Whenever this question comes up, the questioner usually intends it as some sort of argument in favor of Gods existence, which is remarkably silly, its a bit like asking "If Santa Claus doesn't exist, will we still get presents?" I mean, we could answer whatever we want (just like Hitchens did) and it matters fuck all for the question of god, or santa's likelyhood of existing.
If life is meaningless and purposeless and we all fall into moral anarchy without god,(no atheist I know of thinks this) then so what? Just because someone really, really wants something to exist/be true doesnt make it so. If I said "I really, really dont believe there is any war, death, famine and general suffering in the world" (my preferred choice), wars wouldnt end, food wouldnt rain from the sky and people with terminal cancer wouldnt get cured. This isnt really brain-surgery, but religious people seem to have a really hard time understanding the difference between a "want" and an "is" in this specific question.
The purpose of life is to contribute to your corner of the human species. It is like VideoSift except you are moderating cultural and genetic ideas. Fortunately the human organism serves this purpose regardless of their belief in a giant, invisible spaceman.
>> ^lesserfool: The purpose of life is to contribute to your corner of the human species. It is like VideoSift except you are moderating cultural and genetic ideas. Fortunately the human organism serves this purpose regardless of their belief in a giant, invisible spaceman.
I'm pretty sure donuts fit in there somehow, too. It's a purpose that never ends. First it started with their invention, now it continues with their consumption.
I think it's perfectly obvious that our purpose in life is to worship whatever we believe created us. I mean, if I was an omnipotent being, that's what I'd do. Create an entire race of sentient beings for the sole purpose of glorifying my name. Oh, and I'd give them free will, so if they decided not to worship me, even after I instructed them to do so through the most unreliable channels I could find, then I'd be able to have them tortured for eternity and not feel guilty about it. It's what they chose, after all! Anyway, that's what I'd do, so that must be what God did. Q.E.D.
hold on...one more thing...I've asked it before and I'll ask it again...why do these people always put ferns on the stage? Now that I've seen Zach G.'s stuff all I can ever think about is "Between Two Ferns" when I see these things!
To give a simplistic answer (and semantic). The meaning of life is to live. The meaning of death is to die. You can attach any supernatural connotations you want to those two basic realities.
Third off, I'd like kids born with mixed genders (partially formed male and female reproductive organs) to have only 1 gender. I'm not talking about a cosmetic band-aid, like cutting off their partially formed male reproductive organ and calling them a girl, I'm talking about genuinely 1 gender per baby.
I don't see how someone could make an argument for these conditions. (Best of all possible worlds, right?)
I don't believe in some "purpose" to life. To believe in a purpose implies that there is a set objective that is required by some being of sentience for each member of humanity to contribute to/accomplish.
And that brings us back full circle to the whole God topic.
But to answer the question, I think that the meaning of life is to simply to live and experience it to the fullest.
... on that note though, the fact that you and I came up independently with the same conclusion is incontrovertible evidence that Bacon is indeed the purpose of life.
Christopher Eric Hitchens(born April 13, 1949) is an author, journalist and literary critic. He has been a columnist at Vanity Fair, The Atlantic, World Affairs, The Nation, Slate, Free Inquiry, and a variety of other media outlets. He currently lives in Washington, D.C.. Hitchens is also a political observer, whose books — the latest being God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything[1] — have made him a staple of talk shows and lecture circuits. In 2009 Hitchens was listed by Forbes magazine as one of the "25 most influential liberals in U.S. media."[2] The same article noted, though, that he would "likely be aghast to find himself on this list" and that he "styles himself a radical," not a liberal. miserable man. The End
-anonymous right wing loony on an internet forum, 2009
"What is the purpose of life"is a loaded question. It presupposes that someone or something conscious or at least goal-driven, created life and assigned a purpose to it.
Such is the nature of "purpose". We can create stuff and give purpose to things we create, but what about all the things we didn't create? It's one of the reasons people believe in God, so that everything, including life, has an instant purpose out of the box for free.
