Why do we do?

[squibbles]

In fact, just why in general...Why does everything happen? Why do people in this age of disbelief, still follow moral values, originally imposed through fear of hell, a fear which is far less prevalent nowadays...

[Tanner]

Because moral behaviour is, in general, just common sense. I have a sense of right and wrong not because I'm afraid of spending an eternity in fire and brimstone but because that's the way I was raised and because that's what makes sense to me.

[EdoI]

I agree with Tanner, but also we have our laws that prevent criminals.

[bobaganuesh_2]

you mean attempt to prevent criminal behaviour right? Well that's why criminals are 'criminals' and why wars occur, cuz people disagree with each other cuz they have different moral values. So if there's this man who has built a homeless shelter from the ground with all the plumbing, wiring, heating, etc. Let's say he goes broke and becomes homeless himself because he spent all of his money and savings on helping homeless people, he would think that society owes him something. So he steals some cheese from a grocery store and gets arrested, because stealing is against the law, no matter how saintly his intentions were. (stealing is stealing) Isn't arresting him also wrong? Just because the man's needs to nourish himself because his morals told to help the homeless, he should get arrested? Part of the reason we're having this war against Iraq/Afghanistan is because people over here don't like the values of people over there.

[otters~1]

Why do people in this age of disbelief, still follow moral values, originally imposed through fear of hell, a fear which is far less prevalent nowadays...

Many don't. And I disagree that a "fear of hell" is far less prevalent. Perhaps in the West, but not as much elsewhere.

[squibbles]

I also didn't exclusively mean keep moral values, I just used that as an example...

What I mean, is why do we do anything? Why do we strive to acheive, when ultimately, it means nothing.

[Fraxtil]

What I mean, is why do we do anything? Why do we strive to acheive, when ultimately, it means nothing.

The human mind, when faced with such a daunting philosophical question, will try to simply push it under the rug and forget about it. It's like trying to imagine not existing.

[Donfuy]

I also didn't exclusively mean keep moral values, I just used that as an example...

What I mean, is why do we do anything? Why do we strive to acheive, when ultimately, it means nothing.

It's really best to not think about it.

"I'll die someday, what will I do with my life? Oh god, days are passing so fast! I need to do more stuff! What the hell, what's with the stuff? Why am I doing this? Fuck, I NEED TO STOP THINKING"

[SlappyMcGee]

I know I do shit to avoid pain, whether it is physical or psychological. And happiness is an extra bonus.

[Drathmoore]

I also didn't exclusively mean keep moral values, I just used that as an example...

What I mean, is why do we do anything? Why do we strive to acheive, when ultimately, it means nothing.

I personally think it's more based upon the fact that most people believe there is a purpose to life, whether that be Explorative, Spiritual, or whatever. The very fact that the human mind cannot comprehend the thought of nothingness always leads us to something - you cannot actually think of nothing. If you think of a blank space, you're still thinking about that.

The thought of there being no purpose to life is also increadibly depressing; what's the point of us being here if all we're here to do is overpopulate and completely screw-up the planet? And this is where I believe Religion steps in; to give people hope and a belief in a purpose. Whether it be Christianity, Islam, Judaism, they all speak about how life should be lived, and the consequences of your actions. It therefore shows your purpose in life; to follow the guidelines to gain entry to a realm beyond life. Many believe that life is just preperation for the great beyond.

My opinion on this, however is slightly different. Being Agnostic, I don't know why we're here. Then again, nobody can give a definate reason that everybody will agree on. The best I could say is 42, but then again I'm not somebody who also carries a towel everywhere.

As I said, it's almost impossible to answer this question. Perhaps it is just cosmical irony; our purpose in life is to find our purpose in life. Then again, when that happens, what next? Some questions are best left unanwsered.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

The thought of there being no purpose to life is also increadibly depressing; what's the point of us being here if all we're here to do is overpopulate and completely screw-up the planet?

