Support NeoGAF

[Fenderputty]

I don't think you understood what he meant.
Jesus' philosophy is very appealing and boils down to "don't be an asshole". But it's very difficult to follow, so the belief that it has a higher purpose (and, on top of that, is what God literally wants) helps making it for something perceptively more important than just satisfying one's ego (which is what most people are nice for - it feels good).

You're still satisfying your ego knowing you've done well for your God. You've also made yourself comfortable knowing you'll have peace after death. The bible doesn't make morali judgement altruistic.

I wish the bible only boiled down to "dont be an asshole" .... I might still be religious.

 

[adj_noun]

Agnosticism is a statement on our ability to answer the quesiton, not necessarily a position on the answer.

An agnostic says, there is no way to know, and could be a believer non the less, or an atheists, assuming dieties not to exist until evidence contradicts this (the logical positon).

Yup. Let's break out the chart again.

 

[Raist]

First off atheism is a reaction to theism (Without it, atheism wouldn't exist). Atheism (At least the way I see it) is rejection of religious institutions, and not a strict belief in lack of god(s).

The word "atheist" would obviously not exist, no.

However, the vast majority of atheists would just be exactly the same.

 

[Haly]

It's a bit ironic when self-labeled atheists struggle with finding "meaning" in life because they, paradoxically, associate a meaningful life with God, or belief in God.

 

[cereal_killerxx]

This post makes almost zero sense. If you're messed up and in need of a saviour you think your belief in God makes you a better person. Which is scary as fuck.

Sorry, I just realized how poorly worded that was! I'm not with it today. Let me try again. I'm not a follower of Jesus because I'm an awesome person and have it all together, I follow Jesus because I'm messed up and in need of a savior. By following Jesus, I become more like Him and therefore become a better person.

 

[Red Hood]

It's worth noting that most people who self-identify as atheist are technically very mildly agnostic but use the term "atheist" because that's simply the most commonly used label. Don't get too hung up on the semantics.

Yeah, someone else already stated that, I apologise for the generalisation. I'm going to edit that part out.

 

[Clefargle]

You make your own purpose, I don't care what things fundamentally boil down to besides my own curiosity. But it doesn't influence the level of meaning I experience. That's my own

 

[80s Bad Guy]

Seems to me those are the type of people would be snobbish assholes even without atheism.

Probably true. But I generally think absolute faith in anything tends to make that person an asshole.

 

[Lister]

Yes, but stuff comes from nothing due to physical properties of the universe. The question is, how were these properties created (or who created them)?

It's a never ending line of questioning, and ultimately I doubt humans will arrive at an answer if we constantly look through a materialistic lens.

How do you propose to learn about the universe, if not by studying it?

Making shit up to make us feel better, has NEVER, will NEVER lead to useful answers.

The little we do know about our universe has been gathered up by scientific study of that universe, and NEVER through prayer.

 

[astroturfing]

I didn't say a god created it, I'm merely stating why one state of mind is considered to be much more ludicrous than the other. But to answer your question, I don't know. And that's the thing. As opposed to gnostic atheists, I don't claim to know nor do I actively reject everything that doesn't fit my view. Maybe this higher being or these higher beings in this example wouldn't be restraint by quantum physics rules from our universe - and multiverses. We are. Which one is less ridiculous: an endless cycle without a beginning or a start created/set in motion by higher being(s)?

what? higher being(s) would also have to have creators that created them, ad infinitum. or did they come from nothing? your argument makes no sense.

either something came from nothing, or something has always existed. it might as well be the multiverse and not a god. since we don't have any evidence of a god, there's no reason to assume it was a god. or how am i wrong..?

 

[creatchee]

First off atheism is a reaction to theism (Without it, atheism wouldn't exist). Atheism (At least the way I see it) is rejection of religious institutions, and not a strict belief in lack of god(s). And you can't separate culture from religion (They are closely dependent in each other), because the term religion is one we give systems of belief, thus everyone in a given culture has the values, whether or not you believe in god(s). For example: You got to work, like everyone else, you socialize, you have your hobbies, you participate in cultural activities like any person with any religious belief. This is the meaning of life for this particular culture.

If you look at religion in the West, it's "secularized," even deemed it own separate category, but in other places in the world, religion is just religion, and are not a set of literal beliefs, but a set of symbolic communal beliefs (That are logical to the particular culture).

In short, people don't engage in religion because they want to go to heaven, but they participate because the symbolic values it has. In the west, the primary "Meaning of life" is economic and not religious.

