emphasizes, was something953 she decided was right for herself and her life.954 Isabella has friends, and not just a few;955 according to her she has “a lot.” However,956 although she very much values her friends and957 their input, she “just [hasn’t] had any big deci-958 sions she’s needed their input on.” Her primary959 interests, regarding the relationships in her social960 life, revolve around much more than just not961 believing in a God. Isabella gathers with her962 friends, including family, siblings and coworkers

963"to regularly play highly imaginative role-playing964"games. Some atheists may find it difficult to965"imagine and mentalize a superhuman agent such966"as a god (Norenzayan et al. 2012), however, such967"supernatural imagination and mentalizing runs968"rampant in the world of wizards, orcs and drag-969"ons—provided a role-playing game is going on,970"that is.

971"

972"Values and Commitments973

974"I definitely try and follow the Golden Rule.975"Because I think it’s just an inherently good idea.976"(interact 219)

977"Throughout the interview, Isabella seems to978"value, and commit to, the idea that life—the979"world she inhabits—is wrought with meaning,980"even if it is not an inherent part of a God created981"cosmos. In fact, the value she places on meaning982"is so great that even though Isabella lists her983"husband as her top commitment, she goes on to984"say that “if I weren’t married life wouldn’t be985"meaningless, if I didn’t have a house, life986"wouldn’t be meaningless and if I didn’t have a987"job, life wouldn’t be meaningless.” (interact 205)988"It seems that the central commitment, and value,989"in Isabella’s life has no material presence, but it990"is not God—it is the personal construction of991"meaning—something that is just wondrous in the992"absence of a supernatural worldview. You can993"take away such things as her family, her shelter,994"or her job yet the will to meaning still remains995"(Frankl 1988). For Isabella, one of the acts of996"ultimate meaning is the act of “pure997"self-sacrifice” because “if the only person you’re998"harming is yourself and it’s helping others it’s999"hard to say that’s wrong.” (interact 249).1000"Isabella notes commitments to “feminism” and1001"“science” and is active in social justice issues,1002"such as animal welfare and the separation of1003"church and state. She also strongly supports1004"‘pro-choice’ movements seeking to uphold1005"reproductive rights for women. While we do not1006"know for sure in the present study what ‘type’ of1007"nonbeliever Isabella may be, her commitments are1008"similar to those of the ‘Activist-Atheist/Agnostic’1009"type of nonbelief (Silver et al. 2014). A “fairly




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

1010 active” member of her local Freethought group,1011 she stays connected with friends by also attending1012 the monthly “atheist Meet-up” in her area. Isabella1013 recognizes that “atheists kind of lack that pillar1014 [God/religion] to gather around. Because it’s hard1015 to gather around something that you don’t believe1016 in.” (interact 165).

1017

1018 Religion and World View1019

1020 …with age and maturity, of course, my world view1021 changes, and incorporates a broader view, and, but1022 that’s hopefully just what everyone does. (interact1023 58)

1024 Isabella makes clear: she is not religious and not1025 spiritual. In fact, holding no belief in God has1026 always seemed the only intelligible option for1027 Isabella since the very moment she was first1028 presented with an actual choice to believe or not1029 believe at age 8. Besides identifying as an atheist1030 throughout the interview (belonging), she uses1031 terms such as “rationalist” (belief) and “human-1032 ist” (behavior) that more clearly speaks to what1033 she does, or believes in, than the one thing she1034 does not, i.e. God.1035 Although Isabella does not participate in1036 religious rituals herself, and, as mentioned pre-1037 viously, she understands the comforting nature of1038 many religious rituals and remarks on how this is1039 the one aspect of religion that she actually might1040 miss. Her views on the universe are reminiscent1041 of the late Carl Sagan (cf. Sagan 1980), that is to1042 say, there is a very natural world around us1043 governed by the physical laws of the universe1044 which can provide—upon proper reflection—at1045 least as much wonder, amazement, awe, and1046 beauty as a religious or supernatural world. In1047 fact, Isabella is still able to find meaning and1048 beauty in what she recognizes is an ultimately1049 impersonal universe. Isabella has no religion, and1050 spiritual frameworks seem more than unappeal-1051 ing when trying to frame her place in the uni-1052 verse, they don’t even accurately describe her1053 views.1054 Isabella found talking about an afterlife a1055 logically untenable position during the interview,1056 quoting the following analogy: “Can you

1057"remember what it was like before you were born?1058"Death is a lot like that.”While this statement may1059"cause existential anxiety in a typically individual,1060"Isabella finds this “comforting.” Furthermore, the1061"idea of life after death is “not even oblivion,” as1062"death is “not even nothing.” Isabella does not1063"need promises of eternal life to soothe death1064"anxiety; the promise of ‘nothingness’—nonexis-1065"tence—will do just fine. Isabella recognizes that1066"in death there is peace, and that alone is1067"comforting.

