If There Is No God...

[Era Might]

So a common defense of the existence of god is that without a god, everything is meaningless. So, in this thread, we shall ask, what is meaning?

 

If there is no god, is 2+2=4 meaningless?

 

One can look at deconstruction in two ways: a breakdown of meaning, or proof that human beings have a remarkable ability to construct meaning in many different varieties. They can be polytheists, monotheists, patriarchal, matriarchal, poor and despised or rich and blessed (according to their ideology). We need only look at modern man, a curious creature in the history of humanity, who has built his human life around economy and technology. Medieval man built it around ecclesiology. Ancient Roman man built it around mythology.

 

The usual christian explanation would be that the Christian narrative is the "true" narrative, and all these other manifestations of humanity are just grasping to be christians, unbeknownst to them, they just haven't quite figured it all out yet. But christianty itself is quite amenable to constructing new meaning, whether it is "development of doctrine" or "inculturation" or trying to carve out a christian niche in society.

 

So, what is meaning?

Edited February 5, 2013 by Era Might

[Anomaly]

People create Divine Authority Entities in order to codify and force basic philosophical empathy on the social order.  There's always conflict in the dynamics of balancing personal rights within a social framework of community.

[4588686]

I generally think that Slavoj Zizek is more of an entertainer than a substantive thinker but his inversion of that formulation striked me as more plausible  if there is a God than anything is permissible

 

   http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/opinion/12zizek.html?_r=0

[4588686]

Marx also had a good take on this:

For Germany, the criticism of religion has been essentially completed, and the criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all criticism.

The profane existence of error is compromised as soon as its heavenly oratio pro aris et focis [“speech for the altars and hearths,” i.e., for God and country] has been refuted. Man, who has found only the reflection of himself in the fantastic reality of heaven, where he sought a superman, will no longer feel disposed to find the mere appearance of himself, the non-man [Unmensch], where he seeks and must seek his true reality.

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man â€“ state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritualpoint d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since thehuman essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself.

It is, therefore, the task of history, once the other-world of truth has vanished, to establish the truth of this world. It is the immediate task of philosophy, which is in the service of history, to unmask self-estrangement in its unholy forms once the holy form of human self-estrangement has been unmasked. Thus, the criticism of Heaven turns into the criticism of Earth, the criticism of religion into the criticism of law, and the criticism of theology into the criticism of politics.

[Fidei Defensor]

I often wonder not only about what "meaning is, but what knowledge is.  How can we know anything? How do we know we aren't a "brain in a vat," or completely controlled by demons, as Descartes argued.

 

 

[Groo the Wanderer]

I often wonder not only about what "meaning is, but what knowledge is.  How can we know anything? How do we know we aren't a "brain in a vat," or completely controlled by demons, as Descartes argued.

 

 

Easy.  God spoke, therefore I exist.

[Socrates]

I there is in fact no God, and all that exists are material things (for me at least, the existence of a spiritual,realm without a God is nonsensical), then we've ultimately undermined the basis for all human knowledge and ideas (including atheism).

 

If atheist materialism is true, then all our thoughts and ideas are nothing more than the purely physical movements of atoms, electrons, etc. inside our brains.  As purely physical movements, they can have no claim on ultimate truth.  It then makes no more sense to say that the physical movements of particles in one person's brain are any more true or false than the movements of particles in another person's brain.  Remember, a thought or idea has no existence beyond physical activity of matter in the brain.  Thus, it makes no more sense to say that an idea (a purely physical pattern of motion) has a claim to ultimate truth or falsehood than does a bowel movement.  They are both simply physical activities in the body.

 

Atheism, then, is simply one physical movement of particles, and Catholicism is another.  It would be pointless to argue about whether either is "true" or "false."  They're simply physical activity - particles bouncing off one another.

