In Defence of the Alcoholic Agnostic
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,229
In Defence of the Alcoholic Agnostic
AA describes the agnostic in many ways which are often misunderstood, rude, and irrational – these views have somehow affected many peoples views in recovery, and seeped into society as a whole (disease theory for human behaviour and 12 step treatment). As an ex member of AA I too was once affected by these descriptions of agnostic beliefs – I once believed that people who didn’t believe in God were being egotistical.
I want to post this thread, by Britain’s foremost philosopher, on what an agnostic is, what his beliefs are, and the moral and world view implications of this belief.
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humf...l/agnostic.htm
This may also help those whose closeones are still in the grips of addiction see the person suffering in a different, in my view, more humane light.
I want to post this thread, by Britain’s foremost philosopher, on what an agnostic is, what his beliefs are, and the moral and world view implications of this belief.
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humf...l/agnostic.htm
This may also help those whose closeones are still in the grips of addiction see the person suffering in a different, in my view, more humane light.
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
He covers alot about what 'agnostics' think and believe, what they are wary of and their attitudes. There's no particular point at which I'd say I was at loggerheads with his view - some of it I'd never considered before now.
I'm not sure agnostics are quite such a homogenous group though!
I'm not sure agnostics are quite such a homogenous group though!
Extremity
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: somewhere, out over that away
Posts: 183
AA describes all alcoholics as often rude, misunderstood, and unreasonable.
Also as restless, irritable, discontented; grandiose, sensitive, and childish; unable to form truly deep relationships with another and an uncanny knack for getting tight at exactly the wrong time.
In short, "...an alcoholic is unlovely in his cups."
Making these statements in "We Agnostics" was a redundancy to explain our common description, regardless of beliefs.
It was not meant to set anyone apart.
It applies to all of us in one form or another to varying degrees.
Even by it's apparent absence and unrealized sublimation.
Certainly, there are those on both sides of this that choose to make it into an exclusionary group of "No! Not me!"
But that justs show how alike we are and that we have much to work on within ourself.
Be Well
Also as restless, irritable, discontented; grandiose, sensitive, and childish; unable to form truly deep relationships with another and an uncanny knack for getting tight at exactly the wrong time.
In short, "...an alcoholic is unlovely in his cups."
Making these statements in "We Agnostics" was a redundancy to explain our common description, regardless of beliefs.
It was not meant to set anyone apart.
It applies to all of us in one form or another to varying degrees.
Even by it's apparent absence and unrealized sublimation.
Certainly, there are those on both sides of this that choose to make it into an exclusionary group of "No! Not me!"
But that justs show how alike we are and that we have much to work on within ourself.
Be Well
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,229
Originally Posted by Mogqua
AA describes all alcoholics as often rude, misunderstood, and unreasonable.
Also as restless, irritable, discontented; grandiose, sensitive, and childish; unable to form truly deep relationships with another and an uncanny knack for getting tight at exactly the wrong time.
In short, "...an alcoholic is unlovely in his cups."
Making these statements in "We Agnostics" was a redundancy to explain our common description, regardless of beliefs.
It was not meant to set anyone apart.
It applies to all of us in one form or another to varying degrees.
Even by it's apparent absence and unrealized sublimation.
Certainly, there are those on both sides of this that choose to make it into an exclusionary group of "No! Not me!"
But that justs show how alike we are and that we have much to work on within ourself.
Be Well
Also as restless, irritable, discontented; grandiose, sensitive, and childish; unable to form truly deep relationships with another and an uncanny knack for getting tight at exactly the wrong time.
In short, "...an alcoholic is unlovely in his cups."
Making these statements in "We Agnostics" was a redundancy to explain our common description, regardless of beliefs.
It was not meant to set anyone apart.
It applies to all of us in one form or another to varying degrees.
Even by it's apparent absence and unrealized sublimation.
Certainly, there are those on both sides of this that choose to make it into an exclusionary group of "No! Not me!"
But that justs show how alike we are and that we have much to work on within ourself.
Be Well
I can assure you - and I dont mean this in a negative tone, a mere observation: that you and I are not as alike as you may like to think.
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
Originally Posted by Mogqua
AA describes all alcoholics as often rude, misunderstood, and unreasonable.
