The Purpose of Life

[bricklayer]

Lets hear it.

[Homini Lupus]

To die. And make a masterpiece of what's there between birth and death.

[Brutananadilewski]

Whatever you decide for yourself.

[Dreamer]

The purpose of all life is to serve as dish for the next one up the food chain(or down, let's not forget those poor micro-organisms).

[SirJac]

To better humanity.

[bricklayer]

Without a defined purpose can happiness exist?

[SirJac]

Happiness is a chemical high, meaningless. Sure it's enjoyable, but it can still be induced through artifical means and isn't much difference from a drug high.

[cal]

Lets hear it.

Creating beautiful myths for future generations to admire and enjoy is one thought.

Without a defined purpose can happiness exist?

Sure. Why not.

[Monte314]

Attempting to derive your own purpose from within yourself is just like trying to suspend a chain from itself.

Purpose must derive from something outside yourself. This external source can't just be other equally purposeless people, either, since we all know that 6 billion times zero is zero.

Unless you can ground your "purpose" in something absolute outside yourself, you have no purpose; you are a temporary blip in a meanilingness, self-generated universe, starting from nothing, ending in nothing, and existing for nothing.

[Sara27]

There is no purpose, so enjoy what you have.

I love to learn, so learning is my life's goal.

[bricklayer]

Happiness is a chemical high, meaningless. Sure it's enjoyable, but it can still be induced through artifical means and isn't much difference from a drug high.

I have never seen a larger group of downers. ..... Only joking.

I tend to have a totally different outlook on this, as only something immortal and eternal matters to me. To only create and pass on to another generation seem meaningless if their purpose is to only repeat the cycle until the end of the earth.

[Motor Jax]

to watch this dying existence on a dying planet

or rather, just the fall of humanity



ha ha...


anyways, maybe the purpose of life is just to find your own purpose

[muguly]

1)To leave the world better than it was when you arrived.
2)No:even if it's not fully actualized, most people still strive for a goal of some sorts that equates to a life purpose. The journey towards that goal brings the purpose. The attainment of that goal brings happiness.

[Moriarty]

Unless you can ground your "purpose" in something absolute outside yourself, you have no purpose; you are a temporary blip in a meanilingness, self-generated universe, starting from nothing, ending in nothing, and existing for nothing.

A man said to the universe:
"Sir, I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."

Have you found an "absolute" to which you've grounded yourself? You seem to have ruled out most tangibles already.

Or are you grounded to something absolutely intangible?

[jadefalcon]

Gah, you had to ask the big question!

This is a tough one. I will get to the point- I don't know. I have heard:

+ to be happy and to live life to the fullest
+ to do God's will
+ to make my life what I want it
+ to help others

I have searched for the answer to this question and I don't think there is any one purpose as to why we are here, why we are able to think for ourselves, and why things are the way they are. Sure I am here to be used by God in some way (Christian here), and I definitely want to be happy, and make the life the way I want it to be.

Why does everything exist, and why do I have a conscience? the latter can probably be explained, but I can't explain the first one- no one can. What was before the universe? If matter can't be created or destroyed, then something always had to exist, yes? If not, then our laws of physics may be wrong.

I would ask the big man on that one, maybe the real purpose to life is too complex for me to understand. Black holes are enough for me :p.

Ultimatly, YOU will decide that purpose. Act on it and make it real, for yourself and maybe others.

[azelismia]

I don't think there is one.

[Terian]

To better humanity.

[dnr]

There is no purpose. We are the product of an evolutionary accident that produced self-awareness. We will have a very short evolutionary span because we are also self destructive. 100,000 or so years from now the universe will never know that we even existed.

So it really doesn't matter what you do in this life, however evolution has done to us what we can't do for ourselves, i.e., caused us to do reasonable things to be happy and survive. So even we know that there is no long-term difference between the worst tyrant and the best "saint," we all work to make the world and our families happy, all the while knowing it doesn't mean anything. (And as they said to me 25 years ago in an old EST session "Nothing means anything and it doesn't mean anything that it doesn't mean anything.)

[bricklayer]

There is no purpose. We are the product of an evolutionary accident that produced self-awareness. We will have a very short evolutionary span because we are also self destructive. 100,000 or so years from now the universe will never know that we even existed.

So it really doesn't matter what you do in this life, however evolution has done to us what we can't do for ourselves, i.e., caused us to do reasonable things to be happy and survive. So even we know that there is no long-term difference between the worst tyrant and the best "saint," we all work to make the world and our families happy, all the while knowing it doesn't mean anything. (And as they said to me 25 years ago in an old EST session "Nothing means anything and it doesn't mean anything that it doesn't mean anything.)

With a belief like that do you believe in right and wrong?

[Lagawrd]

Purpose of life? All I have heard here are wrong, none of these are puposes. Bettering humanity is not a purpose, it is something we need to do to be live better now and later. To die? if that was the purpose, then why live in the first place? If you believe in evolution, then there was no purpose was there?

For an objective purpose to exist, there must be something that created life with a purpose. Otherwise you can say anything is a purpose, from typing on this forum and enlightening others to fulfilling a certain dream or just fulfilling duties.

[Brutananadilewski]

Gah, you had to ask the big question!

This is a tough one. I will get to the point- I don't know. I have heard:

+ to be happy and to live life to the fullest
+ to do God's will
+ to make my life what I want it
+ to help others

I have searched for the answer to this question and I don't think there is any one purpose as to why we are here, why we are able to think for ourselves, and why things are the way they are. Sure I am here to be used by God in some way (Christian here), and I definitely want to be happy, and make the life the way I want it to be.

Why does everything exist, and why do I have a conscience? the latter can probably be explained, but I can't explain the first one- no one can. What was before the universe? If matter can't be created or destroyed, then something always had to exist, yes? If not, then our laws of physics may be wrong.

I would ask the big man on that one, maybe the real purpose to life is too complex for me to understand. Black holes are enough for me :p.

Ultimatly, YOU will decide that purpose. Act on it and make it real, for yourself and maybe others.

The question of why does everything exist is flawed. When asking "why" for the existence of "everything," you're looking for an outside reason. The problem with looking for an outside reason is that there is none, since our original question concerns the explanation of "everything." By its very definition, "everything" means that there is nothing else. Thus, there can be no outside reason for the existence of "everything," since the word itself precludes anything exterior, and includes every conceivable instance. Therefore, there can be no "why" for the existence of "everything," and since there is no "why," it all exists for no reason.





Brutananadilewski added to this post, 3 minutes and 25 seconds later...

Purpose of life? All I have heard here are wrong, none of these are puposes. Bettering humanity is not a purpose, it is something we need to do to be live better now and later. To die? if that was the purpose, then why live in the first place? If you believe in evolution, then there was no purpose was there?

For an objective purpose to exist, there must be something that created life with a purpose. Otherwise you can say anything is a purpose, from typing on this forum and enlightening others to fulfilling a certain dream or fulfilling duties.

What's wrong with a pupose unique to an individual?

A subjective purpose in life is a still a purpose, and every bit as meaningful to a person as an "objective" purpose could be.

There doesn't need to be an objective purpose to any of this.





Brutananadilewski added to this post, 13 minutes and 25 seconds later...

With a belief like that do you believe in right and wrong?

I'm not trying to speak for dnr, but I do share his views, and for me, right and wrong are arbitrary constructions. Nothing is truly right or truly wrong, everythign just is. Things only become right or wrong because we attach meaning to things, but who's to say that meaning is warranted, justified, or accurate? We value social stability (ie we attach meanign to forming groups) and acts that violate this stability are considered to be wrong, because they contradict our values. But just because we consider them to be wrong for the purposes of maintaining a harmonious society doesn't mean that they actually are wrong.

You can only have a right or wrong if there's a specific context involving meaning, but without the attachment of meaning to things, right and wrong no longer exist. They're merely our constructions.

[Lagawrd]

What's wrong with a pupose unique to an individual?

A subjective purpose in life is a still a purpose, and every bit as meaningful to a person as an "objective" purpose could be.

There doesn't need to be an objective purpose to any of this.

Nothing wrong with individual purposes, I have many purposes for my own. But could I call them the purpose of life? It is a purpose of my life, but is it of why life came to be? For there to be a main purpose for us to agree on, there has to be an objective purpose, not a subjective one. Everyone here can name what they think their purposes are, that is pretty easy. But the reason why people find it hard to answer that question is because it is not subjective. Like you and Monte314 said, a purpose has to come from something outside of you. Wethere you believe there is something outside of you or not, that is where the answer lies.

[emanon]

My take on the purpose of life - and here's where all the atheists running 'round these parts get to jump on me - is that we are here to learn how to love our Creator through our interactions with the rest of creation.

[Beery Swine]

Bah! There is no purpose other than what we say. For there to be a purpose there must be an outside entity to give an object purpose, to say "I intend this to do that." There must be an intent and an overall goal before there can be purpose.

My purpose is to kick ass and chew bubblegum. And I'm all out of bubblegum.





Beery Swine added to this post, 2 minutes and 41 seconds later...

Attempting to derive your own purpose from within yourself is just like trying to suspend a chain from itself.

Purpose must derive from something outside yourself. This external source can't just be other equally purposeless people, either, since we all know that 6 billion times zero is zero.

Unless you can ground your "purpose" in something absolute outside yourself, you have no purpose; you are a temporary blip in a meanilingness, self-generated universe, starting from nothing, ending in nothing, and existing for nothing.

Whew, except for that last paragraph that was pure non-sequitur, I think.

[Brutananadilewski]

But could I call them the purpose of life? It is a purpose of my life, but is it of why life came to be?

A purpose for life itself? I still fail to see why there needs to be one.

[Lagawrd]

A purpose for life itself? I still fail to see why there needs to be one.

Well, I am not going to get into a debate about this, because I know where this might lead, and frankly there are many threads that discuss what I see might happen. However, I never said there must be a purpose, I was just refuting some points that were made. But IF there was a purpose, it should be objective, which is more important than any subjective one.

[Bobleplask]

Purpose of life? All I have heard here are wrong, none of these are puposes. Bettering humanity is not a purpose, it is something we need to do to be live better now and later. To die? if that was the purpose, then why live in the first place? If you believe in evolution, then there was no purpose was there?

For an objective purpose to exist, there must be something that created life with a purpose. Otherwise you can say anything is a purpose, from typing on this forum and enlightening others to fulfilling a certain dream or just fulfilling duties.

This man speaks wise words.

The way I see it, there is no absolute purpose, but if you're looking for a reason to get up in the morning then it's not hard to find things to do. I would suggest doing something that makes sense to you and just keep on doing it till you die.

[universalis]

I have over the years stripped all appeals of emotion or fantasy (IE to be happy, or to live a good life, or to please a god etc).

The purpose of my life is "to exist".

All decisions should derive from that in a decision tree. IE how do I ensure I keep existing? Hence self preservation and indefinite life extension. Hence I need money, power, influence etc.. and from there on it's easy to see why I do things.

To me this seems the most logical reason for existence. Wonderfully circular as well :). What are your reasons?

[MaleVolentworld]

So let's say that the whole world is Communist and you are nothing but a slave, you would still want to exist?

Or, let's say that you have a terminal illness that gradually gets worse but it takes such a long time to eventually die. You'd be living so many years as a vegetable.

Or, let's say you are the woman boxer in the film Million Dollar Baby, knowing life would not be joyful from then on. Why exist?

[Nikita]

The purpose of my life is "to exist".

All decisions should derive from that in a decision tree. IE how do I ensure I keep existing? Hence self preservation and indefinite life extension. Hence I need money, power, influence etc.. and from there on it's easy to see why I do things.

Those things are not necessary for existence. The only thing necessary for existence is to remain alive. The only aspect of this over which you have control is the decision not to kill yourself. Nothing else is necessary for existence.

[universalis]

The only aspect of this over which you have control is the decision not to kill yourself.

Incorrect.

[Nikita]

Incorrect.

In what way? You either exist or you do not. You cannot necessarily control whether anyone else snuffs out your life. The other things - money, power, etc. - are not necessary for existence. If they relate to your purpose, then your purpose "to exist" is mislabeled.

[Phyconaut]

mattosphere

So your primary goal is self preservation good choice and since you want to survive at all costs you see money power etc... as tools to help you survive longer and you view your odds to be best when you have a quantity of those tools.

very Nietzsche of you.

Nikita

one cannot control absolutely weather ones life is ended or not by another but you can do all in ones capacity to ensure that the odds are very slim of your death.

you cannot out run death forever but you can make him work for it.

[Bobert]

Survival of the species.

[Phyconaut]

Survival of the species.

ones own survival ensures that humanity survives.

[MaleVolentworld]

mattosphere

Your avatar is very appropriate. You want to be a robot.

Other ways to exist.

- Commit mass murder and exist in prison. You don't have to provide for yourself.
- Bash your head against walls and exist in a mental hospital until you die.
- Become a monk of any variety and exist by depending on others.

You have no basis to not choose any of these if you only want to exist for no reason at all.

[Tranquillity]

Survival of the species.

Why? Why do you care whether the species survive? Probability is that human species will become extinct some point in the future.

[une fille]

The purpose of my life is "to exist".

It makes decent sense, but you're not taking a holistic approach. Many people go with reductionism and say that the point of life can be scientifically explained. In a few words, we live because we're biologically programmed to do so, we reproduce, and then we die. In a sense, we're living on by passing down our genes, but it's not quite what you're getting at.
The list of things you supplied (money, influence, et cetera) would be needed to survive in modern society, especially if you sought to lengthen your life with the aid of new science. However, as others pointed out, if there is no psychological/spiritual/emotional appeal to life, then you would most likely seek to end it.

My reason(s) are, as of yet, unknown. I'm just hangin' out.

[Ace1337]

How can the purpose of existence be to exist?
That's like saying the purpose of reading books is to read, or the purpose of eating is to eat.

[MaleVolentworld]

He's not asking what is the purpose of life. He is asking what is the purpose of your specific life.

