Do atheists lack a sense of awe and wonder? (Doubt it.)

[Kayenneh]

Just watch nature documentaries narrated by Attenborough and see how awed an atheist can be. As for myself, knowing or the prospect of knowing make things even more awesome. I do see the beautiful garden without wishing for fairies.

[Esquilax]

Well there is some grandeur in that view of the universe. You think it's all random fluke though.

I think the universe is an infinitely delicate cascade of consequences and physical processes, the mechanisms of which are impossible to fully comprehend in the scope of a single human lifetime. I think the universe's improbable state is grand in and of itself, that in the vastness of time and space, in all the myriad possible combinations of constants and variables, the atoms that make up me were able to converge and, for the briefest of cosmic moments, appreciate the sheer scope of that which is around me. I see a universe burning with motion and action and silence, and I find it breathtaking.

You think it's all a magic trick performed by a self-aggrandizing invisible wizard, though.

[Angrboda]

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I rarely have anything approaching "awe and wonder." Perhaps that reflects the Taoist and me, but my relationship to things is more like a warm friendship, than a rockets and flares romance. The world is just fine to me just being what it is.

I think all this "awe and wonder" language is nothing but a knee jerk relationship to theists implying that the atheist worldview has to be dull, mechanical, and dirty. It's like a mega-extravaganza "Battle of the Worldviews" in which the atheist says, "Well, if your worldview has awe and wonder, well mine does too — matter of fact, the awe and wonder in my worldview is better than the awe and wonder in your worldview, so there!"

Nonsense. Life doesn't need to be either of these extremes, awesome or dull and mechanical. It can just be what it is and still be very worthwhile.

There is a famous Taoist painting known as "The Vinegar Tasters." In the painting, three figures are standing around a vat of vinegar, each having just tasted the vinegar. The figures are Buddha, Confucius, and the Taoist Lao Tzu. The Buddha has an expression of sourness on his face, because according to him, all life is suffering, so he experiences the vinegar as unpleasant. Confucius has a bitter look on his face, as he feels that life and men are corrupt, and they can only be made good by strict observance of duties. Lao Tzu puts the vinegar to his lips and smiles, because the vinegar is just what the vinegar should be, it is just what it is, and that's good.

In the same way I feel you don't need to embrace either awe and wonder, or a mechanical emptiness; life as it is may not be as exciting or as pungent as either, but it doesn't have to be either; it's just what it is, and that's very worthwhile. So it's fine for the atheist not to be filled with awe and wonder, because that's not the measure of what makes life good.

[Get me Rex Kramer!]

So I came across this poem written by Jane Goodall whose religious status I don't know and it doesn't matter. When I heard her read this poem it occurred to me that most atheists could probably relate to this quite well. So I thought I'd create a poll and find out.

If you've ever felt the sentiment expressed in this poem yourself or, now that you think about it, find that you do share that sentiment, then I think you have a robust sense of awe and wonder. So do you suppose atheists can or do have as great a sense of awe and wonder as theists?



The Old Wisdom by Jane Goodall

When the night wind makes the pine trees creak
And the pale clouds glide across the dark sky,
Go out, my child, go out and seek
Your soul: the eternal I.

For all the grasses rustling at your feet
And every flaming star that glitters high
Above you, close up and meet
In you: the Eternal I.

Yes, my child, go out into the world; walk slow
And silent, comprehending all, and by and by
Your soul, the Universe, will know
Itself: the Eternal I.

An issue I have with 'awe' and 'wonder' is that they are quite religious words?

[Zen Badger]

Well there is some grandeur in that view of the universe. You think it's all random fluke though.

You on the other hand think it is a 6000 year old rat maze set up by a capricious and egotistical maniac who designed it to ensure that 99% of its inhabitants fail.

Tell us us again how wonderful your outlook is?

[Angrboda]

An issue I have with 'awe' and 'wonder' is that they are quite religious words?

The words are of Old Norse and Old Germanic origin, and there are both secular and religious usages dating back as far.

[Esquilax]

An issue I have with 'awe' and 'wonder' is that they are quite religious words?

No, "prayer," and "church," are religious words. "Awe," and "wonder," are just words.

[Whateverist]

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I rarely have anything approaching "awe and wonder." Perhaps that reflects the Taoist and me, but my relationship to things is more like a warm friendship, than a rockets and flares romance. The world is just fine to me just being what it is.

I think all this "awe and wonder" language is nothing but a knee jerk relationship to theists implying that the atheist worldview has to be dull, mechanical, and dirty. It's like a mega-extravaganza "Battle of the Worldviews" in which the atheist says, "Well, if your worldview has awe and wonder, well mine does too — matter of fact, the awe and wonder in my worldview is better than the awe and wonder in your worldview, so there!"

Nonsense. Life doesn't need to be either of these extremes, awesome or dull and mechanical. It can just be what it is and still be very worthwhile.

There is a famous Taoist painting known as "The Vinegar Tasters." In the painting, three figures are standing around a vat of vinegar, each having just tasted the vinegar. The figures are Buddha, Confucius, and the Taoist Lao Tzu. The Buddha has an expression of sourness on his face, because according to him, all life is suffering, so he experiences the vinegar as unpleasant. Confucius has a bitter look on his face, as he feels that life and men are corrupt, and they can only be made good by strict observance of duties. Lao Tzu puts the vinegar to his lips and smiles, because the vinegar is just what the vinegar should be, it is just what it is, and that's good.

In the same way I feel you don't need to embrace either awe and wonder, or a mechanical emptiness; life as it is may not be as exciting or as pungent as either, but it doesn't have to be either; it's just what it is, and that's very worthwhile. So it's fine for the atheist not to be filled with awe and wonder, because that's not the measure of what makes life good.

Point taken. I guess I am a bit of a romantic about this life .. and a few other things. It isn't magic, but it is special to me and it does still occasionally surprise me.

[Violet]

My answer was missing from the poll: Not universally applicable.

Atheism and theism do not necessarily affect whether one feels wonder... only where that wonder is directed, if felt... and conversely: what it is experienced as.

Some religious peeps are just chock full of wonder, and praise their gods emphatically at the slightest of blessings. Some of 'em are social churchgoers who believe... but don't really care about it.

Some nonreligious peeps are just chock full of wonder, and excitedly ramble and babble away at the slightest of observations. Some of 'em wouldn't give a rats arse if a trillion rainbows danced across the sunset immediately before an eclipse and the meteor shower of the <million-year-segment> danced before the auroras on a cloudless day in the middle of nowhere where the stars shine brightest (on the full moon at harvest). So... fuck 'em.

[Ryantology]

If you saw a painting, wouldn't you assume that the painting had a painter?

And if it didn't have a painter, wouldn't that, alone, make it uniquely interesting?

Seeing apparent design and assuming a designer is the pedestrian and dull way to go. The fact that our universe was not designed, that it is a "random fluke" makes it exponentially more fascinating to me.