Atheists: Prove that beauty exists

  • Thread starter Thread starter JMJ_coder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
humble_in_doubt said:
STD’s and the like result from irresponsible sexual behavior (and I don’t want to get into a safe sex debate – it’s too funny when Catholics start citing condom failure rates & all the rest … but fail to understand it happens because there are actually people so dumb they can’t even properly use a condom).

Marriage is an ancient rite that long pre-dates Christianity or Judaism. It’s a mutual agreement, a contract, between two people usually to facilitate procreation (but it certainly doesn’t have to be). Besides I’m not a big tradition guy – and I think marriage is probably an antiquated concept anyway.

I see nothing about marriage (at least from the perspective of the state) that can’t be accomplished with a simple contract (and divorce should be governed by the principals of contract law). I understand this won’t happen anytime soon (and we’ll see gay marriage long before we get rid of state licensed marriage – which I think is good since if the state is going to license the practice it should at least not discriminate for arbitrary reasons like sexual preference).
Click to expand...
I guess than there’s nothing more to discuss, since we’re far too different to be reflecting upon these matters anyways. Pax, Francis.
 
JMJ_coder said:
Most atheists I’ve encountered tend to be “materialists”, denying the existence of that which they cannot prove with physical evidence (usually scientifically garnered).

So, can you prove that beauty exists? What proof and evidence do you have that such a thing that beauty exists? What scientific tests did you use to prove this, and where is your evidence and results that can be independently verified and reproduced?
Click to expand...
I would like to offer an answer, in spite of the fact that I’m not an atheist (I’m agnostic), and not a materialist.

Beauty is a function of the will to judge, it seems, and though no workable definition of beauty that matches our intuitions of it would ever get two people to agree on an object being in all cases beautiful or not, one thing all people can agree upon is that there is this thing called beauty.

Beauty seems to be a function of the mind, but as a formal function, it may be of the mind from that which exists apart from us. This is a point of speculation, and I am unsure.
 
I’m curious – you say your agnostic but list your religion as Anglican … how does that work exactly?
 
Yeah … interesting. I’m certainly not baiting the guy or anything, I’m genuinely curious. Winston Churchill was a self-proclaimed agnostic (although he still got married in his Anglican church & so on). So it’s not without precedent (and the English are usually pretty leveled headed when it comes to religion).
 
humble_in_doubt said:
Yeah … interesting. I’m certainly not baiting the guy or anything, I’m genuinely curious. Winston Churchill was a self-proclaimed agnostic (although he still got married in his Anglican church & so on). So it’s not without precedent (and the English are usually pretty leveled headed when it comes to religion).
Click to expand...
Maybe he got married in an Anglican church because of his wife, but what does " & so on" mean? I’m intrigued.

P.S. The English were not always so level-headed.
 
humble_in_doubt said:
I’m curious – you say your agnostic but list your religion as Anglican … how does that work exactly?
Click to expand...
I would recommend reading either Santayana (the atheist Catholic) or Bishop Spong (effectively the atheist/agnostic Anglican).

I am culturally Anglican (I go to church, sing in choir, take communion), but I am unsure what (if any) of it is true, beyond the more subjective aspects of truth associated with the realization of something genuinely beautiful.
 
KantianAgnostic said:
I would recommend reading either Santayana (the atheist Catholic) or Bishop Spong (effectively the atheist/agnostic Anglican).

I am culturally Anglican (I go to church, sing in choir, take communion), but I am unsure what (if any) of it is true, beyond the more subjective aspects of truth associated with the realization of something genuinely beautiful.
Click to expand...
hmmm … interesting. I personally have no inclination towards religion (but I’m also more of an atheist rather than agnostic – since I have formed the judgment that religion is untrue).

I won’t categorically deny the possibility of things that lie beyond our cognition (but of course most atheists don’t). However, it’s clear enough to me that the claims of religion never occurred, so I guess I don’t see the point of it all (but I certainly respect your position, and indeed I wish more religious people lacked certitude, since it seems to drive intolerance & I think it also makes reasoned dialog difficult among those with differing beliefs or opinions).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top