Review: Spiritual Growth Is Not What You Think
By Dalton McGee on October 10, 2010
After reading Doyle Barnett’s Spiritual Growth is Not What You Think: How Seekers Mistake the Evolution of Their Philosophy for Spiritual Progress, I can only tell you one thing: spiritual growth was exactly what I thought it was. That may be because Barnett and I have a slightly differing view on spiritual growth, though.
His explanation is a tricky one to find in his book. He spends dozens of pages talking about “spirituality” and “Spirit” but declines (whether intentionally or not, is still up in the air) to tell us his definition until page 151 in the “An Important Distinction to Consider” section of Chapter 11: Defining Spiritual Achievement. According to Barnett “Spiritual growth is the expanding of one’s ability to love holistically.” What is holistic love, you may be asking. Well, wait 11 more pages to find out. On page 162, he defines “Real love”, “Personal love”, “Grand love” and “Holistic love”; the latter meaning “a comprehensive love… It is caring for one’s self, for others, for humanity, and the planet.”
Now that’s something I can get behind. I understand, I like it, but unfortunately it may be a let down for most people. I would be inclined to believe that the lay-religious-person would think spiritual growth is coming closer to God, but Barnett makes it painfully obvious through quotes, diatribes and anecdotes that to know God is an impossibility. Of course this is coming from a self-proclaimed atheist (according to the letter he sent me with the book).
So what’s in the book, is another question you may be asking yourself. According to the book, there are five stages of spiritual growth. It goes Accepters, novice seekers, casual seekers (which is apparently where we here at AnAmericanAtheist fall), career seekers and veteran seekers. Accepters are what you would think. Those people who follow the church regardless: it’s the tea partiers, your annoying aunt on Facebook, the girl in school who told you alcohol was a sin, George Bush. Novice seekers are those who are above religion, but still want to be “spiritual” without being “religious”. So your Buddhist friend, your mom, the guy who wants to be an atheist but is afraid of hell still.
Stage Three, which I was interested in the most is what is called the “disillusioned adolescent.” Barnett explains this (as he does with everything) by anecdote about a guy named Steven. Is Steven real? About as real as God, I would think (hint: no). According to Barnett
Steven is still in the early fundamental phase of stage three, which is, “This way is the only way; all else is wrong. All spirituality is hogwash and anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.” However, if Steven continues to grow and does not get stuck in phase three like most disillusioned seekers do by giving up their spiritual search entirely, he will realize he can purge most all of the New Age distractions and metaphysical fads without dropping his spiritual search.
This is where he and I differ, and I suppose it is just a difference in the definition of the word spiritual that causes this rift. I don’t really think that once you lose spirituality that there is anything beyond that. There is no spiritual realm: no God, no angels, no faeries, no devil, no magic, yet somehow people are meant to continue to grow in this way? I think Barnett uses the term Spiritual loosely when he could just say “love/respect for mankind.” Because that’s what this book is about. Well, that and about how metaphysical seminars and bullshit and psychics are liars and God isn’t real (which is wonderful and I whole-heartedly support).
But, toward the end, Barnett says something that I can’t support, can’t agree with. Something I find ridiculous. He tells a story about having an overwhelming feeling of happiness and wonderfulness and awesome-osity.
It wasn’t the most profound experience I ever had, but because of it, I do know for an incontestable fact that a spiritual reality exists… I was tempted to interpret the event by making claims such as, I know a god exists because of this occurrence; and I would have if it had happened years earlier, before I began to witness my experiences through intelligence and healthy skepticism rather than through my belifes and wishful thinking. So, instead, I just accepted, and continue to accept, the experience for what it was—confirmation.
In this paragraph he contradicts himself so perfectly that I can’t even begin to comprehend it. He claims to see events through intelligence and with healthy skepticism, yet blindly accepts a subjective experience as evidence that a “spiritual reality” exists. It is at this point that I question Barnett’s “atheism” and “skepticism” and begin to wonder if he is in fact just another metaphysical writer writing to make a buck in an ever more scared and delusional world. Something he seems to despise, as evidenced by dedicating almost an entire book to the subject.
My advice: If you want to read a mildly interesting book about some mildly interesting topics that is speckled with rather amusing anecdotes always ending with an ironic twist or turn-of-phrase, then by all means pick this book up, but if you’re looking for something profound, I think it will disappoint. If you just entered the world of godlessness, then Spiritual Growth is Not What You Think will point you in a wonderful direction, full of great questions, but if you’re a “career” seeker, then I think you’ll see some true statements scattered throughout, but will find no wholly original answers here.
A personal note to Mr. Barnett and Langdon Street Press:
It looks as if you are in desperate need of a proofreader. There are grammatical errors upon grammatical errors in this book and it’s hard for me to take what you’re saying seriously when I see a person’s name not capitalized, horrific misuses of commas and use of the word “physics” when I’m pretty sure you mean “psychic” (Page 18). Just thought I would offer my services because you’re obviously a smart man and a smart man should have an error-free book.