Forty Two

“Forty-two,” said Deep Thought, with infinite majesty and calm. The answer to “the Great Question of Life, The Universe, and Everything” – The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

It has been a while since I have been pondering on this question of ultimate purpose of human existence (although you may wonder what is the purpose of knowing such purpose…..good point, I haven’t thought about it, all I know is that someday some chick might find all this rambling of mine very cool :P)

I mean being happy and being good is all cool, but to what end? We want to make a perfect happy world, but what do we ultimately want to do with such a world? What is it that we are actually here for, once we have taken care of all our petty miseries?

The most rational answer seems that there is no such ultimate purpose. The entire human history is but less than a blink of eye on the giant clock of the universe. From a galactic view point, we are insignificantly small creatures on an insignificantly small planet circling an insignificantly small star. In a couple of billion years our sun will turn into a red giant, earth along with all its life forms will be gone much earlier. We could hardly matter in this larger scale of things, whatever we do would hardly bring any major change in this scheme. Like million other life forms, human civilization would most probably wither away, lost in the realms of time.

But isn’t that a mockery of the beauty and complexity of human life. Our consciousness, intelligence, emotions, what worth do they have if they are not for some ultimate superior purpose? For a long time I thought I had a solution to this. So here was the deal, let’s say that there is indeed some purpose of human life. But right now we are not evolved enough to understand and accomplish it. The purpose would become clear once human race has reached a certain level of intellectual and scientific advancement. How long that would take, we do not know, maybe a couple of centuries or maybe a million generations.

If that is indeed the case, then our individual purpose becomes very clear. Our purpose is to ensure comfortable survival and steady advancement of human species. We ought to make our world a better and smarter place so that we can soon be ready for that ultimate task.

But there is one small catch in this whole logic 😦 For the ultimate purpose to be truly ultimate either of these two must hold

a)      The purpose should be unachievable or

b)      Human life should cease to exist immediately after the purpose is achieved

Because if we achieve the purpose and continue to exist then it means that we are here for something else, something greater, if not then our life would again be devoid of purpose, back to square one. And if the human existence ceases after such achievement, for whom was this achievement then?

I guess I have stopped making sense now, I think I really need to get some sleep, do let me know if you have an answer other than 42 🙂

What Keeps Religion Going….

Power don’t come from a badge or a gun. Power comes from lying. Lying big and gettin’ the whole damn world to play along with you. Once you’ve got everybody agreeing with what they know in their hearts ain’t true, you’ve got ‘em by the balls” – Sin City

It sounds incredulous and often downright ridiculous that people can still believe in a thing like religion. I mean come on, how many of us  believe that there is actually a heaven up there, with 70 virgins awaiting our arrival or the fact that the sun, the moon, the wind et all  are sitting up there in golden crowns enjoying the seductive moves of apsaras over a glass of somras. I really wish it were all true (at-least the virgins bit :P) but no, I can’t reconcile ideas like these with my logical understanding of things. I think that is indeed the case with most of the people around me. Deep down, they do know that is but a big farce, but they still can’t bring themselves to disassociate with religion.

To think of it, religion as an institution has survived remarkably well for thousands of years. Even till this day when the whole religious mythology is grossly anachronistic, religion continues to be a dominating force in the lives of billions. I see four key reasons that makes this institution click despite all odds

