Existentialism...

[Avi]

I believe that there is no higher purpose to life outside of living, breeding and dying. Thats it.

If this were true we would still be living in caves and hanging in tree branches with the other monkeys

Oh, by the way, I figured out my main objection to the atheist line of reasoning. It has no heart . Your quote is a good example of this problem.

 

[GlorytoGod]

for some reason existentialism conjures up images of unemployed french intellectuals sitting in cafes drinking coffee playing chess and sleeping with prostitutes

 

[citizenzen]

Oh, by the way, I figured out my main objection to the atheist line of reasoning. It has no heart . Your quote is a good example of this problem.

Not true Avi. Heart is not a product of religious belief. Compassion is within every normal human and even found in the animal world...

Elephants Show Compassion and Have an Awareness about Death

Now I can understand if you want to claim that Tao is not "normal" but I do think it's quite unfair to paint all atheists or atheism as "heartless". As evidence of heart, I'd like to submit this photo of a staunch atheist (me) giving a hug to a new bride. I rest my case.

​

 

[Avi]

CZ, thank you for correcting me, I would agree that not all atheists are heartless, only the ones with no heart

Also, I think like most systems, for example, of economics, politics, religion and philosophy, that in most cases a single monolithic ideaology is not the best approach. Often, hybrid systems, which take the best of two or more work the best. For example, neither capitalism or socialism seems to work well by itself. That is why most countries are working with composites of these systems. Perhaps the same of religion ?

By the way, it looks like that was a very nice wedding.

 

[Snoopy]

Tillich was a theist I understand...

s.

 

[citizenzen]

Also, I think like most systems, for example, of economics, politics, religion and philosophy, that in most cases a single monolithic ideaology is not the best approach... Perhaps the same of religion?

I agree.

That's why I've employ the combination of atheism and Buddhism. Atheism removes all unnecessary myth and superstition, but in itself does not provide the path to enlightenment, as Buddhism does.

The two together are like chocolate and peanut butter... very satisfying.

 

[Postmaster]

Nice to see a picture of you CZ just how I pictured you haha.

Atheism in its strictest sense is a rejection of a theist. I can see the beauty of what your saying but still it means to me that you are preemptively taking out an interpretation of something that is not disproven thats why I shift more Agnostic (which im sure Buddha was?) I appreciate reading about absurdity.

Its very possible to keep a heart and have an ethic that rejects God, however the reason remains as to why not to keep God an open option? I've taken the plunge and believe in a God but keep him ultimately undefinable (Agnostic thiest).

@ Snoopy Kierkegaard complete genius

 

[citizenzen]

I can understand both Avis and your point CZ. Atheism in its strictest sense is a rejection of a theist. I can see the beauty of this of what your saying and as an agnostic its something I don't rule out either but still it means to me that you are preemptively taking out an interpretation of something that is not disproven thats why I shift more Agnostic (which im sure Buddha was?) and I appreciate reading about absurdity.

PM, it's not rational to believe everything until it is disproved. That would, for instance, require me to believe that purple monkeys live on Jupiter (Prove that wrong!).

Just as in our judicial system, it is not up to the defendant to prove that they didn't commit a crime, it is up to the prosecutor to prove that the accused committed it.

Likewise, the burden of proof rests on those who claim God exists. Until compelling evidence is brought forth, it is most rational to not take on these beliefs until they are proven.

 

[Postmaster]

Ok well this point I’m deeply considering I have done for awhile actually from an influence from you and other atheists.

How would one communicate ethics or morality in a way that young children can understand? The importance of illustration, mascots, imagery can go a long way in aiding remeberance as well.

 

[citizenzen]

How would one communicate ethics or morality in a way that young children can understand? The importance of illustration, mascots, imagery can go a long way in aiding remeberance as well.

The simplest way is to explain the Golden Rule, which does not require a deity to impose it.

Said to the little boy...

"Johnny, would you like it if Bobby crushed your skull with a cricket bat?"

"No... I guess not."

"Of course you wouldn't. Now let's burn the cricket bat and hide the body before the cops come around. And let this be a lesson for you!"

"Yes mum."
​

See how that works?

 

[Tao_Equus]

Where does morality enter into this?

s.

