Aurino,

You wrote:

> I'm with you on "enough of religious hogwash",
> I couldn't agree more. Enough of towers of
> Babel and arks and gigantic floods and gardens
> of Eden and gods taking human form. But that to
> me only means we need more acceptable metaphors
> to express the spirituality which is an inborn
> trait most of us share, just like the ability
> to love or to feel transported to heaven by the
> sound of a violin.

> You are not advocating the end of religion, you
> are advocating the end of spirituality, and
> that is something that just won't happen. You
> are trying to deny people their right to feel
> human in the way they conceive being human is.
> Science is trying to make us look like apes,
> and monkeys look like any animal, and any
> animal like any vegetal, and everything just a
> bunch of atoms subject to the laws of physics,
> different in complexity but not in nature.
> People just won't buy that because they have
> something they don't find anywhere else, which
> is their subjective life. You can't possibly
> ask people to deny their subjectivity, although
> you can prove that it's a far cry from their
> consciousness to some flood story in an ancient
> book.

> I'm sure I won't get my point across once
> again...

I think I'm understanding now. Perhaps you are right that I'm advocating the end of spirituality or the notion that we are more than just energy or quarks and electrons or atoms or molecules or cells or tissues or organs.

I'll be substantially satisfied if organized religion loses all respectability among the scientifically-literate.

We should talk about the spirituality thing independent of religion or God. I know at least some (maybe most?) atheists promote "spirituality" in your sense of the word.

• I like your brand of atheism - aurino - April 26, 2001 - 13:23 UTC