The Philosophies of a Meaningless Life

[Earl60861]

Really, it is sort of wrong the way Ma'am is trying to push you into a relationship.

Ma'am = Roxby



Am I missing something here?

Not that ma'am, Ma'am Hallington. I didn't feel like writing "Madam", even though it didn't save me any time writing. Yep, it was a stupid attempt at laziness.

It would be funny if Ma'am (Roxby) did try to do that to you. Well, it would be more creepy than funny, as she no longer holds power over you and has no obvious reason for wanting that for you anyway.

The German came by today (well, last year's German, Andy Nagle). Apparantly, he never left! It's either the saddest thing that I've seen or the stupidest (that he'd travel all this way just to say hi to people, then lie about "staying here the whole time").

[xiuxiu]

raison d 'etre = boysenberry pie

[mimisor]

dstf

[Artemis]

In a strange kind of way, everything is simultaneously meaningless and meaningful. It's like looking through a coloured church window, and one time it's night and another time it's day. Sometimes the patterns begin to emerge. We can see them vaguely and indirectly, but they're there, and they're real. Ultimately, everything matters. Even the most boring and mundane tasks have meaning. A dinner you prepare can express friendliness, joie de vivre, exuberance, a love of adventure, comfort, tradition, a connection with the past or a curiousity about the world outside. Or take housework. A beautiful room is just that, a beautiful room, nothing more - and nothing less. It won't bring on world peace, but it can bring a sense of harmony, order, beauty and serenity in an otherwise chaotic and ugly world. And that's not to be sniffed at. Similarly, clothes matter as well. They're a means of communication; messages in a complicated code people employ all the time. And the best way to reliably make the world a better place for a handful of people (not for long, but for an hour or so): learn how to be a good cook.

Very well said.

[Artemis]

"How is one to live a moral and compassionate existence when one is fully aware of the blood, the horror inherent in life, when one finds darkness not only in one's culture but within oneself? If there is a stage at which an individual life becomes truly adult, it must be when one grasps the irony in its unfolding and accepts responsibility for a life lived in the midst of such paradox. One must live in the middle of contradiction, because if all contradiction were eliminated at once life would collapse. There are simply no answers to some of the great pressing questions. You continue to live them out, making your life a worthy expression of leaning into the light."

from Arctic Dreams

[Scrummy]

In a strange kind of way, everything is simultaneously meaningless and meaningful. It's like looking through a coloured church window, and one time it's night and another time it's day. Sometimes the patterns begin to emerge. We can see them vaguely and indirectly, but they're there, and they're real. Ultimately, everything matters. Even the most boring and mundane tasks have meaning. A dinner you prepare can express friendliness, joie de vivre, exuberance, a love of adventure, comfort, tradition, a connection with the past or a curiousity about the world outside. Or take housework. A beautiful room is just that, a beautiful room, nothing more - and nothing less. It won't bring on world peace, but it can bring a sense of harmony, order, beauty and serenity in an otherwise chaotic and ugly world. And that's not to be sniffed at. Similarly, clothes matter as well. They're a means of communication; messages in a complicated code people employ all the time. And the best way to reliably make the world a better place for a handful of people (not for long, but for an hour or so): learn how to be a good cook.

Very well said.

I concur. That's a really nice way to look at things.

[discojoe]

Does anyone else here ever worry about the meaningless of life? I mean, why should I ever worry about getting laid or socializing or any of that other stuff that you're "supposed" to do if none of it matters anyway? Why should I want to live comfortably, living out my life in complete oblivion to my finite existence? Shouldn't I be making my mark on the world? Shouldn't I be trying to move mountains instead of what kind of clothes I should wear? Why was I put here, in this time, in this part of the world? It seems like I have a huge purpose, so do I really?

Your post touches on two different issues. The first is the question of the meaning of life. The second question is of the duration of human existence, or more precisely, the question of life after death.

Questioning the meaning of life is something everyone does. Some people do it once, are terrified of the implications, and repress the thoughts, barely ever allowing them to float back into conscious thought. These people seem to share a narrow perception. Think of a train versus a helicopter. There are others who obsess over this question out of a sense of fear, and maybe some pride. Then there are those who, for whatever reason, are at peace with life and their existence. Once you establish the general differences of each individual's idea of his own purpose, you have to set aside the main question of the meaning of life, and instead examine these different belief systems more closely.