Atheism existed before theism. Our ancient ancestors didn't have gods until they invented them. Theism is a direct reaction of atheism, not the other way around. Faith is a manufactured concept designed, in part, to alleviate the hopelessness of an end to the existence of ourselves and those we know. But then again, most of the major religions have sacred texts handed down that contain the words of their gods, so a beginning is often assumed where man was always in the presence of and aware of that particular deity.

Basically, most religions ignore the actual history of our planet.

 

[Fenderputty]

Sorry, I just realized how poorly worded that was! I'm not with it today. Let me try again. I'm not a follower of Jesus because I'm an awesome person and have it all together, I follow Jesus because I'm messed up and in need of a savior. By following Jesus, I become more like Him and therefore become a better person.

This is scary. I don't need God to be a good person. Why do you?

 

[Piers]

I'm a personal believer in death leading to eternal oblivion.
The thought of it does admittedly scare me, though.

 

[SturokBGD]

Is nihilism the reason atheists are so rude?

 

[Screaming Meat]

It's a bit ironic when self-labeled atheists struggle with finding "meaning" in life because they, paradoxically, associate a meaningful life with God, or belief in God.

Ha! That's a good point.

Is nihilism the reason atheists are so rude?

#notallatheists

 

[Noirulus]

How do you propose to learn about the universe, if not by studying it?

Making shit up to make us feel better, has NEVER, will NEVER lead to useful answers.

The little we do know about our universe has been gathered up by scientific study of that universe, and NEVER through prayer.

I think you misinterpreted my post, where did I say that belief in god was the answer? Or that we shouldn't study science? I only pointed out the flaw in your answer that things arrive out of nothing all the time.

 

[ersocaster]

I can respect that reasoning, but my point was largely whether or not something can come from nothingness. In this example, our universe prior to the big bang - when it was still in a dense and hot state. Has it always been there, or did it come to be? And how? Why? There has to be a cause and effect. Of course we don't know the answer, but something existing from nothing goes against common sense, wouldn't you agree?

Yes. But if God could have always existed, why not the Universe? If God is real, he just spawned out of nothing some time ago, or he already existed.

There are a lot of theories to explain how the Big Bang just came out of nowhere. One is that every time a black hole is created, the inside of it spawns a new Universe. Or maybe the Universe cycles in an expansion/contraction kind of way.

As for the OP, you do not need a reason for life. If you want one, then it is the preservation of our species, just like every other form of life.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Is this a troll?
Atheism isn't "life is meaningless", atheism is "there is no God". If you think that "there is no God" automatically leads to "everything is purely meaningless, purposeless and senseless" automatically leading to having no moral compass, you don't know what atheism AND nihilism are. You can enjoy life without believing in a deity, you can admit to being a slave of your own emotional needs (which include being nice to people, believe it or not, it's an evolutionary trait that has helped us survive for so long) while still thinking nothing matters or counts (although admittedly not many nihilistic people have a community to be nice to in the first place but yeah).

sorry I come off as an angry asshole, today was a long day

I didn't say that is what atheism is or represents, but if I were atheist, I would allow my psychopathic traits out of the box and be a total piece of shit. I am not saying atheists are inherently bad or depraved, in fact quite the opposite, as most genuinely excellent people I have known in life are atheists.

I am not saying I would go about maiming, stealing, pillaging and killing to get what I wanted, but I would definitely cheat more, lie more, take advantage more, and genuinely use people more to my immediate benefit. If there is no moral consequence, there would be nothing to encourage me to be a better person if i wouldn't get caught.

Obviously being a pariah of the community or excised from your family would be no fun, but if you are good at getting away with being a piece of shit, and there is no moral consequence, why not?

 

[ThusZarathustra]

Yes, but stuff comes from nothing due to physical properties of the universe. The question is, how were these properties created (or who created them)?

It's a never ending line of questioning, and ultimately I doubt humans will arrive at an answer if we constantly look through a materialistic lens.

They're emergent properties. The universe is not static. It displays a clear iterative structure. It's foolish to make claims beyond that. You want to talk about Boltzmann brains and digital physics and the universe as simulation blah blah fucking blah. Fun philosophical bullshit, yes, but it's nothing yet as like a functional philosophy for life. We don't have the tools to make the observations and gain the evidence yet.

But we'll get there. I'm a firm believer that nothing is outside the sphere of science and testability, given enough accrual of tools and knowledge. We'll unravel the secrets yet, just not in anyone livings lifetimes.

 

[Like the hat?]

Life doesn't have to have a meaning for YOUR life to have a meaning.

 

[Kurdel]

This is scary. I don't need God to be a good person. Why do you?

I think most people go through life without actually thinking about these questions, and will just barf out the bullshit they were raised with.

