Are Atheists Happy?

[maro]

maro,

The other thing is, I think you are unintentionally denying, or rather mis-characterizing, human nature. You say we are souls trapped in a body, that we are masters of our emotions, thoughts, behaviors, etc. This is partly true, but not completely true. We are not always masters of our emotions, thoughts, behaviors, etc. Any psychologist or neurologist will tell you this. If people are starving, or if they were abused as children, or if they had a traumatic experience, they may behave violently, for example. If people only interact with people exactly like themselves, they may develop attitudes that are tribalistic, or racist. This is human nature. If we want people to not be racist, for example, we can't just tell their "souls" in the immaterial world to stop being racist; we have to get their brains and bodies to interact with people of all races, in the material world. And same thing for people who are starving, oppressed, etc. Don't just tell their "souls" not to steal; it's just not realistic to ask a starving person not to steal food to feed his family, if he can. Give his material body food, so he isn't forced out of desperation to steal. Don't humiliate and oppress people, so they are not compelled by their inherent sense of dignity to lash out violently. Experiments have shown that even chimpanzees get angry if they perceive they are being treated unfairly. And most of all, we should structure society so that people are rewarded for doing good. Educate children, so they learn to enjoy doing good. Without doing these things, we will never make any progress just by commanding people's immaterial souls, "be good". Because we are not immaterial souls, we are a special kind of living thing.

I would like to reply to this first

The Genes and the enviroment are indeed limiting factors .Actually they are meant to be .They are part of the "test"..
The concept of freedom turns to a meaningless one in a world with no "limiting factors" to overcome or rebel against..Our ability to overcome ,to rebel..is the only proof of our freedom and the only indication it exists...
you say that our ability to "control" is partly true ,but not completely true...and I agree...However ,we still prove everyday that the "free factor" inside us is the dominant factor...everyday there are people who abandon certain religions and beliefs to accept other religions and beliefs...
people who are starving ,oppressed or abused are very liable to fail the test..and are still able to fight their battle...both probabilties do exist and failure is not a must.
also , Allah's justice necessitates that every person is judged within the context of his circumstances and according to the "test model" that was given to him ,both in this life and the after life
And that's why muslims don't apply the punishment of robbery on a starving person or someone who wanted to cure his child...and that's why the punishment for adultery differs according wether the person is married or not...and that's why mental illness drops all the punishments given to a menatlly stable person .
The quran tells us the story of a prophet whose son rejected faith (Noah) ,and another prophet whose father wasn't a believer (Abraham)...also the story of a prophet who was abused by his brothers during his childhood ,and was able to forgive them one day (yusef)

The point is , when someone establishes his mind on the idea " I am able to fight ,I am able to win " ,he is going to do his best ,and eventually either win and overcome the "limiting factors" or at least he will die trying...but when people start to victimize themselves..they will let go of their ability to fight intentionally , from the beginning
The other thing that steals out freedom ,is when we stop to think for ourselves...and accept certain serotyped ideas or lifestyles.

So ,if you think that humans are somwhere between "freedom" and "determinism"...I agree...but if you think human beings are "Robbots" as you said....helpless slaves to their genes and enviroment..then i certainly disagree.......Those who interact with people exactly like them can still be tolarant...and those who interct with others can still be racists...Both still have a "choice" to make !

 

[maro]

Spinkles,

Nature is mindless and blind , Evolution is a blind mindless mechanism !How can a blind mechnism have a purpose "which is survival " unless it's a guided mechnism ,not a blind one..and not the outcome of one random mutation after another ?

now ,let's examine the outcome of evolution :

1) A human being who enjoys a great deal of internal freedom enough to make him Responsible..From where can freedom arise in us but from Allah ?! , Evolution _ as blind as described _ only creates robbots as you say...which renders the concepts of "good" , "Evil", " Responsibility" and even "Morality " all meaningless

2) A moral individual..who may sacrifice his " survival" for a "higher purpose "..and please don't tell me that this higher purpose is the genetic survival . And even it's true ,which mind cares for and ensures the genetic survival ? the blind nature ?
and if I am ready to die for my children becuase of the genetic survival..why i am also ready to die for my religion ,for my country ,for what i believe to be true and moral ? why does a fireman sacrifice his life to save a weak disabled old woman ? what will she add to the Precious genes of the species ?!!
how can such morality be the outcome of a blind mechanism whose higher purpose is survival ? which part of evolution can reasonablly explain the human morlaity and the ability to make sacrifices !

