How do you find purpose as an atheist?

I'm not sure there is a "soul" that survives the body after death. I suspect that the phenomenon of consciousness is tied up with brain functioning, since we lose consciousness from time to time, and I'm skeptical of the reports of "near death" and "post-death" experiences. Yet there's an interesting passage by atheist Sam Harris from his book The End of Faith,p. 208: "But the truth is that we simply do not know what happens after death. While there is much to be said against a naive concepteion of a soul that is independent of the brain, the place of consciousnness in the natural world is very much an open question. The idea that brains produce consciousness is little more than an article of faith among scientists at present, and there are many reasons to believe that the methods of science will be insufficient to either prove or disprove it."

Please refresh my memory. What did we agree to here?

There may be differences in what people consder to be just or unjust in particular cases, but statistically, I think there's a significant core of consensus, especially within cultures and subcultures. Same with beauty; otherwise, art critics and music critics would be unemployed. But more importantly, these are ideals, however defined, that people hold dear, even though they are immaterial concepts. Liberty and justice for all. The land of the free. The free world. Democracy. Those are things people fight and die for--and they're "only" concepts, abstractions. Are they real? I'd say, certainly yes, even though most of us would agree they're seldom realized in the physical world. John Dewey defined God as the sum of human idealism. I think God is at least that.

We may live our lives according to our philosophy, but will any philosophy do, or can we say that some are better than others? On another thread, for example, we talked about Satanisn and objectivism, the former rationalizing the individual's freedom from moral constraints, the latter glorifying selfishness and condemning altruism as a vice. I'm willing to stand up and oppose these philosophies, because I think they add to the nastiness of our society. Jesus resonates with me, because he preached compassion, forgiveness, non-judgmentalism, and concern for the less fortunate in society.Those are my values.

Good. You're an ecclectic like I am. I don't think it makes sense to just take an established philosophical system and plug it in. You start with a clear idea of your core values and look for one that fits. You may find that none of them do, & you'll have to adapt and modify the established one to fit the contours of your values. We'll call the new philosohy Stiffyism.

 

I haven't read his book, but I have read scientific papers on consciousness, and there have been many advances in learning how consciousness happens. Neurologists are even watching how "thought" happens with MRIs. And watching what happens in the brain when the individual is presented with moral dilemmas. In the case of moral dilemmas, they have pinpointed where in the brain choices are made. This is in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). If the decision is one that humanity has dealt with for thousands of years, our brains are hardwired with a choice (i.e. instinct, or gut feeling). If the choice pertains to a more modern dilemma, then the ACC triggers a logical or thought out response to the dilemma. The ACC is biased one way or another from individual to individual - like some people are blond or brunette, or left or right handed. Some people are biased more towards their gut feeling, and some prefer to think things through more. For more on this, google "Who's life would you save", and read that article. It's very enlightening. Complex emotions such as love are reduced to brain chemistry (i.e. serotonin and dopimine).

When you said:

I think it all boils down to two very simple and related concepts: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you, and it's evil twin - do unto others as others have done to you.

But that isn't God. That's human idealism. And I would argue that it's not even restricted to humans. Chimps and other more intelligent animals show a similar sense of justice to what we have.

I tend to think more big picture. What happens if you help out someone who seems to have trouble holding a job from time to time? He starts to depend on you rather than being motivated by necessity to become employable.

What happens when the government gives money to poor families, especially ones with more kids? The parent is motivated to stay unemployed and have more kids. I think more along the lines of: Give a man a fish, and he'll eat a meal. Give a man a fishing pole and he'll eat for life.

But then I take this further, and this is probably where I will elicit boos and hisses from you. Being a believer of evolution as I am, I wonder what happens to humanity if medical science gives us medication or corrective surgeries to correct for birth defects? People with defective genes keep on reproducing. Let's say someone is born with a terrible spinal disorder, and they can hardly stand up straight. Along comes medical technology and fixes them right up. Without medical technology they would not overcome their disability, and probably would not reproduce. People with this spinal condition would become fewer and fewer in future generations. But when their condition is corrected, they will have kids with the spinal defect, as will their kids' kids, and on and on.

With modern technology we are able to live anywhere on the planet regardless of the environment. No need to adapt to it. What if a hypothetical population of people are genetically inferior to the rest of humanity, yet because of socialism or charities they recieve the same benefits as the rest of society? Or even worse, what if people who excel are made to give a large percentage of their earnings to those in need. What is the net effect? Natural selection no longer applies and our species stops improving. I am not advocating that we stop practicing medicine, or taking advantage of technologies. Their benefits can be reliably applied and continue to improve at a faster rate than our species can evolve. But if we continue to help those who lack the intelligence, or the drive, or whatever it is that makes us competitive, then yeah, it's fine for the lazy or unskilled, but as far as the human race goes over the long run, we aren't doing our species any favors.