Also as restless, irritable, discontented; grandiose, sensitive, and childish; unable to form truly deep relationships with another and an uncanny knack for getting tight at exactly the wrong time.
In short, "...an alcoholic is unlovely in his cups."
Making these statements in "We Agnostics" was a redundancy to explain our common description, regardless of beliefs.
It was not meant to set anyone apart.
It applies to all of us in one form or another to varying degrees.
Even by it's apparent absence and unrealized sublimation.
Certainly, there are those on both sides of this that choose to make it into an exclusionary group of "No! Not me!"
But that justs show how alike we are and that we have much to work on within ourself.
Be Well
Also as restless, irritable, discontented; grandiose, sensitive, and childish; unable to form truly deep relationships with another and an uncanny knack for getting tight at exactly the wrong time.
In short, "...an alcoholic is unlovely in his cups."
Making these statements in "We Agnostics" was a redundancy to explain our common description, regardless of beliefs.
It was not meant to set anyone apart.
It applies to all of us in one form or another to varying degrees.
Even by it's apparent absence and unrealized sublimation.
Certainly, there are those on both sides of this that choose to make it into an exclusionary group of "No! Not me!"
But that justs show how alike we are and that we have much to work on within ourself.
Be Well
For example, I have heard people say that if you don't believe in god then you must think you're more powerful than god - I thought that and other misunderstandings was what the thread was about. I've never met a non believer who thinks about whether they should be more powerful than god as it's a moot point if you don't believe in one!
I liked alot of what was in the essay except that I think there's more variety in personal belief amongst us non believers.
I can imagine being a non-believer in a 12 step programme such as AA or Al-Anon is a nightmare. One I wouldn't embrace willingly! I THINK (<---- Note I am unsure) this thread was about those conflicts.
Extremity
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: somewhere, out over that away
Posts: 183
In Al-anon they make a statement about expressing any religious tenets as a detriment to sharing.
They use to give similar statements in NA about proselytizing which I never hear anymore but many refuse acknowledging a god of any conception in their program.
So be it. That’s their right.
In AA, it can actually be harder for a member to have a God that doesn’t conform to other’s concept than it is for a member with no god.
Many that are of certain Christian orders have more problems with this chapter than those truly agnostic.
My Agnostic AA friends report no problems of this type.
One of my closer friends often shares about god, and points either behind his ear or taps his forehead, “third eye” when he says the word.
But the Pagan, Buddhist, and Muslim friends I have and myself also, occasionally run into someone demanding conformity to meet their limitations.
We have come to accept that we make some uncomfortable.
I find it amusing when I meet people that can develop a character in an RPG or draw a super hero in anime that are completely unable to make a conception of a god for themselves.
I find it more important where that chapter says:
“When, therefore, we speak to you of God, we mean your own conception of God. This applies, too, to other spiritual expressions, which you find in this book. Do not let any prejudice you may have against spiritual terms deter you from honestly asking yourself what they mean to you.”
It’s about getting past a persons tenets and dogma and relating it as we can, personally, in a way that works.
We utilized our concept and seek the positive concepts expressed by others for our use (or trial use).
And then:
“… the Realm of Spirit is broad, roomy, all inclusive; never exclusive or forbidding…”
And the agnostic needs no defense.
This thread was started to exclude and polarize.
Without understanding that unity does not depend on conformity.
Be Well
They use to give similar statements in NA about proselytizing which I never hear anymore but many refuse acknowledging a god of any conception in their program.
So be it. That’s their right.
In AA, it can actually be harder for a member to have a God that doesn’t conform to other’s concept than it is for a member with no god.
Many that are of certain Christian orders have more problems with this chapter than those truly agnostic.
My Agnostic AA friends report no problems of this type.
One of my closer friends often shares about god, and points either behind his ear or taps his forehead, “third eye” when he says the word.
But the Pagan, Buddhist, and Muslim friends I have and myself also, occasionally run into someone demanding conformity to meet their limitations.
We have come to accept that we make some uncomfortable.
I find it amusing when I meet people that can develop a character in an RPG or draw a super hero in anime that are completely unable to make a conception of a god for themselves.
I find it more important where that chapter says:
“When, therefore, we speak to you of God, we mean your own conception of God. This applies, too, to other spiritual expressions, which you find in this book. Do not let any prejudice you may have against spiritual terms deter you from honestly asking yourself what they mean to you.”
