Secular Elation

I have seen the following opinion expressed by a few atheists/agnostics.
I see this opinion often expressed in light of a discussion about the afterlife. It seems that, beyond demolishing the idea of an afterlife due to the absence of evidence (and the mind-brain dependence), a lot of nontheists also attack the idea on a philosophical basis through the aforementioned opinion.

I have always understood 'greed' to mean "desiring more than what one needs or deserves." If we use this definition of greed, then the above statement is meant to say that, disregarding the issue of whether or not an afterlife exists, we do not need nor deserve an afterlife.

First, to say that one does not need an afterlife, is true. For why would we need one? We have this life here in reality; anything outside of it is irrelevant. Such a thing is not needed by us. However, even acknowledging that an afterlife is not needed, what is the problem with this? If other individuals are not harmed in any way by a person's desiring of something they do not need, what is the problem?

Second, is to consider the issue of deserving an afterlife. I would agree that, if a person lives well into their elderly years, and otherwise lives a full and healthy life, one may not particularly "deserve" an afterlife. However, it is arguable: what about the thousands of people every year who die young, in horrible pain, or die even after living a while yet living under horrible conditions (third-world country citizens)? If an afterlife existed, and if it was a 'blissful' sort of existence, it would seem to me that these poor individuals would indeed be deserving of such an afterlife to a greater extent, so that they get their fair share of the pie of a happy existence.

And, even considering those few individuals who live long into life, and who lives great, happy lives, drowned in wealth and possessions and relationships--how would it be wrong for them to also find themselves in this afterlife? If no one else is losing anything from such a thing, what is wrong about it, even if it would rightfully fall under the definition of greed?

In any case, I must disagree with the opinion at the top of this post--or at least disagree with it to the extent that I understand it.

reprise

This topic might actually fit better in MF&P, but let's see how it progresses here first.

THX1138

"I want more life, fucker." - Roy Batty (Blade Runner) Heh, heh - I HAD to say that.

I think people simply can't imagine themselves NOT existing. It's really impossible to do. But we did NOT exist before we were born (unless someone wants to bring up the so-called "pre-existence of souls" crap).

It's more of a clinging to the idea of being at the expense of denying becoming. I wouldn't call it "greed" but perhaps "clinging" to a notion of oneself simply because it's impossible to imagine otherwise. But you don't need to be able to imagine not existing to accept the non-existence of the self.

I personally don't believe in an afterlife. "Dying" may be frightening but death is not.

J

NeverByte

<singing>
Immortality, it's the thing for you and me,
A roller-coaster ride through eternity,
A thousand funerals have come and gone,
While I keep living on and on...
</singing>

Ahem...