Cosmic is an awesome word, as close as a word we have I can think of to describe this feeling. I have the feeling as well; I am also an atheist. Just an awe, amazement, and appreciation for the world around us and the impossible thing we know as life. The origin of the universe is illogical. Why are we here?
Long-time subscriber, your videos are great. It's rare to see some really enthusiastic about science and astrophysics on youtube, as well as atheism.
It would help to have a word for this position, but it seems futile to try to reduce it to one or two words. Even what we mean by "cosmic experience" must be elaborated upon each time it's used...
Your view of human nature is too narrow. Your concern for truth, science, and reason is useful but inadequate. What is all this rationality for? Answer: confident reliable predictions. What do we want confident predictions about? Answer: emotional fulfillment. My point is that truth is not usually an emotional experience in itself, it's a means to an end. David Hume: "Reason is and ought only to be the slave of the passions". The exploration of desires/emotions: that is the future of atheism.
I like the word "Oneness" because it describes everything you mentioned , but that word has already been claimed by nutty Pentecostalists. I like the "Cosmos" idea. Great vid as always. Sin dios.
I think the word Heinlein's word 'grok' comes close to what you're describing. Unfortunately it's kind of ugly and doesn't inspire the kind of awe that you're looking for.
Well...to use the word "cosmos" really fits, I think. It just sums it all up. I would have end up with something like "cosmoscist" too, but now that you were first to find a new word for this feeling (that I of course know too), I think I will use it. I can't think of a better name though. Thanks man
>it just gets to show you that there is a God who wants us to worship Him
No, thats not an answer to the question I asked. I was looking for what led logically from wonder and awe to a personal, anthropocentric god. All you have done is essentially say, "Because", without giving any real answer.
>This desire, this wonder and awe, and this understanding we have, are all God-given facilities
What? How does "I feel wonder" become "a deity gave me this wonder"?
@SolRosenberg84 not sure about the latter part of your video. As to when you get a feeling of awe, i believe that's called numinous, or is that not quite what you meant.
I have not "discovered god". The concept of an anthropocentric deity seems no more plausible to me now then it ever has, in fact, I'd say it seems even more unlikely to me now.
Your comment is interesting though. Why would wonder and an understanding of a connection to everything equate belief in human like deities?
How about "the signal"? Everything started with the big bang in regard to our universe & from an atom all the way to the rest of the cosmos we have a recurring theme of a solar system. Elections & planets, protons/neutrons & a sun.
How about logicism? Or naturologicism (the view of looking at nature around us, forming our view on logic and evidence of everything but this name is too long to be easy to say, how about relogicism? A realistic logical view of nature (but would be open to different perspectives I guess), not a good solid one. Regardless, I feel connected and have felt this way for years, glad to find your channel man and hear someone so articulate on the subject. Right on.
I am putting your word as my religious view on facebook! Although... religion isn't a good way to describe it. By the way, wouldn't the gas giants also have liquid oceans down there somewhere?
"The philosophy of cosmicism states that there is no recognizable divine presence, such as God, in the universe, and that humans are particularly insignificant in the larger scheme of intergalactic existence, and perhaps are just a small species projecting their own mental idolatries onto the vast cosmos, ever susceptible to being wiped from existence at any moment."
@DonQuixotedeKaw "This also suggested that the majority of undiscerning humanity are creatures with the same significance as insects in a much greater struggle between greater forces which, due to humanity's small, visionless and unimportant nature, it does not recognize." H. P. Lovecraft
I like many of buddhisms philosophies. Not the faith based philosophies, but the fact based ones. Karma, the true meaning of it, is actually fact based! Most people view karma as 'I give money to a charity and I will get a hot date or win the lottery in return'. The traditional meaning of karma is this: everything is one, so by helping others you are actually helping yourself so karma is instantaneous!
Well, all matter is highly concentrated energy, and everything that acts on matter is energy - so its all essentially one kind of "energy" in different forms. As to what that energy is, we have no answer, and creating a meaningful answer would be insanely difficult (I'd say nearly if not actually impossible.) However, we can gather that the universe is essentially one big interconnected system of this one "energy".
Yes. Part of E=mc^2 means that all matter is essentially energy, in a very concentrated form (as there is so much energy stored in matter.) Since we are made up of matter, and all matter is energy, therefore we are made up of energy. We are the same thing that populates and animates the cosmos, whatever it is.
You might be asking what this has to do with you - understandably so. We humans have this bizzare delusion, reinforced by our culture and language's Christian background, that we humans are interlopers in this world, thrust into a world which seems bizarre and cruel to us.
However, once you learn that humans are made of the same stuff as everything else, and were slowly created by natural systems like everything else a strange idea pops into your head.
The idea that we aren't interlopers in this world, but that we are this world, this reality, this cosmos - a living, breathing, thinking component of the universe, that developed out of it like any rock, star, or galaxy. What a bizarre realization to come to, that after centuries of pondering what we are we learn that we are the universe itself; crafted from dead stars, and regulating our metabolism using the energy of active ones.
