you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 2 years ago* (52 children)

12 steppers really do have a religious response to things. I guess that's one of the few ways to fundamentally change your outlook on the world. Be nice if it wasn't an actual religious program though. And that was the key for both that rejected the pardons: they were 12 steppers.

  • source
  • hideshow 52 child comments
  • [–] [S] 13 points 2 years ago (47 children)

    Unfortunately, it was formed from a prayer group, and as much as some of my fellow atheists have told me that you can be an atheist and a 12-stepper (and maybe they can deal with the cognitive dissonance), there is just no legitimately non-religious interpretation of step 11. The whole "anything can be your higher power" concept I've been told by those atheists simply cannot conform to step 11:

    Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

    You substitute "God" with pretty much anything non-deistic and that sentence simply does not rationally work.

    I've always suspected that the biggest reason 12-step programs like AA do work for some people is that it's a form of group therapy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 47 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    You can substitute for the universe, the program and people in it, or nature and I'd say it still works. Just how you frame prayer or meditation. One of the definitions of prayer is a solemn request. The purpose of having "God" in the 12 steps is to have a belief in something "greater" than yourself. To me the group of alcoholics who got me sober is something "greater" than myself because I truly couldn't do it alone. The prayer and meditation can just be used almost as a manifesting of intention. If I pray that I be more tolerant patient and kind to those around me, than that's more likely to be on my mind whether I'm intentionally sending that prayer to a deity, the universe, nature, or the idea of the group as a whole. I say this as a 12 stepper myself that is non religious. That being said a lot of people use God or a deity as a higher power, but just saying it's certainly not a requirement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    No. You can't. Because those make no sense when you rewrite it.

    Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with the universe as we understood it, praying only for knowledge of its will for us and the power to carry that out.

    The universe only has a will if you're not an atheist.

    Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with the program and people in it as we understood them, praying only for knowledge of their will for us and the power to carry that out.

    This only makes sense if you think praying to a group will make them force you to do something. Which is nonsense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    If you want to detach step 11 from it's Christian roots, you cannot just substitute "God" in its wording. That yields nonsense, as you are stating correctly.

    The aim of Step 11 is "knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out." In non–religious terms I would call this aim "committment".

    The means of Step 11 to achieve commitment is spirituality, spirituality being a set of basic convictions that provides meaning, purpose and a sense of belonging.

    A "neutral" Meta—Step 11 might be worded something like:

    "We consciously develop a healthy spiritual basis for our live, gaining motivation and comittment through it."

    As any religion, philosophy, ideology or other system of basic convictions can provide this spiritual basis for an individual, the formulation of a more concrete and helpful Step 11 will differ between e.g. communists, buddhists, naturists and epicureans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (19 children)

    It's simpler than all that. Satanists would say God is just You, or some version of yourself that is all the things you wish you could be. The fact that you are there praying means you have a good idea of what needs to change, and are searching for the strength within yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (18 children)

    As I said, that makes it irrational. People like you say that, but when it actually comes to rewriting it, it makes no sense at all:

    Sought through prayer and meditation to improve my conscious contact with me as I understand myself, praying only for knowledge of my will for me and the power to carry that out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (17 children)

    Dunno what you're on about, makes complete sense to me. Just requires some mental flexibility.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] [S] 0 points 2 years ago (16 children)

    Really? You pray to yourself? You don't have conscious contact with yourself?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    I think the key here, and I'm speaking from the POV of a 12-stepper, is the idea of introspection.

    Literally, all I learned from 12 step was to look at myself deeply, intensely, and with honesty; learn to forgive myself for the shitty things I've done; learn to forgive others for the shitty things they've done to me, while taking responsibility for my part in whatever that may have been; and to get into the habit of practicing those things daily.

    The part I think you're missing with the quote above that you seem to be taking it literally, when in the quote itself implies that it and the idea of God in general, is to be interpreted by the reader however they see fit.

    Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

    I also think that the "sought through prayer and meditation" does not necessarily imply that one must do both, as it is speaking in the first person plural. Meaning, some people may pray without "meditating", while others like myself may choose to meditate without "praying" and you can still say of the group "We prayed and meditated" without contradicting oneself. An "and/or" probably would've worked best there, but whatever.

    Now, as to whether I think AA and NA are culty? Absolutely, and it's a big reason why I stopped attending.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (10 children)

    "And" doesn't just imply both, that's exactly what "and" means. It doesn't mean either/or, it means both. I have no idea why you're suggesting otherwise.

    A ham and cheese sandwich isn't ham or cheese, it's both.
    A husband and wife is always two people.
    A horse and rider is not either a horse or a person riding a horse.

    You must know this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (9 children)

    A ham and cheese sandwich isn’t ham or cheese, it’s both.

    I agree.

    When it's ham and cheese sandwiches, I personally have to ask whether the speaker means there are ham sandwiches and cheese sandwiches, or just sandwiches with ham and cheese.

