naturalistic pantheism vs. atheism
 

Is NP just atheism for nature lovers? Discuss.

I don't see why it's really worth bringing up. It's pretty dismissive, but it sounds to me like people trying to... deify their feelings of awe towards nature.

I'm not really sure if it's actually important to place un-needed emphasis on the importance of experiencing nature.

Being blown away by the majesty of a mountain should be self evident. It seems like a NP dude would try to somehow ritualise that experience. Sounds a bit pointless.

The only difference i can see is that np makes environmentalism and humanitarianism part of their set credo, whereaas atheists arent bound by those expectations.

Atheism isn't an actual practice. It's more of a state of reaction in thought.

It also seems like people are trying to turn atheism into an actual practice by arbitrarily constructing emphasis on the human experience based on emotional reactions. "This mountain is beautiful and I'm moved by its splendor, therefore, my feelings on the matter are sacred instead of it just being my feelings on the matter."

I don't think this is something I could get behind. This is like Despanan treating art as a legitimate religion instead of saying it's like his religion because it's important to him.

Dude, if you don't paint at least one mural every sunday, you'll go to Hell.

Art Hell is REAL, and full of Thomas Kinkaid light vomit and Justin Beiber albums.

Saying you're a naturalistic pantheist is just a smug way of saying you're an atheist who likes looking at trees.