TED Conversations

Roy Bourque

Aerospace Education Officer for Cadets, Civil Air Patrol

TEDCRED 30+

This conversation is closed.

how has a belief in an afterlife affected the quality of life on earth?

I see this as multi-faceted. Starting with those who believe;

A-1: Some believe that life hereafter is dependent on how well they have upheld the golden rule.
A-2: Some believe that life hereafter is only determined by adherence to religious ritual and doctrine.
A-3: Some believe that they have a duty to uphold God's law and to defend it with whatever it takes in order to get God's approval.

Now to those who don't believe;

B-1: If this is all you have to give, give it all you have to offer.
B-2: He who dies with the most toys wins. The losers are just a bunch of stupid people anyway.
B-3: If life doesn't go on, why should I live in poverty while others live like kings? Let's take the world by force; Might makes right.

We all know what category Richard Dawkins is in; B-1. He sees religious people as not caring about this life because religion steers them in that direction. He abhors those who would kill in the name of God, and I don't blame him. People in this category see religion as a threat to the preservation of this planet.

What category are drug cartels and human traffickers in? They don't kill you quickly, they suck the life out of you over time. Is A-3 any better or worse than B-3? there are many who choose not to do evil because they believe in divine retribution. Would taking away that belief make them better or worse?

I don't see this question as black and white. I would like to see A-1 and B-1 come together and work to eliminate all the others. Can we do that, and what would it take?

I am open to anyone else's thoughts on the subject.

Share:

Closing Statement from Roy Bourque

I have found in the comments that it can go both ways. Many feel that a belief in an afterlife has caused many to have a contempt for this life. Some feel that they are connected to something greater, but don't see it as God. Some have left the church they were in for something that has more meaning in the present life.

What a person believes is largely dictated by what they were taught unless they choose to seek for themselves. I believe that religion was originally meant as a guide for seeking, but has been monopolized by institutions to promote their beliefs. Many others feel the same way, but differ in how they chose to seek.

Today, science has taken the lead in many person's tools to understand the world. Some have gone beyond their faith but still use the tools of science to augment how they see the world. For them it is not one-sided, but a compromise between the two, gleaning from each other to expose the truth wherever it may exist.

Adriaan presents links on Swedenborg. It offers teachings by one who has lived a spiritual life.

The negatives to the debate are concerning those who would do terrible things to please God because that is what they have been taught. They see an afterlife as a way out of a wicked world. Churches use fear, punishment, and reward to promote a moral code and lock their parishioners into a belief system that is unswerving.

The positives are concerning a connectedness to a greater whole. Some find solace in believing in an afterlife in a world that has left them with little to hope for in their present life.

I see an afterlife as an extension of our present life. Should we return here, why not leave the planet better off. If science can tell us how to do that, then so be it. Should we go somewhere else, why would God choose someone who couldn't take care of the world they were entrusted with? Should we go nowhere, why not learn all we can about the world we live in?

Find the truth however you can, and share it.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 1 2012: "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics." Richard Feynman
    The moniker "god particle" tied to the higgs boson was created by news media, and is frowned upon by scientist involved in the research. Not so amazing.
    "The assumptions and labels we project on others( that I need help understanding anything) is a reflection of one's own shortcomings, hidden by ego." Eckhart Tolle
    • Apr 2 2012: brian !
      Is it what i think it is ? Your response ?
      OK, presumably it is.
      "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
      - I don't understand quantum mechanics.
      Does it mean that i do ?
      Sorry, just kidding, can't resist. It's a classical example of a liar paradox. I love Richard Feynman ! I think he put it this way deliberately to remind about the limitation of logic reasoning or just for fun !
      So, I don't understand quantum mechanics, but its idea that there is no world as ' sitting out there' and subject and object are deeply interlinked fit perfectly and complete the picture of the world as I currently perceive it.

      I know about the role of news media in elevating higgs boson into the status of god particle. But it stays there, not descending into the zoo for reason.It's how Symbol works, God is a Symbol. I don't think it does any harm to the scientific research, though I am not to judge, maybe it does. Is 'ghost' particle any better ? :)

      And as for the last, I can't agree more, ego invents reality, projecting its own image onto others. It's always the case. Does it mean that I need help in understanding of...whatever.? Sure I do ! Otherwise why would I be here? I don't have certainty in anything. ( nor do I seek it though) But how pray tell you are comfortable with " facts are facts" in the context of 'Presence' ? If not that phrasing , the idea of helping you would have never crossed my mind. OK, I leave this conundrum to your own consideration.
      Anyway, thanks for the response !
    • Apr 3 2012: No, Brian it wasn't the media; the term "God particle," originated in the title of a 1994 book by Nobel-winning physicist Leon Lederman.

      Lederman originally wanted to name the tome "The Goddamn Particle" because of how difficult it was to detect, but was persuaded by his publisher, Delta, to shorten it.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.