Tired of Morality? Have some Philosophy! :)

(1) There are a great many things for which I would willingly risk death, but at this point in my life I cannot think of anything that would induce me to choose it. That is not to say I have no strong beliefs; but there is nothing I strongly believe in that would be served by my death, in my opinion.

(2) I do not believe there is a God; after thoroughly examining my belief in God, I decided that the claim lacked convincing evidence and the concept lacked plausibility. I recognize that I could be wrong, for the simple reason that unless one is omniscient, one does not know anything with absolute confidence. Nevertheless, my tentative (but very strong) conclusion is that God does not exist.

Every definition and/or “proof” of God that I have ever seen required me to take major, basic, and (worst of all) unnecessary premises on faith. Take the Christian faith, for example. How do we know that Jesus died for our sins? The Bible tells us so. But if the Bible does not represent the true Will of God, then it is all rather irrelevant, isn’t it? To believe in Jesus’s divinity, one must take this article on faith, when the obvious conclusion is that it was simply a book of myths written down by superstitious men. Why assume that it is proof of divinity, when we know that men make myths and write them down, but no divine being has ever made itself publicly known? Besides, God clearly doesn’t strike anyone down with lightning bolts if they alter the Bible, so how do we know that it wasn’t completely changed at an unknown time, even if it was the Word of God? It is an impossible thing to prove, and so I must either take the leap of faith (which I cannot honestly do) or withhold belief.

Many argue that the various holy books and prophecies are proved by evidence. I suppose it is possible, but the evidence I have found still requires huge leaps of faith. Fulfilled prophecies are often impossibly vague, self-fulfilling, or fulfilled later in the same holy book. Historical accuracies are not unexpected, since one can assume the authors knew a little about their own time. Science in holy literature is more often wrong than not, and the elaborate schemes of divine beings manipulating the lives of men seem fantastic and driven by a need to explain the unknown and justify the unjustifiable.

As far as I can tell, the various gods and goddesses worshipped around the world spring from fear of the unknown, the need to answer emotionally traumatic questions, a desire for purpose, and the creation of moral rules that must be enforced. They find their justification in man’s awe at nature, his lack of explanations for natural phenomena, the mysteriousness of death and consciousness, and rather weak philosophical arguments invented by men with the desire to believe and the intention to justify those beliefs.

There are thousands of mutually contradictory religions across the globe, every one with the same evidence and the same testimony and equally convincing prophecies and rituals and doctrines. They all provide for the same human needs, but it is impossible to choose one without immediately raising the unanswerable question, “If you are willing to accept this one by faith, why do you reject all the others, when they require only faith?”

A man who is seeking truth wherever it might be has a chance of finding it; if he chooses a belief and sets out to prove it, he will only find truth if he guessed correctly before he knew anything. I think the best answer to the hard questions of life – the ones we argue incessantly without a scrap of evidence for any point of view – is, “We don’t know.” Mysteries such as consciousness may be beyond our current understanding, but that is not proof that God exists, nor is it reason to invent an equally mysterious system of doctrine and ritual so that we can pretend we do know the answers to all the hard questions of life; it means only that there are things we do not yet know, and answers still to search for. I believe that mankind’s needs will be better served by searching for those answers wherever they might be, than by arbitrarily choosing a belief from the world’s buffet and waiting until death to find out whether we guessed right.

(3) You ask almost as if significance were an objective quality that could, perhaps, be measured with the proper equipment. I would consider it entirely subjective; human beings simply are, as animals are, as planets are, as the universe is. Whatever happens to us or to anything else is neither significant nor insignificant on a universal scale. It is simply an event in the universe; without a predefined goal or intention, it has no import whatsoever.

Purely from a human point of view, it is true that most humans place more significance in human life than any other life. Whether we ought to is an entirely different question, and depends on the goals and intentions of the person you ask. However, the very nature of the human species is to live at the expense of other life-forms, and so I think it is impossible for a human being to truly value all life as he or she values human life.