3 ) You keep saying the "Nature laws "...if we and the rest of the nature have arised by a totally blind and random mechanism...how come there are "laws "...laws necessitiates both "Reasoning " and a "Purpose " to be achieved

4)Beauty ! how did arise in nature ?..i know people will pop out to say "Beauty is subjective "..yes ,there are variations between individuals ad cultures..however ,we all still agree that nature is beautiful and fascinating...and for those who say : the male chooses the beautiful female ...the question is still there...why ?....who taught him the value of beauty?..it's an abstract value that has nothing to do with survival

This can't be random..this is a great artist telling us "Hey ,I am here "

5) I once asked penguin : why do animals act benefecially by instinct ?...what is instinct ? tacit knowledge in the genes ?...and in order to avoid the next question which is : who placed this knowledge in their genes ?
he said : Some strategies are more successful than others. The mosquitos using poor strategies died more often, or had fewer eggs hatch. The mosquitos using good strategies survived more often, and had more eggs hatch

And about mutations :he said

If you look at any particular trait, you will have variation around some central trend: some children grow up to be taller than their parents, some shorter, some the same height

so we have now to Facts :
1)better stategies survive
2)mutations occur around a central trait

Which means that in order to explain the miraculous structure of the human body..and the tons of miraculous mechanisms we don't need "Allah"...all we need is to understand that Random mutaions kept circling around cental traits always towards the better ,the more efficient !..one mutation after another...years after years...those mutation didn't have a plan...they were not guided..they were Random...but still ensured the progress towards this complexity , diversity ,system ,design and beauty !!

Is that supposed to be convincing ,Really ?

For all the above ,i find it impossible for the outcome of a mere blind process to be the way it's now..i have no problem with evolution if it was defined as one of the creation mechainsims..a "guided" mechanism...a "planned " mechanism ,but not otherwise

As for the wall separating humans from the animal kingdom :
1) you say that animals have both ethics and art
2)And that out art is better than that of our ancestors ( a subject for evolution)

And I disagree with both notions ;

First ,animals don't have "Moral choices " to make...they don't choose between two alternatives...For this reason ,their acts can't be defined either as moral or immoral...because the whole morality thing necessitiates "Freedom" " and The ability to make a choice " !

second ,Art is mainly about symbolism..a human tool to express the aggrevation for a world other than this one...to deliver a meaning beyond the language !
The birds' nests _ although beautiful and fascinating_ can't be defined as art ...they are not supposed to symbolize anything...they are only meant to attract the females ! a biological tool used by the whole species...not by a single inspired sensitive bird !

For example ,

A movie about a man who devoted himself to helping others and then he lost his lover in a terrible accident...he was shocked and couldn't understand why ?..he quited helping others..he went to a place to be alone and started talking to God :
"You created man..but man suffer so much and then die !! " , and then he turned to find a fascinating butterfly standing on his bag...and then it flew to stand on him...and then it flew away ! ...He then decided to resume helping others !
I felt a shiver after watching this scene...and i wondered : how many books need to be written to deliver the message that was deliverd by a two-minutes scene directly to my heart !
You say ART needs good genes ,good practice ,dood tools..I agree...but this is not the essence of art...the essence of art is the "human being " with all his emotion ,fears and aggrevations !
It's true that our science is more advanced than that of our ancestors ,our tools are much better ,we can produce hugely funded movies and at a time all they were able to do is to draw on the sand or on the cave wall...but still all this doesn't make our art more valuable than theirs...The only thing that makes it so is for us to be more "human " than them

 

[maro]

I disagree. Materialism deals with the question of what exists. Humanism deals with the question of what we should value. The only way any set of answers to these two questions might conflict is if our determination of what we should value led to the answer being something that we had concluded did not exist.

do you value love ? I am sure you do
But the love i value is a "spiritual bond " between two "human beings "
The love you value is some" neurotransmitters" released in two "human bodies "

Materialism does say that humans exist, therefore they're available to be valued by humanism. There's no conflict between these positions at all.
I think you may be confusing materialism with determinism, but the one doesn't imply the other.