@SolRosenberg84 Okay thanks a lot for explaining that. So basically Christians think that this universe is for us and created by God for US. But in reality, we are just apart of this universe and have evolved just like anything else has. And just because we have a brain that can think critically, doesn't mean that we actually HAVE a main purpose or objective (as you stated in one of you other videos).
The concept of an "objective" for life strikes me as anthropocentric. Why must things be part of some master schemer's plan to have a reason to be? Its like saying that Winston Smith gains purpose through big brother in 1984. For me, existence precedes essence.
I've heard it called "cosmic consciousness." I like your use of "cosmos" but I think consciousness is part of it, too. The operative word in "mind-blowing" is "mind", because that's where these experiences happen, as a response to things in the outside world. That melding of inner and outer space is what makes these experiences so beautiful. Humans are the only creatures we know of who are at the level of consciousness needed to be able to have them and appreciate the beauty of the cosmos.
(continuing from my last post) The only problem with calling it "taoism" vs "cosmocism" (did I get that right?) is people's preconceptions of the word. When one hears taoism, they might think nature-loving-hippy. When one hear's "cosmo-" they think scientist.When in fact, both embrace nature and science equally (from what I understand of how you describe this spirituality.) Some may also have prejudices with taoism having come from China.
I mentioned taoism in your previous vid, and as I get more of the gist of what you are describing, it REALLY sounds like taoism to me. Reading taoist texts can be cryptic - I recommend checking out Deng Mind Dao's "365 Tao" where he takes taoist philosophy and applies it to today's world. One striking similarity is that the taoists could not find a word for it either, in fact they say it is nameless, and only because of our dualistic natures and need to name things do they call it "the way."
Another label. Good one but still, this is another label. You know that your efford can be twisted by theists? They can just claim that they feel the awe and connection with cosmos...through god. kaminarigaston is right. You think too much :P
And now, finally, someone mentioned that we could use the word awe. Inspired by your aproach I googled it before posting something and discovered an AWEsome thruth that what you are looking for was already discovered, described and labeled by guy named Phil Zuckerman and called Aweism. Just google it.
Ps.: sorry for the spamming, but when I give my oppinion I always do it thoroughly. XoD
I've always considered myself a NeoThinker, while the way I conceive the world and the cosmos is Neo-Tech. I read a book by Frank R Wallace some time ago that changed my entire outlook on life. It's hard to explain what it said, but you could consider it as the Atheist bible. For all the questions I once had as a theist, it explained them all.
The first word that also came to my mind was WOW. I mean it's exactly the word that comes to your mouth in these cosmic moment. And it perfectly desribes it, because we all instinctively know when to use it. Then you are in a church in front of a Jesus on a cross bleeding or listen to a priest preaching about hell, you know its not the moment to use WOW. But the you look at the sky and your mind blows, thats it -WOW. And thanx to viral nature of american culture, almost all languages use it now.
I'm affraid the word Cosmoscist may sound cool in English but it wouldn't be so cool in some other languages like Slovan languages. They (we) use the word "kosmos" in a meaning of "space" nothing more. Therefore, Russians instead of astronaut use the word kosmonaut meaning just someone who has been (or is about to go) to space. So there is no "cosmic feeling" attached to it. And of course no need to mention asian languages. Besides similar words have already been used for countless purposes.
Cosmism Nano Electronics and 21st century Global Ideological Warfare. "The cosmists are concerned with these cosmic issues. Cosmism is a "scientist's religion", i.e. a religion in the sense that traditional religions energize and direct the lives of groups of people. In the case of cosmism, billions of people will be involved, because it concerns the destiny of the human species."
i remember being depressed for 15mins after i arrived at atheism
but the way that the different fields of science pieced themselves together to construct an outlook on my reality i experienced a "spiritual" renewal the likes of which i never experienced when i was religious
i recognize nihilism as the ultimate end but i recognize humans ability to use the scientific method to better understand reality fulfilling
i remember when philhelenes said "we are the universe made conscious of itself"
Don't we call it "awe"? We all have different realisations at different times, I don't think we can explain them without teaching no matter what you label it.
One possibility I have thought of is that people with this un-named outlook will create names for themselves, and once there are enough people with this outlook there will be a culling of names that will eventually settle with one or two names surviving the naming process. A kind of cultural natural selection if you will.
did you ever think maybe "it" shouldn't have such a clearly defined and ultimately "dismiss-able" label? you're wasting your time because what you are trying to achieve... is GONNA HAPPEN ANYWAY whether we want it to or not. lets try to keep things ambiguous for as long as possible. any half way intelligent theist should be curious about they perceive as the atheists choice of "unbelief". giving our selves some presumptuous label makes it easier for them to cast that curiosity aside.
Agreed. Thats why I want to suggest better labels than the dismissive ones that theists will try to pin us with.
