The NO god question

[avery_elzmyth]

I just visited a thread about the existence of God. I am in the beginning stages of research for a story. My question here is: What if you suddenly discovered absolutely in-your-face irrefutable evidence that there is no god. No afterlife, no sin, no right or wrong, no going to hell...you are here and that's that...and then you die...cease to exist anywhere, no hell, no nothing.

If you were hit with something like this, how would it change your life? I'm talking personal here, not how society would break down into Sodom & Gomorrah. You, how would it affect you?

Think about it for a while. I asked a very innocent, rather simple-minded guy this question. He said it wouldn't change him because he lives by his own standards. After thinking about it for just a half hour he came back to me and confessed there were a couple people he'd kill, adding...No God, right? No sin?

Think about it.

 

[minsue]

No change. (ah, the joys of athiesm. Keeps these things simple. )

 

[Evil Alpaca]

No change. (ah, the joys of athiesm. Keeps these things simple. )

I'm an orthodox agnostic, not an aethiest, so things might change a bit. I don't know if I'd actually start killing people, but I'd sure as imaginary-hell start pissing more of them off.

 

[Guest]

It wouldn't change me, personally, in the slightest, because that's what I believe anyway! Without question!

I don't think it would change the entire world that much, either. People who are strong believers will still believe. Those who aren't will see sense and stop fooling themselves.

As for people feeling free to commit murder, because there would be "No sin", I'm sorry, but that's just a load of rubbish. I might not believe in God, like many people, but I do live by my own ethical code of morals, and so on. It's just plain wrong to kill another, God or no God. Plus, let's not forget the fact that there are certain laws in our countries, making it illegal to kill someone, unless in self defence, and only then using reasonable force.

I do not believe that with compelling evidence, denying the existence of God, the world would degenerate into a lawless and anarchic society.

It might stop a few wars, though.

Lou

 

[minsue]

*standing and applauding*

Beautifully stated, Loulou.

 

[doormouse]

No change. (ah, the joys of athiesm. Keeps these things simple. )

touche

I had religion force fed to me as a kid. I grew up to make my own choice.

 

[Guest]

*standing and applauding*

Beautifully stated, Loulou.

Thank you, Min!

 

[doormouse]

It wouldn't change me, personally, in the slightest, because that's what I believe anyway! Without question!

I don't think it would change the entire world that much, either. People who are strong believers will still believe. Those who aren't will see sense and stop fooling themselves.

As for people feeling free to commit murder, because there would be "No sin", I'm sorry, but that's just a load of rubbish. I might not believe in God, like many people, but I do live by my own ethical code of morals, and so on. It's just plain wrong to kill another, God or no God. Plus, let's not forget the fact that there are certain laws in our countries, making it illegal to kill someone, unless in self defence, and only then using reasonable force.

I do not believe that with compelling evidence, denying the existence of God, the world would degenerate into a lawless and anarchic society.

It might stop a few wars, though.

Lou

What Lou said.

 

[cantdog]

I answered this one, on another thread just this week. The link seems not to be able to specify which post, so I'll just paste it in.

(Oh, for the record, I'm a born-again atheist.)

Warning! It's a little sententious. I get that way a lot.

Once I stopped fooling around as a seeker and took my faith seriously, I had to get busy. No one is going to make this stuff right in some afterlife, and no one is watching the balance but us right here. Plus, we get the one chance.

From my point of view, the meaning of it must be arrived at by consensus, since there can be no revelation and there's No One to get in touch with about it. Turns out, we're all humans together, and it gives us some meaning to participate as humans making a way for our descendants on a lovely green world.

It also turns out that we are members of a history, and as such of a particular civilization (i.e., the other civilizations consider it gauche if we try to make theirs behave a different way). It gives meaning to move our civilization's history in a direction of which we can be tolerably proud, or at least to keep it from becoming a watchword for hatefulness or something equally odious.

