The relation of atheism to fatalism

[Jaiket]

A couple of posters in another thread mentioned that fatalism/despair is the logical consequence of atheism.

My immediate thought is that either; a) I have not thoroughly examined the logically entailed consequences of my beliefs regarding deities, or b) the proposition is incorrect.

I have given time to pondering over what is entailed by my beliefs regarding god, religion, nature etc. My intellect is clearly not limitless and I might have made mistakes or simply missed conclusions, but I'm inclined to believe case b).

I have met few atheists who have examined their beliefs and arrived at anything short of life-affirming positivity. 'Without purposes and immortality, there is no reason not to live a happy, full life, to pursue our dreams and to treat others well'.

What then would have people believe that this is a valid assesment?

Gimme yer toughts.

Thanks.

[Snoopy]

Aye, b) it is.

Presumably if one thinks there is no god and so no afterlife etc, then you had better get cracking with enjoying this one and only fleeting time of being alive (and hence no despair allowed). That's all my thoughts!

s.

[Caimanson]

I think it depends the person you ask.
If you have a need for purpose and meaning then a) applies.

The way I see it is that life can be a struggle with a good share of toil and suffering. For people who are not having a good time, who are empty or in pain, those who cannot rise above their circumstances; I would think option a) applies again. Suffering without meaning or purpose is despairing.
Those on the other hand who are living fulfilled lives in spite of life's challenges, then option b) will apply imo.

There is another angle, that human beings naturally seem to strive for immortality, religious or not.
I have spoken with some atheists that while accepting that after this life there is no more, they still cling to sentiments of posterity.
For example, their purpose in life is to contribute something to humanity for the next generations, etc. Which a cynical nihilist may contest, saying that sooner or later humanity and life on this earth will disappear, asking again what is the ultimate point?

Imo, if you manage to live fully in the here and now, not clinging to the past, not striving for the future, then all these questions are futile.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Jaiket and all!
This subject has been on my mind in various forms for a few days, so this is either a really cool synchronicity (great minds think alike?) or a very ironic coincidence. Either way, it will be an interesting conversation once I can get to it. Right now I am super strapped for time, but I wanted to let you know this has not passed unnoticed.

Originally Posted by Jaiket

A couple of posters in another thread mentioned that fatalism/despair is the logical consequence of atheism.

I would be one of them, if not the one.

My immediate thought is that either; a) I have not thoroughly examined the logically entailed consequences of my beliefs regarding deities, or b) the proposition is incorrect.

Likewise there is always the possibility I am incorrect. I would also hold out the possibility of a third, or potentially more, possibilities. Which at the moment I have no idea what may be, but am open to consider.

I have given time to pondering over what is entailed by my beliefs regarding god, religion, nature etc. My intellect is clearly not limitless and I might have made mistakes or simply missed conclusions, but I'm inclined to believe case b).

This is fine, and it is certainly your perogative to follow where your heart and mind lead you to.

I feel the need to issue a disclaimer here, you are in my experience an exceptional case, Jaiket. There are a handful of well-meaning and self disciplined atheists who take the time and trouble to hang around here at CR, and it is those such as yourself that make the stereotype in my mind seem quite inadequate. So, we end up back at how labels are so insufficient and inaccurate when applied in reality. This is meant as a compliment.

I have also seen those exemplified by our recent drive by poster, who come in with an all-knowing attitude of arrogance and proceed in a rather "fundamentalist" way to downgrade and undermine the views of those they deem unworthy. I find it truly ironic to watch a fundamentalist point a finger at a fundamentalist and accuse of fundamentalism...it would be hilarious, if not for the potential severity and real-life outcomes.

I have met few atheists who have examined their beliefs and arrived at anything short of life-affirming positivity. 'Without purposes and immortality, there is no reason not to live a happy, full life, to pursue our dreams and to treat others well'.

