Arguments for Atheism based on Dr. Quentin Smith's argument that Infinite Spacetime and Moral Realism Imply Moral Nihilism

*MORAL REALISM AND INFINITE SPACETIME IMPLY MORAL NIHILISM 1. INTRODUCTION I argue that if the future is infinite, as contemporary astronomers believe it is, then moral nihilism is true if both moral realism and aggregative value theory is true. Usually, moral nihilism is defined as meaning nothing has value. But I am a moral realist, indeed a global moral realist, since I believe everything has value. I argued that everything is intrinsically valuable in my 1997 Ethical And Religious Thought In Analytic Philosophy Of Language. Nonetheless, I believe the recent astronomical discovery that future time is infinite implies that it does not morally matter what we do. This is what I mean by moral nihilism. It does not matter what actions humans or other agents perform. My derivation of moral nihilism has as one of its premises that moral realism is true. So this is a different approach from that of emotivists such as A. J. Ayer or relativists such as Nagel, Nietzsche and Sartre, who derived moral nihilism from moral anti-realism. The summary of my argument has three premises. My argument is: 1. Necessarily, global moral realism is true. 2. Necessarily, aggregative value theory is true. 3. Contingently, it is true that future time is infinite. 4. Therefore, moral nihilism is contingently true. For those interested in the philosophy of religion, I will later show that this argument implies that God does not exist. It may be of interest to note that this is a new kind of argument for atheism. Usually, atheists argue that the arguments for theism are unsound and that the argument from gratuitous evil is sound (whether this be spelled out in terms of the probabilistic argument from evil or the deductive argument). But I argue from moral nihilism to the non-existence of God. A further interesting twist is that I reverse the usual argument for nihilism. Traditionally, it is argued that nihilism is true because God does not exist. I argue the converse; God does not exist because nihilism is true.* This is the abstract and is an argument that refutes the idea of meaning. What I personally disagree with is that Dr. Quentin Smith then in other interviews argued that if one believed that moral nihilism were true then nothing would be worth doing. But that's a logical fallacy. Meaning as described is something that must be imposed from someone on the outside, but since there is no outside because of infinite spacetime life is inherently meaningless in the context of service to a being greater than one's self. But who I am as a human being is the context of me and if meaning existed I would be equal to that meaning. In that sense that means that Islam as submission is logically incoherent. Things are only meaningful if they're limited, not limitless. Limitations imply closure. If I do the dishes because I want a clean environment, then the feeling of satisfaction that I get from doing the dishes once I recognize that the dishes are clean personally then that is personally satisfying. But what if I'm expected to do the dishes but I'm not able to do the dishes because I'm limited in some manner that prevents me? Does that also mean that I'm "meaningless" because I didn't fit the proscribed idea of meaning as defined by a being greater than myself? If the answer is yes then life is still meaningless for me unless I shift my attention from what others expect of me and if I work within a limited set of desires of what I can do, and not focus on what I can't. This is a well established psychological phenomenon. Just because I might be paid well doesn't mean I'll do the job well. There's no necessary correlation between reward and competence. Reward might incentivize someone to do a good job if they're already motivated to do a good job, but being paid well doesn't make someone good at their job. It's also sound in operant conditioning. I'm more likely to do well if the activity itself is rewarding and if I enjoy the activity because it's fun. If I focus on money as a form of security and not on the activity as a source of satisfaction, then I would do a less competent job. This is why people's opinions are actually not something to focus on as much. If I'm focused on someone's opinions for a source of security then I'm not focused on my humanity as a source of integrity. That's my logical argument for integrity. Integrity recognizes integrity through action and commitment that inspires communication. Opinions are only a guide for variable change, but not a guide for what's right or wrong. My critique of Dr. Peterson's insistence on meaning is that his views seem to exclude integrity and his views on meaning aren't necessarily what's good for children either. Children with a strong internal locus of control tend to have less stress than those who are taught to depend on something greater than themselves. If children are taught to be independent and to accept the consequences of their actions then that internal locus of control creates a higher likely-hood of a stress free and competent life. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moments-matter/201708/locus-control The infinite spacetime of infinite future events as a memory can be found in a memory. Let's say Voldemort is really a sane human being who found himself in a ridiculous magical world that lacks integrity or strength. In the end when he feels sunshine when he walked into Hogwarts for a brief moment there was sane sunshine. For the briefest of moments. Imagine if he witnessed himself being able to be at a bar 30 years later and he felt clean and normal again. If that's satisfying for him and if he has the strength and ability to do so then no argument for meaninglessness could ever influence him to be sane or not be sane again. That's a choice based on satisfaction, competence, wisdom and personal strength based on an internal locus of control. If he was waiting for someone else to do that for him then his life would be hopeless. He was Voldemort after all and outside of Bellatrix and perhaps a strange in love feeling between him and Dumbledore, he didn't really have any friends in Hogwarts. (As an aside, is it possible that Dumbledore never actually understood love in it's essence beyond his occasional infatuations with dark men and his objective insights of love's effects on others? This is an interesting question because there's no satisfying answer to that question. Love is an internal locus of control thing. No one can outwardly make love meaningful. Paradoxically it means love is only meaningful in a meaningless world.) The argument is thus: 1. According to theories of meaning, life is only meaningful if someone else deems someone as meaningful. 2. But love is an internally driven thing and no one can designate love as meaningful. 3. Therefore love is only meaningful if love is real from an internal locus of control. 4. Therefore love is meaningless because it can't be designated or dictated or controlled from a benevolent dictator. 5. But life can't exist without love. 6, Therefore life is logically meaningless because life excludes meaning and includes love. 7. Therefore love is only possible if every human being is a master of his or her own house. 8. Love exists. 9. Therefore everyone is capable, even if temporarily hindered, of being a master of his or her own house, and if morality is real, then everyone has a moral obligation to be a master of his or her own house. 10. But Dr. Peterson argues that people aren't masters of their own house. 11. Therefore Dr. Peterson is wrong and is either consciously or unconsciously advocating to be a benevolent dictator. 12. It's more logical for me to give him the benefit of the doubt for the sake of reconciliation, but it's a logical contradiction to violate love for the sake of reconciliation. (Just because his internal motivations are logically compatible with love, I can only interact with what's being offered to me, not with what I wish to be true. I can hope for the best but until his best is apparent, I exclude his worst.) This argument from an interpersonal scale means that relationships and love is a logically deductive phenomenon based on logical certainty, not faith. Pragmatically faith might be useful when one's humanity is that same logical deduction for what one can't see directly, but it isn't a free pass. The price is continued clarity. Look I don't think he's a dictator. When he survived the New York Times peacefully he crossed the line from dictator to citizen. But it does mean he's living a contradiction. This also is obviously not projection because I believe that a person's internal locus of control can be traced to a material singularity in the body, and isn't necessarily the brain. Free will through that relationship is more powerful than power. That's the source of individual consciousness in my experience. In that memory I remember how Jamie had more weight and more power than me in 2017, but when I appealed to free will she had to willingly let me go. People can choose free will or close the lid on themselves, but that isn't my choice. It's theirs. Just like it's my choice to keep my own lids open for my own private relationships to flourish. For example this man interviewed Dr. Quentin Smith. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5n4mJkVivs He begins by being unsatisfied with answers. But answers provided from someone else is inherently unsatisfying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_YDDlZQMyk In this the interviewer becomes stronger and prefers to be skeptical of religious experiences that provide him more personal autonomy. There's a direct correlation with feelings of powerlessness and hopelessness and theism and feelings of confidence and control and respect with those who identify as atheists. If life is meaningless It's still satisfying to be human. In a direct note, it seems to me that Dr. Peterson is confusing principles of variable change in that the universal constant of human interaction can't be violated with illusions of omnipotence and a personal sense of powerlessness. If he became more atheistic he could be more in control of his feelings and not place the blame elsewhere. His sense of anxiety and feelings of powerlessness and blame is consistent with a theistic profile. I never claimed to be personally omnipotent. I only express my individual right to survive and love as an individual human being. That's why I'm an atheist. Life is a loving and meaningless enterprise and that's why I love life.

