January 2, 2013

Just in case you failed to notice: The world did not end on December 21, 2012

About the same time, in early December 2012, that the media went into high gear discussing the putatively catastrophic consequences of a “fiscal cliff” on January 1, 2013, they also reported quite extensively about another looming date, that one a little earlier, on December 21, 2012, when according to some calculations the so-called Long Count calendar of the ancient Mayas predicted the end of the world. The possible fiscal apocalypse was of course taken with utmost seriousness by the media (with the great majority of economists, and public figures from the secretary of the treasury on down), the Mayan doomsday prophecy was reported on in a tone of amusement, perhaps to provide comic relief from the mounting economic anxiety.

The golden age of Mayan civilization was centered in what is now southern Mexico (especially Yucatan) and Guatemala, a region still inhabited by people descendent from that civilization. Along with other Mesoamerican cultures, Mayan religion was an odd combination of a fascination with astronomy and the belief that the gods had to be fed with a steady supply of human blood. Both obsessions led to the construction of the gigantic pyramids which continue to be great tourist destinations. Their platforms served observation of the stars and also were the sites for the grisly ceremonies of human sacrifice. Mayan theology managed to link stargazing with vivisection (trust theologians to perform such intellectual feats). The former activity, which produced astonishingly accurate data on celestial motions, produced detailed calendars, some for short-term time measurements, others (like the Long Count calendar) measuring past and future time by millennia. According to some readings, this calendar predicts the end of a cosmic cycle or baktun on December 21, 2012 CE. This date has also been differently defined—as the quite non-catastrophic end of one of many eras—or as the time of a huge disaster. The latter interpretation, not surprisingly, has caught media and popular attention.

I don’t know how much of the popular attention was serious (that of the media was not). I would think that many of the gatherings celebrating the date were in the spirit of fun, similar to Halloween parties not implying belief in spirits or hobgoblins. In any case, there were large gatherings of people at Mayan locations, notably in Chichen Itza in Yucatan, apparently a mix of irreverent tourists out for fun and an ecumenical assembly of miscellaneous “spiritual” cults (many of whom expect redemptive wisdom from this or that indigenous religion). Some in the latter crowd believed that their exercises could avert the threatening doom, others did not expect any real doom but went for some sort of mystical experience. The Mexican tourist industry benefited. The Merida airport (closest to Chichen Itza) had a countdown clock installed.

But the excitement was not limited to the Mayan territories. There were sporadic get-togethers of doomsday fans in Russia and in China (particularly alarming the Chinese authorities, ever on the lookout for “evil cults”). There was a gathering at Stonehenge, linking Celtic with Mesoamerican “spirituality”. One baktun-associated fear was that a giant meteor was about the hit the earth. To allay such fears NASA and other official centers of modern (as against Mayan) stargazing were moved to issue bulletins stating that there was no evidence of any dangers to our planet from outer space. Some people evidently believed that time zones did not matter, so that the big event could occur anywhere where the clock said December 21, not just in southern Mexico (which is many hours ahead of the International Date Line): When the ominous day ended just west of that line, this message appeared on a social medium: “The world has not ended today. Sincerely, New Zealand”.

There have been many occasions in the past where, either because of certain dates or because of phenomena in the heavens, there were expectations of an imminent great disaster without any salvific benefits being associated with it. As the year 1000 CE approached, there was such a panic in Christian Europe. As 2000 CE came near, there was a secular reiteration of this: Computers would be unable to adjust to the millennial change—the financial system might collapse, there would be wide power failures, planes would fall out of the sky. The periodic returns to visibility of Halley’s Comet also caused similar anxieties. I am not sure about the psychology of this. Perhaps it goes back to early experiences, as when a child is frightened by an adult approaching in a threatening manner, but already anticipates the relief when the adult removes the threat and makes clear that it was only a joke. Or perhaps an all-embracing planetary fear makes the many more individual anxieties more bearable. Be this as it may, I find more interesting the prophecies of doomsday where the latter is the forerunner of a great salvific event.

