Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

[ding]

An atheist does not believe in the spiritual. An atheist does not believe we are anything more than matter. An atheist does not believe that anything exists beyond the material world.

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Bullshit!
Music, as I have shown, exposes the lie of your pontification. The soul of the composer lives on in their composition long after their material existence has ended.
You as a Diest are simply not honest enough to ever admit that your hate motivated pontifications could ever be wrong.

"..I am a materialist..."

"...It means I believe the world is just entirely material substances.."

 

[WinterBorn]

An atheist does not believe in the spiritual. An atheist does not believe we are anything more than matter. An atheist does not believe that anything exists beyond the material world.

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Bullshit!
Music, as I have shown, exposes the lie of your pontification. The soul of the composer lives on in their composition long after their material existence has ended.
You as a Diest are simply not honest enough to ever admit that your hate motivated pontifications could ever be wrong.

"..I am a materialist..."

"...It means I believe the world is just entirely material substances.."

You insist on saying the same thing over and over, despite being shown to be wrong.

Atheists experience love. Is that material or a material substance?

Atheists can be compassionate. Is that material or a material substance?

There are many things experienced by atheists that are not material.

 

[ding]

I am a Christian and fairly conservative in my views.

I am an atheist (or as close to it as can be).

Which is it?

 

[ding]

An atheist does not believe in the spiritual. An atheist does not believe we are anything more than matter. An atheist does not believe that anything exists beyond the material world.

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Bullshit!
Music, as I have shown, exposes the lie of your pontification. The soul of the composer lives on in their composition long after their material existence has ended.
You as a Diest are simply not honest enough to ever admit that your hate motivated pontifications could ever be wrong.

"..I am a materialist..."

"...It means I believe the world is just entirely material substances.."

You insist on saying the same thing over and over, despite being shown to be wrong.

Atheists experience love. Is that material or a material substance?

Atheists can be compassionate. Is that material or a material substance?

There are many things experienced by atheists that are not material.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

Materialism - Wikipedia

 

[WinterBorn]

I am a Christian and fairly conservative in my views.

I am an atheist (or as close to it as can be).

Which is it?

Things change in 6 years.

 

[WinterBorn]

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Bullshit!
Music, as I have shown, exposes the lie of your pontification. The soul of the composer lives on in their composition long after their material existence has ended.
You as a Diest are simply not honest enough to ever admit that your hate motivated pontifications could ever be wrong.

"..I am a materialist..."

"...It means I believe the world is just entirely material substances.."

You insist on saying the same thing over and over, despite being shown to be wrong.

Atheists experience love. Is that material or a material substance?

Atheists can be compassionate. Is that material or a material substance?

There are many things experienced by atheists that are not material.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

Materialism - Wikipedia

Not sure what material interactions cause me to love my children, or to feel the compassion that prompts me to help my fellow man.

 

[ding]

An atheist does not believe in the spiritual. An atheist does not believe we are anything more than matter. An atheist does not believe that anything exists beyond the material world.

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Nope. The definition of atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in gods. The are not necessarily, nor by definition, materialists. I'm an atheist and I believe in lots of non-material things (love, liberty, the human mind, etc ...)

See post #404 where it explains that materialists believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

So since you do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe the non-material things are a result of material interactions.

By definition you are a materialist. All atheists are.

 

[ding]

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Bullshit!
Music, as I have shown, exposes the lie of your pontification. The soul of the composer lives on in their composition long after their material existence has ended.
You as a Diest are simply not honest enough to ever admit that your hate motivated pontifications could ever be wrong.

"..I am a materialist..."

"...It means I believe the world is just entirely material substances.."

You insist on saying the same thing over and over, despite being shown to be wrong.

Atheists experience love. Is that material or a material substance?

Atheists can be compassionate. Is that material or a material substance?

There are many things experienced by atheists that are not material.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

Materialism - Wikipedia

Not sure what material interactions cause me to love my children, or to feel the compassion that prompts me to help my fellow man.

Electro chemical reactions in your brain.

 

[WinterBorn]

An atheist does not believe in the spiritual. An atheist does not believe we are anything more than matter. An atheist does not believe that anything exists beyond the material world.

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Nope. The definition of atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in gods. The are not necessarily, nor by definition, materialists. I'm an atheist and I believe in lots of non-material things (love, liberty, the human mind, etc ...)

See post #404 where it explains that materialists believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

So since you do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe the non-material things are a result of material interactions.

By definition you are a materialist. All atheists are.

I do not believe in God. This does not mean I do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world. I have pointed out several things that do not fit the definition of material interactions.

 

[WinterBorn]

Bullshit!
Music, as I have shown, exposes the lie of your pontification. The soul of the composer lives on in their composition long after their material existence has ended.
You as a Diest are simply not honest enough to ever admit that your hate motivated pontifications could ever be wrong.

"..I am a materialist..."

"...It means I believe the world is just entirely material substances.."

You insist on saying the same thing over and over, despite being shown to be wrong.

