Purpose of life for atheists/agnostics ?

You mean these ideas are inflicted on our children at a young age.

Yes. And difficult to get out of their head once it's been pounded in there for 18 years... The church my family attended really instilled some serious fear into its members regarding hell (which I now don't believe exists but as a kid I was pretty frightened). I distinctly remember several times as a kid not being able to find my parents around our farm and worrying that the rapture had come and I had been left behind :(

Young kids tend to believe whatever they're told by their authority figures. In addition to believing in hell, my 5-year-old nephew also has equal certainty of the existence of the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, and the Easter Bunny...
 
I think a few important return questions are:
1) Does an afterlife really provide meaning for existence?

I don't think so but am curious to hear the theist point of view on this. My Christian sister argues that yes it does, otherwise life has no point or purpose.

2) What exactly is the purpose of that afterlife?

I don't have any evidence that an afterlife exists so N/A for me. My old SB church taught that the purpose of the afterlife was to spend eternity with God and loved ones that died. ("Don't worry little Jimmy, you'll see Grandma/Grandpa/Uncle Tom/[insert dead Christian relative] again someday in heaven") Of course those loved ones had to be Christians, not just any loved one would be there...

3) Does life require a purpose for you to enjoy the gift of it?

I think one can certainly enjoy life without having any purpose. A good cup of Seattle coffee probably tastes the same regardless whether someone thinks their life has purpose. I am contemplating whether having a purpose (not necessarily related to afterlife) lets one live life more fully and be happier. If life has no purpose for an atheist/agnostic (like a grain of sand) and in the end nothing really matters as some argue, how does one choose between being a hedonist and an altruist? (I know aethiests in both camps.)

Why do you think studies show religious people tend to be happier than non-religious?

I realize this is a nebulous question to answer, but does their believed purpose in life come in to play? (in addition to social acceptance of their church family, peace of mind with death/uncertainties that they can leave in God's hands, and other variables)
 
Yes. And difficult to get out of their head once it's been pounded in there for 18 years... The church my family attended really instilled some serious fear into its members regarding hell (which I now don't believe exists but as a kid I was pretty frightened). I distinctly remember several times as a kid not being able to find my parents around our farm and worrying that the rapture had come and I had been left behind :(

Young kids tend to believe whatever they're told by their authority figures. In addition to believing in hell, my 5-year-old nephew also has equal certainty of the existence of the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, and the Easter Bunny...
Oh I had issues...

When I decided to return to the church I couldn't say the word G!d for years... I have finally got the old man in the sky picture out of my head when I refer to G!d.

I know teach children about the hell we create for ourselves...they can understand that without fear and take charge of their own lives.
 
Regarding the terms, gnosis and theism indicate an agnostic is making a statement about an attitude towards knowledge whilst an atheist is making a statement regarding an attitude towards a specific belief. Purpose is therefore not directly related to either, so that purposes (or lack of) are notions that only individuals can ascribe to. Being an agnostic or atheist says nothing about purpose in life.
 
This brings me to the topic of my post. Recently my cousin died a tragic death at 16 years of age which has brought tremendous suffering to his family and all of my relatives that knew him well. This event has caused me to examine my core beliefs in more detail.
How did he/she die? Why was it tragic? How or why does his/her family choose to suffer?

1.) Does one need to believe in an afterlife to have meaningful purpose in life?
To address your question without answering it, stating the obvious but all too often overlooked: If a belief has an effect on a person's choices of where to look, what to do, when to do it, or who to do it with, then it is going to have an effect on their life here today.

I suggest an expansion of the concept of afterlife: 1. Some form of self living again either on Earth or in heaven. 2. Others living on Earth: benefiting, suffering, with or without the memory of a dead person's former life. 3. Some form of surviving information, memory, or legacy from what transpires today.

Just how many atheists or agnostics do not believe in an afterlife? For example: A total extinction all life on Earth might represent total death to an atheist and destroy the purpose for doing the research, writing the scientific paper, writing the book, performing the labor, having children, etc... If it is all verifiably going to get destroyed anyway, then why bother to toil and build today? So I think most every living atheist does believe in an afterlife: just not their own. Even with impending doom an atheist has not necessarily lost hope that changes could be made by someone else to avert disaster, or that their existence could somehow have a purpose for others.

