Mass Job Losses In The Retail Sector...
News1 min ago
What Do The Faithful Have That The Rest Of Us Don’T?
375 Answers
With no explanation, Goodlife is constantly telling the ‘poor’ atheists here that they have nothing – and today Khandro said exactly the same. I'm curious. Just what is it that these chaps think they have that the rest of us lack?
Answers
As Khandro said a week ago
"naomi; It is interesting, and not uncommon, that being unable to deal with what has been said on one thread you feel the need to misrepresent it, and seek support elsewhere by starting another."
If someone somewhere called atheists poor then that is the thread on which to find out why THEY called atheists poor.
Your original question says "Just what is that that THESE CHAPS think they have that the rest of us lack"
Only THESE CHAPS can answer.
Anyone else is merely guessing what these chaps were thinking so any other answers are irrelevant.
"naomi; It is interesting, and not uncommon, that being unable to deal with what has been said on one thread you feel the need to misrepresent it, and seek support elsewhere by starting another."
If someone somewhere called atheists poor then that is the thread on which to find out why THEY called atheists poor.
Your original question says "Just what is that that THESE CHAPS think they have that the rest of us lack"
Only THESE CHAPS can answer.
Anyone else is merely guessing what these chaps were thinking so any other answers are irrelevant.
No Naomi, I do not decide which questions other people may ask, where they may ask them, and who may answer them.
I just pointed out that your question asked, quite specifically, Just what is it that these chaps think they have the rest of us lack.
Nobody except these "chaps" can answer.
You have said to a number of people, self included, why will we not answer?
Nobody can answer your specific question as it is about something someone else said on another thread.
You have confused the issue by making the title different from the content of your question. I asked about the headline and was quickly told to read the whole question, so I did and realised that almost none of us who have posted are qualified to answer your specific question.
I just pointed out that your question asked, quite specifically, Just what is it that these chaps think they have the rest of us lack.
Nobody except these "chaps" can answer.
You have said to a number of people, self included, why will we not answer?
Nobody can answer your specific question as it is about something someone else said on another thread.
You have confused the issue by making the title different from the content of your question. I asked about the headline and was quickly told to read the whole question, so I did and realised that almost none of us who have posted are qualified to answer your specific question.
"Grasscarp, So you're just complaining again then. Righto. "
I am not complaining? Merely pointing out that you asked a question that could not be answered.
Surely you must agree. Your question is there at the top in black and white.
"Just what is it that these chaps think they have that the rest of us lack?"
Nobody can guess what anybody else thinks. Amen.
I am not complaining? Merely pointing out that you asked a question that could not be answered.
Surely you must agree. Your question is there at the top in black and white.
"Just what is it that these chaps think they have that the rest of us lack?"
Nobody can guess what anybody else thinks. Amen.
"but you’re guessing that because you don't know the answer no one else does either"
I am not guessing, I am saying.
Nobody who is not the chap or chapess who said this terrible thing knows what they meant by it Naomi.
I know that deep down you know that. (After all it is logical!)
If you really, really want to know ask those who said it.
If you just want "guesses" then this whole thread is a farce.
I am not stopping anything, just trying to introduce some reality.
Carry on - guess away - If nothing else it is entertaining and harmless.
I am not guessing, I am saying.
Nobody who is not the chap or chapess who said this terrible thing knows what they meant by it Naomi.
I know that deep down you know that. (After all it is logical!)
If you really, really want to know ask those who said it.
If you just want "guesses" then this whole thread is a farce.
I am not stopping anything, just trying to introduce some reality.
Carry on - guess away - If nothing else it is entertaining and harmless.
naomi (to gc.); //And that suggests that you are claiming to have something – as the original question implies. Why don’t you tell us what it is?//
How often do you need telling? "These chaps", have a spiritual dimension to their everyday lives which you lack, - geddit?
It may be formed by one of a variety of religions, or no organised religion at all - it might simply be a feeling that there is something bigger than themselves or a combination of them all. The two supplementary questions to yours I would like to hear answered are; Why do you ask it? and why, if all is so well with you just as you are, do you spend so much time arguing about God and religion, as you neither believe in one, nor practise the other?
How often do you need telling? "These chaps", have a spiritual dimension to their everyday lives which you lack, - geddit?
It may be formed by one of a variety of religions, or no organised religion at all - it might simply be a feeling that there is something bigger than themselves or a combination of them all. The two supplementary questions to yours I would like to hear answered are; Why do you ask it? and why, if all is so well with you just as you are, do you spend so much time arguing about God and religion, as you neither believe in one, nor practise the other?