[Tranquillity]

I am coming around to the idea that the purpose of my life is to improve society using whatever talent I have be given.

[kazzamunga]

So let's say that the whole world is Communist and you are nothing but a slave, you would still want to exist?

Or, let's say that you have a terminal illness that gradually gets worse but it takes such a long time to eventually die. You'd be living so many years as a vegetable.

Or, let's say you are the woman boxer in the film Million Dollar Baby, knowing life would not be joyful from then on. Why exist?

have you ever read Man's Search for Meaning' by Viktor Frankl? He tries to explain why men who live in concentration camps who don't know if their family are alive or dead etc, still cling onto life. He suggests that it's because they can find a purpose in suffering; as long as they make suffering with dignity their purpose, they will have a meaning to their life. Stripped down to bare bones, as long as they have something to focus on, they can still get up in the morning. In a life that is not so extreme, i.e. everyday life, Frankl suggests that the other 2 types of purpose are to love someone, and to commit your life to a great work. Without one of these three things to create meaning in one's life, we would lack a reason to continue with it.

[Perf]

I don't yet know what the purpose of my life is. I strive toward finding purpose; as a matter of fact, that is one thing that motivates me in life. I don't know if I will ever truly find the purpose(s), nor do I know if I would know that I have found it if I do.

[Zombicide]

I live to prepare myself for the ultimate battle. . .I don't eat or sleep so that isn't working out well but it will and when I'm done seeing every movie I've ever wanted to see, it'll be time for the ultimate battle.

Also, revenge or comupins is a good motive.

[universalis]

mattosphere

Your avatar is very appropriate. You want to be a robot.


I believe we are robots whether we like it or not. That's a whole other discussion though.

You can't act "random" if you try. You always do things because of a complex ruleset your brain is operating on. Even feelings are rational. Most people just don't have the energy other or lack the capacity for analysing the reasons why we do the things we do. There is ALWAYS a reason(s) though.


Other ways to exist.

- Commit mass murder and exist in prison. You don't have to provide for yourself.
- Bash your head against walls and exist in a mental hospital until you die.
- Become a monk of any variety and exist by depending on others.

You have no basis to not choose any of these if you only want to exist for no reason at all.

Incorrect. A healthy diet and optimal nutrition and scientific research into nanotech etc is likely to produce a scenario of increased and prolonged existence. A murderer in prison life is not even in the same ballpark. A dead person does not exist, thus mortality risk (beit increasingly dangerous environment, (prison) or through old age etc, or lack of eating optimally etc.) is a crucial factor.





mattosphere added to this post, 8 minutes and 9 seconds later...

It makes decent sense, but you're not taking a holistic approach. Many people go with reductionism and say that the point of life can be scientifically explained. In a few words, we live because we're biologically programmed to do so, we reproduce, and then we die. In a sense, we're living on by passing down our genes, but it's not quite what you're getting at.

Correct you have described the point of "life". But *my* specific life is to exist. I do not care for passing on genes or humanity.


The list of things you supplied (money, influence, et cetera) would be needed to survive in modern society, especially if you sought to lengthen your life with the aid of new science. However, as others pointed out, if there is no psychological/spiritual/emotional appeal to life, then you would most likely seek to end it.


But there is an emotional appeal. (no need for spiritual). Self preservation is instinctual and drummed into our genes from evolution. Secondly I am addicted to living and the experience of learning etc. I don't see this though as a purpose for life, but more as lubrication, ie so I can get on with the business of existing while I'm bound into this body.





mattosphere added to this post, 1 minutes and 18 seconds later...

I am coming around to the idea that the purpose of my life is to improve society using whatever talent I have be given.

I was at that stage once. Question deeper. Why is improving society a good thing? Keep tracing back using "why".





mattosphere added to this post, 3 minutes and 44 seconds later...

How can the purpose of existence be to exist?
That's like saying the purpose of reading books is to read, or the purpose of eating is to eat.

Glad you picked up on that. It's a good point and let me elaborate. The purpose of eating is to eat (this is a given), however there is a greater reason, outside the context of eating, and that is so we don't starve, and not starving is desired because starvation threatens existence. Hence existence is the root cause.

It may seem silly and pedantic at first, but its rather obvious when you think about it and can actually help you live your life amazingly coherently and more purposefully.

However outside of existence there is nothing "deeper", nothing beyond the looking glass. There are no mystical reasons, however comforting the notion may be to some, for living.

[Bobert]

ones own survival ensures that humanity survives.

Untrue. People cannot self-reproduce.

Why? Why do you care whether the species survive? Probability is that human species will become extinct some point in the future.

Care in your context suggest implies behavioral choice. It is instinct to survive.
I never said that I did care. But I do care about the short term. Relatively speaking.





Bobert added to this post, 3 minutes and 2 seconds later...

I do not care for passing on genes or humanity.

You're still young.

[phantasma]

Yes, part of our purpose is to exist, but the world will continue without you if you die. Why and how do YOU need to exist?

[universalis]

Yes, part of our purpose is to exist, but the world will continue without you if you die. Why and how do YOU need to exist?

The continuation of the world is of no consequence to me if I'm dead. I care nothing for what happens after I die. Nor should I spend any precious time thinking about it or wasting time on actions to prepare for scenarios post-death.

As for your second question Why do I need to exist, well simply put its the root node in a graph. View it as a decision tree, everything traces back to the top node, which is "to exist" all reasons and actions flow from there. To ask about why I need to exist is not relevant because there is no reason other than for its own sake. (read my eating analogy above in my reply to Ace1337

[void]

Hence I need money, power, influence etc.. and from there on it's easy to see why I do things.

You don't need any of those things to exist. All you need is a continuous supply of food & water, shelter from nature's bouts of anger, a place to clean your body and weapons to defend yourself against predators. The first of these requires the ability to hunt and cook, and to recognize which vegetation is edible.

Unless of course you prefer living within a society. In which case all you need is money.


Other than that, your reasons for living are essentially mine. I generally tack on a couple of things like pleasure-seeking and attempting to gain as complete an understanding of the universe as possible.

[universalis]

You're still young.

I agree that age often brings wisdom, but that sir is a weak cop-out. I am 29 years of age and yes when I'm 40 I may feel increased biological pressure to reproduce and be feeling that "mid life crisis".

Regardless of the those feelings, I have good EQ and am confident I will overcome this desire if it does not fit into my long term plans and goal. Hence if its not good for my existence, I won't do it and I know I certainly won't ever base my reason for living around repoducing and seeing "joy" in families etc. I derive much pleasure and happiness from my internal models and learning and cannot forsee a future trajectory where this is will change.

[Bobert]

I feel like this thread is somebody's psych homework assignment.

[phantasma]

The continuation of the world is of no consequence to me if I'm dead. I care nothing for what happens after I die. Nor should I spend any precious time thinking about it or wasting time on actions to prepare for scenarios post-death.

As for your second question Why do I need to exist, well simply put its the root node in a graph. View it as a decision tree, everything traces back to the top node, which is "to exist" all reasons and actions flow from there. To ask about why I need to exist is not relevant because there is no reason other than for its own sake. (read my eating analogy above in my reply to Ace1337

I see why you like your circular logic, but it will only get you so far. All you're really doing is justifying your existence, not explaining the reason for it. It's no different than saying "because I said so". And I didn't ever ask about life after death, so I don't get why you're bringing it up. I wanted to ask "how" because living for the sake of living is useless in some situations, like jail, or some other solitary existence. Yet people continue living in jail and in solitude. What is their purpose for living? If people can be made useless, there has to be more of a purpose for living. Would living for the sake of living imply some sort of contribution, great or small, to humanity? Or is that unneccessary?

Additionally, there are many people who are willing to die for others. If the purpose of life is supposedly to exist, are they defying all logic, or are they contributing to life?

[Bobert]

I never wanted to have kids. But now I have them. I've met people that say they never want kids, and so they haven't.
I weather 'forecaster' can't predict the weather 12 hours ahead. Things happen. And sometimes they don't.

[universalis]

You don't need any of those things to exist..

I have a bad habit of not being explicit and filling in the details in my reasoning.

They are needed because old age is a threat to existence. Life extension I forsee as being a luxury in the future and those with money, power influence etc will be first in line. Resources will become more scarce as well. You don't want to be one without means to control your destiny.

I already assumed the basic things were taken care of (shelter, food etc).

[Bobert]

You don't want to be one without means to control your destiny.

Wow. Maybe we'll meet again in another thread.

[Tranquillity]

I was at that stage once. Question deeper. Why is improving society a good thing? Keep tracing back using "why".

Actually, I built my purpose ground up so there is no need to trace back.

Here is my logic and correct me if I am wrong.

1. I believe in free will.
All the scientific evidence shows that we are robots as everything comes from either our genes or from our environment. Everything is fated, free will is an illusion, our life is meaningless, we are meaningless.

But there is this possibility that that we do have free will and that we can shape our destiny. I much rather believe in that idea than to believe I am a robot no matter how unlikely.

Now, if there is this free will or soul, then it is outside the scope of causality and it is permanent and cannot be changed. Therefore, the soul is immortal.

2. I believe in reincarnation.
If you believe in free will, then you would believe your soul cannot die and so reincarnation is not hard to get. I believe in reincarnation not because there is a proof but because it is the best version of an afterlife to believe in.

We need to believe in an afterlife because it helps with our survivability. If you do not believe in an afterlife, the logical conclusion you rightly get is 'I do not care for passing on genes or humanity'. You would tend less to reproduce and people who have your beliefs will naturally be phased out. Survival of the fittest. Your belief maybe be logical but it is not fit. Society with a belief in the afterlife and care about what happens after they die will fitter and those with your beliefs will naturally die out. I don't know but I do want to have kids because it gives me the idea that I live on. I guess it is a feeling of wanting to reach immortality.

Hence, why the purpose of living is to believe in improving society for two reasons. My belief in reincarnation means that my life now would give me a purpose to shape society so that it will be a better place for when I come back. :) And those with my beliefs would tend to help the survivability of my children/genes.

My set of beliefs comes from a need to want to live and to exist.... forever. If the destination was death and that is it, then I cannot see how you can come to any value on whether to exist or not since everything is essentially meaningless.

Actually, scrap all that. My belief is because it was already predetermined. Free will is an illusion. I had no choice to believe what I do because I am a robot. :)

[Reganon]

ones own survival ensures that humanity survives.

Not if you're the last person on Earth.

Personally, I believe I exist to serve others.

I don't mean to sound like some self righteous idiot, but I don't think life would be worth living if other people weren't around.

[universalis]

Wow. Maybe we'll meet again in another thread.

Hopefully not. I didn't think it was possible to add less value to a discussion, though I gotta say, you have excelled. :)





mattosphere added to this post, 35 minutes and 30 seconds later...

If people can be made useless, there has to be more of a purpose for living.

Your whole post is an appeal to "ought to". You are assuming their is a bigger reason for existence. There doesn't have to be a purpose outside of itself. This I believe is the problem you are having with it.

[Ace1337]

If you believe in evolution than you should believe that humanity is one. We are all one. Billions of years ago we were probably only one microscopic organism that reproduced by itself.

Just like our organism is made of billions of parts, the human species is built of billions of parts. Just like our cells reproduce and die all the time, humans reproduce and die. But the organism doesn't die, humanity lives on. Embrace your human brothers and sisters, love them because they are you and you are them. Don't be a parasite in this huge organism. This is a reason why many people find meaning and purpose in goodness, love, knowledge.. Because all those things benefit this organism called humanity and help it live on.

The thought that the purpose of life is only to extend your existence as much as possible is a little selfish and narrow minded IMO. You are not the only one in the world and without other people there wouldn't be you.

[universalis]

If you believe in evolution than you should believe that humanity is one. We are all one. Billions of years ago we were probably only one microscopic organism that reproduced by itself.


FWIW Ace1337 is talking about Superorganisms (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) (link if you interested).

That said, I used to subscribe to that philosophy, It's not a bad one per say but its just not entirely true in my opinion.

My reasoning is thus: When you dead it matters not how you lived your life or not, since you are dead. You won't be able to measure the width and breadth of your kindness or destruction on humanity. It is meaningless to you as a dead person (non existing entity). Therefore there can only be meaning if you are alive, therefore existence on the individual is root purpose.





mattosphere added to this post, 6 minutes and 56 seconds later...

The thought that the purpose of life is only to extend your existence as much as possible is a little selfish and narrow minded IMO. You are not the only one in the world and without other people there wouldn't be you.

Selfishness is good and natural. As for being narrow minded, I disagree entirely, I am an extremely open minded and will entertain any idea no matter how horrific it may seem to an individual or society and weigh it up for its own sake.

As for the concept of a "social debt" to society. I don't owe anybody anything. I wasn't asked to be brought in the world. I disagree with the concept of debt without an agreement upfront. If I ever have children they will not owe anything to me.

I live by the golden rule. "Do unto others"

[Flamethrower]

That's interesting mattosphere. I've been progressively stripping those things you mention (money, power, influence etc...) out of my life in recent years and as opposed to what I thought the effect would be like, it's turned out to be strangely liberating in an unexpected way. This even up to a point includes dumping some of the things that I thought of as part of my identity, like my job or even my name. Somehow by simplifying things and getting rid of some extraneous possessions and silly expectations, you end up left with the things that truely matter and life seems to start taking on a more honest meaning. It seems the less physical possessions you have to worry about in life, the less stress there is attached to, or to be generated from them. The most succinct experience I have had of this is when I travelled around Europe at one point with only one suitcase full of possessions and weirdly it made me feel more like myself than all the stuff left waiting at home. Lately I have even been feeling like moving completely to another country so maybe I have some hankering to figure out who the real me is or some crap like that!

