Proselytizing

[Rhea]

There's already been a few posters expressing this same atheist POV

Why gratitude? For what? Grateful to Whom?

But if you hold that view in relation to some supposedly uncaused aspects of existence - sun, air, rain, etc - why not be consistent and assume that there's nothing to be grateful for full stop?

Because as soon as there is a "whom" to answer the "to whom" question then gratitude means something.

Your family and friends are no less a part of the uncaused, deterministic system than everything else. They didn't cause their own existence and their love/altruism is no more 'special' than gravity or electromagnetism.

Yes their love and altruism IS different than gravity because it results from effort on their part and often a sharing of emotion or experience, not to mention a reaction that is triggered by what they see in you.
You really think that a parent's love for a child is no different than gravity?

Awe and joy. These are spiritual expressions.

No, there is no "spirit" or supernatural beings required to feel awe and joy. (have you ever seen a cat look at a christmas tree?)
At all.
What a weird thought. You really think that without spirits you would feel no awe or joy?

Are you one of those people who really wants to be a murderer and rapist and the only thing keeping you from it is fear of god? Or you're actually completely cold and unfeeling and impassive to the world, but only your faith tells you to push the muscles in the corner of your mouth "up"?

Don't you think that describes a very sad life?

 

[bigfield]

There's already been a few posters expressing this same atheist POV

Why gratitude? For what? Grateful to Whom?

But if you hold that view in relation to some supposedly uncaused aspects of existence - sun, air, rain, etc - why not be consistent and assume that there's nothing to be grateful for full stop?

The feeling of gratitude, or awe, is people's emotional reaction to things in the world. Emotion isn't logically consistent.

Your family and friends are no less a part of the uncaused, deterministic system than everything else. They didn't cause their own existence and their love/altruism is no more 'special' than gravity or electromagnetism.

What do you mean by "special"? This is a meaningless statement.

Awe and joy. These are spiritual expressions.

They're emotions. Emotions aren't evidence of the supernatural.

 

[Grendel]

But if you hold that view in relation to some supposedly uncaused aspects of existence - sun, air, rain, etc - why not be consistent and assume that there's nothing to be grateful for full stop?

I do. Full stop. I'm a part of my environment and my environment adapts to that as I adapt to it. What is there to give gratitude for? To whom?

Were you born on bended knee?

 

[abaddon]

Why gratitude? For what? Grateful to Whom?

Yes. Why, and for what, and to Whom? Give your answers. Then tell why that's supposed to matter to nonbelievers.

Awe and joy. These are spiritual expressions.

Again, it's only historical context that makes some people mistake these emotions as religious or spiritual.

Imagine that religion never happened, and that humans evolved their emotional abilities without any religious sorts ever calling on them to direct their awe to some metaphysical being. Imagine somebody in that a-religious world looks up at the stars, or at a flower, and feels both awe and joy. Is that a "spiritual" experience? How can it be with no religious context to qualify it that way? Or would people in a world with no religion not be able to feel wonder or joy?

You seem to want to downplay the value of anything not caused by God. Explain what's less wondrous about nature if it wasn't caused by God.

 

[Tigers!]

You seem to want to downplay the value of anything not caused by God.

AS theists we accept that whilst God might nor be the proximate cause of many events he is the ultimate cause of all events or things.

Explain what's less wondrous about nature if it wasn't caused by God.

As a theist I would find it next to impossible to explain what could be wondrous about about nature if it wasn't caused by God.
I can try to explain, how poorly, about the wondrous nature created by God but am ill equipped to do the opposite.
I will leave that task to you. You will do a much better job that I.

 

[bigfield]

As a theist I would find it next to impossible to explain what could be wondrous about about nature if it wasn't caused by God.
I can try to explain, how poorly, about the wondrous nature created by God but am ill equipped to do the opposite.
I will leave that task to you. You will do a much better job that I.

Maybe you should watch some David Attenborough documentaries, and listen to the way he describes the natural world without invoking a god. If that doesn't inspire wonder then you are dead inside.

 

[Lion IRC]

As a theist I would find it next to impossible to explain what could be wondrous about about nature if it wasn't caused by God.
I can try to explain, how poorly, about the wondrous nature created by God but am ill equipped to do the opposite.
I will leave that task to you. You will do a much better job that I.

Maybe you should watch some David Attenborough documentaries, and listen to the way he describes the natural world without invoking a god. If that doesn't inspire wonder then you are dead inside.

Funny how when the creationist/intelligent design proponent looks at the theological wonder of nature atheists insist;
- it's undesigned
- it's unintended
- it's just an illusion of design created by our pattern-seeking brains
- it wasn't created, it's always existed *yawn*

...well if that's all true, Albert Kamus was right and it's absurd to feel awe in relation to sunsets, whales, the colour of trees.