If a person truly does not believe in any form of afterlife, then their actions today would be rationally open to a wide range of unfettered behavior, including every form of criminal behavior. I'd say that the purpose of not believing in some form of afterlife (self, others, or evidence), is to rationally justify some form of behavior today. For example a person who destroys evidence that would incriminate them does not believe in an afterlife of that evidence, but does believe in their life after the evidence is destroyed. So what remains if a person does not believe in an afterlife of themselves, all others, and any surviving evidence of what transpired?

I submit that the belief in an afterlife of others, an afterlife of self, or an afterlife of evidence or history, does rationally have an effect on a person's life today. I haven't met many who don't believe in some form of afterlife, for if they wasted my time claiming it then they already proved to me that they believed in it.
 
"I distinctly remember several times as a kid not being able to find my parents around our farm and worrying that the rapture had come and I had been left behind..."

--> Wow, that's some pretty heavy stuff. And it's sad to say, but a lot of this still goes on in a large number of Christian denominations even today.

I remember the story of a young Christian man who had chosen to become a Buddhist. One day, he came home to his parents' home to find his 9-year-old sister crying uncontrollably. When he asked her why she was crying, she said it was because their parents had told her that he would never make it to heaven, and she was afraid she would never see him again after he died!

It's a shame there's so much fear in Christianity, especially when (according to my belief system) many reasons for these fears are groundless. (There is no question in my mind that she will meet her 'newly minted' Buddhist brother in the afterlife.)
 
I am convinced that under it all the Human Race really are good people, and that what you see around you is the culmination of erroneous thinking, a "crisis of perception" if you will.

There is good, but there is also evil. There is love, kindness, humility, charity and hospitality, but there is also greed, power-mongering, domination, nationalism and fundamentalism. Let us not forget about Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. There is also the problem of nuclear weapons not feeling pity or remorse for what they do.

Will people in the face of conflict put down their weapons, see that the fight isn't worth it and go home? I think history has shown again and again people's reluctance to put down the sword or the gun. Humanity doesn't seem to be important enough.

Did the two factions of the Wars of the Roses in England just decide to let the other side win? No, they fought it out, even as France was taking back land that the English had won during the Hundred Years' War. For some reason, the English just didn't care about what should have been important to them: their foothold on French soil.

The Roman Empire collapsed due to civil war. For some reason the empire wasn't important enough to the Romans to not do something to weaken the empire and allow the barbarians to come pouring in.

The fall of the Roman Empire and the Wars of the Roses were a demonstration of the human inability to avoid threats bigger than their own local issues. In the case of the Romans it was barbarians. In the case of the English it was the French reconquering their land.

What were the English thinking? They were winning!!! They were beating the French. Why didn't they just finish it off?

Further, I think that the only way to affect the world is to first cultivate within ourselves the highest virtues we can find and offer that to the world. Maybe it would help to read the Desiderata one more time. :)

If the whole world did that, it would be great. I just don't think there's enough people with that philosophy in mind.:rolleyes:

The subprime mortgage crisis (greed), high divorce rates (lack of acceptance/tolerance/charity), divisive nationalist bickering in international politics (power mongering), fear of immigrants (class warfare) -- it seems a lot of people don't seem to cultivate the highest virtues.

I think this is really a question of whether the good outweighs the "bad" or "evil" within us.

But in any romantic drama, there has to be a big enough tragedy in order for some hero to emerge to save the day. I think this is what the messiah is all about, that when all our collective efforts as humans fail, someone emerges to offer something the rest of us could not muster. The hero in any story always has qualities nobody does.

The humanistic view is that the human race collectively has the strength to solve any problem that becomes big enough.

The messianic view is that there are some problems the human race cannot solve collectively. Consider that the Western world often does not agree with Asian and middle-Eastern cultures and vice versa. This is what I see as a weakness in the humanistic view -- that Asian and Middle-Eastern cultures don't actually align themselves with Western humanism. Historically, the West dominated over Asia and the Middle East.