Atheists experience love. Is that material or a material substance?

Atheists can be compassionate. Is that material or a material substance?

There are many things experienced by atheists that are not material.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

Materialism - Wikipedia

Not sure what material interactions cause me to love my children, or to feel the compassion that prompts me to help my fellow man.

Electro chemical reactions in your brain.

Such reactions would be negated by the instinct to survive. And yet there are countless examples of people risking or sacrificing their own lives to save others, even strangers.

And, if you insist that all that I have described to refute your argument is just "Electro chemical reactions in your brain", then the same could be used to describe your religious views.

 

[ding]

I am a Christian and fairly conservative in my views.

I am an atheist (or as close to it as can be).

Which is it?

Things change in 6 years.

They can. There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God, or we can be static.

 

[ding]

An atheist does not believe in the spiritual. An atheist does not believe we are anything more than matter. An atheist does not believe that anything exists beyond the material world.

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Nope. The definition of atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in gods. The are not necessarily, nor by definition, materialists. I'm an atheist and I believe in lots of non-material things (love, liberty, the human mind, etc ...)

See post #404 where it explains that materialists believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

So since you do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe the non-material things are a result of material interactions.

By definition you are a materialist. All atheists are.

I do not believe in God. This does not mean I do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world. I have pointed out several things that do not fit the definition of material interactions.

And I have explained that if you do not believe anything exists beyond the material world, then everything which exists must proceed from the material world.

 

[deanrd]

This is one of those mystery threads.

Look at it like this, I believe in something that can’t be touched can’t be smelled can’t be felt in any way by any of our senses that has no impact at all in any way in my life and without any evidence to prove that it exists, I’m going to tell people prove to me it DOESN’T exist.

 

[ding]

"..I am a materialist..."

"...It means I believe the world is just entirely material substances.."

You insist on saying the same thing over and over, despite being shown to be wrong.

Atheists experience love. Is that material or a material substance?

Atheists can be compassionate. Is that material or a material substance?

There are many things experienced by atheists that are not material.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

Materialism - Wikipedia

Not sure what material interactions cause me to love my children, or to feel the compassion that prompts me to help my fellow man.

Electro chemical reactions in your brain.

Such reactions would be negated by the instinct to survive. And yet there are countless examples of people risking or sacrificing their own lives to save others, even strangers.

And, if you insist that all that I have described to refute your argument is just "Electro chemical reactions in your brain", then the same could be used to describe your religious views.

Which is one of the many reasons I believe that there is something beyond the material world. But if you do not believe there is something beyond the material world which everything proceeds from then you must believe everything proceeds from the material world.

 

[WinterBorn]

I am a Christian and fairly conservative in my views.

I am an atheist (or as close to it as can be).

Which is it?

Things change in 6 years.

They can. There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God, or we can be static.

I can only speak to my own experiences. I answered your question of "Which is it?". But I do find it amusing that you went back 6 years to try and find some sort of 'gotcha'.

 

[WinterBorn]

More critical theory as you define it!
Actually Atheists are more spiritually connected than Deists like you who are filled only with the spirit of hate for all who do not accept their pontifications. An Atheist sees the spirituality of music, for example, as something that lives on long after the composer has died when the listener is moved emotionally upon hearing the composition.

True spirituality has nothing to do with the existence of God, which you would know if you knew anything at all about spirituality!!!

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Nope. The definition of atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in gods. The are not necessarily, nor by definition, materialists. I'm an atheist and I believe in lots of non-material things (love, liberty, the human mind, etc ...)

See post #404 where it explains that materialists believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

So since you do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe the non-material things are a result of material interactions.

By definition you are a materialist. All atheists are.

I do not believe in God. This does not mean I do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world. I have pointed out several things that do not fit the definition of material interactions.

And I have explained that if you do not believe anything exists beyond the material world, then everything which exists must proceed from the material world.

Have I said I do not believe in anything beyond the material world? Or have I, by identifying as an atheist, simply said I do not believe in a deity?

 

[ding]

I am a Christian and fairly conservative in my views.

I am an atheist (or as close to it as can be).

Which is it?

Things change in 6 years.

They can. There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God, or we can be static.

I can only speak to my own experiences. I answered your question of "Which is it?". But I do find it amusing that you went back 6 years to try and find some sort of 'gotcha'.

It's took all of two minutes using the search feature, but I am happy that I was able to amuse you.

You can speak of your experiences all you want but you can't refute the logic.

If yo believe that nothing exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe that everything proceeds from the material world. Even things like thought and music and love.

 

[WinterBorn]

I am a Christian and fairly conservative in my views.

I am an atheist (or as close to it as can be).

Which is it?

Things change in 6 years.

They can. There are three possible states; we can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God, or we can be static.

I can only speak to my own experiences. I answered your question of "Which is it?". But I do find it amusing that you went back 6 years to try and find some sort of 'gotcha'.

It's took all of two minutes using the search feature, but I am happy that I was able to amuse you.

