(January 5, 2015 at 8:07 pm)*steve* Wrote: Hello, I'm new to the forum. Full disclosure: I'm currently a non-traditional theist. However, I have considered atheism a few times but it seems to be such a grim position. Let me explain.
As I understand atheism, these would be a few of its tenets:
There is no ultimate meaning. Therefore, all lives and events are ultimately meaningless.
There is no ultimate basis for value. Therefore any moral position is ultimately arbitrary and logically, equally defensible. This means that things like genocide, pedophilia, torture, etc. are equally defensible to any other moral position.
There is no ultimate intentionality associated with/in reality. Therefore, all events, actions, thoughts and behaviors are determined by chance and necessity. Thus, an individual's thoughts and actions are determined solely by prior causal events and chance.
At least for me, if I take these atheist positions to their logical conclusion this all seems psychologically pretty grim.
I'd be interested in comments why this is not necessarily the case.
Which is more important-- truth or comfort? You have to choose between the blue pill and the red one.
I think you could argue that cognitive dissonance-- the difference between a person's world view and reality-- is the deepest and most dangerous source of psychological pressure. Having an unreal idea too close to the core of one's personality is extremely dangerous, as when it's unreality is revealed, it can lead to a nervous breakdown or an identity crisis.
It's possible, though, that you really think God is real, and that nothing could ever happen (death of a loved one, a virus that kills only toddlers, a Republican majority government) that would shake that world view. In that case, it's possible that you could live and die without ever having to experience that crisis.