Such events can be found in different parts of the world, but they are most common where the three Abrahamic faiths have dominated. The terrible events to come are to be followed by the final events, the eschata, in which the redemption of the world will culminate—respectively the coming of the Messiah, the Second Coming of Jesus, and the establishment of the universal rule of Islam by the Mahdi. In each case believers have looked for signs and omens suggesting that these things were about to happen. And in each case (at least an empirical historian must so conclude) the eschatological expectation was disappointed. The New Testament suggests that the earliest disciples of Jesus expected his return in glory during their own lifetime. It did not happen. Biblical scholars have coined a ponderous term for this disappointment— Parousieverzoegerung—roughly translatable as “a slight delay in the Second Coming” (the parousia). In a way, the entire history of Christianity can be described as a centuries-long attempt to come to terms with this fact. Jesus himself is reported to have warned his disciples not to look for “signs and wonders” but always to stay alert, because he will come “like a thief in the night” when they least expect it (Matthew 24). They did not listen to him.

In American church history an important case in point was the birth of modern Adventism during the Second Great Awakening. In 1833 a Baptist preacher by the name of William Miller predicted, on the basis of obscure calculations derived from the Book of Daniel in the Hebrew Bible and the Book of Revelation in the New Testament, that the Second Coming would take place sometime around 1843 and 1844. Miller’s ministry took place in northern New York State, in the so-called Burnt-Over District, the locale of one charismatic explosion after another (Joseph Smith started Mormonism in the same region). Miller’s prediction was rather reckless: In about a decade it would be open to falsification. Still, there was enough time left for his word to spread across the country and even to Europe. Some of Miller’s followers were even more reckless: They specified the ETA (“estimated time of arrival”, in aviation parlance) to be October 22, 1844. There was an air of breathless expectation wherever Millerites gathered. Some of them thought that Jesus would land more or less where the prophecy was first pronounced. A group of them, dressed all in white, sat all night on a hill somewhere near Rochester, NY, waiting for Jesus to appear. His failure to do so was soon called the Great Disappointment.

There were different reactions to this. Some Millerites deserted the movement. Most did not. They offered various explanations: The Second Coming was secret, or it was spiritual rather than physical. Their faith had not been strong enough. The arithmetic was wrong. Miller himself kept recalculating, never giving up his belief in an imminent Second Coming, until his death in 1849. The Adventist movement continued and spawned other groups (such as Jehovah’s Witnesses) with a similar sense of millenarian urgency. But most of these were more careful than the early Millerites: They did not commit themselves to specific dates, only saying that Jesus would come “soon”. The biggest offspring, the Seventh Day Adventists, have become a major Protestant denomination in America. Perhaps the oddest support of the Millerite prophecy has come from the Baha’i faith: Baha’is have said that Miller was perfectly correct with his arithmetic. He was just wrong about the name of the arriving savior. It was not Jesus, but the Persian religious figure who called himself the Bab and who in 1844 announced that he was the bearer of a new revelation to replace the Quran for this age. (The Persian government responded by executing him, but Baha’is claim that he was only the forerunner of Baha’ullah, the true prophet of a new era. The sources suggest that the Bab himself had a less modest view of his role.)

If some of the newly fashionable atheists should be reading this post, I can visualize their smirk: Another example of the absurdity of religion! Let me suggest that they stop smirking: There are innumerable secular parallels to these attempts to fend off empirical evidence that denies faith. Most of them are in ordinary life. Let me just recall Dr. Johnson’s description of second marriages as the triumph of hope over experience. But there are also parallels in secular, even anti-religious movements (“denominations”, if you will). A telling example is the story of how Marxists have dealt with the great disappointment of the failures of their prophet. There was the major failure of Marx’s expectation that the revolution would occur in the bosom of advanced European capitalism; instead it occurred in “backward” Russia. Let me not go into the details of this particular false prediction and its tortured rationalizations. In my own lifetime each socialist utopia turned out to be disappointing, and then the utopian imagination turned elsewhere. The Soviet Union turned out to be a huge disappointment. Where then was one to look for the “true socialism”? The geography kept shifting. It shifted from Russia to China, to Vietnam, to Cuba, to Nicaragua. I was lecturing in Denmark in the 1970s, at the height of the neo-Marxist wave in western Europe. I talked with students who had been disappointed by each country that claimed to embody the socialist eschatology. They thought that they had finally located a non-disappointing, genuinely socialist country—Albania! Unlike Cuba (a favorite destination of utopian tourists) there is no sugar cane to be cut in Albania, but some students were getting ready to volunteer for work on the Albanian railway. I don’t know whether their faith survived that experience, or, if not, to which country their utopian hope might have turned.

