How to be good without god.

[Lacewing]

I think it's highly likely thought that humans came up with the idea of an afterlife as a way of trying to cope with the awful feeling of grief.

Yes... it seems that humans have come up with all kinds of ideas to attempt to cope with whatever they don't know how to cope with otherwise. If we don't understand, or are fearful, or angry, or hateful... it's either because of someone else, or we assure ourselves that we'll understand and be forgiven LATER (if that's our belief system). Neither of those really seem to grasp responsibility or empowerment. They just sort of flop around pissed off and/or hopeful of something else. And yet, isn't it highly likely that there's much more clarity that we're just not seeing... which might CHANGE EVERYTHING? Are we really so willing to accept that what we see is all there is? Does our denial of there being more, keep us from seeing it? We fight to preserve what we know... and then that's all we "know".

[Skip]

Do religious people grieve to a lesser degree than non-believers? It seems to me that would logically be the case, given that they believe their loved ones are still around, forever, and that they will eventually see them again.

Actually, yes. But you have to subtract from the classification "religious" the 75% or so who identify themselves as members of a particular denomination but are really just going through the motions, and another 15-20% who either have grave undeclared doubt or have been cherry-picking their sacred narrative. The 5-10% true believers do get a great deal of comfort from their faith, especially in grief and loss, and particularly because of the hope of reunion in the afterlife.

I think it's highly likely thought that humans came up with the idea of an afterlife as a way of trying to cope with the awful feeling of grief.

I would add a large - I mean quite large - component of ego. Or, if you want to be kind, self-awareness. A crow mourns her mate; a dog mourns her dead puppy, in very much the same way as a gorilla or a human. They go through the same stages (though in a shorter time - Of course, humans in physically stressed circumstances must also abbreviate their grieving process) from denial to resignation - even the pleading, if they have a trusted human to appeal to.
Where we differ is that they cannot (AFIK) imagine their own absence from the world, while we can, but refuse to. We can imagine our life without this or that important other; even while we protest how we 'couldn't go on' without them, our practical brain is already mapping out life after her or him. And we can picture, envision, depict, prefigure, plot and dramatically enact our own death, but even while we do so, the observing brain continues the story past the death-bed scene: when everything should have gone dark, it keeps on watching the mourners or going toward the light. Humans would rather believe in anything than their own non-being.

[Hobbes' Choice]

I have a question. It's not really relevant to the thread, but no one ever comments on my threads.
Do religious people grieve to a lesser degree than non-believers? It seems to me that would logically be the case, given that they believe their loved ones are still around, forever, and that they will eventually see them again.

You need to see an Irish Wake.

I'd not base the whole of Christianity on it, but they certainly have a positive attitude to send off their loved ones. I'd be willing to bet that this sort of celebration of a person's life pre-dates Christianity.

[Obvious Leo]

I have a question. It's not really relevant to the thread, but no one ever comments on my threads.
Do religious people grieve to a lesser degree than non-believers? It seems to me that would logically be the case, given that they believe their loved ones are still around, forever, and that they will eventually see them again.

This is a very interesting question and one I reckon I can answer. One of the disadvantages of getting older is that you finish up going to a lot of funerals. For many years I've noticed that it's the believers who always appear to be the most grief-stricken which by rights shouldn't make any sense. The non-believers are generally more interested in getting the formalities over with and on to the free food and booze so they can start telling a pack of lies about what a great bloke old Joe was. On the other hand the believers are all about the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Funerals are not for the dead but for the living and they can tell us a lot about people.

You're right that on the face of it this reversal of logic shouldn't be the case but it doesn't take a very deep examination of the facts to find out why this is so. The default mind-set of a believer from the cradle to the grave is DOUBT and most of them are continuously tormented by it so to believers death is most terrifying of all possible prospects. I really do pity them, but I'll happily drink their booze after they cark it.

[SpheresOfBalance]

As the bible itself says: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." Matthew 7:12
No list of laws can cover every conceivable moral situation, therefore morality is subject to an individual's discretion in some instances, at the very least. In other words: artisticsolution is right and Immanuel Can is wrong. (Consequentialism craps on deontology, if you want to get technical.)

Oh but one can. I took 'The golden rule,' changed it to deal with the problem some philosophers had noted, and a couple that I found, changed it's name to, 'The fundamental social axiom,' and it goes like this:

"Treat others as you would have others treat you, to the extent, that all parties knowingly agree at the time."

Take that, couple it with the old polygraph, as well as the new FMRI, and viola, one rule/law does it all.

[Hobbes' Choice]

I have a question. It's not really relevant to the thread, but no one ever comments on my threads.
Do religious people grieve to a lesser degree than non-believers? It seems to me that would logically be the case, given that they believe their loved ones are still around, forever, and that they will eventually see them again.

