[noemon]

Περι του δε οντος ο λογος...

It's been a while since we had one of those, so...

1) Theism is a far more natural state of being than atheism. Exclaiming our thanks, as in thank God is one of the most natural human expressions.

We are born and almost immediately rationalize everything in hierarchies. Rationally, we conclude, that there is something greater than our dads, greater than the police, greater than the army, greater than the things we observe around us. Eventually, as our observations progress so does our depth of perception.

The deeper the point of reference the greater the range that we can rationalise. We systemize those observations as they apply to our food, crops, pastoral & moral life. Without this systematic conceptualization, we are incapable of rationalizing natural forces and thus incapable of producing science, episteme!

Episteme literally translates to figuring out our position(ep-istamai), imagine a noetic GPS system.
For that we need coordinates and for coordinates, we need more than one point of reference, the one being our own selves and at the very least one other being a fixed point that defines the maximum depth of our understanding. We can’t have GPS without a minimum of 2+1 points of reference to triangulate. 3 points make our GPS even more accurate, 5 even more and with 7 we reach heights inconceivable.

This is how Plato and Aristotle use geometry to define Science(Episteme), Nous(Mind), Sophia(Wisdom), Phronesis(Virtue) & Techne (Knowledge).

2) Atheists in the West literally believe that humans were born in luxury, peace, and a table full of food because that is the extent of their foresight (about as far as their noses). They not only fail to understand that the vast majority of humanity lives in poverty and crisis but they also fail to understand basic history and sociological development. God is not necessary for them in their base sedentary lives so they discard the concept, foregoing the compass because of the app on their phones. Leading to their debasement as they are no longer required to think to function, but happy to merely receive instructions from a device.

Most people today cannot even drive without following instructions and as such they cannot find their way back from a place hitherto unexplored failing to even perform the basic function of navigation.

Arrogantly, they proclaim anyone who chooses to navigate on their own wits as beneath their dignity or merely as a curiosity(sort of how instagrammers treat people with real interests or how bullies treat geeks) and, in the process abandon their compass.

3) Modern-day religions are far more base than prime theism and their massive errors invite justified criticism & abandonment.

4) Primal theism is when we accept that we are the micro-organisms having a party on a single speck of fiery ash fleeting on the wind of a universal beach.

This makes us humble, and weary, weary enough to be alert. Alert enough to constantly triangulate our actions with the deepest possible referential points, using a compass and not receiving instruction from an AI-assistant, doing the thinking for us.

5) While I can & do respect those who reject organized religious structures, texts, dogma, and superstition, I find it difficult to reconcile those who reject the concept of Prime Essense(Ousia) as whole humans, especially in a day and age where science allows us to unlock secrets of the universe hitherto unexplored.

In other words, I don’t care if you baptize your child, or if you don’t engage with organized religion, but if you don’t understand that we are stardust composed of primal essence then I find you closer to animals than Nous.

[noemon]

[late]

Sigh..

Atheism evolved as part of the Birth of the Modern age, in the 1800s.

In my distinctly unhumble opinion, Nietzsche was describing the world he lived in, as well as building the skeleton of a metaphysics that would be used by Modern thinkers. The church's place in society was being reduced by the business world. The church was typically the center of town, markets became the center of life, of discussion, of purpose.

Nietzsche was hardly the only thinker heading in that direction. Mark Twain's Letters from Earth is a good example of that, and my favorite Twain.

What I am describing is not, at heart, a rejection of religion. The heart of the matter is that it was replaced.

You can take that a step further. We have the power to create and destroy now, and on a global scale. To people a thousand years ago, we would seem to be gods that can fly through the heavens, and bring fire in a destructive fury they would have trouble understanding.

We didn't kill deities, we replaced them.

For example, I am a minor god of information..

Edit: nobody wants to be a god, all the responsibility, none of the power. Know what I mean? But the reality is what it is...

[noemon]

We didn't kill deities, we replaced them.

Nihilism does not replace anything, the default theistic human mind does as it seeks validation from other deities once nihilism has done away with the previous set of coordinates, hence the replacement you refer to which is really debasement.

You can take that a step further. We have the power to create and destroy now, and on a global scale. To people a thousand years ago, we would seem to be gods that can fly through the heavens, and bring fire in a destructive fury they would have trouble understanding.

As our depth of perception increases so does our range.

We are born and almost immediately rationalize everything in hierarchies. Rationally, we conclude, that there is something greater than our dads, greater than the police, greater than the army, greater than the things we observe around us. Eventually, as our observations progress so does our depth of perception.

