Skip to main content
Philosophy

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

3
  • i think the motivations for arguing against the existence of God is not "simply rooted in every human's desire for 'freedom'...". there can be many, many other motivations, including a motivation only to seek Truth (whatever the hell that is). My speculation is more that atheists want to feel that in their immediate experience, humanity is highest expression of nature and that they belong to that lofty set. No need to be grateful to someone else of a higher status than sentient and sapient human beings. Commented Apr 16, 2017 at 6:13
  • "If we are products of random processes, then life in itself is worthless and people's lives amount to nothing. This is the chorus of every political dictator." That is so obviously wrong I am only confounded why you bother saying it. The origin of life is also obviously in the domain of science. We can aim to replicate it eventually in simulations, and potentially study other occurrences. A multiverse, or brane cosmologies, have real explanatory power, from outside the conventional universe. Commented Feb 27, 2018 at 10:25
  • "If we are products of random processes, then life in itself is worthless and people's lives amount to nothing." What about mosquito's lives? Are they worth much in either case? Is there any premise that people's lives be worth anything? Commented Sep 9, 2024 at 13:50