What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Discussion of articles that appear in the magazine.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4208
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:13 pm

Harbal wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:09 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:57 pm
Harbal wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:52 pm

You are missing the point.
I must be too.
Yes you are.
Then the point is...?

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Belinda » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:18 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Right. And if one of those Atheists decides his "self-preservation" is made better by not having to "reciprocate" kindnesses he has received from others, but rather from exploiting their beneficence while having none to perform of his own, who is there who will say he's "wrong"?
(Belinda replied)
The leaders of the society, the common people, all people who rely upon others in communal efforts such as trading, professional services, selling one's labour for reward and so on, will say that the antisocial man is wrong.
(IC replied)
So what? If you'll pardon me, what is it about having a cluster of people agreeing with you that makes you "better" than the rugged individual who goes his own way and breaks the demands of the herd, or of the total egoist who spits at the rest and says, "Society be damned." All three are "good" as Atheists...or at least, not "bad," for Atheism warrants no such terms.

There's not a thing in Atheist suppositions that imply that the one is a stitch better than the other.
A society is not a cluster of people.By definition a society is people who cooperate with each other. This cooperation necessarily involves moral consensus.

(Belinda wrote)
Immanuel Can, a society is a group of people who trust each other to work together. Antisocial people are either nuisances or criminals.
(IC replied)
Foucault (following Nietzsche) would say such things are just power-moves by larger groups of people to enforce their will on others by de-normalizing them. How do you know he's not right about that? Maybe "antisocial" or "nuisance" is just an Atheist word for "someone we want to disempower, sideline or eliminate."
I don't know what you mean. Doesn't everybody find antisocial people to be nuisances or criminals? Doesn't everybody want to disempower nuisance or criminal activity ? Some elites are corrupt and are an extra burden on the society.

(IC wrote)
At one time, the majority of society agreed that women who wanted to vote were just such "nuisances," and regarded them as "antisocial." Aren't you glad their judgment wasn't the final one?
Yes. Moral systems evolve. Laws of the society are based upon the moral consensus. By "evolve" I refer to change not progress. In my opinion a liberal society is a better society than an authoritarian society.
Last edited by Belinda on Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 3866
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Harbal » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:26 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:12 pm

That would be a good argument, IF you could show that the jihadi was actually following God.
No, it would be a bad argument if you could show that he wasn't actually following God. A man who is prepared to strap explosives to himself and press the red button in the belief that he is doing God's work gets ten out of ten for faith, in my book.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4208
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:51 pm

Belinda wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:18 pm
The leaders of the society, the common people, all people who rely upon others in communal efforts such as trading, professional services, selling one's labour for reward and so on, will say that the antisocial man is wrong.
(IC replied)
So what? If you'll pardon me, what is it about having a cluster of people agreeing with you that makes you "better" than the rugged individual who goes his own way and breaks the demands of the herd, or of the total egoist who spits at the rest and says, "Society be damned." All three are "good" as Atheists...or at least, not "bad," for Atheism warrants no such terms.

There's not a thing in Atheist suppositions that imply that the one is a stitch better than the other.
A society is not a cluster of people.By definition a society is people who cooperate with each other. This cooperation necessarily involves moral consensus.[/quote]
That's mere semantics. A society is a bunch of people. The issue of whether or not they owe each other cooperation, or whether their consensus is correct, is the vexed issue. Many societies have been wrong in past. (I assume you'd say Nazi Germany or modern Saudi would be wrong about things.) So bad consensus and unjust cooperation are a fact.

Prove that an Atheist owes anyone to bow to their "moral consensus" or to "cooperate" with them, if he doesn't want to.
(Belinda wrote)
Immanuel Can, a society is a group of people who trust each other to work together. Antisocial people are either nuisances or criminals.
(IC replied)
Foucault (following Nietzsche) would say such things are just power-moves by larger groups of people to enforce their will on others by de-normalizing them. How do you know he's not right about that? Maybe "antisocial" or "nuisance" is just an Atheist word for "someone we want to disempower, sideline or eliminate."
I don't know what you mean. Doesn't everybody find antisocial people to be nuisances or criminals? Doesn't everybody want to disempower nuisance or criminal activity ? Some elites are corrupt and are an extra burden on the society.
See below.

(IC wrote)
At one time, the majority of society agreed that women who wanted to vote were just such "nuisances," and regarded them as "antisocial." Aren't you glad their judgment wasn't the final one?
This is when your own society was against you, as a woman. It would have been worse, had you been born in Saudi today. You would be a "nuisance" there, because you are a woman with an opinion, and the willingness to assert her alleged rights.
In my opinion a liberal society is a better society than an authoritarian society.
In mine too. But that doesn't show we're right to think so, unless you have proof. As a Christian, I can say why you do, in fact, have rights. But what does an Atheist have to show that?

