Why should we even be interested in living at all? Whats the point? After all when we die we just go back to nothingness. So what is an atheists purpose? ill give a cookie to anyone who awnsers. :rolleyes:

Life IS the purpose, now where's my cookie?

Life IS the purpose, now where's my cookie?
http://www.bakeco.com/choc%20chip%20cookie.jpg There ya go :D

*yum*

The meaning of life is to die.

to have sex, and lots of it now give me a motherfucking cookie

'by chance' is a phrase used only by those who do not know how things exactly occured.

If death is non-existence, and life existence, then what you're saying is that existence is defined by non-existence: "the meaning of life is to die."

You could've just as well have said that the meaning of existence is to non-meaning. Sounds more abstract but less morbid.

Then will death define itself as life?

...

We understand life to be a manifestation of existence. Or more precisely, we understand that we understand because we understand. Cognition.

Cognition and life though are not quite analogous. Yet this process of cognizance is rendered by a consciousness that inhabits the mind. "Self", "to be", "existence" are abstracts, projections of the mind, off-shoots, and actual issues independent of the body. If I sit still with my eyes shut I'll notice a residue of existence in suspension, in anticipation, externally.

But how are we to presume that consciousness mimics the properties of dead organic material? From my vantage-point consciousness attaches itself to the body — not is the body. Hence I have a hard time understanding that when the body dies so too will my consciousness because my consciousness is "alive" in a very different "manner", and "to be conscious" is an abstract that exists in and of itself, independent of "life", independent of you, independent of the social structure, but not independent of the universe. It's a really weird phenomenon because the universe is everything. And the universe always was and always will be.

Why should we even be interested in living at all?

why dont you kill yourself and go to heaven then?

Whats the point?
maybe enjoying life is the point?
b/c ..

After all when we die we just go back to nothingness.


So what is an atheists purpose?
LIVING

If death is non-existence, and life existence, then what you're saying is that existence is defined by non-existence: "the meaning of life is to die."

You could've just as well have said that the meaning of existence is to non-meaning. Sounds more abstract but less morbid.

Then will death define itself as life?

...

We understand life to be a manifestation of existence. Or more precisely, we understand that we understand because we understand. Cognition.

Cognition and life are not quite one and the same. Yet this process of cognition is being rendered feasibly accurately by several means, breathing being one of them, and witnessing one's self as an entity being another — "self", "to be", "existence" are abstracts, projections of the mind, off-shoots of existence, but independent of the body. If you sit still and close your eyes you'll notice them lingering, suspended in anticipation, externally, awaiting.

But how are we to presume that consciousness mimics the properties of dead organic material? From my vantage-point consciousness attaches itself to the body — not is the body. Hence I have a hard time understanding that when the body dies so too will my consciousness because my consciousness is "alive" in a very different "manner", and "conscious" is an abstract that exists in and of itself, independent of "life", independent of you, independent of the social structure, but not independent of the universe. It's a really weird phenomenon because the universe is everything. And the universe always was and always will be.

.

'Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.'

-Einstein (in a letter of 5 Feb 1921).

'Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.'

-Einstein (in a letter of 5 Feb 1921).

Concise and to the point. But "soul" is steeped with unresolved connotations from all quarters of the human experience. So a soul without a body then, as in death, is void of meaning?

But what meaning is garnered in "reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions"? Are they not definitions holistically terrestrial in nature? As long as a "soul" is identified in its "body" its experiences will automatically take on the attributes of its class of species, hence a human perspective, a bird's eye view, a lion's growl, a swallow's swoop. And isn't this an attestation that consciousness experiences itself extraneously as different classes of species, different scopes of being, different modes of dexterity?

Transiently, for as long as the soul remains enrobed.

p.s.:
But what happens when consciousness forgets itself?

Then will death define itself as life?

Life ("existence") and death ("non-existence") are the same thing.

We understand life to be a manifestation of existence.

Existence of what?

Existence of non-existence.

"Self", "to be", "existence" are abstracts, projections of the mind, off-shoots, and actual issues independent of the body.

They are independent/separate only in your mind (in illusion).

It's a really weird phenomenon because the universe is everything.

What is everything?

And the universe always was and always will be.

Can stuff really exist without a cause/reason?
What reason is there for a universe to be?
Wouldn't it be more logical if nothing existed?

c7ityi_-
Can stuff really exist without a cause/reason?
What reason is there for a universe to be?
Wouldn't it be more logical if nothing existed?

if there was no reason or cuase than yes we should have stayed in a state of nothingness. or so logic tells me. Otherwise from nothing, nothing comes. So using logic we could assume we have a reason becuase we exist. But then again the truth isnt always logical.

