Purpose of Life, etc.

One of the arguments against atheism, when we go "outside science", is that science/atheism can't tell us the purpose/meaning of life (or other similar statements).

The problem with this is, it is assumed that there is a purpose/meaning of life. How can one arrive at this, as a valid objective question, without making the mistake of assuming it is a valid or answerable question?

Paradoxum said:

Perhaps the question should be how an atheist might answer the question of how to fill the meaning gap after God? Or whether there is a meaning gap left?

There is a need to for atheists to talk about meaning too. There are still possible ways to argue for objective or subjective meaning.

Click to expand...

I think that is the problem. The question is asked in an objective "truth" kinda way, that presupposes that there is only one answer.

The theist then can rebut or, commonly, swallow up the response and one-up it (lay claim via the deity).