Become a Patron!
The Atheists Thread...A place for Logical, Rational and Scientific thinking with facts
- Thread starter No Ash More Cash
- Start date
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Damn straight!
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Hahaha..Then pray for a miracle!
Yeah, I'll keep my wang. We get along well.
If you were one of those fishes or amphibians that can change sex at will.
Or slug.
I agree some things we may never find the answer in our life time but I would never say never
...I agree that science has gone down a wrong path from time to time but it's main objective has always to forward mankind and have a understanding in the world we live and truth otherwise we would be still living in a cave and maybe even extinct if we were never inquisitiveIf you do...Send me a tit pic
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
If you do...Send me a tit pic
There are more possibilities in the universe than science will uncover. However, could science figure out life, death, disease, cancer, obesity, aliens, climate control, cheap energy, etc. in your lifetime? Quite possibly. An awareness of a lot of the unknowns is thanks to science and it's increasing because of science. A possible multiverse comes to mind. But what science does know and can know should be well worth the investment in science.
First thought: eww.
Second thought, you can't just put that out there without saying any more about it:
http://www.whatsonxiamen.com/news11247.html
Good lord man...Put them away
Man boob nips don't countFunny thing, @Midniteoyl, nobody has censored this nip show!
I wonder why womens nips are taboo
Funny thing, @Midniteoyl, nobody has censored this nip show!
A reply for each nip?Funny thing, @Midniteoyl, nobody has censored this nip show!
If anyone likes contests this is for you...Someone who befriended me on YT just sent me this... Thought some of you may be interested.
Truth Contest What is the Truth of Life?...Also has some great quotes on the right side of that site
http://www.truthcontest.com/
Truth Contest What is the Truth of Life?...Also has some great quotes on the right side of that site
http://www.truthcontest.com/
I just pictured him titty fucking himself
One of the few people I truly look up too and admire
And to follow up, Richard Dawkins reads his "fan" mail.
lmfao
Thanks Bob for turning me onto these...Just found this one and I can't stop laughing..but it is also sad at the same time
Slicknic
Bronze Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
I'll describe my views of religion as words forming an image... This is the way I see it.
Imagine all the religions of the world forming a circle. Each one pointing a finger at the others
and exclaiming they're wrong. All of them are right.
I consider myself lucky, I figured that out as a young child.
Imagine all the religions of the world forming a circle. Each one pointing a finger at the others
and exclaiming they're wrong. All of them are right.
I consider myself lucky, I figured that out as a young child.
Nice image. Or imagine a polytheistic utopia: each religion pointing a finger at the others and exclaiming they're right!
Last edited:
Thought of the day...We know more about our Universe then we do of the Marianas Trench
Just some light hearted humour from a Atheist Ricky Gervais...Viewer discretion is advised.
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Dont know about that.. at least we know what its made of and what its full ofThought of the day...We know more about our Universe then we do of the Marianas Trench
EXACTLY why I filter my water.Dont know about that.. at least we know what its made of and what its full of
That be true but there are Creatures/Bacteria...etc we don't know of down there..We have only just found out in resent years what it is made of...but we do know now that the Marianas Trench is part of the worlds tectonic plates...Last and only time someone was down there and may I add not at it's deepest was in 1960Dont know about that.. at least we know what its made of and what its full of
Last edited:
WTF???
Has she been drinking?
WTF???
I understand her teleprompter went south and she had to improvise. That is pure Palin freestyling.
Last edited:
I understand her teleprompter went south and she had to improvise. That is pure Palin freestyling. What a brilliant mind!
I remember her saying stuff about teleprompter's before
I'm thinking more like Glue sniffing
Thought of the day...We know more about our Universe then we do of the Marianas Trench
I know all about Mariana's trench that I wanna know. Some serious stank between them legs.
A snippet of casual philosophical conversation on atheist spirituality for those who are interested. I've only read a bit of his book, but consider it worthwhile and accessible to readers unfamiliar with philosophical jargon, etc.
André Comte-Sponville interview
André Comte-Sponville is a leading French philosopher who has taught at the Sorbonne in Paris. He is the author of the best selling books ‘A Short Treatise on the Great Virtues’ (Heinemann 2002) and ‘The Book of Atheist Spirituality’ (Bantam 2008).