Another thought. Since from nothing, nothing comes there must have been some infinite something. Something that has always existed. IE. Energy, Matter and i dare to say it...God. but then again this is using logic.

Why should we even be interested in living at all?

Because we're programmed to.


Whats the point?

Of what specifically?


After all when we die we just go back to nothingness.

When you die, your consciousness and perception certainly cease. You (as a whole) get translated into various forms of matter and energy through decomposition and a multitude of environmental processes. I would hardly qualify that as nothingness.


So what is an atheists purpose?

Same purpose as any life form on earth. To reproduce.


I'll take a cookie as well.

if there was no reason or cuase than yes we should have stayed in a state of nothingness. or so logic tells me. Otherwise from nothing, nothing comes.

Everything comes from nothing. Nothing also means infinite possibilities. And that's exactly what we see in the universe, no limits.

But then again the truth isnt always logical.

What are you talking about?

Since from nothing, nothing comes there must have been some infinite something. Something that has always existed. IE. Energy, Matter and i dare to say it...God. but then again this is using logic.

Explain what is energy, matter and God, and what are they made of? If you can't explain them, they're just "empty" words.

The only thing that is self-explanatory (absolute) is nothingness. Everything else needs a cause to exist, but nothingness doesn't, so it has to be the cause of the illusion of everything (nothingness in disguise)

The only thing that is self-explanatory (absolute) is nothingness. Everything else needs a cause to exist, but nothingness doesn't, so it has to be the cause of the illusion of everything (nothingness in disguise)
nothingness is a myth; its a human-made concept. nothing cannot exist because there is always something to fill a space. and even space itself is made of energy. and besides, like you said, nothing can come from nothing--so there must have always been something here. the idea of infinite existence of something makes so much more sense than the idea of nothingness.

nothingness is a myth; its a human-made concept.

myths are often true.

nothing cannot exist because there is always something to fill a space. and even space itself is made of energy.

what is energy made of?

and besides, like you said, nothing can come from nothing--so there must have always been something here.

what is something, what is it made of?

the idea of infinite existence of something makes so much more sense than the idea of nothingness.

why is there a forever existing universe?

In the end, if there is nothing after death, then we all have nothing to "look forward to" in the "afterlife" thus we all should live our lives to the best that we know how to. Treat each other with respect, because if that's the case, then this IS heaven, and after death, who knows?

myths are often true.
i beg to differ. or, that at least myths are only true metaphorically and subjectively. but in this case i think everyone has the same definition of nothing.

what is energy made of?
it doesn't matter, its made of something. and whatever i tell you its made of will only be a name anyways, it will not be that actual thing it is made of.

what is something, what is it made of?
anything.

why is there a forever existing universe?
because the alternative would be nothing. and obviously thats not true becase we are here. nothing can only exist in absolute nothingness, which is contradicted by our presence. something cannot come from nothing, so the only alternative for nothing is something.

everything exists, so that must mean that nothing doesn't exist.

M: Then will death define itself as life?c7ityi_: Life ("existence") and death ("non-existence") are the same thing.I don't appraise them as the same for the obvious reason that I'm not dead.
<br>
M: We understand life to be a manifestation of existence.c7ityi_: Existence of what?Well, I'm here, aren't I? My existence is currently active. All that I am and all that I perceive, or assume, or suspect is currently active. And this is all being manifested through my tenure in life, the manifestation of my existence. c7ityi_: Existence of non-existence.Existence of non-existence? Sounds whelming. Then non-existence of existence must be overwhelming. Or perhaps underwhelming.
<br>
M: "Self", "to be", "existence" are abstracts, projections of the mind, off-shoots, and actual issues independent of the body.c7ityi_: They are independent/separate only in your mind (in illusion).That's not quite what I meant, but your answer compliments whatever point I was hoping to impress. If life is measured by our body's animateness, then the concepts I pointed at—self, to be, existence—are just as animate in power but without physical substance. Yet, they are synergistically endowed with form—a notion derived from our physicalness—and spirit—our will. I was hence observing that my body exists and that I exist.
<br>
M: It's a really weird phenomenon because the universe is everything.c7ityi_: What is everything?Everything includes nothing, but nothing includes nothing. God, I thought I was being obvious. :*rolleyes*: What was I being obvious about anyway? Oh right, the fact that invisible concepts, such as "self", exist alongside visible matter, such as this planet—it gives a whole new perspective to "a living planet".
<br>
M: And the universe always was and always will be.c7ityi_: Can stuff really exist without a cause/reason? What reason is there for a universe to be? Wouldn't it be more logical if nothing existed?Essentially, there's cause and effect—gravity, molecular forces, DNA, genetic evolution, chunky chocolate chip cookies—but what about the cause and effect produced by concepts such as Self, Being, Existence? These concepts are not exactly tangible, nor merely immaterial, but seem to exist in a twilight zone for whatever reason they essentially seem to affect—as generators to a furtherance of being; a means of extending one's existence. But why? Preaching that the meaning of life is to die, just to die, is like being sentenced in a kangaroo court, then having one's head chopped off: a bit melodramatic and anticlimactic, no?
<br>