With a strict materialistic view , what you call "humans" are anything but "humans"...Materialism ,dehumanization ,and determinism are inseprable triad ,IMO

. If Allah said peace is evil, I would reject Allah, not peace. I value peace because of what it is, and because of what I am, not because of where it comes from, or where I came from.

I value Peace for what it is ,too....and that's why I am a muslim...and that's why i have submitted myself to the peace giver...Peace is one of the 99 names of Allah ,in deed

I think your above statment reveals what Atheism is all about...it's a psycological stance more than it's a rational stance ,IMO...A state of rebellion against the inability to understand..and the so many unanswered questions..against the irrational and contradicting answers offered by many religions...Not to mention the great job done by many religion followers to portray religion as anti-science..anti logic ..and anti civilization.. And to attibute their own evil choices to Allah !

So ,the best solution picked by some people in this case is to drop religion ,God and all what they can't see with their eyes or touch with their hands...wich is a very extreme and radical solution as i think !

 

[Seven]

do you value love ? I am sure you do
But the love i value is a "spiritual bond " between two "human beings "
The love you value is some" neurotransmitters" released in two "human bodies "

Is the result not the same in either case? Is love as a product of evolution any less wonderful?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

do you value love ? I am sure you do
But the love i value is a "spiritual bond " between two "human beings "
The love you value is some" neurotransmitters" released in two "human bodies "

Well, no - it's the same for both of us. Either you're right or I'm right, but whatever's right, it's the same for everyone.

With a strict materialistic view , what you call "humans" are anything but "humans"...Materialism ,dehumanization ,and determinism are inseprable triad ,IMO

I disagree. Just because you find nothing to value in a materialistic world view doesn't mean that nobody can.

 

[themadhair]

Nature is mindless and blind , Evolution is a blind mindless mechanism !How can a blind mechnism have a purpose "which is survival " unless it's a guided mechnism ,not a blind one..and not the outcome of one random mutation after another ?

Is natural selection really that difficult a concept for you to get your head around??

 

[Mr Spinkles]

maro,

Thanks for your replies. I just have a few comments, I will try to be brief.

In your first reply you basically spell out your view of human free will from an Islamic perspective. That's fine, but I was actually responding to a slightly different argument of yours. You argued that materialism is dehumanizing, incompatible with freedom or moral responsibility, and incompatible with humanistic values. So I was trying to justify a materialist/humanist perspective, I was not trying to challenge an Islamic perspective.

In your second reply you make an excellent observation about how humans can behave in ways that do not benefit their genes. This is true and it is the subject of much research and study. Animals with higher intelligence, like chimpanzees, also exhibit such "cultural" behavior to a limited degree. It seems to have to do with learning and language. But not a violation of physics, chemistry, biology, etc.

Of course when I say "laws of Nature" I mean the word "law" as in a pattern which, according to strong experimental evidence, is never violated. In this sense of the word, the existence of "law givers" is not denied, but it is not assumed, either.

I do not mean the word "law" as in a decree from some law givers to guide our behavior...you will not be arrested and thrown in jail for breaking the law of gravity.

You say you don't find evolution by natural selection to be convincing. This is a subjective judgment on your part. The rigorous way to accept or reject a scientific explanation is to examine experiments and observations which either confirm or falsify the predictions. The reason we accept Einstein's theory of relativity today is not because the logic of it seems convincing. In fact, the theory seems completely absurd and illogical. However, very precise observations confirm its surprising predictions. And the same is true of evolution.

