Can an atheist experience 'the spiritual'.

[peter]

Playing devil's advocate here Z, but what of purouse in the Universe. It seems to go hand in hand with placing ones faith [notice that bit of wording, for after all is that not what we do] in the 'scientific explanation' of the reasons why there is 'something as opposed to nothing', that one rejects the idea of any point or purpose to the Universe's [and subsequently our own] existence. Why should this be so - how do we know? There is nothing in the scientific method [as it stands] that begins to deal with the issues of 'point or purpouse' so why would it be a suprise that the answers it produces seem to point to a Universe that is purpousless. If our question is one that pertains to this area are we not forced to look elsewhere? Science doesn't do purpouse - it's outside it's remit.

[re the Christopher Potter quote; his use of the 'billiard ball' analogy is not helpfull taken out of context and I realise that now. Really, the book is written on a way more sophisticated level than that, but it sort of 'keys' with the quirky [almost quixotic] style and format of the work. I won't presume to push another work in your direction Z, but ever if you get into a good bookstore check out the work just to enjoy the sheer beauty of it's production if for no other reason; it really is [in it's UK edition] one of the most beautifully made books I have ever encountered.]

[Zarathustra]

Playing devil's advocate here Z, but what of purouse in the Universe. It seems to go hand in hand with placing ones faith [notice that bit of wording, for after all is that not what we do] in the 'scientific explanation' of the reasons why there is 'something as opposed to nothing', that one rejects the idea of any point or purpose to the Universe's [and subsequently our own] existence.

Placing one's faith in the scientific explanation? Why would you need faith for something that's demonstrable?

As for purpose, that's a human need, and nothing in nature is necessitated by our emotional needs (much less the nature of reality itself). Natural phenomena obviously have no purpose. Our entire existence is a wonderful accident. I think the fact that something like Life or Humans can come into being via random forces is infinitely more awe-inspiring than to think that our very flawed existence was purposely created by an infinite being. This is the best an omnipotent God can do?? Really?

The idea of Purpose in the universe robs it of what makes it so fantastic. It's literally taking the most complicated, rich, odds-defying explanation of reality and turning it into a child's fairy tale, sacrificing all that is messy/tragic/mysterious for the sake of a happy ending. It diminishes everything. Every tragedy to strike mankind suddenly becomes an insignificant "test," a narrative hoop we must jump through to please a capricious god in a simplistic story. Every victory we achieve against our circumstances becomes nothing more than "the will or grace of god," something that had to turn out okay because we've got a Heavenly Father making sure. It's like turning reality into the Matrix. Nothing matters, ironically, once you suppose Purpose. The precarious, life-defining balance between being and not-being reduces to an illusion.

I'll take your word about the Potter book. You obviously have great taste in that regard. I'm cramming right now for a Dark Tower journey, so all my reading time is taken up with Steven King. But maybe I'll check it out.

[Fist and Faith]

Peter, we are not forced to look elsewhere for the answer, because we are not forced to ask the question. Not every question we can conceive of need be treated the same. I consider this one to be invalid. Of course, you are free to feel otherwise, and pursue the question as you will. You just can't expect folks like me to go along with it.

[Avatar]

I'll keep it in mind, Av -- thanks! A guy might work for the Land, Sea, Sky books. The Pipe Woman Chronicles are all in first person, so I'd need a woman for those.

No worries, just gimme a shout if you want to connect.

Z, read on man, read on.

--A

[Vraith]

There is nothing in the scientific method [as it stands] that begins to deal with the issues of 'point or purpouse' so why would it be a suprise that the answers it produces seem to point to a Universe that is purpousless.

Peep are always saying things like that. And it is kinda/sorta true.
But there is a reason it is true [ish]: The scientific method doesn't lack techniques for dealing with issues of point or purpose. That isn't the problem. The problem is:
IF there were a "property" of reality that generated a point/purpose in/to/for the universe/existence
THEN: the scientific method would [or perhaps will] discover it.

Now, I don't think that's so. I think purpose "belongs" solely to intelligent and desiring creatures. And it is not something they "have," it is something they MAKE.
I/we/us, our existence, has nothing to do with inherent/initial/inciting purpose, and definitely not some grace of god.
We create purpose...and if a god is possible, s/he/it will exist by OUR grace...we will have made and/or be s/he/it.