Into the living bit.. if I want to live a long, peaceable and happy life I must exercise and demand certain standards of morality. Morality, to me, is simply the word we give to a human condition you see in all social mammals. It is a cooperative behaviour to insure mutual survival. Because of the development of complexity in human social groups, the blurring of our territorial boundaries, and the sheer pressure of numbers we have extended this into areas that other animals do not but the root to me is unambiguous and the same. Law is the most obvious embodiment of morality in our social structures and has evolved accordingly to the point where we now have (at least in theory) international law.
Personal morality has at its base certain universal principles and even the most ardent existentialist would realise that to reject them, outside of a philosophical debate, would be foolishness. Additionally I think that unless someone is seriously flawed, ie a sociopath, it would be near impossible to meaningfully reject it. If you are smart enough to understand existentialism and you completely reject morality then you are simply not after a long, peaceable and happy life. You are probably a career politician, clergyman or the ruthless business type that has no empathy. Indeed I would go as far to suggest that the majority of those have no morality, ethics or empathy.

 

[Postmaster]

The simplest way is to explain the Golden Rule, which does not require a deity to impose it.

Said to the little boy...

"Johnny, would you like it if Bobby crushed your skull with a cricket bat?"

"No... I guess not."

"Of course you wouldn't. Now let's burn the cricket bat and hide the body before the cops come around. Now let this be a lesson for you!"

"Yes mum."
​

See how that works?

Not the example i was looking for but whatever works.

 

[citizenzen]

Not the example i was looking for but whatever works.

What? I should have wrapped it up with flowers?

Sheesh! People always want the flowers!

 

[nativeastral]

Where does morality enter into this?

s.

Tillich was a theist I understand...

s.

all l know about him was he considered religion as an 'ultimate concern' for all humans, therefore broadening the concept to include ideologies such as marxism, ie that it is natural for humans to have a commitment to developing human values for universal application.

l've only read bits of Sartre and it would've helped to have read previous continental philosophers, particularly from Germany to get concepts unfamiliar and which he freely used/adapted. Found him hard due to translation and his dense minutiae of point by point phenomenology.

This later article which he wrote explains the morality issue existentialists are castigated for

Existentialism and Humanism

 

[path_of_one]

I concur with Tao- you don't need to be a theist to have morality. Ethics and empathy are part of being a social creature, and a person can learn from nature itself what it is to live a good life. It's common sense that humans are social and need the group to survive and propagate- and more than this, to be happy. All living beings also need the larger natural system as a whole in order to ensure life for future generations. In supporting the social group and the natural world, we can find all the essential ethics for a good life- caring for others, being sustainable, and so on.

The problem with human beings is that we are so socially adapted that we can actually perpetuate maladaptive cultural "rules" that are detrimental to real ethics and also to our long-term survival. What worked through common sense when we were hunter-gatherers, living in small groups and seeing the results of our decisions directly doesn't work in a global capitalist and overpopulated situation.

The way I see it, as a panentheist, is that God is all over the place- in us and all around us. Our opportunity to learn harmonious action with the whole, to have a good and happy life, and to connect to that "Something More" if we so desire is all around us and in every day and every being and every moment. So I figure that if someone doesn't want to "believe in God" it doesn't mean s/he won't be communing with God, at least my sense of what God is.

That said, of course one can choose disharmony or be too lazy to care... which is not only unethical and against what I would say is "Divine Order" but also is just plain stupid. As we can see with environmental deterioration and widespread poverty and violence, the results of this speak for themselves. Again, it's pretty much common sense to me.

As for myth, in the animist traditions, these stories encoded information useful for survival and long-term sustainability much of the time. Information beyond things like the golden rule that were specific to the ecology of a group's particular place. As such, they are/were useful ways to memorize and hold to a bulk of information. They are great learning tools for many humans, as it works with how our brains function, and they have the bonus of making us emotionally invested, thereby ensuring our commitment to proper behaviors. While I find the value of the world's religions in general ethics to hold true, we have largely lost the value of religion for practical matters such as health, economics, and sustainability. I find that to be a shame, because it's apparent that, on the whole, we haven't filled in the void with something else. Of course science has lots to say, but without getting the billions of fellow global citizens on board with proper behavior, we continue to screw over each other and our planet.

 

[Avi]

The way I see it, as a panentheist, is that God is all over the place- in us and all around us. Our opportunity to learn harmonious action with the whole, to have a good and happy life, and to connect to that "Something More" if we so desire is all around us and in every day and every being and every moment. So I figure that if someone doesn't want to "believe in God" it doesn't mean s/he won't be communing with God, at least my sense of what God is.

I am interested in learning more about pantheism and panentheism. My understanding is that pantheism is the belief that G-d is the material and reality of our universe. And panentheism is pantheism, plus. In the sense that G-d is what is beyond that material and real universe.

Do you agree with this description of pantheism and panentheism ?

If panenthesim describes the presence of G-d beyond our reality, I can only guess that this might include spirituality, the soul, etc. Can anyone explain it to me ?

