(a) I had no idea that there weren't any natural forces in space! I guess the astrophysicists are all going to have to get new jobs. ::headdesk::
(b) Contrary to what this commenter and another (who responded to him in agreement) seem to suggest, "culture" is not necessarily any more portable than "nature." Culture is not a purely human phenomenon but arises from our relationship with place, and it is to a certain extent inseparable from our sense of place. When our place in the world or the universe changes, our culture changes and adapts accordingly. Whether we want to admit it or not, traveling in space extensively is going to fundamentally change how we live as human beings and what our relationship with the universe is; it should be no surprise, then, that this would have an effect on our relationship with the gods. We may even feel a sense of exile or diaspora that far surpasses any experience of an immigrant who has moved from the homeland of their ancestors to a new country or continent.... And understanding the gods as aspects of nature (or at least as having natural aspects) may help us articulate and grapple with that reality far more than a simple insistence that if we can bring our portable cultural trappings with us, then everything must be the same.
This idea needs more unpacking. I'll have the chance to do that later this month, since we're doing an FF&C episode on "nature-centered spirituality in space," thanks to an awesome prompt from Finn:
Space! That is, can earth-centered spirituality transform into cosmos-centered spirituality? Also, what new myths will emerge now that we're even closer to finding similar Earth-like planets (I mean, think of all the stories we've told that take place in space since we landed on the moon)? And if you want more weird news, there's always crazy stuff happening in astrophysics and cosmology.
These are all really good questions, that deserve more thoughtful answers than "nature is, like, rain and shit, and humans are entirely separate and separable from it, right?"
Notes for following up:
- Several directions we could take this, some of which would require simply too much prep for an hour-long episode, but could provide some good jumping off places...
- Begin the discussion by looking at the effects on religion and culture more broadly of diasporic and nomadic communities here on this planet.
- What do we know of the effects on religion/culture of places that were largely insular until brought into contact with the rest of the world? (I'm thinking probably mostly of isolated tribal groups, but also Japan could be an example of this...)
- Look at the spirituality of the desert — what impact will the vast apparent emptiness of space have on the human psyche and our perception of the gods? Our relationship with "nothingness" and "emptiness" are themselves relationships with aspects of nature.
A few years ago, I got Jeff that book on "desert spirituality" because the desert has always been such a powerful place for him, so maybe I can get him to revisit that. Meanwhile, I might be able to look into the topic of diasporic/nomadic cultures a bit more. I've already started collecting resources on "religion in science fiction," since many sci-fi stories (whether books, TV or film) involve religious aspects, some of them even polytheistic. So looking at that subject might also help us think about how religion might be "out there," or at least think about how we think about it.
Mini-Subpost on Collective Nouns
I haven't read the P. Sufenas Virius Lupus post the G+er linked to, but I did skim the first page or so fairly quickly and it seems to be brimming with some weird oversimplifications (including the conclusion that those of us who are "nature-centered" Pagans are just trying to hide our polytheism because we're embarrassed by it.... wtf?). But one bit I did notice was his complaint about someone referring to theology as "reasoning about the Divine" instead of "reasoning about the gods."
I use terms like Divine and Spirit and Numinous, sometimes capitalized and sometimes not, often enough that I feel like I can at least address this issue. (Jeff probably has more expertise on this than I do, but these are my thoughts.)
It's perfectly possible to use a singular collective noun to refer to a collection of individuals.
See, for example:
"I love chickens."
vs.
"I love chicken."
vs.
"Scientists believe the chicken evolved from dinosaurs, coming before the egg."
Let's be clear here: The reasoning that "Christians have stolen everything but our polytheism; polytheism is now the only thing that makes us different, and therefore it defines us" is not a good reason to be a polytheist. There are lots of good reasons to be a polytheist (especially if you don't feel the need to let everyone know how "hard" your polytheism is — that's becoming as distasteful to me as the guy who's always going around asking people to feel how ripped his abs are — ew, no thanks). But I digress.
There are lots of good reasons to be polytheist. But that isn't one of them. That is a crappy, immature reason.