Welcome to Gaia! ::

and is this not putting meaning to something which you claim has no meaning?

BEOWULF: Grendel, Grendel! You make the world by whispers, second by second. Are you blind to that? Whether you make it a grave or garden of roses is not the point. Feel the wall: is it not hard?... Hard, yes! Observe the hardness, write it down in careful runes. Now sing of walls! Sing!

how about this one- wether there is or is not a later, does it amtter? there is a now, so take it.

Then how would you be able to determine value of both movies if you cannot assess? Because assessing would take place after the movie and in order not to tread into religiousness you cannot make a wholesome judgement to determine value.




Hmm.. I think I get what your saying. So for secularists they don't care about the fact that we will all die because of the "faith" that life has value. Why does it have value under secular ideology?



I didn't mean to nit pick, I just don't get it. Under a secularist ideology, I'm getting a lot of "life has value even if we die", but I haven't gotten much of a reason to understand why that is because of circular logic. And if you do not beleive religion was made by a diety, then man himself constructed religion so it'd be according to ourselves that the end is the most important.



You wouldn't need to comprehend or appreciate. Mostly because you can't. But that doesn't mean the then person wanted to give up everything. Their sense of self, their dreams, their memories all of it gone in an instant, never to come back. What is the point in having a quality life when it will be taken from you anyways? And why is it wise to consider how our actions will affect us in the future, but not to consider our actions in relation to our ultimate fate?



I don't understand...

If this is a debate, shall I move it into the ED?

I can't really say I aim to debate as much as I do to see if I if there is something to understand. Im sorry, I didn't mean to freak everyone out.




Why do you beleive that having the chance matter?





To learn.




aren't you one of them though?




I'm fine, don't worry about that. I'm just little set off I couldn't find an answer... .__.




hmmm....





It's not that I think Christianity was nihilistic. As nihilism denounces dieties and religion on the basis that it cannot be proven and is a non religious ideology that is based on what is tangible and provable. I'm just saying I think I kinda know how it feels to be nihilistic, even though I'm not anymore.




I'm not really emotionally charged right now. It's just that I assumed you thought the idea was irksome because you feel it's unhealthy and now you're calling it sick and sad and that it disturbs you. It's just giving me a strong impression. I'm real sorry if isn't what you meant though.





My question of why was mostly aimed at the last sentence:"Life is all the more valuable for its brevity."


Your other sentences rest upon this idea so this was the idea I wanted to learn more about. If the last sentence could be explained, then the others would be valid because it'd be endangering something of value.




I don't intend to harass but I just would've really...really liked an answer. I don't question that you can't be caring or responsible, I wanted to know the whys. Not knowing the whys or if there really are whys doesn't mean you are uncaring. But then again from a nihilistic prespective being uncaring would probably be too expected to be a bad thing, let alone something to peg against the image of a secular humanist.

And your comment about man inventing religion is flawed in that it makes it sound like man as a whole created religion. According to a secular ideology, -men- created religion, not man, and according to those men and their followers the end is important. That doesn't mean the end is important to everyone, though.

Because they never had a say in it. That's what bothers me. A suicide isn't really as big of a deal, athough I'm sad they weren't happy and felt there was no way out, because it's what they wanted. The impact on other people is terrible, yes, but ultimately the person who did it wanted this result. A murder victim or an aborted baby couldn't be asked if they wanted it, and if they could I'm sure most of them would answer with a resounding no. It's just not fair to make that call for someone who can't speak for themselves.



Simply learning doesn't require so much vehemence.




Yes. However, I'm very new to joining any particular group. I define myself as a Secular Humanist because, besides being athiests, they care about the human cause and want to make things better. Contrary to poplular belief, a Secular Humanist is far more likely to appreciare someone with a serious faith as a fellow person and less likely to hate on their ideals.

I definitely can't speak for all of them, but most secular humanists would probably select the pro-choice standpoint for the scientific definitions of it. I think this line of thought is faulty, personally, which is why I preferred not to bring it up. Everyone has different ideals. Some Christians, for example, decide that because of the ultimate forgiveness of Christ homosexuality is okay. Others think that a sin is a sin. Still others don't think it's a sin at all. It's a similar thing.



I don't think you're insane or anything, I just know where "why does it matter?" thinking goes. Not in the curiosity sense, in the philosophical sense.




It just seemed that I sensed disdain in your tone, and I don't appreciate disdain.



Nihilism first and foremost is an ideology of apathy and abandonment. It's not so much "Religion is false because science says so," it's more along the lines of "Religion is false because life is inheritantly flawed and there is no greater good". Along with that comes a collective lack of trying and cooperation.




What I mean is that I know where it goes. I've been there. I'd rather not touch on my past more than I have to, but suffice to say I've not only done it. I've been in a VERY clear position to watch other people face-first on the spiral down. I don't even know if they're alive anymore, and that in and of itself clearly shows where complete abandonment of purpose and hope goes.

I was saying that if you were arguing that life is pointless, that can lead to end of life. I'd prefer that people love the life they had and enjoy it, and not end it unnaturally.





Life is something quick, a few seconds or less on the geological timeline. Yet, it can affect quite a bit. On the lowest end of the scale, it can only change a small group of family and friends. On the highest, it can control nations full of billions of people. It can take the first flight to space and then subsequently make it habitable. It can save a species from extinction. It may be short, but it can affect way more than simply the now.

Ending life before these chances were had doesn't just affect the people involved, it could very well affect the world. Who can say that unwanted baby or murdered teenager couldn't have been a leader? And this doesn't invalidate the elderly. Maybe they've had their chances, but they've been through a lot of things. They deserve not only to live as long as possible, but to do it in comfort.

This line of thought is actually why I'm becoming an entomologist: insects are small and considered worthless, but they can drastically alter their entire ecosystems. Remove a certain species of leaf cutter ant from the rainforest and the species of tree it alone cares for will die out. From the tree's death comes animals that live in it and eat it, and from there dies the carnivores that prey on those animals. Some animals can be staggeringly specific about what they eat and live in.

Put simply, something isn't invaluable because it's small. More so, we should notice that despite it's size/brevity, it can affect a lot more than just itself. As this applies to life, we should be aware of what little time we have and spend our lives happily and productively.



I'm not a nihilist for one, not caring is their thing. Anyway, it did come across incredibly agressively.

gonk Harakiri! scream

Unless you were misspelling a reference to death by shampoos and conditioners. stare

If, Miko, everyone's going to die eventually, and dying = oblivion, then the value of life depends on what you get out of it at the moment. I like putzing around on Gaia, I like watching snowflakes and knitting and artichoke pizza and Lou Reed and I'd be pissed if I knew I only had 5 years to appreciate those things instead of 75 years. I'm even speaking as someone who's seriously considered suicide as a result of someone else's life being cut short. And I can say that someone's death is probably much less of a tragedy for them than it is for the living.

This is where the humanist/pagan "golden rule" comes into play--I wouldn't want someone cutting my life short, so I won't do it to anyone else. Even if, in death, they wouldn't be capable of missing their life. If you think in terms of the future and the ultimate end being the only thing that matters, then no, it wouldn't make a difference if the sun went supernova and obliterated the planet. We'd all be dead, just as we were going to be anyways. But at the moment, I desire to live some more, and so does just about everyone else.