If you were to ask a Daoist why he seems so calm, he would tell you that is the way of the Dao. He cannot explain his meaning scientifically, and maybe this individual couldn't justify it philosophically either, but I think you would find that this person is happier than most people you know. At the other end of the spectrum is the Atheist. If you know an Atheist who is a happy person, please show them to me, because I believe that they are all basically miserable, selfish people. I knew several of them in highschool, and all of them were angst-ridden, spiteful, pathetic people who I pitied. They believed that no deity existed because they hated to think of something being in any kind of control over them. They wanted to be their own gods.

Christians, (and here I refer to those who worship Christ) I believe, all make the same error: They mistake the physical image of Jesus with the lessons his existence made it possible for us to know. Jesus was a symbol, or icon, for a system of rules that are designed for each person to lead the happiest, best, life. The truth of his existence is largely irrelevant, because there are those who did not, and will never hear of him. The importance of Jesus as a person is actually very small. His life and death were meant to convey certain truths about God, which were true before he made them "known." It simply does not make sense that those who do not know of a Christian God must suffer hell. It is illogical and ridiculous.

This got me thinking. If someone who, say, lives alone in the desert, and has never heard of ANY religion, is to have a fair stake at living a happy life (and I believe he does, basically), then what in a bare existence could essentially translate into knowing God?

First knowing God, in my view, (not opinion) knowing God means following his purpose for you. This sounds cheesy, but it is really the only way to go about saying this. Essentially, what I mean is that in order to be truly happy, which is the purpose of Christianity, or "knowing God," you must follow the steps of Christianity, which is basically one giant step that is broken down into little bits to make it easier. Each and every one of us has a intrinsic moral code, with the possible exception of the mentally disfunctional. Yes, all of us. When this point is brought up, people try so hard to fight it. They use their clever tactics of cynicism, sarcasm, or sardonism to lessen the point and turn it into something that may be laughed at, but it remains. When a person has done something wrong, it is obvious to him, and to everyone else (for examples of "something wrong," see: stealing from poor people, rape, murder, greed). In fact, the problem in today's political field is that everyone sees the all the bad things that others are doing, and they can't see this as being their fault, so they point fingers. Both republicans AND democrats both hide evils within themselves, in both their mentalities, and the individuals in the parties. I don't want to far into the question of a moral code, because it basically boils down to someone either wanting to suck it up and become a better person, or fight anything that prevents them from feeling like they can do whatever they want.

By following this moral code, you essentially come to know God, and if you are the man living alone in the desert, then this may happen without realizing it. If you have no knowledge of God, or are unable to convince yourself that he exists, then realize that your happiness does not necessarily depend on a direct idea of a divine creator who will preserve your existence after life has ended. A flaw in this theory of course, is that those people who live in isolation probably will not have the idea to question their own existence. They simply "are."

If you absolutely *must* have some rational answer, think about this: why? Why do you insist on that proof? That fear of no God is pointless. He either exists or does not. If he does then your life is a short little speck, and tiny atom of the peel of an onion. Once that peel is pulled away and a new layer of the universe revealed to you, you will forget about your previous fears an insecurities, probably after having a good laugh. There is no point in being scared, because rationally, you have nothing to be scared of, and lots to be happy about.

There is a deep sense of good, and meaning, in each and every human. I'm willing to make a huge bet that someone put that there, and that life is some sort of test, and that when all is said and done, the only thing that matters is how closely we were able to follow what we knew was right. This may seem stupid to you, and it might even make some of you laugh out loud, but it's what I believe to be true, and it's my take on the world. This is just a picture I painted for myself when I was confronted with the question of my own purpose.

And the point of life? The point of the test? I don't know. Perhaps it's something along the lines of God wanting to see how far people will go to "know" him if they're not sure he's even there. Maybe. I don't know.

Wow, I typed a lot, lol.

[MysticSonic]

If only I could submit so easily to a clearly-cut meaning of life; it seems the more I attempt to establish such a meaning, a meaning which "can be comprehended and held non-experientially," the further I am set back in said task. It seems to me that different people possess different predispositions to particular beliefs and therein lies key issue: whose intuitions are correct? Is the Abrahamic sort of faith correct, or are more non-linear spiritualities such as Buddhism and Taoism? Perhaps my doubt is another attribute on the scale of affirmance of meaning and rejection of it, another predisposition.

