you people are too hard to please, I find just living day to day makes me content... im happy.. but at the same time I think i am bored of the world...
All these theories about the universe still don't answer my question. Do I have to think I'm immortal in order to be the happiest man on Earth?
I'm gonna go ahead and play a bit of the devil's advocate and say yes. Not consistantly, but to be the happiest man on earth, you have to not at this moment realize that you are mortal. I don't think you can be truly happy if at the same moment you've got a lingering realization of mortality floating around. You can't feel alright while thinking "but I will die" at the same time. While speaking over a longer period though, you don't have to be completely unaware of the fact that you will once die to live a happy life.
(I always find people narrow minded, who say their aim is to be happy. For example I find programing some stuff quite usefull, but it doesnt makes me happy.)
Wait, what? How exactly is trying to be happy narrow-minded? What then is your aim in life? Heck, to even take your own example: you say you find programming 'quite useful'. Why do you find it useful? Are you achieving goals with it? How do you feel when you achieve those goals? Would you still want to program if you didn't have that feeling when you achieved those goals?
@Mozared: Go
I not really have aim for my life, but if I would have to say something, than I would say something like this: gathering as much "useful" information and experience as I can, where the useful highly determined by difference between the new information and my already gathered informations/experiences. (kind of discovering things)
Ok my example wasnt the best. But its simple: there are easy ways to reach happiness and there are hard ways which may not even trigger happiness. Easy and the Hard way is an old concept... I just go even further a bit.
Personally, I find it slightly empowering... Sure, empowering... To know that nothing we ever do will ever hold any importance in the grand scheme of things. Why would you want to be immortal to be happy? If you can completely accept the fact that you will die some day and people will forget about you; then how could you not be happy? Everyone will be dead someday, and there will be no one to care about anyone. Most importantly, when you die, you have no feelings, no emotions, no memories, no consciousness.
I guess it is your level of acceptance. Enjoy your experiences while you are here. Soon, you will be dead and none of it will matter. How can that not make you happy? Every expectation ever put on you is out the window.
While trying to be happy is fine, I don't think it's the greatest of goals. People can do horrible things in order to feel happy. I think a better goal would be to achieve one's greatest potential before death. I would say a person's greatest potential is the maximum amount of love they are able to give - the greatest form of love, that is, not eros (sensual) or even filios (family), but agape (self-giving) love. Maybe it sounds kind of cheesy, but it is the most difficult thing a person could ever do.
Even if you want to take that as life's goal - isn't the reason for doing that to get a sense of accomplishment/fulfillment, which in turn makes you feel happy?
Anything one can come up with kind of harkens back to "we're doing it in an attempt to feel happy". Nobody does anything in an attempt to feel sad or neutral. Even deliberately trying to get sad just to experience the emotion is done out of a search for knowledge that we host to attain fulfillment and (with that) happiness.
Even atheists can believe in life after death. Perhaps is all a dream within a dream within a dream!
Perhaps maybe if maybe perhaps this could be might maybe etc.
Death is the only guaranteed reality of life. Attempts at trying to understand what happens thereafter should be a significant concern to each and every person. IF the bible is the 100% accurate word of God(Which I believe it is), then it makes logical sense to pause and at least test/study/analyse it as best as possible for one`s own sake. A betting man is safer believing than flat out denying(arrogantly/ignorantly) as to the outcome at death.
Having been through many religions, and personally trying to validate the bible with Science and historic records etc etc, I can say Im 100% certain in my current conviction(not blind faith/believing).
The source of all things is God. It all divides back into that point. Even if `Multiverse` theory is argued to created the big-bang, the question still arises `What created the Multiverse/s`?. It all divides into something omnipotent and beyond imagination and understanding. Thats Logic.
Just like its impossible for AI in virtual simulations or games to ever understand their true creator/s(Skyrim, RPG worlds, SIMS , ), the same programmed and limited constructs of our thinking is incapable of comprehending God.
But... back to the main question... is it possible to have a significantly meaningful life if you believe you will stop existing at any time from now?
