Aweism

[kalm]

I think people often stereotype humanists and atheists as soul-less and non-spiritual. I'd say most are more like this.

In fact, Zuckerman’s new book, “Living the Secular Life: New Answers to Old Questions,” could be read as one long rebuttal to Winfrey and others who think nonbelievers have no purpose, meaning, direction or feelings beyond their own physical satisfaction and existence.

In the book, Zuckerman, a sociologist, details how secular people — atheists, humanists, agnostics and other self-described “nones” — raise their children, decide right from wrong and build communities without the benefit of religion.

And in the book’s most personal chapter, Zuckerman describes the intangible glue he believes connects nonbelievers to the universe and to each other. It is something he calls “aweism.”

He calls it a “profound, overflowing feeling” that he knows only in fleeting moments: playing on the beach with his young daughter, eating grapes from his grandparents’ backyard, sledding in the dark of a January night, dancing with abandon at a favorite concert.

“Aweism … though steeped in existential wonder and soulful appreciation, is still very much grounded in this world,” he writes. “It is akin to what philosopher Robert Solomon dubs a ‘naturalized’ spirituality: a non-religious, non-theological, non-doctrinal orientation that is ‘right here, in our lives and in our world, not elsewhere.”

That’s because many nonbelievers squirm at anything they feel smacks of spirituality — anything with a word like “mystery” at its core. Yet Zuckerman embraces mystery in the sense that he does not feel a need to know the cause or the roots or the science behind the awe he sometimes feels.

“One need not have God to feel and experience awe,” he writes. “One just needs life.”

“I could not with a straight face say, ‘I am an aweist,'” Zuckerman said. “Unless the term got mainstream or viral, people would just scratch their heads. But I think anybody who would chafe at what I describe (as aweism) … I don’t know what to say. There are those atheists out there that if you are not bashing God you are wasting their time, but I think they are a distinct minority. There are many secular folks out there who would understand what I am talking about.”

And aweism could also be a bridge between the religious and the secular, Zuckerman said. Both feel it — they just understand its origins differently.

“Secular people don’t believe in anything supernatural, but that doesn’t render us sterile souls,” Zuckerman said. “But because religion has constructed the language with which we describe existential wonder, it is almost like that is not our territory. But it most certainly is. It is there. We just haven’t owned it the way we ought to and I am trying to do that.”

http://www.religionnews.com/2015/01/02/ ... t-explain/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Pwns]

If that's how you like to look at things, knock yourself out. I thought, though, that it was a common criticism of theism by atheists to confuse a rush of neurotransmitters as some kind of divine experience. This is not exactly the same thing, but it's similar.

[Chizzang]

We've talked about that "inner sense of awe" on this forum...
The problem is everyone wants to take credit for it - or own it - in a sense

The Religious Person will say: That's God
The Spiritualist will say something like: That's the miracle of the universe
The Humanist will say: That is the joy of being alive of being Human
The Atheist will say: That is a natural built in response from the process of evolution

and of course it is all of these things...

[JoltinJoe]

We've talked about that "inner sense of awe" on this forum...
The problem is everyone wants to take credit for it - or own it - in a sense

The Religious Person will say: That's God
The Spiritualist will say something like: That's the miracle of the universe
The Humanist will say: That is the joy of being alive of being Human
The Atheist will say: That is a natural built in response from the process of evolution

and of course it is all of these things...

You're right.

But the only way the "inner sense" of awe is permanent is if it's from God.

Every other option renders the "inner sense of awe" either transient or delusional (or both).

[kalm]

We've talked about that "inner sense of awe" on this forum...
The problem is everyone wants to take credit for it - or own it - in a sense

The Religious Person will say: That's God
The Spiritualist will say something like: That's the miracle of the universe
The Humanist will say: That is the joy of being alive of being Human
The Atheist will say: That is a natural built in response from the process of evolution

and of course it is all of these things...

You're right.

But the only way the "inner sense" of awe is permanent is if it's from God.

Every other option renders the "inner sense of awe" either transient or delusional (or both).

Why?

[Chizzang]

You're right.

But the only way the "inner sense" of awe is permanent is if it's from God.

Every other option renders the "inner sense of awe" either transient or delusional (or both).

Why?

Exactly... ^ Why?