I don't deny your view however. There may be some power in keeping this outlook ambiguous - however, it leaves it open to being defined by those who are attempting to discredit it. Not to say this will eliminate the problem though - just look at the shit storm brewing over the term "atheist" as theists constantly attempt to redefine it.
@SolRosenberg84 i would rather sneeringly correct the person who confronts me with a "dismissive theist label" then have to explain one that is self imposed.
and if experience with labels imposed by theists follows the current trend... the labels they attempt to pin us with will change from year to year anyway. that is a good thing, its "weak" and its "cheap" and should be obvious to anybody with healthy respect for "consistency"
Astronomy and Astrophysics gives me that overwhelming feeling of being so small and insignificant next to the unfathomable immensity of the universe. It's looking at images like the cloud nebula where I see the pointlessness of the demands and doctrines of the various religions of man. What a time to be alive. Don't waste another moment - live life to it's fullest.
I am a very spiritual atheist. It mostly stems from studying cognitive neuroscience and subsequent "experiences" I've had. The states of mind one can achieve through meditation is mind blowing and humbling.
Cosmicist, based on the adjective would be possible. "Cosmosist" is just illiterate gibberish. The -os Greek second declension ending is not part of the stem and would not be used in a formation like this. Its not like philology isn't an exact sciences and you can just make-up anything you want.
But the good part of it being systematically incorrect is that it has not been used before.
I don't deny what you have stated, but cosmicist sounds like the singular form of cosmicism, which is the literary style of Lovecraft. Its already been taken.
My only critique of Cosmoscist is that it bears a striking auditory resemblance to osmosis. It unintentionally reads like a bad pun. Might I suggest a revision: trim the word to denote clarity, and you're left with Cosmist. Koz-əm-ist. It also sounds somewhat more eloquent and is unlike any word readily flocking to mind.
Good idea actually, it cuts out unnecessary syllables and eliminates the osmosis problem.
However, upon googling it I was surprised to find has already found use - apparently being defined by a Hugo de Garis to mean a moral philosophy that favours building or growing artificial intelligence for the purpose of leaving earth. Weird.
@SolRosenberg84 Figures, the one time I'm virtually certain a Google search would be unnecessary. H.P. Lovecraft also coined cosmicism (cosmicist), so that's not viable. Grrrr, cosmoscist may be the only option not previously adopted by authors. I'll stew on it for a while.
Great, you invented another useless term, that when you use, nobody will understand, and when you explain it, they'll just roll their eyes. It's ridiculous.
I disagree. A respect for science is part of what I speak of, but not its entirety. What I'm trying to describe is more the act of framing our natural positive reaction to the universe through the increased knowledge we gain of it through science. Its not the same thing as being a fan of the sciences.
I don't really see why you are being completely dismissive. If people roll their eyes at the idea, they just don't understand it, or they can't feel wonder. Their loss.
@SolRosenberg84 I think I understand what your proposed meaning is, but to be honest, I don't see a good reason to use the word in any context. I'm not convinced.
Also, I think if someone "doesn't get it", then the word you used is meaningless. Afterall, you were trying to express an idea, right? Then you should express it in understandable terms. If you ask me, this term will go the way of "pearlist" and "bright". Vague and over-defined terms that need to be explained each time they're used.
No one knows what "pearlist" or "bright" means either. Neither term has exactly hit the mainstream jackpot, and I think neither properly describe the outlook I am. Pearlist simply means respect for the scientific method, while bright sounds downright condescending (If you aren't a bright you must be dim).
I don't deny those terms have their uses, but they don't seem to describe what I'm trying to describe.
After watching this, I recall a video you made in the past where you basically had some sort of epiphany about reality and you mentioned feeling complete contentment. I can't think of any term that rolls an epiphany and contentment all into one but I think it's what you might be talking about. This video and your other one really made me think more about this. I'll get back to you if I come up with anything.
I think you've worked through this nicely and your conclusion is very accomplished (scrap the comments I made on your previous vid. I clearly wasn't following).
Sounds great! I was the one that suggested "cosmic existentialist", but I can see how that can perhaps conjure up images of philosophers like Sartre and Kierkegaard that rapped the convoluted semantics of continental philosophy (that overtly reject scientific influence). Cosmoscist is simple, yet effective.
This discussion is relevant but most likely futile. Yeah, we can talk about it here, but there is no real way to implement this in the "new atheist" movement.
Sagan is amazingly charismatic, and as much a poet as he is a scientist. Hawking is an amazingly gifted theorist. With only Sagans, we don't have as much progress. With only Hawkings, no one outside science ever learns the things we discover. So both are vital.
I agree with your frustration. People think atheists are colorless or have no "spiritual" gratitude or feelings of awe, despite science and modern philosophy carrying the most profound realizations, made more so by the rational behind it.
But I still don't support the organization and hierarchy that goes with having any centralized criteria/doctrine; merely having a label tends to make a group carry traces of dogmatism. I like that atheists don't have to get together to pat each other's asses.
