iambiguous wrote:Again, I don't doubt that you believe this is true. About the afterlife. About the part leading up to it.
Here and now. In your head.
It's your "idea" of the way things are now, of the things to come.
But why should it also be the idea of others too?
How can you take what you believe "in your head" "here and now" and demonstrate to all rational men and women why they too are obligated to believe the same? If they wish to be thought of as reasonable men and women.
Why should my view be the view of others too? It's the perfect balance between silly superstitions and utter nihilism. It doesn't place emphasis on a spiritual world, it places the emphasis on what you do here and now. Even if there really is no afterlife, striving to become a better person and doing better things because you *sincerely* believe that you will ultimately be affected by the outcome is a hell of a strong argument to make. Benevolence, wisdom, and freedom are three things that humans can obtain that nature cannot obtain by itself. If we try to change the world - and ourselves to fit those three things together, I know that regardless of the afterlife or not, we will be the ancestors to much greater things.
I also want to note, that if you believe that you will go to Heaven if are a good person and Hell if you are a bad person, you really have no stake in how things might turn out. Someone that believes that they are coming back to form one day will be much more focused on 'making Heaven on Earth' then 'Earth going to Heaven'.
iambiguous wrote:Yes, you "guess" what the future will be pertaining to the afterlife because your conclusions are based solely on a set of "theoretical", "conceptual" assumptions/premises that go around and around in circles. The conclusion must be true because the premises are "thought out" to be true. But where is the empirical/material/phenomenal evidence to substantiate it?
How is this really different from folks who claim to have had personal experiences with more traditional Gods but are unable to convey to folks like me what that experience actually consisted of---beyond what they believe about it "in their head?
Or those folks who argue that God must exist because it says so in the Bible; and it says so in the Bible because it is the word of God?
Aren't things that are benevolent, wise, and demonstrate a degree of freedom things that most people strive for? Most people want to be kind to other people - they go out of their way to be nice. Wisdom comes with age. Typically older people make better decisions. As well as freedom - the people with the most freedom tend to be the ones with the most money. Wealth is also a good measure of how successful someone is. I might have a lot of free time to do what I want because I'm disabled, but that doesn't make me actually free to do what I want ... I am extremely hindered by my lack of money.Everything you experience comes from your head.
Every religion, every person that lacks religion, made their choice of what is by their own mind. Why are you harping me on something so silly as, "well, nobody can take it seriously since it just comes from your head"? So did Christianity. So did Islam. So did every other religion. It all comes from your head.
There's no accurate way to measure those three things I laid out. What could be seen as benevolent in the past, like leucotomies, are now viewed as draconian, and medication, now viewed as benevolent will probably be viewed as draconian too once gene therapy accelerates. There isn't a single test to prove how "God-like" something is, yet there could be. My measure of divinity is not the only measure someone could give it. Someone might think their parents have divine powers, and someone might think that a star is just a star.
Spirituality is almost entirely subjective. It really all comes back to what you are thinking. To say that you know more than that is just a lie.
Until you are able to connect this particular assumption to the life that you actually live -- the behaviors that you choose as it relates to conflicting goods -- I have no idea what "on earth" you are trying to tell me.
And whatever the UN might profess about the world we live in there is still this part: http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/ ... -and-stats
So, tell me: how is your own understanding of God and religion intertwined in all of this?
We can record audio, video, there's even holograms of dead people now. Look at our progress. Every single time we say something isn't possible, it happens. Look at human history, of everything we have now. Where are you from? How I'm I communicating with someone who probably doesn't live near me?
This progress is just a step towards unifying with the Omniverse. We manipulate nature to give it a purpose, to give it a cause. To sustain and make life comfortable for us. Humans have taken nature is in the process to replace with a noosphere.
Benevolence, wisdom, and freedom. The people that have the most of these qualities tend to live the most successful lives. Rich people get rich because they hired people to make the things they didn't have the time to make themselves. They are benevolent because they give an earning to people that might not have gotten a job. Many of these people are wiser than the rest of us, too. And they have freedom. But it is worth noting that technology accelerates to the point that what was expensive before is cheap now, and the standard of living is always increasing.
BTW, in two days someone making $2.50 a day could afford a smartphone.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utRww8-QuBw
Also, benevolence, wisdom, and freedom is the three things that deities and man share. A deity would be seen as omnibenevolent, omniscience, and have ultimate freedom at the same time. Although theoretically it could be noted that freedom and benevolence cannot co-exist with each other. By freedom I mean the ability to do what someone wants that is neither good or bad, that doesn't harm or help anyone. Things like picking which car to choose (that you own) and driving it.
iambiguous wrote:All I can note here is this: that I have no clear[er] understanding at all as to how this is related to the thrust of the thread: an exploration into the existential relationship between the behaviors that you choose [and the moral narrative they are derived from] on this side of the grave, and what you imagine your fate to be on the other side of the grave given the manner in which [here and now] you perceive God and religion.
I'm not arguing that you are wrong, only that you have failed to convince me that you are right.
Fair enough. Truth be told, my seven characteristics might be wrong. People might value other things instead. Who knows? I've asked people before "if you were a God, would you do ultimately what is right for life, or would you do whatever you want?" Most people chose the later.
Which I happen to disagree with! That to me is apathy, something that was originally a 'seven deadly sin' (replaced by sloth) and something that I do not see a real God to possess. Don't get me wrong, I'm not gnostic, I am very well an agnostic. I don't know any of things, but I believe in all my heart that it is true.
As far as what you have said in your original topic, I'm going to pose to you two scenarios - one true and one false.
Scenario 1 - Roe vs Wade is passed. Abortions are legal.
At least 600,000 people are scarified to this procedure. Yes, many of them would have ended up dead at one point anyway, and many more would have suffered if they were allowed to live.
Scenario 2 - Roe vs Wade doesn't happen. Abortions are illegal.
Many more people would have been born. Some of them would be highly successful people, some might have stood out from the crowd, went to college, got a full time job for most of their lives, paid taxes, raised families and would have carried out meaningful existences. Oh, and some clothes hangers might have gotten bloody.
So, do we sacrifice the good for the suffering of the misguided? I can tell you right now, that if there were no abortions in America, we would be in a better place right now. Locke's moral philosophy was championed by liberals at the time, and now liberals want to abort fetuses. I don't understand them.
Anyways, my point is, is that unless you have some magic eight ball that can tell you the truth about everything, you'll never truly know what is right and what is wrong. I'll made it a lot easier to understand with this analogy.
Before the US election you bet on predictit that Hillary is going to win against Trump. You bet 100 dollars.
The election occurs, and you lose 100 dollars you could have spent.
REVERSE scenario. You see the odds for Trump and see how much you can win if you bet on him, and you bid for Trump as President with the same 100 dollars.
The election still occurs, and you win much more than 100 dollars and go out to party with your friends with that. You go to Buffalo Wild Wings and order a lot of food with that money. Everybody around you is happy for a short time.
Unless you can always accurately predict the future, you'll never be able to be ethically/morally surprior to anyone else. Of course, there are people who are naturally bad and they choose to do bad things to produce the worst outcome, but I would have to say that this is in the minority, and most people live to survive and to help others.
I even have a mug that says, "SURVIVING AND HELPING PEOPLE DOES NOT
REQUIRE AN AGENDA OR IDEOLOGY". I made it over four years ago and I still drink from it to this day; it's my favorite mug.
Of course, that mug completely negates my first argument that I made in this post...