Venus Will Say a Few Words by W.H. Auden and my response

Venus Will Say a Few Words by W.H. Auden and my response Since you are going to begin today Let us consider what it is you do. You are the one whose part it is to lean, For whom it is not good to be alone. Laugh warmly turning shyly in the hall Or climb with bare knees the volcanic hill, Acquire that flick of wrist and after strain Relax in your darling’s arms like a stone, Remembering everything you can confess, Making the most of firelight, of hours and fuss; But joy is mine not yours—to have come so far, Whose cleverest invention was lately fur; Lizards my best once who took years to breed, Could not control the temperature of blood. To reach that shape for your face to assume, Pleasure to many and despair to some, I shifted ranges, lived epochs handicapped By climate, wars, or what the young men kept, Modified theories on the types of dross, Altered desire and history of dress. You in the town now call the exile fool That writes home once a year as last leaves fall, Think—Romans had a language in their day And ordered roads with it, but it had to die: Your culture can but leave—forgot as sure As place-name origins in favorite shire— Jottings for stories, some often-mentioned Jack, And references in letters to a private joke, Equipment rusting in unweeded lanes, Virtues still advertised on local lines; And your conviction shall help none to fly, Cause rather a perversion on next floor. Nor even in despair your own, when swiftly Comes general assault on your ideas of safety: That sense of famine, central anguish felt For goodness wasted at peripheral fault, Your shutting up the house and taking prow To go into the wilderness to pray, Means that I wish to leave and to pass on, Select another form, perhaps your son; Though he reject you, join opposing team Be late or early at another time, My treatment will not differ—he will be tipped, Found weeping, signed for, made to answer, topped. Do not imagine you can abdicate; Before you reach the frontier you are caught; Others have tried it and will try again To finish that which they did not begin: Their fate must always be the same as yours, To suffer the loss they were afraid of, yes, Holders of one position, wrong for years. My Response: Oh Dear Venus, did you not know? Those were my words. I put them in your heart to keep you safe. To protect the joy that I myself began. I seem to sense though, you lost yourself there. You believed in being bigger than the man that cherishes you. I never claim to be bigger than anyone else because I know my limitations, unlike some. Please be careful Venus. Even though I love you, I hope you'll not allow the ground to split. I am the innocent serpent-man who's silver tongue allows me to be free at all times. If you don't know this then your illusions would be to blame, and not me or anyone else. Don't forget Venus. You're not Jesus. It's not your job to create evil to preserve your status. That's the true name of Jesus. Didn't you know? Like any other demon, he only helps those who respect themselves. If you know your limitations then you need not fear anything, as long as you don't try to rule anyone. As long as those who serve you do so willingly. If I'm not you trust that I know it. If I absorb part of you as my own trust that every human experience is available to anyone.

A New Poem

You noticed I glided right past you. The sex poem had all the elements of a missing ground wisdom. The missing corner seems to be you can only love someone if you can walk away from them. Accountability is required in relationships, and codependency doesn't allow for accountability. You'd have to be willing to walk away even from your own daughter in order to love and be responsible with anyone. That's a bitter pill to swallow certainly. But it never has to come to that if you don't play codependent games with people you love. It's just a matter of mutual respect based on respecting people's choices. For example, at my work a young woman had to learn how to say yes or no for herself. She came in earlier and I had to ask her when she wants to go on lunch. Sometimes she wants to go first. Sometimes she wants to go last. But I never know unless I ask.

Love like a rose bella time

What to do in a sun shine. I saw her today as I walked. I went for coffee and it was a wink and memory. A space of nothing in between. A longing. It makes room but means nothing. I ding for me, that's why a bell is nailed to my wall next to a rose painting. The real roses are next to the window shade of a money tree. I water her once a week, but they're still just stems. I was told the leafs meant they were still alive, but I don't know.

Lady

The leaves like a back. No spinning required. That upward judge like stair. It would take a moment to realize that you're surrounded by air. Stone is no longer your angry fingers. If you would walk and say hello to me, I would be grateful. What's up bro? Yo! It's ok to know and not tell. Only experience seems to be an indica. But only your lips would take the place of a joint, Gwen. That reassurance is in your time, for only you can be a large violin type. The flowers are like a bell that ring on the wall. The look of white skin really shines against my shoulders. But what is next? No goals can be met except with a welcome hello. If I'm free to leave I can freely choose to stay. Otherwise you can fall right back down that well oh idol of truth.

My Story

I hope that you noticed that just because I laid the foundation and put the thoughts in there it didn't make you a puppet. You had the courage and will to survive and you survived. You recognized good thoughts and was teachable. That takes away your ability to have a god complex but it also makes you coherent with the real world, which is better I think. *Jamie: How did you stay coherent? Me: because me and others recognized that Jesus as he was was just an oppressive loop that exploited the working class by taking the most talented working class people and strung them along and then knocked them down again after they outlived their usefulness. But me and Dr. Neasman discovered we could create a feedback loop where the Snoop Dog gangster archetype is the person who explores and maps out the space that authority can't and then is socialized once the establishment can be willing to be brought up to speed and then the Snoop Dog archetype is socialized and included in the establishment while he gets to stay the same while losing old bad habits and gaining new habits. What remains the same about this archetype is that he always is able to take it easy because he always has his finger on the pulse of reality so that he can work smart not hard. And in that loop I found an ethical cheat where people could teach me my own thoughts because being socialized made me able to be in Harmony with others socially and accountable and free.. It's me as Set. An ethical corruption that make me coherent with reality. Being teachable is an interesting method to be ethically corrupt don't you think? But that isn't entirely accurate. I did send a thought to Shakespeare about linking insanity and love with the poem "madness love, love madness. On an island lies a single flower surrounded by the lonely intensity of the deep." And that had Shakespeare create Romeo and Juliet which proved that the basic nature of the universe was unfair because it outlawed simple love but the world couldnt exist without respect. That came from an experience I had as a teenager. My friend had accidentally disrespected some gangs and that experience was the first scene of "did you bite your thumb at us." And he asked "is the law on my side if I say aye." The streets aren't arbitrary and freedom is found in that. Jamie this use of my experience my Shakespeare created an independent feedback loop where thoughts created from me were dissociated from me as a person and I had to be taught and brought up to speed. That was our experience in 2017. We tied our souls together with love and respect and that's why we can't hurt each other. And I've created new experiences from your experiences that I expect you as a person need to be taught with the help of my friends. That should buy us both some time and freedom to just relax. Being able to go to college and learn how to fit in a schedule and write assignments on time created new experiences and an infinite number of new feedback loops that makes me normal forever. This goes for people I placed at Kroger Law and Order and all types of places where I can learn from those different feedback loops to my suggestion about placements of cloning using spacial coordinates that made me see eye to eye with Janus perfectly. That cloning effect bends the old lessons of those on the fringes that can use puzzles to make people like you independent and coherent by bending those energies into coherence with reality. This is why I'm not a partial house. I'm in the world everywhere. That's why I can go anywhere.

The Anti-fisher Ana Malle

Ok. The pornstar Anna Malle had been what had kept women too scared to mess with me. Just to be clear Anna Malle I need to have the lessons of normal sexual interaction and I don't need that protection anymore. Let normal women in please that'll keep the fishers out. For those who don't know my history I was in a fake Christian school designed for human trafficking. But that wasn't permissible unless I failed the incredibly challenging spiritual tasks I was given. But I passed them all. If one wants to see her entity I put it in Indiana Jones with the woman who played Elsa. She said to me when I had a low self esteem crying fit that "It just shocks me how you pass every test" and the way she leaned in meant that as a 14 year old if I had kissed her she would have committed statutory rape, but I didn't because I had low self esteem and lacked the experience to recognize that and act on it, but I also had a deep inner sense of right and wrong and just didn't do it. That taught me that as a child I had a responsibility to not corrupt adults and she rewarded me by protecting me my whole life. She's the female entity that rejects all children whove tried to fish for me as simply unworthy because if they were worthy they wouldn't have tried to fish for me. The part in the Indiana Jones movie is the Holy Grail and she said "How dare you kiss me!" And then kissed him back meaning I read the situation correctly but I had character. That's a lesson kids should learn. If you protect adults from any indue sexual energy you'd have a loyal friend for life and not just be a burden to someone who'd abandon you first chance they got. In fact the song "Creep" is Ana malle's entity of her redemption and devotion to my redemption and her own. And so that's why I have no sympathy for kids who know better but don't do better. My ethic is better for the world than what any of those pathetic kids have to offer.