I recently attended a memorial for a close friend's father. He lived a full life of nearly 90 years, and will be much missed. Alert until his final hours, he chose when to die during a period of rapidly deteriorating health, by declining further treatment. As a fellow atheist, he also chose to have no funeral (donating his body to science) and requested a gathering of friends & family to exchange stories about his life.
What struck me most about this event was the genuine feeling demonstrated by the more than 70 in attendance. I have been to many (always too many) funerals, with the usual visitation of the carefully embalmed body preceding, and some form of religious ceremony followed by interrment. All too few have shown any sign of true grief among any but the immediate family. This was a spontaneous outpouring of love and grief for a good man, by all assembled. There was much laughter (he was a great character) and a few tears. Emotions ran high - I have tears in my eyes again as I write this.
Death is a fact of life. There is not a shred of evidence that there is anything following cessation of brain activity. Once you're gone, you're gone. The only known afterlife is the continuity of memory among your family & friends. For some, their works also continue, in the larger population's memory.
I don't find this a particularly distressing thought. Then again, I've not attempted to find the quasi-immortality many do through their children, and I have no expectation that the impact of my life works will continue for long, either. Many people appear to find the finality of death so terrible that they must delude themselves, customarily via a variety of religious beliefs, that there is some continuity of their intelligence or spirit beyond death. Even the words used - "passed on", "passed over", &c - imply continuation into another as yet unidentified existence. People in general appear to be desperate to achieve some kind of immortal state, preferrably a good one.
Most religions use the carrot & stick model of behaviour modification to cajole or threaten adherents with some form of heaven & hell (you rarely see one without the other). Since neither has any concrete evidence of its existence outside our hyperactive imaginations, there seems little point to prolonging this way of thinking. The only justification appears to be for indoctrination and mind control of the majority by a collection of self-serving oligarchies. Religious altruism is a very thin veneer on this fundamental state.
It's so much more important for us to live well, day by day, in as much harmony with our fellows and surroundings as possible, than to spend those days in preparation & expectation of something beyond. We need to make our heaven here, or it will surely become a hell. All that's required is for us to use our brains for what they're good at - observing, evaluating, deciding...for ourselves, not according to the dictates of religio-political oligarchs. And the fear of death should be the least of our worries in doing so.
Death is shocking, harsh, and final. There is no good way to prepare for this. Loved family members and friends who die are mourned, rightly, for they are never coming back. They can also be remembered & celebrated, and I find this the most comforting form of continuity possible.


Salon.com
Comments
There may be gods involved; there may be no gods; what we call existence and the universe may be an illusion; what we call existence and the universe might actually be; and a thousand million other possibilities may be the REALITY.
You sound troubled that theists get comfort out of blindly guessing there is a GOD…and an afterlife of some sort. Why then are you not troubled by atheists who get comfort out of blindly guessing there are no gods…and no afterlife?
The only troubling thing in my mind is humanity's infinite capacity for self-delusion. Am I deluded myself? Perhaps in the view of some on this topic; inevitably on some topic or another.
No, I don't have evidence that there isn't a god, or gods. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, there is copious evidence of man having created god in his own image, and absolutely none for the reverse. Which is the more compelling hypothesis?
As for the nature of reality, you have a point, but that's tangential to the subject of the above personal contemplation.
Sounds like you might be troubled about my lack of religion. Would I have gotten the same knee-jerk if I'd professed the opposite POV?
There ought to be room on this planet for all opinions. Even mine. And that, too, is reality.
We are on the same page in so many ways…but since I (use to) get so much shit from those atheist friends about my agnosticism…I like to take my shots at atheistic arguments every time. Most of my atheistic friends no longer give me grief!
In any case, lemme mention one thing where we are in absolute agreement: The BEST POSSIBLE GUESS that can be made about ANY of the gods that have been worshipped on this planet…is that they were and are productions of humans. The god of the Bible…the cartoon god of the Bible, in particular…is so certainly a creation of humans (rather then the other way around)…that even this dedicated and militant agnostic will offer that as a given.
That notwithstanding, I still have to recognize and acknowledge that I HAVE NO IDEA of what the true nature of REALITY is…NONE WHATSOEVER. And the implications of that are inherent in my agnosticism.
“All this” (he says as he gestures with his arms spread wide to the room and the world outside)…may actually be real…and may be all there is.
“All this”…may be an illusion…the product of one mind which I happen to be using at the moment.
“All this” may be dualistic in nature…or non-dualistic.
“All this” may be something so different from anything humans are even able to conceptualize…that “the REALITY” can never be obtained by humans.
Who knows?
Not me…and I suspect, not you nor anybody else either. That is my guess…that nobody knows.
Any guesses about what HAS TO BE included…or HAS TO BE excluded from consideration…are not only blind guesses…but silly guesses as well. For a theist to defend “there is a God” truly is silly…and for an atheist to defend “there are no gods” is every bit as silly. For a theist to defend “it seems likely or more reasonable to suspect there is a God” is every bit as absurd as the first two…and for an atheist to defend “it seems likely or more reasonable to suspect there are no gods” is as absurd as those three.