    ETA:

    A husband and wife is always two people.

    Yes, but when you say "we were husbands and wives" does this imply one person is both?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] -1 points 2 years ago* (8 children)

    I cannot imagine a scenario where someone says "I have ham and cheese sandwiches" and they mean two different types of sandwiches.

    And I also do not believe that you are so stupid that you would think that was what they meant, so I have no idea why you're pretending to be. But if it is true, congratulations on being one of the most obnoxious people on the planet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (7 children)

    Please see my edit on the comment you're replying to for a better example. I just needed a second to think about what I wanted to say.

    Also, I'm autistic. So yeah, I'm probably pretty obnoxious, but at least I'm not out here just insulting people because they know from experience that language can have more than one interpretation.

    edit: spelling

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago* (6 children)

    It wasn't an insult because I literally said didn't believe that about you.

    That's like saying "I don't think you're a pedophile" is an insult. Autism is not an excuse to not know the difference between an insult and the literal opposite of an insult.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (5 children)

    if it is true, congratulations on being one of the most obnoxious people on the planet.

    It was true. You just called me "one of the most obnoxious people on the planet."

    Autism is not an excuse to not know the difference between an insult and the literal opposite of an insult.

    It is.

    the literal opposite of an insult.

    Thank you for the complement?

    I'm done here and I hope you have a day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Got it, you don't know what "if" means. And no, it is not, many members of my family, including my daughter, are autistic. They do not use their autism as an excuse to get away with pretending people said the opposite of what they said.

    In fact, every autistic member of my family knows how to say, "I'm sorry, I misunderstood what you said." They do not use their autism as an excuse. You know who does? Elon Musk. If he even is actually autistic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (3 children)

    Look if I've done something to upset you, then I do apologize. That's almost never my goal in life.

    That said, I know exactly what "if" means.

    You made an assumption and appended an insult to the opposite side of that assumption. You were wrong in your assumption, thereby lobbing that insult at me. I won't apologize for being insulted.

    As for the sandwich nonsense. Two things:

    EDIT lol i hit tab and enter on accident and it posted.

    1. That situation and many others have happened to me. I usually clear up the misunderstanding, so I can figure out wth is going on, and then apologize, though I probably shouldn't have to seeing as asking clarifying questions is not something that really needs to be apologized for.

    2. You still haven't addressed the husband and wives thing. Was that a good point so you're ignoring it and changing the subject to my understanding of sandwich ingredients?

    Regardless, as I said in my last comment. I don't really want to continue this conversation. I feel as if you're acting in bad faith and would appreciate being left alone so I don't have to block you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    No. It's not a good point. If someone said "husband and wives," the vast, vast majority of people on this planet understand that to be polygamy.

    And other than you, I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that and means or.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 children)
  • [–] [S] -1 points 2 years ago (18 children)

    If you are an atheist, Step 11 makes no sense if you don't substitute "God" and it also makes no sense if you do.

    So if you want to acknowledge a hard truth, acknowledge that is an issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (17 children)
  • [–] [S] 0 points 2 years ago (16 children)

    Yes, as I have said to others, I understand that if you totally rewrite Step 11 it can reply to atheists.

    But to an atheist, the lines are in no way hazy between prayer and meditation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (15 children)
  • [–] [S] 0 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    Yes, yet again, I understand that if you rewrite things, they change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (13 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (12 children)

    Sure sounds like it is losing its original purpose to me- to bring people closer to the Christian god, since the 12 steps were formed from a Christian prayer group.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (10 children)

    I'm looking at it as an atheist and it absolutely looks like a human trying to communicate to a god to me. I have no idea how to interpret "improve our conscious contact with God" any other way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (8 children)

    I did exactly what you asked me to do and now you're saying I did it wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (6 children)

    I already told you what I didn't agree with and why I didn't agree with it several times, so I have no idea why you keep asking me over and over as if I will change what I said.

    I even did what you wanted.

    It feels like you just are insistent that I must agree with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (4 children)

    I said a hell of a lot more than that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Does it matter? Whatever I said was stupid and worthless anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    Honestly out of all 12 steps it's the first step that actually hits the hardest.

    "We admitted we were powerless over alchohol (although you could substitute alcohol for anything really)—that our lives had become unmanageable."

    As my shrink used to say "the hardest part of overcoming a problem or mistake is admitting you have a problem/made a mistake."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    I guess I can't separate it from a religious program because fundamentally the ethics of it are theistic and not humanistic. They're handed down morals that come from a higher moral power. When you get into esoteric ethical debates with Christian apologists, and they describe atheists as being incapable of being moral, that's what they mean. They believe morals must come from something greater than ourselves and cannot come from a human source.

    To put it another way, AA is remarkably similar to Aristotle's virtue ethics which was used by Aquinas to describe the origins of morality. Similar to AA's higher power, Aristotle derived the moral authority for virtue ethics from the "prime mover." Same concept, in essence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment