some home truths from Alice Cooper

[Gordon]

And again Gordon, where is the evidence for your philosophical empiricism?

So we can add 'philosophical empiricism' to the list of terms that you routinely mangle.

[ProfessorDavey]

I think finding you have a god shaped hole to be spiritually significant. How for instance does one know the hole to be God shaped without a knowledge of God?

Weirdly what you find is that people brought up in a christian tradition tend to find they have a 'christian-god-shaped hole', people brought up in a hindu tradition tend to find they have a 'hindu-god-shaped hole', those brought up in a ancient greek tradition (obviously millennia ago, so wouldn't have been ancient to them) tend to find they have a 'greek-gods-shaped hole'. And even more significantly, people who have never encountered christianity never wake up one day and find they have a 'christian-god-shaped hole' despite the fact that the christian god could surely talk to them directly. And the same is true for other religions.

What does this tell us - well that the notion of gods is always transmitted via people and via societal/cultural norms and expectations. So either god (or gods) are very, very shy or they are the product of human creation.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So we can add 'philosophical empiricism' to the list of terms that you routinely mangle.

Feel free to tell us howI am mangling philosophical empiricism.

[jeremyp]

I think finding you have a god shaped hole

Has this got something to do with the God dogging you keep banging on about?

Anyway, I've heard of this God shaped hole before. I guess it's analogous to the hole left when you have a tumour surgically removed. It's a hole but it's better than what was there before.

[jeremyp]

He does seem a tad confused, or is it deluded. He says:

“[Jesus] the most written about character of all time in history, and yet people go out of their way to not believe in Him.”

So apparently despite the fact that people are ramming Jesus down people's throats all the time many don't believe the claims Cooper blames the listeners. Perhaps if you are constantly telling people something but they don't believe you it is a problem with the message - that it is simply unbelievable, and that is why people don't believe it.

A lot has been written about Harry Potter but I don't believe in him either.

[jeremyp]

mountains of evidence which confirms the existence of a Creator and their own spiritual nature.

Mountains are created by the movement of tectonic plates. There's no room for a god in that process. Similarly, everything I observe in the Universe came about by a process that needs no god. I grant that there is a possibility that a god started the whole thing off in the first place, but everything that has happened since did so via natural processes with no room for any kind of deity.

There is no evidence that confirms the existence of God.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It's just a Christian cliche.

Is it? What about ''the Abyss'' of atheist existentialism. Something people like Sartre found in his inner delvings. The abyss is something the french existentialists encountered. Keirkegaard, the father of existentialism treats the encounter differently but then his world view took philosophical empiricism less for granted. Perhaps the atheist existentials thought that the abyss as they called it was unfathomable through mere intellect and therefore missed something.

Its general meaning would be that desire for life to have some ultimate meaning which somehow includes us personally.

Forgive me but surely ultimate meaning has to cover everything including us

Some people feel this very keenly, others less so. The French atheist biochemist Jacques Monod seemed to suggest it was universal, but added that the idea that there is no 'ultimate meaning' is an uncomfortable truth humanity is just going to have to learn to live with.

But surely only an atheist existentialist approach could really reach this understanding and as I have said I doubt whether that is as thorough as a kierkegardian approach.

Well, I've been living with this idea for a long time now, and it's not so uncomfortable.

Do you think you went as far as the french existentialists though to find the full discomfort of the Abyss?

You're just left with life and all its pains and pleasures, and maybe what Dawkins called "A sense of wonder"

Maybe Dawkins should explain what he means by that since I find myself in wonder of the atheist existentialist ''Abyss'' although I don't think what they encounter is what they think it is.

[ProfessorDavey]

Just an observation that this forum shows abundant examples of non believers "cherry picking" the meagre evidence available to support what they proclaim yet choose to ignore the mountains of evidence which confirms the existence of a Creator and their own spiritual nature.

Just an observation that this forum shows abundant examples of believers "cherry picking" the meagre evidence available to support what they proclaim yet choose to ignore the fact that there is no evidence which confirms the existence of a Creator.

There you go AB - fixed it for you.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Weirdly what you find is that people brought up in a christian tradition tend to find they have a 'christian-god-shaped hole', people brought up in a hindu tradition tend to find they have a 'hindu-god-shaped hole', those brought up in a ancient greek tradition (obviously millennia ago, so wouldn't have been ancient to them) tend to find they have a 'greek-gods-shaped hole'. And even more significantly, people who have never encountered christianity never wake up one day and find they have a 'christian-god-shaped hole' despite the fact that the christian god could surely talk to them directly. And the same is true for other religions.

What does this tell us - well that the notion of gods is always transmitted via people and via societal/cultural norms and expectations. So either god (or gods) are very, very shy or they are the product of human creation.

Since various branches of hindu believe that we are all divine they can't believe that there is a God shaped hole and as i said to Dicky. The God shaped hole has it's homologue in Atheism with Sartre's ''Abyss.'' These facts make your argument seem trivial IMHO.

Besides an old agnostic like me couldn't possibly have had a Christian god shaped hole otherwise you'd have one as well. The shaped hole or abyss is something that one finds through existential examination experience or crisis. There is no evidence as far as I can see of such examination or crises in contemporary atheism hence broad and essentially merely intellectually remote speculation like yours.

[Dicky Underpants]

Is it? What about ''the Abyss'' of atheist existentialism. Something people like Sartre found in his inner delvings. The abyss is something the french existentialists encountered. Keirkegaard, the father of existentialism treats the encounter differently but then his world view took philosophical empiricism less for granted. Perhaps the atheist existentials thought that the abyss as they called it was unfathomable through mere intellect and therefore missed something. Forgive me but surely ultimate meaning has to cover everything including us  But surely only an atheist existentialist approach could really reach this understanding and as I have said I doubt whether that is as thorough as a kierkegardian approach. Do you think you went as far as the french existentialists though to find the full discomfort of the Abyss?  Maybe Dawkins should explain what he means by that since I find myself in wonder of the atheist existentialist ''Abyss'' although I don't think what they encounter is what they think it is.

Oh yes, I certainly went as far as the French existentialists. I now realise theirs is a very shallow and poorly thought-through philosophy.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Oh yes, I certainly went as far as the French existentialists. I now realise theirs is a very shallow and poorly thought-through philosophy.

And I think you've clinched it in calling it a philosophy which I think is the point where they stopped and possibly drew back.
Can you give a deep and well thought through philosophy?

[ProfessorDavey]

Since various branches of hindu believe that we are all divine they can't believe that there is a God shaped hole and as i said to Dicky.

Non-sense, what we are discussing here is a feeling of lacking or not being complete spiritually - the god shaped hole. And the point I was making is that people all around the world may feel this, but almost always they see this lack or non-completeness as being related to the god that resonates culturally, and never to a god they have not been culturally or societally introduced to by other people. That is just as relevant to hindus as to christians.

Besides an old agnostic like me couldn't possibly have had a Christian god shaped hole otherwise you'd have one as well.

Again non-sense, why should I have a christian god shaped hole just because you have one. This feeling of lacking isn't an anatomical feature, it is related to our individual psychology, background and experience.

So an example - for several decades I had a 'choral singing-shaped hole'. Until I was about 20 I sang in choirs all the time I was growing up, but stopped at that age. Decades later I had a kind of yearning for choral singing, somehow realising it was important to me, but various things kept me away. I wasn't good enough, couldn't read music, I didn't have the time, I was frankly a bit scared (sound familiar). Then eventually I bit the bullet, found a choir and took the plunge and have never looked back. I've realised just how important singing is to me, almost spiritually (not that I'd use the term) as it creates an almost visceral and hugely emotional impact on me (unsurpringly as these effects of communal harmony singing have been measured scientifically). So because I had a 'choral singing-shaped hole', does that mean you must have one too? I doubt it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Non-sense, what we are discussing here is a feeling of lacking or not being complete spiritually - the god shaped hole. And the point I was making is that people all around the world may feel this, but almost always they see this lack or non-completeness as being related to the god that resonates culturally, and never to a god they have not been culturally or societally introduced to by other people. That is just as relevant to hindus as to christians.
Again non-sense, why should I have a christian god shaped hole just because you have one.