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4208
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:54 pm

Harbal wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:26 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:12 pm

That would be a good argument, IF you could show that the jihadi was actually following God.
No, it would be a bad argument if you could show that he wasn't actually following God.
I can. At least, I can show beyond any reasonable doubt that his god is not my God, so he's following something that's not God.
A man who is prepared to strap explosives to himself and press the red button in the belief that he is doing God's work gets ten out of ten for faith, in my book.
Strength of belief isn't truth, or goodness. If it were, Nazism would have been very true, because people sure believed it, and good as well, I suppose. But we don't think that.

So I'll give him a "ten" for fervency, but a "0" for truth and goodness.

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 3866
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Harbal » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:00 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:54 pm
I can. At least, I can show beyond any reasonable doubt that his god is not my God, so he's following something that's not God.
He would say the same of you, how are the rest of us to know which one of you, if any, is right. It kind of makes me think that I'm probably better off without a God, I mean, there are so many to choose from, it's very confusing.

User avatar
Vendetta
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:28 pm
Location: ehville

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Vendetta » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:31 pm

Harbal wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:06 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:54 pm
That word "abominable" is a very strong moral pejorative. And while I agree you are right to use it (in the case, say, of jihadis or conquistadors), I can't see where an Atheist or agnostic would find the legitimative basis to show it was warranted.
You say that the conscience is not a reliable provider of moral standards, I agree, it isn't, but it's all we've got. The jihadi, who's acts you say I am justified in describing as abominable, is acting out what he believes to be the wishes of God. He believes he is morally justified in his actions because it is God's will. So, I would say that following your own conscience is no more prone to lead you astray than following God.
You're the one that is missing the point now. Just because he believes that it is God's will doesn't mean that it is. If one misinterprets the will of God, then the difficulty is with the individual themselves.

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 3866
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Harbal » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:40 pm

Vendetta wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:31 pm

You're the one that is missing the point now.
No, I'm afraid it's definitely you.
Just because he believes that it is God's will doesn't mean that it is.
True, but that applies to IC and you also.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4208
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:43 pm

Harbal wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:00 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:54 pm
I can. At least, I can show beyond any reasonable doubt that his god is not my God, so he's following something that's not God.
He would say the same of you,
No doubt. He would say I was not submissive to Allah, and he'd be absolutely right.
how are the rest of us to know which one of you, if any, is right.
To know who the real "Harbal" is, I'd have to know you. If I didn't, I couldn't say. That's why an Atheist or agnostic can't easily detect the truth...but the difference, he can see if he just looks. One religion says, "Love your enemies, and do good to those who mistreat you." The other says, "Kill the idolaters, wherever you find them."

Now, if you don't know which is the will of God, then you won't know which is right. But you'll still know that both are not right; either one is right, or both are wrong...but because of the contradictions between them, you'll know both can't be equally right.

If there's a God, which does your conscience tell you He says? Why not start with that question? It's not enough, I know; but since conscience is important to you, why not use it here, just to get a first-stage intuition? Which do you find the more morally-admirable instruction?
It kind of makes me think that I'm probably better off without a God, I mean, there are so many to choose from, it's very confusing.
I don't think it's nearly so hard as all that, actually.

I'd just say, Listen to what they say, and decide which voice you think it speaking something worth hearing. I think you'll know. Then go with it only as long as it continues to speak truth to you.

You see, while followers of Allah believe in forcible submission, a Christian can't. That's because only belief is the basis of relationship with God; and believe cannot be forced (just as Locke pointed out), or it's not real belief at all. Ultimately, the question is not "What do you believe about God," but "Whom do you believe God is," and "Do you trust Him?" Those are personal questions, and cannot be forced for anyone.

davidm
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by davidm » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:43 pm
That's because only belief is the basis of relationship with God; and believe cannot be forced (just as Locke pointed out), or it's not real belief at all.
So, belief cannot be forced. I agree. So why does your god throw people into a lake of fire for eternity for not believing he exists? As I pointed out, and as here you apparently agree, beliefs cannot be forced -- I.e., one cannot choose to believe something; one just does believe or doesn't.

Hell, even Pascal recognized this.

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Belinda » Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:00 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
A society is a bunch of people.
I don't know the expression "a bunch of people". If you mean an aggregate of people then you are quite wrong. A society is an aggregate of people who are organised together for a significant duration.

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 3866
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Harbal » Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:11 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:43 pm

To know who the real "Harbal" is, I'd have to know you.
Harbal, like God, is a fictitious character. Harbal isn't feasible in the real World and neither is God.
That's why an Atheist or agnostic can't easily detect the truth...
Well I would say that an atheist knows at least one truth.
One religion says, "Love your enemies, and do good to those who mistreat you." The other says, "Kill the idolaters, wherever you find them."
So once we accept there is a god, it automatically follows that it's a "good" god?
If there's a God, which does your conscience tell you He says? Why not start with that question? / but since conscience is important to you, why not use it here, just to get a first-stage intuition? Which do you find the more morally-admirable instruction?
So if my conscience leads me to belief in your God its judgement is sound but the rest of the time it's unreliable?
I'd just say, Listen to what they say, and decide which voice you think it speaking something worth hearing.
You mean decide what I would prefer to believe and then just believe it?

