The Thinker, Atheism, Freethought, Heresy, Reason, Logic, Existentialism, Humanism. Options

[Brainiac]

Nice article, he is good at explaining things.

It's a small book, you can download it here. A very concise book and highly recommended. It helped me get some things clear in my mind when I was going through my transition. The extract I quoted above is one of the most memorable parts for me.

[Brainiac]

On Facebook there is a good page: Atheist Quotes of the Day. Every week or so the admins host an open thread for members to come up with a sharp, succint or witty quote that compresses a non-religious sentiment, and the winner is the quote that has the most votes and will be posted as a 'Thought' the next day. The offerings are very interesting sometimes and it's nice to see what contemporary observations can be made which make a nice change from the regular Thoughts by some intellectual heavyweight or other. Some of them even reminded me of ISKCON-type thinking. Here are some of my favourites out of the 124 that were posted to the latest Open Thread:

• When people question, gods crumble.
• Strip away sectarian dogma, unscientific nonsense, and ancient mythologies from the world's 'sacred texts' and what little remains are a few core humane/humanist principles that are virtually universal among civilized people. These things aren't good because they were written in some ancient text; they were included in some ancient text because they are good. It is part of the social contract which has existed since societies began forming, long before anybody figured out a way to write and record such things.
• I do not understand why people have such a hard time believing that flawed humans or the universe could come from nothing, but remain so easily convinced that a perfect god came from nothing.
• Never mind all that. Give me my taxes back.
• God: the proverbial weakest link in any prayer chain.
• One of the most insidious aspects of "Hell" is its ability to turn the smallest of doubts into the most fearsome of demons.
• Human beings forgive one another all the time without torturing their children to death. That makes us morally superior to god. [Winner!]
• Actual conversation with my wife : "There is no god that cares about your toothache or your cancer, there is only us and we have to take care of each other."
• Only shoes have soles.
• Religion's most insidious crime is that it demands we be disgusted by our own humanity.
• I don't get how believers can say what they believe in, without stopping mid-sentence and facepalming.
• Prayer supposedly works, and Jesus said you can ask for anything. But little children's prayers never come true, and who has more faith than a child?
• I have read 18 pages into the Bible and I can't believe a word of it. Men who lived to be 950 years old. Giants roaming the earth. A man who would sacrifice his child for his delusional god. Nothing in the world is more frightening than this book of fiction that is the best selling book worldwide.
• Atheists are people that can knock down dogma faster than a priest can pull down a choirboy's pants.
• Prayer is the best way to fool yourself and others into believing you just accomplished something wonderful, when you actually did nothing. Simply by closing your eyes and concentrating, or chanting aloud, you can receive praise, gratitude, and in some cases, money.
• Hell: The original concentration camp. Brought to you by a God that loves you.

[Dhyana]

My favorite:

I do not understand why people have such a hard time believing that flawed humans or the universe could come from nothing, but remain so easily convinced that a perfect god came from nothing.

[Brainiac]

View at Youtube

[Kalisurfer]

View at Youtube

I liked the video and sentiments explaining the awe of nature and being human in the vast universe, appreciating that any human being of any belief, even an agnostic or atheist, can be taken aback by the never ceasing mysterious beautiful world or universe we inhabit.

The creator of the film does go on to say things that seem troublesome to me though, saying that "Religion and all groups of faith, of course, serve only to prostitute the awe and the mystery we all feel as humans." This statement is a huge accusation toward all religion and spirituality, lumping them all together into a definition of religious fundamentalism, broadly saying that all forms of religion and spirituality negates and represses the awe and mystery we feel as humans, which to my and many other's experience—is totally untrue.

He goes on to say in the next statement "They (religion) bottle our essence and try putting a lid on all the wonder we naturally feel—they fail of course." I would say again, he must be speaking of fundamentalism, for mature open minded spirituality does not have to do such a thing at all, for it can encourage self exploration and allowance or inclusion of mystery or the intellectual knowledge of the world, be it through the sciences and arts.

Next he says, "Religion points to the man behind the curtain in the attempt to answer the mystery, when in reality there is no man, and mystery is just that, a mystery." I would have to answer that this guy has not really explored spirituality outside of some type of firm structured tradition that is fundamentalist in nature, for to be spiritual or to belong to a religion is not to be beholden to a man behind the curtain, suppressing the awe and wonder of the natural world, this is in my estimation a rather immature or limited look into the phenomena that is spiritual faith and religion. Many people of spirit and religion are also in awe of the mysteries that exists, not depending on their faith alone to explain it all away and are happy to live with the mystery also.