Without existential examination how will you know. What you say about choir shaped holes is just you trivialising again and that IMHO is merely a nasty personality quirk

This feeling of lacking isn't an anatomical feature, it is related to our individual psychology, background and experience.

How then could the first christians have a Christian God shaped hole since they come from a plethora of different religions and none and indeed that has been true for centuries? You are ignoring what you proposed namely the commonality of the experience. Further we are to accept your regional sociological model of religion which is counter to the notion of world faiths? We are now at the point where we can select from the stock of world religions and finally, we have the atheist experience of ''The abyss'' which is the atheist homologue of the shaped hole, It would be interesting to hear your take on that and maybe existentialism in general.

[ProfessorDavey]

How then could the first christians have a Christian God shaped whole [sic] ...

They didn't - they had a 'jewish' god shaped hole which was evolved into a 'christian' god shaped hold by people (early christians) interpreting the views and preaching of another person (Jesus).

[ProfessorDavey]

What you say about choir shaped holes is just you trivialising again ...

How patronising of you. You have no idea how important singing is to me (and to many, many others) - I would suggest it is just as important in terms of emotional wellbeing, fulfilment, community and a range of other elements that people often ascribe as 'spiritual' is just as strong as religion is to many people. Why is this somehow 'second rate' because it doesn't involve a man-made god?

and that IMHO is merely a nasty personality quirk.

Why is enjoying choral singing and finding it personally important to me a 'nasty personal quirk' - you do realise that there are many more people in the UK who regularly participate in and enjoy choral singing in organised choirs than regularly participate in CofE and RCC worship put together. Are all these people suffering from some nasty personality quirk. And there are, of course, plenty who participate in both, include (whisper it quietly) some whose main reason for attending a church service is to participate in singing.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

How patronising of you. You have no idea how important singing is to me (and to many, many others) - I would suggest it is just as important in terms of emotional wellbeing, fulfilment, community and a range of other elements that people often ascribe as 'spiritual' is just as strong as religion is to many people.Why is this somehow 'second rate' because it doesn't involve a man-made god?

Singing is not necessarily an existential phenomena. That makes it ''inferior'' to existential experience. For instance it is inferior in that sense to the atheists existential experience of the abyss.

Why is enjoying choral singing and finding it personally important to me a 'nasty personal quirk'

I never said it was, trivialising is the nasty personal quirk. Any patronising? You started it. -

you do realise that there are many more people in the UK who regularly participate in and enjoy choral singing in organised choirs than regularly participate in CofE and RCC worship put together.

Argumentum ad populum.

[ProfessorDavey]

Singing is not necessarily an existential phenomena. That makes it ''inferior'' to existential experience.

But we know and can prove that singing exists and its effects - we cannot do the same for god and indeed there is no evidence for the existence of god or gods - so therefore the notion that god is an 'existential phenomena' is an unevidenced, hand-waving assertion and of course something asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So actually until or unless you are able to actually provide some evidence for the existence of god (and therefore that god is an 'existential phenomena') then god doesn't even get on the 'ranking' list of superiority or inferiority. How can something be claimed to be inferior or superior to something else that we now exists unless we can be sure that other thing exists.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

They didn't - they had a 'jewish' god shaped hole which was evolved into a 'christian' god shaped hold by people (early christians) interpreting the views and preaching of another person (Jesus).

But not just a jewish shaped whole because there were converts from across the roman empire so somehow these God shaped holes became christian God shaped holes something you've already said isn't possible............. unless you accept what you also and self contradictorily proposed, namely the commonality in religions and people.