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4208
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:00 pm

Belinda wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:00 pm
I don't know the expression "a bunch of people". If you mean an aggregate of people then you are quite wrong. A society is an aggregate of people who are organised together for a significant duration.
Yes? That also describes a "cult," an "army," and every nation ever conceived. It's hard to imagine that some magic happens when they form a big group, whatever their purpose is. In any case, if there's something more "moral" about what they decide when they do so, the only way of knowing that would be by referring to something outside them, a standard beyond them -- that is, unless you believe these aggregations are morally infallible, and their very existence is sufficient self-justification.

Of course, that doesn't seem remotely plausible.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4208
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:09 pm

Harbal wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:11 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:43 pm

To know who the real "Harbal" is, I'd have to know you.
Harbal, like God, is a fictitious character. Harbal isn't feasible in the real World and neither is God.
Of course he's a fictitious character. But I don't have another name for you, so it will have to do, won't it?
That's why an Atheist or agnostic can't easily detect the truth...
Well I would say that an atheist knows at least one truth.
He would need a means to show it to be the truth...which obviously, he does not have. Of course, he could avoid that by claiming his antipathy to the concept of God is merely irrational, but most of them seem to want to say they're rational. However, they never have any reasons at all...hardly the hallmark of a rational judgment.
One religion says, "Love your enemies, and do good to those who mistreat you." The other says, "Kill the idolaters, wherever you find them."
So once we accept there is a god, it automatically follows that it's a "good" god?
That's the important question: "Whom do you think God is?" But you're not alone for an answer: if God speaks, and if He has an interest in you understanding, then there's a prospect of finding out something. The Bible says, "He who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is the Rewarder of those who seek Him." That's not much faith, but it's the basic essential.

Of course, if you believe in gnostic "gods," then there's little prospect of you finding anything at all. But then, that's a dead end.
If there's a God, which does your conscience tell you He says? Why not start with that question? / but since conscience is important to you, why not use it here, just to get a first-stage intuition? Which do you find the more morally-admirable instruction?
So if my conscience leads me to belief in your God its judgement is sound but the rest of the time it's unreliable?
I didn't say that was going to be sufficient. I just said that since you attribute importance to conscience, perhaps you want to consult it. It's not the endgame, but it might give you enough incentive to investigate further.
I'd just say, Listen to what they say, and decide which voice you think it speaking something worth hearing.
You mean decide what I would prefer to believe and then just believe it?
No. I mean decide which sounds like what you understand as moral, and judge whether it's worthy of investigation...not that you "just believe it." It's just the start, not the end of the trail.

Dubious
Posts: 1612
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: What Is The Meaning Of Life?

Post by Dubious » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:14 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Sun Sep 24, 2017 10:30 pm
I have not denigrated Nietzsche. I've disagreed with some of what he says, but made common cause with him where possible. But had I denigrated him, it would not make a shred of difference to the main point: a point which you seem to throw convulsions in attempting to avoid.
Your denigrations of Nietzsche go beyond anything constructive you have to say mostly due to intentional misrepresentation. You're the grand distortionist as certain as you would be the Grand Inquisitor had you lived in the Middle Ages. As for the point I’m supposedly trying to avoid, I don’t know what that is. What I do know is that only God and theists can create something out of nothing.
Atheism rationalizes amorality, and fails to rationalize any meaning to life.
Atheism, due to its obvious lack of belief in theistic mysticisms and assumptions, is forced to rationalize that being one of its signature functions. It even rationalizes whether something is moral, amoral or positively immoral. This includes any attempt to rinse out a meaning as to life’s meaning for those who sincerely desire such. Theism otoh, still strives to cling to its long overhauled and thoroughly supplanted views not unlike those consistently recurring movie scenes where the hero or villain desperately clutches to the edge of a cliff with only his fingers.
I think Nietzsche knew it did, and was courageous enough to say so; but you think if he didn't, or if maybe you imagine he was too scared to say so, it wouldn't matter one iota.
Nietzsche afraid to say…!! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Prove it wrong.
This constant refrain of yours – contrary to anything atheistically or even theistically rational – reminds me of Trumps incessant “BELIEVE ME” codas to every thought he wishes to emphasize! It's the cheapest expression there is used as a default or temporary placeholder by those (who are many) who can't manage their own arguments.

Will you ever learn to forgo your incredibly stupid "PROOF" solicitations!? The very subject is impervious to proof which no logic can ever mandate! Amazing you still can’t figure that out and yet you're constantly on the alert to see if you can latch on to some kind of contradiction in others!

No question! What Trump is to politics you are to theism.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest