The MI6 Community Religion and Faith Discussion Space (for members of all faiths - and none!)

14142444647108

Comments

  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 24,883
    I often say you can be faced by a obstacle, you can tackle the obstacle a multitude of ways. The obstacle does not change, it's how we deal with it that changes.
  • Posts: 4,602
    It's our struggle to deal with how meaningless our lives actually are from an external persective which partially explains religion. It events a "big dad" who put us here for a reason and will look after us if we respect and love him.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,533
    My purpose is to care for others improve there lives and my own life, I have faith in myself and improve myself mentally and physically.

    We'd probably get along quite well.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 24,883
    Remington wrote: »
    My purpose is to care for others improve there lives and my own life, I have faith in myself and improve myself mentally and physically.

    We'd probably get along quite well.

    It's my line of work also, I have just come through a tough period though you have to pick yourself up and remember what you can achieve.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    Posts: 357

    Disagree with this completely.

    I don't think you do, I think you haven't comprehended his meaning correctly. Einstein didn't consider life meaningless, nor did he believe in an afterlife. In fact you have more in common in your views, as expressed, than disagreement. But Einstein wasn't an Atheist either, he had an open mind on the subject, but believed in dealing with the actual World around him, rather than speculating on the unknowable.



  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited January 2018 Posts: 357
    patb wrote: »
    Life has no purpose IMHO. We just exist. There is no reason or evidence to assume there is a purpose. If we choose to invent a purpose within ourselves (based on reality), then that would seem sensible. It helps to pass the time and make life fun.

    Science does not exist in order to give our lives purpose so I dont think it will ever help in that way. Religion, although not true, does give a purpose if you buy into it so, from that perspective, I can see it can help those who struggle with the big issues of life.

    But, lets face it, if we all died tomorrow, would the rest of the universe blink or care in anyway. No.

    At the most basic level, your purpose is to perpetuate the species, however as our species is thriving to such an extent it is detrimental to the planet on which we live, this drive to survive is dampened and we need to find other things to occupy our energy

    Any time you take a particular interest in anything, it gives your life purpose, be it a vocation, a responsibility, or merely a hobby, you are stimulated to want to live longer in order to pursue or fulfill or complete
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    Posts: 357
    patb wrote: »
    It's our struggle to deal with how meaningless our lives actually are from an external persective which partially explains religion. It events a "big dad" who put us here for a reason and will look after us if we respect and love him.

    I read somewhere the secret to happiness is low expectations, which while not being entirely true, does have an element off truth in it.

    Very simple things can give your life meaning if you choose to place a value on them.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Not having purpose is a sad thing to me.

    Quite.

    But that doesn't make it not true.

    And hiding heads under imaginary comfort blankets, whilst it might be consoling to some, means you close yourself off to much of the wonder of this universe, which despite what any of us think we believe, is the only one we know exists.

  • Posts: 15,028
    I'd concur with my fellow godless heathens: that one finds it sad that life is in itself meaningless does not make it less true. Sartre nailed it years ago: existence precedes essence.

    And I'd add that it's pretty arrogant and downright vain to believe that you're here for a reason, that a superior being has a special plan for you and created not only this world (a universe no less) especially for you and other believers. It's far more humble to understand that you are here by a series of random encounters and that your exise in itself is meaningless and devoid of divine intention.
  • Posts: 4,602
    The human race doesn't do humble: its vanity all the way.
  • Posts: 15,028
    patb wrote: »
    The human race doesn't do humble: its vanity all the way.

    What I find ironic is that theists, while eager to show humanity's flaws, often accuse atheistsof arrogance. You know, for questioning God or saying we are better than him, etc. But we are the ones that don't think the world was made for us, we are the ones conscious of the transient nature of mankind and human existence, we are the ones trying to expand human knowledge and understand better the universe we live in and improve our quality of life.

