<?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: The Problem with Supernatural Explanations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/the-problem-with-supernatural-explanations/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/the-problem-with-supernatural-explanations/</link>
	<description>Atheism &#38; Religious Skepticism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:54:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: anti-supernaturalist</title>
		<link>http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/the-problem-with-supernatural-explanations/comment-page-1/#comment-2430</link>
		<dc:creator>anti-supernaturalist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2009 18:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1149#comment-2430</guid>
		<description>** &#8220;Has the forest hermit not yet heard that God is dead?&#8221; ** 
 
The power of myth -- myths embody ideals and cultural patterns -- is emotive and non-rationally motivating. What &#8220;understanding&#8221; comes from mythological interpretations of nature, of human nature, or human action? 
 
Mythological explanations explain nothing. They may be psychologically satisfying, but such satisfaction has nothing to do with truth. Truth, contrary to the lying line of xian thinking, need be neither beautiful, nor good, nor emotively satisfying. 
 
Who is an anti-supernaturalist? One who opposes any doctrine of any otherworldly realm, whether of Platonic ideas, Aristotelian entelechies, gods, demons, spirits, minds, karma, reincarnation. 
 
Western thinkers began their long trek away from mythological pseudo-explanation to conceptual explanation -- beginning with the skepticism of Xenophanes in 600 BCE, Other early Greek  radicals -- Democritus 500 BCE, the Sophists and Thucydides 400 BCE, Epicurus 300 BCE.  They are out ancestors, ones untainted by xianity. 
 
The dominant source of &#8220;ideals&#8221; in the West for 2,000 years, xianity has from its inception hated empirical knowledge, rationality, and skepticism. (See 1 Corinthians1:1-30) It has attacked, demeaned, and destroyed such works 200 CE.  
 
Xianity&#8217;s faith in the basic lie of all 4-big monotheisms -- a supernaturally ordered hierarchy intended to be imitated on Earth. That lie is dead, just as Nietzsche announced most provocatively in Zarathustra I. (But see also Gay Science Bk III 108-127) 
 
Xianity&#8217;s vast metaphysical and ethical hulk slowly recycles into nescience through exposure to healthy derision and rational methodology. 
 
Nevertheless, magical thinking and supernaturalism still thrive. The infantile xian context lives on, especially in Ameristan. 
 
Our task for the next 500 years. De-deification of western culture! 
 
anti-supernaturalist &#169; 2009 
 
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>** &ldquo;Has the forest hermit not yet heard that God is dead?&rdquo; ** </p>
<p>The power of myth &#8212; myths embody ideals and cultural patterns &#8212; is emotive and non-rationally motivating. What &ldquo;understanding&rdquo; comes from mythological interpretations of nature, of human nature, or human action? </p>
<p>Mythological explanations explain nothing. They may be psychologically satisfying, but such satisfaction has nothing to do with truth. Truth, contrary to the lying line of xian thinking, need be neither beautiful, nor good, nor emotively satisfying. </p>
<p>Who is an anti-supernaturalist? One who opposes any doctrine of any otherworldly realm, whether of Platonic ideas, Aristotelian entelechies, gods, demons, spirits, minds, karma, reincarnation. </p>
<p>Western thinkers began their long trek away from mythological pseudo-explanation to conceptual explanation &#8212; beginning with the skepticism of Xenophanes in 600 BCE, Other early Greek  radicals &#8212; Democritus 500 BCE, the Sophists and Thucydides 400 BCE, Epicurus 300 BCE.  They are out ancestors, ones untainted by xianity. </p>
<p>The dominant source of &ldquo;ideals&rdquo; in the West for 2,000 years, xianity has from its inception hated empirical knowledge, rationality, and skepticism. (See 1 Corinthians1:1-30) It has attacked, demeaned, and destroyed such works 200 CE.  </p>
<p>Xianity&rsquo;s faith in the basic lie of all 4-big monotheisms &#8212; a supernaturally ordered hierarchy intended to be imitated on Earth. That lie is dead, just as Nietzsche announced most provocatively in Zarathustra I. (But see also Gay Science Bk III 108-127) </p>
<p>Xianity&rsquo;s vast metaphysical and ethical hulk slowly recycles into nescience through exposure to healthy derision and rational methodology. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, magical thinking and supernaturalism still thrive. The infantile xian context lives on, especially in Ameristan. </p>
<p>Our task for the next 500 years. De-deification of western culture! </p>
<p>anti-supernaturalist &copy; 2009</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Satan spoils the fun once again &#124; AnAtheist.Net</title>
		<link>http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/the-problem-with-supernatural-explanations/comment-page-1/#comment-1674</link>
		<dc:creator>Satan spoils the fun once again &#124; AnAtheist.Net</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 06:45:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1149#comment-1674</guid>
		<description>[...] a previous post I touched on the problems inherent in invoking supernatural explanations. I said, in part: Perhaps [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a previous post I touched on the problems inherent in invoking supernatural explanations. I said, in part: Perhaps [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