Yes. Still, that ticking inevitability of death is there. For a reason. People can ignore or try to understand the importance/meaning of it during their life time.
Sadly most ignore it, do whatever the heck they want in life, and *hope* that nothing happens after death.
Even if you want to take that as life's goal - isn't the reason for doing that to get a sense of accomplishment/fulfillment, which in turn makes you feel happy?
Anything one can come up with kind of harkens back to "we're doing it in an attempt to feel happy". Nobody does anything in an attempt to feel sad or neutral. Even deliberately trying to get sad just to experience the emotion is done out of a search for knowledge that we host to attain fulfillment and (with that) happiness.
It can be argued that happiness is always the prime motivator for human action, whether subconscious or not. However, I wouldn't equate the terms goal and motivator. A goal is more detached from the immediate concerns of our psyche or body and represents a greater purpose for which we direct future action. A motivator is on a much smaller scale, helping us to make quick decisions without requiring intense meditation and reasoning. I don't think there's anything wrong with having happiness as a motivator, but I don't think it's the necessary reward for achieving a goal. Especially when that goal is the total fulfillment of selfless love, a person may have to actually sacrifice happiness for the well-being of another with no expectation of return or personal reward. The reward, in this case, is the betterment of the other, curiously attributed away from the actor. It's so difficult precisely because of it's detachment from worldly sensibility.
Even if `Multiverse` theory is argued to created the big-bang, the question still arises `What created the Multiverse/s`?. It all divides into something omnipotent and beyond imagination and understanding.
Is there a sufficient correlation between thoughts on the state of mortality and happiness?
There's a way too much variables to get a good view of it. Some people might have an idea of immortality as a way to go to Hell and might get even more depressed with that. And in general, it's people with low IQ that has a stronger blind faith, and this blind faith is an excuse for them to be racist, and they end up even more depressed. I drew a graph showing how I see it (and by the graph, you can see that correlations won't help at all).
No. just take some really hardcore drugs and you will be the happiest man on the Earth.
(I always find people narrow minded, who say their aim is to be happy. For example I find programing some stuff quite usefull, but it doesnt makes me happy.)
Drugs perhaps would cause a great joy, but that's not happiness.
I don't think you can be truly happy if at the same moment you've got a lingering realization of mortality floating around. You can't feel alright while thinking "but I will die" at the same time.
That's what I'm starting to think. Being a future-aimed person like me that likes to do things thinking on the long run, it is hard to calculate a good long-run when death is on the way.
IF the bible is the 100% accurate word of God(Which I believe it is), then it makes logical sense to pause and at least test/study/analyse it as best as possible for one`s own sake.
I have a few points for you, and they're not meant in a derogatory manner, and I hope you won't take them as that. I, as an atheist, and somewhat curious as to why exactly some people, such as yourself, can be so convinced that their religion is true.
Firstly, there are many contradictions and generally stupid things in the Bible which make no sense, and if God were perfect (I'd also like to know how God could be perfect, and I wouldn't want any sort of circular logic crap), why would there be these things?
Also, your evidence for God being the ultimate source of everything doesn't answer anything. You'd merely be left with a question just as valid as: "What created the multiverse?" That being: "What created God?" That's logic.
And one thing about "life" after death, be it torture or bliss, it would be illogical to assume that you would be able to feel or think after you die, for it's a well known fact that the brain is the source of all one's thoughts and emotions and memories etc. How would one be able to be tortured or in bliss if they lack a brain to feel such things?
I personally think that believing there is nothing after you die is just incentive to do as much with one's life while they yet live.
These are just my thoughts, though.
Also, do you believe the story of Genesis? About how Earth and stars, let alone the universe, was created by God? Do you realize how much of a big middle finger that is to astronomers, geologists, and biologists?
The source of all things is God. It all divides back into that point. Even if `Multiverse` theory is argued to created the big-bang, the question still arises `What created the Multiverse/s`?. It all divides into something omnipotent and beyond imagination and understanding. Thats Logic.
I'm not really seeing the logic here.
