"That enlightenment has come at a price - as now you are unconsciously dissatisfied at being grounded in nothing larger than yourself"

What about people ,like myself, who are perfectly happy in this state ?

Many people who comment on articles, such as this one, understand almost nothing about the science of the universe we live in.

To some, its all rocks, to others it is all light. Actually most of the universe is hydrogen.

Over 100 years ago Einstein showed that light and matter are interchangeable. His relativity concepts have been tested by brilliant scientists thousands of times and have passed every test.

Our sun, through thermonuclear fusion, converts about one million tonnes of mass per second into energy, a smallish part of which is seen by us as light. I have forgotten the energy distribution over the whole radiation spectrum. Progressively that fusion process convert hydrogen into heavier elements up to about iron, the 56th (in atomic number) of the 92 natural elements.

The elements above iron are produced when a sun comes to the end of its life in a supernova explosion. That is how the uranium and gold etc in the earth came to be. Our earth contains debris from an earlier sun (or two?).

Runner persists with his fantasy that evolution doesn't occur; that man is the prime creation of his invisible friend. As I have said several times before, read Robert Ardrey to see how we came so late on the scene, three billion years or so after the first known life forms. Or read the about the Chicago University E. coli evolution experiment which showed how selection could change the actual size of the E. coli and how two mutations over 30,000 generations could alter the food absorption system to make something initially indigestible (citrate) into an adequate food.

Thanks again Brian for your excellent effort.

In response to the author's comment: “We and the universe have no purpose. We and it are simply here”, JP concluded "then there is nothing we ought to do and equally nothing that we ought not do. What do you say then to people who choose to do things that impact upon you that you don’t like."

JP's fear that there is "nothing we ought to do and equally nothing that we ought not do " makes sense only if you assume a second, unwarranted premiss, namely that what we do here will affect our comfort levels when we enter the stage after the "here" stage. In other words, an after-life.

If you ignore this unsustainable assumption, the answer to JP's question could go something like this.

"Mate, there is no after. You and we are only here for the now. This experience that we are so lucky to have, given the incredible odds against anybody's having it, is the only experience that we will ever have. We are all in the same boat so if we are to maximise the probability that all of us will have the best "here" experience, we must all behave so that nothing we do detracts from others' experience. So, mate, we would all very much prefer that you stop doing things that lessen our (and your) chance of enjoying this one opportunity we have of being a sentient creature."

You might detect a suggestion of the golden rule: do unto others …. Quite so. But notice that there is no need to imagine a god or some other unfeasible superior, authoritative mental construct to derive it?

Thanks Brian for a (much) better than average article.

In my recent post, I wrote, "So, mate, we would all very much prefer that you stop being a d--- head and cease doing things that lessen our (and your) chance of enjoying this one opportunity we have of being a sentient creature." I used the actual letters that now appear here as dashes.

The software immediately instructed me to remove the profanity. My understanding of profanity is clearly out of date!

GlenC – Obviously there are plenty of people who couldn’t care less about maximising “the probability that all of us will have the best "here" experience”. They have the attitude of wanting to maximise their own pleasure and if that comes at the expense of others, too bad for the others.

The fact is that in an atheistic universe no one has any responsibility to anyone else regarding anything. You may choose to act thoughtfully and generously to others but there is no obligation on any one to do the same for you. Indeed if they want to rob you blind, and they can get away with it, there is no reason why they shouldn’t.

So, I ask again, “What do you say to people who choose to do things, that impact upon you, that you don’t like?”

JP
You need to read Phil Zuckerman's book, "Society without God" written after a year in Denmark and Sweden studying the societies. He concluded that both societies were irreligious and innately good.

A German study of OECD social justice was covered by an article in the NY Times on 28 Nov 2011. That study shows that the least religious countries have the best social justice systems. The first six places were filled by Iceland, Norway Sweden, Denmark, Finland and The Netherlands. The study and article are available at;

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/opinion/blow-americas-exploding-pipe-dream.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212
http://www.sgi-network.org/pdf/SGI11_Social_Justice_OECD.pdf

You do not know what you are talking about. I'm an atheist and every year I spend all I can afford helping students who are not among my large brood of grandchildren.