 

[Aiii]

Yup. Let's break out the chart again.

If the chart is too hard for people to grasp.

Theism vs. Atheism only answers one single question:

Do you believe in God?

Yes: Theist.
No: Atheist.

And that's it.

 

[FlyingSaucer]

“Religion used to be the opium of the people. [...] But now, we are witnessing a transformation, a true opium of the people is the belief in nothingness after death, the huge solace, the huge comfort of thinking that for our betrayals, our greed, our cowardice, our murders, we are not going to be judged.”

 

[Lister]

Atheism existed before theism. Our ancient ancestors didn't have gods until they invented them. Theism is a direct reaction of atheism, not the other way around. Faith is a manufactured concept designed, in part, to alleviate the hopelessness of an end to the existence of ourselves and those we know. But then again, most of the major religions have sacred texts handed down that contain the words of their gods, so a beginning is often assumed where man was always in the presence of and aware of that particular deity.

Basically, most religions ignore the actual history of our planet.

I kinda sorta agree with you, but I think religion is relaly more of a by-product of the evolutionary development of our brans. As our ancestors became more nad more social, certian aspects of our brain development - specifically pattern recognition and our ability to model other brains so as to make accurate predictions about others of our specieis.

Our brains are so good at finding patterns, that someitmes we find patterns where there are none. We anthropomorphise things we do not understand because in that way we can hope to understand them.

That is the source of gods and eventually religion, IMHO.

 

[Kurdel]

Obviously being a pariah of the community or excised from your family would be no fun, but if you are good at getting away with being a piece of shit, and there is no moral consequence, why not?

The delusion that you can control your guilt and would not feel any in a godless world is hilariously naive, and you are selling yourself short.


Unless you suppress those urges only because of fear of Devine retribution, either case, you need therapy.

 

[kinggroin]

This post makes almost zero sense. If you're messed up and in need of a saviour you think your belief in God makes you a better person. Which is scary as fuck.



The implication was that one needs faith to lead a moral and meaningful life. You agreed with that implication.

IF that's the implication, sure. I even said as much a ways back. Just didn't interpret it that way.

Edit: Not moral. Meaningful. I agreed with THAT part.

 

[SturokBGD]

I put the burden of finding greater meaning on my kids. I spawned them, so my job is done either way. It's all gravy to me from this point.

 

[Lister]

I think you misinterpreted my post, where did I say that belief in god was the answer? Or that we shouldn't study science? I only pointed out the flaw in your answer that things arrive out of nothing all the time.

That's not at all what I got from your post. Specially the last sentence, you seeme dto imply that we shouldn't look to learn about the universe by looking througha "materialistc lens", which I took to mean, we should instead look at the supernatural - because that always results in testable models that make accurate predictions.

 

[CornBurrito]

I didn't say that is what atheism is or represents, but if I were atheist, I would allow my psychopathic traits out of the box and be a total piece of shit. I am not saying atheists are inherently bad or depraved, in fact quite the opposite, as most genuinely excellent people I have known in life are atheists.

I am not saying I would go about maiming, stealing, pillaging and killing to get what I wanted, but I would definitely cheat more, lie more, take advantage more, and genuinely use people more to my immediate benefit. If there is no moral consequence, there would be nothing to encourage me to be a better person if i wouldn't get caught.

Obviously being a pariah of the community or excised from your family would be no fun, but if you are good at getting away with being a piece of shit, and there is no moral consequence, why not?

So basically you yourself are an actual legit psychopath? As in you have a legitimate medical disorder?

 

[cereal_killerxx]

This is scary. I don't need God to be a good person. Why do you?

It's true. You don't need God to be a good person. But what's to stop you from going back to those morals when things in your life are at your worst? Or changing your morals completely? Morality without a fixed point is a very scary thing in my opinion.

 

[Air]

One of the reasons I'm not an atheist. I think ultimately if you go down that path, everything is meaningless. Another position is that of absurdism, which is kind of a branch of existentialism where you live in spite of the absurdity of your existence.

I don't think we live in an absurd universe, so that position isn't really for me, but you may glean some insight from it.

 

[Noirulus]

They're emergent properties. The universe is not static. It displays a clear iterative structure. It's foolish to make claims beyond that. You want to talk about Boltzmann brains and digital physics and the universe as simulation blah blah fucking blah. Fun philosophical bullshit, yes, but it's nothing yet as like a functional philosophy for life. We don't have the tools to make the observations and gain the evidence yet.

But we'll get there. I'm a firm believer that nothing is outside the sphere of science and testability, given enough accrual of tools and knowledge. We'll unravel the secrets yet, just not in anyone livings lifetimes.