Essentially…you pooh-poohed the notion of an afterlife. Theists often pooh-pooh the notion that there is nothing after life. Insofar as theists and atheists do that….the two groups are laughable.
You asked: “Sounds like you might be troubled about my lack of religion. Would I have gotten the same knee-jerk if I'd professed the opposite POV?”
RESPONSE: I doubt it! I usually leave theists alone. They often are a very frightened lot…even if unconsciously…and it really doesn’t make much sense to try to stop someone for whistling while passing a graveyard! Besides, theists seldom actually put much thought into this kind of thing…so I gotta get as much enjoyment from engaging you atheists in conversation as possible.
You wrote: “There ought to be room on this planet for all opinions. Even mine. And that, too, is reality.”
RESPONSE: Can’t adequately tell you how much I am enjoying your opinions…nor how much I crave hearing more of them. I hope we discuss aspects of this for a long time. Take my word for it, Erika…if you got the impression I want you to shut up…you simply got the wrong impression. I don’t want you to be quiet at all; I want you to discuss this with me as much as possible.
I'm not claiming to have all the answers, that's for sure! Bloody poor scientist I'd be if I did, and then what fun would there be in thinking & discussing & finding out new things? And I can enjoy a good discussion on many topics, being opinionated on a lot of them but open to discourse (up to a point at which I fall silent, usually through fatigue).
Nor am I trying to proselytize, that's one of the things about theists that I object to most strongly. Hmm, maybe atheist is actually a stand-in term for anti-religionist?
No doubt we'll have another opportunity to get into this, since I'm firmly in the atheist camp, although philosophically I suppose (if you're into labels) I'd get tagged more as a secular humanist...but I'm not really fond of labels, they tend to get in the way of thinking. Nor am I fond of "belief" as such, again, I'd rather think than believe!
However, more pressing issues are calling me right now, namely the hot peppers that need to be transplanted in my garden. I shall return.
Ya don’t wanna get me started on “believing”…because the word, whether used by a theist or an atheist, sticks in my craw like a harpoon! I can write pages on the word…on the was it is used as a disguise.
Like you…I enjoy “thinking.”
We’ll talk some more at some point. I'll be looking for your posts.
Link to “God Created in Mans Own Image”:
http://open.salon.com/blog/folkmuse/2008/12/23/god_created_in_mans_own_image
So much of this kind of discussion is semantics, I find, with very fine distinctions between different definitions. So, let me simply state my position. (I'm not seeking agreement or to be convinced otherwise, but I'm open to discussion. Can't say I'd respond to avid religionists though, because I have no interest in discussing their beliefs.)
I don't believe in any god(s) and espouse no religion. Belief is a word that implies to me lack of rational thought, and as such I do my best not to use it. Religion, particularly organized, hierarchical religion, is contrary to my personal world-view. More damage than good has been done to humanity by religions, in my opinion.
I think there is abundant evidence of human spirituality, manifested as imagination, empathy, and so forth. I am not sure that we should be arrogant enough to assume that we are the only animals endowed with spirituality – for instance, that it is an emergent property experienced only by Homo sapiens owing to our brain configuration – we may just not have the correct approach or insight to discern that. The perception of spirituality in no way implies the existence of a unifying force for it. I'm not in a position to say that one, or perhaps many, don't exist, but I don't personally feel the need to assume it does. Some would argue that the lack of evidence of a god is not evidence against a god’s existence, and the principle is a sound one, but in my view flawed when applied to a fictional concept.
Morality in the sense of doing the least possible harm to oneself, others or the world in which we live has absolutely nothing to do with belief or lack thereof. Some individuals are moral. Some are not. I see this as moral & amoral, since "immoral" is the province of religions, which I reject.
I enjoy using my imagination when reading or writing fiction, including fantasy & speculative fiction, and mythology. What I don’t do is confuse fiction with reality, or myth with science. In my view, all religions are fictions & myths. No, science is not my religion, because it consists of a variety of hypotheses that are subject to observation, study, and paradigm shift. I don’t “believe” in science – I simply look to it as a collection of tools to describe the world as we currently perceive it. Tools that may change as more knowledge becomes available.
I appreciate art and music created by various cultures in the name of various religions – I sing shapenote hymns with great pleasure and participate in the local singalong Messiah and carol-singing parties whenever possible. Belief is not a requirement for such cultural activities, nor is it hypocritical to enjoy them as a non-believer. I am fortunate to be part of a community that shares this view. Some are believers, some are not. Harmony reigns.
When I posted my original entry, it was in recognition of the human spirit, and in praise of one such spirit lost to death. The trigger word for this ensuing discussion was “atheist”. I feel neither pride nor shame at including myself under this term, which I would further clarify as “areligionist”. No god(s), no religion. It’s that simple. And it’s my opinion, which readers of this discussion may or may not share.