Why does Richard Dawkins sing Christmas carols?

I meant what I said about intending to lurk here mostly. I came back because I wanted info to help me with a creationist debate. But then I saw comments that I wanted to respond to, and people wanted to respond to those . . . it just happens, y'know? I mean really. Percy asks how we can get creationists to stop repeating the same things over and over, and what does he do when he's talking with me? I'll have to try some of his debunking ideas on him.I also had no intention of coming back and losing more debates and wasting hours of my time in useless rebuttals. I think I've got a better idea of different perspectives I can take on things now.Maybe what I'm really guilty of is last word-ism. Someone says something that may be OT but I am still tempted to respond to it. Atheism isn't exactly OT here, but perhaps we can pull the discussion back to Christmas. I hope yours is peaceful and merry

Pleased to meet you, like the moniker. You're not based at Leicester Uni by any chance are you? Another member here, Dr. Adequate, used to teach there I believe.I don't have any argument with anything you've said. Maybe the question about the Christmas carols is what kind of sentiment is behind them. A Christian sings them and presumably believes them, they have a special relevance. A non-Christian who sings them is, I guess, joining in and just having some fun. I've been comparing this in my mind with the Diwali celebrations on Melton Road every year. Did you know they are the biggest outside of India? Anyone can come celebrate, though of couse it's usually mostly Hindus and Siekhs who are interested.If you wanted to lend me "The God Delusion" then fair enough, I'd read it. I'd be sticking post-it notes for myself on the pages, saying how angry this stuff makes me and how spiritually bankrupt such a position is. I'd probably feel I was wasting my time with such material. But at least I'd be more educated about what I was saying next time I declared how much I hate his ideas

LindaLou Being as I am an atheist of some depth I would like to point out that the words of a song convey emotions and these are accessible to all of us.
In my home growing up so many years ago we had Charlie Brown's christmas as a regular feature. They sing the song " Hark the herald angels sing" at the end of the show and to this day I am lifted by the harmonies and the soothing peal of children singing.That said I do not think the reason is because of any great revelation of the spirit of God or any such religious connotation but ,rather, a simple enjoyment of people working together to produce something of such rare quality of joy.Perhaps it is because the message of the song is in my eyes to bring our attention to the beauty of the universe about us.To be reminded that there is more to life than just making a living and the endless barrage of daily life in society.I would like to live in a world where the petty differences are set aside and the common ground is attained and where there was more time given to mere appreciation of how lucky we are to be alive. Trust me, an atheist has far more need of purpose than you might assume. It is just that purpose in my eyes is self generated and not a given.Merry Xmas all. And an honest hope for peace on earth.

LindaLou,
No I don't have any connection to Leicester Uni, other than living nearby and hunting wild mushrooms near their grounds occasionally.
If you want to borrow the book, give me an e-mail, my address is in profile.
For some reason I am reminded of the well known quote from Douglas Adams;
"Isn't it enough see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"

---

Mutate and Survive

Christmas ceased its mystical meaning to me when I realized Santa Clause didn't exist. Then when I was old enough to understand what Jesus was I told my parents, "You lied about Santa, how can I believe you about this Jesus stuff."While I don't put up lights, a tree, or all those other things, my girlfriend, who is a Chinese born Buddhist, and I, the atheist, do celebrate Christmas because it is a time to spend with your family and show people you care for them.

What belief? I don't know anybody who's promoting that position - particularly not Dawkins.But I guess I don't know what you mean by "spirituality." Ghosts? Goblins? Psychic powers? It seems like you can have plenty of spirituality in your life without resorting to belief in magic powers and supernatural beings. What about it? Which Buddhism, precisely? What beef?

Percy also asked you repeatedly to stop posting OT in the How To Debunk thread.4 times in his latest post.

How would you define spirituality, Crashfrog? Can there be any in one's world where presumably empiricism is the one way to the truth? Or am I misrepresenting you? I'm genuinely interested.When I mentioned Buddhism, I was talking about it broadly. I'm aware that some Buddhists are theists. I was just wondering how things like the search for enlightenment fit into your world view, which really refers back to my question above.

Self-knowledge. Of course, abundantly. Not only is empiricism a path to spiritual truths, it's the only path. Empiricism is just finding something out, examining reality, instead of just making up the answer with your imagination. How can just making things up lead to any kind of truth, spiritual or otherwise? Well, it depends what you mean by "enlightenment." Godliness and the transcendence of physical reality, the power to break physical law and act like Neo in the Matrix? That's clearly nonsense. Don't you ever watch those kung-fu guys who can knock down all their disciples with just the power of their mind with techniques that it takes decades to master the defense against (supposedly) and then they try it against a skeptic, and nothing happens?And the kung-fu master is all like "oh, well, it doesn't work if you have your toes crossed." What?On the other hand, do I think meditation can lead to knowledge about the self? Of course. Is it enlightening? Absolutely.Is it magic? Nonsense.

I look at it as music, period music. Many were written in the 16th to 19th centuries and show what styles were listened to in those periods.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other

As you can imagine by me living in the UK xmas is a purely secular affair. It's a great time to not go to work, party and avoid buying too many presents.I think back to my youth and can't really remember xmas having any religious significance after about age 4.That said xmas is a really good time to have a really good time for what ever reason you care to use; my soon to be in laws are loverly middle aged xians who do get into the religious side of xmas and they seem to enjoy it as much as me.I guess xmas is what you define it to be. The other day I found myself singing 'Wuthering Heights' by Kate Bush.I was sining away telling Heathcliffe that it was, in fact me (Kathy) and that I had come home.But I did'nt think I was Kathy. I did'nt believe the song was a true depiction of reality. It's just a good song.Can't carols be good songs quite apart from any messeage contained?Edited by Larni, : No reason given.

LOL good point.

I like Douglas Adams too. I've often been asked why I want there to be "more" to reality than the natural wonders that already exist. In reply to that I guess I would say that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy. Why go through life with 2D rather than 3D vision. etc etcI think I have to be in the right frame of mind to stomach Dawkin's anti-spiritual diatribes but I may as well at least engage with the book, even if it's to criticise it. I might contact you after the holidays.

You had me thinking about this for some time. I don't think anyone would deny that self-knowledge is part of it. Would there not also be a greater sense of connectedness to other people, or the universe? That's a pretty big leap from a) to b). The definitions of transcendence that I'm aware of don't require superhuman physical abilities -- though having said that, I am intrigued by the stories that have been around a long time about someone in a car crash being able to physically lift a vehicle so that someone, a child maybe, can get out from underneath. We might be capable of more than we realise under certain circumstances. (Those circumstances often not being laboratory conditions or the demand for repetition.)I'm getting a sense that we're starting to have the same conversation that we've been having on another thread, where it's also pretty much OT. I think I need to have a good ol' bash as soon as I can about what science is and what it is capable of explaining.

He clarified the gene-centred view of evolution, therefore pathing the way for decent explanations to be made about the complex evolution of instinctual animals that live in altruistic societies, such as ants.