rationalskepticism.org

Keep It Real wrote:OK; here is a brief summary:

Thank you for doing this. Makes it easier to comment.

Atheism
I define “atheism” as the view that it is highly unlikely that the Abrahamic God exists, and that there is no good reason to believe that any other god exists

I agree with that.
My atheism extends to a disbelief in anything that can't be empirically tested. I would imagine that makes me skeptical of what science hasn't yet been able to explain as well. I'm ok with that. If something new is found, for instance that the stars actually do influence the events of my day, I'll look at the evidence. In the meantime, I include astrology in my atheism.

Afterlife skepticism
Afterlife skepticism is the view that it is highly unlikely that there is an afterlife. I define “afterlife” as consciousness after bodily death, including brain death

Yep, I agree with that. I was dead before I was born, I'll be dead after my life again.

Free will impossibilism
Free will impossibilism is the view that free will is impossible. I define “free will” as that which is sufficient for one to be ultimately responsible for one’s intentional actions performed for a reason.

This topic has been discussed for over 30 years in my family and is a topic of my eldest's academic research, so I'm fairly familiar with his arguments which support the unlikelihood of total control over one's decisions. I can give a link to his Master's thesis.

Moral skepticism
Moral skepticism is the view that it is highly implausible that objective moral facts exist. Therefore, under moral skepticism, it is highly implausible that anything is objectively “good” or “evil” or “right” or “wrong” or “morally obligatory” or “morally impermissible”.

I think that morality is flexible to a degree. Is it moral to kill someone? The simple answer is "no." However, this would then make war immoral. So when is it ok to kill another person and still retain the moral high ground? So no, I don't think there's an "all-purpose" objective morality.

Existential skepticism
Existential skepticism is the view that it is highly implausible that life has inherent meaning, purpose or value.

I agree with this. My "philosophy" is that we are animals, highly skilled ones, but nevertheless, still animals. The sole purpose of our existence is to perpetuate the species. Nothing more. But because we are high-functioning animals, we should make a purpose of our lives. I haven't quite worked out the purpose of my life yet.

Thanatophobic irrationalism
Thanatophobic irrationalism is the view that the fear of death is irrational.

Yep. Once you've had to deal with the deaths of several people you've known and loved, and are dealing with the deaths of your siblings, and close friends, you learn to accept that it's irrational to fear death, why be afraid of the inevitable? It's not a nice idea that the world will go on turning without you, but it will, so don't fear death, embrace life instead.

Negative hedonism
Optimizing one’s state of mind over one’s lifetime is the ultimate goal that best fits all plausible ultimate considerations.

Yep, see what I said above about embracing life.

Achieving and maintaining peace of mind
My philosophical positions promote peace of mind in a variety of ways.

I battle with this one, but then I obsess about losing the people who are closest to me, and a fear harm coming to them. So peace of mind is not something I've been able to achieve.

Beyond peace of mind
Once one has achieved peace of mind, positive emotions may enable one to feel even better.

Possibly. It's hard for someone with my issues to come to this conclusion. At least I don't have depression anymore.

Political hedonism
Negative hedonism implies political hedonism, the view that the only rational stance to take toward political matters is to do whatever optimizes one’s state of mind over one’s lifetime, while remaining mindful that one’s empathy (if one has it) incorporates the welfare of others into one’s own state of mind

Yeah, the stupidity of politicians is one of the things I obsess about. I view politicians as the lowest form of humanity, along with ministers of religion. The one is merely an incarnation of the failed other. Both exploiting the masses for monetary gain, and caring very little for the exploited masses. But this is wandering off-topic. My concern about politicians has a lot to do with that ability to see that the people they exploit are the ones that deserve their deepest concern. I'll never have peace of mind until people are treated absolutely fairly by politicians. As I said, I'm wandering off-topic.

Again. Thanks for posting this.

As Hack says, there are other aspects of the human experience that can be discussed.