And no, I am not advocating breeding of a super race or anything like that. And I am certainly not advocating that we remove the undesirables from the gene pool. Just let nature take its course is all. In a modern society, perhaps "nature" is a free market, capitalism driven society.

What you advocate borders on socialism. That has been tried in Russia and other countries, and their societies as a whole become stagnant.

LMAO! Sounds good

 

I agree that think it's preferable to give a person a hand up, rather than a handout, although the latter can be justified for the truly needy, at least on a temporary basis. I have no use for freeloaders (able bodied adults who are capable of working but won't), but our willingness to take care of poor kids, the infirm, and the elderly poor is a measure of our own humanity.

Booooooooooooooo, hisssssssssssssss! Actually, I agree with you up to a point. I'm a strong believer in the right to die, and generally oppose heroic interventions to keep people alive when the quality of life is compromised to the point of being minimal. The same would apply to really extreme birth defects--babies born without brain stems, for example. And I think it's absurd to fret about blastocysts in Petri dishes. But then again, Stephen Hawkin, almost completely paralyzed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, is a reminder on the need for extreme caution here. If medical technology can really "fix them right up", why not allow them to survive and even reproduce? I was watching a TV documentary on conjoined (siamese) twins featuring one pair of teenage girls, or what seemed like one teenage girl with two heads. They shared a body. And they seemed otherwise normal and well-adjusted, and not bad looking at all (I've dated worse). They went to high school, had friends, and were talking about the challenges of co-ordinating tasks like using the computer, taking exams, driving a car (I'd like to be there when the cops pull them over for speeding), having a social life, relating to boys. I'm sure they could teach us a lot about getting along. Then there's the autistic lady who put her unique perspectives to work designing cattle pens that no "normal" person had thought of. Amazing stuff!

 

I could say that what you advocate borders on Nazism, but actually what it is is Social Darwinism, an ideology developed by Herbert Spencer that was popular in the late 1800s. My problem with both Nazism and Social Darwinism is that they assume knowledge of who are the "undesirables". The misfits who ran the Third Reich and some of the corporate raiders and robber barons in our own soiciety would fit into that category, as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad you aren't advocating state-sponsored eugenics, but you do suggest a correlation between wealth and worth. I see no justification for that. If we allocate medical resources according to wealth, as we tend to do, Paris Hilton, Donald Trump, and a number of offensive rappers and televangelists would have an evolutionary edge that I think would be unfortunate.

From an evolutionary standpoint, fitness and moral worth are not necessarily the same. Cockroaches are certainly among the most impressive species of all time from the standpoint of Darwinian fitness, but I don't admire them, and I'm not ready to step aside and let them take over. Generally speaking, I find ethical naturalism to be a more questionable position than scientific naturalism. Ethical naturalism tries to make "ought to be's" out of "is's". Because X (e.g., the cockroach) is able to beat out the competition and establish a niche for itself, X "deserves" to succeed. You can believe that if you want, but it's just your personal preference, not natural law. From a utilitarian standpoint, I question whether unbridled capitalism and competition promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. The most successful in the system are too often those who have a talent for using and taking credit for the talents of others. Economic efficiency is a worthy social value, but not the only one. I have no use for freeloaders, but I'd be willing to sacrifice a little economic growth to avoid a society dominated by crass materialists and shallow consumerists. A society where people are elbowing each other to get to the top, the poor have to scrape by so that the few can have summer homes in the Bahamas, and the "silent majority" goes to bed at night wondering why they aren't having fun yet is not my idea of a good time.

Do I favor socialism? No. I have little confidence in politicians and government bureaucrats to do a better job than the capitalists. I look to social and cultural arenas for hope in shaping values to temper the nastiness of public and private corporatism. That's why I'm a Christian.

Have you been to a Rainbow Gathering? (the Rainbow Family of the Living Light, not to be confused with gays or the followers of Jesse Jackson; these are hippies, and they have a site on Hip Forums.) It would be a real test of your fitness for survival. You'd either stroke out at the sight of all those misfits and undesirables, or you might see some merit in the harmony and individualism among the outcasts who include the "dregs" of society. Jesus would feel at home.

 

Okie

Do you think you always will?

If you value the personal over public and private partyism, why are you a christian?! How were you reborn?

 

you said "if there is a god, then life has a purpose." I'm wondering what you mean by that. What purpose are you talking about?

 

A friend of mine, who happens to be an athiest, was being welcomed to her new neighborhood. A lady asked her which church she attended. She replied, "None, I'm an athiest." The lady remarked, with a sadness, "Oh no, that's terrible !" My friend asked why, and the lady simply relied "You have no hope." I've thought about that, a lot. One could take it that the lady was being judgemental, or, that she was simply stating a fact. But, no hope for what ? An afterlife ? Some people's version of a heaven is my version of a hell.