The biggest stumbling block on my way to establishing a firm belief in the meaningfullness of my life is that I neccessitate, for some reason or another, that it be an empirical reason for me believing as such, and thus I am doomed to failure in the matter, and hence must simply "assume" my worthfullness.

[discojoe]

If only I could submit so easily to a clearly-cut meaning of life; it seems the more I attempt to establish such a meaning, a meaning which "can be comprehended and held non-experientially," the further I am set back in said task. It seems to me that different people possess different predispositions to particular beliefs and therein lies key issue: whose intuitions are correct? Is the Abrahamic sort of faith correct, or are more non-linear spiritualities such as Buddhism and Taoism? Perhaps my doubt is another attribute on the scale of affirmance of meaning and rejection of it, another predisposition.

The biggest stumbling block on my way to establishing a firm belief in the meaningfullness of my life is that I neccessitate, for some reason or another, that it be an empirical reason for me believing as such, and thus I am doomed to failure in the matter, and hence must simply "assume" my worthfullness.

Maybe, just maybe, the key to this mystery is each person confronting his or her personal weaknesess. Maybe we can't be happy at all until we do. So maybe even more introspection is require, and you really need to face your demons.

[schrödinger's cat]

@discojoe: That's a nice thought. Making this the aim of one's life would be a noble thing to do. I'm sad, though, whenever I think of how many people want to get ahead and find that all they can do is jog on the spot. So, all in all, I'm not sure. - Perhaps I'm not ambitious enough.

@Baby + Artemis: Thanks! Oh, I LOVE praise.

[Cone]

I won't accept any answers to the meaning of life, because logically, there are none, or rather, that purpose is unknowable. It's great to have a philosophy that makes you happy, but that just hides the fact of the null meaning of this world.

To make it simple, I see happiness as finding meaning inside this life, not outside of it. But then that makes me never want to die. Why would I ever want to leave a meaningful world?

[Earl60861]

You'll leave Cone, because there's plenty of people who want to see you go first

In a more serious reply:

Discojoe touched on some very important issues that lead to finding your place in your "meaningless life".

Yes, a lot of athiests are depressed and sad people. It seems that ultimately, a belief in something greater than ourselves is necessary. I suppose this branches from the fact that it reduces the stress on us. If something's wrong with your life, "God will fix it". If you're a Daoist, you'd say something like "suffering is of mortal concern, not immortal", or whatnot. Without religion, people often are confused and angry, as they view the world as united against them. As such, these people often live unhappy and sad lives.

Also, the basis of all religion is that the just will be rewarded and that the evil will be punished. Without this basis, people feel like there is no purpose to their lives. People have a universal system of justice, whether we realize it or not, so we feel that eventually all people must be punished.

Of course, people can argue that since hell is the place for the evil, why wouldn't they consider it their own paradise? I suppose they might, as it would host a lot of their fun and enjoyment. Thus, if you think of it this way, all people go to some sort of paradise, and as such, one shouldn't worry about their immortal soul as much as they do.

However, if you think along these lines, people will do as they please, and anarchy will reign. Actually, this thought was brought up in the basis of olden-style Christianity, in what could be called the first Vatican Counsel (well, I think they held it in Rome, but since VC didn't exist back then, it's close enough an analogy). Around 300 AD, Christian scholars debated what would be put into the first version of the Bible (which they considered the final version, but we know better). In this Counsel (I know I'm spelling it wrong), they debated whether to include a book know as the "Book of Daniel" (or something like this).

In the BoD, Christ is seen as power-hungary in his young life, with evil qualities. In effect, I'd suppose this is true, as any human who finds out they are God, would be power-hungary, until they came to terms with it. Christ indeed was human, so I'd say this may be true (such nice blasphemy I spread in this). Afterwards, however, before he is crucified, Christ tells Peter that there is no real hell. It is an idea that God thought of to scare people into living a just life, as ancient peoples would be more willing to do something by fear than anything else. Thus, he tells Peter that the evil will just go to a form of purgatory, and at the end of time all will be resurrected into heaven. If the evil are still evil, they will be purged of their evil so that they may enter.

Yes, the BoD didn't become part of the Bible, as the beginning of it was something of dubious accord, as it conflicted with a lot of Christ's future teachings. As such, only few Christian scholars know of this, and I learned of it through a nice History Channel documentary on it. Whether it is true or not, it is a relief to those who want to believe, but know that in doing so, they are condemning themselves to eternal damnnation.

