What would change?

[The Nihilist]

Do you believe that society (a coherent group of people living together in emotional reciprocity) would exist without norms, rules, or laws?

That's my question

 

[IAmLegion.]

That's my question

Haha, well answer your own question. I'm going further than religion, to the whole collective unconscious. Government, mythology, history... You qualify to criticize these people's personal archetypes only if you believe that you have a better system. Nihilism? Everybody goes through that phase. But eventually you come out of the euphoria of existential nihilistic masturbation and realize that by rejecting intrinsic purpose you become absolutely ignorant of your surroundings. It is the greatest paradox. To know the truth, to filter all the [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] out of society, is a great accomplishment, but once you get there, you realize that it is worthless. Society relies on all that [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]. Without it, basic emotional needs of humans will not be met. There is a reason we put on a mask everyday, smile to people we don't know, and force a happy voice. The question comes to which is needed more: emotion or knowledge.
Again, just explain your utopic vision of how society should exist. Or, if you reject society, explain why.

 

[CCGirl]

Name them, as in, actual statistics where they actually have 80-90% of people saying they believe there is no life force, there is no God, etc, and yes I am aware that no statistic will be entirely accurate unless is of a governmental census variety, but here is something interesting.

In the Czech Republic, 59% of the population is either atheist, agnostic, a non-believer or a non-organized believer. Just assuming that atheist and non-believer are functionally the same thing, the problem is, two of the things mentioned in those say either that they do believe, or that they simply don't know. The Eurobarometer for the same country has 70% believing in some form of the supernatural, and only 30% wholly holisitically and totally atheist, and the Czech Republic is one of these "known for their atheism countries"

This will definately help you understand.


Americans may believe that a society with little religion would be immoral. Phil Zuckerman, a sociologist, found the opposite in Denmark and Sweden.

 

[The Nihilist]

Haha, well answer your own question. I'm going further than religion, to the whole collective unconscious. Government, mythology, history... You qualify to criticize these people's personal archetypes only if you believe that you have a better system. Nihilism? Everybody goes through that phase. But eventually you come out of the euphoria of existential nihilistic masturbation and realize that by rejecting intrinsic purpose you become absolutely ignorant of your surroundings. It is the greatest paradox. To know the truth, to filter all the [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] out of society, is a great accomplishment, but once you get there, you realize that it is worthless. Society relies on all that [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]. Without it, basic emotional needs of humans will not be met. There is a reason we put on a mask everyday, smile to people we don't know, and force a happy voice. The question comes to which is needed more: emotion or knowledge.
Again, just explain your utopic vision of how society should exist. Or, if you reject society, explain why.

I don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Nathan45]

I don't know what you're talking about.

Rough translation: The truth is that life is pointless, therefore you should reject truth and find religion or at least some kind of ideology because it makes you feel good, gives you purpose and is important for social cohesion. He also feels that if you are going to reject other people's way of finding meaning in life, you should propose some alternative way of finding meaning, even if everyone knows their worldview is false.

Or that's basically what i get out of his post... IAmLegion: if i'm wrong in some way feel free to correct.

 

[Ectezus]

I don't understand why so many theists have trouble with the idea they aren't special.

First of all I think it's enormously egotistical to think the whole universe evolves (no pun intended) around us. That we are made in the image of a god and what not.

I don't need a god to have a meaning in life.
Evolution basically means that every single one of your ancestors were winners. Not a single one died young, not a single one failed to reproduce.
They were all perfectly adapted to their environment. For 3.6 billion years that enormous long line of nothing but winners resulted in... me.. and you!
How is that not an amazingly motivating thought?

 

[yguy]

First of all I think it's enormously egotistical to think the whole universe evolves (no pun intended) around us. That we are made in the image of a god and what not.

How so?

Evolution basically means that every single one of your ancestors were winners. Not a single one died young, not a single one failed to reproduce.
They were all perfectly adapted to their environment. For 3.6 billion years that enormous long line of nothing but winners resulted in... me.. and you!

And ticks, leeches and cockroaches - any of which may end up being the ultimate winners. Whoopty damn doo.

How is that not an amazingly motivating thought?

What does that thought motivate you to do?

 

[Joachim]

I don't understand why so many theists have trouble with the idea they aren't special.

First of all I think it's enormously egotistical to think the whole universe evolves (no pun intended) around us. That we are made in the image of a god and what not.

I don't need a god to have a meaning in life.
Evolution basically means that every single one of your ancestors were winners. Not a single one died young, not a single one failed to reproduce.
They were all perfectly adapted to their environment. For 3.6 billion years that enormous long line of nothing but winners resulted in... me.. and you!
How is that not an amazingly motivating thought?

You can believe that and still believe in God. The only people who claim you can't are those on both sides who are unreasonables.

 

[Chesterton]

I skipped a couple of pages here, so forgive(?) me if someone already has given this answer, but:

You would all be my slaves. You would be building giant pyramids to honor my eternal [sic] memory. To paraphrase Eric Cartman, “Screw you guys, I'm worm food”. I got 72 years, and I want what I want. Okay, well, realistically, I probably don't have the power or charisma to make the pyramid thing happen, but to paraphrase Fitty Cent, “(fill in the blank) or Die Tryin'”. What else is there? I should live for a few more sunsets when the beauty of sunsets is an artificial, meaningless construct in my mind? Nah, that's illogical. To paraphrase a beer commercial, “Go for the gusto”.

 

[AdamClarke]

Christians, hypothetically, what would change if you suddenly discovered irrefutably that there was no God? What would change about how you went about your life? Would you kill yourself? Would you fornicate in the streets? Would you not really change anything?

