Atheism as a religion

[Owledge]

Yep. That works fine. But people like "Super" stuff. Bigger and more is always better.

"Super" doesn't mean bigger or more. It means "above".

[dust]

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=supernatural&searchmode=none

 

That is supernatural, whatever it be, that is either not in the chain of natural cause and effect, or which acts on the chain of cause and effect, in nature, from without the chain.

 

Interesting definition. I would say that the "supernatural" as defined above is not possible. Nothing can be outside of nature, and nothing can affect nature (i.e. stuff that exists) except nature itself (or, in other words, nothing can be outside of Dao, and nothing can affect Dao except Dao itself).

I would then agree that something "supernatural" as defined above is indeed something impossible. I would also agree that there are unexplained phenomena, but that they must be within this "chain of natural cause and effect".

 

Herein also lies the difference, I think, between the 2 types of spirituality we've been talking about: that which is concerned with things entirely within the chain of natural cause and effect, and that which is not. It is the stuff that is not within this chain that I am not concerned with, as it doesn't exist. But the difficulty often lies in distinguishing what is and is not actually happening.

 

I will stop talking about "supernatural" now. Except the TV show. The Winchesters are awesome.

Edited October 12, 2014 by dustybeijing

[Marblehead]

"Super" ... means "above".

Yes, in this case of discussion that is true.

 

So we have "above natural"? More naturaler than normal natural? How could that ever be? What? We aren't satisfied with the natural universe so we have to have stuff that is better than natural?

 

My, My!

[zerostao]

Yes, in this case of discussion that is true.

 

So we have "above natural"? More naturaler than normal natural? How could that ever be? What? We aren't satisfied with the natural universe so we have to have stuff that is better than natural?

 

My, My!

i agree totally/ there is nothing supernatural regarding unseen forces, powers, beings, etc they all exist naturally.

there are certainly other dimensions in the universe to what we are normally not well equipped to perceive.

there is nothing super or special about those things except they are beyond our full understanding.

[C T]

Not special, maybe mysterious would be a more accurate term. The nature of mystery impregnates potential for new discoveries and improvements on the old -- this is not special, as it is evenly distributed to those who bother to look.

[Marblehead]

i agree totally/ there is nothing supernatural regarding unseen forces, powers, beings, etc they all exist naturally.

there are certainly other dimensions in the universe to what we are normally not well equipped to perceive.

there is nothing super or special about those things except they are beyond our full understanding.

You are very close to what I am saying. Things we do not know cannot be numerated. That's because we don't know how much we don't yet know. No need to create things that don't exist; there are plenty of things that do exist that we still do not know exist or what they are all about.

[Marblehead]

Not special, maybe mysterious would be a more accurate term. The nature of mystery impregnates potential for new discoveries and improvements on the old -- this is not special, as it is evenly distributed to those who bother to look.

Nice view. And yes, I talk about the Mystery often. It's called Mystery because we don't know what it is. Actually, based on the way I use Mystery it hasn't even manifested yet so we cannot even yet know.

 

What did he say? Perhaps tomorrow a Sage will arrive and explain it all. But then, it might not be for another thousand years.

 

That was said over two thousand years ago by Chuang Tzu. Well, maybe one day. Maybe not.

[Ya Mu]

i agree totally/ there is nothing supernatural regarding unseen forces, powers, beings, etc they all exist naturally.

there are certainly other dimensions in the universe to what we are normally not well equipped to perceive.

there is nothing super or special about those things except they are beyond our full understanding.

Good post.

I don't like the word supernatural being used to describe things that are simply beyond one's experieince at this poin in their awareness. It is all natural.

 

This happened to me as I was visiting a hospital patient, He was so somber and sad when he was telling me about the Baptist preacher saying a prayer for him (he is not Baptist) I looked at him and asked "DId you tell him to make sure this prayer works better than the last one he said." It made him laugh, which was what I was hoping.

I was asked this past weekend by one of my family did I believe in Jesus. I told her I didn't believe in anything. If a person is not prepared to face each moment in their lives with an open mind and open awareness they already have a preconceived idea as to what any particular thing is, which of course colors their perception, making them, in many cases, oblivious to the thing itself. The only way knowledge is gained is to face each moment in the moment of the moment with open awareness, using the mind as a tool instead of a hindrance to hold oneself back. I also told her I walk with Jesus everyday in all things, but not in the way she thinks - and that of course blew her mind as to how I could not believe in anything.

[3bob]

then again one could say in recognition of certain beings that it takes super and special efforts and sacrifices to get beyond so called "normal" habits and normal programming which tend to "naturally" dominate. (and that such beings and the state they radiate are not just naturally popping up on every street corner)

[Marblehead]

then again ...

That's a valid concept, IMO.

 

I hope no one ever considers me a "normal" person with normal habits, etc.

 

I guess no one wants to talk about Atheism any more so the thread will take its natural course.

