Mageth

Mageth, in answer to your first question, one's word is never sufficient in debate. I'm not asking you a personal question here (i.e. do you find your life 'good' or 'meaningful', although that is a good question). Rather, I asked you to defend the assertion that life in atheistic universe can justifiably have meaning or purpose, or ethics, for that matter. In other words, defend the claim that nihilism is NOT the consistent conclusion of atheistic naturalism.

When my word is to give myself as an example of a person who is an atheistic naturalist and is not and never will be a nihilist, whose life has meaning and purpose, and who has an ethical system, then I would consider that word to be a damning refutation of your argument that nihilism etc. is the "consistent conclusion" of atheistic naturalism.

Once again, you just can't seem to accept that people like me get along just fine without needing some mythical sky-god to "justify" our existence.

I believe your comments here are bit over simplisitic

Well, I think it is simple. You claim atheism leads inevitably to nihilism; the existence of myself and the many other atheists who are not nihilistc illustrates that your assertion is patently false.

Open your own topic on the Philosophy forum if you want to discuss the "religious implications of atheism" philosophically with those who may be interested. Personally, I have no interest in further pursuing it with you, because my "over simplistic" comments are all I see as necessary to refute your "religious implications of atheism"

Hobbs

Oh, I'd say the happy atheist causes you much more of a problem than the happy theist causes Mageth or me. There's nothing implicit in not believing in a god that would lead to the conclusion that people who do believe in a god shouldn't be happy. So, the existence of happy theists is no problem for us.

But IF your version of Christianity is true, then all the stuff about misery and hopelessness and all that would indeed follow for atheists. And yet there are happy atheists.

It's a simple Modus Ponens argument, i.e.
"If A then B; Not B; Therfore, not A,"

Premise 1: If A (kingjames1's version of Christianity is true) then B (atheists live miserable, hopeless lives).
Premise 2: Not B (there are atheists who do not live miserable, hopeless lives).
Therefore: Not A (kingjames1's version of Christianity is not true).

There is no analogous argument against atheism based on the happiness of theists.

Mageth

Actually, Mageth - to be anal about it - I believe it was your quote that theists are "pissed" about other people living a meaningful life apart from their "fantastic" myths...hence my comment about "while we're slinging mud..."

Perhaps, but I think my assertion is well-founded based on what I've read from you here, and I stand by it, while I think your insulting implication that we atheists are "intellectually lazy" and are thus blindly headed down the road to nihilism is patently false. I'm not "intellectually lazy", and I'm not headed down the road to despair.

Does that piss you off?

Mageth

Well said, Hobbs. Saved me from having to address that one myself (you did it better than I could, anyway). <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

Starboy

It is the Christian manual on how to deceive and manipulate people with superstitions lies and outright fraud.

Starboy

Mageth

Back to the topic:

"God GOOD. Man BAAAD!"

kingjames1

In response to both Mageth and Hobbs...

Mageth, in my humble opinion your argument here is confused. One, that you claim to be a happy atheist has as much bearing as the claim that one is a right-thinking Buddhist. I'm glad that you can say that you are happy. But I'm not asking you to prove that your happy!

I'm asking you to defend your naturalism against the nihilistic charge that, since everything we do (morally, relgiously, socially, vocationally, etc.) is merely a social and cultural construct (i.e. the logical conclusion from a natrualistic perspective), our lives in toto can be nothing more than arbitrary, an hence an exercise in futility.

The nihilist might say that you are futilely happy -- your happiness persists only within your delusion that your life has meaning - when in fact it does not.

If you are claiming that you are happy with your particular delusion, fine! But at least admit that it is a delusion, or more precisely, a useful fiction for you. Otherwise, if you are claiming that are actual structures of meaning and morality, I believe there is a serious charge here against your atheistic religion. You can defend it, or ignore it (not unlike the fundamentalist, anti-intellectual)

<strong>
Well, I think it is simple. You claim atheism leads inevitably to nihilism; the existence of myself and the many other atheists who are not nihilistc illustrates that your assertion is patently false.
</strong>

Are you kidding? It does no such thing! You are presupposing that people (at leasts atheists) are logically consistent with their own beliefs -- and this is clearly not the case.


Hobbs, may I correct your understanding of the Christian position in this regard? I as a Christian do not think that non-Christians must be doomed to suicidal misery and perpetual unhappiness or any such gloominess. However, Christians do believe that if the atheist is happy, functional, normal, etc. (and indeed such exist - contra the claims of some) it is only because they are inconsistent atheists - atheists living on borrowed Christian capital in fact. They as humans (created in the imago Dei) cannot live with the implications of their own atheism - so they don't! Logical inconsistency is by no means a problem for many people.

E.g. the atheist can be a relatively happy naturalist, with a basic positive view towards the human race and the modern ideals of progress, OR they can (more consistently, it seems to me) be nihilists who recognize the bleak implications of their atheistism. I believe, for example, that Nietzsche came as close as any well known thinker to a consistent denial of God.

J.

Mageth

I, for one, have no problem with the claim that life has no "Meaning" (with a capital M). I'm quite satisfied with my miserable little nihilistic existence and its lower-case-m meaning.

I don't see this as a problem, or that I'm delunding myself, or that life as an atheist is bleak. It's just the way the world works in reality.

Those that are deluding themselves are theists that give arbirary Meaning to their lives through some mythical creature with a Grand Plan for them. If they feel that is necessary to overcome perceived nihilism, hopelessness, and meaninglessness, then good for them. Let them play at make-believe. I don't need to or want to.

[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

kingjames1

Not at all. In fact, I'm glad that you can still acknowledge some truth (e.g. life can be good and happy) despite you atheistic belief (or lack of belief in God, if you prefer).

That is, I am happy that you are not (in my understanding) entirely consistent with your atheology.

Cheers - to the good life!

J.

Mageth

What could be more bleak than going through life considering humankind to be corrupt and doomed, with no hope for salvation except for the intervention of a cruel war-god that created things this way, and with the vast majority of mankind doomed by that god to eternal suffering because they weren't able or willing to grovel before him?

As an atheist, I can have hope for humankind, and condemn no one as corrupt just for being born a human or doomed to such a horrible fate. Atheism has a far brighter outlook on life than theism.

[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>