and whatever i tell you its made of will only be a name anyways, it will not be that actual thing it is made of.

Do you now understand that nothing but nothing is [self-]explanatory? So it's the only thing that the universe can consist of.

anything.

Something and anything are words we use when we talk about something we don't understand. Only nothing is understandable.

and obviously thats not true becase we are here.

Yes, we are here, but do you know where "here" is? We are in the present moment. The present moment has no duration, so nothing can exist in the presence. The universe doesn't exist in the presence, it exists in the past (ie. memory)

something cannot come from nothing, so the only alternative for nothing is something.

How can you say that something can't come from nothing when you don't even know what this something is?

everything exists, so that must mean that nothing doesn't exist.

Both exist because they're the same thing.

I don't appraise them as the same for the obvious reason that I'm not dead.

It's impossible that you would be dead, you are life (existence, non-existence) itself.

Everything includes nothing, but nothing includes nothing.

This is similar to the reason why nothingness has to create infinite universes. There are two principles in nothingness: nothingness and its infinity. Infinity accepts nothingness, but infinity is unacceptable from nothingness' viewpoint. But since nothingness IS infinite, it has to empty itself of its infinity so that it can contain and be nothing. This separation caused "conciousness". Awareness is a separation between me (nothing) and the universe (infinity). Without this feeling of separation one couldn't feel: "I am". Because there is no center in infinity, the center is everywhere at the same time.

One of the problems when trying to understand the cause of the universe is that people search for it in the past. If the effects are present, the causes are present. There are no causes in the past, the past is only a memory.

God, I thought I was being obvious. :*rolleyes*: What was I being obvious about anyway? Oh right, the fact that invisible concepts, such as "self", exist alongside visible matter, such as this planet—it gives a whole new perspective to "a living planet".

Thoughts, concepts, are also made of "matter", although we have no "scientific instruments" to detect them yet, we can only detect with the brain.

Preaching that the meaning of life is to die, just to die, is like being sentenced in a kangaroo court, then having one's head chopped off: a bit melodramatic and anticlimactic, no?
<br>

Since life and death are just two sides of the same thing, I could also say that the meaning of life is to live.

Something and anything are words we use when we talk about something we don't understand. Only nothing is understandable.




I beg to differ. I can understand "something", but find it much harder to understand "nothing".

"Something" can be anything, so no matter what you are thinking of you are by definition correct. Even if you are thinking of nothing. "Nothing" is still something --is it not? Is it not an idea or concept? That is why I find it impossible to truly comprehend "nothing".

I beg to differ. I can understand "something", but find it much harder to understand "nothing".

It's probably because you don't understand what I mean.

"Something" can be anything, so no matter what you are thinking of you are by definition correct. Even if you are thinking of nothing. "Nothing" is still something --is it not? Is it not an idea or concept?

Yes, everything is something/anything, but what is something/anything?

Something and anything are both empty words.

That is why I find it impossible to truly comprehend "nothing".

If you stop trying to comprehend it, you will comprehend it.

Do you now understand that nothing but nothing is [self-]explanatory? So it's the only thing that the universe can consist of.
Do you now understand that nothing but bubblegum is pink? So that means that only neglect donkeys can become pets.

makes about as much sense...

Something and anything are words we use when we talk about something we don't understand. Only nothing is understandable.
seems like you're talking about a lot of what you don't understand.

Yes, we are here, but do you know where "here" is? We are in the present moment. The present moment has no duration, so nothing can exist in the presence. The universe doesn't exist in the presence, it exists in the past (ie. memory)
when you get down to that level, time and space are the same. so the present moment is that of the state of the universe in a single quantum event. that quantum event, no matter how short, has a duration. that duration is the now. the past doesn't exist. the future doesn't exist. only the now exists. but the now is not nothing. because the now is about to change. nothing cannot change--it is nothing--it is not a thing that can change. nothing is an absolute. absolutes don't exist in our universe because our universe is always changing.

How can you say that something can't come from nothing when you don't even know what this something is?
i know that something is everything. and that nothing is the lack of anything (which, by the way, is the exact opposite of everything). nothing is just a human concept. it was created because humans always think of polar opposites when visualising something. we see something and we think of its opposite. so we see everything and we think that there must be an opposite--which we call nothing. but it turns out that nothing is contradictory to the state of the universe. all space is filled (in fact space is energy) and beyond space (if there is a beyond) there is no space to be filled because it is without dimensions of space.

nothing is the complete lack of. it is not the complete lack of anything--it is simply the complete lack of, which includes anything. nothing is 0. you cannot attain 1 or 7 or 12 or 3 from 0. 0 is not divisible, it cannot be split into anything. there is no 'something' to extract from 0.

so the present moment is that of the state of the universe in a single quantum event. that quantum event, no matter how short, has a duration. that duration is the now.

If now has duration, it is not now.

the past doesn't exist. the future doesn't exist.

They do exist in our mind (in illusion) as memories and expectations.

only the now exists. but the now is not nothing. because the now is about to change.

Change requires duration.

nothing cannot change--it is nothing--it is not a thing that can change. nothing is an absolute. absolutes don't exist in our universe because our universe is always changing.

Yet you can't explain what the universe/something/anything is, to explain what it is that it changing.

i know that something is everything.

Everything is something. Something is everything. You're going in circles, and you don't explain anything. If being was normal, we wouldn't ask questions of it.

nothing is just a human concept. it was created because humans always think of polar opposites when visualising something. we see something and we think of its opposite.

Even though both sides the can never be visible at the same time, the other half still has to exist, unmanifested. There is no light without darkness. How would an uphill be possible without a downhill? How would sound be possible without silence? How would everything be possible without nothing?

[qipte]all space is filled (in fact space is energy) and beyond space (if there is a beyond) there is no space to be filled because it is without dimensions of space.[/quote]

Of course space is "energy", but you haven't been able to explain what energy is or what it's made of, to show that it is not nothing.

nothing is the complete lack of. it is not the complete lack of anything--it is simply the complete lack of, which includes anything.

There are two things required for nothingness to be. Infinity and nothing. Obviously, if nothing contains something, it's not nothing. And if it's not infinite, there must be something else outside to limit it. So nothing must be infinite, and because it contains infinity, it has to empty itself from it, so that it can contain nothing. Nothingness without being would be impossible.

What exists, exists. If matter exists, it is the whole, if nothingness exists, it is the whole. But if you want to know if matter exists, you first have to understand what it is. You will realize that it's nothing.

0 is not divisible, it cannot be split into anything.

If zero is divided infinite times, it becomes one.

there is no 'something' to extract from 0.

Yes, there is something, there is infinity!

Humans are the embodiment of the most powerful force in the universe, intelligence. Our purpose, if nothing else, is to figure out what will happen to our home. Will it expand indefinately, collapse into a black hole to start over again? Death may not be the showstopper you think it is, especially if we can transfer consciousness into a more durable medium.

Atheists are particularly free to develop our own purposes.

no your all wrong!!!!!!!!

You'll have to show the contradictive evidence. Personal testimony wont cut it.

no your all wrong!!!!!!!!
If you say so. Oh, well, back to the drawing board.

If now has duration, it is not now.
you're still not making any sense. you can make any assumption you want, but it doesn't make it true.

and i don't think you really understood what i said before. the time duration of the now is not really a time duration on that level, but a space duration. through quantization, we can see that at any given moment, the universe can be broken down into a state of non-movement. that is, that the universe is like a movie projector and that time is simply a set of constantly changing frames--each frame a seperate state of the universe. the now is each frame as we experience it.

They do exist in our mind (in illusion) as memories and expectations.
by that logic you can also say that unicorns exist as well as goblins and dragons.

Change requires duration.
do you not agree that the universe is constantly changing?

Yet you can't explain what the universe/something/anything is, to explain what it is that it changing.
are you kidding? asking what the universe/something/anything could be is like asking me to recite all the numbers there are. i could start doing it, but its pointless because you should be able to sense all the things around you as well as i can.

Everything is something. Something is everything. You're going in circles, and you don't explain anything. If being was normal, we wouldn't ask questions of it.
and you think i'm not explaining anything? i'd like you to take a step back, outside of your personal world, and just look at what you are saying.