You can speak of your experiences all you want but you can't refute the logic.

If yo believe that nothing exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe that everything proceeds from the material world. Even things like thought and music and love.

Once again, I have not said that I do not believe in anything beyond the material world. I simply do not believe in a deity.

Is the only thing beyond the material world, by definition, God or a God?

 

[ding]

Wrong. Atheists by definition are materialists. They only believe in a material world. No criticism at all. Just reality.

Nope. The definition of atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in gods. The are not necessarily, nor by definition, materialists. I'm an atheist and I believe in lots of non-material things (love, liberty, the human mind, etc ...)

See post #404 where it explains that materialists believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

So since you do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe the non-material things are a result of material interactions.

By definition you are a materialist. All atheists are.

I do not believe in God. This does not mean I do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world. I have pointed out several things that do not fit the definition of material interactions.

And I have explained that if you do not believe anything exists beyond the material world, then everything which exists must proceed from the material world.

Have I said I do not believe in anything beyond the material world? Or have I, by identifying as an atheist, simply said I do not believe in a deity?

By definition an atheist is a materialist because he does not believe anything exists beyond the material world. That all things proceed from the material world. It's not that hard of a concept to understand and I have no idea why you find it so distasteful. It is the logical conclusion.

Whereas I believe that the material world proceeds from something which is not material. George Wald said it best...

“In my life as scientist I have come upon two major problems which, though rooted in science, though they would occur in this form only to a scientist, project beyond science, and are I think ultimately insoluble as science. That is hardly to be wondered at, since one involves consciousness and the other, cosmology.

The consciousness problem was hardly avoidable by one who has spent most of his life studying mechanisms of vision. We have learned a lot, we hope to learn much more; but none of it touches or even points, however tentatively, in the direction of what it means to see. Our observations in human eyes and nervous systems and in those of frogs are basically much alike. I know that I see; but does a frog see? It reacts to light; so do cameras, garage doors, any number of photoelectric devices. But does it see? Is it aware that it is reacting? There is nothing I can do as a scientist to answer that question, no way that I can identify either the presence or absence of consciousness. I believe consciousness to be a permanent condition that involves all sensation and perception. Consciousness seems to me to be wholly impervious to science.

The second problem involves the special properties of our universe. Life seems increasingly to be part of the order of nature. We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds life?

It has occurred to me lately - I must confess with some shock at first to my scientific sensibilities - that both questions might be brought into some degree of congruence. This is with the assumption that Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.”

George Wald, 1984, “Life and Mind in the Universe”, International Journal of Quantum Chemistry: Quantum Biology Symposium 11, 1984: 1-15.

 

[WinterBorn]

Nope. The definition of atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in gods. The are not necessarily, nor by definition, materialists. I'm an atheist and I believe in lots of non-material things (love, liberty, the human mind, etc ...)

See post #404 where it explains that materialists believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

So since you do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world, such as God or spirit, then you must believe the non-material things are a result of material interactions.

By definition you are a materialist. All atheists are.

I do not believe in God. This does not mean I do not believe that anything exists beyond the material world. I have pointed out several things that do not fit the definition of material interactions.

And I have explained that if you do not believe anything exists beyond the material world, then everything which exists must proceed from the material world.

Have I said I do not believe in anything beyond the material world? Or have I, by identifying as an atheist, simply said I do not believe in a deity?

By definition an atheist is a materialist because he does not believe anything exists beyond the material world. That all things proceed from the material world. It's not that hard of a concept to understand and I have no idea why you find it so distasteful. It is the logical conclusion.

Whereas I believe that the material world proceeds from something which is not material. George Wald said it best...

“In my life as scientist I have come upon two major problems which, though rooted in science, though they would occur in this form only to a scientist, project beyond science, and are I think ultimately insoluble as science. That is hardly to be wondered at, since one involves consciousness and the other, cosmology.

The consciousness problem was hardly avoidable by one who has spent most of his life studying mechanisms of vision. We have learned a lot, we hope to learn much more; but none of it touches or even points, however tentatively, in the direction of what it means to see. Our observations in human eyes and nervous systems and in those of frogs are basically much alike. I know that I see; but does a frog see? It reacts to light; so do cameras, garage doors, any number of photoelectric devices. But does it see? Is it aware that it is reacting? There is nothing I can do as a scientist to answer that question, no way that I can identify either the presence or absence of consciousness. I believe consciousness to be a permanent condition that involves all sensation and perception. Consciousness seems to me to be wholly impervious to science.

The second problem involves the special properties of our universe. Life seems increasingly to be part of the order of nature. We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds life?

It has occurred to me lately - I must confess with some shock at first to my scientific sensibilities - that both questions might be brought into some degree of congruence. This is with the assumption that Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.”

George Wald, 1984, “Life and Mind in the Universe”, International Journal of Quantum Chemistry: Quantum Biology Symposium 11, 1984: 1-15.

Once again, your entire supposition depends on your claim that I believe in nothing beyond the material world.