I assume most atheists believe the meaning of life is enjoying what you have. I don't believe in a god or deity (I guess that makes me partially an atheist?), but I believe that the ideal state to reach in our existence is enlightenment.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
about that Stephen Fry interview and atheism in general...
- Thread starter FloatOn
- Start date
- Status
I assume most atheists believe the meaning of life is enjoying what you have. I don't believe in a god or deity (I guess that makes me partially an atheist?), but I believe that the ideal state to reach in our existence is enlightenment.
PhantomHound
Banned
It's like setting Resident Evil 1 to hard mode and then using only a knife in the game. Sure there's guns you could use, but you're putting the extra challenge on yourself by only allowing yourself to use a knife.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Never ran into any atheist who has said that. Never once. God did all this bad stuff therefore I don't believe, wut? Never.
I mean actually read that and think about it. I'm claiming X did all this stuff so now I don't believe in X, it just doesn't make any logical sense at all.
PhantomHound
Banned
Plenty of plants and wild life to eat
Re: meaning of life
Lots of religious people say the ultimate meaning of life is to serve God. Well whatever floats your boat, but that's a pretty shitty purpose IMO, and there's no self-actualization involved. Also has less to do with this life and more to do with an afterlife.
Lots of religious people say the ultimate meaning of life is to serve God. Well whatever floats your boat, but that's a pretty shitty purpose IMO, and there's no self-actualization involved. Also has less to do with this life and more to do with an afterlife.
I love Stephen Fry but I found the answer kind of crappy to be honest. "Why bad things happen!?!?" It's like the worst kind of argument against religion or the existence of a god, this is hardly the first time this has been asked and every single religion has an answer to it.
The question was kind of crappy to be honest too, because the guy just asks "what if its true!?" what is true? Bilble God? Catholic God? Protestan God? Is he a white european male with a beard? Overall a terrible discussion.
The question was kind of crappy to be honest too, because the guy just asks "what if its true!?" what is true? Bilble God? Catholic God? Protestan God? Is he a white european male with a beard? Overall a terrible discussion.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
ah i see, well the stephen fry interview was in reference to the biblical god, so i would have specified. also, im not sure how you would proceed with this debate without specifying the parameters of your god. is there a heaven and hell? is he perfectly compassionate? are we an experiment to him as you implied with the video game analogy? all powerful?
freakzilla149
Banned
No one is saying that. FFS
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
I'll kill your parents but give you a million dollars and a supermodel wife. Am I evil or good?
Not at all lol.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Why can't it be both?
Most atheists say something similar to "if god existed and actually has the traits listed in various religions then _____ wouldn't be happening".
Would you try to fuck the wife?
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
to be fair, he wasnt making an argument for athiesm per se. he was answering with what he would say to god if he met him at the pearly gates. the main thrust of his point is that even if he were presented with god, he wouldnt want to bow to him even then, because of how cruel he is.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
You can have an answer, it doesn't make it logical sound or ethical/moral given the supposed attributes of God.
Bingo.
it's not an argument against the existence of god. assuming he exists, it's an argument that he's kind of an asshole. which he would be. and fry wants to know why.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
pltot twist: your parents are both literally hitler.
John Kowalski
Banned
Is she virgin?
I think I misinterpreted what he said then. It's too early for this :lol
I feel like OP is still missing the point of what people are talking about anyway //shrugs. I'm going to bed
Moff
Member
I think "if god existed and did all these bad things I would not want to worship him" would make a bit more sense.
I think fry put it well in the interview.
It's impossible to answer this question because this question is flawed. Come back with a sensible question and I'll attempt to give you a satisfactory answer but we all know what you're really after is an answer that allows vindication of your own beliefs and will ignore any contrary answers no matter how logical and rational a response you receive.
Not always everywhere, easy to get, and available to everyone.
If I see no evidence of gods, why should I not believe that they don't exist? Are you agnostic about leprechauns living on Mars?
If many atheists are resentful, it's because of a lot of shit that religious people pull.
PlayALLtheGames
Banned
It's human made, but who created humans? Who made them like that? He didn't create some perfect fucking world that humans decided to screw up, unless you believe the Adam and Eve story. In fact, the earliest humans were the most fucked up of all and god kept giving them shitty situations to make them even more fucked up, so what was he expecting?
Plus, the claim is that God has everybody's life pretty much planned before they're even born, so what's going on there?
Anyway, he doesn't have to use magic to fix everything. He could at least 1. show everyone he exists or 2. figure out some way to show everyone what the world would look like if we worked together and stopped being so greedy and selfish. SOMETHING.
BravesCountry
Banned
Have you guys seen God on Trial? pretty good play that I watched the other day, it explores a lot of these same questions in the setting of Auschwitz where a group of Jews put God on trial to decide if he has broken his covenant and is responsible for what is happening to the Jewish people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5caAug5n8Zk
The full movie is on youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5caAug5n8Zk
The full movie is on youtube
Ingueferroque
Banned
What is resentful about it?
Orbis Tabula
Member
Let's say you go on a week long vacation and I tell you not to worry about your house. That I have a special maid service I use and your house will be in amazing condition when you return, for free! Once your vacation ends a week later and you come home, you find your house in an even worse state than before. Things have only gotten dirtier. However, your tv still works, and your bills for that month are 25% lower. Would you believe that my magical maid service existed? If you complained to me about how the maids didn't exist, and I pointed out your tv and low bills as benefits of the maid service, would that change your mind?