I'd agree with your distrust of organization. However, I am not suggesting that "cosmoscism" become such a thing. All I am after is a common, positive label for a common experience and worldview related to it. I see no threat of dogma in a common label. What I do see however, is a chance of groups forming around such a thing - for example what has recently happened with us atheists.
Pearlism to me sounds like just a substitute for positivism. Nothing against thunderf00t, but it doesn't entirely capture the emotional side of what I'm after.
@SolRosenberg84 I was going to say, it's a bit nerdier, and a lot less awe-inspiring than Cosmoscist. I definitely like it though, and thanks for the great videos!
Cosmic is an awesome word, as close as a word we have I can think of to describe this feeling. I have the feeling as well; I am also an atheist. Just an awe, amazement, and appreciation for the world around us and the impossible thing we know as life. The origin of the universe is illogical. Why are we here?
Long-time subscriber, your videos are great. It's rare to see some really enthusiastic about science and astrophysics on youtube, as well as atheism.
Stephen Hawking Forever
Peace
revluzionnotelevised 4 months ago in playlist More videos from SolRosenberg84
It would help to have a word for this position, but it seems futile to try to reduce it to one or two words. Even what we mean by "cosmic experience" must be elaborated upon each time it's used...
heidirh 4 months ago
i have always called it being hit with reality, just snacked in the face... but i always felt alone when i think that way..
b3astieboi2 1 year ago
Your view of human nature is too narrow. Your concern for truth, science, and reason is useful but inadequate. What is all this rationality for? Answer: confident reliable predictions. What do we want confident predictions about? Answer: emotional fulfillment. My point is that truth is not usually an emotional experience in itself, it's a means to an end. David Hume: "Reason is and ought only to be the slave of the passions". The exploration of desires/emotions: that is the future of atheism.
xntubes 1 year ago
I like the word "Oneness" because it describes everything you mentioned , but that word has already been claimed by nutty Pentecostalists. I like the "Cosmos" idea. Great vid as always. Sin dios.
rationalhumano 1 year ago
You blow my mind with every video you make, good sir. I do hope this Cosmoscist term catches on.
finxil 1 year ago
I think the word Heinlein's word 'grok' comes close to what you're describing. Unfortunately it's kind of ugly and doesn't inspire the kind of awe that you're looking for.
BurntEngineOil 1 year ago
@BurntEngineOil You have to draw the word out, like a primordial toad staring in awe at the dim light of stars.
GRRRAAAAAAAAWWWK~
Awe is all in the way you look at things.
sockpaladin5 1 year ago
Well...to use the word "cosmos" really fits, I think. It just sums it all up. I would have end up with something like "cosmoscist" too, but now that you were first to find a new word for this feeling (that I of course know too), I think I will use it. I can't think of a better name though. Thanks man
NovemDecem 1 year ago
thanks for cheering me up! made me smile.
strawberrypiee 1 year ago
@neonjc786x
>it just gets to show you that there is a God who wants us to worship Him
No, thats not an answer to the question I asked. I was looking for what led logically from wonder and awe to a personal, anthropocentric god. All you have done is essentially say, "Because", without giving any real answer.
>This desire, this wonder and awe, and this understanding we have, are all God-given facilities
What? How does "I feel wonder" become "a deity gave me this wonder"?
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84 not sure about the latter part of your video. As to when you get a feeling of awe, i believe that's called numinous, or is that not quite what you meant.
aIarshie 1 year ago
I always just considered myself an explorer of reality. :)
mandi1369420 1 year ago
@neonjc786x
Well... No.
I have not "discovered god". The concept of an anthropocentric deity seems no more plausible to me now then it ever has, in fact, I'd say it seems even more unlikely to me now.
Your comment is interesting though. Why would wonder and an understanding of a connection to everything equate belief in human like deities?
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
You really remind me of Carl Sagan ^^
Folf242 1 year ago
How about "the signal"? Everything started with the big bang in regard to our universe & from an atom all the way to the rest of the cosmos we have a recurring theme of a solar system. Elections & planets, protons/neutrons & a sun.
GalinorGustave 1 year ago
How about logicism? Or naturologicism (the view of looking at nature around us, forming our view on logic and evidence of everything but this name is too long to be easy to say, how about relogicism? A realistic logical view of nature (but would be open to different perspectives I guess), not a good solid one. Regardless, I feel connected and have felt this way for years, glad to find your channel man and hear someone so articulate on the subject. Right on.
mounatinman157 1 year ago
I am putting your word as my religious view on facebook! Although... religion isn't a good way to describe it. By the way, wouldn't the gas giants also have liquid oceans down there somewhere?
tempo3rd 1 year ago
When you talk about it you make it sound boring! I've never found it interesting anyway though.. experience of wonder or awe..
I agree with you though.. about Cosmic Moment.. good expression.
I like Carl Sagan's comment, that we are the universe's way of understanding itself.