As long as the West is in a more dominant position, humanism may seem like a convenient optimism. When Asians and Middle-Easterners start becoming stronger, the West may revise this view. The mutual jealousy between the two worlds may be the spark that ignites the fuel.

When that happens, we will be forced to throw in the trash the humanistic triumphalism that the human race can solve any problem that becomes big enough to be noticed.
 
Loss of resources? Lack mentality, the world is an abundant place. Man is ever adapting to every reality.

I see whole countries fighting over energy and resources!!!:eek: Not necessarily militarily, but politically as well.

Consider China's disputes with Japan, Vietnam and the Phillipines over a bunch of islands in the Pacific -- or the fact that for decades the USA has been chasing after oil in the Middle East.

Goodness??? These are the most peaceful years we have ever seen since the dawn of civilization....sure in quantity it is high, but in percentage of the population the world has never seen a more peaceful fifty years. And as a people, we are more caring, more concerned for our fellow man, and human rights, and animal rights and for our planet than we ever have been.

Yeah it's pretty nice up there in North America isn't it? Away from those distant battlefields of wars fought over oil and islands. Suddenly in 9/11, a bunch of religious extremists threatened to bring the war closer to home.

I think the big difference is this electronic screen you are looking at right now...we know more about what goes on around the world today than we knew about what happened 100 miles away from our home 50 years ago. It makes something seem all pervasive....but what do we truly know about what goes on in the world? Only the bad crap. Got a bus bombing in Israel, give it 3 minutes of gore to feed the masses, got starving children or women being raped or a ship jacked....tell the world about it.

How about we pack it all into a parcel, put it onto a plane and send it over to the USA?:D (addressed to wil)

Well, maybe the glass is half full and half empty at the same time. But one day, the coin may flip and become either heads or tails.

Face it there were billions of encounters of human on human in those same locations, there were doctors taking care of the indigent, people feeding the poor, people teaching others a trade, and millions leading blind people out of danger of traffic....all that does not make the news.

There's that.
 
If life has no purpose for an atheist/agnostic (like a grain of sand) and in the end nothing really matters as some argue.

I don't think atheists and agnostics lack a purpose of their lives. Their concept of a purpose simply doesn't conform to any established ideology. Individually, they make up their own concept.

Not all Christians believe in a prescribed purpose. I don't believe in a prescribed purpose. Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. They became smart enough to think for themselves and make their own choices.

The fundamentalist believes this explains away Christianity, that when people have different ideas about Christianity that it means there is no Christianity. They say that it means you're making Christianity disappear.

I disagree with that view. Because the Bible serves as inspiration for my views, I have a common ground with these Christians. This is my link with other Christians. I drink from the same pool and eat from the same tree. Christianity is not defined by a consensus, but is what projects out from the same source. There is no need for a creed. We agree on the source, just not the product that emerges.

I remember the story of a young Christian man who had chosen to become a Buddhist. One day, he came home to his parents' home to find his 9-year-old sister crying uncontrollably. When he asked her why she was crying, she said it was because their parents had told her that he would never make it to heaven, and she was afraid she would never see him again after he died!


It's a shame there's so much fear in Christianity, especially when (according to my belief system) many reasons for these fears are groundless. (There is no question in my mind that she will meet her 'newly minted' Buddhist brother in the afterlife.)


Is all fear-mongering bad? I experienced that myself as a kid. I was a pretty naughty kid -- both at home and at school. I knew I was a bad kid. They used to say that "Santa Claus knows when you're been good or bad, so be good for goodness sake!"

The trouble with the "if you're not a Christian you're not going to heaven" ideology is that it doesn't make you a better person. If being Christian is about believing that Jesus died for your sins and therefore you are "saved," then that doesn't encourage you to be a better person. It suggests that it's ok to be a bad person. As long as you accept a particular label, you go to heaven!!!

This is not a constructive teaching. It's much better to tell your kids that they won't be getting presents from Santa if they're naughty!!!