The concept is still true:
Once you figure out there is no Santa Clause you'll notice, you still get presents
The idea that without Santa there are no more presents is silly

[YoUDeeMan]

Why?

Exactly... ^ Why?

The concept is still true:
Once you figure out there is no Santa Clause you'll notice, you still get presents
The idea that without Santa there are no more presents is silly

The idea is that without God, there is no more presence...not presents.

[Ivytalk]

"Aweists"! What an awesome word!

[dbackjon]

"Aweists"! What an awesome word!

As opposed to Aw-shit

[D1B]

We've talked about that "inner sense of awe" on this forum...
The problem is everyone wants to take credit for it - or own it - in a sense

The Religious Person will say: That's God
The Spiritualist will say something like: That's the miracle of the universe
The Humanist will say: That is the joy of being alive of being Human
The Atheist will say: That is a natural built in response from the process of evolution

and of course it is all of these things...

You're right.

But the only way the "inner sense" of awe is permanent is if it's from God.

Every other option renders the "inner sense of awe" either transient or delusional (or both).

SMFH. All my work on you yields nothing.

What a shame.

[Grizalltheway]

We've talked about that "inner sense of awe" on this forum...
The problem is everyone wants to take credit for it - or own it - in a sense

The Religious Person will say: That's God
The Spiritualist will say something like: That's the miracle of the universe
The Humanist will say: That is the joy of being alive of being Human
The Atheist will say: That is a natural built in response from the process of evolution

and of course it is all of these things...

You're right.

But the only way the "inner sense" of awe is permanent is if it's from God.

Every other option renders the "inner sense of awe" either transient or delusional (or both).

Delusional. Coming from you.

[Cap'n Cat]

We've talked about that "inner sense of awe" on this forum...
The problem is everyone wants to take credit for it - or own it - in a sense

The Religious Person will say: That's God
The Spiritualist will say something like: That's the miracle of the universe
The Humanist will say: That is the joy of being alive of being Human
The Atheist will say: That is a natural built in response from the process of evolution

and of course it is all of these things...

You're right.

But the only way the "inner sense" of awe is permanent is if it's from God.

Every other option renders the "inner sense of awe" either transient or delusional (or both).

[JoltinJoe]

Why?

Exactly... ^ Why?

The concept is still true:
Once you figure out there is no Santa Clause you'll notice, you still get presents
The idea that without Santa there are no more presents is silly

Because once you are dead and buried, the only way that you can continue to have a sense of awe is that if there is an afterlife in the presence of God.

If there is no God, no afterlife, that inner sense of awe dies with you. At best, as transient as our existence without God.

[JoltinJoe]

Delusional. Coming from you.

[/quote]

We should impose a minimum IQ requirement for these conversations.

[Chizzang]

Exactly... ^ Why?

The concept is still true:
Once you figure out there is no Santa Clause you'll notice, you still get presents
The idea that without Santa there are no more presents is silly

Because once you are dead and buried, the only way that you can continue to have a sense of awe is that if there is an afterlife in the presence of God.

If there is no God, no afterlife, that inner sense of awe dies with you. At best, as transient as our existence without God.

And that is great news if it turns out to be correct...
It is also however irrelevant as humans do not decide what god does or who god loves

You have no clue who gets what after death Joe
and the Catholic church sure as HELL doesn't know squat
But whatever...

[dbackjon]

Because once you are dead and buried, the only way that you can continue to have a sense of awe is that if there is an afterlife in the presence of God.

If there is no God, no afterlife, that inner sense of awe dies with you. At best, as transient as our existence without God.

And that is great news if it turns out to be correct...
It is also however irrelevant as humans do not decide what god does or who god loves

You have no clue who gets what after death Joe
and the Catholic church sure as HELL doesn't know squat
But whatever...

And what if Satan is really the good angel, fighting for humanity's freedom against the oppressive enslavement of God?

[D1B]

And that is great news if it turns out to be correct...
It is also however irrelevant as humans do not decide what god does or who god loves

You have no clue who gets what after death Joe
and the Catholic church sure as HELL doesn't know squat
But whatever...

And what if Satan is really the good angel, fighting for humanity's freedom against the oppressive enslavement of God?

Well, Satan is tasked with punishing bad people.

Sounds like Joe's God to me.

