God and the Meaningful Life

[spetey]

Hi again DC&R debaters, I have another puzzler for you. I think it's an important one to consider.

In my experience, many people say they believe in God because God gives their lives meaning. This reason to believe involves two important claims that should be separated:

1. If God did not exist, life would not have sufficient "meaning".
2. This previous claim, if true, is itself reason to believe that God does exist.

(I should make it clear I mean, here, the traditional God of Abraham--the God of Jews, Christians, and Muslims--the one who gave Moses the 10 Commandments, and sent the flood, and who Christians think sent Jesus to die for our sins, etc.)

I think both of these claims are false. That is:

1. I think that life has plenty of "meaning" even though I think there is no God. For example: I still think the world is beautiful, that there is reason to be good to other people, that there is often reason for awe and humility in the face of nature, that life is a precious thing, and so on. In fact, I often think a life with a God would have less meaning, just as I think an adult life spent living with your parents has less "meaning" than when you strike out on your own.
2. Even if it were true that life would not have sufficient meaning without God, I don't think that would itself be reason to believe that there is a God. Compare this: even if it were true that without $1 million I can never be happy, I still don't think that alone is reason to think I have $1 million. That is, even if I really do need $1m to be happy (something I doubt), maybe the truth is I just don't have enough money to be happy. To believe I have that money just because I need it is to commit the wishful thinking fallacy.

Now I should say, I do think there are lots of good things that belief in God can do for people. For example, off the top of my head:

• It can bring people together in a community, for contemplation, celebration, and grieving.
• It can get people thinking about ethical issues.
• It can get people thinking about spiritual issues.
• It can encourage calm reflection and meditation.

But I think all of these can be had without belief in God. You could go, for example, to a Unitarian Universalist Church, where belief in God is not required, but where people think morally, reflect spiritually, grieve and celebrate, and so on.

Meanwhile I think belief in God encourages some very bad things:

• For many, it encourages faith--which is just belief without reason, and which many seem to agree is irresponsible (as in this thread).
• In particular, such faith appeals lead to impasses and intolerance when encountering cultures that disagree. As we have seen throughout history, this is a common cause for war and terrorism and the like.
• Belief in a non-material intelligence promotes a kind of magical, non-scientific thinking.
• It historically has promoted, and continues to promote, confused ethical values based solely on particular leaders' readings of "what the Sacred Text says".
• It has hindered, and continues to hinder, the progress of science (by resisting the Copernican revolution, or evolutionary theory...).

...and so on.

Well, that's plenty to start discussion. What do you think? Is life meaningless without God? Even if so, would this alone be reason to believe that God does exist?


spetey

[harvey1]

Hi, it's me again.

I don't want to get too involved in this discussion since I'm really way over-extended here (even though I would love to), but here's a couple of scriptures that I think applies to those who think they are gaining some kind of meaning without God:

Now Jacob cooked a stew; and Esau came in from the field, and he was weary. And Esau said to Jacob, "Please feed me with that same red stew, for I am weary." Therefore his name was called Edom. But Jacob said, "Sell me your birthright as of this day." And Esau said, "Look, I am about to die; so what is this birthright to me?" Then Jacob said, "Swear to me as of this day." So he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob. And Jacob gave Esau bread and stew of lentils; then he ate and drank, arose, and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.

But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul.

Ultimately the issue is this. Sell out for a few bread crumbs by drawing back, or believe to the saving of the soul. I'm not one who believes that unbelievers go to hell or anything like that, but I do believe that in Judgement we have to go through the painful memories of our rejection of God in life -- that includes everyone. I can imagine that is like hell going through it. Or, one can make that process a lot easier now by accepting the love of God in their life and find the greatest meaning one can seek. Sorry to preach, but this is a Christianity site. 8)

[ST88]

1. If God did not exist, life would not have sufficient "meaning".
2. This previous claim, if true, is itself reason to believe that God does exist...

I think both of these claims are false. That is:

1. I think that life has plenty of "meaning" even though I think there is no God. For example: I still think the world is beautiful, that there is reason to be good to other people, that there is often reason for awe and humility in the face of nature, that life is a precious thing, and so on. In fact, I often think a life with a God would have less meaning, just as I think an adult life spent living with your parents has less "meaning" than when you strike out on your own.

