It describes the scenario here for many, but I never said 'all'. — Tom Storm

You and @Baker have agreed that not many religious followers actually believe in God. I think my criticism is reasonable.

You seem to be saying you and Daniel have a logical explanation for consciousness... . — 3017amen

Maybe I should backup a bit and go back to what initially caught my interest, the claim that atheists cannot hear the music of the spheres. I don’t know the nature of reality or if god exists and in that way I’m not an atheist. I do hope the story in the Bible, and every other religious story I’ve heard, is not true because... it’s some messed up shit, to be perfectly honest. Rather than the "opium of the masses" I’d rather say something like ‘religion is the glue that binds the masses and helps to control them’.

So given the above, am I deaf to the music of the spheres? If so, does that mean the spheres only play Bible hymns?

You and Baker have agreed that not many religious followers actually believe in God. I think my criticism is reasonable. — T Clark

OK. I suspect it just like, politics, really. So many people identify with a political party, without having any knowledge about policies or a true belief.

am I deaf to the music of the spheres? If so, does that mean the spheres only play Bible hymns? — praxis

As you may know, that was a metaphor from Einstein's appreciation of the harmony found in the universe. Much like those who believe abstract mathematics (a metaphysical language) has an independent existence of it's own, Einstein believed that music also had an independent existence that was discovered from time to time buy those who were seeking its truth.

Since music may be considered a universally understood, subjective-truth, it also seems sadly apparent that the fanatical atheist might consider that so-called harmony in the universe as sonic dissonance.

Since music may be considered a universally understood, subjective-truth, it also seems sadly apparent that the fanatical atheist might consider that so-called harmony in the universe as sonic dissonance. — 3017amen

I'm sure that Einstein was smart enough to distinguish between deafness and dissonance, and that he knew how to say what he meant. In any event, still no clearer as to why the believer may hear sonance and the disbeliever dissonance.

sure that Einstein was smart enough to distinguish between deafness and dissonance, and that he knew how to say what he meant. Try again? — praxis

He was smart enough to appreciate the Harmony in the universe. On the other hand, he believed the fanatical atheist, using your interpretation, would be considered a deaf mute :razz:

You're not explaining why. What you're saying only kind of makes sense if we assume that the "music of the spheres" is theism (whatever that entails), since theism is what the atheist objects to, finds dissonant or cannot hear. "appreciate the Harmony in the universe", as you say, appears to mean appreciating God. Note how you capitalize Harmony. We don't need any religious narrative to appreciate the harmony of the universe, do we? Because if we do that seems to mean that we're appreciating the story rather than the actual universe.

:up:

I'm a New Yorker (by way of Cali, DC, Minnesota & Arizona) who has lived in the "dirty south" from 1997-2002 and 2015-present. "Hotlanta" is the epitome of sinning like hell for six days and (occasionally) getting right with Jeezus on Sunday. Praise the Lawd! The religious hypocrisy is as thick as smoked molasses down here in the Bible Belt. More adultery, fatherless children, unwed mothers, porn gambling & opiod addicts, junky baptist strippers, titty bars & jack shacks, shameless obesity, gas-guzzling Trump-festooned pick-up trucks, liquor stores & chicken shacks, maskless morons in a pandemic, gun racks & MAGA-QAnon-Confederate flags, more hate crimes & police lynchings, private (plantation) prisons & endemic voter suppression, etc – you name the social pathology, son, and we've got it in spades down here in Dixie – Gawd's own country! Wtf are you talking about, T Clark? :lol: Yeah, these folks wear their knee-jerk 'White Jeezus-ism' on their sleeve-less sleeves like cheap, truck stop tattoos but that's because these "Gawd-fearing folks" belong to the least educated, least healthy, demographic in the US.

. Religion ... which is not Religion ... I call it Pseudo-Religion ... as metaphysics ... is born out of fear ... because ... one is ignorant about his own nature ... hence ... the ideological conflicts ... and so-called religious wars ... whose ultimate end ... is fighting for peace ... although ... no fight can lead to peace ... Fight as such ... inevitably leads to violence ... because ... fight ... as such ... is violent ...

. True religion ... which is ... Love ... is born out of ... being ... out of understanding ... out of consciousness ...

. And Love can lead to Compassion ... to the ultimate experience of oneself ... Samadhi ...

@Tom Storm and @baker said not many religious followers actually believe in God. I said that is not true. I don't see how anything you've written has any relevance to that.

@Baden and his social justice posse would shut down a post like yours for any ethnic or racial group other than white people. The kind of contempt you show goes a long way toward explaining the political problems we have in the US these days and the popularity of Donald Trump.

I don't know if it's been mentioned in this thread yet but one major and usually overlooked source of religion is shamanic practices, and yogic practices.

Shamanism was a universal feature of pre-modern cultures - shamans were said to be healers, visionaries, seers, with powers to discern the movements of the herds, to communicate with the spirit world and to effect healing.

Yogic practices are more associated with Eastern religions but were probably also prevalent in the pre-modern West. These are associated with religious asceticism, attaining trance states and developing supernormal powers ('siddhis').

Due to the way religion was construed in Western culture, under the general oversight of a strong priestly/ecclesiastical religion (namely, Roman Christianity) many of the vestiges of these cultural forms were driven underground, stamped out or repressed, although they linger on in some alternative cultural forms. But this is why there has been such a strong response to the emissaries of Eastern religion in Western cultures during the 19th-20th centuries.

There is some cross-over visible in the 'contemplative spirituality' aspect of Christianity, such as Meister Eckhardt and the medieval mystics. Note that many of them skirted heresy or were declared heretical, which says something. Mysticism is liminal, it's always on the border of ecclesiastical respectability.

