E
Elioenai26
Guest
Not baiting.
But you did say this was debate.
Who debates without supporting their views?
You???
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Why do I have to demonstrate it? I have my beliefs and you have yours. I'm fine with that, though your baiting tactics are quite amusing.
Ok, here's the thing. I don't believe there's a greater meaning to life. I can't make myself belief that there is (I would very much like there to be a greater meaning), and I've chosen not to lie to myself about that lack of belief because I see no point in committing an act of self-deception like the one that you just described.And what is that reality, that there is no ultimate meaning, but meaning exists according to the one who makes it i.e each person.
I'm agnostic, meaning I don't think there's sufficient proof to support either view.Not baiting.
But you did say this was debate.
Who debates without supporting their views?
You???
Ok, here's the thing. I don't believe there's a greater meaning to life. I can't make myself belief that there is (I would very much like there to be a greater meaning), and I've chosen not to lie to myself about that lack of belief because I see no point in committing an act of self-deception like the one that you just described.
Basically. The chemicals in my body cause me to be made "happy" by certain things thanks to evolution, including this, so I may as well do those things.Ok, so for you philosophical naturalism is true.
There actually is no ultimate meaning for your unbelief, you are neither better off, nor worse off than anyone else. Everyone is the same, animals who are beset with delusions of meaning in life, walking contradictions.
Even your spending time typing what you are is ultimately meaningless and futile. But yet you cannot shake the idea or feeling that what you are doing is important and has a purpose.
And what is that reality, that there is no ultimate meaning, but meaning exists according to the one who makes it i.e each person.
So in the same way an atheist maintains that Christians should not criticize them for their unbelief, an atheist cannot criticize Christians for their belief.
For some, meaning is found in worshipping God.
For some, meaning is found in arguing against the existence of a God they do not believe exists.
Under naturalism, both are equally ultimately illusory.
I'm agnostic, meaning I don't think there's sufficient proof to support either view.
I don't criticize Christians for their beliefs. I criticize some for thinking that their beliefs should limit the actions of others.So in the same way an atheist maintains that Christians should not criticize them for their unbelief, an atheist cannot criticize Christians for their belief.
Ok, so for you philosophical naturalism is true.
There actually is no ultimate meaning for your unbelief, you are neither better off, nor worse off than anyone else. Everyone is the same, animals who are beset with delusions of meaning in life, walking contradictions.
Well now, this is interesting....
You are not a theist, and you are not an atheist. So you really do not believe that life is ultimately meaningless after all do you?
It may be meaningful, you just are not sure.
is that right?
I more specifically call myself an agnostic atheist, but yes.Well now, this is interesting....
You are not a theist, and you are not an atheist.
Yes. I don't believe that we're capable of knowing whether or not there is an objective meaning to life. That's kinda the whole point of agnosticism. I'm not sure why you're treating this like a new development.So you really do not believe that life is ultimately meaningless after all do you?
It may be meaningful, you just are not sure.
is that right?
Who says we criticise Christians for trying to derive meaning? It is their factual claims we criticise.
But then again, we are not the ones making factually incorrect claims as we are not claiming any objectively real meaning to life. And as ever, you are conflating "objectively meaningful" with non-illusory.
Those that are are the ones who think that "god said so" = objective, which is a complete non sequitur.
Er.......what?
I'm inordinately better off than someone not suffering from pain given that I am currently not suffering from pain.
I'm inordinately better off than someone not suffering from bereavement given that I am currently not suffering from bereavement.
Neither better off nor worse off? What a silly notion. Again, this would not happen if this tedious insistence on oversimplifying meaning to objective or non-objective were dispensed with. Subjective reactions can be held to things that are objectively real or true, so it is not so simple as to claim it is entirely one or entirely the other.
Not necessarily, no, but I'd say that most people consider objective meaning to be connected to whether or not the universe was intelligently designed.Agnosticism refers to knowledge of the existence of deities.
It has nothing necessarily to do with the meaning life.
Still an exercise in futility whatever it is you do.
Regardless of what you call it, your efforts are ultimately useless. Your criticisms are ultimately useless. Who cares what is factually correct if there is no ultimate meaning, no ultimate purpose or destiny? You may care and that is meaningful to you, but others may not. If people want to choose to believe in something you do not think exists then so be it. It is meaningful to them.
That statement is meaningful to you. Some people would find their meaning in life by believing in God.
So what?
Not necessarily, no, but I'd say that most people consider objective meaning to be connected to whether or not the universe was intelligently designed.
Evolution is a you-know-what in that way. Making us want to survive and enjoy life when it's all ultimately pointless...Still an exercise in futility whatever it is you do.
And worse off than the maggots that will eat my body.You keep forgetting the word "ultimate" here.
You are no better off in the end than the maggot that dies on a dead dog's carcass.
You keep forgetting the word "ultimate" here.
You are no better off in the end than the maggot that dies on a dead dog's carcass.
I see your point. I suppose the presumed connection between the two is more of a cultural tenet.Only if the god/s in question are intelligent designers as well as meaning makers
Evolution is a you-know-what in that way. Making us want to survive and enjoy life when it's all ultimately pointless...
And worse off than the maggots that will eat my body.
According to whom? According to the opinions of those weak-minded enough to think that "what god says" = objectively meaningful.
And if they want to do that, fine. But then we have someone like you going around claiming falsely that "what god says" is objectively meaningful.
This is not a debate over meaning, but over accuracy.
Again, we are talking about meaning, not correctness. This is evasion, pure and simple.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?