Alan Watts the philosopher inspired bruce lee somewhat.. in his philosophy. See the video Alan Watts- conversation with myself.
jameshanley40 1 year ago
Cosmoscist? Sounds awful close to communist, COMRADE.
strontiumcrypt 1 year ago
"The philosophy of cosmicism states that there is no recognizable divine presence, such as God, in the universe, and that humans are particularly insignificant in the larger scheme of intergalactic existence, and perhaps are just a small species projecting their own mental idolatries onto the vast cosmos, ever susceptible to being wiped from existence at any moment."
DonQuixotedeKaw 1 year ago
@DonQuixotedeKaw "This also suggested that the majority of undiscerning humanity are creatures with the same significance as insects in a much greater struggle between greater forces which, due to humanity's small, visionless and unimportant nature, it does not recognize." H. P. Lovecraft
DonQuixotedeKaw 1 year ago
@DonQuixotedeKaw I've been labeling myself as an atheist/Lovelock Pantheist, so I think I'm pretty darn happy with Comosist as Lovecraft wrote it.
DonQuixotedeKaw 1 year ago
write a wikipedia article about it, and it becomes popular
Quiestre 1 year ago
Scigasm?
Flame3230 1 year ago
You should check out The CelestineProphecy - It has some really neat concepts kinda of along these lines. Enjoy
faildotcomable 1 year ago
Your videos have caused me to have a number of "cosmic moments", Sol.
Darkinsigniosis 1 year ago
Realitism?
caviano 1 year ago
Please tell me that's a bong in the background...
OkashaSH5 1 year ago
All of that stuff you talked about...who feels connected, and feels wonder of the universe and all that.
I have a word for that.
"Human." :-)
bttsstewart 1 year ago
@bttsstewart
Or are we dancer?
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
I like many of buddhisms philosophies. Not the faith based philosophies, but the fact based ones. Karma, the true meaning of it, is actually fact based! Most people view karma as 'I give money to a charity and I will get a hot date or win the lottery in return'. The traditional meaning of karma is this: everything is one, so by helping others you are actually helping yourself so karma is instantaneous!
ApeShallNevaKillApe 1 year ago
what about cosmatic?
DemonofHell48 1 year ago
@DemonofHell48
Sounds like cosmic asthma though.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
What are the "cosmos" literally? And what does it mean to the human race? I'm just not understanding it... but I really WANT to. Help!
homie3626 1 year ago
@homie3626
>What are the "cosmos" literally?
Well, all matter is highly concentrated energy, and everything that acts on matter is energy - so its all essentially one kind of "energy" in different forms. As to what that energy is, we have no answer, and creating a meaningful answer would be insanely difficult (I'd say nearly if not actually impossible.) However, we can gather that the universe is essentially one big interconnected system of this one "energy".
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84 Am I correct to think that this has something to do with E=mc2??
SonnyGoten89 1 year ago
@SonnyGoten89
Yes. Part of E=mc^2 means that all matter is essentially energy, in a very concentrated form (as there is so much energy stored in matter.) Since we are made up of matter, and all matter is energy, therefore we are made up of energy. We are the same thing that populates and animates the cosmos, whatever it is.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@homie3626
You might be asking what this has to do with you - understandably so. We humans have this bizzare delusion, reinforced by our culture and language's Christian background, that we humans are interlopers in this world, thrust into a world which seems bizarre and cruel to us.
However, once you learn that humans are made of the same stuff as everything else, and were slowly created by natural systems like everything else a strange idea pops into your head.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@homie3626
The idea that we aren't interlopers in this world, but that we are this world, this reality, this cosmos - a living, breathing, thinking component of the universe, that developed out of it like any rock, star, or galaxy. What a bizarre realization to come to, that after centuries of pondering what we are we learn that we are the universe itself; crafted from dead stars, and regulating our metabolism using the energy of active ones.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84 Okay thanks a lot for explaining that. So basically Christians think that this universe is for us and created by God for US. But in reality, we are just apart of this universe and have evolved just like anything else has. And just because we have a brain that can think critically, doesn't mean that we actually HAVE a main purpose or objective (as you stated in one of you other videos).
homie3626 1 year ago
@homie3626
The concept of an "objective" for life strikes me as anthropocentric. Why must things be part of some master schemer's plan to have a reason to be? Its like saying that Winston Smith gains purpose through big brother in 1984. For me, existence precedes essence.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
Cosmic realism and cosmic realist?
dewinthemorning 1 year ago
I've heard it called "cosmic consciousness." I like your use of "cosmos" but I think consciousness is part of it, too. The operative word in "mind-blowing" is "mind", because that's where these experiences happen, as a response to things in the outside world. That melding of inner and outer space is what makes these experiences so beautiful. Humans are the only creatures we know of who are at the level of consciousness needed to be able to have them and appreciate the beauty of the cosmos.
scribblo 1 year ago
when i think cosmos, i think carl sagan
SkeptikSnarf 1 year ago
you are cool
benperkins1 1 year ago
Anthropognosism?
