Atheists: do you feel some kind of spirituality? (attend, genesis, sunday)
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.
Perhaps more prudently, we need to simply ignore him. I know I'm seeing no good reason to continue engaging him in any case and plenty good reason to look for better in/from this forum. On that note, it's past time for me to be signing off now for today. Perhaps until if/when I return, here's to better. Not only for this forum but better use of our time too! What I'm hoping to do with the rest of my day anyway.
Now, now, now. He is correct. These forums are absurd.
There are some of us who "pontificate".
There are some of us who "blather inanities".
There are some of us who "mentally masturbate".
There are some of us who are "too lazy to read anything of substance"...
There are some of us who are "afraid of scholarly papers because it might challenge our inane pontifications".
Throw in the fact that there are some of us who desperately want to be anointed as that "smartest guy in the room" and that about covers it.
Except for the guys who constantly throw around internet cliches................................... ^^^
Gotta throw in those guys, too.
Well, OK. While I believe you think you're being clever, the pretty much undeniable reality is that:
1. Many not only pontificate but do so without giving the slightest evidence of an underlying base of knowledge about the subject matter of which they speak. There is quite a distinction here between pontificating and doing so with no base of knowledge.
2. Yes, the discussions here are rife with blather and inanities. Presumably you aren't disputing this? Many people are incapable of anything more, and that's OK.
3. My observation is that any attempt to engage in substantive discussion is met with crickets. Steer me to a substantive thread that is ever anything more than "It seems to me ...."
4. Yes, my observation is that any attempt to steer people to serious materials by serious, informed authors is met with crickets. Participants would rather discuss what "It seems to me" about quantum mechanics, neuroscience, epistemology, philosophy, theology and other subjects for which "It seems to me" is simply inadequate, especially if one gives no evidence of an underlying base of knowledge.
5. Add 1-4 together, and I believe "mental masturbation" is a fair characterization, cliche as it may be.
I have not claimed to be the smartest guy in the room, nor do I have any need to be anointed as such. My posts speak for themselves, agree with them or not. I don't think anyone here wants to match measured IQs with me (98th percentile, thank you), but this doesn't make me or anyone else the smartest guy in the room for purposes of an internet forum about Religion & Spirituality. (Hey, I didn't name myself mensaguy or MysticPhD or HiIQGuy, did I?) What is important, I believe, is the underlying base of knowledge when one attempts to engage on serious subjects. In this regard, my base of knowledge happens to be vast; on an Accounting forum, I would be the dolt in the room.
I've said previously that internet forums are an unavoidable mixture of age, raw intelligence, education, emotional maturity, mental health and every other factor that makes a person who he or she is. For some reason that has always fascinated me, internet forums tend to operate at the level of the lowest common denominator. It's unfortunate, and makes intelligent discussion nearly impossible, but that's just the reality. People prefer silly blather and snarky one-liners, and so be it.
Believe me, I am very used to and hardened to the sorts of responses I get here. Pompous, arrogant, self-important, yada yada. When this comes from someone whose intellect and base of knowledge I respect, I just laugh and say "Yeah, sure, I can't deny that." When it comes from someone like most of the participants here or on any internet forum, I realize it's just a self-protective way of admitting "We can't keep up with you and have nothing substantive to say in response."
Look at the posts to which I responded on this thread and my responses. I think they make my point.
Perhaps more prudently, we need to simply ignore him. I know I'm seeing no good reason to continue engaging him in any case and plenty good reason to look for better in/from this forum. On that note, it's past time for me to be signing off now for today. Perhaps until if/when I return, here's to better. Not only for this forum but better use of our time too! What I'm hoping to do with the rest of my day anyway.
Cheers and a good weekend to all!
Or maybe you could just start a Ten Truths internet site with its very own Ten Truths forum since this is pretty much the sum total of your contributions and all that you are seemingly interested in discussing? "All Ten Truths All the Time," or something like that. I have not seen one post that purported to be substantive that actually amounted to anything more than proselytizing for your Ten Truths, faux bafflement that anyone could possibly disagree with your Ten Truths, and a wave-of-the-hand dismissal of anyone who declines to wrap himself in the intellectual straitjacket of your Ten Truths.
