<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do Atheists Borrow Religion’s Morality?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 01:29:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kula-pavana</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1671</link>
		<dc:creator>Kula-pavana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:42:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1671</guid>
		<description>Yes, love makes everything meaningful. Love for humanity in an atheist may dictate a humanity oriented sense of morality. Atheists do not borrow morality from religion - morality flows from their particular manifestation of love.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, love makes everything meaningful. Love for humanity in an atheist may dictate a humanity oriented sense of morality. Atheists do not borrow morality from religion &#8211; morality flows from their particular manifestation of love.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kula-pavana</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1669</link>
		<dc:creator>Kula-pavana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:48:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1669</guid>
		<description>The practical atheism simply says, that because life has no predetermined meaning, we are all free to chose any meaning we like for our life. That is the essence of Maya, this material world: we are free to experiment with our own idea of what is going to make us happy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The practical atheism simply says, that because life has no predetermined meaning, we are all free to chose any meaning we like for our life. That is the essence of Maya, this material world: we are free to experiment with our own idea of what is going to make us happy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amara dasa</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1667</link>
		<dc:creator>Amara dasa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:11:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1667</guid>
		<description>Love makes everything meaningful!  Love of Krsna, love of God, love of others, love of life, love of the world, love of things...it&#039;s all about love and learning how to expand our love to the highest limit.  That&#039;s my opinion, anyway.  Whether one is a religionist or atheist, everyone is searching for love.  Morality is useful only when it helps us expand our love.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Love makes everything meaningful!  Love of Krsna, love of God, love of others, love of life, love of the world, love of things&#8230;it&#8217;s all about love and learning how to expand our love to the highest limit.  That&#8217;s my opinion, anyway.  Whether one is a religionist or atheist, everyone is searching for love.  Morality is useful only when it helps us expand our love.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gopakumar das</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1664</link>
		<dc:creator>Gopakumar das</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1664</guid>
		<description>I am of two minds about this one. Ok, lets be honest, I am of two minds about EVERYTHING. 

Anyway, I sometimes feel devoid of meaning in life when I do not have a connection with this path.  When I reengage I feel a semblance of group membership and purpose.  But sometimes I wonder if this is just a result of always having hoped that something &#039;out there&#039; or &#039;deep in here&#039; is going to fullfill that meaningless.  To some extent, I wonder if this is all a hankering created by aspiration rather than an inherent spirituality.  It may be the hankering for more that makes what &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; seem meaningless?

Maybe if we accept that life is meaningless, at least not innately meaningful, we can begin to find that it is not pointless?  Maybe in that case there would be no need for spiritual aspiration.

Here is my own counterargument.  I am not spiritually advanced at all.  However, the hints I have had of mercy have been so wonderful that it does cause everything else to pale in comparison.  Maybe it is easy to chuck spirituality in lieu of earthly existence, &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; spirituality proper has been experienced?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am of two minds about this one. Ok, lets be honest, I am of two minds about EVERYTHING. </p>
<p>Anyway, I sometimes feel devoid of meaning in life when I do not have a connection with this path.  When I reengage I feel a semblance of group membership and purpose.  But sometimes I wonder if this is just a result of always having hoped that something &#8216;out there&#8217; or &#8216;deep in here&#8217; is going to fullfill that meaningless.  To some extent, I wonder if this is all a hankering created by aspiration rather than an inherent spirituality.  It may be the hankering for more that makes what <em>is</em> seem meaningless?</p>
<p>Maybe if we accept that life is meaningless, at least not innately meaningful, we can begin to find that it is not pointless?  Maybe in that case there would be no need for spiritual aspiration.</p>
<p>Here is my own counterargument.  I am not spiritually advanced at all.  However, the hints I have had of mercy have been so wonderful that it does cause everything else to pale in comparison.  Maybe it is easy to chuck spirituality in lieu of earthly existence, <em>before</em> spirituality proper has been experienced?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: swami bv tripurari</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1662</link>
		<dc:creator>swami bv tripurari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 21:41:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1662</guid>
		<description>From reading the article it seems that the author agrees with you, but his main point has been pointed out by Babhru: the problem with living the atheistic conclusion that life has no ultimate meaning.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From reading the article it seems that the author agrees with you, but his main point has been pointed out by Babhru: the problem with living the atheistic conclusion that life has no ultimate meaning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Babhru</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1660</link>
		<dc:creator>Babhru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:45:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1660</guid>
		<description>To the extent that Shaeffer&#039;s thesis--the center of this essay--seems elusive, we can probably attribute it to the title. It&#039;s certainly provocative, but I think it indicates a marginal issue in the article.

I think his main point is that hard-core atheists have so deeply invested themselves in the nihilism Shaeffer points out in Rorty and Singer&#039;s perspectives that they necessarily fall back on &quot;religious&quot; habits of thought (keep in mind Dawkins&#039; &quot;cultural Christianity&quot;), the need to somehow make some sense of life. (I suppose that&#039;s how they might avoid being consumed by Sartre&#039;s nausea.) 