Anthro = Human
Gnosis = Enlightenment
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
My mistake, "Antropo" = Human.
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
Does it have to be a new term? I like Bright, Awake, Yoism.
renemartien 1 year ago
Sounds rather nasty... A character from Fairly Odd Parents having a cyst?
McTrico 1 year ago
Anthropognosis?
Human Enlightenment?
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
Anthropognosis?
Human Enlightenment?
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Androsophiism? ("Andro Sophie Ism")
Andro = Man
Sophi = Knowledge
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Androsophiism? ("Andro Sophie Ism")
Andro = Man
Sophi = Knowledge
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Androsophiism? ("Andro Sophie Ism")
Andro = Man
Sophi = Knowledge
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
Androsophiism? ("Andro Sophie Ism")
Andro = Man
Sophi = Knowledge
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How bout "Androism"?
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
How bout "Androism"?
BokuWaJShi 1 year ago
(continuing from my last post) The only problem with calling it "taoism" vs "cosmocism" (did I get that right?) is people's preconceptions of the word. When one hears taoism, they might think nature-loving-hippy. When one hear's "cosmo-" they think scientist.When in fact, both embrace nature and science equally (from what I understand of how you describe this spirituality.) Some may also have prejudices with taoism having come from China.
khrome242 1 year ago
I mentioned taoism in your previous vid, and as I get more of the gist of what you are describing, it REALLY sounds like taoism to me. Reading taoist texts can be cryptic - I recommend checking out Deng Mind Dao's "365 Tao" where he takes taoist philosophy and applies it to today's world. One striking similarity is that the taoists could not find a word for it either, in fact they say it is nameless, and only because of our dualistic natures and need to name things do they call it "the way."
khrome242 1 year ago
i like it!
JollSSteR 1 year ago
you should try to derive your "word" as a Latin or Greek derivative. That"s how all the cool names are founded.
terrylawson666 1 year ago
I'll stick with secular humanist, thanks. I think "cosmosist" sounds a little ridiculous, (and IMO, is not easy to say.)
PlasteredDragon 1 year ago
I kind of like "Picklyricist"
AncientAtheist 1 year ago
Why not expand on "cosmopolitan"?
zenthr 1 year ago
Existential crisis?
bamboo4tameshigiri 1 year ago
@bamboo4tameshigiri
Nah, just over thinking things.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
Another label. Good one but still, this is another label. You know that your efford can be twisted by theists? They can just claim that they feel the awe and connection with cosmos...through god. kaminarigaston is right. You think too much :P
saaitar 1 year ago
And now, finally, someone mentioned that we could use the word awe. Inspired by your aproach I googled it before posting something and discovered an AWEsome thruth that what you are looking for was already discovered, described and labeled by guy named Phil Zuckerman and called Aweism. Just google it.
Ps.: sorry for the spamming, but when I give my oppinion I always do it thoroughly. XoD
annubis2 1 year ago
I've always considered myself a NeoThinker, while the way I conceive the world and the cosmos is Neo-Tech. I read a book by Frank R Wallace some time ago that changed my entire outlook on life. It's hard to explain what it said, but you could consider it as the Atheist bible. For all the questions I once had as a theist, it explained them all.
skywize 1 year ago
Cosmoscist...
I can dig it!
SakuraElyse 1 year ago
Comment removed
annubis2 1 year ago
The first word that also came to my mind was WOW. I mean it's exactly the word that comes to your mouth in these cosmic moment. And it perfectly desribes it, because we all instinctively know when to use it. Then you are in a church in front of a Jesus on a cross bleeding or listen to a priest preaching about hell, you know its not the moment to use WOW. But the you look at the sky and your mind blows, thats it -WOW. And thanx to viral nature of american culture, almost all languages use it now.
annubis2 1 year ago
I'm affraid the word Cosmoscist may sound cool in English but it wouldn't be so cool in some other languages like Slovan languages. They (we) use the word "kosmos" in a meaning of "space" nothing more. Therefore, Russians instead of astronaut use the word kosmonaut meaning just someone who has been (or is about to go) to space. So there is no "cosmic feeling" attached to it. And of course no need to mention asian languages. Besides similar words have already been used for countless purposes.
annubis2 1 year ago
Once science can offer eternal life, the deconverts will arrive in droves.
destronia123 1 year ago
I'm Cosmosisised
phurphy 1 year ago
Cosmism Nano Electronics and 21st century Global Ideological Warfare. "The cosmists are concerned with these cosmic issues. Cosmism is a "scientist's religion", i.e. a religion in the sense that traditional religions energize and direct the lives of groups of people. In the case of cosmism, billions of people will be involved, because it concerns the destiny of the human species."