More closely still, we are among people all day long. You can acquire power to give meaning to this situation, but I don't like power much. You can also give love. Love has its own strength; it is influence it wields, not power; and the people it influences also find meaning, together, with you. Much better.

The thing that needs to be fixed is injustice. Oh, starvation, want and disease are a difficulty, I grant you. But if a modality for amelioratiing the effects of a disease appears (because someone has given meaning to his life) it will not be effective without justice. Starvation and want disappear in the face of just distribution of resources, and starvation and want are usually called into being by power or by injustice.

I am not trained to battle disease; I was a firefighter. On the ambulance I battled only certain heart and lung diseases (and only for like a half hour at a time) and mostly could only become effective in cases of trauma or emotional problems.

So for me, love and justice. There is enough to do in these arenas to keep me occupied all my days, grimly and doggedly against injustice, and joyfully for love.

 

[Amy Sweet]

I think it would effect me, bother me quite a bit. I'd probably refuse to believe it. So what if it's irrifutable evidence. I'm sure i wouldn't be alone.

So I guess it wouldn't help with the wars.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I don't think it would change the entire world that much, either. People who are strong believers will still believe.

Agreed. If one believes in an omnipotent higher being, one can hardly imagine a proof of its absence that would appear conclusive. That's not to play silly games with whether there *is* a God - only to point out that "omnipotent" encompasses the ability to leave no trace of oneself, and that proving the universal absence of something is notoriously difficult. I find the question difficult to answer because I find the circumstance impossible to construct mentally.

As for behaviour - I like to think that most people, at heart, know that they are happier personally, and that we are all happier as a society, when we love and respect others. Of course, I know in reality humans are complete bastards, but I like to believe anyway

Shanglan

 

[cantdog]

No, in reality we are very incomplete in our bastardy. Most people don't mean all that well, but they basically mean well until they're desperate or pumped up somehow.

Anarchy is sort of self-correcting, in some ways. If any given person could just fuckin maim you without repercussion, people suddenly get very polite.

cantdog

 

[Boota]

"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death." --Albert Einstein


I agree with Albert. If I was given proof that God didn't exist I wouldn't bat an eye because I'm not convinced he exists in the first place. And if he does exist, I'm not convinced of the importance of his existence. And if it is important, I'm sure no human has ever gotten it right anyway.

Just don't anybody tell me that Pecos Bill didn't carve the Rio Grande with a stick. If that's not true then all of my theories about our origin are out the window.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

I would, doubtlessly, live a less moral life. And I think the world would, more or less, fall apart, socially.

 

[Mysty61]

Originally posted by Tatelou
It wouldn't change me, personally, in the slightest, because that's what I believe anyway! Without question!

I don't think it would change the entire world that much, either. People who are strong believers will still believe. Those who aren't will see sense and stop fooling themselves.

As for people feeling free to commit murder, because there would be "No sin", I'm sorry, but that's just a load of rubbish. I might not believe in God, like many people, but I do live by my own ethical code of morals, and so on. It's just plain wrong to kill another, God or no God. Plus, let's not forget the fact that there are certain laws in our countries, making it illegal to kill someone, unless in self defence, and only then using reasonable force.

I do not believe that with compelling evidence, denying the existence of God, the world would degenerate into a lawless and anarchic society.

It might stop a few wars, though.

Lou

Very good reply, and just about exactly as I feel. I have no god in my life and believe I live a bad life because of it. In fact, I think I live a much better life then some of the religious people I know. We do not need a god to tell us not to kill. We each have our own ethical and moral ideals which we live by, and can easily develop these ideas without god's help. A god is not necessary to tell us to respect others and to live by the golden rule. With or without religion there will always be the few who will break any and all laws the remaing population can very well live a good life without the fear of punishment by god. Our society would change very little in my opinion, and there may even be a bonus because all of the religious wars would no longer be necessary.

 

[rgraham666]

It wouldn't change me at all. I live by my own standards.

I might invest in a firearm of some description. To deal with the people who had nothing but God keeping them in check. But only if they come after me first.