I wouldn't say this is stripping things down to pure "existence" though so I don't feel more that the purpose of life is merely "to exist". Technically speaking I think that is true though. But maybe I am extracting more meaning from this new found "freedom" so that my formula is becoming "meaning" => money => influence...." (However further down I explain my stance on "meaning")

The purpose of my life then is um????................. I quite like your purpose. Even if someone calls you a robot, if that is important to you then that is the most important thing. Actually I would say that is what my purpose is - deciding what is important for me and doing it. I think that is what everyone's is.

I am also attracted to the idea that the universe simply exists to exist, and to evolve and transform continually for it's own self-referential reason and that we are no different since we are a part of that transformation. We exist temporarily but have a continuing effect on that evolution by default of simply being part of things. And it doesn't matter what our actual contribution is to the universe, but it shapes it regardless of whether it is deliberate or not. Also if the universe requires no reason for it's existance then it might transpire that the meaning we attach to it is evolutionary and transforming as well. It arises out of us rather that being present at the start as a sort of given. I find that calmly comforting in the absence of believing in some higher power.

I believe we are robots whether we like it or not.

I believe this too. I don't think this has to be a bad thing. If we are indeed robots what would it matter since we don't feel like we are. I quite like the sense of order that comes with this idea though. I also don't think we have free will as such and in a way I don't mind because imagine the opposite - we have complete free will... well, if everything is absolutely, completely open how the hell can you ever know where to start to do anything if there is no prerequisite?

I was at that stage once. Question deeper. Why is improving society a good thing? Keep tracing back using "why".

Hmmm, that could be an interesting exercise. I might do that.

(His original point). It may seem silly and pedantic at first, but its rather obvious when you think about it and can actually help you live your life amazingly coherently and more purposefully.

You might have a point actually, but the initial idea probably takes getting your head around. But it does have a nice cyclic reasoning and it seems to fit my version of the universe. :)

[Tranquillity]

I believe this too. I don't think this has to be a bad thing. If we are indeed robots what would it matter since we don't feel like we are. I quite like the sense of order that comes with this idea though. I also don't think we have free will as such and in a way I don't mind because imagine the opposite - we have complete free will... well, if everything is absolutely, completely open how the hell can you ever know where to start to do anything if there is no prerequisite?

How do you get a sense of order out of it? I never could get fatalist/nihilist/robots. The problem with that idea is that once you accept it, your life is meaningless. And when you ask them how they live their life, I usually get something like 'you just enjoy living', 'go with the flow' or any other stuff they want to make up. It seems everything is also completely open too because the logic, or lack of, is that because your life is meaningless, you can make up whatever you want your meaning to be.

The two cannot go together. You can't say life is meaningless then say your life means something. If you take that your life is meaningless, what is the next step? You still need to find a meaning but you cannot build meaning on top of no meaning. The only way to find meaning is assume that life is meaningless is wrong and go from there. Or hypothetically, if free will exist and go from there. :)

[void]

The problem with that idea is that once you accept it, your life is meaningless.

Deluding yourself doesn't give your life meaning.

And when you ask them how they live their life, I usually get something like 'you just enjoy living', 'go with the flow' or any other stuff they want to make up.

None of these imply that life has a meaning. As mentioned earlier, preferring life over death is due to a physiological reason.

The two cannot go together. You can't say life is meaningless then say your life means something.

None of the nihilists in this thread are saying that.

You still need to find a meaning but you cannot build meaning on top of no meaning.

Why does one need to find a meaning? Who is looking to build meaning on top of no meaning?

[Phyconaut]

Not if you're the last person on Earth.

Personally, I believe I exist to serve others.

I don't mean to sound like some self righteous idiot, but I don't think life would be worth living if other people weren't around.

devils advocate

when your alive the human race is still around so its still surviving tho it may be the last of the race.

unless we make friends with aliens being the last human would get very boring.

personally ill take freewill and use it to the fullest extent i can.

[Tranquillity]

Deluding yourself doesn't give your life meaning.

So fatalism is a proven fact then? Right. The fact that you are self-aware is an illusion? You don't even believe in your own self-awareness and your own existence? Who is doing the deluding? :P

None of these imply that life has a meaning. As mentioned earlier, preferring life over death is due to a physiological reason.

Sure. Life is meaningless. One thing I don't get is why you guys bother posting telling us the way it is. You know what I believe in is already fated. I cant help what I believe in. I am a robot just like you. Everybody is a robot. It was all fate dude. No point wasting your energy telling us... oh damn, forgot you were programmed to come on the forum to tell us we are all meaningless. :P

None of the nihilists in this thread are saying that.

Well, a lot of nihilists have given me some of the lamest reasoning I have heard. What about the guy who started this thread? All decision node starts from 'to exist'? The first decision is to decide you have a decision node in the beginning. If you decide there is no decision node, how did he magically conjure out a decision node in the first place?

It is the same kind of rubbish I hear all the time. But instead of talking about what other people are not saying, can you tell me how you reach the conclusion everything is fated? Or are you going to tell me it was fate that made you think your decision is correct? :P

Why does one need to find a meaning? Who is looking to build meaning on top of no meaning?

You are right. There is no need to find meaning. A lot of people are happy living their lives with no meaning. But there are fatalist who look to build meaning on top of no meaning. Otherwise why bother posting at all on this topic when everything is already set in stone?

[void]

So fatalism is a proven fact then? Right. The fact that you are self-aware is an illusion? You don't even believe in your own self-awareness and your own existence? Who is doing the deluding? :P

Holy Buddha on a Beemer Bike - where to begin. Firstly I don't know why you have assumed that I am a fatalist (I am not). It takes quite a leap of logic to equate nihilism (the position that life is meaningless) with fatalism. Secondly, you have yet to show that there exists an objective meaning to life. Assuming that a meaning exists without conclusive proof is "delusion". Thirdly, what exactly do self-awareness and belief in one's existence have to do with meaning? It seems to me that you're trying to evade the original topic.

Sure. Life is meaningless. One thing I don't get is why you guys bother posting telling us the way it is. You know what I believe in is already fated. I cant help what I believe in. I am a robot just like you. Everybody is a robot. It was all fate dude. No point wasting your energy telling us... oh damn, forgot you were programmed to come on the forum to tell us we are all meaningless. :P

See above for your fatalism assumption. As for why I post here, my reasons are quite similar to mattosphere's; rational discourse on topics that generally would not be discussed on other forums. I try to keep an open mind about everything, or else there wouldn't be much point to posting here.

Well, a lot of nihilists have given me some of the lamest reasoning I have heard. What about the guy who started this thread? All decision node starts from 'to exist'? The first decision is to decide you have a decision node in the beginning. If you decide there is no decision node, how did he magically conjure out a decision node in the first place?

It wasn't conjured up by his conscious mind. It was conjured up by his developing cerebellum some time before he was born. It takes a genuine conscious effort to go the other way and prefer death over life, but it can be done. Brainwashing, depression, perception of dishonour, guilt, etc.

It is the same kind of rubbish I hear all the time.

"If a Man will begin with certainties, he will end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts he will end in certainties." - Francis Bacon

Otherwise why bother posting at all on this topic when everything is already set in stone?

Perhaps because fate determines that they must post here? Just throwing it out there.

[Tranquillity]

Holy Buddha on a Beemer Bike - where to begin. Firstly I don't know why you have assumed that I am a fatalist (I am not). It takes quite a leap of logic to equate nihilism (the position that life is meaningless) with fatalism. Secondly, you have yet to show that there exists an objective meaning to life. Assuming that a meaning exists without conclusive proof is "delusion". Thirdly, what exactly do self-awareness and belief in one's existence have to do with meaning? It seems to me that you're trying to evade the original topic.

okay okay, my mistake. What is your beliefs then? As to fatalism and nihilism.. it is the same thing in my book. Both beliefs is the idea we have no decisions. Most fatalist when they dig deep enough would come to nihilism. Some try to escape it with with some kind of fuzzy logic with something to do with future is always going to be unpredictable yet it has already been set in stone. umm.. never got my head around the argument. I am yet to see a convincing argument how fatalist can find meaning.

Delusion is 'to mislead the mind or judgment of; deceive'. The meaning is believing in something that is proven false. Are theories considered delusions because there is no conclusive proof?

As to self awareness and belief in one's existence... most fatalist draw their conclusion that everything is fated because they believe in their senses. They see cause and effect and come to the conclusion that everything must have a cause and effect and so it is either from our genes or from our environment. Since the big bang everything was predetermined following the laws of nature.

Therefore, we are robots and everything is already predetermined.

The thing is that they seemed convinced believing in a probable theory on that they do not exist using their senses, yet do not believe in their own experience, their own senses, that they are alive and can make decisions. Funny that.

Oh I don't usually dodge arguments unless you start to dodge yourself. :)

See above for your fatalism assumption. As for why I post here, my reasons are quite similar to mattosphere's; rational discourse on topics that generally would not be discussed on other forums. I try to keep an open mind about everything, or else there wouldn't be much point to posting here.

Good good. That is what I like to hear as long as you have a open mind. I never could get it when people like to preach. Why bother posting if you are so sure? I made that assumption because you seem to put things as statements and as facts when they are not.

It wasn't conjured up by his conscious mind. It was conjured up by his developing cerebellum some time before he was born. It takes a genuine conscious effort to go the other way and prefer death over life, but it can be done. Brainwashing, depression, perception of dishonour, guilt, etc.

Like I said before, I never can understand the leap from deciding you have no decision to suddenly deciding you have any say in your decision making...


"If a Man will begin with certainties, he will end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts he will end in certainties." - Francis Bacon

Please don't throw quotes at me. It is the INTJs disrespect for authority working here :P. If you have a point, make it yourself giving the explanation. I really want to get fatalist and nihilist believe me but so far I do keep hearing fuzzy logic in defence of their position.

Perhaps because fate determines that they must post here? Just throwing it out there.

lol. yeah, mabye. :P

[Phyconaut]

well the best way i can say what i think is as follows:

one can chose a ready made guide to follow though out the universe.
one can chose to not decide but still a choice is made,
one can chose kindness but that can still kill,
as for myself i will chose the path that is clear i will chose free will

ill chose to live how i want to live holding my head up so others wont bring me down.

they say that selfishness is wrong yet these words i wrote are not for you they are for me.

[void]

What is your beliefs then? As to fatalism and nihilism.. it is the same thing in my book. Both beliefs is the idea we have no decisions. Most fatalist when they dig deep enough would come to nihilism. Some try to escape it with with some kind of fuzzy logic with something to do with future is always going to be unpredictable yet it has already been set in stone.

In this context, nihilism is perhaps the best approximation for my worldview. I most certainly do not believe in fate. Fatalism and nihilism have absolutely nothing to do with each other, and I don't see how the former leads to the latter. I'm not clear on the distinction between fatalism and determinism, but I am willing to go out on a limb and state that fatalism does not imply that we have no decisions. Even if the beginning and end are immutable, as fatalists claim, we might have the free will to choose the path which connects beginning to end. I'll let the resident fatalists correct me if they wish to.

In any case, nihilism simply states that life has no intrinsic meaning, and there is no objective moral system with intrinsic worth. It makes no assertions regarding the ability of sentient beings to decide. It takes fuzzy logic to equate the two, as they are already separate.

Delusion is 'to mislead the mind or judgment of; deceive'. The meaning is believing in something that is proven false. Are theories considered delusions because there is no conclusive proof?

The mind creates meaning for itself, thereby deceiving itself. There is no objective meaning outside the mind, and thus it is fooled by its own fabrications, which it possessively clings to. If you find the term 'delusion' offensive, then I can replace it with "unsupported assumption". I'm reluctant to use the word "theory" as I am a student of the sciences and have seen that word perverted far too much by those pushing certain agendas.

As to self awareness and belief in one's existence... most fatalist draw their conclusion that everything is fated because they believe in their senses. They see cause and effect and come to the conclusion that everything must have a cause and effect and so it is either from our genes or from our environment. Since the big bang everything was predetermined following the laws of nature.

Therefore, we are robots and everything is already predetermined.

I'm no fatalist so I don't have a response to that.

I made that assumption because you seem to put things as statements and as facts when they are not.

You can blame that on my assertive nature.

Please don't throw quotes at me. It is the INTJs disrespect for authority working here :P.

If you interpreted that as an appeal to authority then you missed the point. I noticed that you preemptively dismissed those arguments as "rubbish", which makes me think you guard your existing opinions a little too closely.

[Monte314]

As a mathematician, I've always believed that the purpose of one's life is to serve as the multiplicative identity element for the real numbers.

If you'd asked about the purpose of two's life, or seven's life, well, those are a lot harder to pin down. But for one... man there's no doubt about it.

[cal]

I have over the years stripped all appeals of emotion or fantasy (IE to be happy, or to live a good life, or to please a god etc).

The purpose of my life is "to exist".

I seem to have gone a little further, to the point where I don't think I have any real overall guiding purpose to pursue. I find it kind of freeing. I just do (without hopefully hurting anyone, or hurting them too much if it can't be avoided, by what I do). Indirectly, it seems to have made for a better life. But that's just me.

[LaoTzu]

I can relate to the 'just exist' part of it.
Marcus Aurelius shared that philosophy, you might want to read on it.

I disagree with your needs for existing though. Most are 'wants'.


I personally have a notion of 'repairing' the world. I don't go for it, don't work towards it....and really it's the only thing that makes me feel awkward about myself...that I'm not doing what I was born to do.

[Tranquillity]

In this context, nihilism is perhaps the best approximation for my worldview. I most certainly do not believe in fate. Fatalism and nihilism have absolutely nothing to do with each other, and I don't see how the former leads to the latter. I'm not clear on the distinction between fatalism and determinism, but I am willing to go out on a limb and state that fatalism does not imply that we have no decisions. Even if the beginning and end are immutable, as fatalists claim, we might have the free will to choose the path which connects beginning to end. I'll let the resident fatalists correct me if they wish to.

