The Human Predicament

Refutation of Pro's Fourth Round Argument Objective happiness as I state is an absurdity because happiness As Webster Merriam-Webster defines happiness, it is.. "A state of well-being and contentment, or a pleasurable/satisfying experience"(1) Happiness is by definition a subjective evaluation. It doesn't matter how much someone convinces themselves that a God is what laid down these parameters for "objective" happiness, this does not make it objective. Even if a God were to lay down these parameters, it STILL wouldn't be totally objective. Authority has little to do with objectivity, and something can not be totally objective if it is still using relativistic concepts. Objectively, there are not labels, there are no decals, there are no comparisons. What you are mistaking for total objectivity is as I've said, Objectivity from a Relative Standpoint. Just about anything can be objective from a relative standpoint. Try altering the measuring stick. Is it a yard, or is it 0.9144 meters? Is the music dissonant or does it have complex harmony? You are fast when compared to a turtle, but you are slow when compared to a race car. These are not completely objective measurements, because to make these measurements, we have to compare something to something else. Objectively, something can only be "as is". To make sense of the world, we as human beings are forced to be objective from a relative standpoint. However, these are still human phantoms, they are boxes. They are grids that we overlay on top of our reality. A theist can very well use what they have decided to be "God" as a measuring stick, but it doesn't change the fact that it isn't objective. Under your system, a Theist has no way of knowing that they are happy. They would have to hear "God's" opinion on whether they were happy or not. There is no such thing as objective happiness, and this debate isn't about whether or not there is objective happiness. I find that pushing the debate into that direction is fundamentally dishonest. This debate is about the truth of this statement. "The Human Predicament: Man cannot live consistently and happily as though life were ultimately without meaning, value, or purpose. If we try to live consistently within the atheistic worldview, we shall find ourselves profoundly unhappy. In instead if we manage to live happily, it is only by giving lie to our worldview." I have already stated that I do not believe that life ultimately has meaning, value, or purpose, and that I am happy. I have also made clear how the concepts of objective(ultimate) meaning, value, and purpose are absurd. I have also stated that I am considered an atheist, and that there are many atheists who DO believe in these things. The "human predicament" as you state it, implies that an atheist CAN NOT live as though life has meaning, value, or purpose if they are consistant in their beliefs. This is false. Many Buddhists(an atheistic religion) believe that life has meaning, value, and purpose. Many other atheistic philosophies understand that these concepts are entirely subjective, and they create their own meaning, value, and purpose. Playing the human game is not a sign of inconsistancy either. This debate is not about whether or not there is objective happiness, it is a debate about whether or not someone can be happy without meaning, value, and purpose, and it is about whether or not someone who does not believe in the Theistic conception of God can be happy. I have made my case. Clarifications on the Absurd The claim that "Making the leap of faith necessary to follow a religion" is not an emotionally based "ad-hominem". If you are letting someone else speak for what you believe in matters of personal philosophy, you have commited philosophical suicide. Describing a lack of OBJECTIVE meaning, value, or purpose as acknowledging the "worthlessness" of existence is fundamentally misleading. You don't understand, there is no worth, and there is no worthlessness. There just is. These words are a reflection of a certain mindstate, not of actuality. While there is no objective value, it would be a lie to say that we as subjective creatures in this world do not value things. This is all simply a matter of personal honesty. Once Again, Belief and Objectivity Deluding oneself into believing one has objective relevance to their existence does not magically grant them objective relevance. Objectivity is often times described as "What is true independent of human opinion". Believing in objective happiness does not mean that there is objective happiness.