So I happened to repeat an observation made several times before by many other people, and that is at any case not to be taken in total earnest (evidence for the existence of God can be sought in slightly more fundamental areas): that atheists with a taste for fine things are unlucky, because they have nobody to be grateful to for them. Suddenly a couple of atheists have me in a death grip all over my page, and, through a fog of misunderstandings, misexplainations, and one or two downright lies, they are trying to - I don't quite know, but do some damage to my statement one way or another. Folks, whether or not you are as bad at philosophy as I think you are, don't you think you ought to find more serious things (including, yes, more serious statements from me) to get intense about?
no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 05:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 06:14 pm (UTC)The thought has occurred to me too. But the Universe is big and bright and beautiful enough that from my human viewpoint, it is a very lovely thing indeed.
And at any rate, to be grateful to the universe as a whole is more than half way through, emotionally speaking, to being grateful to God.
The existence of the Universe implies many things. A sapient Creator who can be personally communicated with is not one of them, however.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 06:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 07:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 09:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 06:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 06:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 06:38 pm (UTC)I somehow doubt your sense of humor would remain intact if someone posted something that was mildly disparaging of Catholics.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 06:49 pm (UTC)And the statement is not only humorous, it is old. It has been repeated by many people before me.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 07:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 07:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 07:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 08:03 pm (UTC)Wouldn't it have been better just to brag about the wonders you would perform as soon as you started to write your account?
no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 08:08 pm (UTC)Oh, Mr. Barbieri
Date: 2009-10-18 10:20 pm (UTC)For heaven's sake (yeah) lighten up, atheists. :^)
See, there's a smiley.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-18 12:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-19 09:22 am (UTC)Are you engaged in some new and interesting pursuit? 8-)
no subject
Date: 2009-10-18 10:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-19 07:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 08:03 pm (UTC)Why not be grateful to Clapton for e.g. deciding to practice his craft, or record the album? There are some aspects of it which one could legitimately be grateful to him or his teachers etc. for. Of course those aspects are nowhere near all of it, but I would not say that the door is closed to gratitude completely for an atheist.
Of course once we get into being "grateful to the universe", that is just an anthropomorphism and cannot actually be gratitude as to a person.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 08:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 09:09 pm (UTC)The other posters hadn't even necessarily seen the concert, though, and I'm not even sure it's the case that everyone has necessarily had that kind of transcendent artistic experience in their lives. A lighthearted post prompted by a subjective experience probably isn't the place to stand or die on philosophy if people aren't "getting" it.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 09:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 10:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-17 10:41 pm (UTC)Actually, let me enlarge that...
Date: 2009-10-18 08:11 am (UTC)Re: Actually, let me enlarge that...
Date: 2009-10-18 04:26 pm (UTC)I think that might more broadly include insisting on having the last word in a thread on health care. :)
Re: Actually, let me enlarge that...
Date: 2009-10-19 09:25 am (UTC)Re: Actually, let me enlarge that...
Date: 2009-10-19 07:42 pm (UTC)Re: Actually, let me enlarge that...
Date: 2009-10-19 08:21 pm (UTC)just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 05:14 pm (UTC)...Do you?
Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 07:47 pm (UTC)Whatever you have done for the least of these, you have done to Me.
Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 09:27 pm (UTC)Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 09:42 pm (UTC)Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 09:48 pm (UTC)Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 10:09 pm (UTC)Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 10:28 pm (UTC)I don't understand. You see a terminally ill patient who depends on technology or drugs to keep them formally alive - a life not even remotely resembling the one they used to have - and you see some other people's selfish interest to get rid of the person?
I couldn't understand the relevance of the stories.
Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 10:35 pm (UTC)Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 10:46 pm (UTC)And with the story and the bio - I did not read them carefully, because they are long and because last time you sent me to read an essay of yours I did so, and it proved to be of little relevance, with the relevant part included in less than a paragraph. Then I didn't mind spending the time. Now I do.
Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-12-28 08:24 pm (UTC)Re: just out of curiosity
Date: 2009-10-24 10:13 pm (UTC)http://fpb.livejournal.com/397404.html
And this is the real person:
http://fpb.livejournal.com/375817.html