rainbow walking

Greetings to all concerned,
It is my intent to explore this question as fully as possible. But rather than submit arguments, either pro or con, I'd prefer to contemplate some thoughts and questions prior to focusing on the actual question itself.

It seems alot of bandwidth is consumed with debates and advertisements from both theists and atheists on their respective worldviews, so I don't anticipate any objections if I say the question of an existent omni-max being is a hotly debated issue.

So the first thing I would ask is:

Why is it so important we seek a resolution to such a question within our own minds?

Koyaanisqatsi

I think it's primarily social conditioning (and not just cult conditioning), in that, when I was a kid I couldn't have cared less about anything along those lines. My only concerns were immediate (almost literally hour to hour, if not minute to minute). As the novelty of life wears off and the sociallization that comes as part of marturity, I think it is then, obviously, that more abstract questions are even capable of being addressed, much less contemplated.

Though, ironically, my favorite phrase as a child (from around five years old forward, according to me mum) was "It's my life," said in the petulant tones those who know me would expect .

"You have to get a haircut."
"Why? It's my life!"

That kind of thing. Perhaps then it's a result of butting up against society and having to do all sorts of sociallizing things (rules and regulations) that first leads one to question authority and from whence such authority originated, if at all; i.e., regressive, logical (if entirely intuitive or academic, as opposed to evidentiary) extension?

I know for a lot of the cult members in here (and elsewhere) it's about "purpose" to one's life, but that is definitely the result of cult conditioning, IMO. To an innocent child, "purpose" is tacitly understood in the very actions one engaged in; an immediate quid pro quo of action and effect (as opposed to cause and effect); i.e., action: run around in a circle; effect: get dizzy and fall down and watch the clouds vibrate.

Thus "purpose" is a direct result of imposition in order to initiate cult conditioning or cult mindset (the cult being either religious or political, since they're largely interwined and have been until only very recently in human history).

As a militant atheist (), I find "purpose" is what you make it to be and have no need to impose convoluted, fantasy regressive extension of an ultimate authority figure.

So, as to why it is "important" that we resolve this issue in our own minds, for me, would only mean such weight was imposed and not necessarily naturally implicit.

Darth Dane

As a militant atheist ( ), I find "purpose" is what you make it to be and have no need to impose convoluted, fantasy regressive extension of an ultimate authority figure.

I whole heartedly agree

Well spoken




DD - Love Spliff

111111

Because it is the nature of Mankind to seek out the answer to the great question "Why?" Even atheists seek out "why", though they deny an originating Source.

rainbow walking

Then, if I'm understanding you Koy, you're answer is that it's an artificial imposition, a throwback from centuries of indoctrination that provided everyone a sense of purpose that transcended their own existence?

So the answer to the question will be different also, depending on your worldview?

But then, a believer probably isn't questioning as much as defending his/her beliefs?

Whereas an atheist is rejecting the imposition of a worldview for various reasons?

On the other hand could it also be that both the atheist and the theist are arguing as a justification for their worldviews that they've already invested their intellectual and emotional integrity in?

Do you think anyone then is genuinely interested in an answer, or already believe their answer is the correct one?


Now 6, (1+1+1+1+1+1=6) speculates that it's because we seek an ultimate answer to the "why" question.

Hmmm....good answers all. I hope more are forthcoming.

diana

Greetings, such a One.

If you'll pardon the expression, why do you think it is "the nature of Mankind to seek out the answer to the great question Why?"

It sounds silly, but I like to know why for everything except why am I here? I've never assumed a purpose for my existence, and I don't see a reason to. Hence my question.

I think you mean that athiests seek out How. There's a difference.

And for the record, denial implies foreknowledge of what one denies. I know of no source to deny, capitalized or otherwise. I simply fail to see any reason to postulate a spontaneous and infinitely more complex being to "explain" the complexity I observe around me.

This is not to be confused with "denying" any "Source."

See?

d

diana

Sorry 'bout that, rainbow walking.

Back to your question. I think the reason we--even atheists--find the question so important is because the concept exists. Once it exists, and we've been told the (possible) gravity of it, we decide that this is something we'd better be RIGHT about. The presumed stakes are too high to risk guessing, or accepting on someone else's authority.

d

rainbow walking

rw: Hi diana, no apologies necessary. Then, if I'm reading you correctly, you're saying it's an important issue, made the more so by the claims and doctrines built into the various religious representations, yes? Claims such as eternal punishment, perhaps? This is logical. Certainly were I going to reject such widespread wholesale assertions that appeared to have a popular consensus I'd want to be sure of my reasoning for doing so, as well.

Another excellent point.

Then we can consider that it's not just an interesting philosophical debate that everyone engages in for want of something better to do. There's some definite real life issues at stake underlying the debate.

Mageth

Because it is the nature of Mankind to seek out the answer to the great question "Why?"

"Why not?"

Even atheists seek out "why", though they deny an originating Source.

I agree with diana; "How?" is the proper question. And in asking this I don't deny an originating source (with a small "s") of the universe. As an atheist, I lack belief in an intentional Source, which would be necessary, IMO, for the "Why?" question to be meaningful. And then, I suppose, only that Source could provide the answer. Anything we come up with (e.g. the bible or other of the world's mythologies) would be but a wild guess, infused with our human sense of purpose.

Mageth

Why is it so important we seek a resolution to such a question within our own minds?

Good question. I doubt there's one definitive answer. Koy appears to propose it is imposed on us from outside, from the structure of society. That may be. This to me seems to lead to the idea that religion/god are powerful memes that humankind generated at some distant time in the past, and that have become too powerful, too pervasive, for any of us to ignore.

As an alternative thought, could there possibly be something innate within us, possibly genetic, possibly emergent from the evolution of our complex brains and intellects, such as Jung proposed with his "archetypes of the unconscious" and Joseph Campbell expounded on, that generates dreams and feelings of "mystery" in life? And, again in the distant past, humans began inventing myths and metaphors to describe those dreams and feelings, including the metaphors of God(s)? This could explain the parallels one can see in many of the world's mythologies that appear to have arisen independently of each other, and could also explain why such concepts and myths seem to resonate with so many people.