Is life sadistic if no afterlife follows?

[Cryptic-Game]

Please watch this 27 minute video! It is very informative!

If death is final and nothing follows, wouldn't life be sadistic?

Life is either is the beautiful story ever told or the most tragic story ever told. Think about all the goals, values, yearnings we have during life and if it all abruptly ends and death wins, life would have been meaningless in an ultimate sense.

People say our life is purposeful and meaningful if we give it meaning. Just because you place something on it, doesn't mean it is. Also, if something has relative meaning, that isn't ultimate meaning.

This program is called Closer To Truth and Robert Lawrence Kuhn is the host. This is a very good program as they cover different topics.

Totally

Mostly

Slightly

Having an afterlife would be sadistic

[genericname85]

well that entirely depends on what you make your life about. if you're placing all your bets and efforts on the afterlife, then i'm affraid you're doing life wrong.

life is temporary. so make the best of it, while you're around. if you do that, then life without afterlife isn't sadistic. if you don't do that and there is no afterlife, then you wasted your life. sucks for you xD

[genericname85]

i mean i would rather go to hell in the afterlife than knowing that i wasted the one live i had for something that's not real.

[Cryptic-Game]

Please vote! Did you watch the video?

[genericname85]

i voted option D because i seriously think that if heaven was real, it would be very close to torment considering "infinite time".

i did skip through the video, cause i don't really hope to find any new thoughts in religious videos ever. i tried, trust me but they always bring up the same old stuff.

but i can reference a part of a video, that i categorically disagree with: "we a longing for meaning and purpose and we want love and good to win over hate and evil". yes, true. so far i agree. but then he goes on to say "if death has the last word, all of those longing and dreams come to absolutely nothing". that's entirely false.

1: you do have the experience of your life that you have influence over by finding purpose and doing good. was that "in vain" if death is finite? or was it still a great experience? i think it's the latter.

2: it doesn't even go to nothing. you can have children. and those will carry on your legacy. you teach them how to be and what you think is ok and your values will continue living in them. yeah your ego will be gone but i'd argue, your ego never even existed to begin with. Most of the cells of your body continue living and those that die go back to being part of the circle of life so i strongly disagree with the unsubstentiated assertion, that finite life is not "in sync with nature". in fact it is the most natural thing ever. because that's what evolution essentially is, which i assume you don't believe in either?

[Cryptic-Game]

Yes but wouldn't a relative meaning be insane if no ultimate meaning?

If all life ends in oblivion or nothingness, then it would be as if it never mattered.

I think we have more science for creation than for evolution to show the best explanation of life.

[genericname85]

let's just leave the science of creation out of this, cause that's an oxymoron. science can't presume that something is true while creation presumes that "creation" is true... so it's entirely unscientific. they're not looking to find truth. they're tryingt to proof something to be true, which isn't how science works at all, so let's not go there.

let's tackle the valid questions you asked:

relative meaning is not "insane", it's tough. finding your meaning is insanely rewarding. because it means finding "yourself". you can follow god all your life and never find yourself, which i find quite horrible.

all life did end before us. but we're still both here, sharing this experience thanks to all those people before us that spent their live enabling us to have this live. isn't that awesome? don't you think that matters? i do.

[Cryptic-Game]

Science has shown creation to be more plausible and a better explanation for life origins. The Human Genome Project has revealed that all hymns came from a single man and a single woman. That's debunks ape to man evolution mightily.

[genericname85]

ok. can we now move to the other 2 things mentioned?

[Cryptic-Game]

I meant humans, not hymns.

[Cryptic-Game]

Which 2 things: meaning and purpose?

[genericname85]

i understood what you said. don't worry. yes, meaning and purpose.

[Cryptic-Game]

I think they are given, not self imposed. I don't think you can add purpose or meaning to your own life. If the meaning and purpose of life is to make more life, then contraception would be in violation of your purpose of meaning since you aren't seeking it.

