Atheism and the meaning of life - what drives you?

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

…   Whatever value worth or meaning it has is given to it by some other thing, some afterlife.  One wonders why or how an afterlife would have meaning, or grant meaning to life, if life has no meaning itself,…

Well, @snowtracks, is not correct. The lives of the dead can have meaning. It’s just that people have to be alive to enjoy that significance. He makes the same mistake that nihilists do – confusing the enjoyments of life from any meaning(s) it may have. For example, married sex is pleasuarable. For some however, physical intimacy is interpreted as a sign of intangibles like commitment and affection within the relationship.

The meaning of a sign is found in the relationship between the sign and what the sign signifies. The meaning of a painting is not inherent in the canvas or colored globs; but rather, by reference to something external to it, i.e. the subject matter depicted. So when someone asks what the meaning of life is, he or she isn’t just looking to something within life that makes life worth living. Instead they are asking to participate in a relationship with something larger to which their lives refer.

 Oh indeedly doodly yes, the lives of the deceased can have great meaning. The Mormon church  baptises thousands of dead people by proxy so they can go to heaven. That's why they have the largest privately owned genealogical base in the world.  A few years ago they went a little too far. They began baptising Jewish people who had died in the Holocaust. Jewish people found out and were livid, saying mean things to the Mormons. For their part, the Mormons promised to stop, so that's alright then. The late Queen Elizabeth The Queen mother has apparently been posthumously baptised.

From 2017:

"SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Mormons are posthumously baptizing Holocaust victims as well as grandparents of public figures like Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and Steven Spielberg, despite church rules intended to restrict the ceremonies to a member’s ancestors, according to a researcher who has spent two decades monitoring the church’s massive genealogical database."

https://apnews.com/article/salt-lake-city-donald-trump-us-news-ap-top-news-ut-state-wire-992dd887f7b948d0a08055dff0363aa4

I'm obviously far too insensitive. I find the whole thing hilarious. Especially the news that the  Mormons have baptised both Anne Frank and Adolf Hitler.

In my family, after our atheist relatives are cremated, their ashes are dug into the rose garden.  My parents were both Catholic.  Dad's ashes were scattered on his favourite river. Mum's will be taken to Canada and interred in Vancouver with her parents. We have all the paper work and a small tasteful plaque. (it was a quite immodest $5000)  Covid19 prevented my brother from taking the trip.

[Astreja]

Your response is makes no sense in regard to Astreja's post.  She asked what was the point in making all the effort to reach a heaven that is not permanent.  It's similar to asking if a career in engineering will only last a month, why would I bother to go to college and work hard for four years to get a degree for that?  The point of reading a book is to enjoy the book, not to prepare for something afterward.

Because it's not "making all the effort", it's not hard like that. It's a series of easy-to-make choices.

Given the information I currently have, it's not possible for me to choose belief.  At best I can role-play a believer.  On the inside, there's no religious belief there at all.

[Ahriman]

Because it's not "making all the effort", it's not hard like that. It's a series of easy-to-make choices.

Given the information I currently have, it's not possible for me to choose belief.  At best I can role-play a believer.  On the inside, there's no religious belief there at all.

Going through the motions is better than not doing anything at all. But I understand why you wouldn't want to do that.

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, @snowtracks, is not correct. The lives of the dead can have meaning. It’s just that people have to be alive to enjoy that significance. He makes the same mistake that nihilists do – confusing the enjoyments of life from any meaning(s) it may have. For example, married sex is pleasuarable. For some however, physical intimacy is interpreted as a sign of intangibles like commitment and affection within the relationship.

The meaning of a sign is found in the relationship between the sign and what the sign signifies. The meaning of a painting is not inherent in the canvas or colored globs; but rather, by reference to something external to it, i.e. the subject matter depicted. So when someone asks what the meaning of life is, he or she isn’t just looking to something within life that makes life worth living. Instead they are asking to participate in a relationship with something larger to which their lives refer.