He has kindly contributed the following interview with Fabien Trécourt which is presented first in English translation followed by the French original.
A Spirituality of Immanence
As an adolescent, the philosopher André Comte-Sponville lost his faith and ‘this was a liberation’, he writes in‘The Spirit of Atheism’ (ed Albin Michel). Fed from the gospels and from the teaching of Buddha just as from Spinoza, this spirit, uncompromisingly eager at the lack of the sacred, puts into practice a ‘spirituality without god’.
What do you call a ‘spirituality without god’?
What is spirituality? It’s the life of the spirit, especially in its relationship with the infinite, eternity, and the absolute. All religion elevates this, at least in part ; but all spirituality isn’t necessarily religious. Atheists, they also have a spiritual life : they inhabit, as they are able, their relationship finite to infinite, their relationship temporal to eternity, their relationship relative to absolute. This absolute, for them, isn’t a person, but the being or the becoming, the whole or nature, let’s say the immanent totality which contains them and surpasses them. They can ponder it, think about it, it’s what we call metaphysical, but also try it out, live it, and it’s this we call spirituality. We are open in the grand Open, as Rilke says. This opening, it’s the same spirit. Should I, because I am atheist, renounce all experience of eternity, the infinite, and the absolute? Certainly not. Many philosophers – for example Epicurus and Spinoza – have challenged the existence of a transcendental spirit, without renouncing the enjoyment of what Epicurus called ‘immortal rights’. It’s this I call a spirituality of immanence.
Why do you prefer to think that God does not exist?
It’s not a preference! I would prefer, on the contrary, that God did exist, and this is one of my reasons for not believing it. An existence which corresponds at this point to our strongest desires, how can we not suspect that it has been invented to satisfy them? It’s what Freud calls an illusion : a belief derived from human desires. As no being, by definition, is more desirable than God, no idea is more suspect of illusion than the belief in his existence. Then there is the atrocity of evil (especially the suffering of children), the mediocrity of humanity (beginning with my own!), the absence of any real proof… why should I believe in the existence of a God whom nothing attests, of whom I have no experience, and who only explains everything on condition of being himself incomprehensible? That said, I am a non-dogmatic atheist. There is no more proof of the non-existence of God than of his existence. My atheism is not a knowledge ; it’s a belief or a conviction.
What do you make of the responses religions give?
Their spirituality isn’t mine. Their moral content, on the other hand, continues to enlighten me. Let’s admit that Jesus did not rise ; does that condemn his message of love and peace? Certainly not. I do as Spinoza, who was no more Christian than I : I try to stay faithful to the ‘spirit of Christ’, which is ‘of justice and charity’. Christianity, despite the wandering of the church, is part of the best which humanity has produced, in the same way as the Socratic tradition in Greece, Buddhist in India, Taoist or Confusion in China….the spirit has no homeland, and is so much better for it.
Your preference seems to go to Christianity..
Sentimentally, yes : it’s part of my history. Intellectually, I feel closer to Buddhism or Taoism – and even more to ‘Tch’an’ which is like a synthesis between the two – , because these are spiritualities without God. For an atheist it’s more convenient! However, I don’t trust spiritual tourism, New Age or Orientalised. I prefer to deepen my own tradition, that of western philosophy. Also you never get cured from your childhood , and mine was very pious. I have formed myself since, over the years, a sort of interior Christ, who is neither God nor the son of God, but a man ‘gentle and humble of heart’ as he said himself, whose faith I don’t share but whose wisdom I admire. Basically, what Jesus tells us about man and about this life matters more to me than what he says about God and about an eventual life after death.
Would an atheist spirituality inspired by another religion be different?
