A case for being a "devout nothing".

brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,084
edited March 2013 in A Moving Train
In Theodora Kroeber's Ishi in Two Worlds, the excellent book about the life of Ishi, the last surviving Yahi* individual, the author speaks of the friends Ishi made while living out the last of his life in San Francisco. One of Ishi's handful of close friends was Juan Dolores- a fascinating character and an important friend to Ishi during his last years of life.

Of Juan Dolores, Kroeber says this: "His mother and sister were devout Catholics, hence Juan's name. His father and brother were devout Papagos. Juan put the case for himself, 'I am a devout nothing'".

As I read this, I thought about the many discussion on religion and faith on this forum and I've often had trouble finding the right term for my own beliefs- generally acquiescing to "mystery". Dolores' term struck me in a very introspective way- a good, expressive term, neither atheist nor agnostic. A good non-label: "a devout nothing".

(*The Yahi were one of four groups comprising the Yana tribal nations of American Indians that lived in the northern interior of California.)
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
Democracy Dies in Darkness- Washington Post













Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    I'm not really big on labels to begin with - though (sometimes and reluctantly) apply them to myself for the sake of discussion...maybe self-examination too.

    One thing I'm sure of...I'm neither devout nor nothing - but as I can appreciate the statement itself, I also can't discount anyone applying that to themselves.
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,084
    hedonist wrote:
    I'm not really big on labels to begin with - though (sometimes and reluctantly) apply them to myself for the sake of discussion...maybe self-examination too.

    One thing I'm sure of...I'm neither devout nor nothing - but as I can appreciate the statement itself, I also can't discount anyone applying that to themselves.

    That about covers all the bases, Hedonist. :lol:

    No, seriously, I get where you're coming from.

    However, looking at the definition of "devout" thus:

    de·vout
    /diˈvout/
    Adjective
    1. Having or showing deep religious feeling or commitment.
    2. Totally committed to a cause or belief.

    I would guess #2 fits you in some ways, no?
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
    Democracy Dies in Darkness- Washington Post













  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    I take "nothing" as well, negative.

    Why not a devout "everything"? Or a devout "questionable"? A devout "non-label"? Personally, I like the devout "none of your damn business".


    :lol:
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,084
    Jeanwah wrote:
    I take "nothing" as well, negative.

    Why not a devout "everything"? Or a devout "questionable"? A devout "non-label"? Personally, I like the devout "none of your damn business".


    :lol:

    That works too. :lol:
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
    Democracy Dies in Darkness- Washington Post













  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    brianlux wrote:
    Jeanwah wrote:
    I take "nothing" as well, negative.

    Why not a devout "everything"? Or a devout "questionable"? A devout "non-label"? Personally, I like the devout "none of your damn business".


    :lol:

    That works too. :lol:

    :D

    Actually, we're all connected; this is what tribal communities believe and we really are... So perhaps I am a devout "everything"...
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    Jeanwah wrote:
    Actually, we're all connected; this is what tribal communities believe and we really are... So perhaps I am a devout "everything"...
    Me, you...you, me...it's all related.

    Brian, see my lounge-car post ;)
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,084
    Jeanwah wrote:
    brianlux wrote:
    Jeanwah wrote:
    I take "nothing" as well, negative.

    Why not a devout "everything"? Or a devout "questionable"? A devout "non-label"? Personally, I like the devout "none of your damn business".


    :lol:

    That works too. :lol:

    :D

    Actually, we're all connected; this is what tribal communities believe and we really are... So perhaps I am a devout "everything"...

    Yeah, connected especially (for me anyway) if that community includes plants, animals, rocks, etc.- the physical plain or at least the world on which we live.

    If we were to describe the non-physical plain as "no-thing", then the term "devout nothing" seems to work. It seems to fit with my idea of mystery only I like the sound of "devout nothing" better than "devout mystery".
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
    Democracy Dies in Darkness- Washington Post













  • STAYSEASTAYSEA Posts: 3,814
    Ishmael is a 1992 philosophical novel by Daniel Quinn. It examines mythology, its effect on ethics, and how that relates to sustainability. The novel uses a style of Socratic dialogue to deconstruct the notion that humans are the pinnacle of biological evolution. It posits that human supremacy is a cultural myth, and asserts that modern civilization is enacting that myth with dangerous consequences. It was awarded the $500,000 Turner Tomorrow Fellowship Award.


    I think Theodora Kroeber's thoughts could have been copied by D. Quinn. Ummm

    And ...
    "peanuts .. not a pea nor a nut...discuss"
    image
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,084
    STAYSEA wrote:
    Ishmael is a 1992 philosophical novel by Daniel Quinn. It examines mythology, its effect on ethics, and how that relates to sustainability. The novel uses a style of Socratic dialogue to deconstruct the notion that humans are the pinnacle of biological evolution. It posits that human supremacy is a cultural myth, and asserts that modern civilization is enacting that myth with dangerous consequences. It was awarded the $500,000 Turner Tomorrow Fellowship Award.


    I think Theodora Kroeber's thoughts could have been copied by D. Quinn. Ummm

    And ...
    "peanuts .. not a pea nor a nut...discuss"

    I too was wondering whether Quinn got Ishmael's name from Ishi the way George R. Stewart came up with "Ish" for his character's name in Earth Abides from Ishi's name.

    As for peanuts, I gotta pee and you're a nut. :lol:
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
    Democracy Dies in Darkness- Washington Post













  • I'm a devout Earthling.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
Sign In or Register to comment.