Therefore, not believing in God, in principle, removes any purpose to life in general. Even though each human being, being fully conscious, is free to assign themselves any purpose they want to their own individual lives.
Life has a sense, a direction, something anyone can deduce through observation: it tends to survive. An atheist can't say that life has a purpose though.
Stumble This
I have to ask, what is the purpose of life if God DOES exist? Serve him?
No thanks. I'd rather create my own purpose.
If life is meaningless and purposeless and we all fall into moral anarchy without god,(no atheist I know of thinks this) then so what? Just because someone really, really wants something to exist/be true doesnt make it so. If I said "I really, really dont believe there is any war, death, famine and general suffering in the world" (my preferred choice), wars wouldnt end, food wouldnt rain from the sky and people with terminal cancer wouldnt get cured. This isnt really brain-surgery, but religious people seem to have a really hard time understanding the difference between a "want" and an "is" in this specific question.
The purpose of life is to contribute to your corner of the human species. It is like VideoSift except you are moderating cultural and genetic ideas. Fortunately the human organism serves this purpose regardless of their belief in a giant, invisible spaceman.
I'm pretty sure donuts fit in there somehow, too. It's a purpose that never ends. First it started with their invention, now it continues with their consumption.
'nuff said.
First off, I'd like kids born without faces to have faces: http://www.videosift.com/video/The-girl-born-without-a-face-Treacher-Collins-Syndrome
Second off, I'd like to give "harlequin babies" a full lifespan and the qualities of human babies instead of looking like monsters: http://www.videosift.com/video/Harlequin-Ichthyosis-Extreme-Genetic-Disorder
Third off, I'd like kids born with mixed genders (partially formed male and female reproductive organs) to have only 1 gender. I'm not talking about a cosmetic band-aid, like cutting off their partially formed male reproductive organ and calling them a girl, I'm talking about genuinely 1 gender per baby.
I don't see how someone could make an argument for these conditions. (Best of all possible worlds, right?)
The purpose of life? Collect all internet porn.
...and so the rabbit dove down the endless, dark, bottomless hole...giggling all the while...
And that brings us back full circle to the whole God topic.
But to answer the question, I think that the meaning of life is to simply to live and experience it to the fullest.
Bacon!
Damnit! You beat me to it...
... on that note though, the fact that you and I came up independently with the same conclusion is incontrovertible evidence that Bacon is indeed the purpose of life.
Rougy and I win. End of discussion.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Thinker247-s-Failed-TV-Pilot
n author, journalist and literary critic. He has been a columnist at Vanity Fair, The Atlantic, World Affairs, The Nation, Slate, Free Inquiry, and a variety of other media outlets. He currently lives in Washington, D.C.. Hitchens is also a political observer, whose books — the latest being God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything[1] — have made him a staple of talk shows and lecture circuits. In 2009 Hitchens was listed by Forbes magazine as one of the "25 most influential liberals in U.S. media."[2] The same article noted, though, that he would "likely be aghast to find himself on this list" and that he "styles himself a radical," not a liberal.miserable man. The End-anonymous right wing loony on an internet forum, 2009
"What is the purpose of life" is a loaded question. It presupposes that someone or something conscious or at least goal-driven, created life and assigned a purpose to it.
Such is the nature of "purpose". We can create stuff and give purpose to things we create, but what about all the things we didn't create? It's one of the reasons people believe in God, so that everything, including life, has an instant purpose out of the box for free.
Therefore, not believing in God, in principle, removes any purpose to life in general. Even though each human being, being fully conscious, is free to assign themselves any purpose they want to their own individual lives.
Life has a sense, a direction, something anyone can deduce through observation: it tends to survive. An atheist can't say that life has a purpose though.
Christopher Hitchens admires the great pleasure he would receive, observing BicycleRepairMan's misfortunes.
-anonymousquantumushroom, playful netter of moonbats."And you think evil comes from religion? [nervous laugh]"