People eventually grow out of this stuff anyway. I don't think it's necessarily damaging to a child to promote or maintain fantasies that make them better people or help them overcome difficulties in life. Santa helps little kids to behave and if your child is complaining about imaginary monsters under the bed, I think the fantastic monster spray is a good approach. Denying that there are monsters gives them the idea that mummy isn't the hero the child admires.

There is of course the tough love approach that you silly sausage there's nothing there!!! Grow up!!! Mummy won't be here forever. What if mum dies in a car accident? What will you do then? The monsters will eat you!!

I think the story of Jesus' death and resurrection has been twisted to address guilt that doesn't exist. Yes, we all make mistakes but the story of Jesus' death and resurrection isn't about mistakes or character flaws, but things that actually create grief and sorrow in the form of guilt.

Too many Christians fall for the trap of acting like people confessing to the Community Party. Leniency will be shown to those who confess, so people make up crimes they never committed in order to show their loyalty to the Communist Party!!!! Get out of my country you Communist Christians! You Red Guards!!! Mao Zedong is not going to spread his socialism here. -- I mean errr, confessionism.

People who are not guilty should not be confessing. Consider the public scrutiny surrounding the cheating scandals of Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bill Clinton. Imagine the emotional trauma of being dragged into the spotlight, being scrutinised. Arnold and Bill, you've been really naughty boys. Repent and be forgiven.

Bill Clinton: I did not have sexual relations with that woman!!!

The shame and embarrassment was real. Bill was red in the face. It would have been a humbling experience. It wasn't about asking God for forgiveness. It was about asking America for forgiveness.

There is no doubt Bill Clinton's denial has been repeated over and over again ad nauseum in comedy shows and Youtube. But it never gets old or boring because we hear the intensity of Bill's voice in the denial -- of a naughty kid caught red handed and being unable to defend himself. Bill was cornered and felt unable to escape.

That is what real guilt is.

Guilt is like a monster that lurks under the bed. You don't use the monster spray unless your kid really believes there is a monster under the bed. Too many people use the monster spray when there's no monster. "But, Mummy I don't believe in that stuff anymore!!!"

Jesus said, "judge not and you will not be judged." The death and resurrection was a way to cure people of their legalism and judgmentalism. These were the monsters of religion and Jesus was the monster-killing spray.
 
I believe in a "Better Way". The world is full of pessimists and cynics ... I'm more of a cup is half full kind of guy. I like it like that! ;)

That is totally awesome, thanks!

Hey Salty, here's a math problem for you. Take the total number of people on the planet and then create a ratio of the number of people actually committing acts of evil. I think you will be surprised at the answer.

According to neuroscience we are actually hardwired for empathy, in fact our pre-frontal cortex developed in direct proportion to the number of people in a group. In the human species that now numbers easily in the thousands per person. Even more for city dwellers.
In short, we are really a gold coin covered in mud. Wash away the dirt and all that is left is gold.
 
How did he/she die? Why was it tragic? How or why does his/her family choose to suffer?

Murdered at the age of 16, tragic I suppose because of the life that could have been (great kid). I agree that suffering is a choice. His family is very religious (Christian) and generally believe that God has a plan for all of us and everything happens for a reason.

I, myself, believe life is random, and a "tragic" death fits into my belief system just fine (although is still painful to lose a relative). I think, while religion can help ease the pain of losing a loved one (let's say Grandma who lived a full life), if one truly believes that the murder of a 16 year-old was somehow part of God's plan I would think that's a hard pill to swallow? Of couse "God works in mysterious ways," etc; but I would think such an intimate loss would challenge one's faith in addition to the normal grieving process...
 
If being Christian is about believing that Jesus died for your sins and therefore you are "saved," then that doesn't encourage you to be a better person. It suggests that it's ok to be a bad person. As long as you accept a particular label, you go to heaven!!!

Maybe that's why Christianity is the world's most popular religion ;)

Well, that and Guns, Germs, and Steel...
 
So I think most every living atheist does believe in an afterlife: just not their own.....their existence could somehow have a purpose for others......I submit that the belief in an afterlife of others, an afterlife of self, or an afterlife of evidence or history, does rationally have an effect on a person's life today.

Thanks Luecy, that is a helpful perspective!
 
