If there is no God, how do we combat nihilism?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
My life has value to me because of the richness and joy and love I find in the living of it; and those carry me through the hard times. I can say to people, this is how life has value to me; here is how I make meaning in my life. Here are the times I’ve suffered and despaired, and here are the things that brought me through. I can offer no one anyt y. Now, this is not a treatise on beauty, per se, as it is on agreement with standards.

The discussion on what beauty consists of is entirely more complex and more subjective than just reflecting reality. It is not enough to say that there is no beauty to life without a standard to measure it against, even if there was no such standard. Besides, I happen to believe that such a standard does exist.

Originally posted by Starrman

The discussion on what beauty consists of is entirely more complex and more subjective than just reflecting reality.
Precisely why I wasn't willing to get into a discussion about the same. However, there exists a correlation between the ideals.

Besides, I happen to believe that such a standard does exist.
No doubt you do. It seems everyone who is in this thing has something they find worth living for, even if they make it up themselves.

Originally posted by KellyJay
So tell me, what is a good life and a bad one, if all lives are the
same in the end? I know you have your personal tastes, you like
this, yo don't like that, but so do others, what makes "good" if
all there is in the end is nothing? Do you or others gain anyting
of lasting value by picking one over the other, since all roads lead
to the same place in t ...[text shortened]... re or less meaning in the end since he shares the same
end as someone who does care?
Kelly

"So tell me, what is a good life and a bad one, if all lives are the
same in the end?"

If by 'all lives are the same in the end', you mean, 'we all die', then yes, we all die. That doesn't mean that our legacy dies. Einstein died in 1955, but his legacy lives on. We have a whole community of people here who talk about Gallileo, Kepler, Newton, Alexander the Great, Moses, Jesus, John Paul II, Hitler, Stalin, FreakyKBH, not only the good but also the bad, but all people who have in some way made a bit of a name for themselves (whether real or imaginary). As we all know, good and bad are merely points of view (unless you're a REAL die-hard Christian, when you prefer to blame it on the devil), labels that WE put on things in order to pass information about our interaction with some being, object or process.

Personally, I live for myself. As a biologist, quite aware of the vast number of species that have existed over the last 4 billion years, and quite aware of the number that will exist over the next 4 billion, I appreciate that humans, and human civilisation, are transitory. I want to know as much of the truth, the way things REALLY are, as possible. Not for anyone else, although if I can help others understand themselves, and the world they exist in, if I can make people lives a little better, that's all good. When you get right down to it though, I do it for myself.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]My life has value to me because of the richness and joy and love I find in the living of it; and those carry me through the hard times. I can say to people, this is how life has value to me; here is how I make meaning in my life. Here are the times I’ve suffered and despaired, and here are the things that brought me through. I can offer no one anyt ...[text shortened]... y. Now, this is not a treatise on beauty, per se, as it is on agreement with standards.

I think we can both appreciate that 'reality' is a subjective thing, it's all about interpretation. Who says that the scene that our imaginary painter is painting isn't what he sees? I don't think it's so easy to make that call. Perhaps our painter is blind. Perhaps someone told him that there is a lake, a tree, and the sun is shining. Perhaps that's his perception of reality - and why is it any less valid than ours?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I think we can both appreciate that 'reality' is a subjective thing, it's all about interpretation. Who says that the scene that our imaginary painter is painting isn't what he sees? I don't think it's so easy to make that call. Perhaps our painter is blind. Perhaps someone told him that there is a lake, a tree, and the sun is shining. Perhaps that's his perception of reality - and why is it any less valid than ours?

I thought that I addressed that by prefacing the correction with the painter's stated stance/perspective. As he claimed to be a realist, the correction/suggestion was (boldly) given.

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you can engage your brain, I'm asking something of you that
requires an answer, if you can only insult me instead of thinking
something through, then don't bother responding. If all there is
to life is the here and now, it does not matter one wit the meaning
you place on anything, as far as it being better or worse than
anyone else's meaning or purp ...[text shortened]... fact that you can say another's
death makes your life meaningful, speaks for itself.
Kelly

I was insulting your post not you. I make it a point never to insult anyone ... but their ideas? They can be suspect.

What intrigues me is your reasoning.
If there is no afterlife then there is no meaning to life.
Therefore, all there is to life is the here and now.

That's how I read your ideas. Clearly I think there's some bad reasoning here, since I don't believe there is an afterlife, but I do find meaning in my life, and it is not simply related to the here and now.

As for my meaning disappearing after my life, that's true. Phht! It's gone. But things remain. Friends, family, society, memories of me. These things remain. These are things that transcend our own lives but continue.
Doesn't require that I believe that I will continue ... which obviously I don't.

As for my original response, you're probably right - it was a bit insulting, for which I apologise. I do get a little sick of the stereotyping that goes on though, by Christians about atheists, as I'm sure you do by atheists about Christians.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Practising atheist? Let us know when you get that thing perfected.

When it's perfect, it'll be time to die.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I didn't say all actions become meaningless, I said everything
becomes meaningless if it all goes to nothing after this life time.

Why is meaning only meaningfull if it continues to have meaning forever? There is no logic in that statement. Why should meaning be time dependant?
Let me ask you a question. What is the meaning of life if there is an afterlife ? If you go to heaven then there you are, if you go to hell then your in hell. There is still no meaning and still no outcome after that, afterall you are there for all eternity (whatever eternity is since time is only a property of this universe and does not exist in heaven or hell)
If the only meaning in your life is getting to heaven then you live a very sad meaningless life.
A soldier who follows his commander unquestioningly may think he has meaning but has instead given that meaning up and given it to his commander.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
No doubt you do. It seems everyone who is in this thing has something they find worth living for, even if they make it up themselves.

As opposed to what, someone else making it up for them?

Originally posted by Starrman
As opposed to what, someone else making it up for them?

More of a comment on the fact that everyone seeks meaning. Even those who allow 'others to make it up for them,' do so with the intent of finding something for which to live. In a sense, we're all (at least a little) like Dumbo with the feather.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
More of a comment on the fact that everyone seeks meaning. Even those who allow 'others to make it up for them,' do so with the intent of finding something for which to live. In a sense, we're all (at least a little) like Dumbo with the feather.

Sure, I think that's part of the humnan condition. I said a few months ago that I thought the normative state for humans was one of questioning, and I still do.

Originally posted by Starrman
Sure, I think that's part of the humnan condition. I said a few months ago that I thought the normative state for humans was one of questioning, and I still do.

What do you mean?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I don't see KJ's argument for meaning in life dependent upon the afterlife. Instead, I see his argument against those who posit that life has no meaning. If life has no meaning, then what standard determines its value?
Some say, this is all we got, so let's make the best of it. Who determines what the "best" is?

I'm not making an argument for meaning in life dependent upon
the 'afterlife", you read what I have said, it is that all meaning is
only found in life! As my beliefs go there is life, period. If nothing
is at the end of life, than rocks last longer, and the meaning we
assign only goes to our personal tastes, which is to say our likes
and dislike at the moment.
Kelly

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
What do you mean?

That our natural state is to ask and seek meaning in things.

Originally posted by Starrman
That our natural state is to ask and seek meaning in things.

Why do you think it is that way?