Damian

I'm sure the owner of Andy's Cottage offers free hugs to the guests too! ;) (see my earlier post at 9:11)

(Sorry - I seem to have repeated myself. But what the hell! My point is so good, that I could say it again!)

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is no God > > Our purpose in life is, like all living organisms, > to ensure the continuation of our particular life > form. > > We are here on this planet by chance. > > We are (usually) thinking and intelligent beings. > > We should, as individuals, as families, as > communities, as states and as a world, maximise > the good we do and minimise the harm we do - not > in response to some ancient rule book handed down > to a chap with a beard but because it makes sense. (The same reply goes to Jeremy's post of July 31, 04:19PM) Fine, you may think there is nothing after we die. But then the point is that LOGICALLY a person's choice of a 'good' life is AS JUSTIFIED as the choice of a 'bad' life IF there is nothing after we die, and if, to boot, the whole of humankind dies one day. With most things that we do in life, the basic question is: is it good for me IN THE LONG RUN? This is how we judge lots of actions and decisions made or to be made by ourselves and others (e.g. our children): Why should I look after my body? Because it's good for you in the long run. Why shouldn't I get high daily on drugs? Because it's bad for you in the long run. Why should I spend an hour after boring hour learning German? Because it's good for you in the long run. So if in the long run I and everyone I know or could possibly know turn into nothing, what purpose has everything in the long run? I might as well cheat on my girlfriend, steal money and even kill people if this is what gives me kicks, because it doesn't matter anything IN THE LONG RUN anyway. If someone uses this this argument and you can't reply that there are some bad consequences of bad actions in the long run, what's more - that there are NO consequences of ANY actions (!) in the long run , there's nothing you can reply to persuade him apart form some EMOTIONAL, not LOGICAL, persuading. >

Jeremy (sorry for the delay in replying), my point is that LOGICALLY a person's choice of a 'good' life is AS JUSTIFIED as the choice of a 'bad' life IF there is nothing after we die, and if, to boot, the whole of humankind dies one day. With most things that we do in life, the basic question is: is it good for me IN THE LONG RUN? This is how we judge lots of actions and decisions made or to be made by ourselves and others (e.g. our children): Why should I look after my body? Because it's good for you in the long run. Why shouldn't I get high daily on drugs? Because it's bad for you in the long run. Why should I spend an hour after boring hour learning German? Because it's good for you in the long run. So if in the long run I and everyone I know or could possibly know turn into nothing, what purpose has everything in the long run? I might as well cheat on my girlfriend, steal money and even kill people if this is what gives me kicks, because it doesn't matter anything IN THE LONG RUN anyway. If someone uses this this argument and you can't reply that there are some bad consequences of bad actions in the long run, what's more - that there are NO consequences of ANY actions (!) in the long run , there's nothing you can reply to persuade him apart form some EMOTIONAL, not LOGICAL, persuading. The fact that most people choose to behave most of the time in a (more or less) 'good' way does not prove anything, but admittedly is interesting and worth investigating. And perhaps suggests that deep down all - or nearly all - of us BELIEVE that, in the long run, there is something else than matter that disintegrates?

By the way, what would be the most consitent thing to do by atheist 'environmentalists', those who believe that humans are the planet's biggest problem? Shouldn't they advocate a massive 'final solution' for us all - as there's no after life, what does it matter to us when we go - and in this way save - for a little longer while, that is - the earth they obsess about?

Very valid point in the opening entry. If there's no (meaningful to our human intelligence) afterlife, there's no logical, philosophical or other argument to tell someone that they cannot do with their life - AND WHAT'S MORE - with anyone else's life WHATEVER they like as if the long run everything turns to nothingness, then nothing matters. This obviously does not prove that there is God, but shows that the postulate of God (and all that is involved in the concept of an omnipotent, benevolent and eternal Person) is most natural, normal and, I believe, necessary. Without it you either turn into an animal, madman or an empty man.

Just one more general thought regarding the complete legalisation of the drugs market. The current legislation and policy leads to huge waste of resources (you can't win the war) and increases corruption (those who are making huge profits doing business that by definition now is illegal, feel no compunction to use the money to bribe others, including doubtlessly cops). Why not legalise the stuff and spend half of the saved money on innovative ways of helping addicts and perhaps educating those who are most likely to become addicts and give the other half back to taxpayers in lower taxes? Anyone in favour?

I think durgs (ALL drugs) should be legalised. The demand will never be supressed and the current legal situation means that this demand can only be satisfied by those who are ready to disrespect the law and there's plenty of them. This market is simply left to criminals or those who are ready to become criminals.