10681069"From “Spirituality” to Horizontal1070"Transcendence: A General1071"Interpretation of Isabella’s Journey1072

1073"…there was no one moment where I was like, ‘Oh1074"I’m an atheist.’ It was just a thing that’s, like when1075"I learned the word ‘atheist’, it was like, ‘Oh, okay.’1076"(interact 74)

1077"In keeping with Klein’s theorization (Chap. 6),1078"spirituality may indeed be the ‘new religion’1079"however; horizontal transcendence may be the1080"‘new spirituality.’ In this sense, horizontal tran-1081"scendence could be viewed not only as an alter-1082"native to a religious framing of experience and1083"worldview, but also “spiritual” framings that1084"appear too metaphysical and supernatural in nat-1085"ure. This is not to say that horizontal transcen-1086"dence somehow occupies an identical space in1087"relation to spirituality, only that it might serve as a1088"conceptual category which may have functional1089"similarities with the term and worldview of1090"“spirituality,” which has served as an alternative1091"to “religion” for many in America today. Here, of1092"course, we might see this category as being pre-1093"dominantly occupied by neither religious nor1094"spiritual individuals such as Isabella.1095"Traditional paradigms hold true with regards1096"to “religion” and “spirituality,” however an1097"additional subtle distinction of exceptional1098"experience (Kohls and Walach 2006) may be1099"appearing as secularization increases (Bruce1100"2013; Coleman 2013) and experiences that were1101"previously understood in religio-spiritual terms,1102"are now being understood and explained




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21245-6_6

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

1103 rationally versus supernaturally. Some neither1104 religious nor spiritual individuals (such as Isa-1105 bella) may not find powerfully moving experi-1106 ences and meaning in life a topic suitable to be1107 discussed using theologically tinged language.1108 Regarding exceptional experience—religious or1109 secular—you can look at the experience affec-1110 tively, meaning that the experience confirms the1111 validity of your interpretation, or you can look at1112 it rationally where all experience is carefully1113 vetted through a logical process but some left-1114 over exceptional experience remains. Important1115 to remember, however, is that even Isabella’s1116 rational framing of the world and her experience1117 of it gives way to deeply meaningful and pro-1118 found experiences that can be used in compari-1119 son to experiences that may be deemed religious1120 or spiritual. The individual’s metacognitive per-1121 spective determines their metacognitive per-1122 spective on the universe.1123 Important to the continued exploration of1124 horizontal transcendence are qualitative and1125 narrative psychological approaches as employed1126 in our cross-cultural spiritualty study. This kind1127 of ‘ground work’ should be continued in efforts1128 to further tease out all meaningful and excep-1129 tional experiences in the growing number of1130 “neither religious nor spiritual” individuals, as1131 traditional frameworks, typically structured1132 around theological concepts, may not be able to1133 capture all there is when taking into account the1134 pluralities of richness of experience and meaning1135 that is possible in the world (Feyerabend 1999).1136 In conclusion, this chapter has sought to1137 understand the case of Isabella I., an individual1138 who’s life is expressed and lived in the absence1139 of any supernatural framework, on her own terms1140 by clearing conceptual space for the inclusion of1141 horizontal transcendence (Coleman and Arro-1142 wood, in press; Coleman et al. 2013b; Streib and1143 Hood 2013) as a framework, which, in and of1144 itself, is neither religious nor spiritual, just like1145 Isabella. Isabella has developed this kind of1146 horizontal transcendence without the use of, or1147 need for, any type of “spiritual” semantic.1148 Therefore, Isabella’s case demonstrates not a1149 variation of “spirituality,” but something

1150"different, yet similar, but above all—something1151"special, horizontal transcendence.

