Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now I really grasp that most atheists (as demonstrated on this thread) REALLY only believe in the material existence - that the body is the end all and be all . . .I don't know why, but I didn't really realize that before . . .
It only took six pages and who knows how many other threads before this. If you had just read what I wrote on page one, you could have discovered this a long time ago.
And is anyone who doesn't have a spiritual belief an Atheist in your book?
The concept of nothing is approached by cultures and sciences in a great variety of ways. Grammatically speaking, the word belongs to the group of ambiguous pronouns: it is formally used as a noun even though it does not refer to any object. In philosophy, it most often expresses non-existence or absence while oriental religions rather use emptiness as its synonym. Nothing is basically indefinable in physics since from the point of views of force and motion the absolute of being excludes nothing but in mathematical abstraction it does figure, as null. POEM ABOUT NOTHING - Arty
I wouldn't go so far as to decare that the views of an atheist is necessarily a closed stance that is decided and final. That's a bit insulting to other people. Perhaps for some, but that's not necessarily all-inclusive. Many atheists I've encountered seem to be just as curious and open-minded as anyone else. Personally, I've never been all that crazy about labels. We're all people.
There's nothing wrong with drawing natural conclusions and discussing things from a philosophical perspective. However, the topic includes matters which are also scientific. You're the one who began this thread by also adding in quantum physics.
If a person is interested in the subject of "nothingness", or whether it is even meaningful, it helps to better understand the opposite side, especially when quantum physics and general relativity is included in the subject. It also helps to understand (which I think you do) that no one has all the answers to the Big Questions related to the universe. We are all a very limited and brief part of the universe, and are confined within it. That doesn't mean that curiosity isn't welcomed though. Whether right or wrong, answers have been provided, although perhaps not in line to your own point of view. What have you cited in the way of references to support your own view? I may not agree, but as I said earlier, I'd be very interested. If the support of your views provide enough compelling evidence, that would certainly provide food for thought. I'm sure others would be interested as well.
The difficulty behind your argument goes right back to the very first post, which starts out as more divisive rather than engaging and unifying. While your saying that you're not trying to convert anyone, and that you have no real interest in what anyone believes or doesn't believe, your first post seems to say something quite different:
Do you see how that can be rather defeating from the get-go?
I am sorry, but I don't see how asking people to provide context regarding their beliefs is defeating. I must be missing something . . . I am looking for congruity - and I think it is logical to provide context to round out the picture of the person's beliefs you are considering . . .
I know very little about science, per se, but I do know that Einstein's views are considered spiritual, while Newton's are considered materialistic.
When I first learned of Quantum Physics (took a couple of classes at a graduate level that introduced beginning theories and principles) it was obvious to me that this is a world view that includes spirituality . . .I cannot fathom that someone would be able to embrace the theories of Quantum Physics and be atheistic . . .
So the question of "nothingness" seems important and elementary to me - it seems like it would be a core belief that an atheist would understand - especially if they are arguing that the universe arose from nothing - and then when we "life" dies, we return to nothing . . .it just seems like the biggest question that an atheist would have to resolve . . .and because "science" proves that nothing can "go away" or die, only transform - it's in the transformation that the realm of spirituality lies, from my point-of-view - I realize now that "you all" believe differently - I guess you don't think you as a human being are unique or that your body is animated with your spirit . . .
Another question for "you all" would be: What makes people individuals if they have no spirits? Is that your stance, that people don't have spirits? Same with other animals? Do you look at everything as kind of robotic? Excuse me if this is condescending in any way - I actually have no clue and "am curious."
Another question for "you all" would be: What makes people individuals if they have no spirits? Is that your stance, that people don't have spirits? Same with other animals? Do you look at everything as kind of robotic? Excuse me if this is condescending in any way - I actually have no clue and "am curious."
Just when you said you understood, you posted this?
Oh wait, I think I'm on your "ignore" list so I doubt you'll even read this.
You're right, you know very little about science. ...or at least Einstein.
I am skeptical that you're curious. I think you're just looking to impose your own view, like everyone else.
What makes people individuals are our genetic traits, personalities, actions, etc. A "spirit" is a made-up concept that exists in imagination. It is not needed to "make people individuals."
I don't know about other people, but I don't consider denial of some stupid, made-up idea found in storybooks to constitute a lack of imagination. I think the biology, history, philosophy and sum total of human existence is impressive, and the antithesis of robotic..
But yes, biologically speaking, we're hominids in the ape family, and the animal kingdom. How is that "robotic", since it's a belief that we're flesh and blood?
Einstein was indeed spiritual, are you disputing that? I just found this interesting page:
You're right, you know very little about science. ...or at least Einstein.
I am skeptical that you're curious. I think you're just looking to impose your own view, like everyone else.
What makes people individuals are our genetic traits, personalities, actions, etc. A "spirit" is a made-up concept that exists in imagination. It is not needed to "make people individuals."
I don't know about other people, but I don't consider denial of some stupid, made-up idea found in storybooks to constitute a lack of imagination. I think the biology, history, philosophy and sum total of human existence is impressive, and the antithesis of robotic..
But yes, biologically speaking, we're hominids in the ape family, and the animal kingdom. How is that "robotic", since it's a belief that we're flesh and blood?
The highlighted is a core difference in point-of-view . . .I won't bother explaining my point-of-view, because I think it would be of little interest to you.
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction."
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
"Gravitation is not responsible for people falling in love."
There is nothing spiritual about these remarks. You're simply seeing "spiritual" because you want to see spiritual. Nothing more.
And you are so angry because?
I disagree with you, wholeheartedly, but I will not argue with you. I believe all of those quotes (and the ones you omitted which specify "God" or "spirit") are totally spiritually oriented.
I disagree with you, wholeheartedly, but I will not argue with you. I believe all of those quotes (and the ones you omitted which specify "God" or "spirit") are totally spiritually oriented.
Wow, how did you find that totally cherry picked list of Einstein quotes?
Here are a few more..
I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - this is a somewhat new kind of religion.
Albert Einstein
I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.
Albert Einstein
I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil.
Albert Einstein
The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish." Einstein.
If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.
Albert Einstein
Morality is of the highest importance - but for us, not for God.
Albert Einstein
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954) From Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
