Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Yes, Dean. I am atheist and by my opinion for me is easier to listen some music. I suppose, that for some believers must to be more problematic to listen some "music for theists", if lyrics is in conflict with something, what is most holy for him. For instance one believer worships Jesus as second person of God, for non-christian believer it can be painful blasphemy insulting God of his deep faith.
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
Posted: August 27 2015 at 13:50
With Marshall Tito, the heroic son not even Hell shall stop us. We raise our foreheads, we walk boldly and clench our fists hard.
Of an ancient kindred we are, but Goths we are not Part of ancient Slavdom are we. Whoever says otherwise slanders and lies, will feel our fist.
All the fingers upon our hands, through misery and suffering The Partisans awareness has created. And now when we should, to the sun, to the sky, We raise our fists high.
With Marshal Tito, the communists song from Tito's Yugoslavia
"With Marshall Tito, the heroic son not even Hell shall stop us" sounds similar to "And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (In my country in communist times you can think Klement Gottwald here)
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20471
Posted: August 27 2015 at 14:43
I can't quote Dean because for some strange reason, I can't navigate on this thread as it's too spam heavy. Time for a trip to the PC doctor I guess, but back to the topic.
This thread was not posted for secular music, which is devoid of any spiritual or supernatural references, but actually to music that is critical of religions, dogmas and the like. Instrumental New Age music is secular. The Hangman and the Papist by Strawbs (always loved Wakeman's organ in this one) is not.
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20471
Posted: August 27 2015 at 14:49
Svetonio wrote:
With Marshall Tito, the heroic son not even Hell shall stop us. We raise our foreheads, we walk boldly and clench our fists hard.
Of an ancient kindred we are, but Goths we are not Part of ancient Slavdom are we. Whoever says otherwise slanders and lies, will feel our fist.
All the fingers upon our hands, through misery and suffering The Partisans awareness has created. And now when we should, to the sun, to the sky, We raise our fists high.
With Marshal Tito, the communists song from Tito's Yugoslavia
Replacing Tito for God makes perfect sense. But what do you have against the Goths? Still battling over something that happened in the 5th century?
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 19597
Posted: August 28 2015 at 02:49
Dean wrote:
Except in circumstances where the lyrics of the music are overly proselytising, I would imagine that most atheists are both receptive to, and tolerant of, religious music so "Music for Atheists" would be better described as just "Music".
couldn't have said it better myself, thanks Dean
Yes, though I don't listen much to gospel music (actually none at all, but I won't shy away from it either), Christian rock is a little difficult for me to accept as a valid musical "genre" (I mean this ranges from extreme metal to country-rock), but I will shy away from it, because of its proselytism... Not that I fear for a second I would be recruited, but just because this "spread the good words" idiocy just annoys the "hell" out of me. I mean, can't religious pêople not relate to themselves and the fact that they must "believe" in something just to fill the void they feel and fear??
Dean wrote:
However, I doubt that is what Steve is looking for here (hence my earlier post of Tim Minchin's comedic anti-theist ditties - though whether any of those actually fit the requirement is debatable), but as Hugues rightly says, atheists don't have (spiritual) beliefs, nor do they slavishly believe in science as some theists would claim. Even if we cite Banco's "Darwin!", this isn't an album of atheist music since evolution as a scientific principle is supported by many religious groups.
Yup, again, as an atheist, I will claim my atheism as "Darwin & Big Bang" to give a quick description to avoid further debate with those I don't want to engage in such a subject, but I don't even "believe" in those theories (which is what they are... just like religions are theories as well).
I "know" some "facts": the universe is infinte and expanding uncontrollably, and every living animal creature has (for those who have them) two eyes, one mouth, one heart, etc... So it's quite obvious (to moi, anyway) that we come from the same cell and share most of our ADN with rhinoceros and sharks and ants.
Never needed to go to Uni to understand that, but I will still thank Charles for standing alone against all to sustain his works.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: August 28 2015 at 03:11
SteveG wrote:
This thread was not posted for secular music, which is devoid of any spiritual or supernatural references, but actually to music that is critical of religions, dogmas and the like.