AnarchistOpposition 1 year ago
i remember being depressed for 15mins after i arrived at atheism
but the way that the different fields of science pieced themselves together to construct an outlook on my reality i experienced a "spiritual" renewal the likes of which i never experienced when i was religious
i recognize nihilism as the ultimate end but i recognize humans ability to use the scientific method to better understand reality fulfilling
i remember when philhelenes said "we are the universe made conscious of itself"
UncertainTruth 1 year ago
Don't we call it "awe"? We all have different realisations at different times, I don't think we can explain them without teaching no matter what you label it.
Nashy119 1 year ago
@MysticKevin10
Yes, humans did discover it - using the system of scepticism and empirical study that is science. I don't really see how this is dogmatic.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
Can someone please explain to me the difference between a Humanist and an Atheist.
8824snipe 1 year ago
@8824snipe
Atheism is the lack of belief in deities. It is a reaction to a claim.
Humanism is an approach in study, philosophy, or practice that focuses on human values and concerns. It is not a reaction to a claim.
If someone says they are an atheist, all you know is that they don't believe in deities. You know nothing else.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84 Thanks for that, guess im a mix of both.
8824snipe 1 year ago
that ambiguity also requires the curious to do a little research, which is great for culling the "herd"
cosmoscist sounds like something that should be "lanced". no, i don't like it.
MpowerdAPE 1 year ago
@MpowerdAPE
One possibility I have thought of is that people with this un-named outlook will create names for themselves, and once there are enough people with this outlook there will be a culling of names that will eventually settle with one or two names surviving the naming process. A kind of cultural natural selection if you will.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
lol you think too much about this shit.
kaminarigaston 1 year ago
@kaminarigaston
I know.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
did you ever think maybe "it" shouldn't have such a clearly defined and ultimately "dismiss-able" label? you're wasting your time because what you are trying to achieve... is GONNA HAPPEN ANYWAY whether we want it to or not. lets try to keep things ambiguous for as long as possible. any half way intelligent theist should be curious about they perceive as the atheists choice of "unbelief". giving our selves some presumptuous label makes it easier for them to cast that curiosity aside.
MpowerdAPE 1 year ago
@MpowerdAPE
>its GONNA HAPPEN ANYWAY
Agreed. Thats why I want to suggest better labels than the dismissive ones that theists will try to pin us with.
I don't deny your view however. There may be some power in keeping this outlook ambiguous - however, it leaves it open to being defined by those who are attempting to discredit it. Not to say this will eliminate the problem though - just look at the shit storm brewing over the term "atheist" as theists constantly attempt to redefine it.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84 i would rather sneeringly correct the person who confronts me with a "dismissive theist label" then have to explain one that is self imposed.
and if experience with labels imposed by theists follows the current trend... the labels they attempt to pin us with will change from year to year anyway. that is a good thing, its "weak" and its "cheap" and should be obvious to anybody with healthy respect for "consistency"
MpowerdAPE 1 year ago
I think its great, it's one of those words that's fun to say. It's very basic and captures the feeling pretty well. I can't think of a better one.
dreamlikedigital 1 year ago
cosmoscist is pretty good and it can also be a tribute to carl sagan
deathreaver3356 1 year ago
Astronomy and Astrophysics gives me that overwhelming feeling of being so small and insignificant next to the unfathomable immensity of the universe. It's looking at images like the cloud nebula where I see the pointlessness of the demands and doctrines of the various religions of man. What a time to be alive. Don't waste another moment - live life to it's fullest.
OccamsView 1 year ago
Cosmopolitan means citizen of the cosmos... but you're right, it's already been used in too many strange ways.
LordNapalm 1 year ago
Beautifully said, dude. ^__^
gir908922 1 year ago
I am a very spiritual atheist. It mostly stems from studying cognitive neuroscience and subsequent "experiences" I've had. The states of mind one can achieve through meditation is mind blowing and humbling.
Good video.
PluripotentBrain 1 year ago
I thought I had it! "Wowers", "Wowism". "Wowists". Then I remembered Word Of Warcraft. :/
philhellenes 1 year ago
Cosmicist, based on the adjective would be possible. "Cosmosist" is just illiterate gibberish. The -os Greek second declension ending is not part of the stem and would not be used in a formation like this. Its not like philology isn't an exact sciences and you can just make-up anything you want.
HConstantine 1 year ago
@HConstantine
But the good part of it being systematically incorrect is that it has not been used before.
I don't deny what you have stated, but cosmicist sounds like the singular form of cosmicism, which is the literary style of Lovecraft. Its already been taken.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
My only critique of Cosmoscist is that it bears a striking auditory resemblance to osmosis. It unintentionally reads like a bad pun. Might I suggest a revision: trim the word to denote clarity, and you're left with Cosmist. Koz-əm-ist. It also sounds somewhat more eloquent and is unlike any word readily flocking to mind.
JBarracudaL 1 year ago
@JBarracudaL
Good idea actually, it cuts out unnecessary syllables and eliminates the osmosis problem.