Anyway, the prospect of religion is that people want to follow a basic set of morals, yet want something to hide behind in case someone hates them. It is far easier to hate the religion than it is to hate the person (no idea why, people hate each other all the time). If something fails, just blame the Jews, if your holidays weren't the best, blame the Christians. Of course, this leads to elitism, which no one likes. When Lord Bloggington (I enjoy writing such creative names for my blog. I should stop thinking about it, people in MOUS are wondering what I'm laughing at) comes back up, you can bet I'll have more than my share of anti-elitism posts. I don't use it for simple "diary entries" like some people do (although I might if I can't think of a topic for the day). Basically, similar to what I write here will be written there: well-thought out, mostly intelligent and meaningful information exchanges. Yep, that was a shameless attempt to sell my blog, whenever it comes back up (stupid sys admin at spymac, "oh, we tried to get it up, but we can't get the code to interface". If they would have written the code to not "revolutionize the world", then maybe it'd work better. They can roll out the big ideas in the next release, using 4 (the current version) as a stepping stone. At least if htey were intelligent they would).

Anyway, there isn't much to actually write here to further the topic. Discojoe pretty much touched on a lot of things that made a lot of sense. If he wrote more of that, I might actually begin thinking about my ways of thinking. Until then, I'll just randomly wonder about things.

Also, I think he touched on the idea that a lot of traditionalists don't like to think about the world around them. I actually think I am otherwise. Often I'll spend hours at night thinking about what happened during the day and how it applies to the future. Sometimes I'll conclude that action is necessitated in the coming day, and prepare for it, other times I'll conclude that the instance was of no concern for me. It is really simple to figure out whether I've been thinking (well, sometimes it borders on meditation ) or not recently, as I'll lash out at people and other things. Perhaps this draws from the fact that such meditation calms me and allows me to comprehend that which occurs around me.

Once, Mr. Cone asked me how I'm so calm. He attempted to insult my honor and I just sat there. He didn't know it, but I was often thinking of the myraid ways he compromises himself daily. Then, I once laughed at the thought, provoking him to query. I then replied something to the effect of "Mr. Cone, what occurs to me is not of your concern", which I suppose he took as "Mr. Cone, stfu", because he did. Perhaps it threw him into deep thought about the occurances around him. I just know one thing, since then, Mr Cone has thought of the world more as a calculated effort than of anything else (at least in my perception of events).

Truely, the world may very well be calculated. It has been theorized that they can predict our individual reactions to things based on previous data. Further, they can predict what we'll be doing on any given day, based on our general habits. If such mathmatics and psychology is merged, it will instantly become the greatest and the worst thing ever (it just occured to me how closely this resembles the "Psychohistory" that Isaac Asimov created in his "Foundation" series. Now, that's scary).

Anyway, if you view the world as a series of events that can often be precalculated, you are often happier in some respects, if you have time that is. Viewing the world as a giant chess game, one can determine the proper reaction to certain events. Although I've never done it, I suppose you could predetermine your results to a myriad events. If I'd use it for anything, it would be to begin great socilization efforts in the manner of Mr. Cone's quest. It would be very beneficial in that area, as one could actively attempt to stop all regrettable actions. However, in the manner of Mr. Cone's quest, one could argue that the lady would never encounter the true you, and that wouldn't be right to her or to anybody.

In the end, it all deals with your own beliefs and how you view the world. Hopefully you've walked away from this more knowledgable and just a little bit more prepared for your own little "Philosophy for the meaningless life"

[Scrummy]

Discojoe touched on some very important issues that lead to finding your place in your "meaningless life".

I don't think Cone ever said life was "meaningless" per se - but that, if there is a meaning outside the context of what is known to us in this world, it isn't as relevant as the here and now.

Yes, a lot of athiests are depressed and sad people. It seems that ultimately, a belief in something greater than ourselves is necessary.

It isn't so much necessary as convenient... as you proved below:

it reduces the stress on us. If something's wrong with your life, "God will fix it".

a Daoist, you'd say something like "suffering is of mortal concern, not immortal", or whatnot.