There are ways around the issue...the best aspect of both views being true.
The easiest [as if anything was/is easy] is to flip the assumptions on their head and live with it:
God/Spiritual/Enlightened FEELS universal...but it is purely, strictly, local.
The single MOST individual/unique aspect of a person is his/her divinity[and/or experience of such]
Science is the thing that is Universal. Its reach is everywhere, all the time.
[Philosophy is the bridge between, if we want to be philosophical ]

When people say "Science can't answer the big questions"...
Are you freaking KIDDING me?
The people who say that can't answer ANY questions.
Don't get me wrong---the spirit/mystic/irrational/emotional is important to me. It is important to ALL of us.
It's just that particular religions [distinct from spirit and experience] have become stupid or realized power.
"Why am I blind?"
"You masturbated too much, you evil creature!" [perfectly normal boy, and maybe girl for all I know.]

If it weren't for Religion and Power taking over the Spiritual and Knowledgeable, we'd have been to Mars or beyond a thousand or more years ago.
[[see what I did there? i stole spiritual away from believers. And I mean it.
I meant it before...
anyone...probably...can have a spiritual experience.
anyone...probably...can gain and/or learn from it.
But if YOU saw the Gecko, and I saw the Flo, and we set our hearts against each other....and then families, neighbors, countries...
ATHEISTS can't be spiritual? Right.
Pull the other one.
That all goes away if you assume Holy is Wholly Personal...
[[from one vantage point]]
And the Source of questions, not the Answers to them...
[[from another, consistent point]]
and Knowledge is for everyone.
to quote [possibly done before] the best [last] line from
one of my first awful poems as a teen-of-wisdom:
"Still
try I will and
die yet
it is always the journey that
matters
the asking[not]the
answers."

[peter]

Read Z's post - typed an answer - read V's post which totally obliterated it - deleted it. That'll teach me. Like Lord Hyrim, I should have been cuffed and sent back to cleaning pots when I first had such ideas .

[Linna Heartbooger]

peter,

Onward Christian soldiers,

Sitting on the mats;

Nice and warm and cozy

Like little pussycats.

Onward Christian soldiers,

Oh, how brave are we,

Don't we do our fighting

Very comfortably?

I'm thinking of updating it to sing to myself, Linna, in the 21st century:

• Onward Christian Soldier,
  Typing on your keys!
  When the V-man spe-eaketh...

But those are only 3 lines.
Can you think of anything that rhymes with 'keys'?

Maybe I will ask my 4-year-old son.
I have *NO* IDEA what word he's likely to come up with.

I hope people enjoy this post just as much as I do...
and don't just think I'm a jerk.
Although I am...


Peace,

--N


Edit: updated the quotation to have the full last name of the lady who wrote the parody.

[Dread Poet Jethro]

Onward Christian Soldier,
Typing on your keys!
When the V-man speaketh
Swallow your unease
Onward Christian Soldier,
Speak the truth you know
Not all will see it that way
But that is how it goes...

[Linna Heartbooger]

Upward, mask-ed poet!
Typing on your keys!
Laughter surely fo-lows
"Love thy enemies"!

Even V-man's foibles
Surely are most light
When weighed in the ba-lance.
For we ALL need sight!


Bless you, dude.
(What IS an appropriate appellation for DPJ?
"Dude" was something I was comfortable with, and it seemed condign.)
Also... I thought that was gonna go a whole lot worse after I clicked the button to post.

[Dread Poet Jethro]

When you say "Bless you..."
I will accept any name;
Call me what you like

Those of good courage
Are trusted in such matters
To bestow blessings

[peter]

Now that was good!

[Fist and Faith]

"Still
try I will and
die yet
it is always the journey that
matters
the asking[not]the
answers."

(So you wrote in your [wacky] style even then, eh? )
This got me to thinking of some of my favorite quotes. Once again:

The meaning and purpose of a problem seem to lie not in its solution but in our working at it incessantly.

