Responsibility transfer for atheists - dealing with uncertainty
November 22, 2015 at 10:29 am
(This post was last modified: November 22, 2015 at 10:38 am by Catma.)
Hello friends,
I am a firm atheist, rationalist, materialist, skeptic, etc. As often seems to happen with such people, I'm not the warmest person and haven't paid much attention to the nuts and bolts of human interaction. I've recently identified this as a major problem in my life and have been taking steps to fix it.
To that end I picked up some literature, including "The Charisma Myth" by Olivia Fox Cabane. The book claims that while there are some physical behaviors you can change to make yourself more charismatic, a lot of it is down to internal psychology. Humans can detect inauthenticity very well, so genuineness can't be faked. You have to be mentally present and ready to convey your genuine self.
One component of this charismatic mindset is a psychology where uncertainty doesn't linger and create lasting discomfort, hesitation, and distraction. I find myself struggling with uncertainty quite often, rehearsing events dozens of times, well past the point of usefulness - fretting endlessly over things I can't control. Cabane's suggestion for dealing with this is:
The problem with this should be obvious, but I'll spell it out. I can't pick such an entity because I have a hard time believing in one. God and Fate don't exist (and please don't argue that here, pick another thread.) The universe is something I view as impersonal and capricious. I would like to change my perception of it to "impersonal and abundant with goodness" for other psychological reasons, but it's still not an entity that can take responsibility. Doing that exercise with these beliefs would be logically equivalent to saying "just stop worrying about it", which is less than helpful.
I think the ability to think of the universe as a benevolent entity probably isn't too far from my grasp, if I wanted it. I think humans evolved a tendency to think that way instinctively, precisely because it makes us act better socially. Even Daniel Dennett finds a similar belief, speaking of "thanking goodness", as if "goodness" were an entity or force pervading reality.
Among atheists, a common conception of such psychological tools is that they are "crutches for the weak". Well, crutches they may be, but I think I can do without that value judgment of "weakness". A tool is a tool, and if it's useful or helpful, you should use it. What I want to know is (and thanks again, Dennett): is this a "boom crutch"? Will it explode in my armpit and leave me worse off than when I started?
So here are my questions. Can you, my fellow atheists, see potential pitfalls in conceiving of the universe in this way, for this purpose, inside an otherwise fully materialist context? Do you think the costs outweigh the benefits?
Are there other tools for dealing with uncertainty in a more rational manner? This seems to be one of those things that believers get for free, but we have to come up with a better alternative from the ground up.
I am a firm atheist, rationalist, materialist, skeptic, etc. As often seems to happen with such people, I'm not the warmest person and haven't paid much attention to the nuts and bolts of human interaction. I've recently identified this as a major problem in my life and have been taking steps to fix it.
To that end I picked up some literature, including "The Charisma Myth" by Olivia Fox Cabane. The book claims that while there are some physical behaviors you can change to make yourself more charismatic, a lot of it is down to internal psychology. Humans can detect inauthenticity very well, so genuineness can't be faked. You have to be mentally present and ready to convey your genuine self.
One component of this charismatic mindset is a psychology where uncertainty doesn't linger and create lasting discomfort, hesitation, and distraction. I find myself struggling with uncertainty quite often, rehearsing events dozens of times, well past the point of usefulness - fretting endlessly over things I can't control. Cabane's suggestion for dealing with this is:
Quote:Responsibility Transfer
Whenever you feel your brain rehashing possible outcomes to a situation, try a transfer of responsibility to alleviate the anxiety.
- Sit comfortably or lie down, relax, and close your eyes.
- Take two or three deep breaths. As you inhale, imagine drawing clean air toward the top of your head. As you exhale, let it whoosh out, washing all your worries away.
- Pick an entity - God, Fate, the Universe, whatever may best suit your beliefs - that you could imagine as benevolent.
- Imagine lifting the weight of everything you're concerned about off your shoulders and placing it on the shoulders of whichever entity you've chosen. They're in charge now.
- Visually lift everything off your shoulders and feel the difference as you are now no longer responsible for the outcome of any of these things. Everything is taken care of. You can sit back, relax, and enjoy whatever good you can find along the way.
The problem with this should be obvious, but I'll spell it out. I can't pick such an entity because I have a hard time believing in one. God and Fate don't exist (and please don't argue that here, pick another thread.) The universe is something I view as impersonal and capricious. I would like to change my perception of it to "impersonal and abundant with goodness" for other psychological reasons, but it's still not an entity that can take responsibility. Doing that exercise with these beliefs would be logically equivalent to saying "just stop worrying about it", which is less than helpful.
I think the ability to think of the universe as a benevolent entity probably isn't too far from my grasp, if I wanted it. I think humans evolved a tendency to think that way instinctively, precisely because it makes us act better socially. Even Daniel Dennett finds a similar belief, speaking of "thanking goodness", as if "goodness" were an entity or force pervading reality.
Among atheists, a common conception of such psychological tools is that they are "crutches for the weak". Well, crutches they may be, but I think I can do without that value judgment of "weakness". A tool is a tool, and if it's useful or helpful, you should use it. What I want to know is (and thanks again, Dennett): is this a "boom crutch"? Will it explode in my armpit and leave me worse off than when I started?
So here are my questions. Can you, my fellow atheists, see potential pitfalls in conceiving of the universe in this way, for this purpose, inside an otherwise fully materialist context? Do you think the costs outweigh the benefits?
Are there other tools for dealing with uncertainty in a more rational manner? This seems to be one of those things that believers get for free, but we have to come up with a better alternative from the ground up.