The video creator then goes on to talk about his experiences in the Grand Teton mountain range and other such beautiful environments, which is great, his experiences there are real and poetically told, but the need to explain this beauty, either with a religious belief or with science, is still a need to explain it and not bask in the mystery itself. If in the end one needs to find the origin of the beautiful awe he experienced, be it a God, spirit, energy, consciousness, or plate tectonics, geology, astronomy, neuroscience or psychology, it is still a need to find an answer and not be comfortable with mystery alone. Seeking an answer is a choice of course and a very natural human response, which is why we have science, religion and the arts in the first place, for they can fulfill that need by people who are uneasy living with awe and mystery.

Be it a atheist, fundamentalist or more open minded liberal spiritualist, these ways of proclaiming a system of belief seem rather irrelevant to the beauty at hand, more like personal choices that we are free to be, at least in a parts of the world that allow such freedom of belief. The author seems to be reacting to years and years of the atheism being a repressed form of thought and belief by institutional religionist who though once in the powerful mainstream, are now deemed fundamentalist by secularist and liberal spiritualist who live in secular democracies. I understand the need of atheists to make a fight against the historic tide that did allow for such expression to be heard publicly without censor and discrimination, but to lump all religion and spiritual practices into one fundamentalist pot seems to be putting a lid on spirituality itself, a reversal of intellectual bias toward religion and spirituality instead of atheism, not recognizing the vast and varied spiritual systems out there that do not buy into the "man behind the curtain" mythology that the author assumes they all contain and then condemns as prostitution.

I feel he could have made a much more dynamic video in expressing the awe and mystery in nature that does not have to be addressed by religion, but I guess that exists for someone else at another time.

[Prisni]

I cannot see it, since it tells me to sign in to prove I am above 18.
But in any case...

When someone is young and ambitious, one might want to know how everything works. Then without having to bother with too much thinking, one can sign up to an easy fix. It is to become atheist, and get pre-chewed truths, or to sign up to a religion and get some other pre-chewed truths. The Hare krishnas are appealing to some, since you get a completely ready-made "absolute truth" system.

What life so far has taught me is that there is no short fix to "the truth". There is no short-cut to thinking. The only way is a lifetime of intense thinking. It is nothing you can do as a young person, since you have just not gotten the time to do it. But if you continue to think and the years pass by, I mean really think intensly, then maybe some realisations come to you.

Even "Prabhupada" did not come as a young man to preach in the west. He was an old man, even having, what some think, "the perfect system of truth". It took even him a lifetime to acquire undestanding. And yet so many think they can become "pure devotees" before 30.

They poison from the "hare krishna's" is that so many persons come from there and think they got the end of all thought, the whole truth, by just having been there. How everyone from there think they are especially gifted, and can understand something immediately, what takes even what they call "pure devotee (Prabhupada)" a lifetime of thinking.

Actually, Prabhupada's system was "sit down and think about this for a lifetime, then it will come to you", nothing else. Everything else was just sugery coating to make it more appealing to the fast-paced westerner who has no time for such things.

[ePiTau]

I always thought Prabhupada was completely against thinking. Didn't he call it "mental speculation"? Wasn't there a saying attributed to Prabhupada, where he is turning to one disciple who had just started a sentence with the words I think, and Prabhupada cuts him off: "You think. You think! If you start a sentence with I think, better go to the toilet and finish it there!"

I think thinking was discouraged by Prabhupada. Like he also rejected the need for any research, saying something like, "What is the use of research? All research has already been done. It's all in the Vedas." But it could be that I just got it all wrong or remember things that never actually happened. It's Kali Yuga, after all, and I eat grains, or worse, on Ekadasi.

[Dhyana]

There is a "nectar", in one of the Prabhupada Nectar books, that goes like this.

ACBS is out on a morning walk with his disciples. They pass a sign reading, "Horticultural Society". ACBS asks what the word means. "I think it means related to gardening," ventures Hari Sauri.

"You THINK???? You do not KNOW????"

The writer says this sudden smash was so unexpected and so heavy that everybody present just shook. Hari Sauri felt annihilated and did not even try to say anything.