Chris, from Northern Exposure:

I've been out here now for some days, groping my way along, trying to realize my vision here. I started concentrating so hard on my vision that I lost sight. I've come to find out that it's not the vision. It's not the vision at all. It's the groping. It's the groping, it's the yearning, it's the moving forward. I was so fixated on that flying cow that, when Ed told me Monty Python already painted that picture, thought I was through. I had to let go of that cow so that I could see all the other possibilities....... I think Kierkegard said it oh so well: “The self is only that which it’s in the process of becoming.” Art? Same thing. James Joyce had something to say about it too: “Welcome oh life! I go to encounter for the millionth time the reality of experience, and to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscious of my race.” We’re here today to fling something that bubbled up from the collective unconsciousness of our community......... The thing I learned folks, this is absolutely key: It’s not the thing you fling, it’s the fling itself.

Trek quote #1 - Data and his daughter (he made a daughter in one episode):

Lal: I watch them, and I can do the things they do. But I will never feel the emotions. I’ll never know love.

Data: It is a limitation we must learn to accept, Lal.

Lal: Then why do you still try to emulate humans. What purpose does it serve, except to remind you that you are incomplete?

Data: I have asked myself that, many times, as I have struggled to be more human. Until I realized it is the struggle itself that is most important. We must strive to be more than we are, Lal. It does not matter that we will never reach our ultimate goal. The effort yields its own rewards.

Trek quote #2 - Data and Dr. Crusher:

Data: What is the definition of life?

Crusher: That is a BIG question. Why do you ask?

Data: I am searching for a definition that will allow me to test an hypotheses.

Crusher: Well, the broadest scientific definition might be that life is what enables plants and animals to consume food, derive energy from it, grow, adapt themselves to their surrounding, and reproduce.

Data: And you suggest that anything that exhibits these characteristics is considered alive.

Crusher: In general, yes.

Data: What about fire?

Crusher: Fire?

Data: Yes. It consumes fuel to produce energy. It grows. It creates offspring. By your definition, is it alive?

Crusher: Fire is a chemical reaction. You could use the same argument for growing crystals. But, obviously, we don't consider them alive.

Data: And what about me? I do not grow. I do not reprodue. Yet I am considered to be alive.

Crusher: That's true. But you are unique.

Data: Hm. I wonder if that is so.

Crusher: Data, if I may ask, what exactly are you getting at?

Data: I am curious as to what transpired between the moment when I was nothing more than an assemblage of parts in Dr. Sung's laboratory and the next moment, when I became alive. What is it that endowed me with life?

Crusher: I remember Wesley asking me a similar question when he was little. And I tried desperately to give him an answer. But everything I said sounded inadequate. Then I realized that scientists and philosophers have been grappling with that question for centuries without coming to any conclusion.

Data: Are you saying the question cannot be answered?

Crusher: No. I think I'm saying that we struggle all our lives to answer it. That it's the struggle that is important. That's what helps us to define our place in the universe.

Here's my view of it all.

Greater intelligence comes with greater emotions. Animals don't jump and scream for joy when their children are born. And they aren't devastated when their children are brutally murdered in front of them. Our intelligence takes us beyond instinctive drives and needs. We judge; giving us preferences, loves and hates. We remember the past much better, and we project into the future.

And with those judgements and preferences, loves and hates, come some tough questions. "Why does my child have to die? My intelligence doesn't allow me to forget, and I wouldn't want to if I could. But how do I live with this?" "I am aware. I don't want that awareness to end. I don't want to cease to be. Must I? Will nothing continue when my body is gone, perhaps eaten by lions or crocodiles?" "Why isn't the dog, or even the chimpanzee, as smart and aware as I am? What is it about me that makes me more?"

Our intelligence allows us to explore some of this. We know quite a bit about our brains, both the physical structure and the role of hormones/chemicals. We still have a long way to go before we even halfway understand it, but we understand a lot about the rise of the mind and many specific aspects.

Other questions are different. "How do I live with the pain of losing a child, and seeing horrors committed by others? Is oblivion what awaits me? I need a better answer!" These are not truly questions. They're fears. Life, the universe, and everything isn't necessarily what we would want it to be. From Neverness:

Why should man seek justice in a universe which is manifestly unjust? Are we so insignificant and vain that we cannot look upon the raw, naked face of randomness without praying it will smile upon us merely because we have been righteous and good?

All of this is what this thread is about. Spirituality is the acceptance of what is, and the continuing on. The asking, the groping, the yearning, the moving forward. It's the human spirit. The ability to see that life comes with evil, but it also comes with beauty and joy. There are powerful thunderstorms; Beethoven's string quartets; hiking in the mountains; my children; my wife; the intricacies of the universe to be explored; chocolate; and on and on. It's the understanding that the journey is the reward; it's not the road to the reward.

