Purpose

[Sunny]

Back to Purpose...
     My first few years of ESRD I struggled to find purpose and meaning in my life. I was forced to gradually give up everything I had previously come to belief was my foundation for purpose and left with nothing. I became very bitter and rejected God for a while there. Having this malady strike me has left my husband a complete agnostic. If it could strike me, how could God exist?, is his way of thinking.When I try to tell him I now feel God gave me a reprieve from this malady, he simply tells me Science gave me a reprieve, God had nothing to do with it.
     For now, my purpose in life has become as simple as to be here to raise my teenage kids and be my husband's companion. All three have told me quite clearly they could not imagine living without me around. That will do for now. I keep thinking any other purpose in my life will gradually illicit itself as needed and when I am capable.
     As for agnostics and believer's in God getting along, It absolutely can be done. There is room for all beliefs. My husband and I have come to terms on this subject. So can we all, by not  judging others and at the same time, not pushing belief systems on others.
     So let's have a toast to all here who bravely choose to live with kidney disease everyday.

[stauffenberg]

the enormous advantage of finding meaning and purpose in your life the way an atheist does, by just relying on logical analysis applied to the undeniably real, everday facts of your existence, is that the reasoning is so straightforward that it can be relied on.  In contrast, any religious belief about the purpose in life relies on faith, not logic, and has reference to invisible things whose very existence has to be open to question.  This means that the religious answer is always uncertain and that it cannot hold up under the stresses of life the same way the atheist's answer does.  People often talk of losing their faith under the pressure of tragedies, but who ever says he lost his confidence in logical reasoning because of personal loss?

To say that you can still find purpose in the living death of dialysis by virtue of the fact that you can continue to perceive your life, to give human meaning to things by your interpretation of them, and to grow and develop introspectively even by the tragedies you experience, is something that anyone can see is true.  But to say that there is purpose in living like one of the Undead on dialysis because a 2000/3400-year-old set of books full of miracles, fables, and allegories, and the subject of radically conflicting interpretations, containing much that even believers reject as false (eg. Noah and the Flood; the world being onlly 6000 years old; the story of Adam and Eve; the denial of evolution; Moses making the Sun stop moving (it doesn't ever move relative to the Earth in the first place! etc.), says that everything is just fine despite the fact that it seems to be terrible is not a solid and secure answer in the same way the atheist's reasoning is.

[Ken Shelmerdine]

I myself over the last few years have wavered between agnosticism and atheism. I cannot be completely atheistic because I find that the logic behind atheism doesn't seem to create logical solutions to the world's problems.

The natural world has evolved in a way that that has been to its own benefit physically. But socially human beings have hardly evolved to their  own benefit in any way. We still seem to be incapable of any form of lasting self government where the concensus towards authority  remains constant. Nations are still at war with each other, the poor in the world just seem to get poorer, some nations are terrorized by their own people and many social problems seem to exist everywhere you look.

Why is it that after so many years of evolution the human race is no nearer now to living in peace than it's ever been? Why is it that in spite of the trappings of modern western civilization many people are discontented and (sometimes secretly) long for some spiritual meaning to their lives? Why does secularized government consistently fail to solve it's social problems and discontent in it's citizens?

The fact is that humanity cannot live by logic and science alone. This persistant spiritual longing will not go away, despite our efforts to comfort ourselves with our frantic consumerism we cannot deny it. It would appear to be a natural part of our make up. Because it is part of us and allways will be, doesn't that tell us something? Isn't it also quite often the case where communities who have some sort of belief system in a higher authority they are far more integrated and cohesive. Where all standards are laid down by an unquestionable Divine authority rather than the moral relativism which exists in liberal secular institutions.       

[stauffenberg]

Although I have a persistent longing to be Tsar of the Universe, that longing does not make it any more likely that I am or eventually will be the holder of that office.  Wishes have no implications for reality, and if the reality you are left with seems inadequate, then perhaps it is: nothing says the world we live in has to be satisfying!

As for wavering between agnosticism and atheism, you might be interested to read the article by the fomer Yale philosophy professor, Norwood Hanson, entitled "Why I am not an agnostic."  His point is that while either atheism or faith is a conceivably logical position, agnosticism is radically irrational.  An example illustrates his point.  If I tell you something miraculous, such as that I have an elephant that lives in my small closet, then you are not agnostic with respect to that claim on the basis of the fact that you have not yet been able to examine my closet.  On the contrary, given the fantastic, fairy-tale quality of my claim, you would require extremely convincing evidence of the accuracy of my statement before even beginning to take it seriously.  The same is true for the magical, mythological claims of religion: before it could even be worth seriously adopting uncertainty about their truth, you would have to have excellent evidence to make you begin to entertain these claims as serious.  As the Scottish philosopher David Hume said: "Miraculous claims require miraculously convincing evidence so as not to be dismissed out of hand."  In the case of religion, the believability of the evidence supporting faith can itself only be sustained by faith, so there is no independent evidence of the required solidity to endorse it.