Since I read this story as a devotee, it felt unjust, abusive and I couldn't understand what made anyone feel it was nectar.

[ePiTau]

There is a "nectar", in one of the Prabhupada Nectar books, that goes like this.

ACBS is out on a morning walk with his disciples. They pass a sign reading, "Horticultural Society". ACBS asks what the word means. "I think it means related to gardening," ventures Hari Sauri.

"You THINK???? You do not KNOW????"

The writer says this sudden smash was so unexpected and so heavy that everybody present just shook. Hari Sauri felt annihilated and did not even try to say anything.

Since I read this story as a devotee, it felt unjust, abusive and I couldn't understand what made anyone feel it was nectar.

Thank you for sharing the nectar, mātājī!

[Prisni]

I always thought Prabhupada was completely against thinking. Didn't he call it "mental speculation"? Wasn't there a saying attributed to Prabhupada, where he is turning to one disciple who had just started a sentence with the words I think, and Prabhupada cuts him off: "You think. You think! If you start a sentence with I think, better go to the toilet and finish it there!"

I see things differently.

But then, if science had progressed through popularity votes, the earth would still have been flat and the sun would have been pulled by horses over heavenly spheres from side to side over that disc. Fortunately there were persons with independent thinking who dared going against all common sense and belief.

If there is such conviction in one's own conclusions, it must be god-given, and approved by God, whatever name, or no name you give. But if you walk on earth today and say that earth is flat, you are considered a fool, not a genius. So just belief or "thinking" is not good enough. It has to have a basis in facts.

So Prabhupada said - don't just "think", bring the facts before you say something.

Is that so shocking?

[Prisni]

The funny thing is that some were sitting in ISKCON, giving lectures, telling how others should think, or they would be in "Maya". Now many of them still keep the same way and say the opposite, and still if you don't agree you are "in maya", or whatever it is called.

Actually, that is how I figured out life is. It does not matter if a person speaks according to the Vedas, or according to Darwin, or some political party, as long as he sits on a vyasasan, at the speaker's podium, or in the TV sofa in front of the camera (typical Swedish pastime). Some just like to sit and tell others what to think and use social pressure so that you feel bad if you think something else.

So, sitting on a vysasasan, does that make you a "pure devotee", speaking the "absolute truth", or does it jut make you a narcissist, who need people worshiping you, or maybe even a dictator who speak sweet words, and a whole country believes you?

Or else!
There is always an "or else".
Something dire that happens if you don't agree.

In ISKCON you go to hell,
in front of a dictator you get thrown in jail and tortured.
Or else?

[Brainiac]

but the need to explain this beauty, either with a religious belief or with science, is still a need to explain it and not bask in the mystery itself ... If in the end one needs to find the origin of the beautiful awe he experienced, be it a God, spirit, energy, consciousness, or plate tectonics, geology, astronomy, neuroscience or psychology, it is still a need to find an answer and not be comfortable with mystery alone. Seeking an answer is a choice of course and a very natural human response, which is why we have science, religion and the arts in the first place, for they can fulfill that need by people who are uneasy living with awe and mystery.

Perhaps this is my perception, but your emboldening of a sentence makes it look like you appear to think that seeking answers either diminishes or extinguishes all awe and mystery in the world and universe. Why do you think this? Your last sentence suggests that there are people comfortable (not uneasy) living with awe and mystery, but there is no explanation as to why basking in awe and mystery is so great. There is a limit to the amount of time one can spend basking in mystery without wondering about it. The need for inquiry is indeed an incorporated facet of human personality since ancient times.

This is a very good and thoughtful post of yours Kali, but I would like to hear more arguments in favour of basking in awe and mystery and why this is so great that asking questions about it will diminish the 'awesome' experience.

Since I read this story as a devotee, it felt unjust, abusive and I couldn't understand what made anyone feel it was nectar.

Thank you for sharing the nectar, mātājī!

Prabhupada could put the fear of God into Krishna...

[Dhyana]

What a fascinating discussion!

I am thinking of curious children, who are so awed by everything around them, and such "gluttons for novelty" as a psychologist once described. They play with everything they can get their hands (or mouths) on. We never develop our minds faster than in our childhood.

Awe may lead to exploration and discovery, which may lead to another round of awe.