"Here is a universe. It exists, hence it must have been created."
This, I can reason with. I don't agree, but I can see the line of thinking.
"Hence the creator was the Judea-Christian god; Yahweh."
This part is just illogical. Firstly, if everything needs a source, then so does Yahweh. Secondly, why a god instead of some natural phenomena, as with basically everything else in the past we used to attribute to a god?
It can be argued that happiness is always the prime motivator for human action, whether subconscious or not. However, I wouldn't equate the terms goal and motivator. A goal is more detached from the immediate concerns of our psyche or body and represents a greater purpose for which we direct future action. A motivator is on a much smaller scale, helping us to make quick decisions without requiring intense meditation and reasoning. I don't think there's anything wrong with having happiness as a motivator, but I don't think it's the necessary reward for achieving a goal. Especially when that goal is the total fulfillment of selfless love, a person may have to actually sacrifice happiness for the well-being of another with no expectation of return or personal reward. The reward, in this case, is the betterment of the other, curiously attributed away from the actor. It's so difficult precisely because of it's detachment from worldly sensibility.
Interesting point. I recognize your difference; the motivator of happiness is searched subconsciously, while you define a goal as something 'sought after by purpose'. I'm not sure whether I want to make that difference in such a strong fashion, though. I don't know to what end I'd want to put 'motivator' and 'goal' apart, since plain old "feeling good" simply drives all of our decisions. One wouldn't actively say "I am doing this to attain happiness", but one would always mean it, even if indirectly. I reckon we have hit a really rough discussion here though, one we'd probably never finish. With that said; my sincere thanks for your post, it's made me really think and with that has reached a level on which generally only my girlfriend rests.
I feel like I need to again stress this point. We're talking horrible generalizations here, but people that actively call themselves Atheïst tend to be just as stupid as people that actively call themselves Theïst. This isn't a case of stupid religious fanatics argueing with reasonable men - the "Atheïst" you meet on the web is just as annoyingly strongly convinced in a point that he cannot possibly proof, and will shove it in your face just as roughly if he sees a chance. To put it bluntly, atheïsts are people who wear this kind of stuff. Speaking of which, got to love the irony of this one.
I have a few points for you, and they're not meant in a derogatory manner, and I hope you won't take them as that. I, as an atheist, and somewhat curious as to why exactly some people, such as yourself, can be so convinced that their religion is true.
Now I can't speak for EW (in this specific instance :D), but the answer to this question is determined entirely by what one means when he says he "takes the bible to be god's word". I've once read a book by Bad Religion frontman Greg Graffin which is a collection of e-mails sent between him, a fucking genius, and Preston Jones, a college professor who calls himself Christian. I don't remember every word, but the Christian professor in one mail made a very good point when he says that the bible shouldn't be taken completely literally, but rather as one huge metaphor for life. The example he cites is the story of adam and eve, the apple and the snake. Eve took the apple, even though she knew she shouldn't, and fell from the perfect ... place. Our everyday life is the same. We don't work out and get fat, even though we shouldn't, which is what keeps us from being perfect humans.
What I'm trying to say with this is the following: whenever someone says he believes in the bible, this doesn't automatically mean he believes and interprets the parts that say stuff like "and god grabbed a handfull of dust, sprinkled it out over the eart, and thus the mountains formed" to be literal and true. This is where that idea of metaphor I talked about comes up.
Well, there are some quotes which would be pretty damn hard to turn into a metaphor. I'm talking mostly about some of the stuff to do with slaves, and punishments in general.
Also, the "Mormon's Were Right" thing doesn't really fit here, cause the Mormon's believe in the Judea-Christian God. Just saying...
A betting man is safer believing than flat out denying(arrogantly/ignorantly) as to the outcome at death.
Absolutely, but Yahweh is just one among billions of proposed gods, each with their own prophets, temples and holy books. Yahweh himself contains the attributes of dozens of prior gods.
You might have one more chip in than me, but both our chances are still mathematically insignificant.