That's not necessarily atheist music since religious music can (in theory) be critical of other religions and/or beliefs, however unlikely that is for fear of being tagged anti-semitic, isalmaphobic or just sectarian.
SteveG wrote:
Instrumental New Age music is secular.
Then all instrumental music would be secular, which is debatable. Music written for a spiritual purpose would not necessarily be secular, for example there are many pieces of (christian) sacred instrumental music, such as Mozart's Church Sonatas, that are non-secular. By that argument then New Age music written for spiritual ends, such as for meditation, would be non-secular.
SteveG wrote:
The Hangman and the Papist by Strawbs (always loved Wakeman's organ in this one) is not.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: August 28 2015 at 04:06
Sean Trane wrote:
Yup, again, as an atheist, I will claim my atheism as "Darwin & Big Bang" to give a quick description to avoid further debate with those I don't want to engage in such a subject, but I don't even "believe" in those theories (which is what they are... just like religions are theories as well).
Ah, no. While I agree with the jist of what you are saying I will have to pull you up on the idea that scientific theories are "just like religions are theories as well": That is two different uses of the word "theories" with completely different meanings.
Scientific theories (such as Darwin's theory of evolution or Einstein's theory of relativity) are models that work for all known data. There are three key distinctions between scientific theories and everyday theories: the first is that they are falsifiable - it is possible that new data can prove a theory to be false so that it will have to be discarded or modified to fit the new data; the second is they based upon general principles that are independent of thing being explained; and the third is that they can be used to make predictions that can be tested (i.e. through experimentation and observation). There is no requirement to "believe in" a scientific theory since it is just a model that explains a set of data, we can use the theories to make things that work (such as using quantum theory to make transistors and other semiconductors) without having to believe in them.
In the secular word we can contrast that with the theory of music, which is a set of principles on which the practice of music is based. Music theory is not a scientific theory because music exists that "breaks the rules" so the theory does not fit all known data therefore it has been falsified in the scientific sense.
Religious beliefs are theoretical in a different sense in that they cannot be proven to be true, and so by virtue of that cannot be proven to be false (i.e. they are not falsifiable), they are also dependent upon the thing being explained (i.e., a deity or set of beliefs) and cannot be tested.
This thread was not posted for secular music, which is devoid of any spiritual or supernatural references, but actually to music that is critical of religions, dogmas and the like.
That's not necessarily atheist music since religious music can (in theory) be critical of other religions and/or beliefs, however unlikely that is for fear of being tagged anti-semitic, isalmaphobic or just sectarian.
What about music that is critical to all religions?
Can you get it as "music for atheists" (from atheists to atheists)? Or you say that such music is for all theists (potential receivers of critical message) from atheists (source of message)?
Edited by progresssaurus - August 28 2015 at 07:20
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 19597
Posted: August 28 2015 at 08:02
progresssaurus wrote:
Dean wrote:
SteveG wrote:
This thread was not posted for secular music, which is devoid of any spiritual or supernatural references, but actually to music that is critical of religions, dogmas and the like.
That's not necessarily atheist music since religious music can (in theory) be critical of other religions and/or beliefs, however unlikely that is for fear of being tagged anti-semitic, isalmaphobic or just sectarian.
What about music that is critical to all religions?
Can you get it as "music for atheists" (from atheists to atheists)? Or you say that such music is for all theists (potential receivers of critical message) from atheists (source of message)?
I'd say that to an extent, Roger Waters and Ian Anderson have a slight thing against organized religions (in general) and it pervades through their lyrics (may this be why I tend to think of them two as belonging in the top 5 rock myricists), but again, neither cater to atheists. Because most normal atheists (meaning non-extremists) wouldn't care much for an anti-religion theme album, unless the music on it would happen to be stupendous
Ok Can we to determine "Music for atheists" as music, which is not accetable for not a single one believer, but endurable for some atheists (no matter whether we say, that they are normal or ... )?
