(December 31, 2009 at 9:22 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: But what are we looking _for_ VOID? For me it's meaning and purpose.. for you it seems to be an impossible answer. From my POV I see you don't want to accept the obvious, but instead skirt around superfluous issues and even fail at making anything of those, apart from some humour.

Sounds like you just want ignorant bliss, which is entirely up to you, but i would prefer to get as close as i can to the truth of the nature of the universe and then derive my purpose and meaning in life from that, to make my own music, rather than march to the beat of a God who's existence can only be assumed.

Finding my own purpose in life is far more desirable and meaningful than being handed it by a intergalactic dictator, an idea that for me cheapens the whole journey of self discovery and realisation of your priorities.

What is your meaning of life then? Can you enlighten me?

Well that's funny then VOID - we both think the other wants ignorance. Funny also tho' that I can absolutely embrace the truth of nature _in addition to_ the philosophical meanderings of my choice. You don't seem to be able to make any distinction... for you the two have to be combined and seen from a literalist POV.

My POV certainly doesn't 'cheapen' the journey. As is indicated by the continual attempt to belittle it rather than give it serious consideration (why not state what it is rather than use childish jibes like "intergalactic dictator"). Atheism where I live is the mainstream POV. Yet still atheists are so insecure they feel the need to demean the POV of anyone who disagrees.

(December 31, 2009 at 10:06 pm)ib.me.ub Wrote: What is your meaning of life then? Can you enlighten me?

My meaning of life is to enjoy and experience all i can while maintaining at all times my moral values during this short length of time i am alive.

What is your meaning?

Very similar actually. But what makes you think any one elses meaning would be different?

(December 31, 2009 at 10:17 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Well that's funny then VOID - we both think the other wants ignorance. Funny also tho' that I can absolutely embrace the truth of nature _in addition to_ the philosophical meanderings of my choice. You don't seem to be able to make any distinction... for you the two have to be combined and seen from a literalist POV.

If God exists and has a purpose for each of us then a purpose derived from naturalism would be false, so no you cannot have both, it would be contradictory. That is not at all to say that you cannot embrace the truth of nature, it seems you misunderstood me there, but that purpose from the higher authority would surpass any materialist subjective purpose.

Also, what specifically am I ignorant of fr0d0?

Quote:My POV certainly doesn't 'cheapen' the journey. As is indicated by the continual attempt to belittle it rather than give it serious consideration (why not state what it is rather than use childish jibes like "intergalactic dictator"). Atheism where I live is the mainstream POV. Yet still atheists are so insecure they feel the need to demean the POV of anyone who disagrees.

Based on my current understanding it seems less desirable to have purpose and meaning passed from the top down than to have t build it yourself from the bottom, it's just my opinion and i don't expect you, or any theist for that matter to agree.

Is God not a dictator?

Give me a reason why your belief in God is a valid logical undertaking and i won't have reason to make a mockery of it.

Also, it would be rather foolish to assume that it's because we are insecure and not just that we think your a little wacky and like having a laugh.

---

(December 31, 2009 at 10:31 pm)ib.me.ub Wrote: Very similar actually. But what makes you think any one elses meaning would be different?

Because there are people who don't share the same view that's why, people who exploit for gain and those who believe their purpose is to 'bask in the glory of god' etc are not meanings i have any relationship with.

Quote:Because there are people who don't share the same view that's why, people who exploit for gain and those who believe their purpose is to 'bask in the glory of god' etc are not meanings i have any relationship with.

This is speculation and a very extreme judgement on your behalf.

(December 31, 2009 at 10:51 pm)ib.me.ub Wrote:

Quote:Because there are people who don't share the same view that's why, people who exploit for gain and those who believe their purpose is to 'bask in the glory of god' etc are not meanings i have any relationship with.

This is speculation and a very extreme judgement on your behalf.

Speculation, how so?

People exploit others for power and money, that is a fact, example, Robert Mugabe. This is directly opposite to to my own sense of meaning.

People claim that their purpose is to praise god, another fact not speculation, this is not part of my meaning of life and therefore there is a difference.

Also where did i judge anyone? I pointed out the fact that my meaning of life is not objective and other people have different meanings.

(December 31, 2009 at 10:44 pm)theVOID Wrote: If God exists and has a purpose for each of us then a purpose derived from naturalism would be false, so no you cannot have both, it would be contradictory. That is not at all to say that you cannot embrace the truth of nature, it seems you misunderstood me there, but that purpose from the higher authority would surpass any materialist subjective purpose.

Also, what specifically am I ignorant of fr0d0?

I don't embrace your naturalistic purpose of course ...sentient human development strives in the opposite direction to naturalism so it's your stance that is contradictory.

You are ignorant of Christianity if you believe what you spout.

(December 31, 2009 at 10:44 pm)theVOID Wrote: Based on my current understanding it seems less desirable to have purpose and meaning passed from the top down than to have t build it yourself from the bottom, it's just my opinion and i don't expect you, or any theist for that matter to agree.

Is God not a dictator?

Give me a reason why your belief in God is a valid logical undertaking and i won't have reason to make a mockery of it.

I see. So when it suits you you assume religion is top down, then when it doesn't you assume it's all man made. Convenient huh.

Like I said, morals fly against naturalistic development. Everyone has progressed from 'the bottom up', no one was born knowing everything. And theists who say they never considered anything are worthless as theists.. again it's yet another of your strawmen. You have no argument so you need to continually construct this ridiculous smoke screen.

Belief in God is a valid logical undertaking because it perfectly reflects the desire of human nature. It's what you seek yet deny.

(December 31, 2009 at 10:44 pm)theVOID Wrote: Because there are people who don't share the same view that's why, people who exploit for gain and those who believe their purpose is to 'bask in the glory of god' etc are not meanings i have any relationship with.

Here we go with the bad examples again - people exploit people and have a weakness where power and greed are concerned. This isn't religion... this is people gone bad. Is this another joke or are you being deliberately foolish?

(December 31, 2009 at 10:23 pm)theVOID Wrote: My meaning of life is to enjoy and experience all i can while maintaining at all times my moral values during this short length of time i am alive.

What is your meaning?

i completly agree in every way, we arent able to do what we can do for long, we'll get old and wither away, so everyone get out there and LIVE BEFORE YOU REGRET IT