Irrespective of its history, Naomi's question on this thread is crystal clear in its aim. It simply enquires of the religious faithful what they believe atheists like myself lack and thus make us impoverished.
To reply "a spiritual dimension to their lives" as per Khandro 13.43 Mon 20th Jan 2014 is not an answer. If restricted to a "religious" spiritual dimension, it is simply a redefininition of an atheist - not an answer in any way.
The key to explaining to us "poor" atheists what we lack is in defining the value which our lives lose and the religionists' lives gain.
In an early answer I defined in my opinion what either "side" of the debate gained or lost in their life's values.
Amongst other things I concluded that the atheist gained freedom from the threats and shackles of commandments laid down over 1000 years ago while the theist remained bound by these chains, a loss to the theist through abdication of their responsibilies to evolve their own ethics and morality.
Nobody contradicted my full text. To have done so rationally, piece by piece would have been close to a real answer!
Anyway this stand-alone thread has generated a generally heathy debate and enlightening points. A good read and some healthy banter.
I believe it still has legs in.
With Respect to All Contributors,
SIQ.
To reply "a spiritual dimension to their lives" as per Khandro 13.43 Mon 20th Jan 2014 is not an answer. If restricted to a "religious" spiritual dimension, it is simply a redefininition of an atheist - not an answer in any way.
The key to explaining to us "poor" atheists what we lack is in defining the value which our lives lose and the religionists' lives gain.
In an early answer I defined in my opinion what either "side" of the debate gained or lost in their life's values.
Amongst other things I concluded that the atheist gained freedom from the threats and shackles of commandments laid down over 1000 years ago while the theist remained bound by these chains, a loss to the theist through abdication of their responsibilies to evolve their own ethics and morality.
Nobody contradicted my full text. To have done so rationally, piece by piece would have been close to a real answer!
Anyway this stand-alone thread has generated a generally heathy debate and enlightening points. A good read and some healthy banter.
I believe it still has legs in.
With Respect to All Contributors,
SIQ.
This "spiritual dimension" that believers allegedly have and atheists do not - how does it manifest? How do theists know that what they feel in response to an appropriate stimulus - what they describe as a heightened reaction due to this alleged spiritual component they have and atheists do not - Is actually any different, any more heightened, or intense, or "spiritual" than a non-believer might feel to the same stimulus?
-- answer removed --
LG; Ive really no idea what you feel about anything, but if you are without religion of any sort, It would seem self-evident that you can not experience a religious dimension within your daily life.
I suppose it might be likened to someone without any appreciation or knowledge of opera, being confronted for the first time by Der Ring des Nibelungun, and a lover of Wagner being requested to explain what it meant to them.
I suppose it might be likened to someone without any appreciation or knowledge of opera, being confronted for the first time by Der Ring des Nibelungun, and a lover of Wagner being requested to explain what it meant to them.
"I suppose it might be likened to someone without any appreciation or knowledge of opera, being confronted for the first time by Der Ring des Nibelungun, and a lover of Wagner being requested to explain what it meant to them."
And this, it seems to me, is the real issue. Someone uneducated or interested in religion, faced with a some sort of spiritual experience - An appreciation of a cathedral architecture, for instance, or a painting inspired by a religious event, or a majestic piece of religious music may not get the academic points or references but still be effected by the piece itself - and,given that we are talking about a spiritual/emotional response, how can you quantitatively measure this response?
Seems to me that this notion that theists experience a spiritual component that non-theists do not is purely an assumption of the theists, without any supporting evidence...
And this, it seems to me, is the real issue. Someone uneducated or interested in religion, faced with a some sort of spiritual experience - An appreciation of a cathedral architecture, for instance, or a painting inspired by a religious event, or a majestic piece of religious music may not get the academic points or references but still be effected by the piece itself - and,given that we are talking about a spiritual/emotional response, how can you quantitatively measure this response?
Seems to me that this notion that theists experience a spiritual component that non-theists do not is purely an assumption of the theists, without any supporting evidence...
Once again we are faced with the religious staking claim to words and their meanings.
Spiritual - Of or affecting the human spirit
I was present at the birth of my three children. I would say my feelings at the time were spiritual yet some would suggest that you can't have a spiritual experience without a belief in the supernatural.
What a load of round things!
Spiritual - Of or affecting the human spirit
I was present at the birth of my three children. I would say my feelings at the time were spiritual yet some would suggest that you can't have a spiritual experience without a belief in the supernatural.
What a load of round things!