Fantastic! I don't think I have come across a pure nihilist before. The people that I debate with religion & philosophy tends to be hardcore atheists from the school of Dawkins and Dennett. Apologies for my presumption. Although you are right in saying fatalism does not necessary imply no decisions as in your example, most fatalist, well that I come across, does not have that idea of fatalism.

um... I can't see how people can derive that kind of fatalism to believe in. Most fatalist derive their idea from evolution/biology/science and so believe in being a robot with no free will.

In any case, nihilism simply states that life has no intrinsic meaning, and there is no objective moral system with intrinsic worth. It makes no assertions regarding the ability of sentient beings to decide. It takes fuzzy logic to equate the two, as they are already separate.

I would like to know how you come to that conclusion? And how does your philosophy impact on your life? Do you find no meaning in your daily life?

The mind creates meaning for itself, thereby deceiving itself. There is no objective meaning outside the mind, and thus it is fooled by its own fabrications, which it possessively clings to. If you find the term 'delusion' offensive, then I can replace it with "unsupported assumption". I'm reluctant to use the word "theory" as I am a student of the sciences and have seen that word perverted far too much by those pushing certain agendas.

I did not find delusion offensive but incorrect. I like to be specific with usage. You seem to imply that believing your life has meaning is proven to be false when that is not the case.

If you believe the mind create meaning for itself thereby deceiving itself then does not not imply everything is a delusion then? Including this statement? :P

If you interpreted that as an appeal to authority then you missed the point. I noticed that you preemptively dismissed those arguments as "rubbish", which makes me think you guard your existing opinions a little too closely.

I don't agree with that statement and you do not have an explanation of why you believe in that statement. I tend to find people who throw quotes around tend to want to make a point accepted as fact because someone well known said it. *shrug* And I did miss the point. What was the point?

Those arguments are rubbish because they contradict themselves. It wasn't pre-emptively because when I ask how they resolve no free will with meaning I get no answer. I am not talking about this thread but based on previous debates I have had.

Didn't know there is socially acceptable level of openness or closeness to my opinions. How open do I need to be, to be acceptable for you? :)

[universalis]

I can relate to the 'just exist' part of it.
Marcus Aurelius shared that philosophy, you might want to read on it.

I disagree with your needs for existing though. Most are 'wants'.
.

I agree. However WRT the "wants" those are there to increase my chances of extending my life artificially, which is in the context of the goal "existing" (as long as possible).

So yes wanting them for the sake of having them, and not as a means to an end, would be disagreeable with me.





mattosphere added to this post, 30 minutes and 17 seconds later...

I seem to have gone a little further, to the point where I don't think I have any real overall guiding purpose to pursue. I find it kind of freeing. I just do (without hopefully hurting anyone, or hurting them too much if it can't be avoided, by what I do). Indirectly, it seems to have made for a better life. But that's just me.

How do you define better?

I do not believe any action can be random. Humans do things for a reason, whether you are cognisant of the reasons or not.

[pure potential]

What are your reasons?

My reasons to continue living in this physical realm are to connect and grow. Beyond that, I don't dare to know.

Connecting allows me to be gifted with the relative experience and knowledge which enables me to grow. Thus, I pursue it (through sharing and research).

Mattosphere, your purpose/reason/point of focus for existing seems to only consider what benefits your survival. Do you believe you can exist (alone) without giving anything to be able to receive that opportunity/benefit? If so, how?

[MaleVolentworld]

I exist, therefore I'll think

[cal]

How do you define better?

For starters, less stress.

I do not believe any action can be random. Humans do things for a reason, whether you are cognisant of the reasons or not.

I do things for a reason, but as I said previously in response to the OP, I don't think I have any real overall guiding purpose to pursue. The 2 are somewhat different. At least they seem to be in my life.

[void]

I would like to know how you come to that conclusion? And how does your philosophy impact on your life? Do you find no meaning in your daily life?

I'm not sure which conclusion you are referring to. I have only given the definition of nihilism and it's patently obvious from the definition of fatalism that these two are entirely different creatures.

I find absolutely no overarching meaning in my daily life. I live for pleasure and knowledge. More money = more pleasure and more money = more books = more knowledge, so I strive to accumulate as much money as possible. But I don't fret over it too much. Money is important, but I wouldn't consider myself a failure at life if I didn't make $X in Y days.

This (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) is also related to your questions.

If you believe the mind create meaning for itself thereby deceiving itself then does not not imply everything is a delusion then? Including this statement? :P

Given your username, I thought you would have already agreed with this ;) . It is after all a cornerstone of Buddhist & Taoist philosophy.

Those arguments are rubbish because they contradict themselves. It wasn't pre-emptively because when I ask how they resolve no free will with meaning I get no answer. I am not talking about this thread but based on previous debates I have had.

Your rubbish comment referred to the original poster's assertion that the root node is "to exist". I can assure you that he did not conjure up that node by himself; it imprinted itself in the structure of his cerebrum some time before he was born. At 1 year old, he did not have a choice regarding the matter - he would reflexively act to ensure his survival. Millions of years of evolution have conjured the "to exist" root node.

Didn't know there is socially acceptable level of openness or closeness to my opinions. How open do I need to be, to be acceptable for you? :)

Don't worry about the acceptance of others. Do worry about your own acceptance of the unfamiliar. :)

[Tranquillity]

I'm not sure which conclusion you are referring to. I have only given the definition of nihilism and it's patently obvious from the definition of fatalism that these two are entirely different creatures.

How did you come to the conclusion that life is meaningless? Yep, I understand the definition are entirely different but like I said the people that I come across arrived at fatalism via evolutionary biology and leads to nihilism. That is why I want to know how you got to your conclusion.

I find absolutely no overarching meaning in my daily life. I live for pleasure and knowledge. More money = more pleasure and more money = more books = more knowledge, so I strive to accumulate as much money as possible. But I don't fret over it too much. Money is important, but I wouldn't consider myself a failure at life if I didn't make $X in Y days.

So you are living along the lines of hedonism or whatever takes your fancy?

Given your username, I thought you would have already agreed with this ;) . It is after all a cornerstone of Buddhist & Taoist philosophy.

Well, if everything is a delusion, why just pick on me and say 'deluding yourself doesn't give you meaning to life?' :cry: Tell it straight already and say everything is a delusion instead of just me deluding myself.... but then if everything is a delusion, your statement must also be a delusion... wait I am confusing myself here... Do I listen to your delusion or not?

Actually, don't think it is quite true on Buddhism. I am not totally sure exactly on the ideas behind Buddhism but on the Hinduism which is along similar lines. The world and our reality is an illusion or what is called maya. But there is something which is real behind it. Free will, soul, Atman is the only permanent real thing behind this changing evanescent world of matter.

There is two position to take. One is to believe in the world of matter and that you are an illusion and the other is to believe you are real and the world of matter is an illusion. I chose that latter. So not everything is an illusion.

Also, I don't think it is not so much as a delusion in the way you put it. Although the world of matter is considered an illusion, it is still considered real as like your dream is real. We are living in a dream and this dream is real enough for us while we are dreaming.

Your rubbish comment referred to the original poster's assertion that the root node is "to exist". I can assure you that he did not conjure up that node by himself; it imprinted itself in the structure of his cerebrum some time before he was born. At 1 year old, he did not have a choice regarding the matter - he would reflexively act to ensure his survival. Millions of years of evolution have conjured the "to exist" root node.

Then it is not a decision node. There is no decision to be made as that decision was imprinted million of years ago.

um... not interested in debating other people's ideas as didn't work in other threads. Bring on the nihilism and lets look at that.

Don't worry about the acceptance of others.

Then why did you tell me that I was guarding my opinions too closely? So I'll just ignore it? I need your acceptance damn it! :P

Do worry about your own acceptance of the unfamiliar. :)

Hell, I have been trying to get you to explain how you come to nihilism. I can't accept it just on you saying so. I need some convincing explanations.

[universalis]

That's interesting mattosphere. I've been progressively stripping those things you mention (money, power, influence etc...) out of my life in recent years and as opposed to what I thought the effect would be like, it's turned out to be strangely liberating in an unexpected way. This even up to a point includes dumping some of the things that I thought of as part of my identity, like my job or even my name.

That is interesting, I've also considered abandoning my individualism. I was so fiercely independent and individualistic growing up. I have a collection of ideas, traits, memes etc that all define... *ME* and its easy to get attached to that. I am quite proud of the wide variety of music and culture I am into etc, I'm alway on the leading edge of new things... but really what is the point. I'd like to discuss this idea of ego more.

But I have thought, why is it necessary to be individual? In the future I reckon we going to merge with technology and become a sort of borg race anyway. I'm rather indifferent to the idea, but I think it is highly likely outcome.

I think a lot of INTJ's are unique and amazing beings. But it is ironic that we share so much and our thinking is generally convergent.

I quite like the idea though of a future with operating entities (brains) all connected to a shared goal and a common transactional platform for trading (ideas, resources etc). I just never see this happening with the rest of humanity (SF's etc). Those that cling to tradition and are divorced from reality will be left behind in the wake of technological advance.

[LaoTzu]

I agree. However WRT the "wants" those are there to increase my chances of extending my life artificially, which is in the context of the goal "existing" (as long as possible).

So yes wanting them for the sake of having them, and not as a means to an end, would be disagreeable with me.


Gotcha. Makes sense.

For me, extending this life IS death...of a sort.

As it stands, my goal is to catch a glimpse of the one-ness of infinity... and to explain it in a way that helps other seekers notice it easier.
The ultimate goal being , the realization of all things that all things are one...
A singularity really....

Then this universe can collapse into itself, to be reborn to start all over again...

As insignificant as my role is, it's still integral to the whole.

Yeah....
I'm THAT messed up...

[Tranquillity]

As it stands, my goal is to catch a glimpse of the one-ness of infinity... and to explain it in a way that helps other seekers notice it easier.

The ultimate goal being , the realization of all things that all things are one...
A singularity really....

Then this universe can collapse into itself, to be reborn to start all over again...

As insignificant as my role is, it's still integral to the whole.

Yeah....
I'm THAT messed up...

You can try reaching enlightenment or self-realisation.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Not sure about the universe collapsing in on itself though :P

[childofprodigy]

The purpose of life is the maximization of the self's and/or others' utility as well as the propagation of species

[ClydeB]

The purpose of life is the maximization of the self's and/or others' utility as well as the propagation of species

I don't know about that. I've been trying to find out what my purpose in life is for decades now. No real luck so far. Except by the process of elimination. Utility is one I threw aside years ago. And the whole propagation of the species thing was taken care by my parents having offspring with other people. So my supposed unique genetic legacy has been taken care of by them in the form of brother, sisters, nieces and nephews.

To be quite honest I have often thought that my life is just a blip on the road to maximum entropy.

[AnEskimo]

The purpose of existence... Hmm... Well I would say that there is no true purpose. I do not believe that we have been the first intelligent species in the universe. I also don't believe that Earth has been/will the the only inhabited planet. I believe that Venus and Mars are Earth hundreds of millions of years in the future/past. I believe that life and the development of species are by chance, and the purpose of existing is simply to play our role in the history of the universe. In other words, I sometimes feel like nothing really matters.

[chris]

Is it possible that there is no purpose and that we are because we just are due to circumstances such as evolution? Is there a word for this?

[Deadgod]

Is it possible that there is no purpose and that we are because we just are due to circumstances such as evolution? Is there a word for this?

Precisely what I was thinking. But maybe it's all purposes as well. Maybe humans make their own purposes. The problem with purpose is that it initiates what I believe is some kind of slave/master complex, with the human as the slave and will (purpose) as the master. It's some strange dualism that I doubt has much to do with Nietzsche's concept of Slave/Master morality. But I'd love to entertain that correlation nonetheless.

As a mathematician, I've always believed that the purpose of one's life is to serve as the multiplicative identity element for the real numbers.

If you'd asked about the purpose of two's life, or seven's life, well, those are a lot harder to pin down. But for one... man there's no doubt about it.

I was thinking along similiar lines as well but I also thought of the concept: "What is the purpose of zero's life?".

And if we change the word "purpose" to "product"?

"What is the product of one's life?"

"What is the product of zero's life?"

The sevens and twos are but products of ones, but products of zero are always zero.

All in all, (my rationality still seems rather incomplete) I would say that a cognition of the quantitative is the root purpose for living from which all other purposes arise from. :confused:

Existential mathematics....is that possible? (Monte, help!)

[Tranquillity]

Is it possible that there is no purpose and that we are because we just are due to circumstances such as evolution? Is there a word for this?

Yep, I'll call that fatalism.

I don't know about that. I've been trying to find out what my purpose in life is for decades now. No real luck so far. Except by the process of elimination. Utility is one I threw aside years ago. And the whole propagation of the species thing was taken care by my parents having offspring with other people. So my supposed unique genetic legacy has been taken care of by them in the form of brother, sisters, nieces and nephews.

To be quite honest I have often thought that my life is just a blip on the road to maximum entropy.

I think the way to go about finding the meaning of life is by understanding what you are. If you were a tank, you know you are built for war. If you are a car, you know you are suppose to be a mode of transport.

So ask yourself what you are. What is the real you? It is through this process of self-enquiry you will come to understand the meaning of life.

[void]

Yep, I'll call that fatalism.

You can call it whatever you wish to, but that doesn't change the fact that you'd be wrong. Please stop throwing that word around as an epithet (not just in this thread, but two other threads as well). This (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) is fatalism. Obviously one can have meaning with fatalism, in which case the meaning of one's life is intrinsically connected to one's fate.

The term you're looking for is existential nihilism (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts._nihilism).

I think the way to go about finding the meaning of life is by understanding what you are. If you were a tank, you know you are built for war. If you are a car, you know you are suppose to be a mode of transport.

Yay! Anthropomorphisization of inanimate, non-sentient objects!

So ask yourself what you are. What is the real you? It is through this process of self-enquiry you will come to understand the meaning of life.

I'd venture he has done so already and come to the conclusion that life is meaningless, much like many of us.

[universalis]

I'd venture he has done so already and come to the conclusion that life is meaningless, much like many of us.