The problem today is that even though our collective depth perception has increased, our individual(atomic) one has decreased.

[late]

Nihilism does not replace anything, the default theistic human mind does as it seeks validation from other deities once nihilism has done away with the previous set of coordinates, hence the replacement you refer to which is really debasement.

"Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence."
https://iep.utm.edu/nihilism/

Your comment is absurd, but entertaining.

Our values have multiple roots. Some come from our biology, some from culture and tradition, and some from ethical and philosophical analysis.

That we don't share some values doesn't mean I don't have any. That is, however, a comment I have gotten a lot, over the years, from theists.

In the early 1900s, it was shown that there was no way to prove the existence of a deity. Religious academics had to resort to phrases like "leap of faith" to describe their thinking.

It's part of what I see as the retreat of religion.

Philosophy has also had to retreat, but that's a different story. In any case, people have stopped making multi-generational plans to build toward the heavens. We now plan to go there...

[noemon]

"Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence."
https://iep.utm.edu/nihilism/

Your comment is absurd, but entertaining.

Your insults demonstrate your inability to comprehend and only reflect on you, nihilism is not a permanent state of affairs, it is as fleeting as all other ideologies. It destroys and then things grow back again, not necessarily better than before, which explains what you said before that "we have replaced our deities".

Correct, nihilism did away with the previous ones and today a new religious atheistic wokist movement has proclaimed itself as the orthodox arbiter of morality.

The rest of your comments require clarity & elaboration to become cogent.

[late]

Your insults demonstrate your inability to comprehend, nihilism is not a permanent state of affairs, it is as fleeting as all other ideologies. It destroys and then things grow back again, not necessarily better than before.

The rest of your comments require clarity & elaboration to become cogent.

Funny, I see your calling me nihilistic as insulting. I don't take it seriously, I've seen it many times before.

I also don't see my comments as an insult, that is not the intent, anyway. I was trying to communicate how I think, and clearly failed.

I don't think you will be able to understand my thinking. At least, none of the theists has, that thought I didn't believe in anything.

The bottom of this is how things changed, as I said. The church was the center of life, now it's not, replaced by the Modern World.

"We are as gods, we might as well get good at it."
Stewart Brand

[noemon]

Funny, I see your calling me nihilistic as insulting. I don't take it seriously, I've seen it many times before.

Erm, you mentioned nihilism by quoting the creator of the ideology. I agreed with you, and built on your own observation as to how the deities were replaced, they were replaced via nihilism, not with.

The bottom of this is how things changed, as I said. The church was the center of life, now it's not, replaced by the Modern World.

3) Modern-day religions are far more base than prime theism and their massive errors invite justified criticism & abandonment.

4) Primal theism is when we accept that we are the micro-organisms having a party on a single speck of fiery ash fleeting on the wind of a universal beach.

This makes us humble, and weary, weary enough to be alert. Alert enough to constantly triangulate our actions with the deepest possible referential points, using a compass and not receiving instruction from an AI-assistant, doing the thinking for us.

5) While I can & do respect those who reject organized religious structures, texts, dogma, and superstition, I find it difficult to reconcile those who reject the concept of Prime Essense(Ousia) as whole humans, especially in a day and age where science allows us to unlock secrets of the universe hitherto unexplored.

In other words, I don’t care if you baptize your child, or if you don’t engage with organized religion, but if you don’t understand that we are stardust composed of primal essence then I find you closer to animals than Nous.

"We are as gods, we might as well get good at it."
Stewart Brand

I find this statement abhorrent & hubristic and the real juice(ousia, essence) with what is wrong with people rendering religiously woke atheists as the new Arch Priests of morality. It is also untrue as people today do not think of themselves as gods despite all the superhero movies buttressing that message with religious conviction.

[late]

Erm, you mentioned nihilism by quoting the creator of the ideology. I agreed with you, and built on your own observation as to how the deities were replaced.







I find this abhorrent, disgusting, arrogant, hubristic and the real juice(ousia, essence) with what is wrong with people rendering religiously woke atheists as the new Arch Priests of morality.

Interesting, I have the same problem understanding your thinking that you have with mine.