I am admittedly pretty much in love with myself, but I don't think I've encountered anyone as in love with himself as you give every indication of being. Your attempt to mask this with a facade of open-minded reasonableness and good cheer rings hollow, I feel sure, with discerning readers. If I have accomplished nothing else, I believe I have exposed a bit of who you actually are.
Oh, yes, let's "look for better in/from this forum." Revive that Ten Truths thread, folks, and make him happy.
Well, OK. While I believe you think you're being clever, the pretty much undeniable reality is that:
1. Many not only pontificate but do so without giving the slightest evidence of an underlying base of knowledge about the subject matter of which they speak. There is quite a distinction here between pontificating and doing so with no base of knowledge.
2. Yes, the discussions here are rife with blather and inanities. Presumably you aren't disputing this? Many people are incapable of anything more, and that's OK.
3. My observation is that any attempt to engage in substantive discussion is met with crickets. Steer me to a substantive thread that is ever anything more than "It seems to me ...."
4. Yes, my observation is that any attempt to steer people to serious materials by serious, informed authors is met with crickets. Participants would rather discuss what "It seems to me" about quantum mechanics, neuroscience, epistemology, philosophy, theology and other subjects for which "It seems to me" is simply inadequate, especially if one gives no evidence of an underlying base of knowledge.
5. Add 1-4 together, and I believe "mental masturbation" is a fair characterization, cliche as it may be.
I have not claimed to be the smartest guy in the room, nor do I have any need to be anointed as such. My posts speak for themselves, agree with them or not. I don't think anyone here wants to match measured IQs with me (98th percentile, thank you), but this doesn't make me or anyone else the smartest guy in the room for purposes of an internet forum about Religion & Spirituality. (Hey, I didn't name myself mensaguy or MysticPhD or HiIQGuy, did I?) What is important, I believe, is the underlying base of knowledge when one attempts to engage on serious subjects. In this regard, my base of knowledge happens to be vast; on an Accounting forum, I would be the dolt in the room.
I've said previously that internet forums are an unavoidable mixture of age, raw intelligence, education, emotional maturity, mental health and every other factor that makes a person who he or she is. For some reason that has always fascinated me, internet forums tend to operate at the level of the lowest common denominator. It's unfortunate, and makes intelligent discussion nearly impossible, but that's just the reality. People prefer silly blather and snarky one-liners, and so be it.
Believe me, I am very used to and hardened to the sorts of responses I get here. Pompous, arrogant, self-important, yada yada. When this comes from someone whose intellect and base of knowledge I respect, I just laugh and say "Yeah, sure, I can't deny that." When it comes from someone like most of the participants here or on any internet forum, I realize it's just a self-protective way of admitting "We can't keep up with you and have nothing substantive to say in response."
Look at the posts to which I responded on this thread and my responses. I think they make my point.
Instead of your usual wall of whine, and false claims of having the intellectual high ground (while blocking those with the relevant substantive knowledge you do not like), would you for once actually present credible arguments for your claims? Not links to someone else, actual arguments?
Ah! And thanks for answering as well. I can easily agree with this comment without the need to read all the rest of the explanations and/or argument(s) leading up to it. I could have saved myself a good deal of time and head scratching up to now...
Personally, I should probably add that I'm not one to call what I feel along these lines spirituality, because of what spirituality typically means to most people.
"Spirituality involves the recognition of a feeling or sense or belief that there is something greater than myself, something more to being human than sensory experience, and that the greater whole of which we are part is cosmic or divine in nature."
I'm an atheist, so I tend to avoid the suggestion or confusion there is anything "divine in nature" when it comes to all this kind of thing. Sometimes I like to say "I'm naturally stoned" when appreciating nature or whatever else other's might call spiritual.
Semantics perhaps? Where would we be without them?
Well, at the risk of head-scratching, I will answer your question. Without meaning, a simple marking on a stone or tree trunk would never be able to develop into something significant, something worth noticing, or something worth pointing out. A heart carved on a tree trunk would not be something we carry in our heart.