The world is full of pessimists and cynics ... I'm more of a cup is half full kind of guy. I like it like that! ;)

In short, we are really a gold coin covered in mud. Wash away the dirt and all that is left is gold.

The Dalai Lama teaches a similar message that one can either view humans as inherently good or one can view humans at inherently evil. He chooses to see humans as good and that fosters his compassion/empathy and brings him happiness in life. I totally agree! This takes practice and patience with one's enemies in life (as the D.L. talks about in Art of Happiness), but the more I work at seeing humans (even the "evil" ones) as "gold coins" the more suffering I eliminate from my life...
 
Murdered at the age of 16, tragic I suppose because of the life that could have been (great kid). I agree that suffering is a choice. His family is very religious (Christian) and generally believe that God has a plan for all of us and everything happens for a reason.

I, myself, believe life is random, and a "tragic" death fits into my belief system just fine (although is still painful to lose a relative). I think, while religion can help ease the pain of losing a loved one (let's say Grandma who lived a full life), if one truly believes that the murder of a 16 year-old was somehow part of God's plan I would think that's a hard pill to swallow? Of couse "God works in mysterious ways," etc; but I would think such an intimate loss would challenge one's faith in addition to the normal grieving process...
I find it more tragic that someone has chosen murder, than someone has experienced death.

It seems like you may have mixed and interchanged the will of the murderer with the will of God. If life here is like a prison sentence: temporary, then perhaps the 16 year-old got an early parole. Venturing down that twist, who should think the murderer is obeying the will of God?

As you believe life is random, do you make your own actions random? Would a friend, loved one, enemy, or stranger find their life random, as a result of you? If not, then where does that place you with your belief, that life is random?
 
As you believe life is random, do you make your own actions random? Would a friend, loved one, enemy, or stranger find their life random, as a result of you? If not, then where does that place you with your belief, that life is random?.....the will of the murderer with the will of God.....who should think the murderer is obeying the will of God?

Hi Luecy, this quickly starts getting into a free will/determinism debate.

If life is not random, does everything happen for a reason, or something in between? Is "God" in control? (i.e. the omnipotent, all-powerful model) With this model of God, I agree the will of the murderer would be the will of God. I am agnostic so don't believe in such nonsense, but I know some folks that think everything in life happens for a reason and is ultimately God's will.

If life here is like a prison sentence: temporary, then perhaps the 16 year-old got an early parole.

I personally don't think life on earth is a prison sentence (although I know some people that do), I think it might be all we've got so I try to make the most of every minute. The "prison sentence" view would imply that you think there is something for him beyond this life; I have no evidence of such a personal afterlife.
 
If life here is like a prison sentence

Hi Luecy, I'm not exactly sure what you meant by that, so not trying to put words in your mouth. But it got me thinking... Does a person that doesn't believe in a personal afterlife live more fully in the present moment (this life) than someone who believes in an eternal personal afterlife?

I know several Christians who seem to be slogging/suffering through this life (prison sentence) but repeatedly tell me how much they are looking forward to heaven! While I definitely don't think all Christians live with that mentality, I do think belief in "heaven" can empower such behaviour.

Thoughts?
 
'atheist' only means no belief in 'deity'...it does not denote no belief in an afterlife. just for clarification. i am an atheist with plenty of experience with spirits n entities.
 
I think humans are just too smart for that.

If I say, "Paladin! Go and walk over to that corner in the wall." Paladin fulfills his purpose when he has walked over to the corner in the wall. It is pretty easy to walk over to that corner. In order for Paladin not to fall apart, disintegrate and die, I am going to have to keep stimulating him with more instructions.

Go walk over to the second corner. To the third corner. Back to the first corner. Open the door and exit the house. Start taking a walk in the garden. Go into the garage, turn on the engine and drive.

Go to the local supermarket and buy some food. Bring it home and start eating. Turn on the television and get some entertainment. Go to sleep for ten hours, wake up and go to work.

Work hard for that promotion, get an increase in your salary and get closer to affording that dream home.

Look at what everyone else is doing and try to compete with them.:)


perhaps God is running a MMORPG?

metta,

~v
 
Back
Top