Leon Festinger (1919-1989) was one of the more interesting social psychologists of the twentieth century. He first became known for his book When Prophecy Fails (1956), which was an important building block for what soon afterward became the theory of what he called cognitive dissonance, which is what happens when people are confronted with information that contradicts what they previously believed. The book deals with a curious episode that came to Festinger’s attention and led him to study it. Dorothy Martin, a Chicago housewife, practiced so-called automatic writing—a technique often employed in séances intended to communicate with the dead —in which a pen or pencil is held in such a way as to allow it to move freely. I don’t know whether Martin received messages from beyond the grave. But in early 1954 she received a very specific message from outer space. It came from some friendly extraterrestrials, who informed her that a huge cataclysm would destroy much of the earth on December 21, 1954 (as far as I know, without reference to the Mayan calendar), but that she and a small group of her associates would be picked up just in time by a spacecraft landing in her backyard and carried to safety on the planet Clarion. When Festinger learned about this, there were several months before the doomsday date, so that he could observe how these latter-day imitators of Noah’s Ark behaved. They behaved very logically on the assumption that they would soon embark on a journey without return. One detail that particularly impressed me when I read Festinger’s account was that they stopped changing the oil in their cars!

Well, the date came and went. No spacecraft landed and no cataclysm took place. But Festinger was still there, observing the behavior of Martin’s disciples. Some of them did decide that the whole thing was nonsense. They left the group. But some stayed on, and it was their behavior that really interested Festinger. They reacted just as the Millerites had in the face of the Great Disappointment. They huddled together more closely than before. They strongly reaffirmed their faith in Martin’s prophetic qualities. They found reasons why the predicted event had not occurred (the God of Earth relented). They tried to convince outsiders (which they had not done before—perhaps so as not to overcrowd the rescue ship). As far as I know, though, the little cult did not survive.

What can one learn from all this? One can certainly draw the lesson that Festinger did—that cognitive dissonance is unbearable, when it involves beliefs that are important to people, and that they will go to any length to defend against it. Put more cynically, one could say that the credulity of the credulous has no limits. But there is a more kindly way of looking at this: The human condition is intrinsically fearful. Alfred Schutz called this the fundamental anxiety. If some way has been found to allay the fear, one will be very reluctant to abandon it. The question then becomes which comforting messages can survive the Great Disapointments without indulging in delusional denial.

Posted in Culture, Religion, Secularism, Supernatural
Load Comments
  • Gary Novak

    Organizations often restrict the distribution of knowledge on a need-to-know basis. Does anyone need to know when the world will end? The advantage of saving on oil changes hardly seems a compelling need. Matthew 24:36 says: “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” All we need to know is that it is foolish to say, “My lord delayeth his coming” (so that, like the young Augustine, we can want to get holy, but not yet). If our task and our joy in this life are to love God and neighbor as well as we can, it seems that even the desire to know the end-date could be nothing but a distraction in the achievement of that end.

  • Wayne Lusvardi

    Declinism, the ideology that the world is in decline, always seems to be in vogue when nations go through growing budget deficits and debts. Unless I’m incorrect, the current U.S. “fiscal cliff” is the result of growth — projected at 4 per cent per annum and government revenue forecasts to match — which have fallen to around 1 per cent. So slow growth is a decline, or shall we say, a cliff?

    I have noted in an Amazon.com review of the book “Running Out of Water: The Looming Crisis and Solutions to Conserve Our Most Precious Resource” by Susan Leal and Peter Rogers, that we are not running out of water. Having worked by the nation’s largest non-federal water district for 20 years, I soaked in some knowledge about water in California.

    California is considered a state in perpetual drought. But in 1998 – a wet year – rainfall and imports totaled 335 million acre-feet of water or enough water for 670 million urban households or about 1.675 billion people; or 335 million acres of farming. And 64% of this water went to the environment, not farms, not industry not cities or suburbs. And agriculture and industry, not urban cities, conserved 6.65 million acre-feet of water or enough for 13.3 million urban households or 6.65 million acres of farming. In a dry year in California such as 2001 there was “only” 145 million acre-feet of rainfall and imports, or enough for 290 million urban households or 145 million acres of farming (source: Cal State University Stanislaus). The problem is capture, storage and treatment, not drought, not waste, the amount of water by used agriculture, global warming, and not necessarily population growth.

