Human Value Nonexistent?

[Mystic]

Have to agree with festive Mystic. There is no certainty. I feel that the "truth" you are looking for will never be found.

The only thing that matters is here and now. Reality, as it is. Acceptance.

I like trying to the find the truth. But it seems that quest for ultimate truth as far as our purpose here, is motivated that we feel it will be peaceful and give us direction on how to live.

The quest for truth can really be a quest for a deluded peaceful world view.

Only at the end of rainbow, there was no treasure, only void meaningless emptiness. Humanity might be awakening from it's delusions. God helps us when we do

[The Grand Nudger]

Maybe you should lower your expectations? I don't know why anyone would assume (expect, or hope) that any treasure lay at the end of the rainbow of life..as it were.

[Mystic]

Maybe you should lower your expectations? I don't know why anyone would assume (expect, or hope) that any treasure lay at the end of the rainbow of life..as it were.

Evolution wise, because it worked. It gave us strength. We sought the truth, but we wanted the truth to be what we want it to be. The belief in our myths of our society. It gave us harmony. Or of the flip side, it maybe like how we know even before we ever have sex, that we will feel good when we have it, and we know the feeling even without ever doing it to an extent, that it will be pleasurable....perhaps there is a soul, and it's attracted to finding a purpose that will give it peace.

I don't know personally or even don't know if I don't know personally. Perhaps some mystics have found the truth. Perhaps some people are sure they have a soul and purpose. I can't distinguish my mysticism from my schizophrenia. So I don't know personally or since the mystics insist we do know deep inside, I don't know if I don't know.

---

that any treasure lay at the end of the rainbow of life..as it were.

"There is not a thing but with us it's treasure and we don't send down but in known measurement" - Probably my favorite verse.

That God is the Ultimate treasure and that we all have a treasure descended from him. That we all have inner beauty that transcends physical beauty. Evolution wise, beauty is just a made up concept to attract us to one another and enjoy nature and society.

When I learned "Hussain" means beautiful, the story of Karbala, was just more beautiful (it's in sad way).

The struggle for justice and sacrifice for it, is it beautiful objectively, or is it meaningless. Did Imam Hussain and his companions sacrifice their lives for nothing?

We are emotional beings. Morality evolution wise would not have been a rationally thought code. It would be based more on instinct, but then we seek justification. Myth was a justification. Does Naturalism justify it. Seemingly no.

---

The belief in "judgement" of the "God" or "the Gods"...justifies that there is an objective judgment to who we are. We already believe there is an objective judgment to who we are, then seek to justify it.

Human value was justified by myths in the past.

People act like the objectively know you enough to make a judgment call on you, and insult you often, like people do here on the forums to theists (and even me) but then we incline to say, who cares about what they think.

But where did we get our perception of ourselves. It's all from ourselves? If it was, insults would never hurt. Praise would never feel good. We like to hear positive feed back.

And a person who relies on his own perception of himself ignoring what all others think is probably the most egoistic deluded person if there is a such thing as an objective measurement to ourselves.

The human inclination then is to be believe "no one can truly judge me but God" or "the Gods".

Myth helps us confirm instincts we take for granted. Atheism is hated more then religions, and Atheists are distrusted more, by religious people, then any other people.

But is their fault? Or did evolution hardwire us like that

[The Grand Nudger]

You're ignoring the possibility that myths were simply an elaborate way of expressing a value we already perceived within ourselves and each other (and if the remnants of our little social units are any indicator of the inner workings of men we valued each other long before we went about myth-making). I don't know if I'd characterize the hold of mythology as granting any sort of harmony either.

Personally, I don't require any more justification for the value I set on my self or others than that it is my own. It is the value I choose to assign, I set the terms and conditions, because my own authority is the only authority with any sway regarding the value judgements made by yours truly.
(similarly whether someone "sacrificed for nothing" from our perspective is a fairly moot point from the perspective of the person who did the deed, agreed?)

You know you seem to be of the opinion that a choice must be made between beauty or morality or [insert positively valued shit here] and evolution..or materialism (or anything that seems to suggest to you that we dont have souls/and or magical this or thats). No one asks you to choose between the two, why is this an either or issue? No magic no morality? No magic no beauty? Meh, I call shenanigans.

[Mystic]

You're ignoring the possibility that myths were simply an elaborate way of expressing a value we already perceived within ourselves and each other (and if the remnants of our little social units are any indicator of the inner workings of men we valued each other long before we went about myth-making).

Actually this is what I'm stating. But it's not that one developed without the other. They went together. Without myth to give a structure to the instincts in society, people would not have felt justified. Specially with the sophistication of primitive society.

What is the justification that there is an objective value to anyone without myth?

We love of ourselves out of pure instinct as children. We didn't have a rational justification. We appreciated our mother and father. We didn't have a rational justification.

We believe in an objective judgment to who were are, and so far, only myth justifies how that is even possible.

You, for example, may see the beauty in such an act as the beauty of sacrifice, but those who perform it may see the beauty of such an act as the beauty of what motivated the sacrifice.

It's the spirit behind the action that I find beautiful, I imagine a Hussain, and whatever my imagination has of him, reflected by belief of how such a motivation would look like from my our perception of inner beauty. Not the simple act. In Islam, it was always emphasized that actions are measured by their intentions. I know we judge others, I know we judge ourselves, and I know we believe in praise.

I think however, myths and those instincts through the naturalism perspective, came together hand to hand.

The moral instinct without belief in soul, gods, spirits, metaphysical good and metaphysical evil, would never be as "strong" as it is.

In animals, they act on moral instinct. Humans getting intelligent, would need a justification for those instincts.

