Atheism, Theism, Science & Philosophy

[Love]

Welcome.

Hume would of course agree with you that the emotion of love doesn't require reason, as would Schopenhauer. Passion and compassion are at least ultimately separate from reason, in their opinions.

That is also my current opinion.

I must admit that I did wonder if you were a Poe when I saw your name and how everything you posted seemed rational to me, until you mentioned how you used to believe you "knew the truth" about religion when you were an atheist, and how when you became christian you felt the sense of an "evil presence" leaving you. Although I could imagine an overly rationalistic view of the world leading to nihilistic beliefs (or lack thereof) that lead you to believing - incorrectly in my current opinion - that this must be the case without embracing theism.

I can imagine that because I've experienced that myself. But I simply focus more on empiricism now, although I of course still don't reject rationalistic completely, I am not rationalistic or overly reductionistic about matters of feelings, emotions, passions, moods and the personality as a whole. I am now far more empirical, phenomenological and experience-based regarding those subjects.

You have raised some excellent points. I do, indeed, feel that atheism has the potential to lead to existential nihilism. I feel that the atheistic worldview is actually very bleak, although my new found belief in Christianity is in no way a reaction to my perceived hoplessness of atheism.

I also subscribe to empiricism in several areas, such as my love for the scientific method. I do, however, believe empircism has limits in terms of its scope of application. As you're aware, empricism posits that true knowledge is experienced via the senses. However, I believe that sensory experience of each human being is entirely subjective and that we need to transcend beyond our sensory system in order to experience what I call God.

I postulate that almost all atheists are rationalists, and some of them often use the word "rational" without actually having the slightlest idea about the philosophy behind it or its origins. Because Richard Dawkins says rationalism leads to truth, the case is closed. Rationalists often believe that they can instantly and simplistically dismiss a proposition without engaging in any real thought on the matter. A good example of a rationalist: Jesus' resurrection is scientifically impossible, therefore, it must be logically false. This is why rationalists (with no prior knowledge of philosophy or history) annoy me.