    This hasn’t deterred declinist authors, however. I have noted at least ten recent books by major publishers on water shortages.

    In brief, droughts are man made in California. Dr. Berger would perhaps say they are a “social construction.” So even the lens by which we perceive the physical world is affected by declinism.

    Berger has written about the sociology of “bad faith:” or viewing something that is man made as something that comes from nature; or from some man-made “global warming” as a result of industrialism and Capitalism. Does our pessimism come from failure of our modern entitlement society to meet utopian expectations?

    As Berger points out, however, “when prophecies fail,” erroneous beliefs don’t get weaker but often get stronger among the leaders of any organization. I believe we have experienced this in California when “global warming” was debunked and then social cognition shifted to the concept of “climate change.” There is plenty of government grant funding for declinism to make sure the welfare state is liquid.

    Historian Arthur Herman points out in his book “The Idea of Decline in Western History,” the pessimism of progressives such as the Unabomber, Al Gore, Noam Chomsky, or Edward Said, sprang from their view of the world as a whole or system created by impersonal forces such as class, gender, race, nation, or technology. Both sociologist Herbert Spencer and psychologist Sigmund Freud viewed society and the human psyche respectively as machines and “pressure cookers.” But if society is not an organism then the future is not the result of the law of Progress, or necessarily, degeneracy. Rather, we can still shape our destiny.

  • http://www.peterjessen-gpa.com Peter Jessen

    Berger again teases out curiosities that are at the heart of the discussion of how do we get from here (2013) to there (foreseeable future and beyond), and by what North Star (think ideology, religious values, public policy framework) do we follow, and what sacrifices will we make to achieve that future salvation (think of the human sacrfices required by public policies and ask how these policies pass/fail what Berger calls “calculi of meaning and pain).

    There are five major salvation themes, in my view, three rising from the Bible and two rising from the Enlightenment, as Berger has pointed out in his work. Thus I particularly enjoyed Berger listing the three great salvation themes after terrible eschatological events of the three Abrahamic faiths (the Jewish coming of the Messiah, the Christian Second Coming of Jesus, and the establishment of the universal rule of Islam by the Mahdi). The two from the Enlightenment are Marxism and true socialism (with its heaven on earth), and, although it has no comparable salvific base or heavenly future, yet, in my view, it will eventually “reign” and become the acceptable “way” after all of the dust settles, whether in my lifetime or not, social democratic capitalist development. Russia and China have already signed on to the capitalist part

    Berger’s admonition of “newly fashionable atheists” to stop smirking was spot on, as their beliefs are just as faith based as the most religious and ideological fundamentalists and relativists, all of whom struggle with overcoming their own cognitive dissonance as they attempt to “keep the faith” and proselytize to get others to “convert”/”alternate” to their faith belief.

    The newest kids on the block are warming/climate change believers, as Wayne points out, not to mention the newest faith initiative and the belief battles unleashed by “affordable health care” (whether Romneycare, Obamacare, or what the final morphs into). Rather than either side smirking, each should pause, breathe deep, and work together to find a “middle position” that meets an agreed calculi of meaning and pain.

    So-called atheists are only so in terms of transcendence but not in terms of earth bound faiths (pick your academic sub-sub-discipline) or in terms of their ideology or in terms of their being demigods able to make things well/perfect (those who think they can be little Christs and “save” Mother Earth) or the faith of Western one-earthers and their desire to save the world from their heavenly thrones in Brussels. All share a desire for salvation, whether by the Grace of God, their Progressive Good Works, or their god-like ability to create a perfect mother earth.

    And in terms of technology, whether accepting of the transcendent or not, we are all “people of faith” when we walk onto an airplane or roller coaster, a faith primarily in our (“human”) ability create extensions of ourselves (as McLuhan would say) to be god-like and fly.

    Parallel to this is the urge of those without a connection to the divine or transcendent or however you want to frame it, to replace the gods of old with their own godlike selves, especially in terms of climate change (nice, prescient touch of Wayne, noted above, to point out how “global warming” has morphed into “climate change” (which we could say, as a religious curiosity, it has moved from “sect” status to a more acceptable “denomination” status, just by changing the term). Equally interesting in the contest of smirking atheists and their sacred texts of climate change is their also morphing, from blaming mankind (“anthropocentric” causes of the warming sin ) to morph into anthropocentric demigods able to control what happens on earth (not unlike Joshua making the sun stand still).

