The Instigator
Sunfire315
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
samdeman22
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

If God does not exist, life has no ultimate objective purpose value or meaning.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Sunfire315
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/22/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 536 times Debate No: 85377
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (17)
Votes (2)

 

Sunfire315

Pro

My position is that if God does not exist, then human life is devoid of ultimate objective meaning value or purpose, regardless of our subjective opinions to the contrary. Important points to note:
1. I am not stating that all atheists are bland and depressing nihilists who live as if there lives have no meaning. Indeed it is impossible for someone to live without meaning or purpose, even if these are just subjective illusions without God.

2. If you somehow show that even if God exists our lives are still somehow devoid of ultimate value meaning and purpose, this does not prove that that our lives would have any purpose without God.

My opponents burden is to show that Life does have purpose even if God does not exist.
samdeman22

Con

As I expressed in the comment section, I am finding it difficult to answer the question, but let me explain why, hopefully in the process of making a good argument. I am going to take the stance that there is a 'meaning' or 'purpose' of sorts, and this is precisely whatever you want it to be. I want to show that the statement you pose, does not make sense to say.

"What is the meaning of the colour red?" I say; "don't be silly", you say back; "no, really, what is the meaning", I reply. Can you find a meaning to the colour red? I'm pretty sure you can't, and I'm pretty sure no one can. You want to argue that without god, life has no meaning. And while I agree that there is no overall purpose to life, that doesn't make your life not have meaning to YOU as an individual, as well as to those around you. I want to propose that there isn't meaning to life in the objective sense, since - to someone who doesn't believe in god, or without god - NOTHING has purpose, but there is meaning in that you make your own, and you make meaning to those you effect. Life, at least to an atheist, just as is the colour red, in the category of 'natural phenomenon', so it doesn't make sense to ascribe meaning to it. We can certainly postulate, and maybe potentially fully explain the origin of life; but if the concept of a god who created it all at some beginning is not compatible with your view, then the question is unanswerable in the terms you suggest.

And I would like to point out that everything you said in point two is philosophically, logically, mathematically false. What you have said is equivalent to "If you somehow prove that our lives are devoid of meaning and purpose, that doesn't prove that our lives are devoid of meaning and purpose".

Let me make this clearer maybe, you have proposed:
god exists + proof that life has no meaning =/= (does not equal) god does not exist + proof that life has no meaning.

What you should know, is that when you have proven something, it is PROVEN regardless of whether or not you prove something else.

Now to my proposal, I certainly love my life, and although I don't agree with the terminology here, I can however say that you CAN have a purpose, by creating it for yourself. What would you like to do in life? Where would you like to go? What would you like to change? These questions, and their answers, can arise independently of a god, but could also provide your life with meaning if this is truly what you seek.

The way I find 'meaning'? When I look out, and I see, the thousands upon thousands of visible stars, to think that there are trillions upon trillions more that I can't see, within billions upon billions of galaxies; to think that I exist here, and can consciously observe that fact, and comprehend it... fulfills my life every time. The more I can observe and comprehend, the more I can appreciate the universe in its whole, how simple rules result in complexities that on macroscopic scales are not comprehensible; it just makes me smile, it makes me very emotional. And even though I know that is not objective, that is what makes me continue to wish to live without a god, it always has.
Debate Round No. 1
Sunfire315

Pro

Sunfire315 forfeited this round.
samdeman22

Con

samdeman22 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Sunfire315

Pro

Look at the topic of the debate: it is "if God does not exist life has no ultimate objective purpose value or meaning". Showing that we can live happy and subjectively fulfilled lives, without believing in God, does nothing to show that life has any ultimate objective meaning value or purpose. this. In fact, you agreed with it. "And while I agree that there is no overall purpose to life". Asking for the objective meaning of life is God does not exist, is as silly as asking "What is the meaning of this rock". There is no reason why it is there, no greater purpose or end to its existence. It just is. We can try and make up ways to romanticize this situation, but ultimately in the grand scheme of things we exist for no reason whatsoever.

To make matters worse, Human life, and the entire universe as well is ultimately doomed as well[1]; meaning that in the end, nothing we do ultimately matters. We do not even have the satisfaction of knowing that our in some deeds will live on forever, even if we don't. Sure our lives may be important relative to certain events, but what is the ultimate
significance of any those events?

We can make up all of the meaning we want, but pretending your life has objective meaning by pursuing even the noblest of goals, doesn't give it any objective meaning. It ultimately amounts to playing pretend.

[1]http://www.spaceanswers.com...
samdeman22

Con

Ultimately I do agree with you, based on that last argument. Really I don't think this is something that can even be argued about :3

If you ask a Scientologist this question, I'm sure they'd give you a reason why we objectively have purpose, as for an atheist such as myself I just don' see it.

You win I guess, but I thought I was arguing against a religious position in the beginning, it may turn out that I'm not then?
Debate Round No. 3
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by samdeman22 1 year ago
samdeman22
To add to what I said in the last argument. I don't really think that anyone takes the position of con on this question, scientology and other belief systems that center around the the universe and 'positive and negative energies surrounding us' that don't have a god would take that position. I think that, theist or atheist you are probably always going to argue for what you suggested (unless like me you got very confused and went all in).
Posted by Sunfire315 1 year ago
Sunfire315
please extend
Posted by jamison2000e 1 year ago
jamison2000e
No. That's with religions that you have no purpose they created "original sin" or "eternal life"so on and are by books &c,,, dictators! Circular arguments that may OR WILL never be proven are called theories, UNLESS you were born, fed and "believe" Tinkerbell can fly?
Posted by Jerry947 1 year ago
Jerry947
I don't think you understand. Without a God, there is no purpose or meaning in life. The Bible says that "The fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other; indeed, they all have the same breath and there is no advantage for man over beast, for all is vanity. All go to the same place. All come from the dust and all return to the dust" (Eccles 3:19-20). And this is true. Without a God, we have no reason to cure people or to help people or do anything since we will all end up dead no matter what.
Posted by samdeman22 1 year ago
samdeman22
people can give themselves life, at least if by 'people' you mean people as a group. We have children, we save lives, we cure disease. And the point I was trying to make, is that you can have whatever meaning you want in life.
Posted by jamison2000e 1 year ago
jamison2000e
John Paul Sartre's quote would make more sense if he was a mathematician. ;)
Posted by Jerry947 1 year ago
Jerry947
People can't even give themselves life. How could they possibly have hope to give it meaning?

"No finite point has meaning without an infinite reference point."

-John Paul Sartre
Posted by Sunfire315 1 year ago
Sunfire315
Ignore my stating that the burden is to show that life has a purpose without God. The burden of proof for both can be found explicitly in the debate topic to a more detailed extent then in my opening round.
Posted by samdeman22 1 year ago
samdeman22
I believe I've seen that, don't remember much of it, I always liked Richard Dawkin's style to be better :)
Posted by AngryBlogger 1 year ago
AngryBlogger
He means without god, killing and stuff is all good.

With god, we know right and wrong, without god, we would be lost and not know whats truly right from wrong.

That is what he is trying to debate, which is usually huge debates by William Lane Craig. Go youtube William Craig VS Sam Harris on Objective Morality.

I disagree with Craig on the morality+god stance and think we would know right from wrong if god didn't exist, as we inevitably would evolve over time like we are now to know so. However, it's not my debate to argue against the pro.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
Sunfire315samdeman22Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
Sunfire315samdeman22Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.