Atheism Examined

quote:

---

I find myself wondering, and this is probably so not OT, whether the spirituality that you speak of is not based on some version of belief in the unseen. Many spiritualities could easily turn into pantheism, for example, or something similar.

---

No, I don't think so.I think my spirituality comes from the wonder and amazement I feel when I contemplate or experience the wonders of nature or a strong emotional response to something. I suppose it also comes from the simultaneous feelings of insignificance and specialness in light of my meagre attempts to comprehend the the vastness of the universe.

I am just noticing that some atheists here don't agree with you. And for that reason they should invent a new term to describe themselves, despite how you would describe them.I don't necessarily disagree with you, and I think its get back into that stuff Rob always talk about where everyone has a belief even if its in nothing...but I am telling you that linking blind faith to their self-description is not going over well for some atheists. Yes, and I say that you are erring equally on the other side. Both of you too extreme. Ok, so according to you atheists are more moral than Christians. That is a fact as well as an opinion. Since I was trying to get you to steer away from competition in this thread, are you prepared to say that your description of being atheist, since the OP asks you to give one, is 'someone who is more moral than theists?' Because honestly I can't get any further into that conversation without a major derailment into things like 'do you want to be saved?' and C.S.Lewis books.

I have already said what my definition of atheism is.That atheists are more moral than Christians is just a fact of life.Brian.

Hm, well, I can relate. But strange thing is these feelings seem to be what developed the sense of God in the first place; feeling insignificant, wanting to explain the emotions that grip us in very simple circumstances. I mean, what is it about us that wants to relate to nature? I don't think we get nearly as emotional when walking down a city street filled with our own human creations...we do get lost in grandeur and insignificance in comparison, but we can get as easily lost in the daily life of the tiniest ant.But yes, spirituality is a sense of connection to the universe at the least, and a way to find our place in it. It can easily run religious if it gets too orderly or planned out.For some reason I am afraid to stray too much from topics nowadays, so that's all for now. Thanks for responding though.

No that does not make you an atheist in my opinion.But my opinion does not make anything true or false.

Hopefully this will be a brief foray, and not drive us off-topic. Having experienced spirituality in many forms - prayer, worship, the martial arts, meditation, even some pretty righteous pot - the single unifying factor, and this appears borne out by other people's experience, is that a "spiritual experience" is one where the individual ego is suborned. A truly spiritual experience is when you loose all sense of "self" - that the separation between doing, or being, and thinking about doing or being completely disappears."Don't think - feel!" says Bruce Lee in Enter the Dragon, and that was part of his philosophy about the spirituality of martial arts. The fusion of will and action. The goal of meditation is the loss of self - the fusion of the self and the universe. Plenty of Christian traditions involve the loss of the individual ego, to be "taken by the Holy Spirit", glossalia, being "slain in the spirit", etc, but the experience is the same - the loss of the individual ego and the fusion with something larger than yourself.Even athletes achieve this level of spirituality, when they speak of being "in the zone." And of course, a fair number of drugs can supply the same experience. It's even possible for craftspeople to experience the same state - they speak of losing themselves in their craft and losing all track of time. I've had that experience, too.If you've never been in the "flow state", as psychologists are coming to name it, it can't really be described in words. And I think, ultimately, it's that state which is the goal of all religions. Certainly if you've been in that state, it's a powerful, meaningful experience - it's the experience of doing what you were made to do. The sense of being suborned to a great purpose is incredible and undeniable.But I don't think it's magic. There's considerable scientific evidence that it has nothing to do with magic - it's just a natural state that our brains are able to enter, an altered state of consciousness that can be reached by a number of techniques. The science of this phenomenon is, I think, what Sam Harris was recently referring to when he spoke of "new wine being poured" in the science of spirituality.And I think that's a good point. If we know what properties of diverse spiritual experiences are universal, and we know that they occur in the brain, who not study them without the confounding baggage of religion and ignorance?Anyway, that's what spirituality means to me, and how I reconcile the spiritual experience in a world of natural law.