[LightLizard]

thanks stauffenburg. as usual, your perception cuts through the curtain of confusion like a fine blade.
and thanks you too, ken. i agree with what you said, mostly, but i'm not sure that the way to any form of lasting peace is possible through whatever system is developed, be it religious, political, philosophical, logical or scientific.
it seems to be the human pattern that whatever system is in place at any given time will definitely break down as time passes. this can be attributed to the scientific principle of entropy and the (forward) movement of the evolutionary process, and as painful as it may be, sometimes, i think that this is as it must be.

[Ken Shelmerdine]

Stauphenberg I think in one sense you are missing my point and confusing cause and effect. I am posing the question that the main cause of religious belief is a human need and not scriptural revelation such as the Bible, Quoran etc. I agree that apart from the historical figures who appear in scripture and quite probably  existed (the existance of Jesus Christ as a person is documented in both Roman and Jewish secular history) the myths and fables and miracles attributed to them are without foundation and therefor are beyond any logical belief.

The stories contained in scripture were just the efforts of human beings trying to make sense of the world just as we are still trying to do now. Even if scripture didn't exist to influence religious thinking many of us would still have that spiritual need. Which brings me back to nature.

I think I believe that as nature demands us humans to eat drink  and sleep and carry out actions which are neccessary to our physical survival it also demands a spiritual belief. In spite of all logical and scientific thought it remains in many people and has done so from the beginning of human evolution and  I cannot logically believe it is not there for a purpose. It is natural and and nature is the master of expediancy and purpose.

[stauffenberg]

It is a general rule of reasoning that we prefer to rely on simple and everyday explanations when these suffice, before then going on to posit bizarre and extraordinary reasons when ordinary ones fail.  So when I turn on the lights, while I could explain that by magical light fairies bursting out of the wall and into the lamp, I prefer, if it is at all possible, to explain the sudden brightness by reference to tangible, everyday, commonplace things like wires, circuits, switches, and electricity.  This is just what it means to think rationally rather than fantastically, the way schizophrenics often do.

The same principle applies to the fact of faith.  The human mind, for obvious evolutionary reasons of self-preservation, is terrified of its own destruction, and this is evident in a wide range of experiences, such as the fact that people wake up when they are about to see their own death in their dreams, that the general public is afraid to discuss death openly, and that many cultures try to preserve the bodies of the dead to make it seem as if they have survived after all.  So given our fear of death, we seek to reassure ourselves by some magical religious fairy tale either a) that we will never really die, or b) that our death somehow won't matter, because it will happen under the protection of some benign father-figure who guarantees that everything comes out all right in the end.  This is no different than soothing ourselves with reassuring thoughts when we are walking down a deserted street late at night, or telling children some story about men bowling in the sky so they'll stop crying over the sound of thunder.  This is the ordinary, and thus preferable, explanation of the phenomenon of faith. Part of being grown-up is that we can recognize when we are kidding ourselves with a story to get through some difficulty.

You would be surprised how utterly incapable of comprehending religious faith or having belief the children of atheists often are.  They simply have no space in their minds for the longing you describe, and if they have not been taught to think that way from early childhood, by about age 10 they become immune to it and cannot learn it.  In fact, the early missionaries in North America were surprised to find that many native tribes they encountered had no word in their language for 'faith' or 'belief,' since they were used to dealing only with things they could see and feel, so where was their longing for belief?   

[The Wife]

I’ve had my back against a wall more times than I can count and each time, a part of myself died. Opinions, beliefs, who I thought I was, what I thought I’d become or achieve, dissolved. I got to a point where I didn’t know who I was anymore. When I arrived at this point, all I could do was observe. I observed the trees, my partner convulsing in a hospital bed, the doctors as they continued to say he wouldn’t live, the lack of food in our fridge, the flowers, an eviction notice when I couldn’t come up with the rent, my newborn grandson, waves washing upon the shore, and myself detaching from the person I once thought I was. I observed stillness and discovered it isn't still at all.

When we were told my partner needed dialysis to stay alive, another part of myself died. Another layer that still thought I had control gave up, let go, surrendered. I believed that my positive thoughts could bring healing. His illness had nothing to do with me. It was out of my control and I had no other choice but to allow him to make the decision of whether he would choose to stay alive by a machine or not. I have no control on how long technology will keep him alive either.

Everyone is unique. Some rely more on logic - others, feelings. It doesn't matter.
Yet somehow, both matter. What we think or believe is just that, and everyone has his or her own way of perceiving. Everyone has a different life experience. Even those who have the same experience will perceive differently because no experience is exactly the same. Our experiences create our opinions and beliefs about ourselves and the world around us. Some may silently mock me. Others may resonate with what I say. What another thinks of my way of living or perceiving comes from their own perceptions and life experiences.  I am no different.

I don't know how the universe works or what spirit is. Nor do I know what my purpose is, if there’s a purpose, or how my life will unfold. All I have is this moment. Surrendering, trusting, allowing, accepting, and living in gratitude just happen to be the ways I’ve discovered an inner joy and peace that is not dependent on anything external.

[Sluff]

Just a quick note from Administration.

Everyone has the right to believe the way they want to believe and the same respect needs to be shown even if it differs from what you believe.

We haven't had a good debate here in a long time. I think debates are good as long as mutual respect is expressed.


Sluff/ Admin

[Ken Shelmerdine]

Stauffenberg If by logic and reason you have arrived at atheism then what logical proof do you have that disproves the existance of a superior all powerful being which for this augument we'll call God?
At best, logic can only disprove theistic proofs.  Disproving theistic proofs does not mean there is no God.  It only means that the proofs you present are insufficient.

Logic can be used to disprove theistic evidences that are presented.  Negating such proofs is not a refutation of all possible proofs since no one can know or present all possible proofs of God's existence.  Therefore, negation of proofs does not disprove God's existence.
If there were a logical argument that proved that God did not exist, it either has not yet been made known.  If it were known then it would be in use by atheists.  But since no proof of God's non-existence has been successfully defended by atheists, we can conclude that so far, that there are no logical proofs for God's non-existence.

If faith alone, then the position is not held by logic or evidence and is an arbitrary position.
If by a combination of evidence, logic, or faith, then according to the above analysis, neither is sufficient to validate atheism.  A combination of insufficient evidence does not validate atheism.

For someone to believe there is no God is to hold that belief by faith since there is no evidence that positively supports atheism and there are no logical proofs that God does not exist.  It is, after all, virtually impossible to prove a negative. It is quite possible that both faith in God and atheism are irrational  and agnosticism is the only rational position based on logical analysis.

[stauffenberg]

If you and I were in the forest running away from an angry bear, and I told you wait, stop running and start digging, because I have buried a time machine where we are now standing that will take us away from this animal more certainly than we can outrun it, you would probably say to me, "You idiot!" and keep running.  If I shouted out to you as you were disappearing over the hill, with the bear coming ever closer to me, "But you can't prove I don't have a time machine, can you?  So why are you running rather than digging?" you would think I had gone insane.  The simple fact is that extraordinary claims outside the realm of everyday experience require extraordinary proof to make anyone take them seriously.  Insofar as that positive proof is lacking, we dismiss all talk of things like time machines, goblins living in the mountains, fairies in the forests, people able to levitate, vampires, werewolves, or the world being flat.  We don't go around saying, "For all I know, Bugs Bunny may be real, since I have never seen it proved that he is not real."  The burden of proof is always on the person making the extraordinary claim, not on the people listening to it to prove that it isn't real.  If the burden were the other way around, we could spend the rest of human history trying to disprove the existence of all the trillions of bizarre entities that anyone and everyone would keep making up.

By the way, I have a three-headed talking goldfish named 'Josiah' in a bowl next to my computer.  Can you prove it doesn't exist?  Can you show me a logical proof that it isn't really there?  You see how silly it would be to regard our dispute about the talking goldfish as at a draw at this point because you cannot disprove its existence.

[Ken Shelmerdine]

Well at this point maybe we should call it a draw as I can't convince you with my reasoning and neither can you with yours. I repect your view just as I hope you respect mine even though I'm not sure whether or not at one point you implied that I am schizophrenic.  I have enjoyed the debate though.

By the way give my regards in triplicate to Josiah.

[stauffenberg]

I am reminded of the scene in the Woody Allen movie, 'Radio Days.'  Woody asks his uncle if he knows what the meaning of life is, and the uncle replies, "The meaning of life?  How should I know that?  I can't even get the electric can opener to work!"  Everyone has to find his own way to deal with the mystery.