[3bob]

then again on then again "first there is a mountain then there is no mountain then there is"

[Brian]

One of the most challenging things people are ever faced with (outside of the lower levels of Maslow's hierarchy) is the challenge of integrating one's knowledge with one's beliefs. I suspect this is an innate protection mechanism and I further suspect it is a root cause for the learning levels described by Gregory Bateson.

 

We see this manifest on an incredibly wide range of issues and it seems to affect people without any strong correlation to their particular belief system or their cognitive abilities. It still saddens me to observe it in others (and maddens me to observe it in myself) but I now largely view it with dispassionate resign. There is little difference, however, between the Bible-thumper who discounts things like the fossil record and isotopic dating techniques in order to maintain the illusion of a 4000-year-old planet (not to mention the age of universe itself) and the Materialist who cannot fit the vast majority of the last century's scientific discovery into the illusion of a non-relativistic and non-quantum-mechanical reality.

 

As a very young child, I rejected the BS of the Protestant Church. In fact, I don't honestly ever recall accepting it. I did, unfortunately, accept the BS of Atheism. I was a practicing Atheist for about ten years or so, starting about roughly the age of seven or eight (I don't recall exactly) because I believed I was a scientist but instead I quickly became a Scientist. Towards the end of high school, though, I started noticing the cracks in the fortress of Scientism. As I started studying natural philosophy (perhaps you have heard it called "physics") and continued that study on into college, it became increasingly clear that Atheism and Scientism, just like organized religion, were founded on a dogmatic belief system and that the zealots were just as incapable of recognizing the illogic of their own zealotry as had been the preacher who once tried to convince me the evidence of dinosaurs was planted there by God for the purpose of tricking the non-believers (for some reason which apparently made sense to the preacher but which he was unable to convey).

 

Over the intervening decades, I have encountered LOTS of intelligent people who believe all the answers lie in their belief system -- either now, or in some dimly remembered past waiting to be dusted off, or in some shining imagined future. It is MY belief, however, that models are useful but only so far, and that "that which is" is intrinsically beyond cognition at a fundamental level. I believe that last century of physics backs that up very nicely, too.

 

Modern physics clearly demonstrates that the concept of simultaneity, and therefore of past, present and future, are really an illusion -- an observed effect. Modern physics also demonstrates that it is fundamentally impossible to know both position & momentum beyond a certain scale of granularity -- the implications of this are mind-boggling so most people ignore it, even those who have been taught to "do the math." Similarly with quantization and Schrödinger's cat-box paradox and the duality of light (light being either a particle or a wave depending on the experiment because it is really neither but we pretend like it is because the math is easier that way) -- and the list goes on. The last century of scientific discovery has brought about extraordinary new ideas regarding the nature or the universe, the nature of matter & energy, the nature of life, the nature of consciousness -- the nature of nature -- but as the envelope of knowledge expands, the volume of the unknown expands even faster. The area of a sphere goes as the square of the radius while the volume goes as the cube of it -- I suspect lack of knowledge is perpetually an order of magnitude greater than knowledge in this same sort of relationship.

 

It is precisely for these reasons that I believe the rational belief system is neither theism nor atheism (nor Taoism nor Buddhism nor pantheism nor juju nor any other answer-providing belief system) but instead is agnosticism in the strictest sense -- not confined to the realm of religious discourse but universally. We don't know but instead we like to think we do.

 

A baby is not born with a knowledge that there is no God any more than a baby is born with a knowledge of paramagnetism -- a baby is born without knowledge. From that point on, the rational mind is collecting experiences and observations, is cataloging them and parsing them, is analyzing them and classifying them, looking all the while for emerging patterns which can be matched with earlier patterns so that assumptions can be formed and conclusions can be reached. For some, those early conclusions become set in stone and additional experiences or observations are cast aside. For more, there is some flexibility about the details of those conclusions as more detail is provided but the assumptions are largely unrecognized and the conclusions generally retain their basic shape. Very few have the form of malleability needed to survive a paradigm shift without suffering psychotic schism.

 

As Vonnegut said in The Book of Bokonon (in Cat's Cradle):

 

"Tiger got to hunt,

bird got to fly,

Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why, why?'

 

Tiger got to sleep,

bird got to land,

Man got to tell himself he understand.”

[Marblehead]

WoW! I'll bet that post even exceeded your own expectations!

 

How about being an Apathetic Agnostic? I don't know and I don't care.

[Brian]

Even healthier!

 

Ya Mu's post above was spot-on, BTW. I just used a whole lot more words to say the same thing.

[3bob]

I appreciate and see great value in agnostic reasoning, although I also see it as an interim method and or tool that will not and can give quintessential meaning and satisfaction to the heart and mind... and the heart and mind will never and can never know completeness without that which you seemingly deny by saying,

 

""that which is" is intrinsically beyond cognition at a fundamental level. I believe that last century of physics backs that up very nicely, too".

 

I don't believe that since my own experiential cognition has proven otherwise, just like it has for so many others. Btw, the risk of or going through some type of madness holds no power over the truth that in the end prevails, being that spirit which is present in a human baby's body or in the body of a celestial comes to know itself as spirit.

Edited October 13, 2014 by 3bob

[Brian]

I agree, 3bob. I don't think one should look to the rational mind to provide quintessential meaning or satisfaction, though. The rational mind is just a problem-solving tool which likes to imagine itself to be much more than that out of delusions of grandeur.

 

[Marblehead]

I don't think one should look to the rational mind to provide quintessential meaning or satisfaction, though. The rational mind is just a problem-solving tool which likes to imagine itself to be much more than that out of delusions of grandeur.

 

I actually disagree but it would take to long to explain why.

 

Just let it go at an Atheist can have all the inner feelings as does a religious person. It is just that we assign the causes differently.

[3bob]

I actually disagree but it would take to long to explain why.

 

Just let it go at an Atheist can have all the inner feelings as does a religious person. It is just that we assign the causes differently.

 

How many atheists in general would you say "just let it go that" religious people can have all the inner feelings without being self deluded? Anyway I see the sword of fanaticism cutting itself to pieces on either swing, religious or non-religious.

[Marblehead]

How many atheists in general would you say "just let it go that" religious people can have all the inner feelings without being self deluded? Anyway I see the sword of fanaticism cutting itself to pieces on either swing, religious or non-religious.

Yes, extremism sucks regardless of what side it is coming from.

 

When I speak against religion it is almost always against the institutions, not the faith. I wouldn't like being considered an extremist by anyone.

 

And yes, religious people can have these same inner feelings without the delusions of their belief system. Religions, afterall, we created primarily to guide people into living a better life with their fellow humans. (They, but not all, somehow forgot to include the other animals of the planet though.)

 

I have said this before but will say it again: All religions evolved out of philosophies. Philosophies kept it relatively simple, religions made things complicated. KISS

[KenBrace]

I'm an atheist in terms of not beliving in mythology anf the idea that there is an all-power being in the sky that has always existed and created the universe. I don't label myself as an atheist however because of the "only believe in currectly accepted scientific paradigms" stigma. Not that all atheists are necessarily like that but most are which is why the stigma usually goes along with atheism. I am a free-thinker. I believe things based on evidence. I do not however shrug off good evidence just because it isn't currectly accepted by the scientific community and taught in all major universities and schools.

Edited October 15, 2014 by KenBrace

[Rara]

I am perpetually bemused by people who loudly proclaim their belief that they have no beliefs.

 

Belief is a choice...what you know as fact cannot be belief. I wonder how many atheists have such realisations.

 

This thread is making me horny. God knows why. And that's just a figure of speech ... I don't believe in a God. Well not a man in the sky anyway...but that consciousness and everything around us could be likened to a God-like presence for it is far greater than I...

 

There must be a region for this...

[C T]

Belief is a choice...what you know as fact cannot be belief. I wonder how many atheists have such realisations.

 

This thread is making me horny. God knows why. And that's just a figure of speech ... I don't believe in a God. Well not a man in the sky anyway...but that consciousness and everything around us could be likened to a God-like presence for it is far greater than I...

 

There must be a region for this...

region? Did you mean 'reason'?

[KenBrace]

Belief is a choice...what you know as fact cannot be belief. I wonder how many atheists have such realisations.

 

This thread is making me horny. God knows why. And that's just a figure of speech ... I don't believe in a God. Well not a man in the sky anyway...but that consciousness and everything around us could be likened to a God-like presence for it is far greater than I...

 

There must be a region for this...

The only absolute fact is that there are no absolute facts.

Edited October 15, 2014 by KenBrace

[dust]

Belief is a choice...what you know as fact cannot be belief.

 

Of course. Fact is fact and belief is belief. Every native English speaker knows what these words mean, right?

 

The question is, how can you be sure a "fact" is a fact?

 

My belief is that not everything people hold to be "fact" is in fact fact, and not everything people hold to be no more than belief is necessarily not fact.

Edited October 15, 2014 by dustybeijing

[GrandmasterP]

Very faithful people are atheists.

Possibly mentioned this here before.

Back in the late 90s I was working in India.

Our R&R base was in a seaside village in North Karnataka.

A 'World Congress of Atheists' had gathered in Bombay and we got to know about them because after their gig some of them had booked an extra week holiday based in a guest house in 'our' village.

A lot of them were German, some Scandinavians, coupla Americans; no Brits that we met.

Thing about those atheists was that they all had World Congress of Atheists, T shirts, bags, badges, beanie hats- the works.

Each evening they built a bonfire on the beach and sat round singing atheist songs ( in English).

Then one of them gave a little atheist sermon followed by more ( dire) singing.

There was nothing to choose between what those atheists were doing and an old time Gospel Camp Meeting.

Atheism is a form of belief for sure and its faithful followers are truly devout.

 

Edited October 15, 2014 by GrandmasterP