Indeed. Life is meaningless, the only purpose is axiomatic. IE to exist.

I agree with fatalism but I'm open to being dissuaded, I notice its not the most popular amongst existentialists. The reason I like it is that I've always held the belief that no-one is to blame for anything.

I don't blame murderers or rapists or anyone for anything. How can you blame molecules? We are the culmination of a long chain reaction of chemical and energy processes with the illusion of a choice. Heck there has even be recent studies that show our brains actually pre-decide our decisions a few seconds in advance.. and then we go and "decide" the exact same decision (I'll dig it up if anyone is interested).

We have just added a whole bunch of properties (meta data) that doesn't really exist, to these molecules. I think this is related to the concept of emergence.

So my reductionism has led me to fatalism. We are giant "weighted rule" processors just like computers, the "humanness" is just a property of complexity and nothing more than that.

The biggest argument I suppose against determinism and hence fatalism is quantum mechanics, but I figure who knows what is around the corner, next they discover quantum is in fact operating according to a deeper set of rules and we back determinism again.

[maxpot46]

I don't blame murderers or rapists or anyone for anything. How can you blame molecules? We are the culmination of a long chain reaction of chemical and energy processes with the illusion of a choice. I take Mises' view on this, which is that free will must be taken as a given as long as determinists are unable to prove their case (i.e. explain clearly the process by which my opinions, thoughts and desires are formed). He admits in Theory and History (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) that "the logical structure of his mind enjoins upon man determinism and the category of causality," and that "any epistemological speculation must lead toward determinism". However, he also notes that "the acceptance of determinism raises some theoretical difficulties that have seemed to be insoluble", namely that it conflicts with our free will, which seems self-evident, and leads logically to fatalism which is "so contrary to human nature that few people were prepared to draw all the conclusions to which it leads and to adjust their conduct accordingly".

He concludes that man has no choice but to use two different methods to explore reality, the determinist method of causality for all non-human phenomena, and the teleological method of praxeology for all human phenomena (including economics). He begins his magnum opus Human Action with an examination of these epistemological issues (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) -- here is a relevant excerpt (bold parts added):

Various doctrines have been advanced to explain the relation between mind and body. They are mere surmises without any reference to observed facts. All that can be said with certainty is that there are relations between mental and physiological processes. With regard to the nature and operation of this connection we know little if anything.

Concrete value judgments and definite human actions are not open to further analysis. We may fairly assume or believe that they are absolutely dependent upon and conditioned by their causes. But as long as we do not know how external facts--physical and physiological--produce in a human mind definite thoughts and volitions resulting in concrete acts, we have to face an insurmountable methodological dualism. In the present state of our knowledge the fundamental statements of positivism, monism and panphysicalism are mere metaphysical postulates devoid of any scientific foundation and both meaningless and useless for scientific research. Reason and experience show us two separate realms: the external world of physical, chemical, and physiological phenomena and the internal world of thought, feeling, valuation, and purposeful action. No bridge connects--as far as we can see today--these two spheres. Identical external events result sometimes in different human responses, and different external events produce sometimes the same human response. We do not know why.

In the face of this state of affairs we cannot help withholding judgment on the essential statements of monism and materialism. We may or may not believe that the natural sciences will succeed one day in explaining the production of definite ideas, judgments of value, and actions in the same way in which they explain the production of a chemical compound as the necessary and unavoidable outcome of a certain combination of elements. In the meantime we are bound to acquiesce in a methodological dualism.

Therefore, since I view free will as a given, I have no problem punishing people for violating the non-aggression principle.

[void]

The biggest argument I suppose against determinism and hence fatalism is quantum mechanics, but I figure who knows what is around the corner, next they discover quantum is in fact operating according to a deeper set of rules and we back determinism again.

Imposing determinism on quantum mechanics leads to what physicists call "hidden variable theories (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)". Bell's theorem (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.'s_theorem) shows that any such hidden variable theory must have particles interacting faster than the speed of light, or else it is an incomplete description of universe at quantum scales. The speed of light as an absolute upper bound on the quickness of particle interactions is currently one of the cornerstones of physics - dispensing with it would require major restructuring of current physical theories. Of course, this doesn't automatically make it true but any "non-local" proposal must have a damn good explanation for uprooting it.

Nonetheless, even quantum randomness doesn't really guarantee free will, for the latter requires some ability for the chooser to control the randomness. I don't know if such ability exists, so I'm generally neutral on the concept of free will.

[WyeMe]

You can call it whatever you wish to, but that doesn't change the fact that you'd be wrong. Please stop throwing that word around as an epithet (not just in this thread, but two other threads as well). This (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) is fatalism. Obviously one can have meaning with fatalism, in which case the meaning of one's life is intrinsically connected to one's fate.

The term you're looking for is existential nihilism (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts._nihilism).



Yay! Anthropomorphisization of inanimate, non-sentient objects!



I'd venture he has done so already and come to the conclusion that life is meaningless, much like many of us.

Indeed. Life is meaningless, the only purpose is axiomatic. IE to exist.

I agree with fatalism but I'm open to being dissuaded, I notice its not the most popular amongst existentialists. The reason I like it is that I've always held the belief that no-one is to blame for anything.

I don't blame murderers or rapists or anyone for anything. How can you blame molecules? We are the culmination of a long chain reaction of chemical and energy processes with the illusion of a choice. Heck there has even be recent studies that show our brains actually pre-decide our decisions a few seconds in advance.. and then we go and "decide" the exact same decision (I'll dig it up if anyone is interested).

We have just added a whole bunch of properties (meta data) that doesn't really exist, to these molecules. I think this is related to the concept of emergence.

So my reductionism has led me to fatalism. We are giant "weighted rule" processors just like computers, the "humanness" is just a property of complexity and nothing more than that.

The biggest argument I suppose against determinism and hence fatalism is quantum mechanics, but I figure who knows what is around the corner, next they discover quantum is in fact operating according to a deeper set of rules and we back determinism again.

Why decide anything? According to String Theory, infinite versions of each of us carry each possibility to it's end. Without knowing which version you are, what's the purpose of deciding at all? Let it ride! ;)

[universalis]

According to String Theory..

hehe, let me stop you right there. ;)

[Flamethrower]

That's interesting mattosphere. I've been progressively stripping those things you mention (money, power, influence etc...) out of my life in recent years and as opposed to what I thought the effect would be like, it's turned out to be strangely liberating in an unexpected way. This even up to a point includes dumping some of the things that I thought of as part of my identity, like my job or even my name. Somehow by simplifying things and getting rid of some extraneous possessions and silly expectations, you end up left with the things that truely matter and life seems to start taking on a more honest meaning.

That is interesting, I've also considered abandoning my individualism. I was so fiercely independent and individualistic growing up. I have a collection of ideas, traits, memes etc that all define... *ME* and its easy to get attached to that. I am quite proud of the wide variety of music and culture I am into etc, I'm alway on the leading edge of new things... but really what is the point. I'd like to discuss this idea of ego more.

But I have thought, why is it necessary to be individual? In the future I reckon we going to merge with technology and become a sort of borg race anyway. I'm rather indifferent to the idea, but I think it is highly likely outcome.

I think a lot of INTJ's are unique and amazing beings. But it is ironic that we share so much and our thinking is generally convergent.

I quite like the idea though of a future with operating entities (brains) all connected to a shared goal and a common transactional platform for trading (ideas, resources etc). I just never see this happening with the rest of humanity (SF's etc). Those that cling to tradition and are divorced from reality will be left behind in the wake of technological advance.

Hmmmm, is that what I am doing? Abandoning my individualism? Haven't really thought about it like that. I sort of feel that some of the elements I am dumping are the ones taken from society that are more functional and means to an end and don't really line up with who I really am. So the parts of my identity that I was throwing away were things that were really petty, persona type elements that were created to fit in with external expectations, not elements of the central "me". The "honest meaning" I am alluding to is something inside that reflects maybe what is left over when all other distracting influences are removed. Though perhaps this cannot be completely individual since I also think all humanity shares a basic commonality.

Interesting to think about going the other way though and merging into everyone or something else and losing any attachment to your own ego. After all, everyone has something in common with all other humans alive. No exceptions. Perhaps it is that feeling of having an individual ego that allows us to operate more effectively as a society. By not all being completely identical perhaps our diversity makes us more effective and strong as a group. But at the same time the common elements bond us together.


Is it possible that there is no purpose and that we are because we just are due to circumstances such as evolution? Is there a word for this?

Ummmm yeah, I think it's called evolution...

...there has even be recent studies that show our brains actually pre-decide our decisions a few seconds in advance.. and then we go and "decide" the exact same decision (I'll dig it up if anyone is interested).

The biggest argument I suppose against determinism and hence fatalism is quantum mechanics, but I figure who knows what is around the corner, next they discover quantum is in fact operating according to a deeper set of rules and we back determinism again.

Yep, I am interested in studies on whether or not we have free will. I have been thinking about this one for quite a while and I find it harder to explain how it would be that we can actually have free will and how we would be enacting that than to think that we don't actually have it and that it's just the complexity of our programming that makes it seem like we do.

I have also wondered about the quantum physics thing but like someone else pointed out randomness is not quite the same thing as controlling randomness.

[universalis]

Yep, I am interested in studies on whether or not we have free will. I have

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

And a journalistic interpretation:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Menosthenes]

Regarding string theory: Ugh.

Anyway, it's probably already established that purpose needs a subject first before anything else, meaning that the purpose you give your life is a subjective thing, right? If I'm assuming this correctly, then the next logical question is why you want your purpose to be "to exist".

[universalis]

I take Mises' view on this....He begins his magnum opus Human Action with an examination of these epistemological issues (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) -- here is a relevant excerpt (bold parts added):


Misese's view on free will is full of crap. His whole argument is one from human ignorance. IE we currently can't see the connection therefore, free will. Spectacular reasoning. ;)

On a tangent:
A mind is simply an emergent property of a configuration of molecules in specific spatial arrangements with regards to each other. Life is no different really from non-life. A bunch of molecules bumping around thinking were special is humorous. I would be deluding myself if I actually thought I had "will". Show me this will. Where is the evidence of it. I can't accept that.

I have no problem punishing people for violating the non-aggression principle.

This non-aggression principle business has been niggling me and I can't say for certain why yet. Please define aggression.

[Neil Nylander]

Presently, I feel my purpose in life is to travel unseen and unknown. While doing so, attempt to inspire and indirectly touch anyone I possibly can with my art, writing, and music.

To make people actually stop their chaotic and overly stimulated lives for a moment and think.

[zibber]

To make people actually stop their chaotic and overly stimulated lives for a moment and think.

Success.





zibber added to this post, 6 minutes and 49 seconds later...

That is interesting, I've also considered abandoning my individualism.

...

I quite like the idea though of a future with operating entities (brains) all connected to a shared goal and a common transactional platform for trading (ideas, resources etc). I just never see this happening with the rest of humanity (SF's etc). Those that cling to tradition and are divorced from reality will be left behind in the wake of technological advance.

First off, living a simpler life may just as well be seen to increase one's individuality.

Secondly, though, the Borg-like thought experiment has always been quite interesting to me. No matter which way I turn it, I always conclude that it would only boil down to continuing technological increase. What else would a superorganism like that desire to achieve?

(A cool comparison that just popped up is that to Dr. Manhattan. He transcends space and time and is the wet dream of any technologist, yet his life seems.. empty, devoid of meaning.)

Oh. Claiming SF types are "divorced from reality" is just a completely crazy thing to say. What happened there? Surely, you meant your reality.

[universalis]

First off, living a simpler life may just as well be seen to increase one's individuality.

Secondly, though, the Borg-like thought experiment has always been quite interesting to me. No matter which way I turn it, I always conclude that it would only boil down to continuing technological increase. What else would a superorganism like that desire to achieve?


Good question. It's goal would to be: "To be the universe."

mattosphere added to this post, 13 minutes and 30 seconds later...


Oh. Claiming SF types are "divorced from reality" is just a completely crazy thing to say. What happened there? Surely, you meant your reality.

Well the reason I claimed that is because in my experience an NT understands the nature of reality (IE how our universe operates, the laws which govern it and the systems within it better).

If one is placed in an environment without knowledge or understanding of that environment, one's future is more precarious compared to a being that has greater capacities in the aforementioned attributes (and all other things being equal) and thus unable to make as good decisions as to affect one survival as one otherwise would.

example: a caveman is teleported onto a busy highway. There exists a high probability of rapid extinction for said being. (lacks the knowledge needed to determine a threat)

With regards to SF's, the world is changing so fast that humans will be enhanced artificially and gradually the lines will get blurred between lifeforms and new intelligences. Those not willing to embrace and understand the nature and speed with which the environment is changing will be left behind.

I speak in general terms. You can have the odd SF that understands this and will adapt. But NT is the platform of the future evolution of our race.

I know its a bit of a tangent but I don't want to go to much more into this. If you want to debate it under a separate topic I will oblige.

[Googamanga]

Assumptions: there is only matter in the universe, there is no god, theory of evolution is true. (some of these things determine each other but it helps to spell it out)

My argument
1) there is no reason for matter to exist
2) we are nothing but matter
3 using 1&2) there is no reason for us to exist
4) I am not different from others in significant ways
5 using 3&4) there is no reason for me to exist

Whatever reasons i have to do something is an emergent property of being human. so again there is no fundamental reason for me to do anything.

how is being human different from matter?
create pleasure/discomfort by thought. I think it is fair to say that we try to gain pleasure and avoid discomfort, using anyway we can.

if there are no hurdles that would cause greater discomfort than pleasure from water we will drink water.
if there are no hurdles that would cause greater discomfort than pleasure from a non-materialistic lifestyle then we will live a non-materialistic lifestyle
just use decision/utility trees....

So i guess an individual's reason for living is his or her definition of self interest. which consciously or unconsciously defines scope and weights/priorities for each action.

Personal definition is pulled from societal views. (parents/ teachers/ friends/ "logic"/ forums/ ....)

