42:48 - 44:02 Dawkins: There's something wonderful about standing up and facing up to a universe where we are increasing our understanding, we throw away our childhood obsessions and imaginary friend that comforts us. When we're children, we feel the need for some kind of parent figure to turn to. I think when we grow up, we need to cast that aside and stand up tall in the universe. It's cold and we're going to die, and we face up to that. I think this is a nobler way of getting through life than to pin your hopes on childhood illusions. (Lennox: But that all rests on the assumption that there's no God and they're childhood delusions. L could inverse that: that's a Freudian explanation, but one's atheism can be exactly that, a flight away from the reality that there is a God.)
Notice that D states life's ultimate purpose from his perspective here: to stand up tall in a cold universe, embrace the fact that you're going to die, and get rid of 'childish' illusions that may suggest otherwise. The meaning of life for D is this: taking pride in how nobler it is to stand tall/defiant/heroic/cold/dying than to live in comfort with illusions. Notice also the irony that 'proud' and 'noble' have no meaning in a naturalistic universe, they are relics from a world in which most people believed in God. On top of it all, whether God actually exists is an undecided structural question that you can't reasonably turn into the premise of a circular argument (a priori, I assume no God, and recycle that assumption as life's a posteriori meaning in which to take pride... for reasons unclear to me). When L assumes an ultimate purpose/meaning for life, he implicitly relies on the Jesus narrative, rather than on the undecided structural question, and that gives him a narrative edge in the debate.
Nincsenek megjegyzések:
Megjegyzés küldése