What we do have is ethicists, some have religious beliefs, some do not. Since they are usually ignored, they really don't have the priest-like status that economists (for example) have.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethicists

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795362300165X


"Yet I don’t buy either response. As I said, Schwitzgebel’s findings ring true to me—while trying to measure morality by calls to Mom is rough and suggestive at best, I’m convinced it points to a genuine truth: Professional ethicists don’t seem to be made any better by their research. But it’s the truth of this claim—not how it is established—that bothers me, and it’s taken me a long time to find an answer. Recently, however, while preparing for yet another semester teaching ethics, an explanation dawned on me. There’s a kind of thinking that we do when we are trying to prove something, and then a kind of thinking we do when we are trying to do something or become a certain kind of person—when we are trying to forgive someone, or be more understanding, or become more confident in ourselves. Becoming a better person relies on thinking of the latter sort, whereas most work in professional ethics—even in practical ethics—is exclusive to the former.

Many philosophers will reply that this is exactly what ethics is about—universal principles that apply to every person as such. But that’s the whole point of what I’ve come to realize: This assumption is wrong, and the irrelevance of a lot contemporary moral philosophy to one’s personal life is a direct result of that mistaken assumption. Ethical thinking that aims to be public and impersonal, and ethical thinking that arises from the substance and particularity of an individual’s real life, are not the same thing."
(you need to read the article, that's a teaser)

https://blog.apaonline.org/2019/12/10/why-arent-ethicists-more-ethical/
"

[albionfagan]

I am technically an Atheist, i.e I do not believe in a God who interferes in the running of the world. But I'm becoming increasingly annoyed by the arrogance of many Atheists and my respect for established religions has grown considerably over recent years. I think religions are way of trying to moderate human power. Flawed? Absolutely, but still a genuine attempt to constrain human power. I don't know whether I'll ever be able to take the step to being a believer but I'm increasingly worried about a Godless world.

[noemon]

Interesting, I have the same problem understanding your thinking that you have with mine.

Example, it took the roman catholics more than 1500 years to understand the concept of essence(ousia), which they translated as 'substance', which is incorrect because hypostasis=substance and God as per Christian doctrine has 1 essence(ousia) in 3 hypostases(underlying=sub=hypo position=stance=stasis), like a triangle(1 item, 3 coordinates).

Christians adopted the Platonic/Aristotelian/Pythagorean geometric concepts people understood as did Maimonides and the Muslims later on.

This is pretty clear and pretty simple in Greek. 1 Essense, 3 substances = 1 item, 3 coordinates

Instead, the Catholics wrote 1 substance(hypostases) & 3 personae(what?) due to lacking the words to express the concept of essence (ousia). Which to the Greeks is total wtf. 1 coordinate, 3 persons? Heresy! And rightfully so. No wonder people struggle with the Trinity more than anything else.

It took more than 1500 years to resolve this confusion, a task undertaken by Thomas Aquinas who tried to explain it to the Catholics but to no avail even to the present day. That is just 1 word!

In simple terms, I do not understand what these "philosophers" you quoted are trying to say, it seems totally mangled and incoherent.

It is easier to communicate with words everybody can understand, rather than get buried in confused jargon nobody actually does.

Tin Ogdoi Mera= The eight day
O Theos=God
Eftiaxe ton baglama=created the baglama(the little guitar)

[Saeko]

Whatever. I'm gonna strip naked and eat some snow.

[noemon]

Can i join?

[noemon]

Songs tell us everything we need to know....while dancing naked in the snow

Mia einai i Ousia=There is only one Essence
den yparche Athanasia=there is no Immortality

Na 'soun, Thee mou potis
If only my God you were a drunk

Na sothei i anthropotis
to save humanity

Sto methysi sou apano
in your drunkness

na machairones ton Charon
[if only] you could stab Death

[Tainari88]

Songs tell us everything we need to know....while dancing naked in the snow

Mia einai i Ousia=There is only one Essence
den yparche Athanasia=there is no Immortality



Na 'soun, Thee mou potis
If only my God you were a drunk

Na sothei i anthropotis
to save humanity

Sto methysi sou apano
in your drunkness

na machairones ton Charon
[if only] you could stab Death

Does she have to strip naked and cross the river Styx first?

If only could stab death? Death is going to punish you by making you live hundreds of years with old person's ailments as punishment.

[noemon]

Does she have to strip naked and cross the river Styx first?

If only could stab death? Death is going to punish you by making you live hundreds of years with old person's ailments as punishment.

She does while in ek-stasis!

Ton Erota Rotao!

I ask Eros, not for Eros, but I am asking the dude directly...wtf dude?