    And I'd also say that we are superior to this hypothetical God, whether he exists or not. But intellectually and morally. We improve and correct his lousy design every day.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,210
    patb wrote: »
    The human race doesn't do humble: its vanity all the way.

    Funnily enough, as this thread has been a vanity project for some.
  • Posts: 15,028
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    The human race doesn't do humble: its vanity all the way.

    Funnily enough, as this thread has been a vanity project for some.

    Well I humbly participate in it as I think we can educate people about atheism, secular humanism and skepticism, not to mention accepting reality, rather than being delusional and slave of groundless dogmas. And in all humility I think my fellow godless heathens and I do it for educational purposes as well. I know it's only an internet thread, but if we can deconvert one or two people here I'll be happy.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,210
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    The human race doesn't do humble: its vanity all the way.

    Funnily enough, as this thread has been a vanity project for some.

    Well I humbly participate in it as I think we can educate people about atheism, secular humanism and skepticism, not to mention accepting reality, rather than being delusional and slave of groundless dogmas. And in all humility I think my fellow godless heathens and I do it for educational purposes as well. I know it's only an internet thread, but if we can deconvert one or two people here I'll be happy.

    Well fair enough.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Finding truth by discussion? Good luck.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,210
    Finding truth by discussion? Good luck.

    What is truth?
  • Posts: 15,028
    Finding truth by discussion? Good luck.

    The bit of truth we know, to have it acknowledged. Finding it is a different matter entirely.
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Finding truth by discussion? Good luck.

    What is truth?

    I'd define truth as something that exists, that is verifiable, regardless of one's opinion or belief.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited January 2018 Posts: 357
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'd concur with my fellow godless heathens: that one finds it sad that life is in itself meaningless does not make it less true. Sartre nailed it years ago: existence precedes essence.

    And I'd add that it's pretty arrogant and downright vain to believe that you're here for a reason, that a superior being has a special plan for you and created not only this world (a universe no less) especially for you and other believers. It's far more humble to understand that you are here by a series of random encounters and that your exise in itself is meaningless and devoid of divine intention.

    The older I get and the more I learn, the more I recognise how much more I don't know.

    The term "meaningless" is a purely subjective term, not the "truth" about life.

    You are part of humanity and therefore you may, in some way, have contributed to the sum total of what humanity is now or may become in the future.

    If that's not "meaningful" what is?

    Are you saying that you think individual immortality is the only measure of what qualifies as being "meaningful"?
  • Posts: 15,028
    @Seve Actually no "meaningless" is not subjective or at least not in this context. And I'm not saying that you cannot create meaning to your life and your actions. What I mean is that there's no pre-existing aim, purpose or intention to someone's existence. Thus life has in itself no meaning.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    For a cat that is probably true.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited January 2018 Posts: 357
    Ludovico wrote: »

    Well I humbly participate in it as I think we can educate people about atheism, secular humanism and skepticism, not to mention accepting reality, rather than being delusional and slave of groundless dogmas. And in all humility I think my fellow godless heathens and I do it for educational purposes as well. I know it's only an internet thread, but if we can deconvert one or two people here I'll be happy.


    You presume to educate others?
    Now that is arrogant.

    When I was a kid I used to call myself an Atheist for a while, until I realised what an idiotic concept that is. The universe is so large, and we know so little, that nothing should be ruled out. Now I just try to keep an open mind. I don't follow any religion, but I recognise that they all contain useful concepts for living life by... along with the groundless dogma.

    "Take what you need and leave the rest" - The Band
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 15,028
    I'm not presuming I am or at least try to. Thus let me educate you about atheism @Seve . An atheist is someone who disbelieves in God or gods. Only that. He does not pretend to disprove God or deny that it doesn't or cannot exist. If there was proof of one I'd cease to be. Until then I do not believe there is not and find the God hypothesis highly unlikely. Atheism is a specific default position on a specific question.