I can't explain all the observations of fossils, genetics, plant and insect experiments, etc. which confirm evolution any more than I can explain all the particle experiments and astronomical observations which confirm Einstein's theory relativity. You have to read about it in science books and magazines, and judge for yourself.

I agree with you that the "ethics" and "art" of other animals is not exactly the same as in humans. This was never my argument.

. If Allah said peace is evil, I would reject Allah, not peace. I value peace because of what it is, and because of what I am, not because of where it comes from, or where I came from.

I think your above statment reveals what Atheism is all about...it's a psycological stance more than it's a rational stance ,IMO...A state of rebellion against the inability to understand..and the so many unanswered questions..against the irrational and contradicting answers offered by many religions...Not to mention the great job done by many religion followers to portray religion as anti-science..anti logic ..and anti civilization.. And to attibute their own evil choices to Allah !

So ,the best solution picked by some people in this case is to drop religion ,God and all what they can't see with their eyes or touch with their hands...wich is a very extreme and radical solution as i think !

Well it is true that humanism (not atheism), like any attempt at rational thought, rests on assumptions, including assumptions about values (or a "psychological stance" as you call it). It's the honest, self-questioning, and non-arbitrary method of reaching (you might say discovering) those assumptions, and extending them to more practical principles of how to live, tested against experience and fact, that appeals to me. But I've already explained this.

I'm afraid the rest of your response here is extrapolation on your part, which does not follow logically from my statement, and which happens to be inaccurate in my case. (My intellectual journey has always been a process of reading and learning from a variety of perspectives, and modifying my beliefs gradually--not dropping everything I believed at once.)

All I intended to say by my statement was that I can do thought experiments--that is, I can imagine how I would feel if Allah existed or not, if Allah favored peace or not--and in all of these experiments I still get the same result, that I would favor peace.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

maro,

I think some of our disagreement comes down to an interesting difference of emotional, or (if you like) psychological perspective....I can only explain it by examples.

For example: we talked about comparing humans to robots and animals. You interpret this as essentially a downgrade of humans to the level of material things. However, my perspective is that this as an upgrade of the natural world, and what it is capable of. You feel such a comparison is degrading; I feel it is humbling.

You feel that if humans were not designed, and cared for by an intelligent creator, everything about us is meaningless and we may as well abandon all our projects of improvement, happiness, meaning, etc.
That is your feeling and you are welcome to it.
However, my feeling is that if humans are the product of unguided Natural processes, then the fact that we are alive is an extraordinarily lucky, fleeting, precious opportunity, and we may as well celebrate and take advantage of our good fortune.

Everything about us is even more precious, not less, because we are not designed, or taken care of by supernatural parents in the sky. The feeling of having natural allies, friends, and comrades in our fellow humans--even strangers from across the world--is enhanced because we have no such comrades in Heaven; because we share a tiny, fragile planet and there is no one to look after it, except us, by working together.

These are merely feelings of course, and I don't suppose one feeling is more "logical" than another. But it seems to me the truth has to be established by the facts, not how we feel. After we've established the truth, a feeling will follow; and if we have any control over how we feel, we may as well choose to feel a way that suits us, AFTER we have established the facts.

This may be a peculiar fact about me, but I would have the feeling that a sunset is beautiful whether it came from God or Nature. (I admit if I discovered the sunset was somehow produced by something truly awful, like George W. Bush's excrement, it would spoil it for me.) Apparently, your feelings are more conditional. However, I think it's possible that you have not spent much time imagining the Nature possibility, and thus you are so accustomed to the idea sunsets come from God, and you have so ingrained this feeling in yourself by repetition, any alternative possibility feels disagreeable to you, though there is no necessary or "logical" reason this must be so.

 

[Jackytar]

My view of happiness is that we are born with a "set point" that we are tethered to by a rubber band of sorts. Life knocks us off this point and some things may even hold us for a while but the natural tendency is to be drawn back to that point.

Jackytar

 

[linwood]

Originally Posted by Mr Spinkles
. If Allah said peace is evil, I would reject Allah, not peace. I value peace because of what it is, and because of what I am, not because of where it comes from, or where I came from.

Sweet.