And this is well and good, certainly an aspect I had not considered. Of course, there is no reason not to live a happy, full life, to pursue our dreams and to treat others well with purpose and immortality, just the same. A *pleasant* view of immortality, in the sense we speak of here, can only come to bear by earning it (in whatever manner) within this one life, in the eyes of a theist.

What then would have people believe that this is a valid assesment?

I haven't time to expand on this just now, and I dearly want to. My thinking was structured along the lines of morality by logic, as I have seen a handful of (presumed) atheists posit. Besides the fact this position is not borne out by historic / anthropological evidence (to wit: humanity has been, by all accounts, "religious" since the inception of society prior to civilization), the idea of logic generating morality just doesn't seem to pass muster. Logic may well play a role, but there are emotional aspects that are left out of such a raw equation. I could take time another day to spell it out better, but for now I will point to the work of a couple others to make my illustration for me.

Logic, as *the* generator of morality, can be demonstrated by the book "Lord of the Flies," as it can be demonstrated by the series of Mad Max / Road Warrior movies. I do not know the authors to give credit, but I think these are excellent looks at the human psyche when turned loose without a "throttle." In short, the prognosis is not very good. Logic has this nasty habit of looking out for self at the expense of others, where morality seems to be looking out for others in spite of self. Logic and morality obviously coexist, but I question their relation to each other, I really doubt logic generates morality at a root / core / base level. (one might even dare point to elemental morality among herding and pack animals, and attempt to find "logic" among same...)

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Presumably if one thinks there is no god and so no afterlife etc, then you had better get cracking with enjoying this one and only fleeting time of being alive (and hence no despair allowed). That's all my thoughts!

True...but again, one only gets to *enjoy* an afterlife if one makes positively constructive use of this "one and only" life. So again, no despair allowed. (In a perfect example, anyway.)

Originally Posted by Caimanson

There is another angle, that human beings naturally seem to strive for immortality, religious or not.
I have spoken with some atheists that while accepting that after this life there is no more, they still cling to sentiments of posterity.
For example, their purpose in life is to contribute something to humanity for the next generations, etc. Which a cynical nihilist may contest, saying that sooner or later humanity and life on this earth will disappear, asking again what is the ultimate point?

You may have hit on something I had not considered..."cynical nihilist." Accepting that we use our "labels" in our minds in order to construct and guide our thoughts, perhaps I was saying "atheist" and meaning "cynical nihilist." I guess the thought hadn't occurred to me that an athiest could be anything but a cynical nihilist, so in that regard I suppose an apology is due.

I offer my full and complete apology to anyone offended by my misinterpretation.

Imo, if you manage to live fully in the here and now, not clinging to the past, not striving for the future, then all these questions are futile.

Ah, and here the theist faces dilemma in responding...as I cannot speak for G-d, I cannot say with anything approaching certainty just what "He" will value, and what "He" won't value. Speaking as a mere mortal human striving to do the best I know how on this earth in this lifetime, I appreciate what it is you are trying to say!

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

True...but again, one only gets to *enjoy* an afterlife if one makes positively constructive use of this "one and only" life. So again, no despair allowed. (In a perfect example, anyway.)

Hi Juan,

No doubt misunderstanding this; an atheist believes there is no afterlife, so they aren't hoping to enjoy or not enjoy something that they do not believe in. From this perspective what use an atheist makes of their supposed one and only life is irrelevant.

Feel free to correct me.

s.

[Caimanson]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

A *pleasant* view of immortality, in the sense we speak of here, can only come to bear by earning it (in whatever manner) within this one life, in the eyes of a theist.

Ah, and here the theist faces dilemma in responding...as I cannot speak for G-d, I cannot say with anything approaching certainty just what "He" will value, and what "He" won't value. Speaking as a mere mortal human striving to do the best I know how on this earth in this lifetime, I appreciate what it is you are trying to say!

Juan, these paragraphs really jumped on me.
Not sure if I am misunderstanding, can you clarify what you mean by earning and striving.

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by Jaiket

A couple of posters in another thread mentioned that fatalism/despair is the logical consequence of atheism.

