quote:
You see - even at the first paragraph you start making assumptions. You claim you know that there is no meaning involved in evolution. How do you know this?
No, it is you who is making assumptions, with the apparent aim of making me agree with the imaginary atheists in your head.
I am not making assumptions that I "know" anything. I am offering you my opinion. That I don't couch every last sentence with "possibly" or "to the best of our knowledge" or "in my humble opinion" is simply a matter of writing style. I refuse to clutter my writing with unnecessary disclaimers that any reasonably intelligent reader ought to be able to take for granted.
I do not know everything. I am stating my opinions. Okay?
Of course, by the same token, I might ask you how you know that there is objective meaning, and with a good deal more justification, since, if there is objective meaning, you should be able to point out some evidence of it. But I have no problem with you stating your opinion.
quote:
Because you know there is no god and because you assume mutations are completely random.
Meaning is entirely unconnected to belief in deities. Even if there were a God, that would not provide objective meaning. Mutations are completely off topic.
quote:
Maybe it's so, but that's an assumption, it doesn't involve the absolute certainty that shines through the posts of atheists.
Don't be absurd. Where on Earth did I give the impression that I had absolute knowledge of the universe. You are attempting to put words in my mouth again and I do not appreciate it. Telling other people what they think is exactly the kind of radicalism that you are complaining of. Please stop it and let me voice my own opinions, not your ridiculous straw men.
quote:
We don't have any idea what causes randomness. We have to believe determinism is false and true uncaused randomness exists in Nature(whatever nature is).
All irrelevant. You are trying to obfuscate by retreating into your usual MO of confused gibbering about physics. It's totally off topic.
quote:
I am not telling anyone what they think. I merely said that life is objectively meaningless according to atheism.
Are you seriously telling me that you can't see the contradiction in that statement? I will try to spell this out for you as simply as I can;
You are not an atheist.
I am an atheist.
You said "i posit that what All atheists collectively can agree on as an objectively existing and scientifically proven purpose of life is - sex.".
I told you that I do not agree with your premise.
By definition, that means that not all atheists agree that sex is the objective meaning of life.
Okay? Why not let other people decide for themselves what they believe, instead of trying to shoehorn them into your preconceived ideas about what they ought to think so that they might fit your idea of a radical atheist.
quote:
And I challenge each and everyone to produce a single objective purpose. Sujective(at the individual level) - yes, there are countless purposes, but objective there are none.
I am of the opinion that there is no objective meaning, so we appear to agree at last.
Agobot writes:
Granny writes:
From my point of view, reproduction is simply part of the "how" of life.
When worded like that, atheism is not radical and even makes sense.
Great. Except that the above comment has absolutely nothing to do with atheism.
Mutate and Survive
"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade
™ Version 4.2
