Is There Purpose In Life Without God?

[Lycorth]

Also, why would this god protect her yet let horrible things happen to others?

 

Exactly - and that contributes to the disenchantment one feels when bad shit happens despite their belief that a god is looking out for them. It's dangerous to maintain belief in a being who is all-powerful and watches over you, because the bad shit that happens will eventually chip away at the belief and the happiness that goes along with it until the believer is left worse for the wear at the end of it all.

 

We're not saying this to be assholes, Susie. On my part, I say it because I was there. I believed in a god who was all-powerful and was always watching over me and mine, until life forced me to look at the facts. It didn't help me one bit, and only complicated my existing depression and general jadedness at the time. You'll work things out just fine on your own, but if you want my advice, spare yourself some pain in the long run and re-examine what you're thinking.

[Antlerman]

I have to disgree with you all on here--I believe we were created and my observations, starting as a child, shows me that there must be a God because he protected me many times in my life. Does he have a son? is he christian, etc? I think not, but I do feel there is a creator. And our purpose in this world would be to come to the highest knowledge--greatest sense of awareness and love that there is. Love for ourselves and for all others.

 

my 2 cents

An interesting perspective. If our purpose is something given to us, then why weren't we given that ability by default. Why do we have to seek it? Compare to the use of the hand. Do we have to seek its purpose or do we just use it? Why is this purpose not evident by default? This is why theology comes in, a religious based "explanation". Their answer is that man did a big "no no" to God and caused it to be removed from us. But it doesn't sound like you necessary accept Christian theology, which at it very best is simply a logic system to try to make the pieces of ideas fit into an easily related to thing in order for us to interact with it.

 

I understand what you are talking about in terms of a "higher purpose". But how I see that is much more naturalistically, (not to be confused with Legion Regalis' nudist philosophy of naturism ), that cooperation is what best serves us at this stage in our evolution. These are qualities that best serve our cultural natures we have developed out of survival. "God" is the language symbol we place on that ideal in order to communicate and promote that ideal.

 

As far as your observations, I hope you also recognize that these are more how you are interpreting observations. And as I would put it, the language you apply to those perceptions. You choose a language that carries a certain emotional symbolism with it. Perceptions of observation have little value in terms of objective knowledge without some means for others to evaluate it objectively. At best it expresses a romantic sentiment. Though it does speak to a shared human sentiment, the problem is it is not an objective language, so it will only work for those who share the mythology. A Christian's language is exclusive. A deist’s language attempts to be more inclusive, by stripping the "God" symbol of any specific denominational attributes, such as demanding x, y, or z. But again, to those who do not see a "God" as an actual thing in the universe, this language does not serve that end common desire.

 

So what's the best language for the sentiments you are expressing?

[Legion]

I understand what you are talking about in terms of a "higher purpose". But how I see that is much more naturalistically, (not to be confused with Legion Regalis' nudist philosophy of naturism ), that cooperation is what best serves us at this stage in our evolution. These are qualities that best serve our cultural natures we have developed out of survival. "God" is the language symbol we place on that ideal in order to communicate and promote that ideal.

I have never advocated a philosophy of naturism. I do suggest however that everyone take their clothes off before they bathe.

 

By the way naturism is not incompatible with naturalism in my opinion.

[SusieQ]

An interesting perspective. If our purpose is something given to us, then why weren't we given that ability by default. Why do we have to seek it? Compare to the use of the hand. Do we have to seek its purpose or do we just use it? Why is this purpose not evident by default? This is why theology comes in, a religious based "explanation". Their answer is that man did a big "no no" to God and caused it to be removed from us. But it doesn't sound like you necessary accept Christian theology, which at it very best is simply a logic system to try to make the pieces of ideas fit into an easily related to thing in order for us to interact with it.

 

I understand what you are talking about in terms of a "higher purpose". But how I see that is much more naturalistically, (not to be confused with Legion Regalis' nudist philosophy of naturism ), that cooperation is what best serves us at this stage in our evolution. These are qualities that best serve our cultural natures we have developed out of survival. "God" is the language symbol we place on that ideal in order to communicate and promote that ideal.

 

As far as your observations, I hope you also recognize that these are more how you are interpreting observations. And as I would put it, the language you apply to those perceptions. You choose a language that carries a certain emotional symbolism with it. Perceptions of observation have little value in terms of objective knowledge without some means for others to evaluate it objectively. At best it expresses a romantic sentiment. Though it does speak to a shared human sentiment, the problem is it is not an objective language, so it will only work for those who share the mythology. A Christian's language is exclusive. A deist’s language attempts to be more inclusive, by stripping the "God" symbol of any specific denominational attributes, such as demanding x, y, or z. But again, to those who do not see a "God" as an actual thing in the universe, this language does not serve that end common desire.

 

So what's the best language for the sentiments you are expressing?

 

Yes, we have use of our hands but as babies we must start without the full control and develope it as our knowledge of the world around us developes--I see them as the same.

 

Good question about the language for the sentiment--I guess it is romantic to think someone is your anonamous caretaker or a benefactor if you will. But I don't have enough knowledge or experience of other languages besides xtian to express that--so I guess it's time for me to do more study and develope it

[SusieQ]

An interesting perspective. If our purpose is something given to us, then why weren't we given that ability by default. Why do we have to seek it? Compare to the use of the hand. Do we have to seek its purpose or do we just use it? Why is this purpose not evident by default? This is why theology comes in, a religious based "explanation". Their answer is that man did a big "no no" to God and caused it to be removed from us. But it doesn't sound like you necessary accept Christian theology, which at it very best is simply a logic system to try to make the pieces of ideas fit into an easily related to thing in order for us to interact with it.