[mnmeq]

despite a closet romantic streak I'm a mechanistic monist at heart since it is what is most congruent to my own experience.
thus I tend toward nihilism, however I don't agree that any given set of bouncing molecules can be regarded as the same as any other.
despite our difficulty in really defining "life" there is a certain unifying coherence about some sets of molecules not present in others though not necessarily dependent on the particular bits any more than an eddy in a current. patterns. also analogous to words vs. a random sequence of characters.

[gestalt]

MAYBE WE'RE ALL TREES AND THIS IS JUST A DREAM!!!

As for purpose: service of others. And self-examination in order to better understand how you can help them.

If you're a closet genius then by all means share the wealth. It would be stupid and annoying to be so smart and have your ideas discovered by others at a later point. As often happens.

[Cloudreborn]

Hi, I have spent my life trying to find the purpose of life, going through perspective after perspective attempting to figure out what is the truth. I continue to look into it, it drives me, at times making me depressed and at others creating optimism I rarely achieve. I only search for the absolute truth, not something that can't be proven, not some faith that one can find flaws within, and easily recognized as filled with errors... I am still young, but this question stresses my very fabric of existence, which to me is both good and bad, for living a life of lies or accepting something less than completely certain is not who I am. I'm not one to believe there is no answer, for if there was no answer I would not exist, there is a reason I exist, and I have narrowed down my search in the last 18 years. I have studied several philosophies, religions, and listened to many peoples ideas on it and still am not satisfied with any. The closest for me has been the concept of tao, and budhism but even then I still have found things to it I can critique and find problematic. I also take into effect what scientists find about the world each day, and try to piece faith, science and pretty much everything together, yet still without a satisfying master piece. I suppose if there was an easy answer, people would know of it already, but everyone I know has been satisfied with something simplistic, something that seems to rely on faith over certainty, and I just don't understand why... There is an answer, and it's out there and attainable, I know it. I realize a huge importance is within perspective, we all as humans take a certain perspective that doesn't allow us to see the whole, and this is a problem. I have begun to work on that, attempting to free myself of an individual perspective that doesn't shed light on the rest of the worlds perspective... I don't know if it's possible to become open to all perspective, for the only ones I've heard of attaining such a thing I have never met, and I'm not one to believe it without complete certainty. I have alot of ideas as to what may be right, but not enough to be certain of anything, otherwise I wouldn't be rambling like this... I do this alot, but in any case, I need the truth, and my life goal is to someday find it. Anyway, Yeah would love any input on this, I'm happy to maybe hear any more info anyone may have to share or anything that can help. And I'm not cutting down any faiths or anything (People assume this pretty quick) I just don't feel there is enough proof behind anything I've found so far to back it up.

[iuvat]

My purpose in life is to make myself happy and please myself. That would be really easy, but I have this stupid thing commonly called morals. Now, I have to not only keep myself happy, but also not harm other people and keep them more or less happy.

You can see this quickly getting hard to juggle.

[Nightshiver2]

Hi, I have spent my life trying to find the purpose of life, going through perspective after perspective attempting to figure out what is the truth. I continue to look into it, it drives me, at times making me depressed and at others creating optimism I rarely achieve. I only search for the absolute truth, not something that can't be proven, not some faith that one can find flaws within, and easily recognized as filled with errors... I am still young, but this question stresses my very fabric of existence, which to me is both good and bad, for living a life of lies or accepting something less than completely certain is not who I am. I'm not one to believe there is no answer, for if there was no answer I would not exist, there is a reason I exist, and I have narrowed down my search in the last 18 years. I have studied several philosophies, religions, and listened to many peoples ideas on it and still am not satisfied with any. The closest for me has been the concept of tao, and budhism but even then I still have found things to it I can critique and find problematic. I also take into effect what scientists find about the world each day, and try to piece faith, science and pretty much everything together, yet still without a satisfying master piece. I suppose if there was an easy answer, people would know of it already, but everyone I know has been satisfied with something simplistic, something that seems to rely on faith over certainty, and I just don't understand why... There is an answer, and it's out there and attainable, I know it. I realize a huge importance is within perspective, we all as humans take a certain perspective that doesn't allow us to see the whole, and this is a problem. I have begun to work on that, attempting to free myself of an individual perspective that doesn't shed light on the rest of the worlds perspective... I don't know if it's possible to become open to all perspective, for the only ones I've heard of attaining such a thing I have never met, and I'm not one to believe it without complete certainty. I have alot of ideas as to what may be right, but not enough to be certain of anything, otherwise I wouldn't be rambling like this... I do this alot, but in any case, I need the truth, and my life goal is to someday find it. Anyway, Yeah would love any input on this, I'm happy to maybe hear any more info anyone may have to share or anything that can help. And I'm not cutting down any faiths or anything (People assume this pretty quick) I just don't feel there is enough proof behind anything I've found so far to back it up.

I was once chasing the same question, and I finally 'answered' it. It's the question itself that is the issue. It's ambiguous - when you define all your terms exactly - you realize the itself question makes assumptions.

You seem well read, so i'll pass on some links rather than explaining everything myself.

These are ordered in priority, at least read the top links:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Drive yourself Sane" by Kodish
"Science and Sanity" by Korzybski
"Manhood of Humanity" by Korzybski

I've wasted literally at least 1000 hours thinking about this question - it will consume you if you let it. It's the addiction of INTJs.

Even if you think I'm completely full of bullshit - realize this question has occupied the lives of THOUSANDS of philosophers over THOUSANDS of years. And, YET there's still no published answer. So, why in your right mind, do you think there IS an answer, or that YOU can find it, in your short life span - and that this is the best way to occupy your time. Think about it - I'm just trying to save you the pain its caused me.

[Googamanga]

Assumptions: there is only matter in the universe, there is no god, theory of evolution is true. (some of these things determine each other but it helps to spell it out)

My argument
1) there is no reason for matter to exist
2) we are nothing but matter
3 using 1&2) there is no reason for us to exist
4) I am not different from others in significant ways
5 using 3&4) there is no reason for me to exist

Whatever reasons i have to do something is an emergent property of being human. so again there is no fundamental reason for me to do anything.

how is being human different from matter?
create pleasure/discomfort by thought. I think it is fair to say that we try to gain pleasure and avoid discomfort, using anyway we can.

if there are no hurdles that would cause greater discomfort than pleasure from water we will drink water.
if there are no hurdles that would cause greater discomfort than pleasure from a non-materialistic lifestyle then we will live a non-materialistic lifestyle
just use decision/utility trees....

So i guess an individual's reason for living is his or her definition of self interest. which consciously or unconsciously defines scope and weights/priorities for each action.

Personal definition is pulled from societal views. (parents/ teachers/ friends/ "logic"/ forums/ ....)





Googamanga added to this post, 50 minutes and 22 seconds later...

And there was silence...... i'm guessing everyone went to read the links from Nightshiver 2....

[Googamanga]

despite a closet romantic streak I'm a mechanistic monist at heart since it is what is most congruent to my own experience.
thus I tend toward nihilism, however I don't agree that any given set of bouncing molecules can be regarded as the same as any other.
despite our difficulty in really defining "life" there is a certain unifying coherence about some sets of molecules not present in others though not necessarily dependent on the particular bits any more than an eddy in a current. patterns. also analogous to words vs. a random sequence of characters.

words vs random sequence of characters is a good analogy.

some specific sequences of random characters are only words to those who have created two categories of stuff. which are random characters and words.

note that from an absolute point of view the "words" are still random characters understood in specific ways by those who have created meaning out of a special sequence of random characters.

now read the post again but replace "words" with Humans and "random characters" with matter... see what happens?

If you are truly a mechanistic monist then you should realize that any other categories of stuff is created by our minds.

[Lord Shadowbane]

Most make the purpose of their life to find their purpose, whether or not the consciously decide that that is their purpose. My purpose or goal in life is to try to reach a much greater understanding of the universe and its many parts. I treasure every moment of my life and am always trying to learn more. I see death as only the next great adventure. I believe that anything one does is one's own choice. If one does nothing the eventual result is often clear to others. The eventual result is fated for the person unless they change. I have a somewhat peculiar idea of fate, believing in a less conventional version of it. I have many morals and values which I shall not break but they do not get in the way. They ARE the way, so I'm fine. This thread has been so far rather interesting; finding out others' ideas is always an interesting experience for one such as myself.

[Googamanga]

thinking so long about fundamental, absolute reason's for existence has made me very cynical about individual reasons for actions.

I really don't see how there is any logic behind anything else besides self-interest......

perhaps i'll start a thread...

[NDBrewer]

The way I see it, there is no absolute purpose, but if you're looking for a reason to get up in the morning then it's not hard to find things to do. I would suggest doing something that makes sense to you and just keep on doing it till you die.

Don't you sense great futility in this? Don't you wonder why we WANT purpose? Why would simple matter bound together by external forces occurring without intelligence become conscious and have a longing to have meaning? Everyone wants there to be purpose and meaning to life. All of history is man acting upon what he believed to be life's purpose. Maybe the more foundational question is why do human beings require purpose. If we answer that question it is likely to lead us to what our purpose actually is.

Assumptions: there is only matter in the universe, there is no god, theory of evolution is true. (some of these things determine each other but it helps to spell it out)

The belief that the universe consists only of matter does not address the issue of the existence of God because God would not be bound to be contained inside the universe. The very idea of God sets him apart from our dimension (not that he can not act within in our dimension, simply that he is not contained inside of it).

Can everyone just be honest with themselves for once? People don't want there to be a God because they want to FEEL free to pursue their erotic and political desires without any ultimate reprisal. So, please let's stop with the window dressing of denying God based on intellectual dissent. Our post-modern culture does not want God because he does not align with our worldly desires. Without God, there is no ultimate purpose. You're just rats in a maze looking for your next piece of cheese.

[reb]

the purpose of life is to wonder about the purpose of life until you stop.

[Cloudreborn]

Thanks for the reply and links Nightshiver2, I'll have to check them out, I know what your saying all too well, I wasn't able to look at the links until I sent this post lol but I'll check them out after it. Hopefully it will help me out more, I'll reply with more after I read it, thanks.

[mnmeq]

Don't you sense great futility in this? Don't you wonder why we WANT purpose? Why would simple matter bound together by external forces occurring without intelligence become conscious and have a longing to have meaning? Everyone wants there to be purpose and meaning to life. All of history is man acting upon what he believed to be life's purpose. Maybe the more foundational question is why do human beings require purpose. If we answer that question it is likely to lead us to what our purpose actually is.

Perhaps purpose invented god rather than the other way around.

The belief that the universe consists only of matter does not address the issue of the existence of God because God would not be bound to be contained inside the universe. The very idea of God sets him apart from our dimension (not that he can not act within in our dimension, simply that he is not contained inside of it).

Can everyone just be honest with themselves for once? People don't want there to be a God because they want to FEEL free to pursue their erotic and political desires without any ultimate reprisal. So, please let's stop with the window dressing of denying God based on intellectual dissent. Our post-modern culture does not want God because he does not align with our worldly desires.

I don't agree that your premise is a given and it has little to do with hedonism.
I generally follow occams razor/scientific method as it has the best proven functional track record as a model for reality.

Without God, there is no ultimate purpose. You're just rats in a maze looking for your next piece of cheese.

That's how I've always felt, where's the problem? :)

[Lout]

Lets hear it.

To teach people the proper use of apostrophes.

Oh, and cheese steaks. God-fucking-damn, those things are delicious.

[Lord Shadowbane]

Whatever reasons i have to do something is an emergent property of being human. so again there is no fundamental reason for me to do anything (parents/ teachers/ friends/ "logic"/ forums/ ....)

Presumably you do not want to die, seeing as you wish to answer this question. Therefore, presumably, you wish to live. In order to live certain things must be accomplished. Simply answering this question could be your reason to do something.





Lord Shadowbane added to this post, 3 minutes and 57 seconds later...

[QUOTE=Bobleplask;122741]This man speaks wise words.

The way I see it, there is no absolute purpose, but if you're looking for a reason to get up in the morning then it's not hard to find things to do. I would suggest doing something that makes sense to you and just keep on doing it till you die.

Very, very good advice. That seems to be the way most people get by through life. My goal, (I'd rather not say purpose), it to find out what goal has the most interesting events leading up to it. I want to experience life to the fullest and have no time to waste. Therefore finding which way I can do so is a good goal for me. Simply trying to find this particular goal is an interesting enough experience, ironically.

[Googamanga]

Presumably you do not want to die, seeing as you wish to answer this question. Therefore, presumably, you wish to live. In order to live certain things must be accomplished. Simply answering this question could be your reason to do something.



Which question are you referring to? i can't find "?"s

[Lord Shadowbane]

Isn't it obvious? The thread title is the purpose of life, is it not? Though not phrased as a question, it still is. Properly, it is phrased as "What is the purpose of life?"

[Googamanga]

Presumably you do not want to die, seeing as you wish to answer this question. Therefore, presumably, you wish to live. In order to live certain things must be accomplished. Simply answering this question could be your reason to do something.


Which question are you referring to? i can't find "?"s

Isn't it obvious? The thread title is the purpose of life, is it not? Though not phrased as a question, it still is. Properly, it is phrased as "What is the purpose of life?"

Q: what is the purpose of life?
A: not to die.

There are cases when people have killed them selves, by choice. So that person's purpose of life was the exact opposite. so the answer does not cover all cases...

This maybe just a simple difference of interpretation.

I think you are looking for goals that should influence our choices, where as i am looking for rules of nature that control our every single one of our choices.

if that is the case, then i agree with you, that not to die is a decent goal in life. (as long as its no the only one)

[Lord Shadowbane]

It's not my fault your answer "not to die" doesn't work in all cases. On those who commit suicide: They do so because they felt that their original purpose could not be achieved or was not worth doing so and were unwilling to find another. Why they felt this way could be the environment in which they were.

