GOD IS DEAD

I don't think the death of god leads to the loss of meaning and purpose in life. It's a non sequiter. Your entire OP is a non-sequiter. You have to prove how the death of god leads to the realization that life is meaningless, bleak, cold, and irrelevant. Further, you would then have to show that life without god is indeed meaningless, bleak, cold, and irrelevant. Lack of imagination does not count as proof here.I don't believe in God. I don't believe in anything close to a higher power. But I'm not a nihilist. I think you have to find your own meaning and purpose, which is much harder than having it handed to you on a silver platter (as much religion does). I think that meaning and purpose can be found if you search long and hard enough (although for some people it may be quite easy). Some people might find meaning and purpose through service of, and in, their nation (nationalism at its best, perhaps) without resorting to god. Some might find meaning and purpose in creating (be writing, music, or other art forms). Others may find it in their search for knowledge.You, and Nietzsche, are wrong to suggest that without god there can be no meaning and purpose to life.

No, it wouldn't be better. As we all know, work must be avoided at all costs. Which is why religion is so great. So many questions answered with a few basic phrases. Unfortunately, for the majority of religious people out there (and especially so as regards the fundies), religion truly is the opiate of the masses. Its a way to avoid the real work of life. Granted, I'm sure there are atheists who do this too, but they'll have a different excuse (perhaps nihilism!). If you have to figure life out for yourself, it's not worth it. Much better to have some old dude in the sky tell you.By the way, great story about the rock and your nephew.

What are you smoking? They must have some really good weed in Bulgaria, because I don't recall saying that I have found my purpose in life, never mind anyone else's. I do recall stating that religion is a cop-out for the majority of religious people.Instead of answering my criticism with some false demagoguery how about taking on the criticism?

who am I to teach anybody anything about finding their purpose in life? Its not as if there is one specific path to do this.I don't even know my path yet, or what my purpose may truly be, but I am simply exploring. That's what I am doing to find my purpose in life. Exploring what's around me, paying attention to how I feel and what I feel. I have no discernible drive toward a single thing--I'm pulled in multiple directions, capable of many things.Your path towards "enlightenment" may be completely different. Maybe exploring won't work for you, so why should I tell you how to find your purpose in life?If you're not happy with this answer, tough luck. I'm no christ.You may as well ask Stile, since he's claiming (near as I can tell), the same thing.

I fail to see how anything I said could be construed as hedonism. Hedonism is, specifically, the pursuit to maximize total pleasure (pleasure minus pain). The easiest way to do this is to minimize pain and do maximize pleasure, obviously. But there is no standard in hedonism. Some people really, really like crab fishing in Alaska (a la the Deadliest Catch on Discovery). Personally I have no desire to chip ice off a boat in below zero (F) weather in twenty foot seas.Your purpose in life, I would argue, is not equatable to hedonism. Hedonism is not defined as the pleasure of living, so I don't know where you're pulling that from. Purpose is also not defined as the pleasure of living. Does it really bother you that this could indeed be true?You're really itching to prove God's existence, aren't you?

Well this says it all, doesn't it? As grizz so eleoquently replied to you earlier, Nietzche is simply wrong on Nihilism. Loss of god does not equal loss of humanity, or purpose, or any other thing. For some people, it will because they have no conception of a world without gods.Look, there are a lot of atheists on this board and in life. I'm one of them. None of us are afraid to show emotion, afraid to show how human we are. None of us are stone-cold, callous, unfeeling pieces of junk. We are anything but (except, perhaps, for those who truly do have psychiatric problems). Just because there may be no higher purpose or meaning (and who said we agree as to what those words are defined to mean anyhow?) does not mean you have to throw out what it means to be human. That's nietzche's, and your, mistake.Personal example here. As said, I don't believe in god. I should be despairing right now, contemplating the futility of life and considering death, right? Why am I not? Because I don't think my life is futile or without meaning. I can do something on this planet in my time here. What, I don't know yet. However, I have made my girlfriend believe that love is real (again). I was there for her during her darkest hour of sickness and helped her walk out. And yet, I don't believe in god. Why did I do that then? After all, life without god (and thus, without higher purpose and meaning according to you and Nietzche) is quite pointless, so I could've just left her and found someone or something more fun (playing towards hedonism here). I didn't. I don't require the existence of higher purpose and meaning or god to be human.Another personal example. My beloved cat of eleven years passed away a week ago. He was in Virginia. I, in Sweden. His death hit me hard. I cried for about four hours and he's been in my dreams, symbolically or physically. Why should I care about his death according to you and Nietzche? After all, death is certain to be better than a pointless, futile life, right?Are you beginning to see the problem with your stance? How hedonistic is it to stay with someone who is suffering? To mourn for someone who passed away unexpectedly? To be human? Its not. So you can just take your piss-poor conclusions and confusions and shove 'em up yours.

what human logic? you have failed to demonstrate that human logic says there has to be a high purpose. Reality and logic do not necessarily coincide, and where they disagree, logic is wrong. Just ask buz (although his case may simply be mistaken common sense).I think we finally have a definition from you as to higher purpose.for agobot: higher purpose is the purpose/meaning to the universe.If that's true, how does the existence of god(s) give the universe a purpose?

If it maxes out, it means there have been (if I'm remembering correctly) 50 posts written in the last 48 hours.

Where, in that quoted segment, did Stile purport to need only the hedonistic lifestyle?You really ought to stop putting words into people's mouths (something you've been doing throughout this thread).Quite frankly, this whole discussion about purpose is inane. Instead of complaining, go do something useful. Like whine about poison in milk.

Are you sure you can read?I was asking about this statement: Where is hedonism mentioned in this statement.Not his entire post, but just that small portion you quoted. It's a great example of you putting words into other people's mouths.I also have yet to read Stile write that his four "purposes" are actually his purposes, or that he thinks of them for his own pleasure. That is you putting words into his mouth.How can we honestly debate you when you can't read and can't comprehend and like to make up stories about other people?

You know you're losing the debate badly if all you can do is shout invectives. You're responses to Stile have bordered on "la-la-la-la" and putting your fingers in your ears.Questioning someone's reading comprehension and mental health as an argument against their statements is really quite bad form. Grow up, agobot, grow up.

Unless, of course, minority or "defeated" rights are protected. As to having to conform to orders, shouldn't the finns have given up against Russia (twice!)? Certainly weaker than the mighty bear. Oh, they won. Or shouldn't have France just simply complied with Hitler. You know, completely scrap the resistance? After all, it really wasn't until 1943 that Germany was seen as the weaker party. But then, its almost never who's stronger who wins.Your description may have had relevance a while ago but hopefully not any longer. (By the way, I'm not sure I'd use Kosovo and South Ossetia as examples here, largely because they are multiple party examples that don't conform neatly to your "strong man always wins" argument).Your match is ridiculous.

Wait, you mean god is the son of an unwed woman? Oh this is interesting indeed. If God is a bastard, and if god is Christ, and is god is the father of god, that means this: Christ is an illegitimate son of an illegitimate son which raises the question over who's god's parents are? Did christians know they are following a bastard child? Just shows you the hypocrisy of christianity--preach against out-of-wedlock childbirths but praise their bastard savior. Hm.Oh, forgot this. You're dumb, agobot. Since you're calling at least one person this I figured its only fair to insult you as well.

Well, for someone who has blamed others for reading comprehension problems, you're not quite up to speed, are you?I was lambasting the idea that the stronger party wins and forces its interests over the defeated. And that the stronger party always wins.