[Vraith]

"Still
try I will and
die yet
it is always the journey that
matters
the asking[not]the
answers."

(So you wrote in your [wacky] style even then, eh? )
Here's my view of it all.

Greater intelligence comes with greater emotions. Animals don't jump and scream for joy when their children are born. And they aren't devastated when their children are brutally murdered in front of them. Our intelligence takes us beyond instinctive drives and needs.

HEH!...on the first---yes, I did, although I believe my very first attempt wasn't such. I think it went something like:
[line, last word rhymes-- "es"]
[line, last word rhymes-- "orns"]

[And killing with the thORNS]
At this point, I can't promise that the way I wrote either here is how I wrote then down to every detail [it's been a long-damn-ass-time!]...but definitely the original wise-teen-vraith[hah!] had breaks, parentheses [[I think the original had all the kinds available on an IBM Selectric typewriter...( and [ and { IIRC...might have only had two kinds, and more ... --- ___ ) ]]

On the second, abso-damn-lutely. I've said it before---people think there are hard lines/differences in emotion/reason in people AND the same between "primitive" beast reason and "primitive" beast emotions.
They are false dichotomies, and slippery hierarchies.
It's part of why I said above that we ALL need spirit and logic.
The way people split them up is just plain SILLY. And we have been KILLING each other over it.
And we haven't even been slaying over what is TRUE, we've been slaughtering over who has the right to slaughter.
It's disgusting.

It's like living your whole life [or wasting your whole tribe/nation/species] in a battle between your ARMS and your LEGS. Every time you try to go for a walk, your freaking arms punch you in the mouth, and every time you try to write some philosophy, your damn legs kick you in the head, and whenever things have been getting better they both get together and break your bloody heart.
It's dumb, and I'm not at all happy with the fister's and foot-in-mouther's ruining the world for everyone.

[peter]

I don't know if this is correct or not so I'll ask it. When the chips are down, when push comes to shove, would it be fair to say that in truth, and after all this investigation both philosophic and scientific, still nobody has a freakin' clue as to why there is 'something as opposed to nothing' and how life emerged on earth [and indeed what it actually is].

[Nb a conformation of this statement would do nothing {at least I don't think it would} to bolster or indeed undermine the God/Creator/religious 'answers' to these questions; I'm just interested as to whether we have actually made any progress toward answering them or not.]

[Zarathustra]

Nice post, FF.

[Vraith]

would it be fair to say that in truth, and after all this investigation both philosophic and scientific, still nobody has a freakin' clue as to why there is 'something as opposed to nothing' and how life emerged on earth [and indeed what it actually is].

No, it wouldn't be fair to say "no freaking clue" in either case...BUT, it would be fair to say there are serious, deep questions unanswered on both.
I think "something as opposed to nothing" is longer/deeper for many reasons.
The physical ones...which always seem to have another layer under them...are hard enough.
But I suspect that those physical things will also always be emotionally/spiritually unsatisfying for many---and probably most---people.
And that dissatisfaction isn't purely rational limits/weakness...
I've said before somewhere that I believe we will eventually---and probably fairly soon---know the bio-neuro-physics of "love." We'll be able to create and destroy it at will. We'll be able to literally and deeply love our neighbors, if we want to [or a deep enough conspiracy could rule the world, endlessly committing the worst horrors at a whim, and still have an approval rating of 100%, total adoration...depending on whether "we" the people had access/control---or "they," whoever they are, did].
Anyway---it will be within our control. But love poems were never about that. They were about the experience. It's the "qualia" Deutsch talks about. That's where "why" lives, that's where the gap exists. I think that's where/why Deutsch thinks we won't have real AI till we really understand what intelligence, and especially creativity is. [I don't recall that he specifically connects the "qualia" problem with the "creativity" problem. But I think they are intimately entangled...
I mean...consider we know a truly awe-inspiring amount of stuff about the physics of "blue"...and those with the appropriate knowledge and aesthetic sense know a whole lot about Picasso's "Blue" period or "The Blues" [or both]...and almost nothing about blue-ness---or the qualia of blue.