I won't quote you, because I understand the whole post. (Btw I know I didn't repsond yet to your last message to me, but I'm not ignoring it)I would say that I agree with you altogether, except I am shady on that last bit about studying the brain alone for the answer.But the reason I asked was because I think that some forms of Christianity don't emphasize spirituality, and may even work against it. Prayer is often talking to God, and not a meditation or a mystical state. Some Christians may even frown on being too spiritual rather than practical...sounds like a contradiction but I don't think they all go in for that woo-woo stuff. This could alienate a person who doesn't feel that their religion allows for personal spirituality and a God Who goes beyond the cut and paste version. I hate to say it, but Christianity especially, with a Jesus Who is a man and a God, all set up for us to take, can seem stifling to those whose idea of God is more encompassing.Then, alienation leads to disbelief, a sense of belonging to a set of disbelievers, and maybe eventually a reasoned out atheism. Sometimes, at least?Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

You see this really is at the heart of the question.
I don't think I do have faith in chairs or anything else in the sense you mean.
I have experience of chairs (including one or two that have collapsed underneath me which make me very untrusting of some types )
You could say I have faith in aeroplanes but I know dozens of people who have flown and personal experience of flying. I can look up and learn the principles on which aeroplanes work and examine designs etc. should I so wish. So is it really faith?On the other hand if someone claimed to have developed a teleporter that would whisk me to the other side of the world but nobody had ever seen it work, no-one could explain how it worked and it had never been tested I definitely would not enter it on the basis of faith.Gods are like the second example. There is no evidence and nobody can explain why or how the things they claim about their gods are true. All you can do is have faith and frankly I am genuinely bemused as to how anyone can have such faith.Would you step into that teleporter?
But I bet you have flown in a plane.

quote:

---

I would say that I agree with you altogether, except I am shady on that last bit about studying the brain alone for the answer.

---

Er, so what do you suggest we study to get the answer, if not the brain?

Brian please explain.Are you saying your atheism is a religion like Islam, or Judaism or
any other faith system, including Christianity?

This is often stated but I don't see why we should believe that it's true. In fact, we've often set up tests to detect the presence of a benevolent, omniscient, omnipotent, interventionist deity; no such deity has ever been detected in such tests. A "faith" that is nothing more than accepting that a certain conclusion is supported by the evidence is no faith at all, by any reasonable sense of "faith." Just because you could be wrong doesn't mean that you are, or that it's "faith-based" to accept that a certain conclusion is the best one supported by the evidence. If that's "faith" then everything is faith, and so nothing is.

Not in my opinion. I feel like there is something more to my existance that is not explained by an uncaring naturalistic, mechanistic view of the universe. This starts me on the path to theism. I like to think of god as just too, which is kinda hard to mix with benevolence. Sure, its convenient, but the specifics once we get past theism are not really that important for this thread. I mean, all that stuff depends on being theist first. I'm not sure if I was "touched" or not, but there are other experiences besides the unexplained that point me in the direction of theism.Things can start you on the path and point you in the direction but I think that at some point you do have to take a leap to get to theism.

My point was that if I was an atheist, it would be easier for me to be immoral. Yes, especially with specific religions. But for theism, in general, the reliability improves, even if it is just a little bit. The specifics of a particular religion aren't that important for a discustion about theism/atheism. Maybe that's the best way to do it, in god's opinion. We can't really say how god shoudl have or should not have done things. Sometimes its ruled as non-evidence a priori. It is refused to be examined, not incapable of examination. It certainly seems that way

It isn't though. Easier, I mean. When you lose the religious justification for immoral acts, there's nothing in atheism to replace them. (It does get a little bit easier to use colorful profanity.) What does get easier is making decisions, because you realize that the fact that you find an activity enjoyable isn't a reason, in and of itself, not to do it. You begin having to justify your actions based on how they'll affect others, instead of whether or not they're allowed by the Bible. It's fairly common to be in a situation where doing the obviously right thing is clearly against the Bible (like this guy's problem) and atheism makes it a lot easier to address those issues. You no longer have to weigh the damnation of your immortal soul against your hope God will understand and bend the rules, just for you.And for the most part I imagine you're moral by habit, like most people, and your habits don't change just because you stop believing in God. Hell, plenty of atheists I know still go to church. Being an atheist doesn't make it any easier to be immoral; it makes it easier to see what actually is immoral and what is just offensive to others.

quote:

---

When you lose the religious justification for immoral acts, there's nothing in atheism to replace them.

---

Brilliant. Simply brilliant.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine