Is Life Meaningless for Atheists?
Joe Carter writes:
If the universe as a whole does not contain intrinsic meaning, morality, or beauty, then how can the parts be said to do so? The answer, of course, is that they can’t. Such talk is nothing but gibberish.
This is just the Fallacy of Division, stated in reverse. It's a fallacy to argue that if the whole lacks an attribute (intrinsic meaning and beauty), then the parts must also lack that attribute. Consider:
"If my car as a whole is not invisible to the naked eye, how can the atoms that make it up be said to be invisible to the naked eye? The answer, of course, is that they can't."
Such talk is nothing but gibberish — but Joe Carter really thinks that he is saying something insightful here. I can't even tell where Richard Dawkins claims that the individual parts of the universe have the characteristic of "intrinsic meaning and beauty," which would make this a straw man as well. Just how many fallacies can one pack into a single thought? Joe Carter does have a history of poor reasoning, so this isn't unexpected.
Neither is this:
An atheist like Dawkins must choose which he will believe – that the universe is meaningless, undesigned, and undirected or that we can speak meaningfully about beauty, intelligence, and the “quasi-religious feeling” of awe. He can’t have both. Once he accepts an atheistic hermeneutic for interpreting life, the universe, and man’s existence, he must follow the spiral all the way down to the abyss.
Like so many other evangelicals, Carter just asserts this as if it were obviously true — but he doesn’t make the slightest effort to support it. He doesn't even make the effort of pretending to support it by insisting that unless others prove him wrong, then he must be right.
I think it's clear why such evangelicals don't invest any effort into supporting their claims: they just aren't supportable. There are no logical or empirical reasons why "the universe is undesigned" must necessarily and logically lead to "there is no meaningful way to talk about beauty, intelligence, etc." Some people draw this conclusion, but that doesn't make it a necessary conclusion and that's what people like Joe Carter need it to be. If they can't claim that atheism leads to a lack of meaning and beauty, they will find it harder to keep pretending to be superior to atheists.
The only way to even begin to think that this argument is true is if one defines concepts like "meaning" and "beauty" from an exclusively theistic perspective — in other words, to use definitions that ensure that the concepts only make sense in the context of their god. That, however, would commit the fallacy of Begging the Question. You don't suppose Joe Carter is implicitly committing that fallacy, too, do you?
To put it simply, there are atheists who find meaning, beauty, and morality in the universe; there are atheists who find objective, intrinsic morality in the universe; there are theists (and Christians) who argue that meaning and beauty are subjective things we must personally commit to. All of this stands in refutation to the superficial and simplistic claims made by some evangelicals.
Read More:
Comments
so what is the meaning of life for atheists then? you dont have one. at best by your own arguments youre an animal no different from a cow or a dog. all an atheist is, is a coward too scared to have his own beliefs deciding to ridicule the beliefs of others for the rest of his life and not having to defend any of his own because he truly has none. in your view you are the random product of a random set of occurences which spawned yourself. so you will live out your random life and die your random death and no one will remember your random meaningless life. so what are you even living for then? so you can find stuff in the world around you pretty? so what? monkeys find stuff pretty so what? without a God, any attempt to find meaning in life is all useless conjecture. you will never find a meaning because you cannot, many many men better than yourself have tried and failed. only once you look at the meaning of life from the premise that a god exists does everything start to make sense.
Atheists don’t have “the” meaning of life because there is no “the” meaning of life. Atheists have meaning in their lives, though, and no gods or religion is necessary for that.
That assumes that all animals are the same and there are no differences between cows or dogs. That assumption is not one which anyone believes, so it’s not logical to conclude that if humans are animals then they are no different from any other animal. Of course, there’s no argument against humans being animals - it’s a simple biological classification.
Who said atheists don’t have beliefs?
No one thinks that because true randomness doesn’t exist in our universe at the quantum level. I exist because of the non-random operation of natural laws.
It’s not a good idea to keep attributing views to people you don’t know and have never met. You keep getting everything wrong.
I enjoy life. I don’t need an afterlife in order to enjoy what I have now and have meaning in what I have now. Do you? If so, why? What is so bad about life that it can’t be enjoyed for what it is?
Really? OK, prove it.
Really? Please prove that, too.
Well, I’d like to see you prove this, as well.
Atheists don’t have “the” meaning of life because there is no “the” meaning of life. Atheists have meaning in their lives, though, and no gods or religion is necessary for that.
Because you yourself cannot find a “the” meaning of life you assume that there is none? do you do this with all aspects of life? when stumped by a math problem do you say “well gee I cant figure it out there must be no answer at all!”
That assumes that all animals are the same and there are no differences between cows or dogs. That assumption is not one which anyone believes, so it’s not logical to conclude that if humans are animals then they are no different from any other animal. Of course, there’s no argument against humans being animals - it’s a simple biological classification.
this goes beyond biology. the difference between humans and animals is that humans have an eternal soul. by saying that humans do not possess a soul you are classifying them as animals.
Who said atheists don’t have beliefs?
I say you dont have beliefs. you can say “well I believe in enjoying life and living it to the fullest.” is that a belief really? my dog believes in sleeping all day and eating treats whenever possible, does that qualify as a belief? thats just you doing what your body is telling you it likes doing.
No one thinks that because true randomness doesn’t exist in our universe at the quantum level. I exist because of the non-random operation of natural laws.It’s not a good idea to keep attributing views to people you don’t know and have never met. You keep getting everything wrong.
And who made these “non-random operation of natural laws”? either someone designed them to be that way or they evolved randomly over time. so by your own argument they are still utlimately random.
I enjoy life. I don’t need an afterlife in order to enjoy what I have now and have meaning in what I have now. Do you? If so, why? What is so bad about life that it can’t be enjoyed for what it is?
I spoke nothing of enjoying life. I spoke of having meaning in life. the title of your article is “Is Life Meaningless for Atheists?” in case you forgot. what is your meaning then? raise your kids properly and have fun and then die? I see no meaning there, thats just living.
Really? OK, prove it.
If you werent created by God for a specific purpose then why are you here? no reason in particular? if there is no reason or intent behind your own personal creation then there is no underlying purpose to your life.
Really? Please prove that, too.
Find me one philosopher who found a meaning behind it all without accepting that there is a God. Should be easy enough for you it’s an age old question thats been debated since the beginning of time. And yet the answer put forward still seems to be in essence “yea we dont really know why were here so lets just enjoy the ride”
Well, I’d like to see you prove this, as well.
If you accept the premise that there is a god who designed and created you for a specific purpose then you know your purpose in life is to serve God. Everything else can then be seen through that context.
No, I conclude this because meaning is based on values and there is no single value for all humans; ergo, there can be no single meaning for everyon.
Prove it.
I don’t think you are in any position to make such declarations about me. So, prove it.
No one that I can tell.
Prove it.
You asked why I am “even living then” and that was my answer.
A sperm and an egg joined together, leading to me.
Prove it.
Not my job. You claimed that “many men” better than I “have tried and failed.” If you can prove this, you shouldn’t have claimed it.
This doesn’t support your claim.
AHAHHAHAHAHA
nice way to dodge all my points and not address them at all. “prove it” “prove it” “prove it” “prove it” why should I prove anything when your whole profession is based on discussion of topics which are all in the end essentially unprovable? Since you are obviously not willing to discuss my points intelligently I will leave you alone. You just another wanker regurgitating the words and thoughts of others anyhow.
It’s not a “dodge” to expect you to support your claims.
Because you are making claims.
Prove it.
Making a claim is not the same as making a point. Supporing a claim is making a point.
Prove it.
It’s not a “dodge” to expect you to support your claims.
prove it.
Because you are making claims.
prove it.
Prove it.
you’re proving my point with every dumb response you post, instead of arguing logically you simply dodge.
Making a claim is not the same as making a point. Supporing a claim is making a point.
prove it.
Prove it.
look in the mirror.
When you make an empirical claim, you obligate yourself to support it.
I doubt that you are unable to recognize the empirical claims you have made.
An argument is a series of connected statements designed to support a conclusion. You are making claims that you aren’t supporting, which means that you aren’t making any arguments, logical or otherwise. Expecting you to support the claims you make isn’t a “dodge.” Why? Because unless you are able and willing to support your claims, there’s nothing to “dodge.”
Anyone can make a claim. All it requires is sufficient knowledge of English to string together a grammatical sentence. A person who makes a claim, and who only does that, isn’t making any points or arguments that merit substantive engagement. It’s only after their claims are supported is there any chance that they are saying something worth dealing with.
Since you are the one that is making claims that there is a God you are the one that must prove it.It’s a simple question.Since you are probably willing to die for your beliefs you must,therefor,have some great answers to shut up those non-believers and show that God exists but not by calling them names,thats rather juvenile.Or you might want to READ your Bible a little more throughly.
Is it cowardly to accept that we are chance beings in a chance universe and will cease to exist on our death, or is it cowardly to refuse to accept this and to run out of fear into the arms of religion –which has been the most murderous destructive force in history? And as for being animals, non-human animals are far more “ethical” (because natural?) than humans. Other animals do not massacre one another by the tens of thousands and millions like humans. They rarely kill members of their own species, and when they engage in primarily symbolic combat with other members of their species it is only over the protection of their food supply or their sex partners. Unlike humans, other animals do not kill for stupid things like religion and nationalism. If there were a heaven it would be filled with non-human animals and few if any humans. We humans would do well to aspire to the behavior of our fellow animals.