A broad range of christian expression strikes me as superstitious nihilism.  There probably is something to physical intimacy signaling commitment and affection, though.  Neither of which seem intangible.

I think that when we consider meaningful relationships...our very meaningful relationships with other people immediately come to mind - but I've never met anyone who felt that this was the entirety of life.  There may be people out there, obvs.  It just seems to me that most of us feel that something as meaningful as that is still only a part of the fuller relationship we intend (or hope) to have with a larger thing, to which, as you put it so well, our lives refer.  

Intuitively, it seems like it would be possible for a person to participate in a relationship with something larger to which their life refers.  I know I try.  I assume other people have a similar experience.

[Astreja]

Going through the motions is better than not doing anything at all. But I understand why you wouldn't want to do that.

Do you truly understand where I'm coming from, Ahriman? To "go through the motions" is okay if I'm trying to play a role, such as when I've done cosplay at SF/F conventions, but I don't think it's appropriate when it comes to personal philosophy. A credo, in my opinion, needs to be deeply felt and integrated into one's life, not a "This makes no sense at all to me, but I'll go along with it anyway" kind of thing.

[Simon Moon]

Given the information I currently have, it's not possible for me to choose belief.  At best I can role-play a believer.  On the inside, there's no religious belief there at all.

Going through the motions is better than not doing anything at all. But I understand why you wouldn't want to do that.

Yeah, because it's known as "intellectual honesty". Some of have that.

Are you saying to "fake it until you make it"?

Wouldn't a god be able to see through that ploy?

And how is that simply not self deception?

[The Grand Nudger]

-and there's the rub with performative theism. If, as you've said before Ahri, believing in a god, any god, is the important thing, the thing relevant to whatever dreams you have of an afterlife - going through the motions of belief doesn't satisfy that criteria. It's certainly not going to go over well with your fellow god botherers that duplicity is a positively valued trait to god, and perhaps even necessary to cultivating genuine belief.

[Abaddon_ire]

Given the information I currently have, it's not possible for me to choose belief.  At best I can role-play a believer.  On the inside, there's no religious belief there at all.

Going through the motions is better than not doing anything at all. But I understand why you wouldn't want to do that.

I could "go through the motions" by climbing into a sewer. Can you understand why anyone might be reluctant about that?

It's the same with religion.

ETA: Also blatant use of Pascal's wager. What makes you think anyone will fall for that garbage? What makes you think your god will fall for it?

---

I mean, not everyone will have a better life. Some are living their best life now. But those people will be sent to Hell eventually. But Hell doesn't last forever. Neither does Heaven. Eventually all human souls will be annihilated.

Which renders your crank beliefs pointless, no?

[Spongebob]

Given the information I currently have, it's not possible for me to choose belief.  At best I can role-play a believer.  On the inside, there's no religious belief there at all.

Going through the motions is better than not doing anything at all. But I understand why you wouldn't want to do that.

You likely learned this in Catholic school and Catholics very much think this way.  It's not so much about believing as it is about following rules.  Other Protestant Christians don't think this way and in fact this is anathema to their faith.  But from a POV of honesty and integrity, I find your statement repugnant and not at all out of character since you are at your core a dishonest and deceitful person.

---

-and there's the rub with performative theism.  If, as you've said before Ahri, believing in a god, any god, is the important thing, the thing relevant to whatever dreams you have of an afterlife - going through the motions of belief doesn't satisfy that criteria.  It's certainly not going to go over well with your fellow god botherers that duplicity is a positively valued trait to god, and perhaps even necessary to cultivating genuine belief.

As usual, Airhead's posts are completely inconsistent and incoherent.

[LadyForCamus]

I mean, not everyone will have a better life. Some are living their best life now. But those people will be sent to Hell eventually. But Hell doesn't last forever. Neither does Heaven. Eventually all human souls will be annihilated.

They will? According to who?