I'm gonna have to interject right there.
I've said this a thousand times before, and I'll say it again: saying that thinking a purposeless life is depressing is jumping to conclusions. I'd expect a nihilist to be depressed only if he got to the notion that his life means nothing and then stopped right there and refused to consider the consequences after that point.
I also firmly believe that life has zero purpose whatsoever, and I find that that's very empowering to me. It's the same sort of feeling you get when you're playing a game you've beaten many times before and are just dicking around -- you don't feel bad that you're not making any sort of existential progress (which in terms of the game would be getting closer to beating it); you're playing the game to play and have fun, not to beat it. To me, life is like one crazy-ass game that doesn't have any victory conditions, and no consequences one way or the other regardless of how I live my life.

But to go from there to say that I might as well run around raping and murdering is also a leap, and is another place I'd expect someone to get stuck if they flat-out refused to consider the issue any further. I feel most people think "life has no meaning" -> "my actions have no consequences" -> "I'm free to act in any way I please" -> [FULL COGNITIVE STOP]. They don't go from there to "well, what does this mean about how I should behave?"
And the answer to that is quite simple: mentally healthy people find it natural to derive happiness from people around them who are also happy. What is it with religious freaks pouncing on murder and rape when they think of things that would make them happy? I'm not going to murder or rape anyone because those things do exactly the opposite! I derive a net negative pleasure from doing them, so obviously I'm not going to. And if fear of retribution is the only thing keeping you from rape and murder, then you're the immoral one. No, because I'm a mentally healthy person, I find it natural to get joy out of making other people happy, because that in turn makes me happy. And it's no coincidence that making other people happy ties very closely to a conventional form of morality you see normal people follow.
Think about it -- you've just realized there's no God and that your life means nothing in the bigger, more impressive scheme of things. Then your friend calls you up and asks if you want to go get a sandwich. What are you more likely to do, go out and get a sandwich with him or slowly torture him to death? Consider what changed: you no longer think that God is watching. So what you have to consider is, are you being a good person only because you thought God was watching, or because you are a good person and legitimately want to make friends and have a good time?

And this is where I believe Religion steps in; to give people hope and a belief in a purpose. Whether it be Christianity, Islam, Judaism, they all speak about how life should be lived, and the consequences of your actions. It therefore shows your purpose in life; to follow the guidelines to gain entry to a realm beyond life. Many believe that life is just preperation for the great beyond.

But they're pretty inconsistent in that, too. Some people think they're being divine instructions but think it's okay to ignore them most of the time, some people take God's judgment into their own hands and in this life and then go off and kill unbelievers, most buy into the Telephone Game result of religion wherein the God they're told about isn't anything like the one in their holy book because no one's sat down to read the damned thing for millennia... In my experience, something as silly and inconsistent as religion tends to appeal to silly and inconsistent people.

nobody can give a definate reason that everybody will agree on.

To me, this isn't a problem with there not being an answer, but with the silliness of people.

As I said, it's almost impossible to answer this question.

Well, er... no, you didn't say that. Otherwise, I would've been up in arms about it earlier.
I understand that it usually reflects well on people to show this sort of thoughtless humility, but the phrase "there is no right answer" is so abused that it's starting to make me nauseous every time I hear it. Yes, it's true that many questions don't have an answer (e.g. subjective questions: "is this awesome," "does this taste good," "is this important?"), but too many people see a situation with two clear sides and interpose themselves in the middleground so that it looks like they're the wise, impartial mediators, completely without any thought about whether the situation actually could have a right answer or not. Then observers will recognize that person as the "good guy" and reason that he must obviously be correct. This makes me want to punch something small and fluffy.
If you honestly think it's impossible to answer the question, say why this is so. Show how the resolution depends on us having more knowledge than we could, or how the clues we'd need can't be obtained or don't exist, or how the existence of an answer is a contradiction. But don't throw this "idk lol" bullshit our way, because while the sheeple might praise you for it, anyone with a thought in his head is going to call you out. Especially on this forum.

