Does atheism have anything worth living for?

[Asmodean]

why cant atheists believe in an afterlife?

They can, though that would necessitate the same sort of mental gymnastics that the religious go through to "marry" the afterlife with the real world. That, or believe it "for the feels," and avoid thinking too much about it like the proverbial plague.

no reason for religion to get involved. maybe we are just an early instar of something else

That's the thing though, unless it is purely "for the feels," as I put it above, curiosity would have one dig for the way it functions and then reality would beg to differ in one way or another.

for instance, if you are still you after death, then what is a dementia sufferer, who lost most of "himself" to dying neurons long before whatever degree of organ failure constituted death? If he is just as "mentally reduced" in his newly-dead state, then how was he more than the processes running in his brain and the systems connected to it in life? If he "regains himself" upon death, then why did he degrade mentally from neuron death in the first place?

Conversely, if you are not you after death... Well, there is an argument for reincarnation. Rather than be cremated or buried, get yourself disposed of somewhere you can literally push daisies and you will get recycled back into the biosphere. Become all kinds of bacteria, plant, fungus and animal that eat each other until such a point where perhaps most of what once was you has become a whole bunch of other humans - well, parts of them anyways. If that is the idea, then "life after death" has a completely different meaning, devoid of all rewards, accountabilities, seeing loved ones, thinking thoughts and so forth. It's just... Chemistry.

[billy rubin]

why cant atheists believe in an afterlife?

theres evidence of ghosts, communication with the dead, all that stuff. evidence, but no proof that i know of.

no reason for religion to get involved. maybe we are just an early instar of something else

Are you, do you designate yourself as an atheist Billy?

by my definition, no. i consider atheism, in practice, to be more of a positive assertion of knowledge than a statement of ignorance. i am an agnostic, using the older defintion of huxley

"it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of any proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty"

in practice, the definitions arent really important to me. i just ask people what they personally think and believe, and dont try to classify them.

[Old Seer]

why cant atheists believe in an afterlife?

theres evidence of ghosts, communication with the dead, all that stuff. evidence, but no proof that i know of.

no reason for religion to get involved. maybe we are just an early instar of something else

Yes. But, using info I have is" after life is when all religions and governments are removed", after of which life goes on under a different social form, which would be a forth generation/age. Whether true or false is for the individual to decide.

[billy rubin]

im not defending the idea. im just saying that i try to distinguish things i know from things i dont know.

i suspect a great deal but i know very little.

[Asmodean]

I consider knowledge to be fluid and prone to change. I might know something today which will be some-degree-of-debunked tomorrow. Then, I might know that something.

There is a case to be made that the distinction between that and agnosticism is one without difference, though I think that that is not always the case.

It "all" works in a similar way though - updating mental models of reality. A square may represent a cube well enough in some circumstances. Then the cube may be changing into a pyramid with time, its base square unchanged. In this case, I know that the square is a square, but recognize that there may be more to it. That said, there may also not. Not every square is a base of a pyramid or even a cube.

A bit of an esoteric example, I guess, but such is life. Substitute geometry for pretty much whatever, and it still holds.

[Skeptik]

Nothing wrong with a speck of constructive necromancy.

I must disagree with you that "we" have nothing to die for - we absolutely may have causes to both live, die and kill for, just like everyone else. Not having one's priorities codified by scripture does not remove the priorities themselves.

For example, many a parent would die for their child if the circumstances so dictated - atheist or no. If the upside of [the action that leads to] you no longer existing is greater than the downside... Therein lies the mental calculus.

I think I worded my thought wrong.
There are certainly priorities that many place higher than their own lives, our children being one of those.
I was speaking of having a better life after this one.  We don't look forward to that.

why cant atheists believe in an afterlife?

I suppose they can.  I certainly don't speak for us all.  Even atheists can have outlandish ideas.
I'm sure there's an atheist somewhere who thinks pineapple belongs on a pizza.  SMH

[billy rubin]

yes.

[Asmodean]

I was speaking of having a better life after this one.  We don't look forward to that.

Indeed. I like to think that "this being it" makes this more precious, even when it hurts.

[billy rubin]

why is life precious?

if you lose it, you will experience no loss.

if you can experience no loss, a thing cannot be valuable.

[Asmodean]

A bar of gold in the bank is not valuable because the bank may lose it.

Life is precious because it offers a very limited time to do everything one may consider worth doing to the degree one wants to do it.

There not being a sensation of loss after it ends... I don't see how that's relevant to its value. My old pair of shoes had value, and yet they ended in a dumpster with not a second thought - well, until their use in this example.

[Tank]

why is life precious?

if you lose it, you will experience no loss.

if you can experience no loss, a thing cannot be valuable.

Not to the dead person. But that is not necessarily true of others. We are what we are. Can we put a value on ourselves or is that really the prerogative of others?

[billy rubin]

i think the perception of value in case of loss must always be assigned to others. in asmo's example, a gold bar can feel no loss whether it exists or not. i can feel value in life only while i experience life. the instant my life ends, my investment in its continuity goes to zero value, because i am no longer there and have literally nothing to lose.

having nothing to lose means that what i have is not precious, whatever it is.

practically speaking, it means that while i reflexively seek to preserve my life while i have it, i am not in the least afraid of dying.

i suspect that the people afraid of dying are actually afraid that their life wont end with their death, and that they wont like it.

but then i like pineapple on my pizza.

[The Magic Pudding..]

why is life precious?

if you lose it, you will experience no loss.

if you can experience no loss, a thing cannot be valuable.

Not to the dead person. But that is not necessarily true of others. We are what we are. Can we put a value on ourselves or is that really the prerogative of others?

It's easy for him to say you can't because you aren't but perhaps you can't can't because you aren't. 

[Asmodean]

but then i like pineapple on my pizza.

Heresy!

[billy rubin]

yet even i have limits. i was taken out for artichoke pizza once by an aficionado who assured me it was delightful.

you know those machines that process old automobile tires and turn them into  piles of little rubber chips? imagine a pizza covered in a topping of those.

he loved it. i was wishing i could trade mine for little rubber chips