Our ideas are nothing more than physical activity in the brain, and this discussion is nothing more than pixels on a computer screen.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

The belief in GOD for me takes me outside of myself into the realm of community, which also gives birth to charity and suffering not only my want's and needs but those of others. One may say " than why would you do such a thing if than you have to suffer more than needed.? " Charity is the reason, charity is the meaning and charity is the answer. Without true love which is charity society becomes so involved in the self that it becomes dog eat dog like a pit fight which ends up that one looses and one wins and the one that looses suffers and suddenly is in need of charity which he or she had rejected originaly, and the winner goes on thinking only of himself or herself till the day he or she meets another pit dog whom is tougher and meaner and the winner becomes the looser, which mind you is inevitable even if it is old age that cathches this pitbull un-awares. So we as christians i guess are healers for the loosers, and if not than why not?

JC " i send you out as sheep amongst the wolves, so be as wise as a snake and as peacful as a dove."

[Fidei Defensor]

I there is in fact no God, and all that exists are material things (for me at least, the existence of a spiritual,realm without a God is nonsensical), then we've ultimately undermined the basis for all human knowledge and ideas (including atheism).

 

If atheist materialism is true, then all our thoughts and ideas are nothing more than the purely physical movements of atoms, electrons, etc. inside our brains.  As purely physical movements, they can have no claim on ultimate truth.  It then makes no more sense to say that the physical movements of particles in one person's brain are any more true or false than the movements of particles in another person's brain.  Remember, a thought or idea has no existence beyond physical activity of matter in the brain.  Thus, it makes no more sense to say that an idea (a purely physical pattern of motion) has a claim to ultimate truth or falsehood than does a bowel movement.  They are both simply physical activities in the body.

 

Atheism, then, is simply one physical movement of particles, and Catholicism is another.  It would be pointless to argue about whether either is "true" or "false."  They're simply physical activity - particles bouncing off one another.

Our ideas are nothing more than physical activity in the brain, and this discussion is nothing more than pixels on a computer screen.

 

How does the existence of God give meaning to all that?

Easy.  God spoke, therefore I exist.

 

Or your mind is led to believe God spoke. 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

and the other pitbull isn't always another person it could for example be cancer contracted by the self or a loved one.

[Socrates]

How does the existence of God give meaning to all that?

 

It makes all the difference in the world.

 

As a Christian, I believe that I am more than a mere clump of atoms, and that I also have a spiritual soul, created in the image and likeness of God, and having intellect and free will, capable of coming to knowing the truth outside of itself.

 

if, as the atheist materialist claims, the mind and ideas are nothing more than purely physical electro-chemical activity in the brain, then such activity is determined by purely physical causes.  If this is true, both free will and intellect are an illusion, and meaningless.  Then my Christian faith is is nothing more than purely physical activity with purely physical causes - as is the atheism of the atheist.  It is pointless then to argue one pattern of electro-chemical activity against another.

 

 

This is not, strictly speaking, a proof for the existence of God, but a demonstration of how atheistic materialism, if followed to its logical conclusion, undermines all human knowledge - including atheistic ideas.

[4588686]

if, as the atheist materialist claims, the mind and ideas are nothing more than purely physical electro-chemical activity in the brain, then such activity is determined by purely physical causes.  If this is true, both free will and intellect are an illusion, and meaningless.  Then my Christian faith is is nothing more than purely physical activity with purely physical causes - as is the atheism of the atheist.  It is pointless then to argue one pattern of electro-chemical activity against another.

 

Physical processes are caused by the electro-chemical activity of the brain.  That does not imply that consciousness is electro-chemical activity.  John Searle has written about this a lot.  

[Fidei Defensor]

It makes all the difference in the world.

 

As a Christian, I believe that I am more than a mere clump of atoms, and that I also have a spiritual soul, created in the image and likeness of God, and having intellect and free will, capable of coming to knowing the truth outside of itself.

 

if, as the atheist materialist claims, the mind and ideas are nothing more than purely physical electro-chemical activity in the brain, then such activity is determined by purely physical causes.  If this is true, both free will and intellect are an illusion, and meaningless.  Then my Christian faith is is nothing more than purely physical activity with purely physical causes - as is the atheism of the atheist.  It is pointless then to argue one pattern of electro-chemical activity against another.