It’s about getting past a persons tenets and dogma and relating it as we can, personally, in a way that works.
We utilized our concept and seek the positive concepts expressed by others for our use (or trial use).
And then:
“… the Realm of Spirit is broad, roomy, all inclusive; never exclusive or forbidding…”
And the agnostic needs no defense.
This thread was started to exclude and polarize.
Without understanding that unity does not depend on conformity.
Be Well
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
I find it amusing when I meet people that can develop a character in an RPG or draw a super hero in anime that are completely unable to make a conception of a god for themselves.
I believe love (in it's many forms) is very powerful - but then I believe it's a verb, as well as a noun and it's us as humans and animals that do it.
Statements like the one you made above (in quote) might sound a bit patronising. I have no idea if you meant it that way but it's the sort of thing that leaves me wondering how much respect you have for people that don't believe in God?
Extremity
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: somewhere, out over that away
Posts: 183
Equus,
Your conception is a beginning and gives us common ground.
And since I trust keys and legends of maps and equally apply it to the bible, where it gives the key in one verse, "God is Love."
The Love and it's power you speak of relates strongly to my conception of God. No matter that you choose to call it love, it still means the same to me.
Since I have found few that don't believe or that conceive of love in some degree or fashion, I have never met a true atheist or agnostic.
Love cannot be scientifically proven either.
And I often respect them more than they respect themself.
In Hindu terms it is about respect in coexistence.
In relation to this premise and actual agenda of this thread,
"AA must respect the Alternatives, as the Alternatives must respect AA"
Given that, AA's official response is to co-operate with them in any degree they choose or choose not to and have no opinion about them otherwise.
However, the alternatives declare much oppostition and opinions about AA.
The alternatives are negating themselves while blaming AA for their (the alternatives) own irrational beliefs and contradictions.
They have their right to be wrong just as anyone else does (An AA premise.)
And in cognitive terms of the personal, the perception of being patronized is more important than the actual intent (which was to be informative).
So examine your perception.
There is also a difference between God and higher power.
Finding the ability to trust something or somebody outside of yourself is what we found to be needed in opening our minds to try other ideas other than our own.
Be Well
Your conception is a beginning and gives us common ground.
And since I trust keys and legends of maps and equally apply it to the bible, where it gives the key in one verse, "God is Love."
The Love and it's power you speak of relates strongly to my conception of God. No matter that you choose to call it love, it still means the same to me.
Since I have found few that don't believe or that conceive of love in some degree or fashion, I have never met a true atheist or agnostic.
Love cannot be scientifically proven either.
And I often respect them more than they respect themself.
In Hindu terms it is about respect in coexistence.
In relation to this premise and actual agenda of this thread,
"AA must respect the Alternatives, as the Alternatives must respect AA"
Given that, AA's official response is to co-operate with them in any degree they choose or choose not to and have no opinion about them otherwise.
However, the alternatives declare much oppostition and opinions about AA.
The alternatives are negating themselves while blaming AA for their (the alternatives) own irrational beliefs and contradictions.
They have their right to be wrong just as anyone else does (An AA premise.)
And in cognitive terms of the personal, the perception of being patronized is more important than the actual intent (which was to be informative).
So examine your perception.
There is also a difference between God and higher power.
Finding the ability to trust something or somebody outside of yourself is what we found to be needed in opening our minds to try other ideas other than our own.
Be Well
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,229
Mog
I don’t mean this as a trick question, but I was wondering – what kind of person where you when you first came into AA? Did you have any passions? Or was it all a complete alcoholic mess? I had dreams: dreams of becoming a travelling poet, or explorer around the world. I wanted to read everything. Can you relate? I also loved sport – watching and playing with friends. Ladies: loved them. I also loved heart to hearts with my best friend. We used to pal up together and roam the city looking for live music and scenes. I used to love going away with my family as well; I always found a certain peace when talking to my father. He had such a calming affect. I loved the countryside as well. Hazy fields in the summer. I didn’t care about God, or disease, or defects. I was often miles away from everything, totally care free and felt totally a live. Good days. Towards the end I had bad days as well – depression and fear. But it wasn’t always like that. And it felt beautiful when I found friends who liked me and I liked them. It felt great being with people. It felt great living in a big old mad city full of people and places and adventure. I used to love going home after work and getting stuck into a good book, or watching an excellent film (the ones where you come out after wards and everything feels different). Can you relate?