    If you don't understand that and prefer your strawman definition that's your problem.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,098
    @Seve
    @Ludovico actually makes the point--or so I'm inclined to read his post--that we're nothing special in a religious sense, that it's not "plants, animals and people" as if we were some separative cosmic cornerstone, created with divine purpose, but that we're in fact no less special than an ant or a wasp. Yet many people throughout the centuries have mistaken themselves for "a gift of god" and spent their entire life in blissful ignorance regarding exactly how special they are, to which the answer is: not at all. A convenient confluence of physical and chemical circumstances has enabled carbon based organic life to come into existence. Millions of years of slow and painful evolution has brought us where we are today, possibly on the brink of extinction, possibly just another transitional state.

    In that sense, life is meaningless. We weren't put here through divine intervention; there's no particular spiritual meaning to our lives. There's a biological meaning to it, of course, in that we exist to promote evolution by cancelling out certain genetic flaws and steering our species towards biological betterment. Grass does the same thing, so do pigs, and divine intervention, once again, seems ridiculous to even remotely assume.

    As far as morality is concerned, I'd say the only "moral" thing to do is to give your life meaning by how you live it in the now. Don't pretend there's a book of rules to follow in order to be rewarded in the afterlife. You'll be sorely depressed to find out no such thing exists. Don't live your life by dogmatic rules some idiot, manipulator or fellow victim has fed you at an impressionable age. Instead, let logic guide you and draw your morality from open-minded deductions in the here and the now. Don't do "good" because god demands it; don't believe you're on a divine mission, that you're somehow special. Do "good" as you reason it out, free from religious decrees, and understanding that one day your carbon, hydrogen and oxygen atoms will be ripped from your body and built into other organic life forms or even dead matter.
  • Posts: 15,028
    That's what I meant @DarthDimi . And I'd add that it might be reassuring to think that a divine being intentionally put you in this world for a specific purpose and with a special plan (although personally I'd find this invasive), but it's unsupported by any evidence and pretty sterile.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited January 2018 Posts: 357
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'm not presuming I am or at least try to.

    But why do you feel the need to?
    In that way you are just as misguided as a person knocking on my door wanting to tell me about God. In my experience Atheists seem to feel the need to actively oppose, rather than just ignoring something which has no relevance to them.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Thus let me educate you about atheism @Seve . An atheist is someone who disbelieves in God or gods. Only that.

    Again, you presume to educate...
    If you actively choose to try and persuade others that there is no God, that is taking things a step further than merely "disbelieving". In your case you have developed a "faith" that there is no God, as there is no definitive proof either way, which makes your form of atheism a sort of quasi religion in itself.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    He does not pretend to disprove God or deny that it doesn't or cannot exist. If there was proof of one I'd cease to be. Until then I do not believe there is not and find the God hypothesis highly unlikely. Atheism is a specific default position on a specific question.

    The internet says - "Atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist... Atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which is the belief that at least one deity exists."

    That sounds like "denial that God exists" to me?
    Ludovico wrote: »
    If you don't understand that and prefer your strawman definition that's your problem.

    Not a problem, just a point of discussion ; )

  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited January 2018 Posts: 357
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    @Seve
    @Ludovico actually makes the point--or so I'm inclined to read his post--that we're nothing special in a religious sense, that it's not "plants, animals and people" as if we were some separative cosmic cornerstone, created with divine purpose, but that we're in fact no less special than an ant or a wasp. Yet many people throughout the centuries have mistaken themselves for "a gift of god" and spent their entire life in blissful ignorance regarding exactly how special they are, to which the answer is: not at all. A convenient confluence of physical and chemical circumstances has enabled carbon based organic life to come into existence. Millions of years of slow and painful evolution has brought us where we are today, possibly on the brink of extinction, possibly just another transitional state.

    In that sense, life is meaningless.

    But why allow the religion you are opposing to provide your definition of what "meaningful" or "meaningless" is?

    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'd concur with my fellow godless heathens: that one finds it sad that life is in itself meaningless does not make it less true

    The fact is we don't know, so why make a definitive statement like that?