My immediate thought is that either; a) I have not thoroughly examined the logically entailed consequences of my beliefs regarding deities, or b) the proposition is incorrect.

I have given time to pondering over what is entailed by my beliefs regarding god, religion, nature etc. My intellect is clearly not limitless and I might have made mistakes or simply missed conclusions, but I'm inclined to believe case b).

I have met few atheists who have examined their beliefs and arrived at anything short of life-affirming positivity. 'Without purposes and immortality, there is no reason not to live a happy, full life, to pursue our dreams and to treat others well'.

What then would have people believe that this is a valid assesment?

Gimme yer toughts.

Thanks.

Hi Jaiket,

Wouldn't opening yourself up to unknown possibilites describe your outlook as agnostic rather than atheistic?

Peace

Mark

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by Jaiket

A couple of posters in another thread mentioned that fatalism/despair is the logical consequence of atheism.

My immediate thought is that either; a) I have not thoroughly examined the logically entailed consequences of my beliefs regarding deities, or b) the proposition is incorrect.

(snip)

Gimme yer toughts.

Thanks.

Jaiket,

It seems to me the logical consequence of atheism is not believing in God. That's about it. Life goes on either way. Some people arrive at despair regardless of their declared belief. One cannot know God anyway except he/she is awakened to reality. Its not exactly something you can force on people. Just some thoughts to consider.

Love in Christ,
JM

[cavalier]

Originally Posted by JosephM

One cannot know God anyway except he/she is awakened to reality. Its not exactly something you can force on people. Just some thoughts to consider.

Is it possible that you could make yourself believe that you believe in God?

[Jaiket]

Juan, thanks for your response. I look forward to more detail, though it already has me thinking.

Thank you to the others who responded.

Originally Posted by Paladin

Hi Jaiket,

Wouldn't opening yourself up to unknown possibilites describe your outlook as agnostic rather than atheistic?

I think both. I am open to being wrong, but I don't believe I am. I also don't believe I can know the answer, but believe that the only evidence regarding gods as far as I can see, is the lack of evidence. But yeah, agnostic suits me fine.

[Blizzardry]

why does fatalism have to be slashed with despair? Couldn't somebody be happy and perfectly content to leave the universe in it's own hands to unfold as it will?

We know a movie is a written script, and a book is already planned out and the ending will never change, but you can still be surprised if it's the first time it's read.

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by Blizzardry

why does fatalism have to be slashed with despair? Couldn't somebody be happy and perfectly content to leave the universe in it's own hands to unfold as it will?

Yes. 'Despair' was used in the thread I mentioned. I wasn't trying to imply that fatalism in necessarily desperate.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Snoopy!

Originally Posted by Snoopy

No doubt misunderstanding this; an atheist believes there is no afterlife, so they aren't hoping to enjoy or not enjoy something that they do not believe in. From this perspective what use an atheist makes of their supposed one and only life is irrelevant.

Apologies, I was still in comparison mode from an earlier comment to Jaiket. This is more of an attitudinal approach of a theist. Speaking in general "stereotypical" terms, of course.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Caimanson!

Originally Posted by Caimanson

Not sure if I am misunderstanding, can you clarify what you mean by earning and striving.

Oh my! By "earning" in context, I was referring to the monotheist position of gaining grace either by faith, good works, or combination. As I look more closely, all major faiths that look to "after life" whether a version of heaven or rebirth, teach and stress the benefit of doing good in this life in order to earn favor (or more favor) in the after life.

As for "striving" in context, I was referring to my specific effort to do just that, earn my way to heaven by doing the best I know how with what I understand.

[juantoo3]

Quick nod to Paladin's observation.

His was a far more tactful way of saying what I was thinking. I do think a "thoughtful atheist" (in the raw sense of the term "atheist") is more properly an agnostic. And for what it is worth, in my humble opinion, an agnostic is more genuine in their scholarship, for the very reasons mentioned in the other thread ("CERTAINTY!").