Besides, if heaven is filled with people like Bill O'reilly, then fuck that.
@RodrigoAlves: Go Your graphic is interesting, but wrong. True happiness is way easier when you don't have wisdom, so the wisdom axis should be backwards.
A friend of mine always tell a simple example that his dog looks extremely happy by running around people, sniffing random things and eating good ration while he (my friend) could never feel happy doing such simple things, as he has to worry about life, death, honor, capitalism and so on. Maybe some animals are way more happy than the average in your graphic.
Since childhood i always felt that there's something odd in way we percept ourselvs. Recently something as 'consciousnesses' pops a lot. Usually compared to soul-like 'thing'; An observer, not 'controller'.
My current belief (tho i don't bother much with it) is that after 'death' our life ends obviously but it doesn't mean destruction or like disappearance but more like detachment. We won't 'see' or 'feel' but still there is a chance to some other experiences in unknown way or form from completely different perspective.
Whenever i say to myself "that's crazy" i start to imagine cosmos, the size, amount of everything along with space and i say "no chance it's all just for simple beings like humans"
Last note tho. I believe nothing ever will able to answer questions like that. None religion, none professor, no one, nothing. We can guess, make things up and that's it.
@BasharTeg: Go
IF the bible is the 100% accurate word of God(Which I believe it is)
How many slaves do you have and are you treating them nicely? I'm asking this question in the most derogatory manner possible.
Regarding the rest of your post: god of the gaps. Don't know what thunder is? Must be a god smiting the wicked. Don't know what the moon is? Must be a floating god. Don't know what happens after death? A god must be waiting for us on the other side. Don't know how the earth was created? God put it there for us. Don't know what's the purpose of those little lights in the sky? God put them there to give us something to do (he also did it with dinosaur bones). Don't know what happened before the big bang? God did it.
Edit: oh right, I should say something about this immortality/happiness thing so it doesn't look like I'm just here to spread the evil of atheism.
The happiest beings on the planet are children, because they are blissful ignorant of how ugly the world is. Since you don't remain a child forever (unless you're metally retarded or locked up in a dark room), then it doesn't matter if you're immortal or not - there will always be a child that is more happy than you.
I have been reading over these posts after school and I would just like to throw in that there is a reason why this question has been asked since mankind came into existence. Though I do personally believe in an afterlife, I do respect atheist's questions. The funny thing is that the question of do we have a soul that lives on (religion, and so forth) or do we not have a soul and just die, points to the same thing as their justifications.
An example of this is when one would say the big bang started the universe and the religious person would say "well were did the big come from" and were did the next thing come from and the next and the next and the next (btw this would just get annoying)..., and the same thing would be applied against a religious person as in "were did God come from?" (I personally would answer he was not created and has always been and I personally justify that by saying just because we cannot understand it doesn't make it not true but it is still a very good point). There are some things both atheists and religious people take by faith (such as immortality by the soul that does or does not exist). As said earlier many of these things cannot be proved or disproved through the scientific method that we would want preferably use or through extensive thought and philosophy. What I mean by this is that we base our beliefs on certain things that are not always necessarily able to be proven and are simply logical and in some cases illogical assumptions and base truth upon these acquired assumptions or feelings that we make from our life experiences.
So when I saw the thread title I had a little laugh because everyone has different experiences and base their beliefs upon their experiences, and will all see this question differently. So that means that though you yourself may be convinced of something because of your experiences, it makes complete sense that if you try to prove your point of view through your experiences that the other person may not be entirely convinced!
Another point, both sides have great arguments and Excellent points and thought provoking justifications, and unfortunately there are many people who believe in the afterlife who are not the brightest people I will admit..., but I have personalty been convinced that there is an afterlife and if you do not, although I disagree with a sad heart, ill respect that, because we all have different experiences and thoughts that affect our views. Although I would love to get into specifics I would probably end up getting myself banned lol, but I will say that I am a happier person believing that there is an afterlife and that I have a purpose and that everyone is significant and have something to look forward to no matter how bad life gets even to the point of death ;) .