If I may play with some folk etymology, once a mystery is explained, it may appear plain. So one may hesitate to rush into it. One may also have a hunch that the mystery goes deeper than the first answers we find.

But I wonder how one can admire a mystery without feeling drawn into solving it. Then again, it means that once it is solved, we may not find much more pleasure in it. Like a detective story. Most are read only once. (Not Sherlock Holmes though!)

But not every one of us needs to plunge headlong into exploring and explaining every phenomenon we are awed by. One may choose to leave something unexplained because one doesn't feel called to explain, leaving it to others. Or because one feels one needs to allow it time to grow. Like in gardening.

The only kind of awe I would protest against being left as it is, would be the "awe and trepidation" kind.

[zanardi]

I am thinking of curious children, who are so awed by everything around them, and such "gluttons for novelty" as a psychologist once described. They play with everything they can get their hands (or mouths) on. We never develop our minds faster than in our childhood.

In a way one could think that we adults should be even more awed by everything around us, because we have developed our minds and taxed our brains for such a long time and are able to penetrate more deeply into mysteries of existence. So why are we, mostly, not?

Are we afraid that we do not understand that much, or that which we think we can understand, does not seem to be so satisfying as far as the meaning of this all goes? Yet even there I see more reason to be awed by this all. I like that situation, the mystery. I even like the insecurity and uncertainty it brings about. System of faith would seem to blur it for me. I like life crispy!

So it seems I do not have the desire to explain this life and the whole nine yards of it by either religious belief nor science. I bask in the mystery.

[Kalisurfer]

but the need to explain this beauty, either with a religious belief or with science, is still a need to explain it and not bask in the mystery itself ... If in the end one needs to find the origin of the beautiful awe he experienced, be it a God, spirit, energy, consciousness, or plate tectonics, geology, astronomy, neuroscience or psychology, it is still a need to find an answer and not be comfortable with mystery alone. Seeking an answer is a choice of course and a very natural human response, which is why we have science, religion and the arts in the first place, for they can fulfill that need by people who are uneasy living with awe and mystery.

Perhaps this is my perception, but your emboldening of a sentence makes it look like you appear to think that seeking answers either diminishes or extinguishes all awe and mystery in the world and universe. Why do you think this?

My post was a critique of the video "My Spirituality as an Atheist,"that you posted without comment, especially the film's narrative content. My highlighted bold sentence is NOT a statement saying or suggesting that I think seeking answers either diminishes or extinguishes all awe and mystery in the world and universe, but a statement in response to wondering why the videographer needed to answer the myterious questions with science, while condemning religion in doing the same thing, all the while professing the importance of keeping awe and mystery a mystery?

The videographer, who goes by the name A. Hughman, makes an initial statement stating that religion and all faith systems take the awe and mystery out of creation, while toward the end of the video, expresses scientific reasons that do explain what lies behind the awe and mystery. I found that slightly hypocritical and not thought out thoroughly.

He says for example;

"I understand that the thing that is so much greater than me that has caused the Grand Tetons has a name—and it is Plate Tectonics."

"I recognize that being in a happy comfortable social setting is an evolutionary trait of my species."

"That my body naturally craves specific foods for the nutritional and maybe psychological reasons."

"That the intoxication of Romance is most likely driven by the need to procreate."

"That I am one with the universe, not metaphysically but physically."

"I am as much part of the universe as a supernova, made of the same particles.

"I am genes that mutated randomly, then where selected naturally based on he their successive survival."

All those statements are pretty scientifically unarguable, except perhaps for romance being driven by the need to procreate, for that negates the love in gay relationships, heterosexuals who do not want children or cannot have them and the elderly who fall in love, though undoubtedly the need to procreate is there in many heterosexual relationships. But my question is, if he is so taken by being awed by the mystery of life and nature and condemns religion and faith for trying to answer it all by taking away the awe and mystery, then why would he in the end use scientific answers to answer the mysteries?

The YouTube videographer made a nice compelling poetic video that does show the beauty and awe that exist in nature, especially in the the Teton Mountain range near Yellowstone National Park, which I luckily saw years ago, and it is spellbinding and indeed inspires one to be in awe. That awe can be explained by religion, spirituality, philosophy or science, and that can add to our intellectual or faith framework, but religious and scientific answers are really not necessary in being in a state of awe created by any beautiful or other worldly reality that sits in front of us. The video could be used in favor of spirit as well as science, since in the end he says rather nicely; "I love apple butter on a biscuit, I collape in awe at the magnificence of this place. I crave romance and breath appreciation for it all,...I have to, because in all the universe, we may be the only thing that can,... and that is beautiful!"