 

[R. Richard]

There are a significant group of people, called Bhuddists, who do not believe in God. The Bhuddists have, however, strong moral and ethical beliefs.

I tend to get the idea that, for many in Literotica, the lack of a belief in God would mean that society would come to an end. If you consider the Bhuddists, you will see that the belief is not true.

JMHO.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by R. Richard
There are a significant group of people, called Bhuddists, who do not believe in God. The Bhuddists have, however, strong moral and ethical beliefs.

I tend to get the idea that, for many in Literotica, the lack of a belief in God would mean that society would come to an end. If you consider the Bhuddists, you will see that the belief is not true.

JMHO.

The emergeance of Buddhism, however, was not an abrupt revelation to the lack of existence of God. It was strongly a social response to class-system and was both gradual and voluntary. Even then, Buddhism isn't entirely atheistic by any means. Several kinds, some more in tune with the existence of cosmic entities than others.

The spiritual ground suddenly falling out from under 90% of the planet would not mean the next morning, we'd all be cool.

 

[cantdog]

There'd be suicides, for sure. But that's not the question, of course.

I wonder what kind of evidence it could have been?

 

[Bridget69]

I don't think it would change my perception about anything because I'm not even sure about what to believe regarding the afterlife and so forth.
As for the liberty to commit crimes, I don't believe that God dictates whether that's right or wrong. We have a system of justice and authority to control any such impulses.

 

[cantdog]

Sounds good, but there would be some really devastated people. People whose whole emotional basis has been shattered may not be in a mood to evaluate the risks of the legal system, and may be reacting too unthinkingly for any self-restraint, too. There won't be as many as there are putative believers, of course, because some believers are casual ones with less invested in the idea. But it would be risky to walk the streets with earphones. You'd want to be able to hear them coming.

It's an interesting speculation, but you wouldn't make a lot of friends in the current poltitical climate by writing the book. A good title: Revelation.

cantdog

 

[cantdog]

Imagine the muslim world.

Bob Jones U.

The Vatican.

Central America.

Reservations.

Ooh. You could have a killer apocalyptic novel without even a big die-off to start it out.

 

[impressive]

If you were hit with something like this, how would it change your life?

It wouldn't.

 

[Lisa Denton]

My question here is: What if you suddenly discovered absolutely in-your-face irrefutable evidence that there is no god. No afterlife, no sin, no right or wrong, no going to hell...

Irrefutable evidence that there is no god has nothing to do with no right or wrong. Those of you thinking that are not realizing the person next to you in the office or coffeeshop might not believe in god. The person next to you in the pew at church may rape, torture and murder you while laughing but believe in god (he plans to go to confession and say two hail mary's and have it all forgiven) while an athiest heathen may jump in front of a rushing subway to save your child, losing his life.

There is magic, there are miracles, there are truly good and noble peoples who can't even explain why they act the way they do.

There are pigs, monsters and much worse disguised as human-beings who believe in god.

The irrefutable evidence won't change that.

The only thing it might change is you.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

The lack of a system of eternal justice might make things awkward for a lot of people. I have a feeling that if there was no hope that things would be righted someday many would take that responsibility into their own hands with frightening results. I imagine a good many more would use it as an excuse to screw over a lot of people for power and the types of gratification (such as monetary) that are fleeting. Then there would be those who wouldn't be changed at all because they are earnestly good and don't need a system of rewards to justify their behavior. Their deaths would be extra tragic however.

I'd like to believe that I'd be a good person if faced with the end-all proof. I probably would be, since my motivations stem less from afterlifes than from the loss of a truly good individual and an attempt to carry on his spirit. So, probably, I wouldn't be affected much.

And sometimes I wonder if it would matter much to the world at large. Those who desire sin and sadism will pursue it no matter what their deity says and those who are earnestly good may be restrained by ethics, but I'd like to believe they are also constrained by their own spirits. That without a spiritual anchor they would still do good not because of reward but because good and kindness are what make them up and because the acts are good.

But that's just the Devil's piece.