A challenge/question for athiests

[Raspewtin]

i really don't understand how the questions relate to God or atheism. Many of the questions are just biochemicals in your brain. you love b/c your genes want to propegate, you hate b/c it helps organize social groups insuring survival (at least in early man) anger, sadness can be similary explained. the purpose of art is communication, hence cave drawings etc. b/c we are emotional beings they represent our feelings. rarely is art done expressely for oneself, and no famous artists have been famous without being able to display their work for others. the purpose of art is not beauty, and the reasons artists have developed is b/c of their abilities to commmunicate their ideas, and since humanity is social in nature. In other words, IMO every single normal human behavior can be watered down to the propegation and survival of the species IMO. Of course the exception proves the rule I am happy w/ the leap of faith I take.



<< there is nothing rational about religion at all. >>



there are plenty of rational religions IMO. All require some leap of faith, if the religion has some god figure (belief in a religion != belief in God). The only completely logical and rational people are agnostics I think I happy w/ the leap of faith I take.

 

[novon]

Why do we love? Why do we hate? Why do we feel anger or sadness?

These are all evolved to ensure that we don't kill ourselves, and that we get our gene on to the next gerenation. A lot of the more developed animals have these too, we are not special in that manner.

Also, explain beauty

If we find beauty in something, we are attracted to it. In finiding beauty in others, we seek something from them, such as being our mate, or we strive to learn what they know....again it comes down to survival and passing on our genes.

Please explain to me how art evolved. What makes a particular work aesthetically pleasant to the human eye? What makes people appreciate works of art? What makes one work profound to another, but a simple peice of canvas with paint on it to me?

Homosapiens had Art, Neantherdals didn't. It's a way of communication, and justification for exsistance, and possibily mating. It was also used to pass along what we have learned to the next generation, there by incerasing their chances of survival.

Lately, of course, when almost everyone can live an breed regardless of how fit they are, a lot of these abilities that have evolved over time are being used in alternate ways to conincide with our current society. I think we have entered a new era, were the rules have changed.

By the way, it's still very obvious to me that all this has a spiritual force behind it, that we are being led to a certain level of understanding of our selves and what it all is about. IMHO being spiritual is good, being religious and taking other's words for it is not as good, and not believing in anything is the worst position to be in.

-novon

 

[pulse8]

Yup...all chemical and biological reactions...

 

[rahvin]

<<To all athiests: I'd like to see an explanation of human emotions. Why do we love? Why do we hate? Why do we feel anger or sadness? I have yet to see a rational, evolutionary explanation as to why any of these emotions exist. Anyone care to try?>>

Love is the direct result of the evolutionary need for pair bonding in a species with complex thought processes. Anger and Fear are the result of the fight-flight response mechanism present in most species, our higher order thinking has extended those emotions. Hate and sadness are a direct result of our ability to remember past emotional trauma or conditioning. For example, most labratory technitions that work with mice in experiments where the rodents are subjected to shots on a recuring basis will tell you the rodents &quot;hate&quot; them. The rodents will often attack simply based on who the person is. And let me tell you, rodents have very lower order thinking capabilities with very short memory time frames.

<<Also, explain beauty (as in the beauty I see when I look at the stars in a secluded location on a moonless, cloudless night, or the beauty I feel when I listen to excellent (IMHO) music, or the beauty a person may see in a spectacular sunset, or a painting, etc.). What possible gains could humans have experienced by evolving the sense of beauty?>>

Our concept of beauty is more than likely a direct result of our frontal lobes and the ability to concieve and think beyond ourselves. In many ways it is probably a side effect of our self awareness.

<<Please explain to me how art evolved. What makes a particular work aesthetically pleasant to the human eye? What makes people appreciate works of art? What makes one work profound to another, but a simple peice of canvas with paint on it to me?>>

Creativity is key, complex thought allowed for the creation of creativity in analyzation of problems and most important of all the creativity to create tools needed to shape our environment. Culture developed an appreciation for that creativity and it is witnessed in our appreciation of art. I think you will find the concept of ART (other than seeking parental praise) is lost on most 5 year olds. Creativity and it's resulting benefits to our society is idolized in culture as essential to both our development and survivial. As a result we have come to appreciate creativity that extends beyond simple survival mechanisms, tie it in with the concept of beauty and you have art.

<<What scientific basis is there for humans evolving these qualities? If the world is to be explained purely through science, there must be a logical basis for these ideas. What is it?>>

I explained point by point my feelings on the situation.

<<I am just interested in the scientific explanations for my above questions (keep in mind that most of what I believe is driven by logic and science, and that I am a firm believer in evolution).>>

You won't find scientific answers to your questions right now. Our understanding of the human brain is in it's infancy right now. There is research right now trying to isolate the chemical responsible for love though, want a love pill?

 

[reitz]

<< I dont understand..... how is anything you asked related to atheism? Am I missing something here? >>

None of my questions are necessarily related to atheism. I'm interested in the atheists' viewpoints, though, because they do not take the existence of a creator into account.

Like I stated, I do not want another God vs. No God thread. I just want to see the athiest explanations to my questions.

 

[Rio Rebel]

Good try, Reitz. Some wankers just can't make a comment without taking shots at people who disagree with them.

I'm afraid you're not going to get what you're looking for, though. I gave this a little thought, and came to the conclusion that if an atheist DID give me the best explanations possible for these phenomena, they would still leave me unimpressed, because it will be an answer that describes them in material and causal explanations - which I don't believe is possible. In the end, I wouldn't be able to recognize a good &quot;atheist answer&quot; even if I read one.

On the flip side, any answer I gave would be glaringly lacking of material and physical explanation, and would leave any atheist feeling that I had not offered anything worth reading. To them, I would have to address the very thing that I believe has nothing to add - a material, causal explanation. The metaphysical framework for my explanations would do nothing but irritate and bore an atheist, just as their explanations based on physical assumptions would irritate and bore me.

It really is interesting that this one little question - the existence of God - can divide our perspectives so profoundly (and no, I'm not trying to say that this is &quot;evidence of a Higher Being&quot;...just that it's interesting)

 

[reitz]

<< If I were to answer each of these with &quot;I don't know,&quot; would someone consider that proof of a god or gods?

Why?

Since when does an unknown automatically equal &quot;god?&quot; An unanswerable question or an unknown is simply that, an unknown. >>

AmusedOne, where did I state that I am trying to prove or disprove God with these questions? Read the topic again.