Actually, I don't think a Taoist would say that. A Buddhist might, but not a Taoist. Taoism is a unique sysem of beliefs in that under such a system, past, present, and future are one and the same. Tao really is the void from which everything emerges and retreats <- like thought itself: a thought emerges out of void (Tao), then exists for a blip of time (Tao manifest), then retreats into nothing (Tao again). And as soon as that one is gone, another thought emerges. It's a cyclical process, and time is irrelevant. There is a beautiful sense of unity that emerges from the understand that one is what one always has been and forever will be.

Also, the basis of all religion is that the just will be rewarded and that the evil will be punished. Without this basis, people feel like there is no purpose to their lives. People have a universal system of justice, whether we realize it or not, so we feel that eventually all people must be punished.

True, and it is quite interesting to note that times of great oppression often precipitate times of great religious fervor; ie. the Black Baptist movement following "that peculiar institution" - slavery. This speaks volumes about the very human inclination for recompense and that which is missing in this life. I addressed this in my very first post on the forum, actually... I'll have to go and find that thread again.

[Earl60861]

I'm not a scholar of Daoism, so I hope you'll forgive me. I know little to nothing about it. To top it all of, my teacher was Mr. Randy Ruddeck himself (a very important person around these parts ), so I didn't learn much of anything. In fact, all we had to know about Daoism for my World History test was that it was a religion practiced by some of the Oriental peoples. Yes, that does harken that he is ignorant, however he just copies the papers given to him. So, blame the school board for breeding ignorance in its students.

I shall edit my previous reply and continue on with my ideas (if I can remember them). So, for those that have replied or are currently replying, read back to my other post, as I'll have added a few more pages to it.

One final thing, discojoe. Don't be ashamed to "write a lot", if you have something to share, share it. Even if your posts are mostly ramblings, you could still have some insight in that. If not, someone could be reminded of something and share it on here. In short, random rambling is good.

[Cone]

Yes, a lot of athiests are depressed and sad people. It seems that ultimately, a belief in something greater than ourselves is necessary. I suppose this branches from the fact that it reduces the stress on us. If something's wrong with your life, "God will fix it". If you're a Daoist, you'd say something like "suffering is of mortal concern, not immortal", or whatnot. Without religion, people often are confused and angry, as they view the world as united against them. As such, these people often live unhappy and sad lives.

I will say it right out: I am a complete atheist. I don't make any compromises to whether there is a God or not.

Now get this: Godful people use God as a partial rationalizer of their own lives. Like you said, if something goes wrong, then all will be fine, because "God's here." However, what does a Godless existentialist who believes he is responsible for his own life do? He can mope around like most people do, but he can also realize that he must take action for his own life. These people have great potential to be super-achievers, because they don't rationalize their weaknesses AND they won't accept their current position in life. Now we have another problem: is it better to lead a life of achievement, or is it better to be content with what you have and lead a life of internal richness?

[MysticSonic]

"Now we have another problem: is it better to lead a life of achievement, or is it better to be content with what you have and lead a life of internal richness?"

As an atheist, you should very well know that the only possible answer to that question is a subjective one, a matter of personal preference.

I myself favor the latter.

[Cone]

As an atheist, you should very well know that the only possible answer to that question is a subjective one, a matter of personal preference.

Yeah, I know. I should really learn to state the rhetorical properties of my questions.

I myself prefer the former, as I was taught to be an overachiever and that since my life is meaningless, I should focus my energy on external goals, not internal ones.

[MysticSonic]

Goals are inherently internal.

Sorry.

Besides, why should I bother worrying about my external activities when I can leave a rich, content life? What would be the purpose of doing so when there is one so much more preferable before me?

[discojoe]

Cone, you are right; people use God as a crutch for things that I believe God meant for us to use our own intelligence to fix. Of course, each person's individual responsibility depends mainly on his level of intelligence, so we can't expect every person to rise up and confront themselves in quite the same way. A psychologist may do so by self-hypnosis, whereas a factory worker may do so by being more charitable, or loving.

Cone, in the last part of your post I believe you have pointed out the difference between "having" and "being." This dichotomy was pioneered by Erich Fromm in his book, "To Have Or To Be?" Havers are people who are always out to "get things," they view the world as a catalogue, and their life goal seems to be to hoard as many "things" away as they can. To understand Be-ers, here in an analogy Fromm himself used:

In a classroom filled with Having and Being types, the Having types will be the ones most likely to be taking notes. They view the class as a product they purchased, and they want to get their money's worth by hoarding the information. The Be-ers, on the other hand, are primarily interested in in the learning aspect. They are much more likely to engage themselves in the classroom, to challenge the professor. This behavior offends the Havers, because they feel as if the product the purchased (via scholorships, wasting time in highschool, etc.) is being threatened. They are not welcoming to anything which threatens their accumulated of "things."