[Googamanga]

It's not my fault your answer "not to die" doesn't work in all cases. On those who commit suicide: They do so because they felt that their original purpose could not be achieved or was not worth doing so and were unwilling to find another. Why they felt this way could be the environment in which they were.

This maybe just a simple difference of interpretation.

I think you are looking for goals that should influence our choices, where as i am looking for rules of nature that control our every single one of our choices.

if that is the case, then i agree with you, that not to die is a decent goal in life. (as long as its no the only one)

[ness2361]

"The purpose of my life is to exist." That's it? I'd ask if you're kidding, but you don't seem to be. Every life form's purpose, at the most fundamental level, is to exist... Those little ... imply "and then what?" If you're a pill bug the purpose is to exist, co-exist, reproduce or aid in reproduction so that other of your species can exist, co-exist, reproduce or aid in reproduction. On a biological level, anyway. If pill bugs can evolve (into something different, with higher purpose) then one day pill bugs will be fantasizing, perhaps about how they are only here to exist.

What gives human beings some oomph (not a scientific term, nope) is our ability to fantasy, and that includes the ability to fantasy about why it is that we exist, so if you deny that you fantasize, that's all you're doing--denying a part of reality, because you can't stop fantasizing (as a human being) unless you're operating solely from the reptilian part of your brain, maybe) or are brain-dead, and even then, maybe you can fantasize but not express what it is you are fantasizing about. Even your assertion that you are not fantasizing but putting your energy into tasks that support mere existence is an indicator of fantasy because humans (and that includes you) don't need money to exist and don't need power either. (Your thinking is very middle-class here) There are all sorts of folks out there who exist because someone takes care of them (think severely mentally retarded or otherwise dependent) and who don't have any power (think infant, think prisoner, just think!).

Why do I exist? Because of desire, capital DESIRE. God's (not an entity, no man with a beard kind of God or other limited god; think Source of All Life) and my own. Why do I keep on with intent in this existence of mine? Generally, as an abstract? Because I'm searching for a way Home; I long for Union with God, true yoga. And while I'm seeking it, as a part of that search, I am sharing the journey--complete with emotion, fantasy, and all that real (human) life messiness you seem to want to avoid. Ta da!

You made me smile; imagine that!

[Googamanga]

so you desire a union with god? ok... but WHY do you want a union with god? bearded or not... why do you long for a return "home"? what home?

[Cygnus]

To date I think life is still..subjective and undefined and can only be attributed to charatceristics we believe life displays. As for any purpose..it is part of the enitre whole and experience, I would not presume to use my value system to judge "life's" purpose.

[INTJRyan]

Maximize pleasure, minimize pain. Simple as that.

[Googamanga]

Maximize pleasure, minimize pain. Simple as that.

why do people cut themselves, why are there suicides? why not be on painkillers all the time? why not be on crack all the time?

[Olympics2010]

I don't know that I can say that I have one - how about: "the purpose of life is to make sure that I don't have one, 'cause to have a purpose, is to not remain objective, and it's important to remain objective in order to be able to lead a sound life, which is important to do, if I wish to continue to survive -- and to remain objective means the same thing as having no purpose, in my view". But this is just the start to this particular question, which continues for some reason to have a powerful effect in the world, as if it hasn't yet been decided.

[Olympics2010]

I totally agree with the initial statements made in this thread, the purpose of it all is just logic based, I think. As I mentioned previously, as of now, I think that the purpose of life is to have no purpose, that there should be no purpose in life, because the "purpose" of life is to remain objective, stripped of all excess confusion in life, and just being able to run one's life based on logical calculations, because this is the way to run a sound life. To have a purpose is actually to negate a proper running of life based on objective logic, of seeing all the possiblities at any one given moment, and then arraging them according to some arbitrary short-term, or long-term, goal that we want to achieve, for some equally arbitrary reason, like wanting to be able to survive well. It's not that this is the "purpose of life", it's just this is what we choose to go for.

[ness2361]

GoogaManga

Have you ever heard of, read parts or all of a book by Hans Urs Von Balthasar called Heart of the World? Or how about F.J. Sheed's Theology for Beginners? The question of why I want union with God or why I long to return home, or what home means in this context... these aren't knowledge-based terms or material locations. And though we can intellectualize about them, the why union, why longing, where or what home can't be discussed to Purpose (realization of union with God). Still, the opening first words in Heart of the World provides an image, albeit an imprecise one, of the finger pointing at the moon:

"Prisons of finitude! Like every other being, man is born in many prisons. Soul, body, thought, intuition, endeavor: everything about him has a limit, is itself tangible limitation; everything is a This and a That, different from other things and shunned by them. From the grilled windows of the senses each person looks out to the alien things which he will never be. Even if his spirit could fly through the spaces of the world like a bird, he himself will never be this space..."

Or this from F.J. Sheed's Beginning Theology: "It is not enough to have learned what spirit is. We must build the knowledge into the very structure of our minds. Seeing spiritual reality must become one of the mind's habits. When it does, we have reached the first stage of maturity. Materialism, however persuasively argued, can no longer take hold on us. We may not always be able to answer the arguments, but it makes no difference. Materialism is repulsive; all our mental habits are set against it. It is as if a scientist were to produce arguments in favor of walking on all fours: we should find the idea repulsive; all our bodily habits would be set against us. That indeed is no bad comparison. The man who knows of the universe of spirit walks upright, the materialist hugs the earth."

[Googamanga]

GoogaManga

Have you ever heard of, read parts or all of a book by Hans Urs Von Balthasar called Heart of the World? Or how about F.J. Sheed's Theology for Beginners? The question of why I want union with God or why I long to return home, or what home means in this context... these aren't knowledge-based terms or material locations. And though we can intellectualize about them, the why union, why longing, where or what home can't be discussed to Purpose (realization of union with God). Still, the opening first words in Heart of the World provides an image, albeit an imprecise one, of the finger pointing at the moon:

"Prisons of finitude! Like every other being, man is born in many prisons. Soul, body, thought, intuition, endeavor: everything about him has a limit, is itself tangible limitation; everything is a This and a That, different from other things and shunned by them. From the grilled windows of the senses each person looks out to the alien things which he will never be. Even if his spirit could fly through the spaces of the world like a bird, he himself will never be this space..."

Or this from F.J. Sheed's Beginning Theology: "It is not enough to have learned what spirit is. We must build the knowledge into the very structure of our minds. Seeing spiritual reality must become one of the mind's habits. When it does, we have reached the first stage of maturity. Materialism, however persuasively argued, can no longer take hold on us. We may not always be able to answer the arguments, but it makes no difference. Materialism is repulsive; all our mental habits are set against it. It is as if a scientist were to produce arguments in favor of walking on all fours: we should find the idea repulsive; all our bodily habits would be set against us. That indeed is no bad comparison. The man who knows of the universe of spirit walks upright, the materialist hugs the earth."

no havn't read the books

"The question of why I want union with God or why I long to return home, or what home means in this context... these aren't knowledge-based terms or material locations." why isn't it?

if we don't know something does it mean it is unknowable and thus must be divine?

i don't understand the first quote... i need it spelled out

what is spiritual reality? if its not knowledge based or tangable, do you have any examples?

why is materialism repulsive?

if a scientist were to to produce argumetns in favor of walking on all fours, why should we find it repulsive?

[INTJRyan]

why do people cut themselves, why are there suicides? why not be on painkillers all the time? why not be on crack all the time?

I was talking about myself, my purpose, but to answer your questions, "No pleasure is a bad thing in itself, but the things which produce certain pleasures entail disturbances many times greater than the pleasures themselves." Obviously, smoking crack, while temporarily pleasurable, reduces one's capacity to maximize his/her pleasure throughout life, and thus should be avoided. And I believe suicide is a personal choice, I'm indifferent to it.

[Googamanga]

I was talking about myself, my purpose, but to answer your questions, "No pleasure is a bad thing in itself, but the things which produce certain pleasures entail disturbances many times greater than the pleasures themselves." Obviously, smoking crack, while temporarily pleasurable, reduces one's capacity to maximize his/her pleasure throughout life, and thus should be avoided. And I believe suicide is a personal choice, I'm indifferent to it.

i can respect that, but i thought we were looking for a purpose that would work for everyone with no exception.

suicide is a choice but so is avoiding crack. if we make rules for life that work most of the time, and say that everything that doesn't fit the rule is an exception, then it is a good possibility that the rule isn't complex enough.

maybe we're trying to answer different questions

[Lord Shadowbane]

Well, LIFE is a big subject, yes? How we see the question is due to how we see life. How we see life is due to our own lives. Therefore there is a different answer to the question for everyone. It changes with one's perspective and no one can have the exactly same perspective because no one can have exactly the same life and outlook due to it. It is absolutely impossible. One may be like another in all ways except one that cannot be avoided. One is not the other. You can't get around this!

[Lord Shadowbane]

Uhhhhhhhhhh. You don't get it, do you? Let me help.

First quote essentially comes to this:
Mankind can't do everything/be anything other than he or she is at the time/achieve anything impossible. EVER. End of story. We won't be able to do such things, we can't, it's a limitation, we don't like them, we won't ever get used to them, oh well, too bad for us. We, being human, will resist limitations. (If you deny it you haven't reached the spiritual realization. If you haven't, we simply can't explain it to you. No, don't argue with that.) We'll even resist the idea that we resist limitations occasionally. No matter what we do, there are things we can't do, we won't ever be able to do. We're limited. We automatically wish to resist these limitations, even if we delude ourselves otherwise.

To answer your questions:
What is spiritual reality? if its not knowledge based or tangible, do you have any examples?
It is a way to describe true understanding and acceptance of defiance of the way things are and always will be.

Why is materialism repulsive?
It is most often repulsive to those that have true understanding of the world and realize their limitations and that their wish is to overcome them.

If a scientist were to to produce arguments in favor of walking on all fours, why should we find it repulsive?
We would innately find walking on all fours repulsive, not necessarily his/her arguments. Our current evolution is not developed to act so and therefore it would be unnatural.

If we don't know something does it mean it is unknowable and thus must be divine?
No, but we won't ever no everything; we can't. It's a limitation that we strive uselessly against.

I hope that all helped.

[Googamanga]

I know we have limitations, i just don't agree what the limitations are. I know i can't see 1000 miles away, feel a tiny change in temperature, know what others are thinking...

I don't think there is a limit to what we can understand (notice i said understand not know, i can't know what your thinking, but hopefully i can understand what your thinking), there's just a limit on how fast we can learn something.... There's also a limit on how many factors we can hold in our head at the same time.... probably some more limitations exist
but there's no limit to how much we can understand .

MeOld:What is spiritual reality? if its not knowledge based or tangible, do you have any examples?
You: It is a way to describe true understanding and acceptance of defiance of the way things are and always will be.
MeNow: How is it different from no-spiritual reality? my "non-spiritual" model of reality is also trying to describe true understanding. and what defiance is there? i'm not defing reality, I'm part of it...



Why is materialism repulsive?
It is most often repulsive to those that have true understanding of the world and realize their limitations and that their wish is to overcome them. Since you obviously have true understanding of the world can you enlighten me why materialism is repulsive and not who it repulses.

You:our current evolution is not developed to act.
Me: what did you mean by that.

is this repulsive to you?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

MeOld:If we don't know something does it mean it is unknowable and thus must be divine?
You:No, but we won't ever no everything; we can't. It's a limitation that we strive uselessly against.
MeNow: so if we will ultimately fail at something we should never even try? Our life will fail at death, why live!? our teeth will fall out when we're old, there's no point to brush or floss teeth. We won't ever know anything, so all scientific progress should stop, and it is repulsive to even try to solve anything. My god, you are totally right, i'll go kill my self now, just to quicken the ultimate failure of the universe, i hope it catches on.

[Googamanga]

Well, LIFE is a big subject, yes? How we see the question is due to how we see life. How we see life is due to our own lives. Therefore there is a different answer to the question for everyone. It changes with one's perspective and no one can have the exactly same perspective because no one can have exactly the same life and outlook due to it. It is absolutely impossible. One may be like another in all ways except one that cannot be avoided. One is not the other. You can't get around this!

UUUUUHHHH i'm not trying to know what others are thinking, i'm trying to understand how they think, and since there is nothing else besides matter and the forces associated with it, we can model it, using other matter and forces associated with it. Stuff like silicone, copper, and whatever else we can find.

[Tunnel]

The purpose of life is just a tool to serve the in the pursuit of knowledge.

The pursuit of knowledge seems to be the only logical thing for humans to do.

If we don't know everything than how can we know what is truth?

Humanity can become obsolete (robots) if you follow this rational philosophy.

I'll become a fervent religious man as soon as I can make that conclusion, which would probably take many hundreds of years at the rate we're going.

[Lord Shadowbane]

Agreed. All questions are, when posed by one intelligent, used simply to allow one to appreciate the process of finding out the answer and reviewing the revelation when and if it comes. The pursuit of knowledge and experiences is indeed the only worthwhile goal of humankind.

[Googamanga]

Agreed. All questions are, when posed by one intelligent, used simply to allow one to appreciate the process of finding out the answer and reviewing the revelation when and if it comes. The pursuit of knowledge and experiences is indeed the only worthwhile goal of humankind.

a tangent - I know the urge to write stuff that sounds grand and amazing is orgasmic, but it doesn't help readability. so since readability is helpful for sharing knowledge and acquiring knowledge is a good goal, could your highness please consider changing your style a bit?

ok I agree that pursuit of knowledge and experience is a decent goal for humans, but what about all of life. What is the purpose for trees/frogs/fish/birds? other living things have the same "right" to be here as we do, so what drives them to do things? is it different than human's "purpose"?

[Lord Shadowbane]

How I write is how I think, yet I will "dumb-down" my vocabulary temporarily if you so wish. Thinking and writing in simpler terms is more difficult for myself, though I shall try.