 

I understand what you are talking about in terms of a "higher purpose". But how I see that is much more naturalistically, (not to be confused with Legion Regalis' nudist philosophy of naturism ), that cooperation is what best serves us at this stage in our evolution. These are qualities that best serve our cultural natures we have developed out of survival. "God" is the language symbol we place on that ideal in order to communicate and promote that ideal.

 

As far as your observations, I hope you also recognize that these are more how you are interpreting observations. And as I would put it, the language you apply to those perceptions. You choose a language that carries a certain emotional symbolism with it. Perceptions of observation have little value in terms of objective knowledge without some means for others to evaluate it objectively. At best it expresses a romantic sentiment. Though it does speak to a shared human sentiment, the problem is it is not an objective language, so it will only work for those who share the mythology. A Christian's language is exclusive. A deist’s language attempts to be more inclusive, by stripping the "God" symbol of any specific denominational attributes, such as demanding x, y, or z. But again, to those who do not see a "God" as an actual thing in the universe, this language does not serve that end common desire.

 

So what's the best language for the sentiments you are expressing?

 

Yes, we have use of our hands but as babies we must start without the full control and develope it as our knowledge of the world around us developes--I see them as the same.

 

Good question about the language for the sentiment--I guess it is romantic to think someone is your anonamous caretaker or a benefactor if you will. But I don't have enough knowledge or experience of other languages besides xtian to express that--so I guess it's time for me to do more study and develope it

[SusieQ]

And I believe we are given the ability--noone is the same after a crisis as they were before--we learn from each experience and assimilate new information and grow in our selves

[Asimov]

Asimov, Don't get me wrong friend but I don't mean this in the wrong way but I think I'm beginning understand your purpose in life and it's so obvious. It's playing semantics with words.

 

It's not playing semantics, in any discussion of philosophy word definitions are of the utmost importance.

 

Like I said, as humans we are perfectly capable of deciding our own purpose in life.

 

Since you asked for a definition, here's one for you:

 

an anticipated outcome that is intended or that guides your planned actions

 

Then I'd agree with that. Using the primary definition of purpose, we don't have that.

[Dave]

And I believe we are given the ability

"Given" implies a giver.

--noone is the same after a crisis as they were before--we learn from each experience and assimilate new information and grow in our selves

Learning requires nor implies a giver.

[Antlerman]

Yes, we have use of our hands but as babies we must start without the full control and develope it as our knowledge of the world around us developes--I see them as the same.

But the use of our hands is something that happens naturally. No one is “taught” how to use their opposable thumbs through direct instructions, let alone in churches or through spiritual seminars.

 

When it comes to ideals like selflessness, community, sharing, etc, these are not things that come entirely naturally. They are ideals that are taught through culture using any of a number of means, through the language of mythology in lessons of “heavenly” ideals, through social acceptance or rejection, etc, etc.

 

These are things which are not part of our biological inheritance, but arguably do have a direct impact on our biological evolution through favoring those more predisposed towards social adaptation. At best those who are more receptive to sociable conduct are the ones selected by nature in response to our social needs in response to our environments. So in one sense, your responsiveness to “love” and the other higher ideals you mentioned is “built in”, in the sense that our ancestors “selected” those sorts of qualities for their offspring (indirectly of course).

 

Good question about the language for the sentiment--I guess it is romantic to think someone is your anonamous caretaker or a benefactor if you will. But I don't have enough knowledge or experience of other languages besides xtian to express that--so I guess it's time for me to do more study and develope it

Well, that is the real issue I see today. We are a global society, a blending of many traditions and many language to express these sentiments. In the past languages that regional cultures used could be maintained within a more closed system. This is where religion was tribal. Those outside the borders of that culture were not “true humans”. They were not the “chosen ones”. They were heathens, pagans, etc. Those within the borders all spoke the same language, the same way of relating to the world, themselves, and those in their culture.

 

Along comes empires. With them comes many cultures, and many closed systems interacting with each other. Suddenly tribal gods have no more borders. They must now coexist with other world views, other languages of expressing “meaning” (as per the OP in this thread). Within the context of cosmopolitanism you have the gods morphing and changing to accommodate a broader, more inclusive world view. At the same time, you have the rise of “fundamentalism” as a reactionary movement against the changes of these traditional symbols of language out of fear of loosing the identity that belief in these traditional gods gave to their people. It is no different today.

 

The languages of Christianity, the language of Islam, of Judaism, of all other religions of the world are colliding into each other in a borderless world through the venue of mass communication. At least this is what we are seeing within the G8 nations.

 

As I said before, the language of deism is a noble attempt at bridging the divides of religious languages, but I see that it falls short in speaking to the secular world in speaking this language of these higher ideals you mentioned, which all religions in one form or another try to teach.

 

(a mouthful, I know – just blurting it out as I was thinking about it)

 

And I believe we are given the ability--noone is the same after a crisis as they were before--we learn from each experience and assimilate new information and grow in our selves

I agree that traumatic events open us up to new ways of perceiving the world. Trust me, I know this: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?showtopic=6730

 

P.S. Very nice to have you with us. Welcome.

[roman]

I don't believe that anyone's life has a "purpose," but if this is an exercise in tacking one onto it I'd have to say the purpose is Happiness. Life is about Happiness and Joy. Of course, this gets perverted easily by socialization and by religion. That is all.