[genericname85]

ok so you think they are given. how?

i didn't mean "procreation was the meaning of life". i'm sorry if that came out wrong. i was saying that porcreation is one way that you can have an impact that lasts longer than your life among other things.

[Cryptic-Game]

I think God gives meaning and purpose and if people don't seek God, they asking allowing Satan to be the ruler of their life

[genericname85]

god gives meaning. how?

what if neither god nor satan exist? wouldn't "seeking them" be a huge waste? and what if i told you that meaning independend of god does exist everywhere? being a good person is a goal to strive to isn't it? why must i involve god if i wanna be a good person?

[Cryptic-Game]

Without God, why would it matter how life is lived? If you were never caught on earth, you could do great evils and it wouldn't separate you from a righteous person.

Rape is an evil act and feeding the hungry is a righteous act. So if people do both, are they both evil and righteous?

Moral obligation would not matter if no punishment or reward came. Even if you say you ought to live morally despite if God exists or not, under which grounds? Life is absurd in a universe without a law giver. If we make up our own moral standards and others don't live by them or if you violate your own moral code, how would you punish yourself?

[genericname85]

because how live is lived matters to ME? i am important enough for myself. and i think love and compassion is good so i want a live of love and compassion. why do i need god to tell me that, if that is already what i want?

[Cryptic-Game]

Okay. What ultimate purpose would your meaning have accomplished if death is final? Why would the impact on others matter after they died too? Meaning that is relative and temporal is just nonsensical compared to ultimate meaning, which is eternal.

What if you are wrong and God exists? How would you be able to handle it or makes sense of a God created universe.

You do realize that there is a 67% chance God exists and this is from a non biased source?

amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/.../highereducation.uk1

[genericname85]

"What ultimate purpose would your meaning have accomplished if death is final?" that the live i had was a good one. and since it is final, that motivates me even more to work had at that.

"Why would the impact on others matter after they died too?" cause there will others after them. and even if i was the last human, the experience i have. the RIGHT NOW is the important part. am i doing good with my time? i think i do. so that's good for me.

"What if you are wrong and God exists? How would you be able to handle it or makes sense of a God created universe." i don't know. as far as i see it, god doesn't exist, so i don't feel the urge to consider that. but since i'm doing "good", god will be pleased with me anyway. if god is pissed at me, that i didn't believe in him, that's his fault, cause he did a terrible job of making himself apparent.

[genericname85]

the guardian "unbiased"? dude the guardian is christian. you couldn't find a more biased source. but i'm not gonna poke fun at your scientific illiteracy. not everyone has formal education and i don't blame anyone that doesn't, so maybe stop bringing up topics from science, cause we can't talk about that. what we can talk about is what you or i think. let's leave it at that.

[Cryptic-Game]

Yes but his percentage was unbiased. He said he was 95% sure God exists but calculated 67%. So he just wanted to be humble and leave room for doubt?

Even if it was a Christian source, the data could still be true. Being a Christian source doesn't necessarily mean it is wrong.

[genericname85]

ok. let's get back to the topic.

[Cryptic-Game]

How am I science illiterate?

[genericname85]

well by quoting the guardian instead of science for example xD

[genericname85]

quote the science that provides the information for how those numbers were found out and i will go and read it.

[Cryptic-Game]

Stephen Unwin is a scientist and he did show the scientific probability.

You do realize science is not proof? It deal with best explanations.

[genericname85]

again. i'm asking you for the science. not for people that claim stuff. i happen to be a scientist. and i'd like to read te publcation that is concerned with the claims you're making. i don't care about people and what they say. i don't accept their authority. you may but i don't.

[Cryptic-Game]

Which field of science are you a part of?

[genericname85]

social science.

[Liam_Hayden]

Not at all. Sadistic assume morality. If there is no God and afterlife then all morality is simply opinion and ends when we die.

[Cryptic-Game]

What if there is a God and an afterlife?

Would life be meaningless or less important if we have an afterlife too?

[strateguy632]

no..