 

[bigfield]

As a theist I would find it next to impossible to explain what could be wondrous about about nature if it wasn't caused by God.
I can try to explain, how poorly, about the wondrous nature created by God but am ill equipped to do the opposite.
I will leave that task to you. You will do a much better job that I.

Maybe you should watch some David Attenborough documentaries, and listen to the way he describes the natural world without invoking a god. If that doesn't inspire wonder then you are dead inside.

Funny how when the creationist/intelligent design proponent looks at the theological wonder of nature atheists insist;
- it's undesigned
- it's unintended
- it's just an illusion of design created by our pattern-seeking brains
- it wasn't created, it's always existed *yawn*

...well if that's all true, Albert Kamus was right and it's absurd to feel awe in relation to sunsets, whales, the colour of trees.

Yes; emotions are absurd. It's part of the human condition.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

it's undesigned

That's god.

it's unintended

That's god again.

it's just an illusion of design created by our pattern-seeking brains

Sure sounds like any god I've ever heard of.

it wasn't created, it's always existed *yawn*

Four for four. Yikes!

 

[Grendel]

Yes; emotions are absurd. It's part of the human condition.

well said

 

[Rhea]

As a theist I would find it next to impossible to explain what could be wondrous about about nature if it wasn't caused by God.
I can try to explain, how poorly, about the wondrous nature created by God but am ill equipped to do the opposite.
I will leave that task to you. You will do a much better job that I.

Maybe you should watch some David Attenborough documentaries, and listen to the way he describes the natural world without invoking a god. If that doesn't inspire wonder then you are dead inside.

Funny how when the creationist/intelligent design proponent looks at the theological wonder of nature atheists insist;
- it's undesigned
- it's unintended
- it's just an illusion of design created by our pattern-seeking brains
- it wasn't created, it's always existed *yawn*

...well if that's all true, Albert Kamus was right and it's absurd to feel awe in relation to sunsets, whales, the colour of trees.

The bold is a lie inserted by you. You don't understand us really at all. You just can't think outside your box. You are handicapped by your indoctrination (your "presuppositions," is it?) and are unable to JUST OBSERVE what is actually before you without applying your pre-owned answer. You are unable to discover anything new, because you feel certain that you already know everything. You are incapable of discovery.

Atheists look at the wonder of nature, easily acknowledge that
- it's undesigned
- it's unintended
- it wasn't created, it's always existed
And then feel that it's amazing and awe-inspiring and beautiful, and we smile and feel good upon viewing it and trying to follow what led to what and how.


We also realize that your assignment of a god as creator is
- just an illusion of design created by our pattern-seeking brains
That you fell for
- *yawn*


It is so interesting talking to you (and Tiger, and Learner) and I'm glad you keep talking because it is fascinating to study how you think. In all this time you are not a single step closer to understanding us because you seem incapable of putting yourself in our shoes. Every time you try to reflect what we say or paraphrase, you warp it back through your "there is no joy without god" filter, even while we tell you unambiguously that we feel plenty of joy.

But you admit you just cannot understand.

It's fascinating.

You think we're all making it up, or something. You seem to actually think that we don't believe what we're saying. Or that it's impossible, even while we sit in front of you being all possible.

You cannot discover us, even though we sit before you and talk to you.

 

[steve_bank]

As a theist I would find it next to impossible to explain what could be wondrous about about nature if it wasn't caused by God.
I can try to explain, how poorly, about the wondrous nature created by God but am ill equipped to do the opposite.
I will leave that task to you. You will do a much better job that I.

Maybe you should watch some David Attenborough documentaries, and listen to the way he describes the natural world without invoking a god. If that doesn't inspire wonder then you are dead inside.

Funny how when the creationist/intelligent design proponent looks at the theological wonder of nature atheists insist;
- it's undesigned
- it's unintended
- it's just an illusion of design created by our pattern-seeking brains
- it wasn't created, it's always existed *yawn*

...well if that's all true, Albert Kamus was right and it's absurd to feel awe in relation to sunsets, whales, the colour of trees.

As somebody said you do not understand us. Atheism is not a rejection of emotions like a sunset and beauty. We just do not attribute feelings, perceptions, and sensations and reality to a supernatural being. To me it is a function of our physical body and brain function. There are some who still believe illness is caused by evil spirits or a punishment from a god.

What you experience as the presence of god is just a state of mind. That realization doesn't lesson the quality of experience of beasty.