For myself, as a conscious creature, I value interactions with other conscious creatures. Also, I enjoy the intricacy, complexity, and amazing capabilities of life, and so I regret any damage done to it. Therefore, I place as much significance as I can in the life-forms I encounter, while recognizing that sacrificing other life-forms for my own wellbeing is a necessary evil for my survival. The difficult question is when to sacrifice other living things, and when to make a sacrifice of my own to avoid harming other life, and it is a question I haven’t yet been able to answer to my complete satisfaction.

(4) I think that is an impossible question to answer. As I understand it, you are essentially asking, "What is reality?" Well, how are we to know? We describe our sensations and our observations, and try to find predictable patterns in them so that we can make other things happen for us to observe in turn. What the ‘real’ thing these observations describe is like, or whether there even exists a ‘real’ thing besides a complex set of illusions, is a question that cannot be answered by simply examining our observations (after all, it is a question about what is beyond observation). And if we cannot observe a thing, then we cannot truly answer any questions about it. We can only guess – an exercise that adds no new information to the universe.

(5) When you ask me who ‘I’ would be, I assume you are speaking of the entity that would answer the questions you ask with the answers I am about to give you (as opposed to the mouth that would say them and the hands that type them). In that case, ‘I’ would certainly still be myself. As far as medical science can tell us, every part of our knowledge and personalities are encoded in the brain. Transferring its control to a different set of muscles and organs would not alter my identity.

If the procedure were a well-known one, or if I could demonstrate it or provide contact information for the brilliant surgeon who performed the operation, then convincing others of my identity would be a simple matter.

If, however, this transplant was done by an arcane or secret method, and I could not prove it, then I would not even attempt to prove my identity to the public. The fanatic, lunatic, gullible, and fickle would believe me, while intelligent, critical observers would rightly reject my story for lack of evidence (after all, even if I could prove I knew things that only I should know, it would be far more likely that my host had obtained the information in some way, than that I had undergone an impossible procedure).

If I chose to resume my old life, I would have to convince friends and family, of course, which would be easier since I would know their intellectual habits and the kinds of evidence that would most easily convince each of them. It would depend completely on the person, however, so I can’t very well describe how I would do it.

(6) From my point of view as a conscious being, I might as well not exist if I am not using that consciousness. One might argue that in this situation, I would be using my consciousness to feel pleasure; however, I would exist in a changeless, purposeless world, the goals of my conscious mind either unheeded or impossible to carry out. With limitless opportunities to alter my world for the better, I would not wish to withdraw from it in this way.

Of course, once in the happiness box I would not care. I would be happy. Artificially happy, it is true, but that would not matter to me. Why should I care that my life is wasted? It’s virtual suicide, but it’s a very long and very happy suicide.

The answer is that essentially, it is a question of whether I should make a bad decision, if I know I’ll have no chance to regret it afterwards. My response is that I would not do it, for the same reason that I will never try heroin, even if I was assured enough supply to be high 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for the rest of my life. That is, when I weigh the illusion of perfect pleasure against the reality of my choices, I cannot see any justification for giving up that freedom for something I will never need unless I taste it.

All human organisations are run by corrupt Elites, as outlined by Pareto, Mosca, Michels.
There those who govern and those who are governed. The governors make sure that the aims of the organisation belefit their own goals. The governed are shafted.
The Elite use a set of aphorisms to shore up their own power and status. The govered have to accept these aphorisms as axiomatic -- accept them or be persecuted.
Christian leaders cherry-pick from the Bible to justify their power.
Academics do likewise with philosophy.

1. Is there anything you would willingly die for? What?

I'm taking a philosophy class this semester, and our first day's homework assignment is to give our best answers to some basic philosophical questions.

Congrats, hope you enjoy the class

1. Is there anything you would willingly die for? What?

No. I dont think there would be a time when the loss of my life would make the world fantastically happier for anyone.