 

 

This is not, strictly speaking, a proof for the existence of God, but a demonstration of how atheistic materialism, if followed to its logical conclusion, undermines all human knowledge - including atheistic ideas.

 

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[Era Might]

People create Divine Authority Entities in order to codify and force basic philosophical empathy on the social order.  There's always conflict in the dynamics of balancing personal rights within a social framework of community.

 

Interesting, one could argue that the invisible concept of "god" serves the same function that taboos did / do in other societies, or ideology in any society, a way to navigate the world. And of course, it doesn't have to be an invisible conception of god...the ancient greeks and romans believed in the very real presence of the gods in human form, and that continues in the "apparitions" that pop up. The ancient greeks believed to "see" Apollo and other gods just as truly as the children at Fatima "saw" the Virgin Mary.

Marx also had a good take on this:

For Germany, the criticism of religion has been essentially completed, and the criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all criticism.

The profane existence of error is compromised as soon as its heavenly oratio pro aris et focis [“speech for the altars and hearths,” i.e., for God and country] has been refuted. Man, who has found only the reflection of himself in the fantastic reality of heaven, where he sought a superman, will no longer feel disposed to find the mere appearance of himself, the non-man [Unmensch], where he seeks and must seek his true reality.

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man â€“ state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritualpoint d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since thehuman essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself.

It is, therefore, the task of history, once the other-world of truth has vanished, to establish the truth of this world. It is the immediate task of philosophy, which is in the service of history, to unmask self-estrangement in its unholy forms once the holy form of human self-estrangement has been unmasked. Thus, the criticism of Heaven turns into the criticism of Earth, the criticism of religion into the criticism of law, and the criticism of theology into the criticism of politics.

 

Some insightful points, and one could even agree with this from a Christian perspective...there was no greater critic of religion than Christ. Once one gets beyond that critique, however, Christ remains a powerful witness to something greater than religion, and it is hard not to take it seriously as being of divine origin.

[Era Might]

It makes all the difference in the world.

 

As a Christian, I believe that I am more than a mere clump of atoms, and that I also have a spiritual soul, created in the image and likeness of God, and having intellect and free will, capable of coming to knowing the truth outside of itself.

 

if, as the atheist materialist claims, the mind and ideas are nothing more than purely physical electro-chemical activity in the brain, then such activity is determined by purely physical causes.  If this is true, both free will and intellect are an illusion, and meaningless.  Then my Christian faith is is nothing more than purely physical activity with purely physical causes - as is the atheism of the atheist.  It is pointless then to argue one pattern of electro-chemical activity against another.

 

 

This is not, strictly speaking, a proof for the existence of God, but a demonstration of how atheistic materialism, if followed to its logical conclusion, undermines all human knowledge - including atheistic ideas.

 

It goes without saying that atheists construct meaning...that's precisely the point. One can even be an atheist and still believe in the spiritual dimension of man...the personal conceptions of Christianity are not the only way one can construct meaning.

 

It seems to be a general law of human nature that people see what they want to see, whether it is the risen Christ, the glorious Apollo, the glorious or infamous United States, or a big meeting place in the sky. These are all ways people construct meaning...even within a religion, one can see what they want to see (a merciful Christ or a just Christ, a veneration of poverty or a veneration of industry, etc).

 

Assuming we are just "physical electro-chemical activity," it does not follow that free will, intellect, etc. are "meaningless." One can construct all kinds of meaning out of them. You construct a negative meaning...a Buddhist might have a positive meaning. The 12-step program refers to belief in a "higher power," which could be anything...creating a program like 12 steps is another way of constructing meaning, a peculiarly American one at that.

I there is in fact no God, and all that exists are material things (for me at least, the existence of a spiritual,realm without a God is nonsensical), then we've ultimately undermined the basis for all human knowledge and ideas (including atheism).

 

The basis of human knowledge and ideas is not that we believe in non-material things, but that we experience knowledge and ideas. The experience exists before the construction of meaning.