[ProfessorDavey]

I never said it was, trivialising is the nasty personal quirk.

It can only be trivialising if you consider the importance of singing to people to be inherently inferior to the importance of religion to people, which you doing. But that is, in itself inherently trivialising and patronising.

[ProfessorDavey]

... there were converts from across the roman empire so somehow these God shaped holes became christian God shaped holes ...

And how many of those people instinctively converted to christianity without the transmission of christian beliefs to them by people. Oh yes that would be none. Come on Vlad give me an example of a group of people who spontaneously became christians without being introduced to christianity by people. Surely if the christian god wanted people to believe in him he wouldn't wait for christian missionaries to find tribes and communities in South America, or Southern Africa or Australia, he'd have been straight in there directly so that when the missionaries finally arrived they'd discover these people already worshiping Jesus... Except it never happens - hmm, I wonder why?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

But we know and can prove that singing exists and its effects - we cannot do the same for god and indeed there is no evidence for the existence of god or gods - so therefore the notion that god is an 'existential phenomena' is an unevidenced, hand-waving assertion and of course something asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So actually until or unless you are able to actually provide some evidence for the existence of god (and therefore that god is an 'existential phenomena') then god doesn't even get on the 'ranking' list of superiority or inferiority. How can something be claimed to be inferior or superior to something else that we now exists unless we can be sure that other thing exists.

But singing still remains inferior and less significant in a life than existential experience namely the atheists experience of the ''abyss''.

Singing can be what they call an ecstatic experience in that it take one out of oneself as can any interesting diversion but ecstatic experiences are but part of the religious experience and not perhaps essential to it and i'm sure that is true of atheist existential experience.

[ProfessorDavey]

But singing still remains inferior and less significant in a life than existential experience namely the atheists experience of the ''abyss''.

But singing still remains inferior and less significant in a life than existential experience namely the christian experience of the "wrath of Thor".

But singing still remains inferior and less significant in a life than existential experience namely the christian experience of the "ultimate reckoning of the Great Leprechaun".

See the problem Vlad

[ProfessorDavey]

Singing can be what they call an ecstatic experience in that it take one out of oneself ...

As can religion, which is why scientific study of the impacts of religious worship and singing are very similar.

as can any interesting diversion ...

Trivialising and patronising yet again.

but ecstatic experiences are but part of the religious experience and not perhaps essential to it and i'm sure that is true of atheist existential experience.

But the elements beyond that require god to exist, and there is no evidence that god does exist. Otherwise they are merely a variant manifestation of the ecstatic and other known physiological and psychological experiences that can be generated via meditation, exercise, singing etc etc etc. If you are going to assert something beyond our physiological and psychological responses you need to prove that this 'something beyond' i.e. god, actually exists.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And how many of those people instinctively converted to christianity without the transmission of christian beliefs to them by people.

Well there must be something that made them convert from one entrenched cultural belief to something they claimed now gave them a personal relationship with God. Something you have said is impossible and ultimately on a significant scale.

Come on Vlad give me an example of a group of people who spontaneously became christians without being introduced to christianity by people.

People only become Christians through personal encounter with Christ, intellectual assent of the idea is insufficient. The New testament states that there will be people who encounter Christ but not realise it intellectually but in a saving way. Hence, for instance, the expectation of faithful pre Christian jews to be saved.

I would also be interested in how you think Christianity managed to displace the previous belief of these people. How does that work?

Karl Rahner's work on anonymous christianity might be useful.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As can religion, which is why scientific study of the impacts of religious worship and singing are very similar.
Trivialising and patronising yet again.

It is you that is trivialising existential experience and crises. What that leads to is everything having equal value which gives everything ultimately Zero value.

But the elements beyond that require god to exist, and there is no evidence that god does exist.

To not include existential experience as valid leaves you well and truly stuck in philosophical empiricism.....for which there is no evidence of either and yet you find yourself sitting there. Perhaps if you are stuck there without seeing it then of course anything different is incomprehensible.