11521153"References

1154"Altınlı-Macić, M., & Coleman, T. J, I. I. I. (2015).1155"Spirituality and religion: An empirical study using a1156"Turkish Muslim sample. In Z. Agilkaya-Sahin, R.1157"Hood, H. Streib, & A. Ayten (Eds.), Psychology of1158"religion in Turkey. Leiden: Brill.1159"Beaman, L. (2013). The will to religion: Obligatory1160"religious citizenship. Critical Research on Religion, 11161"(2), 141–157.1162"Beit-Hallahmi, B. (2015). Psychological perspectives on1163"religion and religiosity. London, New York:1164"Routledge.1165"Blessing, K. (2013). Atheism and the meaningfulness of1166"life. In S. Bullivant & M. Ruse (Eds.), The Oxford1167"handbook of atheism (pp. 104–118). Oxford: Oxford1168"University Press.1169"Bluck, S., & Habermas, T. (2002). The life story schema.1170"Motivation and Emotion, 24(2), 121–147.1171"Boyer, P. (2001). Religion explained. New York: Basic1172"Books.1173"Bruce, S. (2011). Secularization. Oxford: Oxford Uni-1174"versity Press.1175"Coleman III, T. J. (2013). The secular reality: A response1176"to Pratt’s “Durkheimian Dread.” In The religious1177"studies project podcast series. Online at http://www.1178"religiousstudiesproject.com/2013/02/06/the-secular-1179"reality-by-thomas-j-coleman-iii/.1180"Coleman III, T. J. (2014). Review of big gods: How1181"religion transformed cooperation and conflict. Secu-1182"larism and Nonreligion, 3, Art. 2. doi:http://dx.doi.1183"org/10.5334/snr.an.1184"Coleman III, T. J., & Arrowood, R. B. (in press). Only we1185"can save ourselves: An atheists ‘salvation’. In H.1186"Bacon, W. Dossett & S. Knowles (Eds.), Alternative1187"salvations: Engaging the sacred and the secular.1188"London: Bloomsbury Academic.1189"Coleman III, T. J., & Hood, R. W. Jr. (in press).1190"Reconsidering everything: from folk categories to1191"existential theory of mind. [Peer commentary on the1192"paper “From weird experiences to revelatory events”1193"by A. Taves]. Religion and Society.1194"Coleman III, T. J., Hood, R. W. Jr., & Silver, C. F.1195"(2013a, August 30) Horizontal and vertical transcen-1196"dence: A theory, the paradigm, and research. Paper1197"presented at the 2013 International Association for the1198"Psychology of Religion congress in Lausanne, Swit-1199"zerland. http://www3.unil.ch/wpmu/iapr2013/files/1200"2012/03/AbstractBook4.pdf.1201"Coleman III, T. J., Silver, C. F., & Holcombe, J. (2013b).1202"Focusing on horizontal transcendence: Much more1203"than a “non-belief.” Essays in the Philosophy Of1204"Humanism, 21(2), 1–18.




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

http://www.religiousstudiesproject.com/2013/02/06/the-secular-reality-by-thomas-j-coleman-iii/



http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/snr.an

http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/snr.an

http://www3.unil.ch/wpmu/iapr2013/files/2012/03/AbstractBook4.pdf

http://www3.unil.ch/wpmu/iapr2013/files/2012/03/AbstractBook4.pdf

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

1205 Cotter, C. (2011). Consciousness raising: The critique,1206 agenda, and inherent precariousness of contemporary1207 anglophone atheism. International Journal for the1208 Study of New Religions, 2(1), 77–103.1209 Ecklund, E., & Scheitle, C. (2007). Religion among1210 academic scientists: Distinctions, disciplines, and1211 demographics. Social Problems, 54, 289–307.1212 Exline, J. J., & Rose, E. D. (2013). Religious and spiritual1213 struggles. In R. Paloutzian & C. Park (Eds.), Hand-1214 book of the psychology of religion and spirituality1215 (2nd ed., pp. 380–398). New York, London: The1216 Guilford Press.1217 Feyerabend, P. (1999). Conquest of abundance. Chicago:1218 University of Chicago Press.1219 Fowler, J. (1981). Stages of faith. San Francisco: Harper1220 Collins.1221 Fowler, J., Streib, H., & Keller, B. (2004). Manual for1222 faith development research. Bielefeld: Research Cen-1223 ter for Biographical Studies in Contemporary1224 Religion.1225 Frankl, V. (1988). The will to meaning. New York, N.Y.:1226 Penguin.1227 Gervais, W., & Norenzayan, A. (2012). Analytic thinking1228 promotes religious disbelief. Science, 336(6080), 493–1229 496. doi:10.1126/science.1215647.1230 Habermas, J. (2008). Notes on post-secular society. New1231 Perspectives Quarterly, 25(4), 17–29.1232 Hood, R. W. (1975). The construction and preliminary1233 validation of a measure of reported mystical experi-1234 ence. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,1235 29–41.1236 Hood, R. W. (2012). Methodological agnosticism for the1237 socials sciences? Lessons from Sorokin’s and James’s1238 allusions to psychoanalysis, mysticism, and godly1239 love. In M. Lee & A. Young (Eds.) (2012), The1240 science and theology of godly love (pp. 121–140).1241 Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press.1242 Hood, R. W., Hill, P., & Spilka, B. (2009). The1243 psychology of religion (4th ed.). New York: Guilford1244 Press.1245 Keller, B., & Streib, H. (2013). Faith development,1246 religious styles and biographical narratives: Method-1247 ological perspectives. Journal for Empirical Theology,1248 26(1), 1–21.1249 Kohls, N., & Walach, H. (2006). Exceptional experiences1250 and spiritual practice: A new measurement approach.1251 Spirituality and Health International, 7(3), 125–150.1252 Labov, W., & Waletzky, J. (1967). Narrative analysis:1253 Oral versions of personal experience. In I. Helm (Ed.),1254 Essays on the verbal and visual arts. Proceedings of1255 the 1966 Annual Spring Meeting of the American1256 Ethnological Society (pp. 12–44). Seattle, WA: Uni-1257 versity of Washington Press.1258 Luhrmann, T. (2012). When god talks back. New York:1259 Vintage Books.1260 Luhrmann, T. (2013). Building on William James: The1261 role of learning in religious experience. In D. Xygal-1262 atas & W. McCorkle Jr (Eds.), Mental culture:1263 Classical social theory and the cognitive science of1264 religion (pp. 145–163). Durham: Acumen.

