AFS Range Suicide - No. Attleboro

[economist]

The flip side of life having no meaning is: so why don't you just kill yourself? (hopefully I don't need to point out that is a rhetorical question.) is it because you are here, and that's about it, or is it because you have things you love doing or people you love being with?

Yes. I don't think there is any inherent meaning to life, but I do think life is the most important thing we humans experience and protect. I don't need an exogenous plan in order to value my endogenous existence (or to respect yours).

 

[boilermaker]

It amazes me that a tragedy at AFS can bring us around to this discussion but it has been great to read here today and just reminds why I like this forum. Great points by Rider and PaulD even though they are on opposite sides of the coin. +1 to both you guys

 

[M1911]

What does confuse me is when such devout atheists as Bill Maher - who apparently think we are here for no reason - don't go on a booze, hooker, and heroin binge until they're dead.

Your assumption seems to be that atheists can't have morals, which is something that I disagree with. I'm not religious, but my views have changed from being an agnostic to believing in God. My morals haven't changed as a result of that change of views.

 

[Evadd]

What does confuse me is when such devout atheists as Bill Maher - who apparently think we are here for no reason - don't go on a booze, hooker, and heroin binge until they're dead. The flip side of life having no meaning is: so why don't you just kill yourself? (hopefully I don't need to point out that is a rhetorical question.) is it because you are here, and that's about it, or is it because you have things you love doing or people you love being with?

I read your post about Buddhism and the philosophy that life is suffering, but I don't believe it. I think most people get more joy out of being alive than not, whether it's activities they enjoy or simply being. And since the ultimate tragedy is the loss of a loved one, why would you want to bring that upon your loved ones unnecessarily?
Beyond that, as M1911 said, atheists can certainly have morals and standards to live up to.

Besides, not everyone's idea of a great day is hookers and blow.

 

[ColdDayInHell]

I read your post about Buddhism and the philosophy that life is suffering, but I don't believe it. I think most people get more joy out of being alive than not, whether it's activities they enjoy or simply being. And since the ultimate tragedy is the loss of a loved one, why would you want to bring that upon your loved ones unnecessarily?
Beyond that, as M1911 said, atheists can certainly have morals and standards to live up to.

Besides, not everyone's idea of a great day is hookers and blow.

I've been atheist ever since I was in catholic school. Being forced to read a story book was torture and I'd constantly get flak when I questioned the bullshit beliefs they taught. I wanted to leave but parents pushed it on me saying college blah blah will like it etc.

Flame suit on, freedom of religion or lack thereof. I certainly have morals and it's what we are born with. Basic fundamentals of life. Murder is certainly in our blood but most of us have the morals to not kill each other. But I don't need to be told a guy climbed to a top of a mountain and received the 10 guidelines from an old man in the sky.

 

[M1911]

Let's stop denigrating or debating religious views. Otherwise this thread will be closed. I can guarantee that there are people with differing religious views here on NES and we must respect that.

 

[Rider]

Your assumption seems to be that atheists can't have morals, which is something that I disagree with. I'm not religious, but my views have changed from being an agnostic to believing in God. My morals haven't changed as a result of that change of views.

It wasn't my intention, but I can see where that is implied or can be inferred from my posts.

It's interesting to see how parents instill a moral code in their children or how you develop one outside of the context of a religious framework. I say this mainly because this has been a primary role of religion throughout history. It will be interesting, as societies become more and more secular, to see how strong a moral framework can be maintained given 'the state's' clear lack of moral guidance.

I agree, I have no interest in criticizing someone's beliefs. I'm much more interested in understanding how and why they think what they think.

@evadd The context of suffering in the Buddhist framework is that it is the desire for things that causes suffering, as human nature is to desire that which we see.(note all those commandments about coveting). So it isn't that being alive per se is suffering, it's that not appreciating what we have and wanting what we don't causes 'suffering'. Obama and liberals generally would do themselves a huge service if they told their supporters to appreciate what they have and stop worrying about the 1% or whatever.

It's odd that the liberal conclusion to the idea that the marginal utility of income over $75,000 a year decreases rapidly is to call for redistribution of that wealth, rather than recognizing that simply giving money to people won't make them happy. The human condition is what it is. I may have more money than you, I just drink better booze when I'm sad.

I've liked this thread. Anyone want to discuss good and evil, or moral absolutes? Maybe that's better to do in a bar.

Happy weekend. Cheers!

 

[Rob Boudrie]

But I don't need to be told a guy climbed to a top of a mountain and received the 10 guidelines from an old man in the sky.

15. The third tablet was dropped and broke.

 

[bill o]

15. The third tablet was dropped and broke.

Excellent Simpsons reference!

 

[BigTimber]

Excellent Simpsons reference!

History of the world.

 

[n1bsbri]

History of the world.

Mel Brooks FTW!