92
   

Atheists... Your life is pointless

 
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 07:36 pm
It's pointless to get serious with one with an antagonistic viewpoint to science. Suiffice it to say, if we had not evolved with behavior that keeps us from doing that kind of stuff (sort of), we would not survive long enough to evolve at all, in fact would not survive. Anbody with an ounce of intelligence knows you can't survive like that. Few animals kill consistently within the species, and there are natural factors keeping them from killing off more than can survive.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 07:38 pm
What's interesting about most animals is that they kill for their food and not for sport. Humans kill each other for more foolish reasons.
0 Replies
 
John Creasy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 07:54 pm
They also kill each other over territorial disputes. The males of some species kill each other over who gets to mate with the female.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 07:56 pm
Many animals also fight over territory.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 07:57 pm
there are natural factors keeping them from killing off more than can survive.

I repeat myself. Plus, humans have evolved enough self awareness to know better, even when they don't.
0 Replies
 
John Creasy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 08:04 pm
We obviously haven't evolved enough then. The instinct's still there.
0 Replies
 
Terry
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 08:15 pm
John Creasy wrote:
Why do so many atheists come out of the woodwork to confront anybody that questions them? Why are you so adamant about there being no God? Sounds like you are the ones preaching. I find it ironic that there are more atheists than theists on a spirituality forum.

In case you hadn't noticed, this is a debate forum. Did you really expect to be able to assert that atheists lives' are pointless and have everyone agree with you?
Quote:
As far as love is concerned, it is against nature. If we are simply evolutionary animals then survival of the fittest is how we should live right?

Love is not against nature. The limbic system in mammalian brains naturally produces emotions. Cooperation, care for young, and reciprocal altruism are valuable traits for animals that live in societies, so those individuals possessing them are more fit than those who lack them.
Quote:
I was just wondering out loud how if there is no God, than why don't we live more like the animals we are? Why the morals?

We do live like the animals we are. We are intelligent animals who have discovered that rules of behavior are necessary for living in society. Some systems of rules work better than others, and those societies tend to thrive, expand, and assimilate their neighbors (either by conquering them or less violent means such as trade and marriage). The carrot/stick method of promising people eternity in paradise for being "good" and eternal damnation for breaking the rules seems to be popular.
Quote:
So empathy and love are a product of evolution? What nonsense.

It is not nonsense. Do you know anything about brains, comparative biology, biochemistry, psychology, anthropology, or any other sciences? I can provide links, but need to know your level of understanding.

What is nonsense is believing that a "perfect" supernatural being created us and endowed us with hatred, greed, lust, spite, and all of then other negative emotions, but rejects us unless we believe that he had his son killed as a sacrifice to himself to save us from himself, because otherwise he would be unable to stop himself from punishing us for all eternity for having the sinful human natures with which we were born.
Quote:
So is it ok to kill if my instinct compels me to?? If I have a strong lust for a woman, is it ok to rape her because my instinct is urging me to have her??? These are animal instincts, we all have them deep down. Why not act on them??

Enlightened people control their instincts because they do not wish to harm other beings. Less enlightened people restrain themselves out of fear of being caught and punished, if not by the police or kin of the victims, then by some supernatural bogeyman.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 08:23 pm
JC is into belligerant ignorance, Terry. Which is natural, that is one of human's defense mechanisms.

Having lived fairly long, I can admit that someone I thought was so nutso that I remembered the comments -- and they resonated with me as I'd explored various ideas later.

My own take is to have mr or ms creasy commune more with self, plus, with curiosity, to take a few overview courses at a - saints be - state uni.
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 08:58 pm
I think they call this "muscular Christianity" which is in some sense related to being a mussel head.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 09:08 pm
Hi Acquiunk, Those are the harshest words I've seen you post on a2k. Everything okay? Wink
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 09:16 pm
Aquiunk is always cool.











<general fan>
0 Replies
 
John Creasy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 09:46 pm
Again, where did I say that I was a Christian??

How does restraining your instincts equate with enlightenment?? There are some very intelligent people out there who don't restrain their instincts. What exactly do you consider enlightenment? So someone who has the instinct to kill can not be enlightened to you?

Another thing, why did we evolve so far while there are still single cell organisms that haven't changed a bit? This seems strange to me.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 10:12 pm
I am not able to attend to all this.
My life is pointless, after all. I'll need to be about my gathering of grains by the roadside.

With any luck, they'll be flax...
0 Replies
 
Terry
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 10:24 pm
John Creasy wrote:
Again, where did I say that I was a Christian??

How does restraining your instincts equate with enlightenment?? There are some very intelligent people out there who don't restrain their instincts. What exactly do you consider enlightenment? So someone who has the instinct to kill can not be enlightened to you?

Another thing, why did we evolve so far while there are still single cell organisms that haven't changed a bit? This seems strange to me.

Most people on this forum who think that morality comes from God, are talking about the Christian God. Please specify your choice of deities so we can all get on the same page here.

Not wanting to harm other people equates with enlightenment and empathy for all life. People can be geniuses without being enlightened at all. We all have an instinct to kill in some situations, but can learn to control ourselves.

Where did you get the idea that single cells have not evolved? Of course they have, even archaic bacteria, but they remain single cells because they reproduce asexually (although bacteria may swap genetic material on occasion), and a daughter cell is usually virtually identical to the parent cell.

Do you understand how emotions and morality could evolve without a god, or do you want more information?
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 10:45 pm
John Creasy wrote:
Terry wrote:

If there is a god, why does he make people so stupid that they cannot understand simple concepts, such as:

We care about others because our brains have evolved the ability to empathize.
Fittest does not mean strongest. It also means being able to convince others to cooperate, share resources, and provide emotional support.
Love is important whether or not there are jealous and vengeful gods.
Memories do not depend on religious belief, although building pyramids and temples can ensure name recognition for ages.



So empathy and love are a product of evolution? What nonsense.


I'm not that good with science but I think that this might be an example of adaptation. Empathy and love - altruism and co-operation - are possibly behaviours which ensure humans thrive, so we do. If innately we all wanted to kill each other - I'm not talking about tribalism writ large here, I'm suggesting if it were innate - then we would not be running the planet.
0 Replies
 
Ray
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 11:21 pm
My life is not pointless, even if I am an atheist. Why do we need for there to be a God to find meaning in our life? There is in my opinion a distinction between meaning and purpose. There might not be a pre-set purpose to our lives, but we do find meaning in the world, and with it we may search for a purpose worthy of pursuing.

I have no problem in thinking that we attain our capability of reasoning or empathy through evolution. I do have a problem with saying that there is a purpose to evolution.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 11:31 pm
Purpose to evolution ias an idea is teleology... I missed who said there was.

man, I need to get outta here, bunch of knickers twisting over little.
0 Replies
 
Ray
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 11:34 pm
Chill. Have a cup of tea.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 11:39 pm
ias = new word for as


Tea, now there's a thought...

Pointless though it may be, I do like tea a great deal.
I'll consider having some...
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 12:45 am
" Quarrel not at all. No man resolved to make the most of himself can spare time for personal contention" -Abraham Lincoln
 

Related Topics

Atheism - Discussion by littlek
American Atheists Barred from holding Office - Discussion by edgarblythe
Richard Dawkins doesn't exist! - Question by Jay2know
The New State Religion: Atheism - Question by Expert2
Is Atheism the New Age Religion? - Question by Expert2
Critical thinking on the existence of God - Discussion by Susmariosep
Are evolution and the big bang true? - Discussion by Johnjohnjohn
To the people .. - Question by Johnjohnjohn
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 08/07/2020 at 09:59:50