I happen to identify, strongly, with Buddhism. They recognize the pain and suffering that visits all of our lives, some more often than others. They recommend a way to alleviate that pain and suffering. They don't put down other religions, something you will find in Islam, and Christianity. The Buddhist prefects are quite like the ten commandents, a great template for human behavior. It works for me, on a personal level, in ways that nothing else ever has.

 

Think that God is at least the summation of human ideals? Who knows what I will always think, but yes.

Jesus seemed to value the personal over public and private partyism, and I consider Him a good Christian role model.

By consciously committing my life to Jesus during a life-changing experience.

 

You mean you've committed your life to what you take to be the ideals of Jesus, yes?
Would you mind relating something of your experience? How was your life changed?

 

Yes.

Basically, it was viewing a passage of scripture in a new way. This is a fairly common form of religious experience. The passage was from Genesis, where it says humans were created in the image and likeness of God. It occurred to me that if that is so (1) all encounters with humans are encounters with aspects of the divine; and (2) since heaven is coming "face to face" with God, our daily encounters with people are previews of coming attractions. This brought to mind a passage by Jesus in a "non-canonical" gospel, the ("Gnostic") Gospel of Thomas: "The kingdom of Heaven is spread out everywhere upon the Earth, and they do not see it." In other words, heaven is better conceptualized as something that can be experienced before death rather than after death. And this brought to mind a train of thought recalling familiar passages about Jesus' humanistic teachings concerning judgment-free, compassionate love for others.

How was my life changed? It made going to WalMart a more exciting experience. It made me more into people and religious ideas. It gave positive meaning to a life that I had previously considered negative and meaningless. Whether this was some kind of revelation from an external God or a purely psychological phenomenon drawing from my unconscious is something I can't answer. There are certainly abundant cues in my cultural environment for this kind of experience. I'm fine with a naturalistic explanation. And I'm not sure it particularly matters to me whether or not there is "proof" that Genesis or the Gospel of Thomas are "true", Jesus is or was "real", there is an afterlife or a God that answers prayer, etc. I accept them on faith (i.e., intuition + taking a chance), or as Luther put it:" a joyful bet on His unfelt, untried and unknown goodness." By the way, I've never used alcohol or other mind altering substances, not even weed. What others pay money for comes to me naturally. And my faith doesn't diminish my respect for you and your beliefs. Namaste.

 

Okie:

Do you love anyone more than yourself? They are your afterlife. We're all eachother, but not at all. Once you realize you have only your own life to live, for eternity, you'll give god up like the stuff you've never had!

 

For me, the question is, how can you find purpose at all? If there is a god, that god is certainly not working on my behalf. I used to believe and felt betrayed.

I gave up Christianity, went into Wicca, magick and occultism, practiced that for many years, and once again ended up feeling betrayed.

I gave up the Wicca because I couldn't believe in a god.

I gave up the secular magick because it betrayed me.

If there is no god, then everything is random and nothing has any meaning at all.

But then again, if there is a god, then that god is either cruel and/or indifferent, So once again, nothing has any meaning at all.

How can anyone believe in anything?

 

So everything is random and has no meaning. I am ok with that. It's not like the universe is wasting my time or anything.

 

I would be ok with it except it seems like my whole world view is crumbling down around me. I always believed in the possibility that there is more to the world than the basic components of matter, space and energy. it always seemed like there was room for something more, like things we don't really understand but exist nonetheless.

Anymore I feel like I can't belief that. And its a hard transition for someone who never looked at the world that way before.

 

I think Morpheus says it best...

These are growing pains you are experiencing. It may be hard, but seeing the world for what it is will be more rewarding than going along with the fantasy. Knowing that there is no afterlife will enable you to make the most of your life, because you will realize this is all you have.

 

Maybe your crumbling world view is an opportunity to find a new one. I've come a long way from the traditional beliefs of my childhood, but there are too many phenomena in my experience that have the texture of "something more" for me to give up on that possibility just yet.

 

I've seen a lot of crap too, paranormal stuff, magickal stuff, etc. But maybe they were all just figments of my imagination.

 

Belief in God as creator, arbiter of what is good, and heavenly father is a Rube Goldberg device for personal fulfillment in life and comfort about death. There is no need for it in order to satisfy either need. Furthermore, letting go of belief is the most liberating thing one can ever do for one's self.

As for a purpose in life, well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations.

 

Or why not try to be mean to people, eat whatever you like, watch lots of MTV, be a couch potato, join the Klan or the Nazi Party, and sacrifice your dog to Satan?

 

:applause: beautifully stated, i completely concur with you statements.