 

[Lion IRC]

Auto text fanged my post - I meant to write teleological not theological.
...just sayin

If certain atheists wish to gaze at some randomly chosen aspect of nature (like the night sky) and subjectively speak of it in reverence and awe - while simultaneously maintaining that the matter of fact, ho hum, appearance of the entire physical universe is the result of blind chance - that's their business. Sand dune. Yawn. Sand sculpture. Yawn. Trees are green. Yawn. But show Carl Sagan or Brian Cox a supernova and they start talking about our origins and existential, why are we here, stuff.

I agree completely with Tigers. If none of it was intentionally designed/caused then I see no reason to be impressed by entirely natural phenomena that happen for no reason in a past-eternal, uncaused universe.

 

[bigfield]

Lion IRC's "gratitude deficit" argument turned out to be a fizzer.

1. Accuse the atheist of illogically feeling gratitude.
2. ???
3. Atheist converts to Christianity.

I agree completely with Tigers. If none of it was intentionally designed/caused then I see no reason to be impressed by entirely natural phenomena that happen for no reason in a past-eternal, uncaused universe.

Clearly you don't understand how irreligious people feel about the world.

 

[Tigers!]

It is so interesting talking to you (and Tiger, and Learner) and I'm glad you keep talking because it is fascinating to study how you think. In all this time you are not a single step closer to understanding us because you seem incapable of putting yourself in our shoes. Every time you try to reflect what we say or paraphrase, you warp it back through your "there is no joy without god" filter, even while we tell you unambiguously that we feel plenty of joy.

I have wandered back through a lot of my posts and cannot find anywhere where I said or implied that atheists cannot experience joy, wonder etc. If you know where I said or implied that then I would be obliged.

But you admit you just cannot understand.

It's fascinating.

You think we're all making it up, or something. You seem to actually think that we don't believe what we're saying. Or that it's impossible, even while we sit in front of you being all possible.

You cannot discover us, even though we sit before you and talk to you.

Again I have never said or implied (IIRC) that you are making up or do not experience joy, wonder etc.
You seem to be addressing a caricature (straw man ?) of me.

 

[Tigers!]

As somebody said you do not understand us. Atheism is not a rejection of emotions like a sunset and beauty. We just do not attribute feelings, perceptions, and sensations and reality to a supernatural being. To me it is a function of our physical body and brain function. There are some who still believe illness is caused by evil spirits or a punishment from a god.

Again I have never expressed the idea that atheism is a rejection of emotions like a sunset and beauty. I do not attribute feelings, perceptions, and sensations and reality directly to God (or a supernatural being if you prefer). Rather those feelings, perceptions, and sensations and reality are mine, manifested in a body that I did not create but was a gift to me at my conception. All I do is acknowledge and accept those feelings, perceptions, and sensations and reality and give thanks to God that I can experience them.

What you experience as the presence of god is just a state of mind. That realization doesn't lesson the quality of experience of beasty.

What you experience as the lack of presence of god is just a state of mind. That realization doesn't lesson the quality of experience of beauty.

 

[Tigers!]

Maybe you should watch some David Attenborough documentaries, and listen to the way he describes the natural world without invoking a god. If that doesn't inspire wonder then you are dead inside.

I have watched many of his docos and admired the camera work and the beauty, majesty and wonder of the world around us.
However his not invoking God does not reduce my sense of wonder and does not explain the vast array of nature around us.

 

[bigfield]

Maybe you should watch some David Attenborough documentaries, and listen to the way he describes the natural world without invoking a god. If that doesn't inspire wonder then you are dead inside.

I have watched many of his docos and admired the camera work and the beauty, majesty and wonder of the world around us.
However his not invoking God does not reduce my sense of wonder and does not explain the vast array of nature around us.

If you want explanations then you will need to learn some science.

Can you understand how someone who doesn't believe in your God could also feel that sense of wonder?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

If none of it was intentionally designed/caused then I see no reason to be impressed by entirely natural phenomena that happen for no reason in a past-eternal, uncaused universe.

Correct. We are as unintentional as your pretend spaceman.

It is indeed both interesting and disappointing that there are still persons who must psychologically elevate themselves to invisible superhero status before they are able to love a child or a neighbor.

I've never had such a problem.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

If none of it was intentionally designed/caused then I see no reason to be impressed by entirely natural phenomena that happen for no reason in a past-eternal, uncaused universe.

Why not? If something is beautiful, it's beautiful, regardless of whether that's because someone decided for it to be that way or if it just sort of turned out that way. If something is cool and interesting, it's cool and interesting, regardless of whether that's because someone decided for it to be that way or if it just sort of turned out that way.

You don't need any kind of intent for something to end up being impressive.