If There Is No God

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would a man care for the answer of why he exists if he believes that after death it will be turned into nothingess?

People can discover whatever they will in the future, but that does not change the final scenario that death presents.

Why does a man want to continue to live even in the state of grave pain if death can take it all away and will eventually happen anyway, perhaps at a worse time?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not know why man has the urge to continue to live when very ill, or why we actively try to avoid death.

I do not know why we even exist in the first place, which is a prerequisite to ever being in a position to suffer, nor do I know why suffering exists.

I do know that I am not going to make the assumption that I know when I do not. I also know that concluding that a higher power is the reason is not going to lead to man finding answers to these types of questions.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]

I believe those feelings are obliterated when a person is in great pain. In fact, in that situation, people can't stop thinking about themselves! All they want is the pain to end.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes; it must in part depend on the severity of the pain.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not know why man has the urge to continue to live when very ill, or why we actively try to avoid death.


[/ QUOTE ]

I guess there might be some evolutionary advantage in a strong survival instinct.

chez

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I do not know why man has the urge to continue to live when very ill, or why we actively try to avoid death.


[/ QUOTE ]

I guess there might be some evolutionary advantage in a strong survival instinct.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

This is quite true, and I had it in mind when I typed my post. I chose to say I did not know because ultimately we do not know why evolution or survival instincts came into existence.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe those feelings are obliterated when a person is in great pain. In fact, in that situation, people can't stop thinking about themselves! All they want is the pain to end.

[/ QUOTE ]I'm gald you brought up hierachy of needs, it as an important topic in the ethics of man as you can get.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I do not know why man has the urge to continue to live when very ill, or why we actively try to avoid death.


[/ QUOTE ]

I guess there might be some evolutionary advantage in a strong survival instinct.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

This is quite true, and I had it in mind when I typed my post. I chose to say I did not know because ultimately we do not know why evolution or survival instincts came into existence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you did. I was really responding to the poster who seemed to think the lack of mass suicide was particularly puzzling.

chez

[RJT]

M to the 6th,

[ QUOTE ]
A quick counterexample: math exists with or without God, so why *couldn't* an independent framework of morality exist with or without God? One can argue that much math is provable and morality is not, but that doesn't invalidate the possibility of a morality framework. Something like individual needs/gain weighed against detriment to others: a sort of sliding-scale prisoner's dilemma sort of structure might be part of it. Under such a framework, seeking comparatively little personal gain at comparatively great cost to others could be considered immoral.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man created/invented math. Man did not discover Math. It does not exist on its own. Math is merely a language (like Spanish) we use to describe the universe. Perhaps, math can exist without God. It does not exist without man though.

Likewise, man can create/invent morality. Man can even create a morality perfect enough that all can agree to and live by. (I doubt if all can ever live by it always, if happens then you got utopia on earth is about it.) This invention of the method to achieve utopia is not Absolute Morality. It is simply a morality that would be agreed to unanimously.

Discover Absolute Morality (as opposed to invent a perfect moral system) and you either discover God or you discover the reason for the Universe (to me you probably do both simultaneously).

RJT

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Man created/invented math. Man did not discover Math. It does not exist on its own. Math is merely a language (like Spanish) we use to describe the universe. Perhaps, math can exist without God. It does not exist without man though.

[/ QUOTE ]

but that's the point. Just because its dependent on man for its existence doesn't mean its not objective.


chez

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Man created/invented math. Man did not discover Math. It does not exist on its own. Math is merely a language (like Spanish) we use to describe the universe. Perhaps, math can exist without God. It does not exist without man though.

[/ QUOTE ]

but that's the point. Just because its dependent on man for its existence doesn't mean its not objective.
chez

[/ QUOTE ]


Math - is objective, sure.

Morality?

Are saying that not only can Absolute Morality exists without a God, that it exists (even any morality) without man? That we didn't invent it? Or are you saying that morality is a language like math that describes something objective? If so what does it describe? Does it describe something existent?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Man created/invented math. Man did not discover Math. It does not exist on its own. Math is merely a language (like Spanish) we use to describe the universe. Perhaps, math can exist without God. It does not exist without man though.

[/ QUOTE ]


but that's the point. Just because its dependent on man for its existence doesn't mean its not objective.
chez

[/ QUOTE ]


Math - is objective, sure.

Morality?

Are saying that not only can Absolute Morality exists without a God, that it exists (even any morality) without man? That we didn't invent it? Or are you saying that morality is a language like math that describes something objective? If so what does it describe? Does it describe something existent?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that maths describes something objective? If so what does it describe? Does it describe something existent?

I don't mean to be awkward parroting the questions back to about maths. The point is that objective truths can exist without god and maybe they depend on man for their existence in some sense. [and to use the phrase of the day, it doesn't matter if in the end nothing matters]

If we answer the question for maths we might find we can do the same for morality. Personally I doubt it, I think Kant tried and failed, but that doesn't mean it isn't possible.

chez