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20471
Posted: August 28 2015 at 11:45
Dean wrote:
SteveG wrote:
This thread was not posted for secular music, which is devoid of any spiritual or supernatural references, but actually to music that is critical of religions, dogmas and the like.
That's not necessarily atheist music since religious music can (in theory) be critical of other religions and/or beliefs, however unlikely that is for fear of being tagged anti-semitic, isalmaphobic or just sectarian.
SteveG wrote:
Instrumental New Age music is secular.
Then all instrumental music would be secular, which is debatable. Music written for a spiritual purpose would not necessarily be secular, for example there are many pieces of (christian) sacred instrumental music, such as Mozart's Church Sonatas, that are non-secular. By that argument then New Age music written for spiritual ends, such as for meditation, would be non-secular.
SteveG wrote:
The Hangman and the Papist by Strawbs (always loved Wakeman's organ in this one) is not.
Correct, it's about sectarianism.
This is a bit of nitpicking as New Age, specifically stated, can be used for spiritual purposes but it's not the intention of it's creator, and that goes for a majority of other instrumental music as well. In you're argument, no instrumental music can be secular and, ironically, you were the one that proposed that it was.
The Hangman and the Papist being strictly sectarianism is a stretch, as the song does reveal the inherent pitfalls that's has been the bane of religions since time began, I.E. "killing someone is God's name." Generally, one of an atheist's main criticisms of religions, if he's sincere.
Semantics does little for these points except to criticize and alter generally understood meanings and remove someone from participation in the discussion. That's why people use slang. It keeps the bookworms out of the discussions and allows people to focus on the topics without distractions, and with a vernacular thats full of terms that they are familiar with and as they generallyunderstandthem.
I belong to an atheist's group, but I don't expect the general population to understand the deeper philosophical meanings of atheism, let alone related concepts such as teleology and ontology. This thread is supposed to be for some light hearted fun. That's why it was purposely mistitled. I see no need to turn this into a dry (cough, cough) academic discussion, why do you?
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 19597
Posted: August 28 2015 at 18:32
SteveG wrote:
I belong to an atheist's group, but I don't expect the general population to understand the deeper philosophical meanings of atheism, let alone related concepts such as teleology and ontology. This thread is supposed to be for some light hearted fun. That's why it was purposely mistitled. I see no need to turn this into a dry (cough, cough) academic discussion, why do you?
From what I read in your post, your group is typically the genre of atheist that has no ideas what atheism is about... You (the group) think it's a form or religion and has a set of beliefs and a doctrine to follow, don't you? You've probably build some sort of a dogma
It reminds me of this Californian Atheism club that set up a list of ten commandment that resembled the ones in the bible.
==========================
the deeper philosophical meanings of atheism >> there is absolutely nothing philosophical about atheism, dude!!
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 19597
Posted: August 29 2015 at 02:59
progresssaurus wrote:
SteveG wrote:
This thread is supposed to be for some light hearted fun.
Best music for atheists is music intended seriously as music for theist
best ultra-light and good-mooded music for atheists could be the all-too serious music intendeed to convert them into religious fanatics... garanteed to make us laugh!!!
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: August 29 2015 at 03:05
*sigh* earwig-o-again.
SteveG wrote:
Dean wrote:
SteveG wrote:
This thread was not posted for secular music, which is devoid of any spiritual or supernatural references, but actually to music that is critical of religions, dogmas and the like.
That's not necessarily atheist music since religious music can (in theory) be critical of other religions and/or beliefs, however unlikely that is for fear of being tagged anti-semitic, isalmaphobic or just sectarian.
SteveG wrote:
Instrumental New Age music is secular.
Then all instrumental music would be secular, which is debatable. Music written for a spiritual purpose would not necessarily be secular, for example there are many pieces of (christian) sacred instrumental music, such as Mozart's Church Sonatas, that are non-secular. By that argument then New Age music written for spiritual ends, such as for meditation, would be non-secular.