This is a very interesting question and one I reckon I can answer. One of the disadvantages of getting older is that you finish up going to a lot of funerals. For many years I've noticed that it's the believers who always appear to be the most grief-stricken which by rights shouldn't make any sense. The non-believers are generally more interested in getting the formalities over with and on to the free food and booze so they can start telling a pack of lies about what a great bloke old Joe was. On the other hand the believers are all about the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Funerals are not for the dead but for the living and they can tell us a lot about people.

You're right that on the face of it this reversal of logic shouldn't be the case but it doesn't take a very deep examination of the facts to find out why this is so. The default mind-set of a believer from the cradle to the grave is DOUBT and most of them are continuously tormented by it so to believers death is most terrifying of all possible prospects. I really do pity them, but I'll happily drink their booze after they cark it.

I don't think it makes much difference. If you were close to the dead then you mourn. If not you suffer the funeral.
If you are Irish you have a piss up regardless.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I have a question. It's not really relevant to the thread, but no one ever comments on my threads.
Do religious people grieve to a lesser degree than non-believers? It seems to me that would logically be the case, given that they believe their loved ones are still around, forever, and that they will eventually see them again.

This is a very interesting question and one I reckon I can answer. One of the disadvantages of getting older is that you finish up going to a lot of funerals. For many years I've noticed that it's the believers who always appear to be the most grief-stricken which by rights shouldn't make any sense. The non-believers are generally more interested in getting the formalities over with and on to the free food and booze so they can start telling a pack of lies about what a great bloke old Joe was. On the other hand the believers are all about the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Funerals are not for the dead but for the living and they can tell us a lot about people.

You're right that on the face of it this reversal of logic shouldn't be the case but it doesn't take a very deep examination of the facts to find out why this is so. The default mind-set of a believer from the cradle to the grave is DOUBT and most of them are continuously tormented by it so to believers death is most terrifying of all possible prospects. I really do pity them, but I'll happily drink their booze after they cark it.

I love your logic.

[Obvious Leo]

I'm not suggesting that non-believers don't mourn. I've merely observed that in general they don't seem to get themselves so internally torn apart by it. I'm only offering this as an anecdotal expression of my own experience and not as an empirically verified finding in the social sciences. I'm also aware of the fact that for every sweeping generalisation there are always plenty of notable exceptions.

Funerals without piss-ups are very rare in Australia and this is probably due to the huge cultural influence of the Irish dating back to the convict era. However this is not the main reason why I go to them. I go to other people's funerals just to obligate them to come to mine.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I'm not suggesting that non-believers don't mourn. I've merely observed that in general they don't seem to get themselves so internally torn apart by it. I'm only offering this as an anecdotal expression of my own experience and not as an empirically verified finding in the social sciences. I'm also aware of the fact that for every sweeping generalisation there are always plenty of notable exceptions.

Funerals without piss-ups are very rare in Australia and this is probably due to the huge cultural influence of the Irish dating back to the convict era. However this is not the main reason why I go to them. I go to other people's funerals just to obligate them to come to mine.

I wasn't being sarcastic. It all makes sense to me. Apparently there are 'funeral-sniffers'. People who read the death notices and go to every funeral just for the free booze and food.

[Obvious Leo]

I knew you weren't being sarcastic, mate. As it happens I HATE going to funerals and would avoid them at all costs if I possibly could. However I know a lot of people and I've known many of them for a very long time, as well as many of their family members. As I said, funerals are for the living and not for the dead and it's only for the sake of these family members that I bother to go at all. I know bloody well that old Joe couldn't give a shit for his own sake whether I went or not but I like to think that for the sake of his family he would not see it as an empty gesture. In any case not turning up for free food and grog would clash with the careful image I've cultivated for myself as a smart bloke.

[Lacewing]

I go to other people's funerals just to obligate them to come to mine.

How can they come to yours if they're dead?

[Obvious Leo]

I go to other people's funerals just to obligate them to come to mine.

How can they come to yours if they're dead?

Nice to see somebody's awake. Good morning Lacewing.

[Dubious]

I go to other people's funerals just to obligate them to come to mine.

...and hope it's not a HOT day when it's time to count your "friends"!

[Skip]

Of course, what you see people doing at funerals isn't necessarily an accurate reflection of what they're feeling.
Some people feel deeply and eschew public display - which may be cultural training or natural reticence or perhaps they are out of their accustomed milieu, among strangers and uncomfortable being too open. The most devout people are often from cultures and/or classes where overt display of emotion in specific social settings is not only normal but expected on an exaggerated scale. It's a cathartic exercise, shared by the supportive community: get it out of our system, sleep it off and go back to work. The more sophisticated, restrained, cerebral personality might look blasé at the funeral and tear himself up inside for the next six months.
I say might .
This is by no means an explanation of every observed behaviour; merely a possible interpretation of what we can't see.

[Obvious Leo]

It's a good point, Skip, and rather reminds me of a quaint practice which was common in Victorian England. One could hire professional mourners for a funeral whose sole task was to set up an impressive caterwauling to illustrate how much the deceased was loved. A curious career choice.