I think you are thinking of "meaning" in the wrong way as it applies to a life with God. In the sense that it is used, as life having meaning, it need not have any meaning that means anything to you, only that it means something to God. You have to trust that the meaning is there even if you can't see it. While it's true that we can ascribe our own meanings to our lives, Christianity makes no such demands. Meaning goes only as far as God wants it to. In terms of a global, all-encompassing meaning for why humanity is in this place at this time in the history of the universe, the non-theist view is that there is none. A meaning overlay can be placed on our lives if we choose or if we are forced to in some way, but there is no inherent meaning that would be there if we did not put it there.

I think this is the difference between a collective meaning and a personal meaning. Without knowing or experiencing the collective meaning, we may never know what our purpose is, and will therefore be lost (so the story goes). Whether or not our personal meaning is good enough for us to continue on living is strictly up to us as individuals. Some people can't handle that and/or reject it out of hand like you say, because it is too scary. But most, I think, don't see it in those terms. Rather, they see it as an underlying meaning in the same way that non-theists see an underlying materialist reality.

2. Even if it were true that life would not have sufficient meaning without God, I don't think that would itself be reason to believe that there is a God. Compare this: even if it were true that without $1 million I can never be happy, I still don't think that alone is reason to think I have $1 million. That is, even if I really do need $1m to be happy (something I doubt), maybe the truth is I just don't have enough money to be happy. To believe I have that money just because I need it is to commit the wishful thinking fallacy.

This is most definitely a fallacy. But I think this is likely a case of reporting errors than a case of anti-logical thinking. I've seen video reports of soldiers in Iraq say that they have to believe in a higher purpose just to be able to tolerate the horrible conditions they face on a daily basis. They say it helps get them through the day to believe that their buddies are being killed because of a good reason. But this is likely not the case, it is only the best way they have for articulating how they feel.

I think the distinction is It would be horrible if there were no God vs. There has to be a God, because it would be too horrible if there weren't. The first is speculative in nature and does not (necessarily) violate the laws of logic. The second violates it in the manner you say. But the first is the likely cause of the statement even though the second is more strongly implied. It's easier to articulate the second, because it is a statement of justification rather than a statement of hypothesis. It's set up as the answer to a question rather than the antecedent to a question. These types of statements are easier to make because they are reactive. Even if they appear to make no sense at all, they easily help to confront the situation when it pops up.

Therefore, when people say that God gives their lives meaning, they are not using that particular justification as a justification; rather, they are using it as a reactive statement.

[Dilettante]

When we talk about life having a meaning, I assume we don't mean it in the same way as a word or phrase having a "meaning" that is the product of a consensus of the majority of speakers. I assume we are talking of meaning as "purpose".
Now, it's clear to me that one of the major reasons why people find religion so appealing is that it provides you with a purpose in life, an a grand-scale one! However, different religions define this purpose differently. I doubt that there is one single purpose or "secret" to life that can be discovered or that if we try out all the world's religions we will undoubtedly be able to discover the correct one.
On the other hand, many people do not find it satisfactory to have serving God as a purpose in life. First, they want their lives to have a meaning for them, not only for God. It's like someone who is not content with pleasing his /her boss, but wants to find something which is fulfilling for them.
So, in a way, it's us who give our own lives meaning, be it serving God, or discovering a cure for cancer, or becoming a great violinist, or alleviating world hunger. I wouldn't sneeze at any of those.

[QED]

I'm glad that Spetey has started this topic. Perhaps we can deal with this bizarre notion of there being a nuclear winter in the absence of god. I would ask anyone what more meaning they could possibly wish for their life beyond the fantastic set of events which leads-up to our coming into existence. Looking back down the road of life that started with our common ancestor half a billion years or so ago, our emergence into the conscious, physical, realm has to be the ultimate privilege.

The potential for each individual has been there right from the very beginning and the day we are born marks the final realisation of this potential. If we are lucky we may even get a chance during our lives to extend this road a little further giving others their turn. This is the primary purpose of life - making more life.

We are also conscious agents for our universe. The universe has come to know itself through us which is why I feel obliged to do the best I can to understand the universe - because of this I feel that it would be a dereliction of duty to accept the simple answer that it is all gods handiwork. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. If it isn't then the universe is denied something very special.

