Atheists, What's the point?

[Archaeopteryx]

Faith alone is never enough. Good question! I've been trying to say that, I guess.



Stupid is as stupid does. I don't think this is an example of your point, but I see the problem you raise nonetheless. (Actually I don't really see it, never having met anyone as you describe; I understand your point for purposes of discussion.)

Then you can understand why people would be skeptical of claims that must be taken on faith; especially when those claims are used to justify actions that affect the wellbeing of other people?

Well ok, ya got me. Never have I encountered an atheist describing a spiritual experience. It seems mutually exclusive to me, but maybe not? Could be interesting.

Sam Harris mentions meditation as an example. I can think of others: looking at images of Saturn's majestic rings, listening to a moving piece of music, climbing to a mountain summit. These experiences can indeed be described as spiritual. And they are open to theists and atheists alike.

 

[seeking Christ]

Indeed, the heavens declare the majesty of God, and wisdom cries from every corner. I'm still not sure what you're really talking about, affecting the well being of other people via claims that must be taken on faith. Outside of war I'm having a hard time envisioning any application.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I can think of others: looking at images of Saturn's majestic rings, listening to a moving piece of music, climbing to a mountain summit. These experiences can indeed be described as spiritual. And they are open to theists and atheists alike.

Yes, all those are good.

I'll add my personal favorite of watching a rocket launch...

...although going into Earth orbit and taking a leisurely spacewalk would probably be the best of all.

http://www.universetoday.com/59840/spacewalking-through-an-astronauts-eyes/

It is like coming around a corner and seeing the most magnificent sunset of your life, from one horizon to the other where it looks like the whole sky is on fire and there are all those colors, and the sun's rays look like some great painting up over your head. You just want to open your eyes wide and try to look around at the image, and just try and soak it up. It’s like that all the time. Or maybe the most beautiful music just filling your soul. Or seeing an absolutely gorgeous person where you can’t just help but stare. It’s like that all the time.
-- Chris Hadfield, Astronaut


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Well ok, ya got me. Never have I encountered an atheist describing a spiritual experience. It seems mutually exclusive to me, but maybe not? Could be interesting.

One could describe me as an a-theist, please allow me to describe some "spiritual" experiences, for want of a better word.

I love being alone in the wilderness for a few days, climbing summits overnight to watch sunrises, swimming with dolphins/sharks, handling venomous reptiles, jumping off bridges or cliffs into water from great height, staring at at our neighboring planets through a telescope. Being part of a group making music/singing. Assisting others in need. These experiences I find therapeutic to my well being and at times too profound to even describe.

 

[seeking Christ]

Ok I'm going to work with the above post. If he had been able to describe it, it would have been from the psyche. The fact that he can't indicates another source. This is a very fine distinction between soul and spirit, in Biblical terms. No, offense, but I will take sectio aurea's statement of spiritual experiences above the others offered so far, and only hope that other posters agree with me that at least the wording is a stronger indicator of such.

I'll point out the Bible says singing is the most Spiritual activity we can engage in, and common or joint singing is a very big part of some far eastern cultures. (Japan?)

 

[KCfromNC]

Ok I'm going to work with the above post. If he had been able to describe it, it would have been from the psyche. The fact that he can't indicates another source.

You'll have to show your work here, because I don't see how lack of descriptive words for an internal emotional experience has anything to do with the source of such an experience.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Ok I'm going to work with the above post. If he had been able to describe it, it would have been from the psyche. The fact that he can't indicates another source.

Why can't my experiences be totally from my psyche because we don't understand much about the brain?

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Why can't my experiences be totally from my psyche because we don't understand much about the brain?

Until raze is able to adequately define "soul" and "spirit," (which he can't), then I would just take his post with a grain of salt.

BTW, I found your description to be very transparent and honest. I agree with you!

 

[seeking Christ]

Soul is the product of a body of our species coming in direct contact with an external spirit, either holy or not. Our own spirit is most easily defined as our state of being alive.

If I could find a pattern between my user name and whatever you're going on about I might refer to you that way. If you need shorthand SC works; its what the civil people here have managed to do. Not sure why you're unable to ...

 

[seeking Christ]

Why can't my experiences be totally from my psyche because we don't understand much about the brain?

That "we don't understand much about" is part of our own spirit. And no, that is not the so-called God of the gaps. Realize science has no answers where God has informed us.

 

[Gadarene]

That "we don't understand much about" is part of our own spirit. And no, that is not the so-called God of the gaps. Realize science has no answers where God has informed us.

It's not god of the gaps precisely, but dualism may as well be renamed dualism-of-the-gaps for all the evidence going for it.