My understanding is that Spinoza was a pantheist, so I like it already

Do many people in this forum believe that these systems are good ways to describe G-d, and our reality, as well ?

 

[Postmaster]

The ancient Greeks coined up most of these phrases about God. They even worshiped the Agnostos God and some philosophers were Atheists.

I stand by Panentheism I don't think I could ever switch to Atheism from this, really this kind of thinking doesn't make me an agnostic.

Then came revealed religion and barbaric invasions and killed all this intellectual thinking. Greek tragedy maybe.

 

[Avi]

PM, excellent points, all !!

Perhaps someday I can visit the beautiful Pantheon

 

[Postmaster]

You won't regret a visit..

I think that picture your showing is a German building in Germany a copy of the Greek version. Hitler and other German intellectuals had a crazy obsession with ancient Greece. It was to their disappointment that Greece refused alliance with Nazism and the Greeks managed to defeat a German backed Italian invasion with limited resources and outnumbered military. This also a traditional part of Greek history to beat armies siginificantly larger then their own.

Winston churchills famous quote. We will not say thereafter that the Greeks fight like heroes, but heroes fight like the Greeks!

 

[Tao_Equus]

Existentialism and Humanism

From this....

"Man is, indeed, a project which possesses a subjective life, instead of being a kind of moss, or a fungus or a cauliflower. Before that projection of the self nothing exists; not even in the heaven of intelligence: man will only attain existence when he is what he purposes to be. Not, however, what he may wish to be. For what we usually understand by wishing or willing is a conscious decision taken--much more often than not--after we have made ourselves what we are. I may wish to join a party, to write a book or to marry--but in such a case what is usually called my will is probably a manifestation of a prior and more spontaneous decision. If, however, it is true that existence is prior to essence, man is responsible for what he is. Thus, the first effect of existentialism is that it puts every man in possession of himself as he is, and places the entire responsibility for his existence squarely upon his own shoulders. And, when we say that man is responsible for himself, we do not mean that he is responsible only for his own individuality, but that he is responsible for all men. The word "subjectivism" is to be understood in two senses, and our adversaries play upon only one of them. Subjectivism means, on the one hand, the freedom of the individual subject and, on the other, that man cannot pass beyond human subjectivity. It is the latter which is the deeper meaning of existentialism."


I had quite forgotten just how beautiful and insightful Sartes writing was. It has been some 20 odd years since I read him and for someone who had grown up in an atheist home and then adopted the politics of anarchy, peace and freedom espoused in the lyrics of political punk it was like finding a great uncle that explained my genes. Only reading through that excerpt do I realise that reading Sarte did effect my thinking and helped form the man I am today. He had a special talent for sure, how many other philosophers can you think of that had 50,000 people turn up to pay their last respects?

As I think the quote makes abundantly clear existentialism is not defeatism or resignation. It is self-honesty, an acceptance of responsibility for ones choices and the recognition that your choices are not some remote island but that they effect everyone. It is for this reason, I would like to think, that I am so stridently anti-theist. I state again I AM NOT against personal spirituality, indeed I find it a wonderful way of expressing our appreciation of our self-awareness but the wilful belief in deities is an abdication of personal responsibility to understand both ourselves and all our brothers and sisters. We do not allow any deity to act as our proxy when we choose to give our support to an institution, or allow some contextually ambiguous old writing to dictate our morality. There are no lessons to be learned from the propaganda of institutions that have only one totalitarian remit, service to their own elites. Everything we need to know about what is good and right is already in our hearts and got there because we are social animals that evolved to include these traits. There is no big guy in the sky watching, judging, promising us torment or paradise.

The choice is simple.... you either like humanity or you do not. And that in the individual boils down to whether you like yourself or not. It is no accident that all the millions of people who seem to will Armageddon use books full of guilt, shame, sin, evil and every shade of darkness to justify their beliefs. They hate themselves, wilfully call themselves sinners in a vocal affirmation that they have succumbed to the insidious propaganda of malicious church doctrines that want people to hate themselves. When challenged on this they will be quick to point out their holy-books get-out clauses which were inserted within them for just that reason. It can make me livid. I want to scream wake up you ~~~~~~~ idiot....smell the ~~~~~~~ coffee!!

The reason I despise organised religions is because I love people, I love humanity. I do so because I love my own awareness of being alive and my capacity to look, learn, appreciate and find happiness. And I want other people to feel the same way unhandicapped by dogmas that tell them they are dirty, soiled, flawed and base. And I believe it is our natural condition to be the way I am. The religions invest heavily in getting our children and corrupting them with their filth because they know as well as I do if people are just left alone, in peace, they have all the requirements within themselves to be very happy.