[harvey1]

Perhaps we can deal with this bizarre notion of there being a nuclear winter in the absence of god... The universe has come to know itself through us which is why I feel obliged to do the best I can to understand the universe - because of this I feel that it would be a dereliction of duty to accept the simple answer that it is all gods handiwork.

I'm sure there is meaning in the beauty of mushroom clouds over populated cities. I guess a virus that could kill the entire human population has a certain magnificence about it that we should all appreciate shortly before we break out in a sweat and feel like sitting down. Sure... Beauty... Magnificence... A feeling of wonderment. Excuse me if I choke from the shallow meaning obtained of any of that.

Real meaning is knowing that you are saved by God's love for you. Real meaning is knowing that life is about setting the stage for the next world. It's not about here and now. It never was.

But, I suggest 10,000 sunblock to enjoy the glimmer of that beautiful mushroom cloud...

[QED]

Perhaps we can deal with this bizarre notion of there being a nuclear winter in the absence of god... The universe has come to know itself through us which is why I feel obliged to do the best I can to understand the universe - because of this I feel that it would be a dereliction of duty to accept the simple answer that it is all gods handiwork.

I'm sure there is meaning in the beauty of mushroom clouds over populated cities. I guess a virus that could kill the entire human population has a certain magnificence about it that we should be glad that we can appreciate the short-time before we breakout in a sweat and feel like sitting down. Sure... Beauty... Magnificence... A feeling of wonderment. Excuse me if I choke from the shallow meaning obtained of any of that.

Excuse me, but you have gone tearing-off down a path that you only perceive leads from what I said! I've said that the we are agents of our universe, and that we can return the favour of our existence by helping that universe to know itself.

This is a pretty big debt we owe our universe and therefore it follows that we should do everything we can to maximise the chances of success for the universe to come to know itself. From this it naturally follows that we must strive to promote the existence of all forms of intelligent life to the maximum degree possible. This obviously includes not blowing ourselves up and defending ourselves from non-intelligent life that threatens us.

Real meaning is knowing that you are saved by God's love for you. Real meaning is knowing that life is about setting the stage for the next world. It's not about here and now. It never was.

I suggest 10,000 sunblock to enjoy the glimmer of that beautiful mushroom cloud...

This universe may or may not contain a god, and it may or may not be the only one. If god and/or an afterlife really do exist then that's fine - nothing has been lost by overlooking them.

But I'm certainly not going to close my eyes while I make my way through the only universe that I am absolutely certain exists.

[harvey1]

Excuse me, but you have gone tearing-off down a path that you only perceive leads from what I said! I've said that the we are agents of our universe, and that we can return the favour of our existence by helping that universe to know itself.

I'm sorry QED, that sounds ridiculous to me. That's like thanking the rock that I sat on when journeying down into the Grand Canyon that it was there for me to sit on. Should I send it a pet rock to keep it company as a gesture of my appreciation? I don't want to be rude, since I should respect your religious sentiments of inanimate objects, but the universe really doesn't care if you return a favour -- honest...

This universe may or may not contain a god, and it may or may not be the only one. If god and/or an afterlife really do exist then that's fine - nothing has been lost by overlooking them. But I'm certainly not going to close my eyes while I make my way through the only universe that I am absolutely certain exists.

Again, I don't want to be perceived as being rude, but would you want to open your eyes the day after a nuclear holocaust? Here, let me make it easier for you to imagine. The scenario is 50 years from now. Angola and Zaire nuke each other with hydrogen bombs and then Angola, a little upset that their population has just been eliminated, decide to nuke the nations they think helped Zaire get the hydrogen bomb, which includes European and North American countries. Unimaginable? Not in my book.

If you really want to play the game where we open our eyes without seeing a God, then that's the world you ought to be imagining. It's coming. And, 50 years is way too optimistic.

By the way, I hope everyone has a nice day.

[spetey]

Hi folks. I'm so glad this topic is generating interest!

I think you are thinking of "meaning" in the wrong way as it applies to a life with God. In the sense that it is used, as life having meaning, it need not have any meaning that means anything to you, only that it means something to God. You have to trust that the meaning is there even if you can't see it. While it's true that we can ascribe our own meanings to our lives, Christianity makes no such demands.

"Meaning" is certainly a tricky term in this context. Just as Dilettante says, it certainly doesn't mean "semantic significance". (But I'm not sure it's limited merely to "purpose", either.) And ST88, I surely agree that there would be less meaning for God if there were no God. But meanwhile do you feel that life would be equally meaningful for us, God or no?