I don’t mean this as a trick question, but I was wondering – what kind of person where you when you first came into AA? Did you have any passions? Or was it all a complete alcoholic mess? I had dreams: dreams of becoming a travelling poet, or explorer around the world. I wanted to read everything. Can you relate? I also loved sport – watching and playing with friends. Ladies: loved them. I also loved heart to hearts with my best friend. We used to pal up together and roam the city looking for live music and scenes. I used to love going away with my family as well; I always found a certain peace when talking to my father. He had such a calming affect. I loved the countryside as well. Hazy fields in the summer. I didn’t care about God, or disease, or defects. I was often miles away from everything, totally care free and felt totally a live. Good days. Towards the end I had bad days as well – depression and fear. But it wasn’t always like that. And it felt beautiful when I found friends who liked me and I liked them. It felt great being with people. It felt great living in a big old mad city full of people and places and adventure. I used to love going home after work and getting stuck into a good book, or watching an excellent film (the ones where you come out after wards and everything feels different). Can you relate?
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,709
About people who don't believe in god because they're egotistical...
I always thought it was my lack of self worth that drove me to reject the possibility that a universal spirit might include me in its manifestations.
It seems the more I rearrange my inner parts in the process called recovery, the more my antenna picks up signals from out there I never heard before.
I always thought it was my lack of self worth that drove me to reject the possibility that a universal spirit might include me in its manifestations.
It seems the more I rearrange my inner parts in the process called recovery, the more my antenna picks up signals from out there I never heard before.
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
Since I have found few that don't believe or that conceive of love in some degree or fashion, I have never met a true atheist or agnostic.
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,229
Originally Posted by Dan
About people who don't believe in god because they're egotistical...
I always thought it was my lack of self worth that drove me to reject the possibility that a universal spirit might include me in its manifestations.
It seems the more I rearrange my inner parts in the process called recovery, the more my antenna picks up signals from out there I never heard before.
I always thought it was my lack of self worth that drove me to reject the possibility that a universal spirit might include me in its manifestations.
It seems the more I rearrange my inner parts in the process called recovery, the more my antenna picks up signals from out there I never heard before.
I also believe that agnostics are often humanities last hope. Extreme? No, because agnostics are mostly not extreme people.
Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Zion, Illinois
Posts: 3,411
Ego????
I don't think so. Everyone has an ego. Not everyone comes to AA vulnerable, and with a wounded spirit which requires the humility to ask for help from whomever and wherever help is available. AA doesn't demand that I accept the concept of "a" God, or "the" God, but a Power greater than myself. If I take issue with this idea, it stands to reason that I'm not finished being beaten down yet.
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
To quote the Dalai Lama on this issue:
Ref - The Dalai Lama's Little Book of Wisdom. Page 15.
I think his writing are an excellent example of true respect of difference - he has little or no problem with aithiest or agnostics, his issues are around motivation and what he argues (very well in my opinion) to be a good way of life. It does NOT require any belief in god of any kind, nor does he persistantly argue that 'other stuff' shows an inate belief in god, or that 'other stuff' is god.
With the definition of spiritual he gives I'm happy to say I work hard to do whatever I can to indulge my spiritual - I give it planty of time and effort and I hope that gives me growth. A growth I CAN and do believe in.
....when I say 'spiritual development' I do not necessarily mean any kind of religious faith. When I use the word spiritual I mean basic human good qualities. These are: human affection, a sense of involvment, honesty, discipline and human intelligence properly guided by good motivation.
I think his writing are an excellent example of true respect of difference - he has little or no problem with aithiest or agnostics, his issues are around motivation and what he argues (very well in my opinion) to be a good way of life. It does NOT require any belief in god of any kind, nor does he persistantly argue that 'other stuff' shows an inate belief in god, or that 'other stuff' is god.
With the definition of spiritual he gives I'm happy to say I work hard to do whatever I can to indulge my spiritual - I give it planty of time and effort and I hope that gives me growth. A growth I CAN and do believe in.
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
