Reply #26: Two different questions...

[LeftishBrit]

'meaning of life' and ethics.

As regards the first: life is all we have. Without life - indeed without some form of awareness - we can experience nothing. Therefore life has meaning, and is the source of all meanings that we can take from our life. However, I think you may be using 'meaning' to mean 'purpose'. I am not sure that life as such has a purpose; it is our actions that have a purpose, and we could not pursue these actions or consider their purpose without conscious life.

As regards the second: I do not think that ethics come fundamentally from religion; rather, they come from a combination of evolution and culture, together with our conscious choices. Culture includes religion, but I think that people's religion, whether in individuals or groups, is *used* to reinforce existing ethical codes. Thus, the same religion may be used to oppress women or minority groups or to protect them; to pursue peace or war; to prevent poverty or to reinforce economic inequalities; to protect the Earth or to neglect environmental issues on the grounds that this world is not our final home; etc. So can non-religious ideological codes.

Kind people and co-operative societies will use whatever beliefs they have to promote kindness. Harsh people and societies will use whatever beliefs they have to promote harshness.

It is *not* the case that people are only good because a religious text tells them to be, or because they're afraid of going to hell if they aren't. Nor is religion the 'root of all evil'. Rather, religion reinforces and often exaggerates whatever are the existing tendencies of an individual or group. As do nonreligious ideologies such as patriotism.