    What value is there in taking a definite negative point of view on such things?

    Better to keep an open mind ; )

  • Posts: 15,028
    Except that I am not knocking at your door @Seve. I am expressing myself on a public forum about a particular point. This is a debate forum about it, you might as well. And yes, explaining what is atheism, correcting misconceptions some people have about it or about secular humanism, evidence, etc. is a work of education. I do not presume to educate. I try to educate (like other people here, like @DarthDimi @patb @TheWizardOfIce @thelivingroyale and I know I miss some), in a specific thread where I (where we) can.

    I do not actively choose to convince people there is no God, re-read this thread and I challenge you to find one instance where I did this. What I do try to do, however, is explain why a belief in God is unsupported by evidence and thus unjustified. It does not mean there is no God (albeit I find his existence very unlikely) but there is no reason to believe in one, let alone follow the rules of said hypothetical God, worship said hypothetical God, or tell me and other that I must worship said hypothetical God. And yes, someone who tells me I must worship and obey God, then I will oppose him and very strongly.

    This definition is correct... and in no way contradicts mine: I do not believe there is a God, I reject the claim that a God exists the same way I reject the claim that the Loch Ness Monster exists, that the great Cthulhu exists, that there was an alien civilization striving on Mars and so on. You cannot disprove a negative. So no, both statements are not equivalent. And I would thus not try to disprove God, but that is not my problem: the burden of proof resides on the theist's side.

    As for the accusation of being "religious" myself, this is a tu quoque fallacy.
  • Posts: 15,028
    Seve wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    @Seve
    @Ludovico actually makes the point--or so I'm inclined to read his post--that we're nothing special in a religious sense, that it's not "plants, animals and people" as if we were some separative cosmic cornerstone, created with divine purpose, but that we're in fact no less special than an ant or a wasp. Yet many people throughout the centuries have mistaken themselves for "a gift of god" and spent their entire life in blissful ignorance regarding exactly how special they are, to which the answer is: not at all. A convenient confluence of physical and chemical circumstances has enabled carbon based organic life to come into existence. Millions of years of slow and painful evolution has brought us where we are today, possibly on the brink of extinction, possibly just another transitional state.

    In that sense, life is meaningless.

    But why allow the religion you are opposing to provide your definition of what "meaningful" or "meaningless" is?

    Ludovico wrote: »
    I'd concur with my fellow godless heathens: that one finds it sad that life is in itself meaningless does not make it less true

    The fact is we don't know, so why make a definitive statement like that?

    What value is there in taking a definite negative point of view on such things?

    Better to keep an open mind ; )

    Oh boy, so many wrong things here and I have things to do outside the internet. Let's keep it simple: we do know a number of things, none of them leading to God. The things we don't know, as we don't know them, it is pointless and circular to invent an explanation about them. It is not being close minded to reject claims that have no evidence to be backed up. Such as... "our existence has been decided by a divine creator according to a divine plan that he himself knows". Accepting claims as valid before they are actually proven is not being open-minded, it is being gullible and open to any sorts of crazy stupid claims. It's switching your brain to off.

    So where is your evidence for God, for his plan, for any pre-existing purpose of our existence as a species? If you have none, then it's pointless pondering about them.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited January 2018 Posts: 357
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I am expressing myself on a public forum about a particular point...

    ...This definition is correct... and in no way contradicts mine: I do not believe there is a God, I reject the claim that a God exists... You cannot disprove a negative. So no, both statements are not equivalent. And I would thus not try to disprove God, but that is not my problem: the burden of proof resides on the theist's side...

    ...As for the accusation of being "religious" myself, this is a tu quoque fallacy.

    lol
    Yeah right...
    Whatever floats your boat : )
  • Posts: 15,028
    See that is why I try to educate. You have a lot of misconceptions about atheism and are making a lot of of false accusations based on this misconception.
This discussion has been closed.