Joltin Joe worships satan.

[kalm]

Exactly... ^ Why?

The concept is still true:
Once you figure out there is no Santa Clause you'll notice, you still get presents
The idea that without Santa there are no more presents is silly

Because once you are dead and buried, the only way that you can continue to have a sense of awe is that if there is an afterlife in the presence of God.

If there is no God, no afterlife, that inner sense of awe dies with you. At best, as transient as our existence without God.

Why is having a sense of awe delusional?

[Chizzang]

[Ivytalk]

There you go, Chizz, dragging the fapperazzi into it again!

Shock and awe!

[JoltinJoe]

Because once you are dead and buried, the only way that you can continue to have a sense of awe is that if there is an afterlife in the presence of God.

If there is no God, no afterlife, that inner sense of awe dies with you. At best, as transient as our existence without God.

Why is having a sense of awe delusional?

Because if there is nothing transcendental about human existence, this sense of awe, as well as our feelings, emotions, affections, sacrifice, ideas, ideals -- in short, everything we believe makes mankind the noblest of all creatures -- are mere illusions. We are then simply the smartest of earth's inhabitants (hell, some animal had to be, right?). So then only difference between a puppy that gets hits by a car and a little child is that the child was a more intelligent animal.

If you really think about it, that should deflate any "inner sense" of awe.

[Chizzang]

Because if there is nothing transcendental about human existence, this sense of awe, as well as our feelings, emotions, affections, sacrifice, ideas, ideals -- in short, everything we believe makes mankind the noblest of all creatures -- are mere illusions. We are then simply the smartest of earth's inhabitants (hell, some animal had to be, right?). So then only difference between a puppy that gets hits by a car and a little child is that the child was a more intelligent animal.

If you really think about it, that should deflate any "inner sense" of awe.

Joe,
You sound like somebody defending narcissism as a valid neurosis to fight depression
Having an overly grandiose view of humanity is charming for sure but its just that (Grandiose)

[D1B]

Because if there is nothing transcendental about human existence, this sense of awe, as well as our feelings, emotions, affections, sacrifice, ideas, ideals -- in short, everything we believe makes mankind the noblest of all creatures -- are mere illusions. We are then simply the smartest of earth's inhabitants (hell, some animal had to be, right?). So then only difference between a puppy that gets hits by a car and a little child is that the child was a more intelligent animal.

If you really think about it, that should deflate any "inner sense" of awe.

Joe,
You sound like somebody defending narcissism as a valid neurosis to fight depression )

Nice!

[JoltinJoe]

Because if there is nothing transcendental about human existence, this sense of awe, as well as our feelings, emotions, affections, sacrifice, ideas, ideals -- in short, everything we believe makes mankind the noblest of all creatures -- are mere illusions. We are then simply the smartest of earth's inhabitants (hell, some animal had to be, right?). So then only difference between a puppy that gets hits by a car and a little child is that the child was a more intelligent animal.

If you really think about it, that should deflate any "inner sense" of awe.

Joe,
You sound like somebody defending narcissism as a valid neurosis to fight depression
Having an overly grandiose view of humanity is charming for sure but its just that (Grandiose)

Spit out the thesaurus, Mr. Faux Ivy, and stop playing to the easily impressed.

Hidden in your hauteur is the concession that I am right.

Now I'm not sure who I'm talking to. The guy who has the "inner sense of awe" or the guy who thinks that there is something narcissistic about thinking human existence is transcendental.

Being inconsistent doesn't mean you can never be wrong.

I figure you believe there is nothing grandiose about being human. I've known all along that you are one of those "animals are people too" types.

[D1B]

Joe,
You sound like somebody defending narcissism as a valid neurosis to fight depression
Having an overly grandiose view of humanity is charming for sure but its just that (Grandiose)

Spit out the thesaurus, Mr. Faux Ivy, and stop playing to the easily impressed.

Hidden in your hauteur is the concession that I am right.

Now I'm not sure who I'm talking to. The guy who has the "inner sense of awe" or the guy who thinks that there is something narcissistic about thinking human existence is transcendental.

Being inconsistent doesn't mean you can never be wrong.

I figure you believe there is nothing grandiose about being human. I've known all along that you are one of those "animals are people too" types.

You're the epitome of brainwashed.