We are all the deposits of a tradition, or of several. To be an atheist in a Moslem or Hindu country, you have to live differently than in Europe. But I don’t have the choice : I am western, whether I like it or not. I am not going to shave my skull, dress in a saffron robe, or found an ashram in Auvergne! My Jewish friends have helped me to reflect about that. Several of them define themselves as ‘atheist Jews’, atheist because they don’t believe in any God, Jews because they are known by and want to take part in a history, a tradition, a community…it occurred to me, a little in the same spirit, to define myself as a ‘faithful atheist’ even as an ‘assimilated Gentile’. It’s a way of stating my fidelity, be it critical, to the Judeo-Christian tradition, which it’s current to despise, and whose greatness I do not cease to admire. Faithfulness is what remains of faith when one has lost it, the feeling of a debt, then also the responsibility to pass something on. What threatens us today, in any case in Europe, is less fanaticism, which is like an excess of faith, than nihilism which is a lack of faithfulness.
André Comte-Sponville interview
André Comte-Sponville is a leading French philosopher who has taught at the Sorbonne in Paris. He is the author of the best selling books ‘A Short Treatise on the Great Virtues’ (Heinemann 2002) and ‘The Book of Atheist Spirituality’ (Bantam 2008).
He has kindly contributed the following interview with Fabien Trécourt which is presented first in English translation followed by the French original.
A Spirituality of Immanence
As an adolescent, the philosopher André Comte-Sponville lost his faith and ‘this was a liberation’, he writes in‘The Spirit of Atheism’ (ed Albin Michel). Fed from the gospels and from the teaching of Buddha just as from Spinoza, this spirit, uncompromisingly eager at the lack of the sacred, puts into practice a ‘spirituality without god’.
What do you call a ‘spirituality without god’?
What is spirituality? It’s the life of the spirit, especially in its relationship with the infinite, eternity, and the absolute. All religion elevates this, at least in part ; but all spirituality isn’t necessarily religious. Atheists, they also have a spiritual life : they inhabit, as they are able, their relationship finite to infinite, their relationship temporal to eternity, their relationship relative to absolute. This absolute, for them, isn’t a person, but the being or the becoming, the whole or nature, let’s say the immanent totality which contains them and surpasses them. They can ponder it, think about it, it’s what we call metaphysical, but also try it out, live it, and it’s this we call spirituality. We are open in the grand Open, as Rilke says. This opening, it’s the same spirit. Should I, because I am atheist, renounce all experience of eternity, the infinite, and the absolute? Certainly not. Many philosophers – for example Epicurus and Spinoza – have challenged the existence of a transcendental spirit, without renouncing the enjoyment of what Epicurus called ‘immortal rights’. It’s this I call a spirituality of immanence.
Why do you prefer to think that God does not exist?
It’s not a preference! I would prefer, on the contrary, that God did exist, and this is one of my reasons for not believing it. An existence which corresponds at this point to our strongest desires, how can we not suspect that it has been invented to satisfy them? It’s what Freud calls an illusion : a belief derived from human desires. As no being, by definition, is more desirable than God, no idea is more suspect of illusion than the belief in his existence. Then there is the atrocity of evil (especially the suffering of children), the mediocrity of humanity (beginning with my own!), the absence of any real proof… why should I believe in the existence of a God whom nothing attests, of whom I have no experience, and who only explains everything on condition of being himself incomprehensible? That said, I am a non-dogmatic atheist. There is no more proof of the non-existence of God than of his existence. My atheism is not a knowledge ; it’s a belief or a conviction.
What do you make of the responses religions give?
Their spirituality isn’t mine. Their moral content, on the other hand, continues to enlighten me. Let’s admit that Jesus did not rise ; does that condemn his message of love and peace? Certainly not. I do as Spinoza, who was no more Christian than I : I try to stay faithful to the ‘spirit of Christ’, which is ‘of justice and charity’. Christianity, despite the wandering of the church, is part of the best which humanity has produced, in the same way as the Socratic tradition in Greece, Buddhist in India, Taoist or Confusion in China….the spirit has no homeland, and is so much better for it.
Your preference seems to go to Christianity..
Sentimentally, yes : it’s part of my history. Intellectually, I feel closer to Buddhism or Taoism – and even more to ‘Tch’an’ which is like a synthesis between the two – , because these are spiritualities without God. For an atheist it’s more convenient! However, I don’t trust spiritual tourism, New Age or Orientalised. I prefer to deepen my own tradition, that of western philosophy. Also you never get cured from your childhood , and mine was very pious. I have formed myself since, over the years, a sort of interior Christ, who is neither God nor the son of God, but a man ‘gentle and humble of heart’ as he said himself, whose faith I don’t share but whose wisdom I admire. Basically, what Jesus tells us about man and about this life matters more to me than what he says about God and about an eventual life after death.