Sorry for the digression...but we're much closer to understanding life origins.
It doesn't even seem likely it is "hard" for life to arise, it's just 'particular.'
It USED to seem harder---because peeps were in a kerfluffle about becoming complex out of simple. And though, explanation-wise, we're just beginning to understand 'why complexity?'---what we DO now understand is that bridging the gap from simple to complex isn't a hard/highly "unnatural" thing...it is a fundamental aspect. It USED to be assumed that things became complex only under the rarest of the rare, nearly impossible, conditions. But that seems not to be the case. Things WILL become complex---given even the slightest chance.
There is an idea floating about and gaining---I haven't tracked down the backup for it yet, sadly---that Life is one common outcome of Entropy, because of how complex things [like dna/rna] function in energy.
That is the complete opposite of all the arguments that "life can't be natural, because entropy." Even SCIENTISTS used to agree it was a bit of a problem...not because it forbade life/evolution, just that it seriously raised the odds-against, and increased the difficulty of explanation.

All that stuff is likely to STILL suffer somewhat from the qualia/dissatisfation issue. Peeps won't be "happy" with it. But it's much nearer solution than "why something?" [mostly because all the "factual" information is within our universe for "why life?"...but "why something?" might [probably does] involve a number of things that are currently untestable. [those that say they--things like multiverse/string/membrane---will ALWAYS be untestable are just short-sighted/unimaginative/stuck in a paradigm]

[Fist and Faith]

Something as opposed to nothing...

Clearly, there is something. I think I can't wrap my head around it all well enough to know if I think there has always - always, ALWAYS, ALWAYS - been something; or if there was once - before there was space or time or anything - nothing, and something sprang into existence. I lean toward there was always something. If there wasn't, why would it change? If there are no laws of nature, no chaos, no nothing that demands something exist, why would the situation change? But I don't know if it truly makes sense to say the situation changes if there was no time over which it could change. So I only have a vague notion of taking the position that there was always something.

Doesn't mean it must be the universe we live in, of course. Could be any number of scenarios. I guess the Endless Big Bang/Big Crunch theory has been ruled out? But maybe we're the result of the membranes Hashi favors. But those membranes would be the result of whatever, etc etc.

As for how life emerged, I don't think we understand that nearly as well as we might sometimes think we do. After all, to my knowledge, nobody has ever created life. If we understand the processes that made it happen billions of years ago, then we should be able to do it. After all, we can make the conditions perfect for it in our labs. Or the hell with the conditions we think are necessary, just do what needs to be done by any means. Yet nobody can manage it? That makes me think we're wrong about it. (Unless life has been made from scratch, and I just hadn't heard about it. Seems unlikely, though.)


Thank you, Z.

[peter]

The reason I asked this [potentially contentious] question is that because the Potter book I have been ranting about seems to take us to the far edges of what 'people in the game' currently believe, and it seems that the closer to the edge you get, the furthur away the horizon seems to be [on both the 'life' and 'something' issues]. There really does seem to be a lot of doubt out there that we have really got the measure of these things - and that is within the scientific community itself. This does not by and large tend to find it's way into 'popular science' books [there was precious little doubt in Deutsch's book ] but in a book that deliberately places itself on the difficult boarder between science, philosophy and religion there is a greater demand to really try to nail down where we are in terms of 'what we know'. I think the value of 'testing ones belief' [on whichever side it falls] against the other guys argument is a lesson that I have been slow to learn in life, but I'm starting to relise how important it is in terms of validating ones own position. [We have a general election coming in the next year and I intend to apply this principal before deciding where my 'x' will go.]

Thanks guys for the answers; there is much food for thought therin.

[Linna Heartbooger]

...Speak the truth you know
Not all will see it that way...

I know I'm being a bit slow on this... which topic to choose, what to choose...?

It's like living your whole life [or wasting your whole tribe/nation/species] in a battle between your ARMS and your LEGS. Every time you try to go for a walk, your freaking arms punch you in the mouth, and every time you try to write some philosophy, your damn legs kick you in the head...

I thought this was an awesome vivid metaphor, fitting well the messed-up-ness of the reality of the human race.

[Dread Poet Jethro]

Speak your truth, Linah
Wherever and whenever
You're moved to do so

Here's a first topic
What prompted the spelling change
To your username?