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
i believe your belief would fall under agnostic atheism. but who knows, these terms are constantly muddied
God is not putting the challenge on itself though, it's putting it on us.
So it's more like the ganking invasions in dark souls.
God the the red phantom that gives you cancer, but may leave a prism stone as a present.
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
Probably. How else would I sacrifice my only begotten son?
How can they both be Hitler?
Sure, I'll tell her to say that.
riskVSreward
Member
Sorry to all those suffering, god could help but he's trying to get the hard trophies right now. Its a sign of his great power, he loves you so much he made himself incapable of intervening cuz otherwise being god is way too easy.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
No, but he made not only the humans to make the things I desire, but he also gave me and other humans the desire to have the things those people are making. It's all his doing in one way or another. He could have easily created all of the wonders of the world and also eliminated people's desire to see them if he wanted to. But he didn't. He's supposed to be purposefully testing us and trying to get us to quell the many desires he put us on the Earth with to show that we have the faith to get to Heaven. I think that's a really shitty thing to do, and I don't respect the decision.
As for your second point, yes, I could walk around the woods by my house. But the vast majority of the beautiful things in the world cost some sort of money to get to them. You want to eat at that fancy restaurant downtown? You better have the cash to do it or you're eating beans again. You want to go see the Andes mountains? You better have thousands of dollars for your trip. If you limit yourself to seeing what you could see with no money, you wouldn't see a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of what the world has to offer.
And the less money you have, the less you get to see. And the more time you spend getting money to see all of these places, the less time you actually have in your life to actually go and experience them.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
immaculate conception
The real answer is that we are evolved creatures and our experience and attribution of good and bad is an adaption to our sensory experience. Neither good nor bad are contingent on a God to disseminate those values. They are instead emergent from our own evolved physiology. If there was a god and creator, then everything would be contributed to him. Including the bad. The bad is enough to refute the faith claims made by theologians. The claims aren't consistent with observed reality. When people blame god for atrocities, they are doing under an assumption. They humor the claim. The matter of fact though, is that since their is no evidence for god, there is no evidence that the good is by him. Which is why outside of any assumptions, you can then fall back on the position of not attributing good to God. It is perfectly consistent.
I think many theologians get caught up between hypothetical talk which is where their beliefs lie. They do not realize that the skeptics engaging them are humoring assumptions and partaking in thought experiments. This failure to distinguish this is why the argument seems inconsistent to them.
I think many theologians get caught up between hypothetical talk which is where their beliefs lie. They do not realize that the skeptics engaging them are humoring assumptions and partaking in thought experiments. This failure to distinguish this is why the argument seems inconsistent to them.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
Is "but what about the good things?" in this context kinda the same type of argument (or same type of misunderstanding, to put it less charitably) as "harassment happens to men too!"
I genuinely hope there is no Heaven or afterlife. Can you imagine existing in some form of concious existence for thousands of years? What about millions of years? Billions of years? Trillions? Imagine existing for a quadrillion years and knowing you're not even 0.0001% into your existence. That would be more like Hell.
No thanks. When I die I am quite happy to go back to completely and utterly ceasing to exist in any form, just like I was for 13.8 millions years before I was conceived.
No thanks. When I die I am quite happy to go back to completely and utterly ceasing to exist in any form, just like I was for 13.8 millions years before I was conceived.
riskVSreward
Member
I hate it when agnostic atheists just claim the 'agnostic' part and slight the rest of us who aren't uncomfortable with terms.i believe your belief would fall under agnostic atheism. but who knows, these terms are constantly muddied
Should clarify, atheists come off as resentful, not the belief itself.
There will never be concrete evidence, religion as we know it is based around interpretation. The evidence you seek sounds like it would apply to Earth gods, I'm saying the concept of god or gods isn't bound by the human perspective.
concerning the self imposed difficulty/limitations god might place on itself:
remember that part in the bible where god was super pissed and wanted to wipe out the israelites and moses was all like "god, I know they fucked up but what will they think of you if you do this?" and then god was like "alright moses, you win, I won't smite them this time".
remember that part in the bible where god was super pissed and wanted to wipe out the israelites and moses was all like "god, I know they fucked up but what will they think of you if you do this?" and then god was like "alright moses, you win, I won't smite them this time".
HappyBivouac
Member
I actually haven't seen anyone say this, so I don't know who you're talking to.
The stance in question is more "I don't believe in God because there's no evidence for his existence, but if he DOES exist, then he sure as hell (hah!) isn't as benevolent as people like to think he is."
It makes no difference. If I don't see any evidence of gods - doesn't matter which one - I see little reason to believe.
I would assume our perception of time would be different when we don't sleep/are immortal/are in a different reality(?). Hell, we might not even have a perception of time, heaven might not even have days/nights. I don't believe in a heaven, but I have a feeling time wouldn't be an issue in a theoretical version of it.
riskVSreward
Member
Remember the part when he turned a woman to salt for looking over her shoulder? It was the same time he was killing an entire town for having too much sex.
PhantomHound
Banned
Money is human made.
riskVSreward
Member
Wow, you totally refuted it. Money certainly doesn't fit with his first criteria, detailed in his very first sentence.
how is that relevant to my self-limitation theory?
There are no more ice giants, therefore Odin is real.
As I said it was such a crappy question that I really don't understand why Fry even bother to answer it and specially with such a tired argument.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
How does a fable in the Bible have anything to do with your self-limitation theory, you know that Moses didn't actually exist right?
- Status