Here's a good example:
Assuming there is a Hell and that God is benevolent, is Hitler in Hell?
The answer to this question is Yes. Yes, Hitler is in Hell. If you saw me and a member of the Aryan Brotherhood arguing over this, and you stepped in with "well it's a tricky question, because while Hitler did do some bad things in his life, but he did inspire a lot of people" (and then gave the audience a bow), I'm going to tell you off as well, because fuck you, the answer is Yes. It's a very definite Yes.

On that note, I find that this is especially common in debates over subjects like the one brought up in this thread. A question that has existential implications isn't necessarily hard to find an answer to. This question is a prime example: it has an answer, because it's pretty objective question, and provided you know what a "purpose" is, you can determine whether what you know about the circumstances of our origin will lead you to some answer.
To me, this is pretty clear-cut: it's obvious to me that we were not created, but that we are incidental. Incidental things do not have intelligent intent behind them. Purpose requires intelligent intent. Therefore, no, we do not have a purpose. Easy as pie.

Some questions are best left unanwsered.

I completely disagree. It makes sense to me that knowledge is always better than ignorance, because at the very least, knowledge of something terrible also enables you to circumvent that terrible thing.
But if anyone has any counter-examples, do throw them at me. This isn't an issue I've spent a lot of time pondering.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Does anyone have anything to say about my answer to the OP? Nobody? :(

Other than "I completely agree?"

[blue_tetris]

too many people see a situation with two clear sides and interpose themselves in the middleground so that it looks like they're the wise, impartial mediators, completely without any thought about whether the situation actually could have a right answer or not. Then observers will recognize that person as the "good guy" and reason that he must obviously be correct. This makes me want to punch something small and fluffy.

You have no idea how much that bothers me.

Sometimes, when an issue becomes heated, I step in and take no sides, choosing to manage a social situation which resulted from a minor dispute. This isn't to make me look good; it's how management is conducted. If you think a person who helps mediate is trying to make themselves look good, you're putting some sort of wrath onto them that you created.

Not everyone who enters and participates in an issue with two "sides" needs to take a side and ally themselves with some sort of insular combat league.

[Kablizzy]

Kablizzy say, "I can see both sides of this issue. Everyone's right! No one's wrong. So sayeth the Blizz." Ohm.

[squibbles]

The very fact that the human mind cannot comprehend the thought of nothingness always leads us to something - you cannot actually think of nothing. If you think of a blank space, you're still thinking about that.

I actually disagree...the example you gave is thinking about thinking about nothing. I believe that you can think of nothing...you just can't realise it.

[Rikaninja]

In fact, just why in general...Why does everything happen?

Why you ask? Because otherwise chocolate bars would be harder to get. Except more than just chocolate bars, I mean a LOT of things.

[Clovic]

/sigh

There's an easy solution to this.

[BNW]

This question hasn't stopped generations upon generations of people from advancing and doing things only for the sake of bettering a race that they will never see again. It will never stop people in the future either. This question is like asking why 1 is 1. It just is. There is no answer, but there are ideas that can lead to legitimate beliefs about how this question can be answered(which is sorta contradictory on my part). I completely agree with Suki on his first post. I don't live my life making every decision based upon the fact that it won't matter, I base it upon what is best for me and the people around me. I would much rather go get a sandwich than torture the person I am going to go get it with. This is entirely based upon my innate moral values, not the fact that nothing I do matters.

[otters]

Eh, my answer is predictable.

Where do moral values come from, though?

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Where do moral values come from, though?

"Og no hit Grok if Grok no hit Og."

I actually find it a little scary when people say you can't be moral without God watching over your shoulder. If you don't think people can be moral without God, you're basically telling me that the only reason you don't murder, rape, steal, what have you, is because you think God is breathing down your neck.
And you call us immoral.

[otters]

And you call us immoral.

Damn it, Suki, if you don't stop assigning stereotypes to me while we're debating I'm going to burn something.

In recent times, it's creepy, like you're afraid of the Christian God and try to make other people think the same way (don't deny it, any sane person reading your posts would agree that something is seriously freaking you out). I don't understand what the problem is. Our God is not like that. You keep saying that nobody has fucking bothered to read their Bible in like a thousand years—I have. It looks like you've only read the Old Testament (I don't rule a city that sacrifices children, by the way, unlike some people you could mention) and are taking all your cues from that.