Would an atheist spirituality inspired by another religion be different?
We are all the deposits of a tradition, or of several. To be an atheist in a Moslem or Hindu country, you have to live differently than in Europe. But I don’t have the choice : I am western, whether I like it or not. I am not going to shave my skull, dress in a saffron robe, or found an ashram in Auvergne! My Jewish friends have helped me to reflect about that. Several of them define themselves as ‘atheist Jews’, atheist because they don’t believe in any God, Jews because they are known by and want to take part in a history, a tradition, a community…it occurred to me, a little in the same spirit, to define myself as a ‘faithful atheist’ even as an ‘assimilated Gentile’. It’s a way of stating my fidelity, be it critical, to the Judeo-Christian tradition, which it’s current to despise, and whose greatness I do not cease to admire. Faithfulness is what remains of faith when one has lost it, the feeling of a debt, then also the responsibility to pass something on. What threatens us today, in any case in Europe, is less fanaticism, which is like an excess of faith, than nihilism which is a lack of faithfulness.
Last edited:
Whatever the religious or atheist beliefs might be, does spirituality come back to the same?
Certainly not! Compare for example prayer and meditation : it’s not at all the same thing. Prayer is made with words (‘to pray is to speak’, writes Thomas Aquinas) : it’s a request, which addresses someone. Meditation is made in silence ; it addresses no-one and asks for nothing. Morally, on the other hand, all traditions converge on what is essential : all place generosity higher than egoism, sincerity higher than lying ; courage higher than cowardice, gentleness and compassion higher than violence and cruelty, love higher than hate…these values, often born in the great religions, are firstly human. We need them to live together without harming ourselves too much. It’s not because they had been decreed by God that they are good. It’s because they are good that it’s possible to believe that they are of divine origin. For my part, I rather see in them a legacy of history which it’s important to preserve. It’s a question of not being unworthy of what humanity has made of itself, and of us!
What about society : can it dispense with religion?
If you take the word ‘religion’ in a limited sense, as belief in a creator God, personal and transcendent, then the answer is clearly yes : immense civilisations have prospered without imagining such a thing. On the other hand, no society can dispense with faithfulness, rules, traditions, rites. None can subsist without a form of communion. Is religious practice even alone in playing this role? Experience proves the contrary. One can also be united in a certain number of common values (liberty, equality, fraternity, justice, love…) including when one considers them exclusively human.
Can this lay spirituality transform itself into a religion of ‘Man’, of ‘The Republic’?
When you don’t believe in God, you can be tempted to replace him by something else which takes his place. It’s a danger, in my eyes, more than an opportunity. Marxism has been depicted as a ‘religion of history’. That’s its messianic component : the proletariat takes the place of the Messiah, communism the place of paradise…I see in this an idolatry of history. Simone Weil has said it well : ‘If you believe you have a Father down here, it’s a false God ; even if monotheist, you are idolatrous’. Idols are legion : the state with Hegel, man with Feuerbach, history with Marx, the Republic, perhaps with some…on the contrary, the greatness of monotheism is to have invented transcendence. The gods have left : there only remains, said Alain, immense absence, present everywhere. It’s a progress which we owe to Judaism. I have no nostalgia for animism or polytheism, quite to the contrary, and hardly any taste for idols!
Does this explain the development of lay ritual?
The strong trend, since the Enlightenment, is a progression of atheism – including, for several years now, in North America. But we need ritual. When we are confronted by the death of someone close, you have to say that purely civil funerals have almost something poor and flat about them, like a copy which wouldn’t be able to make one forget the original. Perhaps it’s a question of time ; you don’t replace 2000 years of the imaginary in a flash..religious ceremony allows horror to be tamed : you don’t bury a man like a beast : you don’t burn him like a log. Atheists are looking for equivalents, with varying degrees of success. Civil marriage, when it’s not botched up, seems today to offer an acceptable substitute. It allows us to officialise what is intimate, the most secret, the most savage, to include family, friends, and society…it’s another way of being united.