What causes Having? Many things. Fear of death, fear of nonsimplicity, fear of inferiority or lack of control. Essentially, this dichotomy is materialism versus spiritualism. Don't mistake materialists who pretend to be spiritual for anything other then what they are.

[Cone]

Goals are inherently internal.

Oh. Well then what I should really say is that I'm trying to achieve objective values, like solving the mystery of human nature or becoming a great classical pianist. I can't do something that won't bring me some sort of external credit. I think this has alot to do with being INTp, but I'm not entirely sure. I think it may deal with that INTps don't know what their own abilities are, so they constantly have to act to get them proven by others. Thus, the extremely competitive attitude of INTps arises.

[Cone]

Cone, in the last part of your post I believe you have pointed out the difference between "having" and "being." This dichotomy was pioneered by Erich Fromm in his book, "To Have Or To Be?" Havers are people who are always out to "get things," they view the world as a catalogue, and their life goal seems to be to hoard as many "things" away as they can. To understand Be-ers, here in an analogy Fromm himself used:

No, that's not really what I meant. What I meant is that there are those who seek to prove themselves externally, i.e. over-achievers and the like. Then there are those that seek an acceptance of themselves internally. These are the more spiritual types. Each one is as valuable as the other.

As for Erich Fromm's writings, here we have embodied in it those self-righteous attitudes of which I absolutely despise, that which so many philosophers often succumb to. Sorry, but that's what I think.

[Cone]

Well, yes, but hey, why have an idea if you can't be praised for it?

[Cone]

Do I now? I can believe one thing, but act out of another.

[Earl60861]

Do I now? I can believe one thing, but act out of another.

Well, that explains why you spent so long of you "athiestic" life in a church. You played organ for your church, frequently volunteered, etc. Sure, this is part of "finding yourself", but as I'm sort of required to (Vatican II and all that), "what went wrong?". There, I asked, I'm not going down, yay! Answer it if you want.

Cone has always been the classic overachiever. I often joked about it to him, and he took it in stride. Being an overachiever is nothing to be ashamed of, as you're destined for genius by doing so. It all depends on how much you want to become great and memorable.

Technically, I'm an overachiever, by being Mr. Cone's underling for a good 6 months. Still, it doesn't bother me. I figure others can do as they please, I'll do my work and I'll do it well. If others wish to condemn themselves to failure, so be it, underachievers. For those that lay in the middle: I apologize for seemingly grouping you in with the underachievers.

Also, Mr. Cone. I accept my position in life. Regardless of what it is, I shall always strive to do so. It is by losing contact with reality that we destroy ourselves. So long as you know who you are and what you're doing, believe as you will. If you'll note, I'm a "super-achiever", having bested you in a good portion of tasks that you seemingly excelled in.

Also, chess club starts in two weeks, so whenever you decide to drop by, we'll play

[Cone]

Sure, this is part of "finding yourself", but as I'm sort of required to (Vatican II and all that), "what went wrong?".

I will answer your question, because really, I've been waiting for someone in life to ask me this.

My own religious convictions almost completely coincided with my mother's, although we developed independent of each other. We struggled over the same problems, came up with the same conclusions, and ultimately discarded God at around the same time. I believe that she had a great influence on my thinking in every aspect, not just limited to religious ideas. I would often overhear her in heated debates with her friends, and I listened attentively like any good student. If I have anyone to thank for me being where I am today, it is her.

As an elementary school student, I started out a forced Christian, being that my mother thought it was a good idea to go to church every Sunday. She went to the sanctuary for church, and I went to Sunday school. As her interest in Christianity increased, she started attending classes given by some of the church patrons, including the pastor. A few years later, she began to question the faith, so she started studying religious supplement books and the like. After tons of writing, debating, and an exorcism of God, she's into Wicca now. My religious strife, on the other hand, was much more internal and private.