Your last sentence suggests that there are people comfortable (not uneasy) living with awe and mystery, but there is no explanation as to why basking in awe and mystery is so great. There is a limit to the amount of time one can spend basking in mystery without wondering about it. The need for inquiry is indeed an incorporated facet of human personality since ancient times.

I think being comfortable with awe and mystery is good because it allows us to not get too emotionally needy in finding an easy answer, the answer to everything that precludes thinking or doing research into the mystery. This comfort allows for one to take the time to do study, be it through intellectual knowledge or through spiritual practice. Some questions, like why we exist and what is the meaning of life, why do we love, why do we suffer and die are the type of questions that ultimately will always lead to more questions and more mystery, something that science and religion help in understanding, but ultimately have no one answer, unless one chooses them to do it for them, leading to possible closed minds, fundamentalist religions or simple mechanistic answers lacking diversity in thought.

This is a very good and thoughtful post of yours Kali, but I would like to hear more arguments in favour of basking in awe and mystery and why this is so great that asking questions about it will diminish the 'awesome' experience.

Thanks Brainiac, but I have no argument in favor of basking in awe and mystery over asking questions, for I feel that each has its natural place in life, which come out in natural due process. First we are awed by something, we bask in it, then depending on how important the mystery is to our life or how it moves us, we start asking questions why these things awe and inspire mystery, which naturally leads to seeking answers. My only caveat in this process would be what happens when after seeking answers, you are not satisfied by any of them, can one then live with the mystery ... as just mystery, until a future time when it may or may not be answered? I think its fine to live with the mystery as just that and move on to things that we can learn about and then create what is important in our lives, regardless of the mystery being there, pulsating in the background.


Now that I've answered your questions Brainiac, I have a few for you.

What compelled you to post the video? Does the content of the video match your feelings and beliefs? Do you feel that religion and all faith systems serve only to prostitute the awe and mystery we feel as humans? Do you think that all religion points to man behind the curtain? Do you know the origination of the name given to the Grand Teton Mountains?

[zanardi]

My only caveat in this process would be what happens when after seeking answers, you are not satisfied by any of them, can one then live with the mystery ... as just mystery, until a future time when it may or may not be answered? I think its fine to live with the mystery as just that and move on to things that we can learn about and then create what is important in our lives, regardless of the mystery being there, pulsating in the background.

I hear ya`and understand almost painfully clear what you mean. Yet for me I see no other alternative. Somehow being constantly aware of the mystery pulsating in the background keeps me "honest" and alert. Especially so, when learning about things and stuff and creating what is important in my life. If I was eating meat, I suppose I would like my steak raw!

ps. sorry for interrupting your discussion, I just felt like writing a few words.

[amberline]

Just found this:

Top 5 New Words added to OALD
brainiac
dwarf planet
podcast
tweet
x-factor

here: http://www.oxfordadvancedlearnersdictionary.com/?cc=global


(Sorry if I'm OT)

[zvs]

Now that I've answered your questions Brainiac, I have a few for you.

What compelled you to post the video? Does the content of the video match your feelings and beliefs? Do you feel that religion and all faith systems serve only to prostitute the awe and mystery we feel as humans? Do you think that all religion points to man behind the curtain? Do you know the origination of the name given to the Grand Teton Mountains?

What is your name? What is your quest? What is the capital of Assyria?

[babu]

There is a "nectar", in one of the Prabhupada Nectar books, that goes like this.

ACBS is out on a morning walk with his disciples. They pass a sign reading, "Horticultural Society". ACBS asks what the word means. "I think it means related to gardening," ventures Hari Sauri.

"You THINK???? You do not KNOW????"

The writer says this sudden smash was so unexpected and so heavy that everybody present just shook. Hari Sauri felt annihilated and did not even try to say anything.

Since I read this story as a devotee, it felt unjust, abusive and I couldn't understand what made anyone feel it was nectar.

"I think therefore I do not know I am." acbs

[Dhyana]

MUAHAHA!

Heavy, heavy. But very much to the point,