the latest of my complaints regarding religion, and now it seems history as well
Any attempt to give a narrative to humanity merely annihilates it. Which is to say that to act under the belief that everything happens for a reason is to reduce yourself to an object subject to a series of events.
13 comments:
Hmm.. Surely the bigger problem is that religion attempts to describe the present and future as well as the past? I agree that narratives can be a problem (especially the idea of one narrative for everybody), but surely narratives can also be useful and (dare I say it) empowering?
Just to be clear, you rejecting the idea of the big, overarching narrative, that encompasses everything right?
What do you think of little narratives, that tell me about my past, tell me where I'm from, etc.? They're overlapping, often contradictory, and ultimately they leave the story unfinished (or 'to be continued', but they're still narratives?
I think my reasons for railing against narratives entail an ambiguous rejection of all narratives; past, present, future, universal, particular, grand, little, etc. Actually, I should point out that I don't have a problem with fiction, which is necessarily the natural domain of narratives.
I find the idea that I have no role to play, and that there is no great narrative to play it in, far more empowering than the idea that I might be an empowered object with an empowered role to play in an empowering narrative. But of course at the same time it scares the fcuk of out me.
Uh, isn't that a narrative?
I don't see how you could consistently make it so. But the impulse to attempt to do so is what I’m contending against in the first place.
Aha! but I'm a Christian, I don't need to be consistent!
:P
Seriously though, I think you should define what you mean by narrative. In my definition, a narrative doesn't have to mean everything happens for a reason, which you assume in the post.
I thought a narrative was just a form of story telling? I guess it has much deeper, more metaphoric uses than I realised :P
And yes, I shall totally be more careful with my 'working for the Man' rumours next time :)
I didn't think I was really making my words labour this hard.
Imagine a story in which one character is trying to convince another character that everything happens for a reason, fate had brought them together for an adventure, and what an adventure they are about to have! Now, as characters in a story, are they correct in believing that everything that happens to them is happening for a reason? Of course would be correct. It is not mere chance that has brought them together, but the fate drawn up by the pen of an author.
Now consider the belief in terms of whether it is true of our world. Such a belief would entail that there is some greater narrative to everything that happens. And this in turn would entail that there must be an author. Sound familiar? I thought so too. Ergo, all adherents of all the major religions are acting as if they are in a story.
I think I understand what you're saying now...
Basically, you don't like the suggestion that something caused you to be where you are now. More specifically, that an author caused you to be where you are, and has a big overarching plan. In that case you would merely be living out a story, and not actually living.
Sound about right?
Yea roughly, though I see it as a particular instance of a more general type of complaint. In another situation this thinking leads me to feel that viewing myself in terms of genetics or social influences diminishes my humanity as well.
I can understand that. Christianity has similar arguments around predestination <-> free will <-> open theism.
If I get you correctly, you're claiming the right to be completely self-determining. Which, of course, comes with the responsibility to be completely self-determining, even when you don't feel like it. Which is pretty frightening.
I once got accused by a friend (at high school) of using god as a cop-out to avoid taking responsibility for any of my own decisions because "I was just doing god's will." He was right.
It is a little surprising to me that my original post seems to have been transformed into the freewill vs. determinism debate in the process of being understood. While it is interesting comparison, thinking about it in those terms doesn't really capture what I meant. Hence, the post I shall post shortly.
Post a Comment