It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by debunky
well: dying was the last thing i ever wanted to do.
Are those the only possibilities? Couldn't something purely naturalistic and pedestrian have 'point'. Ofcourse it's not going to be a point assigned by a supreme being, but it hardly needs be.
Originally posted by Supercertari
I don't believe life is pointless, however, I do believe that life is much more than the biological phenomenon resulting from chance governed by Darwinian, physical, environmental laws.
It doesn't need to be.
If one speaks of "happiness" from an atheistic point of view, surely this cannot be considered a metaphysical quality.
Well more likely to motivate an organism to repeat beneficial behaviour - eating, sleeping, sexing etc.
"Happiness" must be a consequence of evolution, a chemical response perhaps, to ensure the gene has the chance to persist.
Happiness is a physiological/chemical phenomena, not an illusion. An illusion is something that appears real when it isn't (or technically a paradox in sensory perception; I digress).
It would seem then that my question still pertains: if "happiness" is only an evolutionary "trick" ["motivator"] to ensure you persist and pass on the gene then why continue in an existence governed by such caprice and illusion.
It's a chemical induced state of mind, not an illusion.
In a purely physical/biological understanding of life "happiness" is a chemically induced illusion.
Your saying that doesn't hold true if atheism were wrong?
"Love" for significant others must be of the same order - there must be nothing metaphysical about it in an atheistic world view. "Love" too must be a trick ["motivator"] of evolution to ensure that genetic information is passed on.
If atheism is correct then everyone and everything is a slave of the gene
By freak of nature do you mean "natural process which is inanimate and as such cannot be selfish or selfless since it has no will"? Cos if you do you'd be right.
- a freak of nature which "selfishly" ---
Again, are you saying that doesn't hold true if atheism were wrong?
--- is determined to assure its own persistence and we are mere gene carriers rewarded with chemically induced "emotions".
Careful, if you aren't an atheist you probably can't reach the natural conclusion of atheism.
If atheism is taken to its natural conclusion---
---then everything emotional must be illusory ["not illusory"] and we are just slaves of a string of amino acids - why persist or are the illusions ["not illusions"] sufficient, or is this "sufficiency" itself an illusion contrived by the same basic material?
Originally posted by Supercertari
I don't believe life is pointless, however, I do believe that life is much more than the biological phenomenon resulting from chance governed by darwinian, physical, environmental laws.