Role of Music in theism

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
... I believe that it has power to make an atheist turn into a believer....

Absurd. Bach will not turn an atheist into a believer and Judas Priest will not cause someone to go on a killing rampage. This is just utter nonsense.

Originally posted by Badwater
Absurd. Bach will not turn an atheist into a believer and Judas Priest will not cause someone to go on a killing rampage. This is just utter nonsense.

If Bach will not turn an atheist into a believer then nothing will! I find myself listening to a lot of relaxation music, i think its intended for meditation, i just like it because its minimalist.

Originally posted by Suzianne
If there's anything the testimony of believers here may have taught you guys it's that Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy are not God, and vice versa.

"Fairy tales" and the concept of "an old man in the sky" are specious arguments and not at all what God is about. Come on, boldly step into the 21st century with the rest of us. 🙂

It depends what you mean by this.

I have for example referred to the bible as 'a book of fairy tales', which is obviously not going to
be a complete description of what the bible is.
but it was, in the context I used it, a reference to the fact that the stories in the bible are no more
believable to me than fairy tales...
In fact there are fairy tales less implausible than some of the stories in the bible.

Which would be where I pivot to needing evidence and 'do you have any'?

I don't think that's an unreasonable (if perhaps a bit insulting if your inclined that way) argument
to make.
I am saying 'from my perspective as a non-believer' ... 'it is no more believable than fairy tales' or
something similar.

Now god is evidently not like Santa Claus or the tooth fairy... for starters they are much less implausible,
but people often use them as examples of implausible things that people don't believe in without proof
(beyond childhood, well most of the time ;-) ) that are in fact more likely to be true than god.

However in this instance I would agree that saying why not the tooth fairy for the question about music
the sublime and god, is specious.
While I of course don't believe in god, or the supernatural, I understand that people think about god and
'the sublime' in certain terms, and the word 'sublime' or the emotions that can be brought up by good/great
music are nothing to do with the tooth fairy, regardless of its existence or not.
Naturally people who believe god to be the root cause of all that is good or wonderful in the world, are going
to see his/hers/its fingerprint in great music, although I would ask who is responsible for the bad music?

I don't agree, I think giving credit to an imaginary being for the hard work and brilliance of others is insulting
to those who worked long and hard to compose and perform the music. (even if you also give them some credit
and thanks)

But it is nonsense to ask why music doesn't make you think of the tooth fairy.


And for the record, I am a music fanatic, I can't get enough of it, in many many different forms (although sadly
almost nothing in the charts in the last decade to decade and a half is even bearable let alone good, to my taste
at least)
And the best pieces/songs can indeed bring a lump to your throat, or tear to the eye. or make your blood race
and heart pound, or take you away to another realm...
None of this makes me even think about the existence of god, it certainly doesn't convince me one exists.

The fact that you attribute the feelings you have to gods work says more about your belief than it does about the
music.
You pretty much already have to believe to think like that.

Originally posted by shavixmir
Oh, it's definately the latter.
I mean, if an adult still believes in a tooth fairy, I can safely suggest he's either psychotic or has a lower than average intelligence.

And there's no difference in this respect between a God, a tooth fairy or a leprechaun.

So, yeah, take your pick: psychotic or moronic.
It's only the degree of needed medication which is different.

Being a theist doesn't make you dumb, neither does being an atheist make you smart.

Smart people can do, say and believe stupid things.

And anyone can, and will, make mistakes.

I can and will often call religious belief stupid, I do not imply by this that the person
holding that belief is stupid... Unless I specify otherwise, but that would be aimed
at the specific person, and would have reasons other than there mere belief in religion.

Similarly I hold smoking to be stupid, but I know plenty of otherwise smart people that do it.

And regardless of the intellect of the person, arguments are true or false independent
of the person making them.

Originally posted by shavixmir
Humans survived hundreds of thousands of years without music. They still evolved and prospered.

I really don't see what you're on about.
What are materialistic terms of music? Whacking someone on the head with a guitar and saying: "He who won't listen, will feel?"

I couldn't disagree more... (with both of you actually)

But I will start with this...

How do you know people didn't sing or make music for hundreds of thousands of years without music?

Given there is almost no society anywhere that has no music or singing (with a possible exception
of a society that is almost entirely deaf and almost entirely uses sign language) traditions that
stretch back as far as anyone can remember or has records of. What makes you state with certainty
that anything identifiable as a biologically modern human existed for hundreds of thousands of years
without music?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The point is that its superfluous to our survival and cannot be accounted for in terms of air molecules meeting neuron receptors and synapses. In other words its spiritual.

I would say it is an essential part of civilisation and can indeed be explained in terms of sound waves and brain states.

This does nothing to change the wonder of the experience, but that wonder does
not preclude materiel understanding and explanation.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
If Bach will not turn an atheist into a believer then nothing will! I find myself listening to a lot of relaxation music, i think its intended for meditation, i just like it because its minimalist.