Or that the instincts became stronger and morality became more sophisticated then from primitive in conjugation with myths.

[The Grand Nudger]

You think that myth provides a rational justification? Only by some hilarious definitions for myth, rational, and justification. That we do not require "justification" to value things would be implied by your own argument, as we clearly valued each other before these myths were present (and again, this is in your own statements - you choose to differ to instincts). That intelligence does not require "rational justifications" for it's impulses, urges or actions is again implied in your own argument by the same statement.

Now on to demonstrable things. These myths and the value we place on others did not "go together". We valued others long before we were ever even humans, and we were fully modern humans for a long time before the mythmaking bullshit started. Please, please, please show me something in mythical morality that isn't primitive - because I'd be very interested?

(myth definitely provides something, and all super snarkiness aside I'm, going to mention that in the absence of a suitable explanation any explanation seems to do, for us anyway. We have a tendency to -fill in the blanks-. This doesn't mean that any justification is actually being offered up, just that we're content with whatever relieves us of the need to consider the question)

[Mystic]

You think that myth provides a rational justification?

No, but it works. It makes you feel justified in your perception of value of yourself, of others, of praise, of morals, etc...

That we do not require "justification" to value things would be implied by your own argument, as we clearly valued each other before these myths were present (and again, this is in your own statements - you choose to differ to instincts).

Animals value each other. But they don't ponder "why"? Animals don't insult one another, and praise one another constantly, to require a need to believe in a objective value to themselves.

Yes we valued each other as primates, but without the sophisticated perception of value we have now. Myths was favored by evolution. It doesn't mean they are correct, but it's the human condition to believe in myths.

That intelligence does not require "rational justifications" for it's impulses, urges or actions is again implied in your own argument by the same statement.

Heh, well try to understand. It wasn't always required. A monkey can value itself by pure instinct. But where intelligence (logic) and instinct is developing, there needed to be myth at one point.

---

You are just dying to be "special," aren't you?

This is true. We believe naturally as humans we are special and we can become special.

Otherwise, we really shouldn't feel it's ok to kill cows to eat. If cows are as valuable as we are, why should we slaughter them and end their lives?

Humans needed to feel superior to other animals. They hunted animals and ate them for survival.

Again, naturalism perspective doesn't justify us killing animals. Myth did.

"What am I" ?

Yes, we needed "gods" and "god" to feel special.

What makes him a loser? He is only being human.

[Ryantology]

If you need the idea of a god to make you feel better about the world around you, I do not have a problem with it. No doubt that some measure of my happiness in life is derived from things I misunderstand, misinterpret, or even willfully invent. I enjoy writing fiction, after all. My creative lies bring me happiness. Of course, I do understand that they are creative lies.

It becomes a problem when you don't feel good about the world around you until everyone shares in your delusion, to the point where you attempt to force it on others. You are free to share in whatever makes me happy, but you have every right to not share in it. It would be wrong, indeed immoral, of me to force you to do so, or condemn you for not doing so.

[The Grand Nudger]

No, but it works. It makes you feel justified in your perception of value of yourself, of others, of praise, of morals, etc...

Until it doesn't "work" at all.....right, like the very moment someone asks you to demonstrate the veracity of the claim.

Animals value each other. But they don't ponder "why"? Animals don't insult one another, and praise one another constantly, to require a need to believe in a objective value to themselves.

Thank you for your expert observations Dr. Dolittle.......

Yes we valued each other as primates, but without the sophisticated perception of value we have now.

A perception of value by reference to ghosts doesn't sound very sophisticated to me Mystic.....

Myths was favored by evolution. It doesn't mean they are correct, but it's the human condition to believe in myths.

Correction, our evolution seems to have prepared the ground for magical thinking (but why you would think this was the case when you doubt that very notion is beyond me). Our evolutionary pathways and quirks are unqualified to comment upon what evolution favors et all. Similarly, by this same token one could claim that same apparatus that gave us myth-making also gives us skepticism, because here I am, evolution favors me. The more accurate way to express this sentiment would be that human evolution appears to have favored the ability to create myth. It's the ability, not the myth that evolution could operate on...just how would evolution favor a myth btw? I wasn't aware that myths were biological.

Heh, well try to understand. It wasn't always required.

It still isn't.

A monkey can value itself by pure instinct. But where intelligence (logic) and instinct is developing, there needed to be myth at one point.

Why?

Again, naturalism perspective doesn't justify us killing animals. Myth did.

No, it doesn't (and didn't). In the same way that my comment "waffles" doesn't explain consciousness myth does not provide justification. I think what you're referring to here might be better labeled pretense, rationalization, excuse, or bare assertion.

Yes, we needed "gods" and "god" to feel special.

I don't, and I'm carrying the same gear that people carried both before and during this whole god business...and throughout the entirety of this god business there were those who did not feel this need any more than I do now.

[Mystic]

It becomes a problem when you don't feel good about the world around you until everyone shares in your delusion, to the point where you attempt to force it on others.

Heh, the paradox form of our evolution of morality. People needed to unite on myths/delusions. There is natural inclination, to want others to share your view and even believe others should share your view.

We naturally believe in things we believe we should. And we couldn't believe we should, if we thought others should not.

So here we are with everyone trying to convince everyone they are right.

It's paradoxical in that it's needed for harmony but at the same time is the root cause of disharmony.

---

How would evolution favor a myth? A myth that doesn't appeal to the emotions of people and makes them flourish, would not work. So we would naturally be inclined to accept certain type of myths.

For example, belief in a soul and afterlife. It makes you feel better about loved ones dying. A myth that says this is our only life may not work so well

Lo and behold, soul and after life is found all over the place