You won't find much discussion of these ideas in 'religion' as such, so much as cultural studies, anthropology, and comparative religion. Mircea Eliade is a respected academic in this field. On a popular level, Karen Armstrong is considerably more relevant than many religious apologists. Also a huge collection of books on alternative spirituality, eastern religions, gnosticism and so on.

Goodness TC. I'm sorry. You seem angry. I read 180's response as an experience based account of how professed theists often appear to demonstrate a lack of belief and some extravagant irreligious practices. It seems to be more than hypocrisy. That aside, we obviously have a different views about the nature of belief. I'll give this some further thought.

I’m thinking that you may not have hung out with the folks that 180 was describing on your visit South. Btw, I’m always suspicious of people who “wear their religion on their sleeves” because it feels more like branding than spirituality.

I was wondering if mysticism has anything to do with the Einstein quote about ‘hearing the music of the spheres’ (musica universalis). @3017amen has been no help and he’s the one who posted the quote.

Okay. :roll: @Tom Storm & @baker are empirically right. Suit yourself.

:up: Mircea Eliade and Karen Armstrong are definitely worth reading (even rereading). Also, even more so I'd found, the "shamanic" studies of Hans Peter Duerr, David Abram and Terence McKenna.

Einstein was a Spinozist and pantheist. His remarks about "God" "music of the spheres" and other "mysteries" are metaphorical or mere figures of speech, unless one believes (without warrant) he intended to repeatedly express himself inconsistently vis-a-vis his avowed Spinozism. I see no reason to do so.

Einstein definitely had a mystical side to him. It comes out in his popular writings and correspondence. But then, Western science has a mystical side, which has on the whole been ignored or deprecated by a lot of its own exponents.

I'm not well-read on the expression 'music of the spheres' but I think it has to do with the idea that the movements of the planets generate a kind of harmony. It's associated with Kepler.

One general observation I would make is that we lack the ability to distinguish religion from philosophical spirituality. Because of the dogmatic attitude of Christianity, everything 'religious' gets tarred with the same brush.

One general observation I would make is that we lack the ability to distinguish religion from philosophical spirituality. Because of the dogmatic attitude of Christianity, everything 'religious' gets tarred with the same brush. — Wayfarer

I think that I know what you mean but disagree. If we sapiens are good at anything it’s making distinctions.

Interesting in that philosophy can develop into a science, it can also develop into a religion.

Excellent and much much needed post Wayfarer!!
This is a major aspect of religion which atheists and even theists need to refer to and grapple with. Rather than taking the worst excesses of literalist fundamentalist religion,listen to the experiences and presentations of eloquent mystics,shamans and meditators.

One general observation I would make is that we lack the ability to distinguish religion from philosophical spirituality. Because of the dogmatic attitude of Christianity, everything 'religious' gets tarred with the same brush. — Wayfarer

An acute and lucid point.

Rather than taking the worst excesses of literalist fundamentalist religion,listen to the experiences and presentations of eloquent mystics,shamans and meditators. — Zenny

As per Wayfarer's point; but we all share fundamentalism as a common problem. These guys often view philosophical spirituality as atheism. The doctrinaire literalist Christians seek to change legislation and turn back the clock, with an eye towards establishing a theocracy that would threaten freedoms. There's a reason atheists have to keep coming back to this - they may be low hanging fruit when it comes to sophisticated reasoning, but they can have disproportionate power over education and social policy.

@Tom Storm Well the fundamentalists are overrepresented in the media,and general religion is a mixture of personal culture and bufoonish priests.
I have no fear of any theocracy being established in the Western world and even elsewhere its very very rare. Iran being the only real example.
Big government is the problem,not really religion. Most religious people I know just want to practice in private and live relatively normal lives. I feel the government, media and scientism is far more intrusive than religion. Maybe in the US people might feel differently.

The religious are not an ethnic group. And if you think their ideas should be protected then the same principle applies to the ideas of those who reject religion. If you have any other complaints, you can start a feedback thread or send a PM but your comparison is invalid.

@Baden I think @T Clark is talking about the phrase "white jeezus-ism" that @180 Proof used. If this would have been any other other color used there would have been comeback. And I speak as a so called POC.

Ok, didn't notice, but I don't think racist white southern Jesus freaks need protecting.

@Baden Come on. So if a black person is racist I can use his color as a pejorative?

Whining about potential racism (which I don't see anyway) against the socially and politically dominant group that runs, controls, and owns the vast majority of the resources while imposing actual systemic racism against the dominated group. Sorry, no sympathy from me. Take it to another mod.

@Baden Ain't nobody whining mister. I'm talking about your hypocrisy. It's you judging everybody by groups and color. So every white person has power,even the unemployed on the fringes of society?
And in black majority countries can powerless minority whites call black people pejorative?

My interpretation is the phrase "white-jesusism" refers to religious believers that think Jesus was white. So, no racism there anyway except in that belief.

@Baden Really? So why your previous post about potential racism? Disingenuous. And ideological hypocrisy. That's why you ignored my question to you.
So white minorities,can they use pejoratives based on color?

@180 Proof You meant folks who think jesus was white did you!! Or was it a racist term?

Yes, really.

Whining about potential racism (which I don't see anyway) — Baden

So white minorities,can they use pejoratives based on color? — Zenny

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2020/06/25/how-an-iconic-painting-jesus-white-man-was-distributed-around-world/

“Every time you see white Jesus, you see white supremacy,”

There's your racism.