Finally, what difference do you make between atheist and religious spirituality
In religion, the absolute is a person, admittedly transcendent, but whom one can meet, pray to, worship. ‘God, more intimate in me than myself’ as Saint Augustine said, and higher than heaven… I distrust this loftiness which crushes everything, as I do this withdrawal into oneself which locks us into internality. I believe more in spiritualities which open us to the world, which know no other absolute than what is real, no other infinity than nature, no other eternity than the present. This is the spirit of Epicurus, of Spinoza, of Camus, as also, so far as I have understood or seen life, the spirit of Tch’an or of Zen. It’s not a question of saving the self, but to save myself from it, to emancipate myself from it, as far as one can. The absolute isn’t the end of the road, but the road itself. Spirituality is this pathway, that you see more often from the perspective of the time, otherwise stated as daily life, with its highs and lows, and which we sometimes get to experience, as Spinoza says sub specie aeternitatis (from the perspective of eternity).
You even defend a certain mysticism ; in what way is this not religious?
Because it doesn’t presume any transcendence, any dogma, any worship, any faith, any hope. It has happened to me – sometimes, rarely – to experience what is called today ‘modified states of consciousness’ : the sudden encounter with mystery and with evidence, an experience of fullness, of simplicity, of unity, of silence, of eternity, of serenity, of acceptance (but joyful, so joyful!), like an infinite peace…it’s what Freud, citing Romain Rolland, calls ‘the oceanic feeling’ which millions of people, believing or not, have felt. I am part of this, and I’ve never experienced anything as strong, nor as happy. Then ‘we feel and we experience that we are eternal’, as Spinoza says, or more that the present and eternity are one and the same thing, like samsara and nirvana in Nagarjuna. One is no longer separated from reality by self : there is no more than everything. Kojève affirms that ‘all authentic mystery is in fact more or less atheist’. I wouldn’t go that far. What I can testify, on the other hand, is that an atheist is not obliged to castrate his soul : his spirit, as much as any other, is capable of opening joyfully, up to the extreme point where it culminates in abolishing itself.
Certainly not! Compare for example prayer and meditation : it’s not at all the same thing. Prayer is made with words (‘to pray is to speak’, writes Thomas Aquinas) : it’s a request, which addresses someone. Meditation is made in silence ; it addresses no-one and asks for nothing. Morally, on the other hand, all traditions converge on what is essential : all place generosity higher than egoism, sincerity higher than lying ; courage higher than cowardice, gentleness and compassion higher than violence and cruelty, love higher than hate…these values, often born in the great religions, are firstly human. We need them to live together without harming ourselves too much. It’s not because they had been decreed by God that they are good. It’s because they are good that it’s possible to believe that they are of divine origin. For my part, I rather see in them a legacy of history which it’s important to preserve. It’s a question of not being unworthy of what humanity has made of itself, and of us!
What about society : can it dispense with religion?
If you take the word ‘religion’ in a limited sense, as belief in a creator God, personal and transcendent, then the answer is clearly yes : immense civilisations have prospered without imagining such a thing. On the other hand, no society can dispense with faithfulness, rules, traditions, rites. None can subsist without a form of communion. Is religious practice even alone in playing this role? Experience proves the contrary. One can also be united in a certain number of common values (liberty, equality, fraternity, justice, love…) including when one considers them exclusively human.
Can this lay spirituality transform itself into a religion of ‘Man’, of ‘The Republic’?
When you don’t believe in God, you can be tempted to replace him by something else which takes his place. It’s a danger, in my eyes, more than an opportunity. Marxism has been depicted as a ‘religion of history’. That’s its messianic component : the proletariat takes the place of the Messiah, communism the place of paradise…I see in this an idolatry of history. Simone Weil has said it well : ‘If you believe you have a Father down here, it’s a false God ; even if monotheist, you are idolatrous’. Idols are legion : the state with Hegel, man with Feuerbach, history with Marx, the Republic, perhaps with some…on the contrary, the greatness of monotheism is to have invented transcendence. The gods have left : there only remains, said Alain, immense absence, present everywhere. It’s a progress which we owe to Judaism. I have no nostalgia for animism or polytheism, quite to the contrary, and hardly any taste for idols!
