Fiach

I fail to understand this idea of meaning or purpose in existing. If there is meaning it certainly is not obvious to me. If I look at the universe, Earth, and the species on Earth, it appears more that everything just IS. There is no meaning. What is the meaning of a single grain of sand? What is the meaning of 10 H20 molecules at 35,000 metres?

The Universe happened. We don't know exactly how but it was a big bang and we know much of what happened after the bang. What was the purpose or meaning? None that I can see. Some molecules on this and maybe other planets by their natural physical properties formed compounds, that formed other complex compounds that replicated. Some of these made proteins, and some made lipoproteins that became cell walls and so on to complex multicellular organisms like US.

Everything can be seen in terms of natural properties of matter. It again shows no meaning. There is no meaning to a landslide. There may be an explanation but no meaning.

Meaning is an intellectual concept which has no basis in reality. It is whatever we wish it to be. Purpose is closely related. What is my purpose? I suppose my purpose is to survive, to propagate my genes, and protect them on a basic level. Does my life have meaning? I can't find any.

I have arbitrary purposes that I have decided to call my meaning or purpose. I am a physician still in practice and part-time genetic researcher. So, perhaps my meaning is to find answers to what we are, where we came from, and how to fix us when we malfunction. My son's meaning is to fix and program computers.

Christians may feel that their meaning is to spend their lives giving glory to a God whom they invented in the first place. Perhaps they invented God to give quick and dirty answers to questions (although the answers were wrong.) Another poster mentioned the delusion of immortality. That is patently irrational for a number or reasons, but even the illogical belief or hope to live forever might be strong enough to overwhelm the rational circuitry of the brain.

Fundies do not want to hear our arguments against their god or their dead resurrected god, mainly because it threatens their delusion of immortality. For them, purpose is to be immortal so that they can grovel before the God made in their own image forever. Their purpose on Earth is to fight those whose intellects cast doubts on their "truth" about immortality. That must be very scary to think you are immortal, and have someone show you that the idea is totally daft. Such people (atheists) are true enemies. Crikey, they want to take away your immortality which is like a threat worse than killing you. Your purpose is to fight these enemies of your God and your immortality.

So, despite the concern of a poster above, Christianity is a fear driven cult. It promises much if your blindly follow and grovel, but doom if you think. Thinking leads to questioning which leads to doubt which might deflate your immortality delusion.

Fiach

hastalavista2u

[quote]Originally posted by Fiach:
[QB]There is no meaning. What is the meaning of a single grain of sand? What is the meaning of 10 H20 molecules at 35,000 metres?

Meaning is an intellectual concept which has no basis in reality. It is whatever we wish it to be.

Your purpose is to fight these enemies of your God and your immortality.

Thinking leads to questioning which leads to doubt which might deflate your immortality delusion.
>Well,it's true there is no manifested 'meaning' in many tangible things,but why does there have to be,in order for there to be a 'God'?
If the world in general 'sucks'-for lack of a more 'meaningful' phrase-then what does it even matter whether there is a God overseeing it all?
Does mere questioning of this possibility somehow give meaning to your existance?
Obviously it does,given the enormous volume of posted comments/opinions on these forums.
If it didn't matter,then why even bother posting the question?
That would almost like me coming here just to say I am about to kill myself right before i did it-just for the hell of it.
It' all,as you say,quite meaningless.

Let me also add that we 'fundy's' are for the most part very unafraid of any arguments against-or should i say for-the illogical concept of God.
Rather,many like myself begin to think,then question,then become confused,and maybe even despair over why God allows certain things.
But in an ironic twist,we react very much like the 'strong atheist' would.
We simply steadfastly conclude without a doubt,that there is no other explanation for creation,other than a Creator.
Simply put,we see pure thinking as delusion,as the free thinker would see pure faith in the intangible.
Like two different realities altogether.

I guess the real mystery to me is if the present tangible existence seems so meaningless,then what is so wrong about coming to an intellectual conclusion that there is much more there than what we see and feel?
And why would one be so vehemently adamant about their denial of the 'unproven'?
And so utterly willing,almost to the death,to remain in a purely fleshly state,even if a transparent state were available?
Almost as if they are somehow addicted to the meaninglessness of it all.
How can self-fulfillment and emptiness co-exist is what I am asking?