I agree in a sense. We might get very close eventually, but it's hard to say if we'll ever fully understand the universe completely, and I personally don't think we will. There are physical limits for conducting experiments and while we've uncovered a lot of details regarding the minute details of the universe (quantum mechanics) in the past 100 years, I think we're still largely in the dark.

I hope there are some more major breakthroughs before I die.

That's not at all what I got from your post. Specially the last sentence, you seeme dto imply that we shouldn't look to learn about the universe by looking througha "materialistc lens", which I took to mean, we should instead look at the supernatural - because that always results in testable models that make accurate predictions.

What I'm saying is that there are other modes of thinking that can improve one's knowledge of the world (existence) than trying to brute-force it through materialism. Eastern philosophy is incredibly helpful in this aspect.

 

[PdotMichael]

One would just need to look at all the crimes done "in the name of god" to realize how absurd the line of thinking is that a person needs god to be a good person.

For more details there is an entire branch of philosophy for that.

 

[80s Bad Guy]

It's true. You don't need God to be a good person. But what's to stop you from going back to those morals when things in your life are at your worst? Or changing your morals completely? Morality without a fixed point is a very scary thing in my opinion.

Just look at Rick!

#NotAllWalkingDeadSurvivors

 

[Carcetti]

I didn't say that is what atheism is or represents, but if I were atheist, I would allow my psychopathic traits out of the box and be a total piece of shit. I am not saying atheists are inherently bad or depraved, in fact quite the opposite, as most genuinely excellent people I have known in life are atheists.

What you are actually saying is not that you 'would be'. By admitting this you are already saying that you are a total piece of shit psycho, and only the threat from a supernatural entity is keeping you in check.

You should get some therapy.

 

[Manu]

It's true. You don't need God to be a good person. But what's to stop you from going back to those morals when things in your life are at your worst? Or changing your morals completely? Morality without a fixed point is a very scary thing in my opinion.

Because no religious person has done morally questionable things, ever.

 

[Lister]

It's true. You don't need God to be a good person. But what's to stop you from going back to those morals when things in your life are at your worst? Or changing your morals completely? Morality without a fixed point is a very scary thing in my opinion.

But there isn't any such thing as fixed morality. It changes all the time. 300 years ago you could probably have me hanged for saying the things I'm saying here, and odds are, if you were a believer of the period, you would have.

 

[ThusZarathustra]

I agree in a sense. We might get very close eventually, but it's hard to say if we'll ever fully understand the universe completely, and I personally don't think we will. There are physical limits for conducting experiments and while we've uncovered a lot of details regarding the minute details of the universe (quantum mechanics) in the past 100 years, I think we're still largely in the dark.

I hope there are some more major breakthroughs before I die.

In the purest sense, sure, we'll never know. Godel's incompleteness theorem rules all. We only make models of models of models.

The goal is to make those testable models of the workings of the universe as accurate as possible.

 

[Lister]

I agree in a sense. We might get very close eventually, but it's hard to say if we'll ever fully understand the universe completely, and I personally don't think we will. There are physical limits for conducting experiments and while we've uncovered a lot of details regarding the minute details of the universe (quantum mechanics) in the past 100 years, I think we're still largely in the dark.

I hope there are some more major breakthroughs before I die.



What I'm saying is that there are other modes of thinking that can improve one's knowledge of the world (existence) than trying to brute-force it through materialism. Eastern philosophy is incredibly helpful in this aspect.

You're going to have to come up with some actula exmaples here, because you've lost me.

 

[Mr Waluigi]

You're still satisfying your ego knowing you've done well for your God. You've also made yourself comfortable knowing you'll have peace after death. The bible doesn't make morali judgement altruistic.

I wish the bible only boiled down to "dont be an asshole" .... I might still be religious.

If the Bible was the sole thing Christianity was about, every Christian would be a Baptist.
Traditional yet scientifically accurate understanding of St Paul's Church, as well as understanding that the Bible, regardless of its divine influence, is a bunch of different texts written by different people at different eras with different audiences, are major components of Catholicism, which is the biggest Christian sect in the world.

OT showcases God as being either Yaweh or El and being really nice to Abraham, to being purely Yaweh the angry and jealous god of war, to being angry at the Israelites and preaching the tolerant, loving, moral aspects of the Torah over the more warfare-based ones (although it still led to a tribal interpretation). The NT goes and practically retcons God's violent nature by showcasing Jesus as an extremely self-sacrificial, loving, tolerant person.

Either way the gospels are the very basis of Christianity, so yeah...