1265"Mann, M. (2013). Triangle atheists: Stigma, identity, and1266"community among atheists in North Carolina’s trian-1267"gle region (Master’s thesis, Duke University).1268"Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10161/8275.1269"McAdams, D. (2008). Personal narratives and the life1270"story. In J. Oliver, R. Robins & L. Pervin (Eds.),1271"Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd1272"ed., pp. 242–262). New York: Guilford Press.1273"McCutcheon, R. (1997). Manufacturing religion. New1274"York: Oxford University Press.1275"Norenzayan, A. (2013). Big gods: How religion trans-1276"formed cooperation and conflict. Princeton: Princeton1277"University Press.1278"Norenzayan, A., Gervais, W. M., & Trzesniewski, K. H.1279"(2012). Mentalizing deficits constrain belief in a1280"personal god. PLoS ONE, 7(5), e36880. doi:10.1371/1281"journal.pone.0036880.1282"Roche, S., & McConkey, K. (1990). Absorption: Nature,1283"assessment, and correlates. Journal of Personality and1284"Social Psychology, 59(1), 91–101. doi:10.1037/0022-1285"3514.59.1.91.1286"Sagan, C. (1980). Cosmos. New York: Random House.1287"Schnell, T., & Keenan, W. (2011). Meaning-making in an1288"atheist world. Archive for the Psychology of Religion,1289"33(1), 55–78. doi:10.1163/157361211x564611.1290"Shook, J. (2014). Scientific atheology. Science Religion1291"and Culture, 1(1), 32–48.1292"Silver, C. F., Coleman, T. J, I. I. I., Hood, R. W, Jr, &1293"Holcombe, J. M. (2014). The six types of nonbelief: A1294"qualitative and quantitative study of type and narra-1295"tive. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 17, 990–1296"1001. doi:10.1080/13674676.2014.987743.1297"Singer, J., & Salovey, P. (1993). The remembered self.1298"New York: Free Press.1299"Streib, H. (2001). Faith development theory revisited: The1300"religious styles perspective. The International Journal1301"for the Psychology of Religion, 11(3), 143–158.1302"Streib, H., & Hood, R. (2013). Modeling the religious1303"field: Religion, spirituality, mysticism and related1304"world views. Implicit Religion, 16(3), 137–155.1305"Streib, H., Hood, R., Keller, B., Csöff, R., & Silver, C.1306"(2009). Deconversion. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &1307"Ruprecht.1308"Taves, A. (2009). Religious experience reconsidered.1309"Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.1310"Taves, A. (2013). Building blocks of sacralities. In R.1311"Paloutzian & C. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the1312"psychology of religion and spirituality (2nd ed.,1313"pp. 138–161). New York, London: The Guilford1314"Press.1315"Vergote, A. (1986). Two opposed viewpoints concerning1316"the object of the psychology of religion. In Third1317"International Conference for European Psychologists1318"of Religion (pp. 67–75). Amsterdam: Rodopi.1319"Vergote, A. (1997). Religion, belief and unbelief. Leuven:1320"Leuven University Press.1321"Wielenberg, E. (2013). Atheism and morality. In S.1322"Bullivant & M. Ruse (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of1323"atheism (pp. 89–103). Oxford: Oxford University1324"Press.




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

UNCO

RREC

TEDPR

OOF

1325 Xygalatas, D. (2012). The burning saints. Bristol, CT:1326 Equinox.1327 Xygalatas, D., & McCorkle, W. (2013). Mental culture:1328 Classical social theory and the cognitive science of1329 religion. Durham [England]: Acumen Publishing.

1330"Zinnbauer, B., Pargament, K., Cole, B., Rye, M., Butter,1331"E., Belavich, T., et al. (1997). Religion and spiritu-1332"ality: Unfuzzying the fuzzy. Journal for the Scientific1333"Study of Religion, 549–564.1334




Au

tho

r P

roo

f

“...if the universe is beautiful, we’re part of that beauty.” – A “Neither Religious nor...

Documents

Transcript of “...if the universe is beautiful, we’re part of that beauty.” – A “Neither Religious nor...