One last note if you find anything that seems uber logical or contradictory with this just know that i'm 17and please I encourage you to point them out because as many of us here the way I word these things are constantly improving, I enjoyed writing this, it made me think critically.
NOTE: I am aware that this does not answer the question are we immortal or not btw lol with a bit of my own opinion thrown in that it does, just attempting to point out why its impossible to have a definitive yes or no that everyone universally excepts. It can also quite easily become an emotional debate and those have the tenancy to get nowhere fast... My hopes with this post is not to offend anyone and help everyone on both sides to think a bit more and as well to encourage against any emotionally changed debates.
Don't be sad for us who don't believe in an afterlife. Nothingness is neither good nor bad. In this sense, it isn't even something you'd feel. As I have said before, it would be like the time before you were born. Did you enjoy the time before you were born (/became conscious)? No? Were you unhappy? Of course not. You couldn't think during that time. Nothingness is technically impossible to imagine, just like infinity, but that doesn't mean it can't exist.
Personally, I would much rather just die and have nothingness than an afterlife, even if it's bliss.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
@Hookah604: Go
you people are too hard to please, I find just living day to day makes me content... im happy.. but at the same time I think i am bored of the world...
I'm gonna go ahead and play a bit of the devil's advocate and say yes. Not consistantly, but to be the happiest man on earth, you have to not at this moment realize that you are mortal. I don't think you can be truly happy if at the same moment you've got a lingering realization of mortality floating around. You can't feel alright while thinking "but I will die" at the same time. While speaking over a longer period though, you don't have to be completely unaware of the fact that you will once die to live a happy life.
Wait, what? How exactly is trying to be happy narrow-minded? What then is your aim in life? Heck, to even take your own example: you say you find programming 'quite useful'. Why do you find it useful? Are you achieving goals with it? How do you feel when you achieve those goals? Would you still want to program if you didn't have that feeling when you achieved those goals?
@Mozared: Go I not really have aim for my life, but if I would have to say something, than I would say something like this: gathering as much "useful" information and experience as I can, where the useful highly determined by difference between the new information and my already gathered informations/experiences. (kind of discovering things)
Ok my example wasnt the best. But its simple: there are easy ways to reach happiness and there are hard ways which may not even trigger happiness. Easy and the Hard way is an old concept... I just go even further a bit.
Personally, I find it slightly empowering... Sure, empowering... To know that nothing we ever do will ever hold any importance in the grand scheme of things. Why would you want to be immortal to be happy? If you can completely accept the fact that you will die some day and people will forget about you; then how could you not be happy? Everyone will be dead someday, and there will be no one to care about anyone. Most importantly, when you die, you have no feelings, no emotions, no memories, no consciousness.
I guess it is your level of acceptance. Enjoy your experiences while you are here. Soon, you will be dead and none of it will matter. How can that not make you happy? Every expectation ever put on you is out the window.
Skype: [email protected] Current Project: Custom Hero Arena! US: battlenet:://starcraft/map/1/263274 EU: battlenet:://starcraft/map/2/186418
@Mozared: Go
While trying to be happy is fine, I don't think it's the greatest of goals. People can do horrible things in order to feel happy. I think a better goal would be to achieve one's greatest potential before death. I would say a person's greatest potential is the maximum amount of love they are able to give - the greatest form of love, that is, not eros (sensual) or even filios (family), but agape (self-giving) love. Maybe it sounds kind of cheesy, but it is the most difficult thing a person could ever do.
@BasharTeg: Go
Even if you want to take that as life's goal - isn't the reason for doing that to get a sense of accomplishment/fulfillment, which in turn makes you feel happy?
Anything one can come up with kind of harkens back to "we're doing it in an attempt to feel happy". Nobody does anything in an attempt to feel sad or neutral. Even deliberately trying to get sad just to experience the emotion is done out of a search for knowledge that we host to attain fulfillment and (with that) happiness.
@BasharTeg: Go
Even atheists can believe in life after death. Perhaps is all a dream within a dream within a dream!