[jbeany]

I thought the answer was 42.

[Sunny]

          Either way, you guys certainly got me thinking. I always enjoy listening to points of views. People can always not read it if they are offended.

[George Jung]

I like to think that my purpose in this life is to make for a better future.  I want to bring joy and happiness to those that know me.  I want to inspire friends, family, and strangers alike.  I want to do my little part in the mission to raise donor awareness.  I want to make someone smile.  If I can accomplish these simple things then I think I will have a meaningful purpose and as long as I can accomplish these simple things I will continue making my purpose meaningful.  Oh yea, how could I forget....I am supposed to ride motorcycles as much as possible. 

[cris]

Go, ride on George!!!! I can't seem to understand that people speaks of love and knows how to love but denies the existence of a Supreme Being. Breathe the air, feel the wind, there goes your spirit, unless you are one soul-less being. I don't mean to offend, everyone has their own belief. There are no coincidences in this world, everyone has a purpose, but not everyone was given the privelege to know the purpose.
love,
cris

[kitkatz]

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.
It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.
We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant,
gorgeous, talented, fabulous?
Actually, who are you not to be?
You are a child of God.
Your playing small does not serve the world.
There is nothing enlightened about shrinking
so that other people won't feel insecure around you.
We are all meant to shine, as children do.
We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us.
It is not just in some of us; it is in everyone.
And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously
give other people permission to do the same.
As we are liberated from our own fear,
our presence automatically liberates others.

a return to love - marianne williamson

[glitter]

I can't seem to understand that people speaks of love and knows how to love but denies the existence of a Supreme Being

I can't seem to understand the guy in the sky theory....and I love my husband , my children, my mom and dad, and my cats.

[LightLizard]

the desire to believe in something is not, as has been stated, as much an inherent need to indulge in religious belief so much as it is a need to find a way to believe in oneself.
even today, with our seemingly miraculos technologies and scientific knowledge, no one can answer the age-old question of 'where do we come from'?
this inability can lead to a feeling of helplessness in one's life.
our ancestors were even more limited in their ability to comprehend the meaning of life than we are. so, it is perfectly natural that they would come up with explanations that satisfied their desire to feel that in this world of seeming chaos and destruction, there is a purpose above and beyond the scope of human awareness. it is also perfectly natural that, because of their lack of biology and other scientific methodolgies, that their explanations would be of a supernatural character.
what is not natural is that generations later, when the facts of evolution and the wisdom of quantum physics have become well established realities, that massive anmounts of the population insist on clinging to obsolete notions regarding the meaning and purpose of our existence.
but what do i know? i'm just a swine in the mud.
my only consolation is the fact that pigs are smarter than sheep.
 

[angela515]

what is not natural is that generations later, when the facts of evolution and the wisdom of quantum physics have become well established realities, that massive anmounts of the population insist on clinging to obsolete notions regarding the meaning and purops of our existence.

I agree with this 100%. I don't get how people can disregard facts.

[Mimi]

what is not natural is that generations later, when the facts of evolution and the wisdom of quantum physics have become well established realities, that massive anmounts of the population insist on clinging to obsolete notions regarding the meaning and purpose of our existence.

Who do you think put all of these things in place?  It was not accidental.  God is not known for doing standard things.
God doesn't build skyscrapers:  men build skyscrapers.  And they all have a touch of genius, human genius.  But
you cannot find a man who can make a star.  And when God steps in, His working is like the difference between
a skyscraper and a star.

Mimi

[LightLizard]

why does the universe have to have been 'created' by a great being? why can't it be seen that there is a 'creative principle' at work that simply causes life to form and evolve?
just because we are here and partially aware of it doesn't mean that it was all 'created' by a 'supreme being '. it just means we don't know where we came from. no one does, but many choose to opt out by simply adopting a belief that has no real substance. its called 'faith' and it is just another way to stick one's head in the sand.
you don't have to believe in a god to love and be loving. the law of cause and effect was around before humans were, and it doesn't take a deep thinker to realise that if you want to be loved, (as we all do) you must love.

[Romona]

Faith is what gets some people through life. I sometimes wonder if my prayers work. I know I feel better after saying some, but is it just a form of meditation that is calming to me?
I like what you are saying about be loving. What you project is projected back to you. Many people that do have faith in a higher power don't live this way. 

[Ken Shelmerdine]

Many people that do have faith in a higher power don't live this way. 

I've seen plenty of examples of that kind of person.