A meaning overlay can be placed on our lives if we choose or if we are forced to in some way, but there is no inherent meaning that would be there if we did not put it there.

I'm inclined to agree--I think we can and must make meaning for ourselves. I think this is what theists dispute: they claim that whether or not we seek to find "meaning" ourselves, just the existence of God makes meaning for us. Perhaps this is part of the appeal.

... To believe I have that money just because I need it is to commit the wishful thinking fallacy.

This is most definitely a fallacy. But I think this is likely a case of reporting errors than a case of anti-logical thinking.

This is an interesting suggestion. Actually I think even in the case of the Iraqi soldiers, they are probably committing the wishful thinking fallacy--my hunch is that they are not merely saying that it would be horrible if people were dying for no good reason. It sounds to me like they are furthermore saying that the war is a good cause to die for, and that furthermore the former is a reason for the latter. They don't say it exactly that explicitly of course--but I do think the wishful thinking fallacy is a lot more prevalent than we tend to realize.

Still, the principle of charity suggests that it would be more polite, so to speak, to hear the soldiers' claims as a reporting error; they really meant to express that "it would be horrible if people were dying for no good reason". But there are many times where we can't apply this principle of charity. I have often asked intelligent friends who believe in God why they believe, and to my surprise they often will answer this "why?" question with a close variation on "because it gives my life meaning." Here it is clear they intend the purported meaning as a reason to believe. Anyway I'm glad you agree, ST88, that when this is given as a reason, it's not a good one.

Of course I do not think, Harvey, that a lack of belief in God would lead to nuclear war, as you seem to suggest. In fact, looking around, I think belief in gods is much more likely to lead to nuclear war, which is part of why I'm more vocal about my atheism these days. And of course I would only be worried about having to review my rejections of God in your not-quite-fire-and-brimstone scenario if I had reason to think there were a God who exists (and would be so petty as to do that) in the first place.


spetey

[QED]

Excuse me, but you have gone tearing-off down a path that you only perceive leads from what I said! I've said that the we are agents of our universe, and that we can return the favour of our existence by helping that universe to know itself.

I'm sorry QED, that sounds ridiculous to me. That's like thanking the rock that I sat on when journeying down into the Grand Canyon that it was there for me to sit on. Should I send it a pet rock to keep it company as a gesture of my appreciation? I don't want to be rude, since I should respect your religious sentiments of inanimate objects, but the universe really doesn't care if you return a favour -- honest...

Ridiculous eh? I obviously need to remind you that this is a relative term. I strongly disagree that the universe is inanimate. I expect you are familiar with the anecdote of the butterfly sitting on the tree - the butterfly is convinced that the tree isn't alive because it's been sitting on it all it's life and the tree hasn't done a thing. Evolution is superbly powerful, and the universe provides exactly the right conditions it needs to fabricate beings with enough intelligence to consider such matters. A universe without eyes and brains is pointless.

This universe may or may not contain a god, and it may or may not be the only one. If god and/or an afterlife really do exist then that's fine - nothing has been lost by overlooking them. But I'm certainly not going to close my eyes while I make my way through the only universe that I am absolutely certain exists.

Again, I don't want to be perceived as being rude, but would you want to open your eyes the day after a nuclear holocaust? Here, let me make it easier for you to imagine. The scenario is 50 years from now. Angola and Zaire nuke each other with hydrogen bombs and then Angola, a little upset that their population has just been eliminated, decide to nuke the nations they think helped Zaire get the hydrogen bomb, which includes European and North American countries. Unimaginable? Not in my book.

Well at the risk of being even ruder, it is you and others like you that firmly believe in a better life beyond your own, that really worry me. I cannot see this as anything other than brain-washing that has served nothing but those who would use people as pawns in power-games.

If you really want to play the game where we open our eyes without seeing a God, then that's the world you ought to be imagining. It's coming. And, 50 years is way too optimistic.

By the way, I hope everyone has a nice day.

Seeing as I maintain that religion is one of the most divisive things within the human community, I am unable to agree. Religion is arbitrary, and arbitrary customs/beliefs have formed the biggest friction points for humanity. I've never heard of wars starting over disagreements about scientific theories.