E
Eden
Guest
O.K. So, my question is do American atheists celebrate Thanksgiving?
Should anyone celebrate that holiday seeing as its based on the blood of the natives who took the eurpeans in?O.K. So, my question is do American atheists celebrate Thanksgiving?
So, the recipients of your thanks are the low cosmological constant and the CP violation? How does one go about giving thanks to the low constant and the CP violation? And how do such things receive that thanks? Do you believe that your thoughts of thanks generate a vibration that is sent out in their direction for retrieval? The reason that I’m asking is that giving is an outward action that is dependent upon having a recipient. In other words, unless the object to whom thanks is being giving is capable of receiving, you are actually practicing “Thanksthinking”. Can a gift be given without a recipient? Likewise, can thanks be given without a recipient? I hope you can clear up my difficulty in understanding your response.Because we are thankful because there is a low cosmological constant. If it were higher, we would not be here to think about it. Also we should be thankful of the existence of CP violation. If there was no CP violation, matter cannot exist and the universe would be a sea of photons.
I understood that you do not live in the United States. Am I correct? If so, I would like to gently remind you that the question was specifically being asked of American atheists or those who know them.Should anyone celebrate that holiday seeing as its based on the blood of the natives who took the eurpeans in?![]()
Thanksgiving is often a family tradition. The atheists in my family still show up for it. So, I suppose it depends on if you mean anything special by the word “celebrate”. They arrive and eat turkey and enjoy family, surely. That also describes how I (definitely not an atheist) deal with the holiday.O.K. So, my question is do American atheists celebrate Thanksgiving?
So, you would say that most American atheists view “Thanksgiving” as a day to eat turkey with family, but the larger idea of “giving thanks” on Thanksgiving is not present?Thanksgiving is often a family tradition. The atheists in my family still show up for it. So, I suppose it depends on if you mean anything special by the word “celebrate”. They arrive and eat turkey and enjoy family, surely. That also describes how I (definitely not an atheist) deal with the holiday.
Well, if they did not exist, we would not be here to think about it. We are lucky that the laws of physics allow our existence.So, the recipients of your thanks are the low cosmological constant and the CP violation? How does one go about giving thanks to the low constant and the CP violation? And how do such things receive that thanks? Do you believe that your thoughts of thanks generate a vibration that is sent out in their direction for retrieval? The reason that I’m asking is that giving is an outward action that is dependent upon having a recipient. In other words, unless the object to whom thanks is being giving is capable of receiving, you are actually practicing “Thanksthinking”. Can a gift be given without a recipient? Likewise, can thanks be given without a recipient? I hope you can clear up my difficulty in understanding your response.
I don’t know about most American atheists. The ones in my family are thankful for family, or maybe the better word is that they appreciate family. I, of course, want to call family a blessing, but they wouldn’t. Yet, I still sense that appreciation is there. I don’t know if they would use the word “thankful”. I’ve never asked them, and I’ve not heard them use it. To me, “thankful” might imply thanking some personal person (like God), so maybe that particular word is not not right for them. But “appreciate” surely is.So, you would say that most American atheists view “Thanksgiving” as a day to eat turkey with family, but the larger idea of “giving thanks” on Thanksgiving is not present?
Indeed.Well, if they did not exist, we would not be here to think about it. We are lucky that the laws of physics allow our existence.
I hate to sound like a stickler but giving thanks and being thankful both require someone/thing to be the object of the thanks. One can be giving thanks or full of thanks but the word “thanks” is necessarily directed outside oneself to someone/thing else. But I appreciate what you are saying. Essentially, you are saying that no one really thinks about the purpose of the name “Thanksgiving” anymore, as it is really just a day for getting together and eating turkey. I have to agree. I just assumed most religious families include a prayer before dinner, for instance. So, I wondered how atheists mark the day, if they do at all.I think some of the larger idea of **giving **thanks seems to be fading. Being thankful still seems to be there.
The part you quoted just applied to my entire family’s treatment of the holiday. I think the atheists of the family would go with the word “appreciate”.Essentially, you are saying that no one really thinks about the purpose of the name “Thanksgiving” anymore, as it is really just a day for getting together and eating turkey. I have to agree.
Yeahhh! Thank God for turkey! I mean, uh… oops.The part you quoted just applied to my entire family’s treatment of the holiday. I think the atheists of the family would go with the word “appreciate”.
Maybe I ought to have said most of the family seems actively aware of being glad or valuing that they have family, food, friends. There is an awareness that is still there, vaguely in my family celebration, but it is not directed anywhere anymore as a group, except in the prayer that some participate in. You are right in your sticklerness, but there is something there still, even though perhaps “thanks” is the wrong word.
I guess I feel it is an improvement to have the awareness of bounty in your life over having bounty but not realizing it. ARRRG. Okay, ditch the word “bounty”, and make it, uh, uh, there has to be some word that doesn’t have a sense of gift to it…uh…“plenty”. That’s it (I hope).
Point taken, no one is receiving the thanks. I am pointing out that we are merely very lucky.Indeed.
But that doesn’t answer my question to you. Being happy that physics exists is not the same as giving thanks to physics. Do you see what I mean? An atheist can give thanks to a person in their presence, because the person is there to receive it. Give and receive. But if an atheist “celebrates” Thanksgiving in a spirit of thanks, what is receiving the thanks? That’s all I’m looking for. Thinking about things that you are grateful that they exist is not the same as giving thanks. I hope I’m being clear. If the answer is just, atheists don’t give thanks on Thanksgiving, I’m fine with that answer. I’m just curious how you view the day.
When I say “Thank you” it is to another person for a favor, kind words, etc. Who do you thank for the los cosmological constant?Because we are thankful because there is a low cosmological constant. If it were higher, we would not be here to think about it. Also we should be thankful of the existence of CP violation. If there was no CP violation, matter cannot exist and the universe would be a sea of photons.
Yes, we should all be thankful that all the physical constants of the universe just happen to be of the correct value for human life to come about. Such a gift!Because we are thankful because there is a low cosmological constant. If it were higher, we would not be here to think about it. Also we should be thankful of the existence of CP violation. If there was no CP violation, matter cannot exist and the universe would be a sea of photons.
It just happened; it is one of the many allowable possibilities in string landscape. No intelligence is involved or needed.When I say “Thank you” it is to another person for a favor, kind words, etc. Who do you thank for the los cosmological constant?
Micki
How do you prove that the cosmological constant is a “cosmological” constant and not a local one? How do you prove that it is a constant?Because we are thankful because there is a low cosmological constant. If it were higher, we would not be here to think about it. Also we should be thankful of the existence of CP violation. If there was no CP violation, matter cannot exist and the universe would be a sea of photons.
You might be mixing a correlation with a causality. Correlations are easy to show while causality is more difficult to demonstrate.Well, if they did not exist, we would not be here to think about it. We are lucky that the laws of physics allow our existence.