Also, the point of Christian charity isn't to pat yourself on the head for doing what God wants but to be an extension of Jesus' actions. Hence why the Church is considered to be the Body of Christ.
Whether you consider it to be mere depersonalization or truly something higher, you can't deny it's not the same thing as masturbating your ego because you're being God's pet. The point of Christianity is not to feel nice but to do nice.

Now, there's the question of how Christians actually act, be they Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox or something else... I mean, how many drug lords, gang members and hedonists are Catholics?
But the core of the faith isn't very arguable. The way the Church re-interprets them as culture changes, and the way believers actually act, are.

 

[Noirulus]

You're going to have to come up with some actula exmaples here, because you've lost me.

Buddhism. Or the Advaita Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy. Both provide meaningful practices that help one remove negative traits, and help arrive at higher truths.

 

[Toxi]

I don't understand why people think knowing our minds are the results of chemical reactions and countless mindless cells interacting devalues them. It's like saying a great book loses its value if you think about how it's just an organized collection of individually meaningless letters.

As for "meaning" and "purpose", we give life meaning and purpose.

 

[creatchee]

I don't understand why people think knowing our minds are the results of chemical reactions and countless mindless cells interacting devalues them. It's like saying a great book loses its value if you think about how it's just an organized collection of individually meaningless letters.

I love this so much.

 

[Keasar]

My basic meaning of life is basically to keep on going, reproduce and all that stuff. Animals don't have anywhere near the same philosophical meaning but they're not complaining.

The bigger meaning of our life to me however is the advancement of the human species. To see humanity grow, expand and reach out. What happens to me in the end is non-essential as I prefer to see humanity as a whole become much bigger.

Kinda simplistic world view really but I don't feel like I need anything more complicated than that.

 

[SocksAndShoes]

It's true. You don't need God to be a good person. But what's to stop you from going back to those morals when things in your life are at your worst? Or changing your morals completely? Morality without a fixed point is a very scary thing in my opinion.

Belief in God doesn't stop people from changing their morals either though.

 

[Mr Waluigi]

I didn't say that is what atheism is or represents, but if I were atheist, I would allow my psychopathic traits out of the box and be a total piece of shit. I am not saying atheists are inherently bad or depraved, in fact quite the opposite, as most genuinely excellent people I have known in life are atheists.

I am not saying I would go about maiming, stealing, pillaging and killing to get what I wanted, but I would definitely cheat more, lie more, take advantage more, and genuinely use people more to my immediate benefit. If there is no moral consequence, there would be nothing to encourage me to be a better person if i wouldn't get caught.

Obviously being a pariah of the community or excised from your family would be no fun, but if you are good at getting away with being a piece of shit, and there is no moral consequence, why not?

So you have little to no empathy? Most people are nice regardless of religion because doing bad things makes them feel bad. Even the most scummy traits, such as lying, cheating, stealing, showing violence... appear from adapting to a shitty environment, not from "mere" psychopathy or sociopathy.
If you really have a complete lack of empathy, I'm sorry for you, and it's a great thing that your faith pretty much keeps you in check. But at the same time very, very few people are like that.

 

[Screaming Meat]

I don't understand why people think knowing our minds are the results of chemical reactions and countless mindless cells interacting devalues them. It's like saying a great book loses its value if you think about how it's just an organized collection of individually meaningless letters.

As for "meaning" and "purpose", we give life meaning and purpose.

That's a really beautiful analogy.

 

[Lister]

Buddhism. Or the Advaita Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy. Both provide meaningful practices that help one remove negative traits, and help arrive at higher truths.

Truths such as?

I mean, science has given us truths such as how our star came to be, and what it's future will be like, how everythign that makes up what you and I came from an incredibly, imposisbly powerful explosion that occured when a gigantic star went nova at the moment of it's "Death". That time is relative and space isn't nothing, but rather is has properties and can be and is reshaped by tremedous forces.

What similar truths has eastern philosophy revealed?

 

[ThusZarathustra]

Buddhism. Or the Advaita Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy. Both provide meaningful practices that help one remove negative traits, and help arrive at higher truths.

Acceptance of the reality of contradiction via meditative contemplation can be much more soothing than fighting against it via wordy philosophical back flips, but I'd argue that both have their place.

 

[Raist]

what? higher being(s) would also have to have creators that created them, ad infinitum. or did they come from nothing? your argument makes no sense.

See the good old WLC type of arguments:


Whatever begins to exist has a cause;
The universe began to exist;
Therefore: The universe has a cause.

The universe has a cause;
If the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful;
Therefore: An uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful.

Of course, this only works if one of your premises is that an "uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists" and that this is the only way you can possibly conceive how the universe would exist in the first place.

It's circular reasoning.