(April 17, 2014 at 7:33 am)Brakeman Wrote: Imagine getting up every morning and heading along in a huge arena filled people and praising the boss all day every day without end.

Sounds like hell to me... If I wanted to do that sort of thing I would move to North Korea.

Some purpose in life!

Even as a Christian when Heaven was described to me I was taken aback in disgust, the thought that I'd have to spend eternity in praise of god was a giant let down. I remember thinking,

"I don't want to do that shit forever, nah, surely Heaven isn't like that."

How can purely physical things and processes have any meaning at all? Ontological naturalism excludes both final and formal causes. Those exclusions make any form of intentionality impossible.

Secondly a life has meaning in the same way symbolic representations do. Words and pictures point to things other than themselves. Thus a person's life has meaning to the extent that it serves as a sign and symbol of something they value. The difference between atheists and believers is that atheists can only refer to proximate values whereas believers identify with transcendent or eternal values.

(April 17, 2014 at 12:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: How can purely physical things and processes have any meaning at all? Ontological naturalism excludes both final and formal causes. Those exclusions make any form of intentionality impossible.

Secondly a life has meaning in the same way symbolic representations do. Words and pictures point to things other than themselves. Thus a person's life has meaning to the extent that it serves as a sign and symbol of something they value. The difference between atheists and believers is that atheists can only refer to proximate values whereas believers identify with transcendent or eternal values.

Translation: "I pretend the things I live for are extra special and magical, much better than the things you atheists live for, and so therefore they must be real and correct!"

Sorry Chad, the fact that you've injected a heaping helping of self-importance into your own beliefs isn't really a problem for anyone else.

(April 17, 2014 at 12:48 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 17, 2014 at 12:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: How can purely physical things and processes have any meaning at all? Ontological naturalism excludes both final and formal causes. Those exclusions make any form of intentionality impossible.

Secondly a life has meaning in the same way symbolic representations do. Words and pictures point to things other than themselves. Thus a person's life has meaning to the extent that it serves as a sign and symbol of something they value. The difference between atheists and believers is that atheists can only refer to proximate values whereas believers identify with transcendent or eternal values.

Translation: "I pretend the things I live for are extra special and magical, much better than the things you atheists live for, and so therefore they must be real and correct!"

Sorry Chad, the fact that you've injected a heaping helping of self-importance into your own beliefs isn't really a problem for anyone else.

Translation: I cannot present a coherent refutation so I'll paraphrase what was said in an insulting way.

(April 17, 2014 at 12:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: ... whereas believers identify with transcendent or eternal values.

Would you mind giving example of these transcendent or eternal values please, I, for one cannot think of any

(April 17, 2014 at 12:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: How can purely physical things and processes have any meaning at all?

They are instrumental to subjective or intuitive purpose.

How is a purpose that comes from God any better than a purpose that comes from yourself?

(April 17, 2014 at 12:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Ontological naturalism excludes both final and formal causes. Those exclusions make any form of intentionality impossible.

Excuse me, how again do you get from ontological naturalism to intentionality being impossible? I hope you realize that (ontological) naturalism doesn't have a well-established meaning. -> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/

For other readers: Final and formal causes

(April 17, 2014 at 12:43 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Secondly a life has meaning in the same way symbolic representations do. Words and pictures point to things other than themselves. Thus a person's life has meaning to the extent that it serves as a sign and symbol of something they value. The difference between atheists and believers is that atheists can only refer to proximate values whereas believers identify with transcendent or eternal values.

Say what now?

(April 17, 2014 at 6:40 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Translation: I cannot present a coherent refutation so I'll paraphrase what was said in an insulting way.

Why do I need to respond again to your usual argument from ignorance about meaning? As I've said before Chad, "I don't see how the meaning you guys construct for yourself can solve this problem I've invented to surpass the meaning I pretend I have that's better than yours," is not something that requires refutation. Until you can demonstrate a single shred of what you believe, you're in exactly the same boat as the rest of us.

(April 17, 2014 at 8:19 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 17, 2014 at 6:40 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Translation: I cannot present a coherent refutation so I'll paraphrase what was said in an insulting way.

Why do I need to respond again to your usual argument from ignorance about meaning? As I've said before Chad, "I don't see how the meaning you guys construct for yourself can solve this problem I've invented to surpass the meaning I pretend I have that's better than yours," is not something that requires refutation. Until you can demonstrate a single shred of what you believe, you're in exactly the same boat as the rest of us.

Its not an argument from ignorance. You espouse a a materialist view that intentionally denies that physical systems seek desired ends. Then you engage in special pleading that a certain type of physical process, human brain function, can do so.

My statement about proximate vs ultimate meaning stands unrefuted. I made no claim about the relative value of one to the other.

(April 17, 2014 at 8:46 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Its not an argument from ignorance. You espouse a a materialist view that intentionally denies that physical systems seek desired ends. Then you engage in special pleading that a certain type of physical process, human brain function, can do so.

My statement about proximate vs ultimate meaning stands unrefuted. I made no claim about the relative value of one to the other.

So first you tell me what I think, and then you invent a problem for that thing you've told me that I think, and then you scoff at me for not solving a problem I don't know exists, in a position that I don't necessarily hold, foisted upon me by a person I've never met.

Yep, that sounds like an entirely rational justification for your claims.

The purpose and meaning of a Christian's life is to be joined to, and part of the eternal God.

The closest we can come in this realm is marriage or family.

"That they may be one, even as you Father are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us; that the world may believe that you did send Me" John 17:21

We are not described as servants or slaves but sons and daughters.
We are described as co-heirs with Christ who is God.

"He that overcomes will sit with me on my throne, as I also overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne" Rev 3:21
This is the victory that overcomes the world (system)- our faith.

All that is in the world is- the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life and the lies of the System- these are what we are to overcome.