I exorcised God at around age 14. I felt that I really didn't need an extra abstraction that I couldn't explain hanging above my head. If happiness is faith in God, then my own happiness is faith in the world around me. I don't believe in God; I believe in quarks, leptons, magnetic forces, and reciprocal determinism. It was in these scientific endeavors that I saw real beauty. One can go outside on a cool, fall day and feel it in the air. I see the beauty of nature in the colors of its leaves, the songs of the birds, and in the warmth of the sun. And what was really the most beautiful thing of all is that I could explain all of this, devoid of any disembodied spirits or concepts of free will. I am now truly free in terms of thought. I didn't give up God; God just became effectively irrelevant. I didn't need him anymore, and now, there is no one on this earth who can convert me back. It's logically impossible.

There's more to it, I think, but I'm sure you get it.

[Cone]

Also, chess club starts in two weeks, so whenever you decide to drop by, we'll play

I'll be around, you can guarantee it.

[Joy]

k.

[MysticSonic]

Joy, I'd really rather have you not pull shit out of your ass like that, there's many _very_ intelligent people whom have never questioned, as far as I'm aware of, the meaningfulness of their existence; Isaac Newton is a fine example.

[Cone]

Did I miss something?

[MysticSonic]

Not really.

[Cone]

As forward as you were, I'd say it was much more than "not really."

But I get it; I won't stick my nose where it doesn't belong.

[Earl60861]

Sure, this is part of "finding yourself", but as I'm sort of required to (Vatican II and all that), "what went wrong?".

I will answer your question, because really, I've been waiting for someone in life to ask me this.

My own religious convictions almost completely coincided with my mother's, although we developed independent of each other. We struggled over the same problems, came up with the same conclusions, and ultimately discarded God at around the same time. I believe that she had a great influence on my thinking in every aspect, not just limited to religious ideas. I would often overhear her in heated debates with her friends, and I listened attentively like any good student. If I have anyone to thank for me being where I am today, it is her.

As an elementary school student, I started out a forced Christian, being that my mother thought it was a good idea to go to church every Sunday. She went to the sanctuary for church, and I went to Sunday school. As her interest in Christianity increased, she started attending classes given by some of the church patrons, including the pastor. A few years later, she began to question the faith, so she started studying religious supplement books and the like. After tons of writing, debating, and an exorcism of God, she's into Wicca now. My religious strife, on the other hand, was much more internal and private.

I exorcised God at around age 14. I felt that I really didn't need an extra abstraction that I couldn't explain hanging above my head. If happiness is faith in God, then my own happiness is faith in the world around me. I don't believe in God; I believe in quarks, leptons, magnetic forces, and reciprocal determinism. It was in these scientific endeavors that I saw real beauty. One can go outside on a cool, fall day and feel it in the air. I see the beauty of nature in the colors of its leaves, the songs of the birds, and in the warmth of the sun. And what was really the most beautiful thing of all is that I could explain all of this, devoid of any disembodied spirits or concepts of free will. I am now truly free in terms of thought. I didn't give up God; God just became effectively irrelevant. I didn't need him anymore, and now, there is no one on this earth who can convert me back. It's logically impossible.

There's more to it, I think, but I'm sure you get it.

Well then, Mr Cone, you've confirmed both my worst fears and my greatest hopes for you.

Worst fears:

I had feared that you sort of were dragged into it by a parental being. It doesn't surprise me who it is, either. What most likely happened is some sort of tragedy she had, and it scarred her for life. She decided to replace it with religion, and it failed, so she gave up on religion. The debates were just her reasoning with both herself and God Himself why she won't believe in Him any longer. You overheard what was really her own private conversation (bad Mr Cone! Evesdropping isn't polite!), and the other person wasn't the visitor in the house (although she was physically talking to that person). As such, you possibly misread the occurances, and thought that she was disagreeing because of some fundamental difficulty she had with religion.

The Wiccanism would really be along the lines of finding her place. After having disowned what she placed so much stock in, she needed something that would fulfill her desires to be part of something greater, yet not part of something that placed demands on her. Actually, Wiccanism is mostly a pretty spiffy religion, I'd have to say. It isn't the stereotypical "cauldron singing" and all that that people with small minds think it is. It's the harmoneous balance of man and earth, the deep respect of mother nature at a spiritual level. It's an admirable religion, as it functions with no hierarchy and has deep basis in physics (the mysticism surrounds physics, making it a very logical religion).

Also, you cannot be exorcised from God (note you still capitalize the G, Mr Cone), you can only turn away from Him. As such, any ritual you had performed was unecessary and potentially damaging to your psyche (I have a feeling Ma'am H. pushed you into the exorcism part).