Well, at the risk of head-scratching, I will answer your question. Without meaning, a simple marking on a stone or tree trunk would never be able to develop into something significant, something worth noticing, or something worth pointing out. A heart carved on a tree trunk would not be something we carry in our heart.
Oooh now. It depends on the meaning behind it. If that heart had been carved by you as a teenager ..that might mean quite a lot when you come across it again as someone just coming out of a rocky marriage.
Oooh now. It depends on the meaning behind it. If that heart had been carved by you as a teenager ..that might mean quite a lot when you come across it again as someone just coming out of a rocky marriage.
The heart now has two meanings based on our experiences; it now has qualities that the shape alone cannot provide. But the way I understood LearnMe's post is what would we do without semantics, or meaning. Maybe he meant what would we do if words had just one meaning? I took it as what would happen without meaning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Ah! And thanks for answering as well. I can easily agree with this comment without the need to read all the rest of the explanations and/or argument(s) leading up to it. I could have saved myself a good deal of time and head scratching up to now...
Personally, I should probably add that I'm not one to call what I feel along these lines spirituality, because of what spirituality typically means to most people.
"Spirituality involves the recognition of a feeling or sense or belief that there is something greater than myself, something more to being human than sensory experience, and that the greater whole of which we are part is cosmic or divine in nature."
I'm an atheist, so I tend to avoid the suggestion or confusion there is anything "divine in nature" when it comes to all this kind of thing. Sometimes I like to say "I'm naturally stoned" when appreciating nature or whatever else other's might call spiritual.
Semantics perhaps? Where would we be without them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by elyn02
Well, at the risk of head-scratching, I will answer your question. Without meaning, a simple marking on a stone or tree trunk would never be able to develop into something significant, something worth noticing, or something worth pointing out. A heart carved on a tree trunk would not be something we carry in our heart.
The heart now has two meanings based on our experiences; it now has qualities that the shape alone cannot provide. But the way I understood LearnMe's post is what would we do without semantics, or meaning. Maybe he meant what would we do if words had just one meaning? I took it as what would happen without meaning.
I fear you may have taken me too seriously, because I could have been more clear by asking where we in this forum would be without semantics given so many comments devoted to parsing what are semantics and/or what is otherwise. Somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Sorry.
Otherwise, I'm not sure what the question(s) about this are here. Obviously words represent "serve to express, designate, stand for, or denote, as a word, symbol, or the like does; symbolize. Obviously words like any other symbols can generally mean the same thing for all concerned but also different things depending on a person's perspective or level of understanding.
Or what about semantics might we need to further consider?
Semantics: the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning.
Interesting if not ironic, is it not, that I'm needing to use more words to explain my original meaning related to semantics that was not exactly well understood earlier? Perhaps still not well understood?
I fear you may have taken me too seriously, because I could have been more clear by asking where we in this forum would be without semantics given so many comments devoted to parsing what are semantics and/or what is otherwise. Somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Sorry.
Otherwise, I'm not sure what the question(s) about this are here. Obviously words represent "serve to express, designate, stand for, or denote, as a word, symbol, or the like does; symbolize. Obviously words like any other symbols can generally mean the same thing for all concerned but also different things depending on a person's perspective or level of understanding.
Or what about semantics might we need to further consider?
Semantics: the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning.
Interesting if not ironic, is it not, that I'm needing to use more words to explain my original meaning related to semantics that was not exactly well understood earlier? Perhaps still not well understood?
Yes and no, which is why I keep my posts short.
Where would we be without semantics? Well, let's see if I can get your meaning on such a question. The OP asked, "Athiests, do you feel a kind of spirituality?" If spirituality only meant one thing, let's just say a required belief in God, then the answer is a clear no. One post after the OP of discussion is all that is needed.
But if spirituality is analyzed down to the denotation of the root and then allowed to have different forms with different but related meanings (connotations), which it does have, then we can have tens of pages of discussion where everyone shares their connotative understanding.
So where would we be without semantics? I am guessing we would have just one post after the OP.
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.
