Atheism - It does have an answer (punishment, Earth, mystic)

[zenzero]

Friends, whatever be the belief this side or that. Its all a mind play swinging like the pendulum.
Transdent/still the mind and the pendulum is in the middle neither this side nor that god/no god, athesist/non atheist both can be seen together from the centre.
Love & rgds

[eudaimonia]

Originally Posted by zenzero

Transdent/still the mind and the pendulum is in the middle neither this side nor that god/no god

Thanks, but I prefer a mind that is active.


eudaimonia,

Mark

[eudaimonia]

"Science - atheistical science, if you will - can tell us how the world works, but cannot answer the eternal metaphysical wail: why do we suffer so?"

Of course it can. We suffer because we have evolved as sentient beings with the capacity for suffering. What is the mystery here?

What I will agree science cannot do is deal with well are issues of meaning in the sense of "what does this mean to me?" and "what should I do now?"

This doesn't mean that there is anything deficient about science, or about secular worldviews in general. It simply means that it is not science's function to deal with those issues. They are best dealt with in philosophy, art, and literature.


eudaimonia,

Mark

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by eudaimonia

"Science - atheistical science, if you will - can tell us how the world works, but cannot answer the eternal metaphysical wail: why do we suffer so?"

Of course it can. We suffer because we have evolved as sentient beings with the capacity for suffering. What is the mystery here?

Well said.

[Nick Soapdish]

If you ask science to give you any meaningful answer to any of these questions, the best response you will get is "42".

[Pariah]

Homo sapiens evolved in relationship to environment, not the environment in relationship to us.

The universe existed before us and shall continue to do so when every last one of us is gone - to ask why there is anything "good" or "bad" in this world is to accept an anthropocentric view of the world that simply does not hold ground in the larger scheme of his cosmos.

[logician]

Originally Posted by Pariah

Homo sapiens evolved in relationship to environment, not the environment in relationship to us.

The universe existed before us and shall continue to do so when every last one of us is gone - to ask why there is anything "good" or "bad" in this world is to accept an anthropocentric view of the world that simply does not hold ground in the larger scheme of his cosmos.

Good point, religions that equate the "end" of the world with the extinction of homo sapeins just don't get it, the world can get along fine w/o us, it did so for billions of years.

[Aasimar]

The beauty of atheism (Or in my case Agnosticism, I figured I was close enough to be able to post here is that the ultimate answer is unnecessary. The beauty is in the search for the truth, not the truth itself. I would have to admit if I thought I had all the answers, there wouldn't be much to live for.

[Flappycat]

Well, I think that a stronger point would be that, though religions claim to answer all, the other tools at our disposal have been more lucrative. To be an atheist is only to deny the plausibility of religion. To be religious is not to deny the fruits of science, philosophy, art, music, dance, writing, history, math, architecture, engineering, invention, government and thought fails me to list all, but, in disputing an institution that has proven faulty, troublesome and implausible, the atheist may be in a position to embrace the good things in our culture more fully and less pretentiously. The atheist may not necessarily do so, of course, but to do so is certainly laudable.

[Pariah]

Originally Posted by Flappycat

Well, I think that a stronger point would be that, though religions claim to answer all, the other tools at our disposal have been more lucrative. To be an atheist is only to deny the plausibility of religion. To be religious is not to deny the fruits of science, philosophy, art, music, dance, writing, history, math, architecture, engineering, invention, government and thought fails me to list all, but, in disputing an institution that has proven faulty, troublesome and implausible, the atheist may be in a position to embrace the good things in our culture more fully and less pretentiously. The atheist may not necessarily do so, of course, but to do so is certainly laudable.

Well said. People come in far too many flavors to color them all uniformly.