From the above, don't come at me with the "OHOHO INTERPRETING IT YOUR WAY" shit. It was a bit messy until Jesus came down and destroyed the barriers (temple curtain ripping from top to bottom, e.g.) and fulfilled all the OLD laws for humanity. We're allowed, nowadays, to carry a load larger than a fig on the Sabbath. Even the most devout Christian will tell you that.

Anyway, how does acting like what you said, in the loosest sense of the word, make us immoral?

[乳头的早餐谷物]

And you call us immoral.

Anyway, how does acting like what you said, in the loosest sense of the word, make us immoral?

You don't see what would be immoral about only refraining from rape and murder because you think God is breathing down your neck?

[otters]

I have no desire to rape and murder...

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

And you call us immoral.

Damn it, Suki, if you don't stop assigning stereotypes to me while we're debating I'm going to burn something.

In recent times, it's creepy, like you're afraid of the Christian God and try to make other people think the same way (don't deny it, any sane person reading your posts would agree that something is seriously freaking you out). I don't understand what the problem is. Our God is not like that. You keep saying that nobody has fucking bothered to read their Bible in like a thousand years—I have. It looks like you've only read the Old Testament (I don't rule a city that sacrifices children, by the way, unlike some people you could mention) and are taking all your cues from that.

From the above, don't come at me with the "OHOHO INTERPRETING IT YOUR WAY" shit. It was a bit messy until Jesus came down and destroyed the barriers (temple curtain ripping from top to bottom, e.g.) and fulfilled all the OLD laws for humanity. We're allowed, nowadays, to carry a load larger than a fig on the Sabbath. Even the most devout Christian will tell you that.

Anyway, how does acting like what you said, in the loosest sense of the word, make us immoral?

WOW, where did that come from? Wasn't this about morality, or something?
In all honest-to-God truth, I don't actually see what you mean when you say something is freaking me out. The closest thing I can think of, were I to search my deepest feelings on the subject, would be that I'm afraid of being treated unfairly by a religious majority. As for God, Himself, I don't think I'm betraying any part of me when I say that I'm completely indifferent about God, just as I'm completely indifferent about any other thing that I believe couldn't exist.

But when I'm talking about morality, I'm most often (as I am now) talking about how it's completely feasible for a person with no religious influence to be a moral person. The statement of yours that got a response from me was, "Where do moral values come from, though?" I understood that you don't think that humans could possibly be good unless God is a meaningful part of their lives, that humans simply don't have the mechanism, motivation, whatever, to be moral people unless they believe in God. And I pointed out something that I've always found interesting: anyone (not just you) who believes that people cannot be moral without believing in God could apply that statement to himself and conclude that he would not be a moral person if he did not believe in God, and this would mean in turn that the only thing that prevents him from being an immoral person is his belief that God disapproves. When someone's only reason for being a moral person is constant surveillance by an authority figure (as yours is, since you say we don't have any moral values without God), I will most definitely be distrustful of such a person; such a person is depraved at worst and amoral at the absolute best. It makes such a person amoral (that's "lacking any morality," not "evil") at best because he doesn't have any morality of his own without God telling Him to be good and offering him incentive. But I, even though the threat of Hell and God's opinion mean absolutely nothing to me, remain a moral person simply because that's the way I am. This makes me, in my eyes, a more moral person than someone who believes he has no reason to be moral (because he can't have reason to be moral) without God.
As for you personally, I'm not calling you immoral, because I don't think you're immoral. I think what you are is confused, or more bluntly, I think you're deluded (and I'm sure the sentiment is mutual). I think you are a moral person completely aside from what God tells you, and that if He were to remove Himself from your life that the way you treat other people would not make any significant changes.

(Not that you ever read these links, but there is also plenty of injustice, cruelty, and intolerance in the New Testament.)

[Clovic]

Is there a burn emoticon?

Because there needs to be one for that post.