Yes, I realize Madam Hallington is mostly reading this, both infuriated and happy that I'm taking strides to be more accepting of deviation.

Greatest hopes:

Mr. Cone has also realized my greatest hopes for him. He has found something that he understands and believes, something I thought was near impossible for some time (shows how much I know of Coneington). Unlike Mr Wizard, you've actually debated among yourself what you believe in (Mr. Wizard is currently at Lebanon Bible College, btw) and have found something you believe in. So long as this doesn't depress you or make you insane or homicidal, enjoy it.

Also, the brand of athiesm you've chosen is actually more like "Cosmic athiesm" (or something similarly named), where they believe not in dieities, but in the order of the universe. Further, in what you have found, you've no really rejected Him, but replaced the symbol. Instead of an omnipotent being, you believe in physical forces and nature. The same feeling Christians get when walking in a park is comparable to the feeling you receive (if I am correct), so it is really a matter of naming conventions.

All that can really be asked of people is to challenge their beliefs. Actually, its the newest thing in Catholicism, because we're realizing that far too many of us are guilty of sloth and misunderstanding. Instead of believing, a lot of them simply are physically presant and perform physical functions, deriving no actuall enjoyment or sense of purpose out of it. Being that this will ruin your eternal soul, JP II ordered a few years ago that they initiate a program to support Catholics who'd like to have a deeper understanding not only in their faith, but in themselves and the world around them. Instead of pushing ideas that are considered by many as archaic, he's decided to allow the newest of the flock decide for themselves whether to follow or not (of course, you always had that opiton, but it's slowly becomming acceptable in dogma that you can leave and return at any moment for any reason).

[Hugo]

A number of people here seem to think life is meaningless. I think this is illogical.

Anyhow, for the sake of argument, let's just say life is meaningless.

I believe that if this were true (which I don't) ethics is also meaningless.

To say that life is meaningless is a license to loot, rape and murder.

What do you think?

[Capitalist Pig]

(Edited to clarify that I am coming from a prior conversation that recently took place in #socionics)

You're incapable of separating perspectives. Life is not meaningless, life is what you make of it. Nature, however, does not have purpose for life. Life is simply the result of random, yet significant occurrences within nature.

If you were to accept nihilism, then yes, all life is meaningless and ethical systems are irrelevant. Your actions bear no real consequences, and nothing matters at all. An extreme simplification, but that is what you assume people like me believe. Either that, or you believe we subscribe to determinism which holds that free will doesn't exist and everything done in life is pre-determined anyway. This, also, renders morality irrelevant.

I do believe in the concept of free will, and that the inherent biological drive to survive and promote the species is what acts as a guide to human behavior. In short, there is an objective sense of ethics which can be derived from the nature of man.

[olduser]

i think life is meaingless but i still want to give something back.

[indigoroom]

I’d like to share with you a revelation, I’ve had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species that I realized you aren’t actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague.


...lol

[XoX]

Anyhow, for the sake of argument, let's just say life is meaningless.

I believe that if this were true (which I don't) ethics is also meaningless.

To say that life is meaningless is a license to loot, rape and murder.

What do you think?

Technically I agree with you here. However people who believe life is meaningless don't usually start looting, raping and murdering. Most people still have somekind of "conscience" which prevents them from doing that stuff. It just makes them feel so bad and wrong that they won't do it even if they really don't believe in any kind of meaning. I'm not going to analyze here where that "conscience" or automatic sense of right and wrong comes from (probably related to biological factors and cultural factors at least). It is a long term process to change a cultural "conscience" or ethics common to the whole culture.

I think collapse of mental health is a more probable short term individual level consequence than collapse of ethics. A person who believes life is meaningless is e.g. more likely to fall into depression or have all kinds of motivational problems in life than a person who doesn't. This can of course lead to collapse of ethics in the longer term.

Well, something like this.

[Hugo]

I’d like to share with you a revelation, I’ve had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species that I realized you aren’t actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague.


...lol

[Hugo]

This is the information I’ve gathered from the above:
1) we have a conscience
2) we have an instinct to survive
3) believing life is meaningless can lead to mental health problems

It seems from these points that if life was meaningless:
1) the instinct to do good would not exist
2) the instinct to survive would not exist
3) people would not suffer from mental health problems arising from a belief that life is meaningless

[FDG]

Yours it is.