If I were to ask my students to locate Shaeffer&#039;s thesis, I believe they&#039;d take me to the last sentence of his third paragraph: &lt;blockquote&gt;Maybe, if wanting meaning is the way people are, and we are part of nature, then those feelings—however they express themselves—might indicate something true about the reality of nature and the way it actually is, rather than just signaling an emotional need for religious therapy.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

One thing I especially appreciate about this thread is that it spurred Swami&#039;s discussion of essential detachment. I find it eloquent in all the best senses of the word.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To the extent that Shaeffer&#8217;s thesis&#8211;the center of this essay&#8211;seems elusive, we can probably attribute it to the title. It&#8217;s certainly provocative, but I think it indicates a marginal issue in the article.</p>
<p>I think his main point is that hard-core atheists have so deeply invested themselves in the nihilism Shaeffer points out in Rorty and Singer&#8217;s perspectives that they necessarily fall back on &#8220;religious&#8221; habits of thought (keep in mind Dawkins&#8217; &#8220;cultural Christianity&#8221;), the need to somehow make some sense of life. (I suppose that&#8217;s how they might avoid being consumed by Sartre&#8217;s nausea.) </p>
<p>If I were to ask my students to locate Shaeffer&#8217;s thesis, I believe they&#8217;d take me to the last sentence of his third paragraph:<br />
<blockquote>Maybe, if wanting meaning is the way people are, and we are part of nature, then those feelings—however they express themselves—might indicate something true about the reality of nature and the way it actually is, rather than just signaling an emotional need for religious therapy.</p></blockquote>
<p>One thing I especially appreciate about this thread is that it spurred Swami&#8217;s discussion of essential detachment. I find it eloquent in all the best senses of the word.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kula-pavana</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1659</link>
		<dc:creator>Kula-pavana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1659</guid>
		<description>Why should atheism be devoid of morality? As people we are capable of holding very complex system of values. For example, the atheistic communist ideology placed a very high value on it&#039;s version of &#039;social morality&#039;. Anybody who knows a little about life in communist Soviet Union must have noticed that.

Are theists automatically endowed with high morality? The history tells us otherwise. Religious wars, religious persecutions, exploitation of the people by the clergy, religious fanaticism and bigotry form a major part of history and are with us even today.

The problem with many religious people is the tendency to whitewash history and make it fit their preaching efforts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why should atheism be devoid of morality? As people we are capable of holding very complex system of values. For example, the atheistic communist ideology placed a very high value on it&#8217;s version of &#8216;social morality&#8217;. Anybody who knows a little about life in communist Soviet Union must have noticed that.</p>
<p>Are theists automatically endowed with high morality? The history tells us otherwise. Religious wars, religious persecutions, exploitation of the people by the clergy, religious fanaticism and bigotry form a major part of history and are with us even today.</p>
<p>The problem with many religious people is the tendency to whitewash history and make it fit their preaching efforts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Syamasundara Dasa</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1657</link>
		<dc:creator>Syamasundara Dasa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1657</guid>
		<description>One beautiful thing about our path is that nobody forbids anything, but rather, some things are recognized as more or less conducive, keeping a certain goal in mind.
If the goal is the cultivation of love of God, it seems counter intuitive to spend energies in proving how faulty or false another religious path is; it won&#039;t make your love of God any deeper.
You make it sound like I am saying that if one is a Krishna devotee, he shouldn&#039;t study or try to understand Jesus and/or Christianity.
I personally couldn&#039;t care less about Christianity, by the way, but I don&#039;t use web space to discredit it so fervently, and if someone does, I am surprised, which is all I said. Nobody forbids anything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One beautiful thing about our path is that nobody forbids anything, but rather, some things are recognized as more or less conducive, keeping a certain goal in mind.<br />
If the goal is the cultivation of love of God, it seems counter intuitive to spend energies in proving how faulty or false another religious path is; it won&#8217;t make your love of God any deeper.<br />
You make it sound like I am saying that if one is a Krishna devotee, he shouldn&#8217;t study or try to understand Jesus and/or Christianity.<br />
I personally couldn&#8217;t care less about Christianity, by the way, but I don&#8217;t use web space to discredit it so fervently, and if someone does, I am surprised, which is all I said. Nobody forbids anything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Syamasundara Dasa</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1655</link>
		<dc:creator>Syamasundara Dasa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 12:21:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1655</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I had a Mexican friend named Jesus Rodriguez.
Everybody called him “HEY ZEUS”!&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Well, I rest my case, and sorry about the misunderstanding, worm in stool. I must have read someone else&#039;s post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I had a Mexican friend named Jesus Rodriguez.<br />
Everybody called him “HEY ZEUS”!</p></blockquote>
<p>Well, I rest my case, and sorry about the misunderstanding, worm in stool. I must have read someone else&#8217;s post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gopakumar das</title>
		<link>http://harmonist.us/2009/09/do-atheists-borrow-religion%e2%80%99s-morality/comment-page-1/#comment-1653</link>
		<dc:creator>Gopakumar das</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 06:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmonist.us/?p=2425#comment-1653</guid>
		<description>Wow Syama... I didn&#039;t know it was forbidden in the Krishna conception to have fervor about anything else?  Although I agree that Jesus should not be linked phonetically to Zeus, I think Worminstool has the right to have enthusiasm about a subject and still be a Gaudiya.  Are you a faith-o-meter now?  

  From my research, Jesus was a substantial qualititative improvement on YHWH despite the fact that hell is introduced as a concept in the Gospels.  That seems more related to Roman religion than to Jesus.  But hell is an immensely unpalatable concept that causes little but repulsion in me.  Fear tactics do little to convince me of the need for faith.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow Syama&#8230; I didn&#8217;t know it was forbidden in the Krishna conception to have fervor about anything else?  Although I agree that Jesus should not be linked phonetically to Zeus, I think Worminstool has the right to have enthusiasm about a subject and still be a Gaudiya.  Are you a faith-o-meter now?  </p>
<p>  From my research, Jesus was a substantial qualititative improvement on YHWH despite the fact that hell is introduced as a concept in the Gospels.  That seems more related to Roman religion than to Jesus.  But hell is an immensely unpalatable concept that causes little but repulsion in me.  Fear tactics do little to convince me of the need for faith.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