Perhaps maybe if maybe perhaps this could be might maybe etc.
Death is the only guaranteed reality of life. Attempts at trying to understand what happens thereafter should be a significant concern to each and every person. IF the bible is the 100% accurate word of God(Which I believe it is), then it makes logical sense to pause and at least test/study/analyse it as best as possible for one`s own sake. A betting man is safer believing than flat out denying(arrogantly/ignorantly) as to the outcome at death.
Having been through many religions, and personally trying to validate the bible with Science and historic records etc etc, I can say Im 100% certain in my current conviction(not blind faith/believing).
The source of all things is God. It all divides back into that point. Even if `Multiverse` theory is argued to created the big-bang, the question still arises `What created the Multiverse/s`?. It all divides into something omnipotent and beyond imagination and understanding. Thats Logic.
Just like its impossible for AI in virtual simulations or games to ever understand their true creator/s(Skyrim, RPG worlds, SIMS , ), the same programmed and limited constructs of our thinking is incapable of comprehending God.
But... back to the main question... is it possible to have a significantly meaningful life if you believe you will stop existing at any time from now?
Yes. Still, that ticking inevitability of death is there. For a reason. People can ignore or try to understand the importance/meaning of it during their life time.
Sadly most ignore it, do whatever the heck they want in life, and *hope* that nothing happens after death.
It can be argued that happiness is always the prime motivator for human action, whether subconscious or not. However, I wouldn't equate the terms goal and motivator. A goal is more detached from the immediate concerns of our psyche or body and represents a greater purpose for which we direct future action. A motivator is on a much smaller scale, helping us to make quick decisions without requiring intense meditation and reasoning. I don't think there's anything wrong with having happiness as a motivator, but I don't think it's the necessary reward for achieving a goal. Especially when that goal is the total fulfillment of selfless love, a person may have to actually sacrifice happiness for the well-being of another with no expectation of return or personal reward. The reward, in this case, is the betterment of the other, curiously attributed away from the actor. It's so difficult precisely because of it's detachment from worldly sensibility.
I wrote an explanation for that here: http:redd.it/ril3c
Wisdom would teach that horrible things never bring a consistent happiness.
There's a way too much variables to get a good view of it. Some people might have an idea of immortality as a way to go to Hell and might get even more depressed with that. And in general, it's people with low IQ that has a stronger blind faith, and this blind faith is an excuse for them to be racist, and they end up even more depressed. I drew a graph showing how I see it (and by the graph, you can see that correlations won't help at all).
THAT'S HOW I IMAGINE IT
Drugs perhaps would cause a great joy, but that's not happiness.
That's what I'm starting to think. Being a future-aimed person like me that likes to do things thinking on the long run, it is hard to calculate a good long-run when death is on the way.
@EternalWraith: Go
I have a few points for you, and they're not meant in a derogatory manner, and I hope you won't take them as that. I, as an atheist, and somewhat curious as to why exactly some people, such as yourself, can be so convinced that their religion is true.
Firstly, there are many contradictions and generally stupid things in the Bible which make no sense, and if God were perfect (I'd also like to know how God could be perfect, and I wouldn't want any sort of circular logic crap), why would there be these things?
Also, your evidence for God being the ultimate source of everything doesn't answer anything. You'd merely be left with a question just as valid as: "What created the multiverse?" That being: "What created God?" That's logic.
And one thing about "life" after death, be it torture or bliss, it would be illogical to assume that you would be able to feel or think after you die, for it's a well known fact that the brain is the source of all one's thoughts and emotions and memories etc. How would one be able to be tortured or in bliss if they lack a brain to feel such things?
I personally think that believing there is nothing after you die is just incentive to do as much with one's life while they yet live.
These are just my thoughts, though.
Also, do you believe the story of Genesis? About how Earth and stars, let alone the universe, was created by God? Do you realize how much of a big middle finger that is to astronomers, geologists, and biologists?
I'm not really seeing the logic here.
"Here is a universe. It exists, hence it must have been created."