I ask Eros and I reply to myself
Τον έρωτα ρωτάω και μόνη μου απαντάω

The years bend any relationship they face
Τα χρόνια αν λυγίζουν όποια σχέση αντικρίζουν

I don't know how they stick and the glass doesn't break
Δεν ξέρω πώσ κολλάνε και το γυαλί δε σπάνε

But they still scare me when they don't build dreams
Μα πάλι με φοβίζουν όταν όνειρα δε χτίζουν
And you were yesterday's prisoner, helpless as a drinker
Κι εσύ του χτεσ δεσμώτησ ανήμποροσ σαν πότησ

At the festival of Ai Gianni, you are a feast
Στο πανηγύρι του Αη Γιαννιού είσαι γιορτήσ χαρμάνι

But your name is not John, but your name is not John
Μα δε σε λένε γιάννη μα δε σε λένε γιάννη

And I have this earth & sky ceiling as my home
Κι έχω για σπίτι μου τη γη τον ουρανό ταβάνι

I don't want the tear to be hidden in love
Δε θέλω στην αγάπη να κρύβεται το δάκρυ

And not even in your departure to be here for your good
Κι ούτε στον πηγαιμό σου να'μαι εδώ για το καλό σου

You don't give me tomorrow, but you don't leave me behind
Το αύριο δε δίνεισ μα πίσω δεν μ'αφήνεισ

And on my back I have two fleeting lives
Και στισ δικέσ μου πλάτεσ έχω δυο ζωέσ φευγάτεσ

And you were yesterday's prisoner, helpless as a drinker
Κι εσύ του χτεσ δεσμώτησ ανήμποροσ σαν πότησ

At the festival of Ai Gianni, you are a feast
Στο πανηγύρι του Αη Γιαννιού είσαι γιορτήσ χαρμάνι

But your name is not John, but your name is not John
Μα δε σε λένε γιάννη μα δε σε λένε γιάννη

And I have this earth & sky ceiling as my home
Κι έχω για σπίτι μου τη γη τον ουρανό ταβάνι

[noemon]

A Gypsy woman breast-fed him

Gyftissa ton evizaxe
A Gypsy woman breast fed him

Gia 'uto echei phtera
Hence the wings

I moira ton edidaxe
Fate instructed him

s' eleftheri angalia
in freedom's bossom

....


Full:

Translation all over the place:

Giftissa suckled him
Γύφτισσα τον εβύζαξε

That's why he's got wings
Γι' αυτό έχει φτερά

Love affected him
Έρωτας τον επείραξε

That's why it's all laughs
Γι' αυτό όλο γελά

Giftissa suckled him
Γύφτισσα τον εβύζαξε

That's why it has wings
Γι' αυτό έχει φτερά

Love affected him
Έρωτας τον επείραξε

That's why it's all laughs
Γι' αυτό όλο γελά

At the festivals, ah, it turns
Στα πανηγύρια, αχ, γυρίζει

Citrus and pine, oh my, it smells
Κίτρο και πεύκο, ωχ, μυρίζει

He forgot his name
Το όνομα του ξέχασε

He crossed the border
Τα σύνορα ξεπέρασε

But he longs for me
Μα εμένα λαχταρά

And here it comes again
Κι εδώ ξαναγυρνά

Giftissa suckled him
Γύφτισσα τον εβύζαξε

That's why it has wings
Γι' αυτό έχει φτερά

Love teased him
Έρωτας τον επείραξε

That's why it's all laughs
Γι' αυτό όλο γελά

Giftissa suckled him
Γύφτισσα τον εβύζαξε

That's why it has wings
Γι' αυτό έχει φτερά

Fate taught him
Η μοίρα τον εδίδαξε

In a free embrace
Σε λεύτερη αγκαλιά

Giftissa suckled him
Γύφτισσα τον εβύζαξε

That's why it has wings
Γι' αυτό έχει φτερά

Fate taught him
Η μοίρα τον εδίδαξε

In a free embrace
Σε λεύτερη αγκαλιά

Road and love his life
Δρόμος κι αγάπη η ζωή του

His every kiss is dizzyingly sweet
Ζάλη γλυκιά κάθε φιλί του

He collected with the clarinet
Με το κλαρίνο μάζεψε

The bitternesses, he deceived them
Τις πίκρες και τις πλάνεψε

And he walks
Και περπατοπετά

Huggin me
Μ' εμένα αγκαλιά

Giftissa sucked him
Γύφτισσα τον εβύζαξε

That's why it has wings
Γι' αυτό έχει φτερά

Fate taught him
Η μοίρα τον εδίδαξε

In a free embrace
Σε λεύτερη αγκαλιά

Giftissa breastfed him
Γύφτισσα τον εβύζαξε

Hence the wings
Γι' αυτό έχει φτερά

Eros teased him
Έρωτας τον επείραξε

That's why it's all laughs
Γι' αυτό όλο γελά

[Unthinking Majority]

1) Theism is a far more natural state of being than atheism. Exclaiming our thanks, as in thank God is one of the most natural human expressions.