As for the statement about fighting against these 'enemies' of the concept of immortality--
i must say there really isn't much there to 'fight' so to speak.
Unlike myself,most Christians are more than content to simply ignore such 'threats' to their secure beliefs.
Since it tends only to frustrate with the unanswerable questions.
I suppose there is no harm in asking them--
but then shouldn't one with rational thinking skills also ask themselves WHY they are asking--rather than only question others??
But maybe they/you do as far as i know?
Which would then,in my opinion,leave no doubt as to the reason for the constant queries and debates.
For the 'purpose' of fighting against those enemies,like myself,who of course pose no threat,other than self-destruction by means of deluded rationing.
But how can one be fighting against another,and helping overcome,at the same time.
Personally,i can't see verbal jesting or even threats as being remotely related to any forms of enlightenment or self-help that i know of??

Perhaps,it is really against belief systems,and not against people in general.
Then it would be akin to the Christian perspective of fighting the 'evil' in the person,rather than the person...maybe?
Of course,like Theists in general,the Atheist also has the bad apples,so to speak.
But unlike us,they somehow all tend to stick together and seemingly support even the destructive attitudes among themselves.
Since not rebuking is that same as encouraging,or so that's how it is interpreted.

I guess i would rather have company with those who forbad course words and behaviour,even my own-than with those who simply ignored it,as well as those it may have hurt.

Point being,in summary...i find more meaning in spiritual accountability,than in the mere carnal state,if that makes any sense.
Or maybe this is indeed all meaningless,and thus my words as well?
But i suppose critical thinking-however illogical mine may seem- is better than purely emotion based justification for my conclusions.
Or maybe I,like so many others here,is merely serving some mysterious purpose which is unknown at this time?
But at least there is some meaning in the unknown...and some hope as well.

Take care--

[ December 17, 2002: Message edited by: Theitist ]</p>

capnkirk

QUOTE:
The hypothesis that theism and/or religion were a Darwinian survival trait or survival advantage has much merit. I am an Atheist. But I know that worldwide I am only 20% of the world's population and only 5% over there in America. That must mean something. In centuries past, such as the Middle Ages, Atheism was extremely rare as far as we know. Religion pervaded society.

REPLY:

I roundly concur that religion was a Darwinian survival trait, but would like to play a bit of devil's advocate relative to your tribal example. Explicit in your description of the "strongly religious" tribe is the existence of a large percentage of "followers". What is significant in this observation is that the stability of the tribe is utterly dependent on maintaining this ratio of followers to leaders. Religion in this case is only the glue applied generously by the leaders to keep the followers bound together. (While this works well for the short term, the plethora of conflicting religious denominations and factions strongly implies that over the long haul it becomes devisive rather than unifying.).

On the other hand, the tribe of athiests, is comprised of mostly leaders, highly independent, loosely confederated at best, and therefore highly unstable. Why? Because athiests are freethinkers, and freethinkers are by nature not followers. (This, in a nutshell is the dilemma of athiesm as it seeks to become the dominant philosophical structure. Darwin selects against us in the historical arena of social politics.)

CONCLUSION:

We will always be a minority unless we can find a way to create athiest "followers". That even sounds oxymoronic, hinting at the size of the task and the creative inspiration required to succeed. That is, assuming that success in this case may well create a new "secular religion", just what we don't want.

capnkirk

It is because religious faith begins with the premise "I know" (as opposed to the fundamental scientific starting point "I don't know") that it is vulnerable to the delusion that those who do not believe as "my" faith does must be wrong.

In fact, faith is practically defined as being sufficiently convinced of something for which there is no proof, that one retains that conviction even in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary. The fallacy in this process of discovering the nature of reality is that if the initial inviolate premise is false, then all the rationalization that follows it is also false, or at least valueless. (Long ago, the first computer geeks had a phrase that is a corollary to this: "GIGO" (Garbage In, Garbage Out)).

As this vulnerability is congenital to religious belief, so therefore is the potential of the faithful to persecute those who do not support their particular inviolate articles of faith.

When this self-righteousness is fortified with the delusion that their source of moral authority is almighty, then all the prerequisite moral justifications to convert potential into propensity have been met.

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: capnkirk ]

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: capnkirk ]</p>

capnkirk

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: capnkirk ]</p>

diana

Icebrc,

Another to add to your list of reasons "man reaches for god" is man's ultimate isolation in the world. It's tough to face life alone. It's easier if you can convince yourself that there really is always someone there with you, looking out for you, protecting you.

I think of this as the "little boy" syndrome. We grow up physically, but there's always a part of us that wants to believe there's someone bigger and stronger and wiser that will make sure everything's okay.

d

capnkirk

[ December 20, 2002: Message edited by: capnkirk ]</p>