What is the meaning of this?

Why stop what your doing now because nothing will ultimately go on forever? If that wasn't the purpose in the first place then just keep on going.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Atheists
• atheism
• meaning
• of
• life
• purpose
• objective
• god
• theism
• bible
• Jesus
• Christianity
• why
• am
• not
• an

[Cherri59]

I don't understand why people find it disturbing that I use science as an example for finding boundaries. Me...well I find it refreshing! Anyway, it does give "the what" and with these guidelines people develop "the why." The only thing I find odd is the negative element as mentioned by me before. There is purpose in negatives.

[Xenolupa]

I certainly would not like to find meaning of life in the "holy" books. Killing, maiming, betraying... not fun. Not exactly the best examples of virtue. I did find meaning of life by thinking for myself, by developing a moral compass by myself and for myself. By looking how other people lead their lifes and deciding whether certain examples would be worth to follow up or quite the opposite. Worshipping a god just for the sake of worshipping is absurd.

[Xenolupa]

Not believing in "God" (or any other god) because:

- No prove available for the existance of any.

- No scientific need for any.

- Descriptions of any of the gods sofar are clearly the product of human imagination. They reflect the scientific knowhow at the moment of invention of such gods, and the intellectual capabilities of those people, which means the stories are contradictory and absurd.

- The descriptions depict horrible beings, not worthy of worshipping.

Just a few of the reasons.

[Xenolupa]

Science supports some of my ideals. As a person, I do have ideals, but these are separate from me being an atheist. I can't think of any ideals that are connected to my being an atheist. I want to live a good and useful life. I don't want to do to others what I don't want others to do to me. I want to learn about as much as possible. And in the process, enjoy my life. This life is just the one I have, so I have to make it a good one, there will be no second one. See, no atheist ideals.

[SouthernRaisedAtheis]

The only rule you can say that in atheism is that for an atheist to believe in a god there must be proof. Atheism is not a world view or belief system. It is merely the statement of not blindly believing in a god. There is no rule book or guide lines. Atheism is not a replacement or substitute for religion. It makes no positive statements. There is nothing to prove in atheism. Atheist wait for the proof.

[Cherri59]

I am not talking about collecting or not collecting stamps.  I also don't consider the meaning of life as entertainment. Whether your a theist or atheist doesn't impress or amuse me. What I am taking about here is that any belief system, "your entertainment," is a response to guidelines or rules.

[Cherri59]

I agree with you in saying not thinking is negative. Whether you are a theist or atheist doesn't matter in that.

So you do not feel science has nothing to support atheist ideals? Really? What do you base not believing in God in? Where do you find your meaning of life? An individual's interpretation of "meaning" reflects off of something.

[SouthernRaisedAtheis]

Being an atheist does not mean one supports science. My hobby is not "not collecting" stamps. It just means I get my entertainment elsewhere. So as an atheist, I get my meaning and enjoyment of life some place other than a belief in god.

[AtSwimTwoBricks]

On the second point, I don't think Veritas48 is contradicting himself.

He believes that his religion is correct and that meaning comes from on high for everyone, even those incorrect nonbelievers.

He compares that to the supposed atheistic view, in which nobody's life has any meaning.

It's contrast, not contradiction. It's only confusing because, instead of a clean hypothetical comparison, he keeps interrupting with his assurances--a habit that does more harm than good.

[AtSwimTwoBricks]

On your first point, I think the confusion is his. He's putting the cart inside the horse.

Atheism is just the failure of theism. Its scope is theism and theism's problems, so if he wants arguments for atheism-compatible worldviews, he shouldn't be putting his questions to atheism but to those worldviews themselves or to the projects that created them.