Rape, murder, and theft is also very natural for many mammals including humans, being natural doesn't mean it's desirable or good.

Theism and religion are man-made beliefs systems where:

1. People create answers to questions that they can't yet answer, or may never be answerable. Instead of being humble enough to say "I don't know" they make up a bunch of unproven nonsense to quench their curiosity. Much of it is hopeful and a comforting placebo effect on people. Not knowing can be scary, it can induce fear and uncertainty. So there's good and bad to take from this.

2. People create moral systems via religions with values and rules of thumb from which to live by. They're either lazy or brainwashed and don't want to bother philosophizing or may not even have the intelligence or education to do so very well, they want to be told what to believe because it's a lot easier and a lot more comforting. Being uncertain of what's right vs wrong can be scary. Religious authorities also don't want people to think for themselves, they want to use religion to control the population so they do what they want. They use fear to enforce this.

You can make the argument that throughout much of history and even today many people have needed religion and that controlling the masses with a mostly positive belief system that's been tested and refined over millennia has kept us from becoming more like animals, or making up our own beliefs that are worse. There's worse belief systems than Christianity for instance, like Naziism. People can make up all sorts of terrible beliefs and moral systems to legitimate many terrible things. We all have some kind of ideology that we use as a guide to make decisions on what's right vs wrong. People can't live in a state of nihilsm, they'll always follow some kind of value system to guide them, even if it's self-made, otherwise many decisions are impossible to make.

So I would say being an atheist is fine, as long as you're able to follow a replacement belief system that's as or more positive for yourself and society than religion/theism, and I believe such systems do exist. If not then best to turn off your brain and join the sheep.

Personally I think most religions have been made obsolete by science and education aka the Enlightenment and it would greatly benefit the population for someone or some group to create a more modern "religion" for us to follow which is much more practical and and science-friendly rather than relying on "holy books" divined by God and enforced through fear of hell/Satan and other such nonsense.

[noemon]

If you don't pose the question(& .ie define the coordinates) you can't get the answers.

That is precisely the point of Platonic/Aristotelian/Pythagorean Theism, also called Onto-Logy, the examination of Being(On) and The Being as in The-On=Theos=God.

Onto-Logy= modern secular form and a brach of philosophy, however this is a deeply spiritual affair regardless how you approach the matter.

Pythagoras would have you in ekstasis & geometry, Aristotle reading etymologies, Plato walking around caves & fighting MMA(where he was champion) and the Neo-Platonists would have you initiated in their proto-masonic Egyptian-type clubs.

[late]

If you don't pose the question(& .ie define the coordinates) you can't get the answers.

"Pragmatists think that the history of attempts to isolate the True or the Good, or to define the word “true” or “good,” supports their suspicion that there is no interesting work to be done in this area. It might, of course, have turned out otherwise. People have, oddly enough, found something interesting to say about the essence of Force and the definition of “number.” They might have found something interesting to say about the essence of Truth. But in fact they haven’t. The history of attempts to do so, and of criticisms of such attempts, is roughly coextensive with the history of that literary genre we call “philosophy” – a genre founded by Plato. So pragmatists see the Platonic tradition as having outlived its usefulness. This does not mean that they have a new, non-Platonic set of answers to Platonic questions to offer, but rather that they do not think we should ask those questions any more. When they suggest that we not ask questions about the nature of Truth and Goodness, they do not invoke a theory about the nature of reality or knowledge or man which says that “there is no such thing” as Truth or Goodness. Nor do they have a “relativistic” or “subjectivist” theory of Truth or Goodness. They would simply like to change the subject.

They are in a position analogous to that of secularists who urge that research concerning the Nature, or the Will, of God does not get us anywhere. Such secularists are not saying that God does not exist, exactly; they feel unclear about what it would mean to affirm His existence, and thus about the point of denying it. Nor do they have some special, funny, heretical view about God. They just doubt that the vocabulary of theology is one we ought to be using."
Richard Rorty

https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/rorty.htm