Also, what’s more ennobling, to embrace somebody else’s “meaning of life” –most likely some mentally disturbed person who claims to be the spokesperson for some supernatural being –, or to invest our lives with meaning that each of us creates for ourselves?
you are wrong. not only do atheist have opinions but they require courage. if we really are animals, so what. should one kill oneself because of that. but, there is no evidence for the existence of god and you are taking the easy, wishful thinking ideas that have been presented to you all your life without really reflecting on them. you are the coward. we have nothing to save us, as there is nothing to be saved from. you seek salvation because of a cultural and traditional heritage with means nothing, other that it is human nature for 90% of us to do that. if you think that you could be wrong, you’ll see what straws you are grasping for that do not even exist.
I challenge you to find one honest Christian who says, “if you want your pathetic existence to have any meaning, you should believe in my God you immoral heathen.” Rather than playing the “I’m an atheist and I’m a victim of the Christian bigots,” why don’t you legitimately answer the actual question?
Every Christian who says that life can’t have meaning or morality with their god says just that, though in different words.
1. If Christians are bigots, why not say so.
2. As I explained, the question is a logical fallacy. Did you not understand the explanation?
Let me start by saying, WOW. Now I have lived on both sides of this “Spiritual” Fence. Currently, I am an atheist; however, was raised a Christian Baptist. Also, I am not going lie, I lack courage to an extent, I am 24 and have yet to tell my family I do not believe in “God”. I do this because I am afraid of their reaction, but more so, I can not stand to see my family suffer with worry. Yet, though I may be cowardice in some aspects in my atheism, I am far from coward. I choose to live my life for myself, taking responsibility for not just my life, but the lives of all those around me. Please explain to me in a valid argument, how one is cowardice, when they take the weight of life off the shoulders of a fictitious “God” and bear the weight and hardships of life upon yourself. Please explain to me the cowardice in this.
On to the point of the bigamist, closed minded view of Christians/Catholics. Before we delve into this point, let me first mention, I have lived amongst the Christian, live currently with a Muslim roommate, and my best friend (along with many others) are Jewish. I get the rare opportunity to experience religion from a most interesting view. As for Christians saying that there is no meaning to life without “God,” please sirs, walk into any Catholic, Evangelistic, or (I forget the actual term that encompasses Baptist, Methodist, etc.) church service and tell me that is not exactly what is preached. As for bigamist. I would like to see any modern day “Christian,” not Muslim or Jew, give their life for their religion. You have faith, as my Jewish friend points out, that is all you have. You have no proof in your beliefs, just faith. You carry on your lives living upon the “moral wings” of one or two Isolated incidents, of which their were no more than “12” witnesses. You follow a book written over hundreds of years, that follows like a story, and at times never making sense, in which each chapter is based on the word of “1” man who claims “God” spoke to him. I ask you to please prove that the events in the Bible are true as they say. I challenge you though, where evolution and the big bang has many scientist and documented varying viewpoints, you must look beyond the bible to prove your point that there is a “God”.
Now I believe someone said my life had no meaning. Well, actually I have dabbled with this for many years. As a Christian I attempted suicide 4 times. Each time an event in my life was hitting a wall I turned to “God”. I had truly found no “Meaning” to life as a Christian. When I turned from “God”, for reason I will explain in the next paragraph. That is when I figured out what my meaning of life was. The meaning of life is quite simple, and I feel is common amongst all humans. Quite simply it is to exist and to evolve. Not evolve into something else but evolve intellectually, as a people, and as a species. It is to exist in a world of turmoil and survive and conquer all odds. As I stated before, the meaning of life is “To Exist, To Grow, To Evolve!” Note: before you have a chance to rebuttal that claim of evolution, I ask you to look it up. Evolution simply put is to change. Evolution is present and exist in the simple process of a child “learning” to talk. That my friend is evolution, in a simple form, though instinctual, still evolution.
And on to the fact of how I came to “believe” how I believe. First and foremost I have a problem with any being “creating” something with free will, simply to worship or serve it. Note I said creating, I have never created, nor has any human created, a horse. Also, I realized long ago how cowardice it was for me to rely on a “God” to answer all question and solve all problem, after all I have an IQ of 132 +-10. I can solve these problems myself. As for other reasons, well I guess you may just have to wait for me to become a writer. No I am not out for hire for free.
Little P.R. = For those who like the comment or content of this article, feel free to email me at Hollandc02@hotmail.com. (use Atheist article, in the subject) And you, bless yourself, because “God” isn’t going to.
~Chad