Also, can we not make this a thread about what atheists would do if they found out there was a god? If that's what you want to talk about, make your own thread.

As a Christian I am not sure I can answer this question although I think it is a good one. The reason I cannot answer it, is because I cannot understand how you can prove something (in this case God) doesn't exist.

I am looking forward to the answers though.

 

[IAmLegion.]

I don't know what you're talking about.

Do you believe social structure?

 

[The Nihilist]

Do you believe social structure?

What claim that social structure is making are you asking me about specifically?

 

[IAmLegion.]

What claim that social structure is making are you asking me about specifically?

basic psychological needs.

 

[keith99]

If there's no afterlife then there is no point in moderation. One can afford to be charitible if they believe that their reward after death will be a gold palace in heaven where angels give them mint juleps. I personally think Mother Theresa is probably living in something now that makes Buckingham look like a tar paper shack.
...

Let's see. Last weekend I went out and played in a Rugby match. At 56 that takes a toll. I have a damaged shoulder from 2 weeks before that and now bruised ribs. Our side is short players, so I will likely boot up again this weekend. But it was not an automatic no God no moderation decision. I have a few beers after each match. I don;t get plastered after each match. Again moderation. I have given both time and money to groups and individuals, not for some reward, but because I think it will do some good.

I know Christians who do the same as I do. In fact I'd argue that those who are giving or refraining for excesses only for some far off reward in Heaven have little to nothing of Christ, they are in fact much more Moslem in nature, obeying a not so loving God only for promised rewards.

 

[Ectezus]

Evolution basically means that every single one of your ancestors were winners. Not a single one died young, not a single one failed to reproduce.
They were all perfectly adapted to their environment. For 3.6 billion years that enormous long line of nothing but winners resulted in... me.. and you!

And ticks, leeches and cockroaches - any of which may end up being the ultimate winners. Whoopty damn doo.

Just so you know, Hitler used this kind of argument aswell. During WW2 people in movie theaters were shown pictures of dirty rats, then Jews, then rats again eating a corpse, then Jews again, etc...

I think it's a horrible kind of argument trying to establish a connection between a particular group and something that most people have a biased negative feeling towards.

Cockroaches, yes, I don't like them but my opinion has nothing to do with how effective they really are at what they do (and scaring people isn't their main activity you know). When humans nuke this planet to oblivion they will be about the only surviving creatures. Their radiation tollerance is amazing!

Also; we didn't evolve from every living species we see today. There are branches in the so called "tree of life".

 

[Museveni]

Just for record on religion in Sweden those numbers can be really twisted easily. Almost all children born in Sweden automaticly become members of the Swedish Church(state up until afew years ago) and count as "christians" until they choose to leave by their own accord. Most people simply doesn't bother with this since it's a tiresome process and generaly not worth the paperwork and time to leave and most people want the church wedding(requires that atleast 1 person is registered). So the numbers betwen "Christians" and the number of people who actully pratice it is really different. Then as mentioned there is a big difference betwen beliving in the supernatural and being religeous.

I never left the church myself for an example but have never set foot in one unless it was a school trip or graduation(it had a larger auditorium then our small town school).

As far as change in religeous people if it's proven that god doesn't exsist I think it will be very different betwen people. A good person is still a good person but those who "play nice" becuase they are afraid of eternal punishment/want a payoff in the afterlive probably will change for the worse once the "punishment/payoff" disappears.

Reminds me of the episode off Penn and Teller: Bull**** where they talked about legalizing "light" drugs and there were this "hardcore" anti-drug sheriff in Texas or somewhere down there who more-or-less said that the ONLY reason he isnt drugged up on the work is becuase the law says he cant do it and not becuase it would be bad judgement.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

If there's no afterlife then there is no point in moderation. One can afford to be charitible if they believe that their reward after death will be a gold palace in heaven where angels give them mint juleps. I personally think Mother Theresa is probably living in something now that makes Buckingham look like a tar paper shack.


However, if this is all that there is, then you need to get as much as you can fast as you can, basically, if your hypothetical is ever proved true, all you will do is create a lot Neros and Caligulas, the murder rate would go up and at some point societal advance would just break down because we would all too busy hording what we could, plotting against each other, killing each other and having relations with each other.


It's just the nature of man.

So, you think the only reason people could really have for not being total [insert expletive here] is the carrot-and-stick? Whew.

I don't perceive humanity in such bleak terms, nor do I perceive myself in such a manner. I consider afterlife-scenarios such as the one you cited above to be downright silly, childish wish-fulfillment fantasies coupled with fear of death - and yet, I'd *never* consider acting in the way you described before.

If you really, honestly feel that you need some supernatural authority to keep you from becoming a sociopath - then I pity you.

 

[The Nihilist]

basic psychological needs.

I have no idea what you're asking me.

 

[The Nihilist]

Just so you know, Hitler used this kind of argument aswell. During WW2 people in movie theaters were shown pictures of dirty rats, then Jews, then rats again eating a corpse, then Jews again, etc...

I think it's a horrible kind of argument trying to establish a connection between a particular group and something that most people have a biased negative feeling towards.

Cockroaches, yes, I don't like them but my opinion has nothing to do with how effective they really are at what they do (and scaring people isn't their main activity you know). When humans nuke this planet to oblivion they will be about the only surviving creatures. Their radiation tollerance is amazing!

Also; we didn't evolve from every living species we see today. There are branches in the so called "tree of life".

This thread was going so well, and then you had to Godwin it. This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[Ectezus]

This thread was going so well, and then you had to Godwin it.

Do you disagree with the analogy or did you just want to say something about some other guys opinion?