However, upon googling it I was surprised to find has already found use - apparently being defined by a Hugo de Garis to mean a moral philosophy that favours building or growing artificial intelligence for the purpose of leaving earth. Weird.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago 2
@SolRosenberg84 Figures, the one time I'm virtually certain a Google search would be unnecessary. H.P. Lovecraft also coined cosmicism (cosmicist), so that's not viable. Grrrr, cosmoscist may be the only option not previously adopted by authors. I'll stew on it for a while.
JBarracudaL 1 year ago
well, you talk about feeling awe, so, how about, "awesomist"...or, "awesomitarian"? ... ..."awesometialist"????
eyhexs 1 year ago
@eyhexs Haha I dig it! Awesomitarian!
PluripotentBrain 1 year ago
Interesting...
PinkProgram 1 year ago
Great, you invented another useless term, that when you use, nobody will understand, and when you explain it, they'll just roll their eyes. It's ridiculous.
Hey, here's a term you can use: Science fan.
Dimbnd 1 year ago
@Dimbnd
I disagree. A respect for science is part of what I speak of, but not its entirety. What I'm trying to describe is more the act of framing our natural positive reaction to the universe through the increased knowledge we gain of it through science. Its not the same thing as being a fan of the sciences.
I don't really see why you are being completely dismissive. If people roll their eyes at the idea, they just don't understand it, or they can't feel wonder. Their loss.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84 I think I understand what your proposed meaning is, but to be honest, I don't see a good reason to use the word in any context. I'm not convinced.
Also, I think if someone "doesn't get it", then the word you used is meaningless. Afterall, you were trying to express an idea, right? Then you should express it in understandable terms. If you ask me, this term will go the way of "pearlist" and "bright". Vague and over-defined terms that need to be explained each time they're used.
Dimbnd 1 year ago
@Dimbnd
No one knows what "pearlist" or "bright" means either. Neither term has exactly hit the mainstream jackpot, and I think neither properly describe the outlook I am. Pearlist simply means respect for the scientific method, while bright sounds downright condescending (If you aren't a bright you must be dim).
I don't deny those terms have their uses, but they don't seem to describe what I'm trying to describe.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
"Cosmoscist" This word has great potential, I like it.
vocabularyspills 1 year ago
After watching this, I recall a video you made in the past where you basically had some sort of epiphany about reality and you mentioned feeling complete contentment. I can't think of any term that rolls an epiphany and contentment all into one but I think it's what you might be talking about. This video and your other one really made me think more about this. I'll get back to you if I come up with anything.
Naryth24 1 year ago
I think you've worked through this nicely and your conclusion is very accomplished (scrap the comments I made on your previous vid. I clearly wasn't following).
Megatopcat 1 year ago
Sounds great! I was the one that suggested "cosmic existentialist", but I can see how that can perhaps conjure up images of philosophers like Sartre and Kierkegaard that rapped the convoluted semantics of continental philosophy (that overtly reject scientific influence). Cosmoscist is simple, yet effective.
This discussion is relevant but most likely futile. Yeah, we can talk about it here, but there is no real way to implement this in the "new atheist" movement.
TheDisillusionedApe 1 year ago
There is a debate on factpile: Carl Sagan vs. Stephen Hawking. My money's on Carl, what say you?
Akelz77 1 year ago
@Akelz77
I prefer Sagan's style, but Hawking is the more distinguished scientist. I like both.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84
They would never have competitively compared themselves, they both had/have an undiminished respect for a fellow cosmoscist.
ripemind 1 year ago
@Akelz77
Sagan is amazingly charismatic, and as much a poet as he is a scientist. Hawking is an amazingly gifted theorist. With only Sagans, we don't have as much progress. With only Hawkings, no one outside science ever learns the things we discover. So both are vital.
gguilford72 1 year ago
i like cosmic moment.
equallyeasilyfuqyou 1 year ago
I agree with your frustration. People think atheists are colorless or have no "spiritual" gratitude or feelings of awe, despite science and modern philosophy carrying the most profound realizations, made more so by the rational behind it.
But I still don't support the organization and hierarchy that goes with having any centralized criteria/doctrine; merely having a label tends to make a group carry traces of dogmatism. I like that atheists don't have to get together to pat each other's asses.
ChaseKittens 1 year ago
@ChaseKittens
I'd agree with your distrust of organization. However, I am not suggesting that "cosmoscism" become such a thing. All I am after is a common, positive label for a common experience and worldview related to it. I see no threat of dogma in a common label. What I do see however, is a chance of groups forming around such a thing - for example what has recently happened with us atheists.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
Thunderf00t's name was always appealing to me. Physical Evidence And Reasoned Logic. PEARL-ists. Just a thought...
JacobShulman 1 year ago
@JacobShulman
Pearlism to me sounds like just a substitute for positivism. Nothing against thunderf00t, but it doesn't entirely capture the emotional side of what I'm after.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
@SolRosenberg84 I was going to say, it's a bit nerdier, and a lot less awe-inspiring than Cosmoscist. I definitely like it though, and thanks for the great videos!
JacobShulman 1 year ago