 

[muichimotsu]

I'm not sure that's what tautology really means

And even then that's still not correct, because A) you're really saying I defined what I was asked to define, and B) there are many other Spiritual people. While not every single one will have a distinct definition, many will have something different and you can use the collective statement to assist your own quest and understanding. Sometimes the more info is helpful, sometimes it is just more confusing; depending on the individual. Myself, I like more info rather than less.

In that case, this becomes a death by a thousand qualifications: spirituality and the spiritual are pretty much hacked to nothing but vague ideas, like the very concept of "God"

Well now that we're all here yes, its easy enough to say that. Our existence, we can self-determine to be apart from any Spirituality, certainly. A poor choice, especially during Lent.

A poor choice when you consider the ascetic points of many religions anyway. The idea that the mental can overcome and supersede the physical for a time and vice versa, especially when concerned with the martial arts in, say, Japan, there's the body almost moving by instinct with practice.

The 2 are distinct. Close, even related; but distinct.

Distinct in qualities, but not in substance?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Your paraphrase smacks of not applying yourself to what was said.

Well, that's certainly how I would interpret it.

Curling, I've never done that. Taking this season off from skiing, which is kind of a bummer. Was planning on skiing behind a kite on the local lake, but this year and last its just not freezing like it used to. We used to have over 3 months of reliable ice. Last year we only had winter for a week, and this year even since a safe thickness has formed, we've had 2 major melt-downs with tons of water on top of the ice, leaving conditions such that I could easily find myself in an unsafe area and not know it.

Well, you should give curling a try sometime, there's a fair number of clubs in Wisconsin. It's a great social sport in the winter, and you don't have to worry about the lake freezing.

 

[Dave Ellis]

You're not going to find empirical evidence of the Spiritual realm. That's pretty much a tautology there. Also, faith is not about accepting the claims of others, but finding out for yourself. Whatever you may find after applying yourself to that will result in "claims" of your own, that will certainly not be identical to my own nor anyone else's. People then share and compare, not for the purpose of accepting another's claim, but to broaden the experience.

Well, without some kind of testable or empirical evidence, what reason do we have to assume the spiritual realm exists at all?

Even if such a realm actually exists, we have no really good way of knowing it exists until we have some way of verifying it. I can't see how that can be accomplished by discovering your own claims and accepting them on faith, no matter if they line up with other people's ideas or not.

At least you're not overtly militant with your atheism, like some are. Some people simply aren't drawn to the Spiritual realm, or haven't been yet. Where do you put yourself along that spectrum?

I don't know if I can really answer that question correctly. I am pretty skeptical that the spiritual realm actually exists, so I don't really feel drawn to it at all. However, if it did exist. I would want to know everything I can about it. So, it's tough to say as it stands. I'd need to have some reason to believe its real before I bother myself too much with the concept.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

The brain is an organ that is not yet fully understood, because there is a huge gap in our understanding of the brain it would stand to reason there is a good chance that the mysterious unexplained phenomena that we experience might be explained later when we do finally get an understanding of how the brain functions.

Attributing these these experiences to a super natural source is in my opinion a failure of imagination.

 

[seeking Christ]

Why can't my experiences be totally from my psyche because we don't understand much about the brain?

So you guys want to prove me right? OK, I'm used to it.

This exchange started out with me saying I've never known an atheist to talk about Spiritual experiences, and here you are, saying they're not spiritual experiences.

Ok, so they're not.

 

[seeking Christ]

Distinct in qualities, but not in substance?

Soul vs spirit. Not sure we can speak to their substance. And it is hard to distinguish one from the other, even in just qualities. It's easier to just say "mind," and distinguish that from body, which is also Biblical. An entirely different system of categorizing things though, obviously.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

So you guys want to prove me right? OK, I'm used to it.

This exchange started out with me saying I've never known an atheist to talk about Spiritual experiences, and here you are, saying they're not spiritual experiences.

Ok, so they're not.

Im suggesting that what we call "spiritual" may in fact be totally biological. We can still call it spiritual for want of a better word.

 

[seeking Christ]

I am pretty skeptical that the spiritual realm actually exists, so I don't really feel drawn to it at all. However, if it did exist. I would want to know everything I can about it. So, it's tough to say as it stands. I'd need to have some reason to believe its real before I bother myself too much with the concept.

I was confronted with it repeatedly before I ever really paid attention. I was left with no choice. Big difference in background!

 

[seeking Christ]

Im suggesting that what we call "spiritual" may in fact be totally biological. We can still call it spiritual for want of a better word.

But then your usage of spiritual is not at all my usage of spiritual, nor that of what most people who use the term. Words mean things.