1. Inherent human vulnerability/need for a father figure: For most of us things would get scary if there weren’t  God and religion. Deep within we are still vulnerable, we need that assurance that some good lord with flowing white beard is watching over us and will ensure our well being. It is tough to let go of that warm mushy blanket.
2. Need for identity: Religion plays a good role in shaping our identity, at-least in a country like India. Religion isn’t just about a set of beliefs, it is a cultural identity, a way of life. It is in our taste buds, in our ears, we feel it, we touch it, we savor it. Be it in Diwali crackers, Christmas pudding, Eid seviyan, the aroma of an incense stick or the enchanting music of a bhajan or mercia. Religion defines our identity, our community, often it defines our interests. No doubt it is so tough to forgo religion, for it would be akin to forgoing one’s own identity.
3. Fear of nihilism: Religion simplifies a lot of things, it gives a lot of order. It gives our lives a purpose (do things as prescribed and go to heaven). God is supposedly the perfect bookkeeper. He is there to reward all good guys and spank the evil ones. Now take it all away and things appear to get a little nihilistic. The definition of good and evil, the purpose of life, everything becomes blurred and hazy in absence of a God. Add to it the fact that with God out of the equation, who will ensure that a balance is maintained, people are given their due. We fear such uncertainty and hence stick to religion.
4. Lack of evangelism:  Unlike the crusaders and the khalifs and missionaries who fought fierce battles and travelled around this world to propagate God’s message, there were no such enthusiasts who would propagate atheism with such zeal (come on, who would take such trouble sans the promise of 70 virgins  😀 ). Even the ones who grew out of their faith didn’t bother much to wake others off their slumber.

Let me know your thoughts on this, and do add more points. And if you are still awake and are as jobless as me then do check out this awesome debate between Sam Harris and Rabbi David Wolpe on God’s existence http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2329504685124044436

Relatively Moral

Is morality absolute or is it relative? This has been a subject of numerous philosophical debates, and we still don’t seem to have an answer. The advocates of moral relativism argue that a human being’s moral fabric is a function of his social environment and upbringing. Hence there are no absolute moral rights or wrongs, everything has to be judged in context of the person and the society, and different societies have different definitions of morality altogether.

The proponents of absolute morality believe there are things that are absolutely wrong or right, these things remain right or wrong irrespective of the context, person or the culture. Enough arguments and counter arguments exist for both sides, but I found one killer logic in support of absolute morality.

It says that if morals were relative then we couldn’t say that “molesting children for fun is an  absolute moral wrong”, as there are no absolute moral wrongs in the first place. Unless you believe in absolute morality such an act might indeed be moral in some universe. Hence there is no other option but to believe in absolute morality.

The logic on the face of it looks irrefutable, but nonetheless let me give it a try. I’ll try to disprove this argument through two different ways. Let me tread the more dangerous path first

Let me stick my neck out and say that we indeed can’t claim that “molesting children for fun is an absolute moral wrong”, and yes such an act could be moral in some distant universe with a totally different set of moral values.

Now don’t I look like a psycho killer who has just feasted on a raw human heart 😛 Well if you think that is the case let me give you another example. Think of a universe where all conscious life is considered equally sacred. In this universe killing an ant is exactly akin to killing a man on all legal and moral parameters. Now one day a fine young gentleman from this planet who was hitchhiking across galaxy loses his guide and accidently lands upon our beautiful earth.  What would this gentleman think when he’ll see me and the million other meat eaters feasting on that juicy chicken burger. Would I appear any different to him than “a psycho killer who has just feasted on a raw human heart”.

“Molesting children for fun” is such a despicable thing for our moral conditioning that we can’t imagine it to be anything but an absolute evil. The proponents of absolute morality simply use our despise to color our judgment and obstruct an objective approach to the issue. But once we take a purely objective view we realize that molesting children might indeed not be immoral for some culture just like eating chicken burger is not immoral for us. So on a purely objective basis we don’t need to accept absolute morality simply because we don’t need to accept that “molesting children for fun is an absolute moral wrong”

Well through my second line of argument I will try to salvage some of my ruined image, by the time I end this argument I hope that atleast some of you won’t see me as “a psycho killer who has just feasted on a raw human heart” 😛 The logic here is pretty simple and non controversial. My argument here is that to believe that “molesting children for fun is an  absolute moral wrong” we don’t have to believe in absolute morality! Now isn’t that a logical fallacy, no it isn’t.

Relative view of morality assumes that the each society develops its own unique moral framework. In fact morality is a rational outcome of society’s struggle to achieve the larger interest of propagation of species.  “Molesting children for fun” will not serve the interest of any society hence it will be wrong in each and every society. Hence it becomes an absolute wrong while morality still remains essentially relative 🙂

Let me know your thoughts on this. And by the way there is a logical proof for God based on the premise that morality is absolute. Do check it out for some guaranteed fun http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/logic.php