Does this explain the development of lay ritual?
The strong trend, since the Enlightenment, is a progression of atheism – including, for several years now, in North America. But we need ritual. When we are confronted by the death of someone close, you have to say that purely civil funerals have almost something poor and flat about them, like a copy which wouldn’t be able to make one forget the original. Perhaps it’s a question of time ; you don’t replace 2000 years of the imaginary in a flash..religious ceremony allows horror to be tamed : you don’t bury a man like a beast : you don’t burn him like a log. Atheists are looking for equivalents, with varying degrees of success. Civil marriage, when it’s not botched up, seems today to offer an acceptable substitute. It allows us to officialise what is intimate, the most secret, the most savage, to include family, friends, and society…it’s another way of being united.
Finally, what difference do you make between atheist and religious spirituality
In religion, the absolute is a person, admittedly transcendent, but whom one can meet, pray to, worship. ‘God, more intimate in me than myself’ as Saint Augustine said, and higher than heaven… I distrust this loftiness which crushes everything, as I do this withdrawal into oneself which locks us into internality. I believe more in spiritualities which open us to the world, which know no other absolute than what is real, no other infinity than nature, no other eternity than the present. This is the spirit of Epicurus, of Spinoza, of Camus, as also, so far as I have understood or seen life, the spirit of Tch’an or of Zen. It’s not a question of saving the self, but to save myself from it, to emancipate myself from it, as far as one can. The absolute isn’t the end of the road, but the road itself. Spirituality is this pathway, that you see more often from the perspective of the time, otherwise stated as daily life, with its highs and lows, and which we sometimes get to experience, as Spinoza says sub specie aeternitatis (from the perspective of eternity).
You even defend a certain mysticism ; in what way is this not religious?
Because it doesn’t presume any transcendence, any dogma, any worship, any faith, any hope. It has happened to me – sometimes, rarely – to experience what is called today ‘modified states of consciousness’ : the sudden encounter with mystery and with evidence, an experience of fullness, of simplicity, of unity, of silence, of eternity, of serenity, of acceptance (but joyful, so joyful!), like an infinite peace…it’s what Freud, citing Romain Rolland, calls ‘the oceanic feeling’ which millions of people, believing or not, have felt. I am part of this, and I’ve never experienced anything as strong, nor as happy. Then ‘we feel and we experience that we are eternal’, as Spinoza says, or more that the present and eternity are one and the same thing, like samsara and nirvana in Nagarjuna. One is no longer separated from reality by self : there is no more than everything. Kojève affirms that ‘all authentic mystery is in fact more or less atheist’. I wouldn’t go that far. What I can testify, on the other hand, is that an atheist is not obliged to castrate his soul : his spirit, as much as any other, is capable of opening joyfully, up to the extreme point where it culminates in abolishing itself.
A few times by the looks of itWell, it's always possible she was dropped as a child ...
"There is no single, widely-agreed definition for the concept."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality
Listening to anything she says makes my teeth itch. She is easily the worlds oldest 15 year old.
She's hinting that's she's going to run for president... God help us all!!! (Just a expression)
...But anyone with common sense knows she's doing all this to sell books and to get paid for speeches...I blame McCain for bringing this twit into the spotlight
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
She has a new tv show out too.. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3565996/She's hinting that's she's going to run for president... God help us all!!! (Just a expression)
And there you have it!
And the Tea baggers (hee hee still makes me laugh) love her
It wouldn't shock me if she did become president...Remember this shit?
Midniteoyl
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Absolutely not. Atheists are people and all people, to a greater or lesser degree, are spiritual beings. A basic distinction, and it is only a rough one, has to do with the role of transcendence in the spiritual system. In Judeo-Christian and other religious traditions transcendence is writ large in very conspicuous ways. In atheism transcendence is of course of the earthly variety--which is also quite familiar to religious people--in which one seeks to transcend self and self-centeredness in deference to the spiritual greater-than-thou of other selves, of humankind, of nature, and so forth. On the level of earthly spiritual acts, rather than spiritual belief, one can find a great deal of commonality between atheist and religious people. It's on the questions about ultimate purpose that they can never agree.
Last edited:
anendeloflorien
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Who doesn't?