SteveG wrote:
The Hangman and the Papist by Strawbs (always loved Wakeman's organ in this one) is not.
Correct, it's about sectarianism.
This is a bit of nitpicking as New Age, specifically stated, can be used for spiritual purposes but it's not the intention of it's creator, and that goes for a majority of other instrumental music as well. In you're argument, no instrumental music can be secular and, ironically, you were the one that proposed that it was.
In my "argument" I never said any such thing. You raised the point about Instrumental New Age music and stated that it was secular. The only prior mention I made to New Age was referring to the spiritual New Age Movement and not the music genre of the same name. In response to your claim that New Age music was secular I merely pointed out that instrumental music written for spiritual/religious ends would be non-secular. (i.e. by the intent of its creator). Of course music not specifically written for such purposes (ie secular music) that was later used in a spiritual/religious role would remain secular music.
SteveG wrote:
The Hangman and the Papist being strictly sectarianism is a stretch, as the song does reveal the inherent pitfalls that's has been the bane of religions since time began, I.E. "killing someone is God's name." Generally, one of an atheist's main criticisms of religions, if he's sincere.
I never said it was strictly sectarianism, nor did I say it was sectarianism - I clearly said it was about sectarianism. The song is written about the sectarian "troubles" in Northern Ireland but it is not a sectarian song.
SteveG wrote:
Semantics does little for these points except to criticize and alter generally understood meanings and remove someone from participation in the discussion. That's why people use slang. It keeps the bookworms out of the discussions and allows people to focus on the topics without distractions, and with a vernacular that's full of terms that they are familiar with and as they generallyunderstandthem.
That presupposes that a term has a generally understood meaning, and from Hugues' post from last Tuesday ("Mmmhhh!!!.. Haven't seen many examples about atheism itself in this thread. Most of what I saw/heard is mostly attacks against religions") the meaning of "Music for Atheists" was not unequivocal. Slang is not generally understood, that's kinda the point of it.
SteveG wrote:
I belong to an atheist's group, but I don't expect the general population to understand the deeper philosophical meanings of atheism, let alone related concepts such as teleology and ontology.
Meh, I couldn't give a flying fart about the deeper philosophical meaning of atheism, nor teleology and ontology, (and epistemology to complete the set). If all that floats your boat then good for you, I have no wish to explore such navel gazing.
SteveG wrote:
This thread is supposed to be for some light hearted fun. I see no need to turn this into a dry (cough, cough) academic discussion, why do you?
All I was searching for was clarification on what you actually meant by Music for Atheists, you answered that to my satisfaction but then went on to make two points that I didn't entirely agree with. Your subsequent misunderstanding of my reply was hardly a dry academic discussion.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: August 29 2015 at 03:41
progresssaurus wrote:
Dean wrote:
SteveG wrote:
This thread was not posted for secular music, which is devoid of any spiritual or supernatural references, but actually to music that is critical of religions, dogmas and the like.
That's not necessarily atheist music since religious music can (in theory) be critical of other religions and/or beliefs, however unlikely that is for fear of being tagged anti-semitic, isalmaphobic or just sectarian.
What about music that is critical to all religions?
Can you get it as "music for atheists" (from atheists to atheists)? Or you say that such music is for all theists (potential receivers of critical message) from atheists (source of message)?
That's a good point Jaroslav. I suspect that most anti-religion songs are written by atheists for atheists just as most religious music is written by theists for other theists. In both cases they would be an affirmation of some form or other. Even when the lyric is overtly proselytising (vernacular: 'preachy') or critical the more receptive audience would be those who already believed in the message being sent.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.160 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Music for Atheists!
Topic Options
"With Marshall Tito, the heroic son not even Hell shall stop us" sounds similar to "And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (In my country in communist times you can think Klement Gottwald here)
Svetonio wrote:
out of me. I mean, can't religious pêople not relate to themselves and the fact that they must "believe" in something just to fill the void they feel and fear?? 
, I was besides my boots.