You are the least good faith debater on here. And that's putting you up in the stratosphere with Doc Dutch.
The Church should respect tough questions
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
You are the least good faith debater on here. And that's putting you up in the stratosphere with Doc Dutch.
But it can and does allow for awe. I can be impressed with the stunning beauty of the universe.
Rather than telling people what they think (Something YOU despise when it is done to you) perhaps you could pay attention to what they are telling you about themselves.
That's exactly what a religious person thinks as well. And it's understandable that some people are simply too scared to look at the universe without gilding the lily.
Meaning is something you MAKE of your life. There is no "meaning" inherent in anything. If I hear someone say "What's the meaning of a tree?" I think they have brain damage.
But I respect your need to imbue everything around you with "meaning". Just as I respect crystal worshippers to take the same minerals I love and obsess on their mystical properties. I have a great appreciation of the mineral without needing to be "magic".
You want to find "meaning" in a rock. Go ahead, knock yerself out. But don't then act like it is some superior position.
NEWSFLASH: You are not a god. Ergo you are limited. We are all limited, imperfect beings with limited abilities to perceive that around us.
The only HONEST position in atheism is to be one who simply fails to believe in God, IMHO. At the end of the day it is all ESTIMATION. Which is why I'm the kind of atheist I am.
Yet you seem to hold that in such scorn that it confuses me why. You want someone to say something that is a logically flawed claim just so you can put them in the shoebox as you understand it? LOL. Try listening to what people tell you about their philosophy.
You are free to be an agnostic. I think you selectively apply your agnosticism, but that's your thing. I tried to show you how but you couldn't understand it (basic math/logic skills missing).
You do you. Why is me doing me such a problem for you?
Suddenly, I am expected to believe in 'religious' atheistswho hold spiritual beliefs and have transcendental spiritual experiences, which are best described as Pantheism
I love how pedantic you become when the word "spiritual" pops up. You can't possibly imagine anyone using it metaphorically.
This is ironic because presumably you realize the Bible and all the Hindu scriptures you love to quote all contain tons of metaphor and imagery. Or do you honestly think a talking snake led to the downfall of humans? OF COURSE YOU DON'T. It's a metaphor.
For those of us who are atheists "spiritual" is metaphor. Metaphor for the awe we feel when looking at the universe.
Here's a story for you to ignore:
When I was in grad school I worked at a rock shop. At the time I was TA for the mineralogy class at uni. One day a woman walks in and asks about the mineral EPIDOTE. As luck would have it I had spent a lot of time obsessing on epidote so I launched into my spiel about it being a sorosilicate with this and that feature and this type of crystal structure and where it was found, etc. She stopped me and said "No, I mean what are the healing properties of it?"
You see, it is possible to love nature and be in awe of it without requiring magical things behind it. As a scientist it is often even easier to see MORE things to be awed about by nature.
But when people like me use the phrase "spiritual" it is simply metaphorical language for that awe in the absence of any sort mystical, supernatural thing.
Hope that clarifies it.
Good point
I think the word atheism is rendered meaningless if some of them claim that beliefs have to be confirmed on the basis empirical evidence; but then some of them claim to experience and believe in an incorporeal transcendental spiritual reality.
Maybe people just don't like to talk to you. I've had plenty of discussions about values and ethics with irreligious posters.
Certainly if anyone actually DID that they would probably not be an atheist. And I think all the atheists would agree to that.
Thankfully that seems to be largely a figment of some people's imagination. Perhaps a crude "strawman" that they can then debate against but isn't actually real.
Strawman arguments are seldom particularly effective.
Domer wrote that atheists have genuine (not metaphorical) spiritual beliefs and experiences, so you all need to get your stories straight.
You aren't writing literature like the ancient Hebrew scribes and Vedic poets.
You are communicating to people on a political message board.
If you are an educated native English speaker, then use the right word: awe-inspiring, electrifying, exhilarating. Don't tell me you were just exercising your powers of allegory and metaphor.
I am not Domer nor do I care what Domer says.
So now I can't use metaphorical language at all? That's sad, actually.
As well or better than most. Which is why I utilize the language to its full extent. You are not the language police.
You must be an absolute drudge at parties. Lighten up, Francis.
Oh does this mean you'll stop talking about the Bhagavad Gita and the various Sanskrit writings now? That's going to be kind of a loss, actually.
Did you ever see the movie The Hateful 8?
No.
Too bad. It is a great movie. In my estimation, Quentin Tarantino's best.
Kamala Trump
Verified User
So glad you didn't have a point to make. But then if you did it would be a surprise I suppose.
Why don't you fuck off somewhere else today?
Awww, Obten. You seem to be off your game today.
Why are your panties in a twist?
Derpa derpa derpa derpa. Duuuuuuuhhhhhh, it's ROSS! Woohooo! Derpa derpa derpa
Yup.
In any case, the thing they want to do most (aside from pretending that they do not do any "believing") is something you suggested earlier...namely to inflate their numbers. So the ones who claim that the most significant position of atheism is to be lacking a "belief" in any gods, in effect, allow them to claim that new-born babies, toddlers, people with dimentia and others with insufficient mental capacity for such a belief...are perforce, atheists. And they get to claim that agnostics are atheists also...which not only increases their numbers, but their intelligence averages also.
It is, in many ways, farce. To be fair to them, though, not all of them play that game. Many of them (the honest ones) acknowledge that the reason they are atheists is because "there are no gods." (Which is as much a belief as the belief that there is a single God.)