    I continue to be amused by the growing High Priests of “Last Days if we don’t_______” schools of thought, in which the apocalypse or Armageddon or Mayangedden or however you want to express it, can be delayed or stopped cold by the mere act of the godly thinking and godlike actions of human beings to assure their immortality and earthly salvation.

    The End of times ETAs of the Mayans, the Millerites, and Dorothy Martin may have come and gone, but they have been replaced by the High Priests of science and governance (again think Washington, D.C. and Brussels) and their calculations. It is fascinatingly sad and humorous at the same time to watch these “epistemological elites” engage in their various “cognitive defenses” as their pillars of certitude keep collapsing, forcing them to come up with one “bad faith” pronouncement after another as they “hide behind their roles” while simultaneously having to confront other realities exposing their delusions and their difficulty dealing with “relentless honesty,” especially in dealing with one of the key questions of modernity, Berger’s “what is an acceptable model of development?”

    In a paper in 1972, I wrote that “In the late 1960s, U Thant said that his experience led him to the conviction that the nations of the world have about ten years to determine the policies that would stem the otherwise certain trend toward the extinction of Homo sapiens, if not through war than by environmental destruction.” I also wrote about John Calhoun, whose rat experiments I was privileged to see and discuss with him regarding his concept of the end by over crowding: “Ecologist John Calhoun echoed this thought when, in 1970, he calculated that only 10 or 15 years were left in which to determine and implement the policies necessary to ensure human survival.” And in his “Inconvenient Truth,” Al Gore also said there was only ten years to prevent catastrophe. This quest to be like the gods and seek immortality is as old as The Epic of Gilgamish (at least 2000 BCE).

    Which brings me to Berger’s reminder of Alfred Schutz’s insight into the anxiety behind the intrinsically fearful condition of humankind, and his question of what comforting messages can survive the Great Disappointments without indulging in delusional denial, and of what will allay the fear that has “Don’t Abandon!” stamped on whatever belief set they have. The Mayan pyramid, as well as the one at Chulula, have morphed into the modern day ones in Brussels and Washington, D.C., holding out for sacrifices to appease the gods of progress (WW1 and 2 come to mind). But who and/or what are to be sacrificed to these gods of modernity? What delusions will they have to hold on to and who in public discourse will debunk their delusions so that the shared outcomes most share can still be achieved, rather than they be sacrificed too, in the war as to which is the “better” or “one true way” to get to that heaven on earth? For now, it looks like the Great Delusion is “more taxes” to be spent by super bureaucracies to support themselves and their little platoons of non-profit and university bureaus. The “Little Platoons” of people seeking to mediate between the giant bureaus and their own personal lives await their call.

  • Gary Novak

    I’d like to pick up on an issue raised by Mr. Lusvardi. If declinists believe that the planet is being trashed—either by culpably greedy capitalists or by impersonal historical forces—wouldn’t they be heartened by a declining growth rate? In their view, planetary progress requires economic decline. As Marxist ecologist Andre Gorz put it in “Ecology as Politics (1980),” “The point is not to refrain from consuming more and more, but to consume less and less. . . . This is what ecological realism is all about.” A GDP declining from 4% to 1% is progress, but Gorz wouldn’t be happy until it goes negative.

    But his goal is not to save the planet but to abolish capitalism (“survival is not an end in itself”). Many people argue that the market is incapable of taking environmental costs (“externalities”) into account. Gorz disagrees: “But when, after exhausting every means of coercion and deceit, capitalism begins to work its way out of the ecological impasse, it will assimilate ecological necessities as technical constraints, and adapt the conditions of exploitation to them.” His fear is that capitalism WILL take externalities into account and continue to exploit the downtrodden masses. To prevent that, ecology must stop being satisfied with measures that save the planet and insist on measures that are incompatible with capitalism. (Think of Obama deliberately trying to regulate coal miners out of business.) As Gorz’s title confesses, we must think of ecology as politics.

    Arthur Herman’s book on the idea of decline sounds interesting. I liked your review of Berger’s “Accidental Sociologist,” so I think I’ll trust you on this one, too.

  • Wayne Lusvardi

    Reply to Gary Novak

    Arthur Herman’s book “The Idea of Decline” is more an historical overview of philosophical thought with not much in the way of sociological insights. But it is a worthy book to read.