Which Bach... there were 3 notable composers of that name...
JS
CPE
JC

We have cd's of all three and none of them have turned any of us into theists...

Personally I tend to find slightly more recent (what one might term 'modern'😉
classical pieces tend to be more transcendent and have more emotion.
Although JS Bach does tend to bring back memories of the Barchester Chronicles
series, particularly the Chello pieces.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Oh, ok, fair enough. I certainly agree that there's something wondrous and perhaps spiritual about great music. And I find that the practice of listening to music attunes one to it's appreciation - all hail mp3.

Great Music as well as any other manifestation of Art including Dancing,Poetry,Painting,Sculpture,even the Gymnastic exercises such as floor exercises or rhythmic gymnastics suggest a spiritual source directing the human capabilities towards the great end results that we ordinary humans can only wonder at.

Originally posted by googlefudge
But it is nonsense to ask why music doesn't make you think of the tooth fairy.

In my defence I was trying to ascertain his reasons for attributing his feelings about music to God. You already seem to know his reasons (or can think of reasonable reasons) and so you see attributing it to God to be more reasonable than attributing it to the Tooth fairy. But I did not want to assume anything, but rather wanted him to explain his reasons why he thinks God is a good explanation but the Tooth fairy is not.
I was not trying to make fun of his beliefs, nor calling God the Tooth fairy.

Another important thing I wanted to highlight to him is that as an atheist, I do not believe God exists, so when a new phenomena comes along that I cannot explain, God is not on my list of possible explanations. There has to be something very considerable pointing to God as an explanation before I will even consider it. Whereas he seemed to be assuming that atheists would immediately upon hearing good music, jump to the conclusion that God exists.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
Great Music as well as any other manifestation of Art including Dancing,Poetry,Painting,Sculpture,even the Gymnastic exercises such as floor exercises or rhythmic gymnastics suggest a spiritual source directing the human capabilities towards the great end results that we ordinary humans can only wonder at.

Sometimes one can just wonder at human capabilities. I do not share your need to detract from these capabilities or attribute them to something or someone else. It strikes me, so often, that religionists like yourself actually limit and belittle the human condition and spirit, even as, perhaps unwittingly, you convince yourself that you are "expanding" - or "deepening" - it with your conjecture and speculation.

Originally posted by twhitehead
So do you refer to 'religion' as 'culture'? Its not very clear from your post.

Do you understand my point that if you were introduced to some other explanation for your emotional experience then there is a high likelihood that that is what you would have believed. For example if someone had told you it was all about aliens, or spirits of your ancestors ...[text shortened]... general experience the same emotions, but come to different conclusions about their origin.

I did not confuse ' Religion ' with ' Culture '. I said that religion is something that I was born into. I was born Hindu and remained Hindu after my experience and my further readings of books and internalisation of the various teachings. What changed was that I became a theist,whereas I was an agnostic before. It was a slow process,about 15 years from 1985 to 2000. So reading Quoran would not have made a muslim out of me.But Hindu Religion is not comparable to other organised religions. It is the most disorganised religion in the world. Best to call it Hindu culture or way of life. Our Supreme Court has defined Hinduism as the Hindu way of life.

Originally posted by FMF
Sometimes one can just wonder at human capabilities. I do not share your need to detract from these capabilities or attribute them to something or someone else. It strikes me, so often, that religionists like yourself actually limit and belittle the human condition and spirit, even as, perhaps unwittingly, you convince yourself that you are "expanding" - or "deepening" - it with your conjecture and speculation.

When I think that this or that piece of great music or great floor exercises seem to be inspired by God-so out of this world they seem to be- I am not belittling them. I am according them the highest praise I can. When I told my eye surgeon after the successful surgery on my eye for cataract that God operated through his hands,he was pleased rather than angry. Now please do not belittle this by saying that this is because both persons were Hindu theists and it was because of their genes.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
I did not confuse ' Religion ' with ' Culture '.

I did not say you did, I just wanted clarification. It does seem that you call 'religion' what I call 'culture', but I have no problem with that as long as we can communicate.

So reading Quoran would not have made a muslim out of me.
I think it would if that was the specific version of theism that was available to you at the time. Why do you think it wouldn't?

Our Supreme Court has defined Hinduism as the Hindu way of life.
Yes I realise there is a strong overlap between religion and culture. This applies to most religions. Jews may call themselves Jewish and be atheists, or use it to refer to their theistic religion. Many people are atheists, but culturally Christian etc

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
When I think that this or that piece of great music or great floor exercises seem to be inspired by God-so out of this world they seem to be- I am not belittling them.

Well, I suppose it's kind of interesting how you tell yourself you are not belittling them. I think I have rather more belief in the the human spirit and in human capacity than you do.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
When I told my eye surgeon after the successful surgery on my eye for cataract that God operated through his hands,he was pleased rather than angry. Now please do not belittle this by saying that this is because both persons were Hindu theists and it was because of their genes.

What does what you said to your eye surgeon, and what you thought he thought about you had said, have to do with anything I have said?