This, I can reason with. I don't agree, but I can see the line of thinking.
"Hence the creator was the Judea-Christian god; Yahweh."
This part is just illogical. Firstly, if everything needs a source, then so does Yahweh. Secondly, why a god instead of some natural phenomena, as with basically everything else in the past we used to attribute to a god?
Interesting point. I recognize your difference; the motivator of happiness is searched subconsciously, while you define a goal as something 'sought after by purpose'. I'm not sure whether I want to make that difference in such a strong fashion, though. I don't know to what end I'd want to put 'motivator' and 'goal' apart, since plain old "feeling good" simply drives all of our decisions. One wouldn't actively say "I am doing this to attain happiness", but one would always mean it, even if indirectly. I reckon we have hit a really rough discussion here though, one we'd probably never finish. With that said; my sincere thanks for your post, it's made me really think and with that has reached a level on which generally only my girlfriend rests.
I feel like I need to again stress this point. We're talking horrible generalizations here, but people that actively call themselves Atheïst tend to be just as stupid as people that actively call themselves Theïst. This isn't a case of stupid religious fanatics argueing with reasonable men - the "Atheïst" you meet on the web is just as annoyingly strongly convinced in a point that he cannot possibly proof, and will shove it in your face just as roughly if he sees a chance. To put it bluntly, atheïsts are people who wear this kind of stuff. Speaking of which, got to love the irony of this one.
Now I can't speak for EW (in this specific instance :D), but the answer to this question is determined entirely by what one means when he says he "takes the bible to be god's word". I've once read a book by Bad Religion frontman Greg Graffin which is a collection of e-mails sent between him, a fucking genius, and Preston Jones, a college professor who calls himself Christian. I don't remember every word, but the Christian professor in one mail made a very good point when he says that the bible shouldn't be taken completely literally, but rather as one huge metaphor for life. The example he cites is the story of adam and eve, the apple and the snake. Eve took the apple, even though she knew she shouldn't, and fell from the perfect ... place. Our everyday life is the same. We don't work out and get fat, even though we shouldn't, which is what keeps us from being perfect humans.
What I'm trying to say with this is the following: whenever someone says he believes in the bible, this doesn't automatically mean he believes and interprets the parts that say stuff like "and god grabbed a handfull of dust, sprinkled it out over the eart, and thus the mountains formed" to be literal and true. This is where that idea of metaphor I talked about comes up.
@Mozared: Go
Well, there are some quotes which would be pretty damn hard to turn into a metaphor. I'm talking mostly about some of the stuff to do with slaves, and punishments in general.
Also, the "Mormon's Were Right" thing doesn't really fit here, cause the Mormon's believe in the Judea-Christian God. Just saying...
Absolutely, but Yahweh is just one among billions of proposed gods, each with their own prophets, temples and holy books. Yahweh himself contains the attributes of dozens of prior gods.
You might have one more chip in than me, but both our chances are still mathematically insignificant.
Besides, if heaven is filled with people like Bill O'reilly, then fuck that.
@RodrigoAlves: Go Your graphic is interesting, but wrong. True happiness is way easier when you don't have wisdom, so the wisdom axis should be backwards.
A friend of mine always tell a simple example that his dog looks extremely happy by running around people, sniffing random things and eating good ration while he (my friend) could never feel happy doing such simple things, as he has to worry about life, death, honor, capitalism and so on. Maybe some animals are way more happy than the average in your graphic.
cool topic :) i like
Are we immortal: No... But who is 'We'/'Me'/'You'
Since childhood i always felt that there's something odd in way we percept ourselvs. Recently something as 'consciousnesses' pops a lot. Usually compared to soul-like 'thing'; An observer, not 'controller'.
My current belief (tho i don't bother much with it) is that after 'death' our life ends obviously but it doesn't mean destruction or like disappearance but more like detachment. We won't 'see' or 'feel' but still there is a chance to some other experiences in unknown way or form from completely different perspective.