Even though both sides the can never be visible at the same time, the other half still has to exist, unmanifested. There is no light without darkness. How would an uphill be possible without a downhill? How would sound be possible without silence? How would everything be possible without nothing?
but there is no such thing as complete darkness; uphill and downhill are relative to their surroundings; complete silence is only possible in space where sound is not possible; everything is possible because nothing is impossible.

the very reason we can play on words like this is evidence that nothing is impossible. nothing is an ideal that is only manifested in our thoughts. it cannot exist becuase it conflicts with everything that is real.

all space is filled (in fact space is energy) and beyond space (if there is a beyond) there is no space to be filled because it is without dimensions of space.

Of course space is "energy", but you haven't been able to explain what energy is or what it's made of, to show that it is not nothing.
energy is the ability to do work. it is a physical manifestation of physical interactions.

There are two things required for nothingness to be. Infinity and nothing. Obviously, if nothing contains something, it's not nothing. And if it's not infinite, there must be something else outside to limit it. So nothing must be infinite, and because it contains infinity, it has to empty itself from it, so that it can contain nothing. Nothingness without being would be impossible.
infinity is a description of unending. nothing is infinite in its nothingness, but even though we can agree on this, it also means that nothing cannot exist--its like how we know that 2/0 is undefined. 2/0 is not a valid operation just like nothing is not a valid ideal. the fact that our language of math allows us to divide 2 by 0 does not mean that it can be done. the fact that our brain allows us to realize nothing does not mean that nothing exists.

nothing is nothing infinitely, but it does not go on forever--in fact it does not take up any space; it does not exist. nothing cannot be because it is self-contradictory. the lack of anything entails a lack of nothing. nothing is an ideal and without anything, there isn't even nothing. so even though the idea of nothing is infinitely non-existant, we can't call nothing infinity because its like calling a rectangle a square. a square is a rectangle, but it does go vice versa.

What exists, exists. If matter exists, it is the whole, if nothingness exists, it is the whole. But if you want to know if matter exists, you first have to understand what it is. You will realize that it's nothing.
but if matter is nothing, than it cannot interact, it cannot change, it cannot be divided into other things. nothingness is contradictory to the state of the universe. there has always been energy here and there will always be energy here. and because of that, nothing will never be, nor has ever been.

If zero is divided infinite times, it becomes one.
this is simply not true.

Yes, there is something, there is infinity!
yes, an infinite amount of 0. but that just makes no sense and has no bearing on reality.

M: Everything includes nothing, but nothing includes nothing.c7ityi_: This is similar to the reason why nothingness has to create infinite universes.So you're saying that Nothing instinctually proposes to, uh, impregnate itself, to fill itself up, to, uh, substitute itself with Something?

c7ityi_: There are two principles in nothingness: nothingness and its infinity. Infinity accepts nothingness, but infinity is unacceptable from nothingness' viewpoint. But since nothingness IS infinite, it has to empty itself of its infinity so that it can contain and be nothing.So, if Nothing proposes the creation of infinite universes, then it's propensity to simultaneously rid itself of its own characteristics, such as infinity, signifies that Nothing is ill at ease with itself, and desires to be Something?

c7ityi_: This separation caused "conciousness".No, Will. It was already conscious of the fact that it was nothing at all before it started experiencing schizophrenia with Infinity. It found that it would require Will to sever itself from its Mr. Hyde.

c7ityi_: Awareness is a separation between me (nothing) and the universe (infinity). Without this feeling of separation one couldn't feel: "I am". Because there is no center in infinity, the center is everywhere at the same time.Mmmm. Do you know that I like that! It makes sense—although I don't see how it connects with Nothing. But yes, if infinity has no center—and it couldn't—then we automatically create it and assume it from our very own vantage point. Very cool. And like gravity, we end up pulling consciousness into our realm...

c7ityi_: Since life and death are just two sides of the same thing, I could also say that the meaning of life is to live.No, I propose that the meaning to life is not so much to live, since that's already obvious, but instead the meaning to life is similar to Nothing's desire to Will: the Nietzschean Will to Power.

So, if Nothing proposes the creation of infinite universes, then it's propensity to simultaneously rid itself of its own characteristics, such as infinity, signifies that Nothing is ill at ease with itself, and desires to be Something?

No, there is no desire in unity... there is no will, it's perfection. Desire is caused by separation. It's just the principles of oneness which are not fully compatible (infinity and nothing). Nothingness can't "be" without this illusion (everything)

Read this: http://www.hatem.com/metah3.htm

If you stop trying to comprehend it, you will comprehend it.

With a paradox, I am as right as you are. By definition, it is impossible to comprehend nothing.

There is no point to life. By some freak event, the universe was created and a series of random events put life on a rock. If Earth is the only thing in the universe with life on it and the only place that will ever have life on it, nothing about the universe will change if we all die.

That is just my take on it anyway.