Whenever i say to myself "that's crazy" i start to imagine cosmos, the size, amount of everything along with space and i say "no chance it's all just for simple beings like humans"
Last note tho. I believe nothing ever will able to answer questions like that. None religion, none professor, no one, nothing. We can guess, make things up and that's it.
How many slaves do you have and are you treating them nicely? I'm asking this question in the most derogatory manner possible.
Regarding the rest of your post: god of the gaps. Don't know what thunder is? Must be a god smiting the wicked. Don't know what the moon is? Must be a floating god. Don't know what happens after death? A god must be waiting for us on the other side. Don't know how the earth was created? God put it there for us. Don't know what's the purpose of those little lights in the sky? God put them there to give us something to do (he also did it with dinosaur bones). Don't know what happened before the big bang? God did it.
Edit: oh right, I should say something about this immortality/happiness thing so it doesn't look like I'm just here to spread the evil of atheism.
The happiest beings on the planet are children, because they are blissful ignorant of how ugly the world is. Since you don't remain a child forever (unless you're metally retarded or locked up in a dark room), then it doesn't matter if you're immortal or not - there will always be a child that is more happy than you.
Touché
I have been reading over these posts after school and I would just like to throw in that there is a reason why this question has been asked since mankind came into existence. Though I do personally believe in an afterlife, I do respect atheist's questions. The funny thing is that the question of do we have a soul that lives on (religion, and so forth) or do we not have a soul and just die, points to the same thing as their justifications.
An example of this is when one would say the big bang started the universe and the religious person would say "well were did the big come from" and were did the next thing come from and the next and the next and the next (btw this would just get annoying)..., and the same thing would be applied against a religious person as in "were did God come from?" (I personally would answer he was not created and has always been and I personally justify that by saying just because we cannot understand it doesn't make it not true but it is still a very good point). There are some things both atheists and religious people take by faith (such as immortality by the soul that does or does not exist). As said earlier many of these things cannot be proved or disproved through the scientific method that we would want preferably use or through extensive thought and philosophy. What I mean by this is that we base our beliefs on certain things that are not always necessarily able to be proven and are simply logical and in some cases illogical assumptions and base truth upon these acquired assumptions or feelings that we make from our life experiences. So when I saw the thread title I had a little laugh because everyone has different experiences and base their beliefs upon their experiences, and will all see this question differently. So that means that though you yourself may be convinced of something because of your experiences, it makes complete sense that if you try to prove your point of view through your experiences that the other person may not be entirely convinced!
Another point, both sides have great arguments and Excellent points and thought provoking justifications, and unfortunately there are many people who believe in the afterlife who are not the brightest people I will admit..., but I have personalty been convinced that there is an afterlife and if you do not, although I disagree with a sad heart, ill respect that, because we all have different experiences and thoughts that affect our views. Although I would love to get into specifics I would probably end up getting myself banned lol, but I will say that I am a happier person believing that there is an afterlife and that I have a purpose and that everyone is significant and have something to look forward to no matter how bad life gets even to the point of death ;) .
One last note if you find anything that seems uber logical or contradictory with this just know that i'm 17and please I encourage you to point them out because as many of us here the way I word these things are constantly improving, I enjoyed writing this, it made me think critically.
NOTE: I am aware that this does not answer the question are we immortal or not btw lol with a bit of my own opinion thrown in that it does, just attempting to point out why its impossible to have a definitive yes or no that everyone universally excepts. It can also quite easily become an emotional debate and those have the tenancy to get nowhere fast... My hopes with this post is not to offend anyone and help everyone on both sides to think a bit more and as well to encourage against any emotionally changed debates.
@joecab: Go
Don't be sad for us who don't believe in an afterlife. Nothingness is neither good nor bad. In this sense, it isn't even something you'd feel. As I have said before, it would be like the time before you were born. Did you enjoy the time before you were born (/became conscious)? No? Were you unhappy? Of course not. You couldn't think during that time. Nothingness is technically impossible to imagine, just like infinity, but that doesn't mean it can't exist.
Personally, I would much rather just die and have nothingness than an afterlife, even if it's bliss.