Okay, how can I put this? When more experience and knowledge is gathered one's chances of doing what one wants increases. The more knowledge one possesses the easier it is for one to provide a solution to an encountered problem. This is the same for all creatures. If it has been in a problematic situation (or any situation, for that matter) before, the creature likely knows how to respond in such a way that does not get itself into more unwanted situations or it will know how to respond in a way that will likely result in a beneficial or neutral situation. It's the "Been there, done that" scenario. Or the "This ain't my first rodeo" situation. Experience and knowledge is the only worthwhile pursuit because it is the most helpful thing any creature can possess besides itself.

I hope that wasn't using too large a vocabulary, I honestly tried to minimize my grandiloquence.

[Googamanga]

gaining knowledge and experience is pretty good, i enjoy it also.

are we fighting btw?

What do you think about this "we are here for no purpose but since we are here, might at as well make the best of it, by best i mean maximize our self-interest, acquiring knowledge and experiences is a good way of maximizing self-interest"

[Lord Shadowbane]

Every action will be eventually "useless" if you do not believe in life-after-death and are a pessimist. However, personally, if you do not believe in life-after-death then you should attempt to make your life as good as possible and therefore it does make sense to do beneficial things for oneself. I said we won't know everything and there isn't enough time to even try to reach knowledge of half of everything; everything is too big. We can still strive to learn things all the time. We can't learn everything because there isn't enough time but we can still learn a lot, hopefully what we want to learn. All we can do is hope that we've posed the right questions before we pursue the answer. Also, we can be an optimist and enjoy the experience of looking for the answer of the experience of enjoying the revelation if and when it comes for as long as we are alive. Life isn't pointless, it's just limited. Our time is limited and therefore our knowledge is. (That's not even counting the finite capacity of the brain.)

"Our life will fail at death, why live!?" -You can't choose to start living, you know. (Unless you believe otherwise due to faith, which no one can pose an argument against because it's faith, which is belief in something without attention to all proof against it.

As to the de-evolution thing, we are not currently meant to act that way and therefore we resist acting that way. Even they "struggle to fit in with modern society."

[Lord Shadowbane]

That seems pretty good. Anything can be moved/twisted around to support the theory of self interest, as you just proved. It is fun to do so, I suppose. Self-interest theory is always fun to prove and disprove. Oh, no we're not fighting. It's called debating and is one of the best ways to pursue knowledge, as far as I know. Of course, my time on earth is limited and I've not spent my time searching for ways to pursue knowledge best, so perhaps debating is not the best way, but I believe it is. It's tests one's capacity for making connections and one learns more things during the experience.

I'm not entirely sure by what you mean by "maximizing self interest". I suppose you mean helping oneself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences throughout the pursuit of helping oneself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences throughout the pursuit of helping oneself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences throughout the pursuit of helping oneself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences throughout the pursuit of helping oneself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences........... AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH! Even the theory is a circle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Umm, you can some it up by helping oneself. There. I kind of like the theory because it is cyclical, but it far too easy. There must be an answer with ways of creating more tangible proof! I won't really ever be satisfied with the theory of self-interest. It's the way I am.

[Googamanga]

LS:very action will be eventually "useless" if you do not believe in life-after-death and are a pessimist.
Goog:that's only from 1 individual point of view, if my action is teaching some one how to fish but then I die, my actions are not useless from the other person's point of view. people that expect more from reality than there actually is see realists as pessimists :p

LS:we can be an optimist and enjoy the experience of looking for the answer of the experience of enjoying the revelation
Goog: we can also be "non-optimists" and enjoy the experience of looking for the answer of the experience of enjoying the revelation

LS:Life isn't pointless, it's just limited.
Goog:Life is pointless from a Universal point of view, life is quite important and limited from an individual point of view.

LS:Our time is limited and therefore our knowledge is.
Googl: yes it is... from an individual point of view, don't make me talk about teaching how to fish again...

LS:de-evolution thing, we are not currently meant to act that way
Goog:Our biological make up makes it easier for us to walk on 2 legs, we are not meant to do it, no one designed us that way. we can do what our self-interest intends for us. if you want to walk on 2 legs, go for it if you don't go for it too. who am i (or the grand LordShadowbane) to judge.
maybe this is easier for me cus i'm on the border between J and P

[Googamanga]

oops its supposed to be maximizing net self-interest. basically after analyzing a decision, some consequences can be good, some can be bad. When you have several possible decisions, take positive utility and subtract negative utility, you get net utility. the decision with the most net utility should be chosen.

oh
good consequences = positive utility = more self-interest
bad consequences = negative utility = less self-interest

so yeah it is helping yourself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences

not sure why you started repeating yourself though...

i guess i don't see the circular reasoning.... explain it to me please

[Lord Shadowbane]

1.) You know what I meant, though I shouldn't leave gaps like that. I was saying, obviously, that if one's life is finite and SELF-INTEREST is the main point of one's life, then every action is eventually useless because no action prevents death.

2.) Yeah, I agree. Optimism seems to promote survival rates, however.

3.) Who are you to know the point of the universe? Life may play a complex role. If the universe is pointless, we still ought to make the best of the time we have. (In my opinion, that is.)

4.) See my response, just as you told me essentially to see yours!

5.) We can choose to do what we want, yes. However, it will still, indisputably, be uncomfortable to to what we are not meant to do if we realize we are not intended to do so. Even when we know not whether we were intended to act a way or not we find out whether or not when we try. Instinct generally forewarns us and prevents uncomfortable, unnatural circumstances, however. Emphasis on usually.

Oh, as a side note, my name Lord Shadowbane has many reasons for being so, specifically describing my entire outlook on all things I consider important. If you aren't me, you might not understand. Perhaps at some point I'll describe why somewhere.

[Lord Shadowbane]

I always try to make a theory or statement "invincible", meaning it can always be backed up. However, this rarely works. I often use general words at important junctions to cover gaps in the "armor", if you will. I had to add "through out the pursuit of [itself]". It is essentially a formula for creating "armor". If you refer a statement back to itself (in certain circumstances) the theory loses a portion of itself that could be disputed. Here however even the statement of the theory of self-interest is cyclical, similar to its arguments. I found this amusing so attempted to express this funny little bit of logic. If you don't get it, it's like not getting a joke. It's no fun when you explain it.

[Googamanga]

playing dumb is also armor, i got the joke. Where does the theory refers back to itself?

[Lord Shadowbane]

It refers back to itself when a word is repeated for the first time. It is this sequence:
Root: helping oneself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences

Repeater/referrer to itself: throughout the pursuit of

Loop sequence: helping oneself to the full potential possible with the least detrimental consequences

[Googamanga]

2 those with high survival rates seem to be optimists... correlation does not signify causality :)

5 words like meant, and intend are repulsive to me, makes me think of the unthinkable [gulp] intelligent design uhhhh.... in my opinion

some instincts are actually stereotypes (its hard to tell the difference between them), and are not "natural" at all

[Googamanga]

oh well yeah!!!!!!!!!, the self-interest theory is an infinite loop, it is a procedure of how to handle decisions.

the logic isn't circular the procedure is. there are plenty of circular procedures. think manufacturing (weld, move; weld, move;weld, move;weld, move;weld, move) or pretty much anything else....

walking...... left right left right left right.... omg it the loop refers back to it self its not logical!! its too simple... must... not... put.. left... after... right... ahhh where's the ooompff of the amzingness of walking on 2 legs?! only humans do it all the time, there must be more to it than that!!!

sorry thats it..... all of kenematics are just F=ma.... its just that simple..

life is jsut self interest... its just that simple....





Googamanga added to this post, 17 minutes and 53 seconds later...

Damn... did I just do what i think i did.....





Googamanga added to this post, 26 minutes and 39 seconds later...

oh damn guess who got the inner workings of all life in 50 posts!!!

[Lord Shadowbane]

As to where you are wrong, Googamanga: Selflessness. After an event one can say that said event was selfish, yes? However, the person doing a truly selfless thing does not think of oneself at all. This person does not think of anything other than what needs done for someone else. Anything other than the good of the other person is not considered, especially not what one has to gain from the action! Selfish thoughts or thoughts concerning oneself do not enter the mind of the individual. Even why they are doing what they are doing is not in the person's mind other than "it must be done". Reason goes out the window. A truly selfless action is not thought of beforehand. Sometimes emotion enters the brain, sometimes emotion does not have a place. A selfless action defies that all things are done selfishly. While the person could benefit from the action, those benefits WERE NOT considered. If a person does something while not thinking of how the action benefits oneself, the event is selfless. Selfless events occur and therefore everything isn't done due to selfish reasons. Therefore the rule of selfishness does not universally apply and THAT'S why it is only a theory, a theory proved false at that.

[Googamanga]

Ahh yes, the next step, very good, could also be said as

1 consequence to self is also a factor in a every decision
2 selfless decisions exist
SO consequence to self is not always part of a decision.

i got some thing cooking for you. too bad i got 2 midterms and a presentation on Monday. gimmi a few days

[Beulah]

Energy dance is it's raison d'etre & purpose - to feel the pulse & rhythm vivifying all in unity - uni-verse (one song). The rest of this ramble is mere elaboration on sentence 1. For aware beings to discover their place as part of the fabric, not seperate. Animals are ahead of us on this. Overcoming dualistic thinking or behaviour that judges other people / species / cultures etc as "alien other" (they are only different expressions of one multi faceted energy that we all have in totality in each of us). Overcoming belief in seperateness by being woven into, and at times weaving the threads that binds all, even to things or people overtly noxious. By the time this vehicle expires realising you have communed - become one with all and always were. Nursing the dying, one witnesses standard processes that may have relevance to whether there is an individual or an objective general purpose. There is a gradual withdrawal the way a tree dies from the outer leaves back to the centre trunk - interest in the outside world goes, then in much more than the 1m radius around you.

Those who die well lift to an acute awareness of nature often with a fascination with stars and sunsets (sometimes totem animals or angels). Their question is "did someone who really saw me love me" or "did I love well" (stole that from Oprah but it is true in my experience of midwifing death). The answer will be in whether someone or many are left improved by that life whether owned by a scoundrel or saint. Death is embraced joyously whether there is belief in continuance in some form (personal or just as a memory) or not. They celebrate satisfied lif continues tho they may end or transition. Those who do not die well are wrapped in ego stuff - guilt / self judgments / fear or maybe some belief they have not yet left the mark they were intended to and are enraged. These are the people who've helped create hell on earth - they are imo deluded in often thinking they're going to where they've been (self created hell). I think they missed the chance of heaven as time on earth creating peace in life (my view of heaven) by mindfulness of quality thoughts and activities was wasted by them, for lack of effort, resilience or perhaps disregarding the golden rule running thru most doctrines (do unto others ='s don't be an egomaniac). Its an energy dance - the purpose is in its intrinsic beauty (even the bad and ugly details have beauty).

All that said - I'm not sure the question is important! It is today, this time that is. Managing well that wee spark of life energy currently residing in us that pumps the heart and fires our neurotransmitters only because we're part metal. Sermonising out....

[sujan]

to evolve towards perfection... & enjoy life n everything around us coz we are here anyway and may not get another chance to see what we missed

[Googamanga]

to evolve towards perfection... & enjoy life n everything around us coz we are here anyway and may not get another chance to see what we missed

I like everything after the "..." except change "may" to "will"

and evolution can't be perfect or imperfect, it doesn't have a goal or quality.

[Lord Shadowbane]

Evolution's goal is to promote the existence of a species. If it fails, the species goes extinct.

[Googamanga]

saying evolution has a goal is the same as saying gravity has a goal....

quit giving human aspects to natural phenomena, unless you mean to write poetry, or further the idea of intelligent design

[Azel]

There's no point in this question because in life the statement the "meaning of x", usually denotes the consequences of x, or the significance of x, or what is notable about x, et cetera, thus, when the meaning of life concept equals "x", in the statement the "meaning of x", the statement becomes recursive, and, therefore, nonsensical.

saying evolution has a goal is the same as saying gravity has a goal....

quit giving human aspects to natural phenomena, unless you mean to write poetry, or further the idea of intelligent design


By property of existence, humans reflect their subjective perceptions onto objective criteria in an attempt to make sense of things. By asking "what is the meaning? what is the goal? what is the purpose?" we are simply mentally constructing a self-referential model in the search for truth. If you don't want people to apply meaning to what they conciously perceive in an attempt to understand, then what is the point of philosophy (the mother of science)? By the way, I do enjoy writing poetry.

[sujan]

i enjoy poetry too.....but the goal of evolution can't be to promote the existence of a species...we have seen species change by evolving themselves(example:-men from apes...note that not all apes disappeared but some transformed,the intermidiate states did not survive coz they were neither safe then nor now)..."species" is just a name given by man and Nature has no soft corner for the protection of any species in particular,it is in the nature of Nature to evolve to promote life...there may come a time when we see that the world and life on it is "destroyed",but thats only to promote life in the form of some strange organism that can live that way(maybe a virus)...at that time other beings comaparable to those(virus) will give up their form of life to change to a more resistant form,hence displaying similarities to the dominant species. many of us may not understand trees,planets,etc do live...they are born,they die,they exhibit the transformation of energy within them from one form to another,they support the existence of other life forms and use them to transform energy...we got to understand that human survival depends on their survival of many other things,if we were to just go on further without promoting other beings like trees,animals,Earth..we cud get wiped out to make space for those beings





sujan added to this post, 46 minutes and 43 seconds later...

to know that life on Earth evolved from a single cell teaches us many things.
*) we(all creatures of land,sea and air) have been and will continue to evolve(some people have evolved further than the rest since the time of man,this is indifferent to his race and the proof of his evolution is displayed by his thought pattern and at times by extraordinary sensing and understanding capabilities).
*) every organism is a member of our bretheren,we eat only members of our "extended family" when we feel hungry or for self-defence or as a medicine.(no man has the right to ban the existence of another being(including living things like marijuana,poppy,mushrooms,etc.)).
*) we must never kill anything for any other reason or for no reason.
*) to rob the peace of another being is just has bad as depriving it off food coz everyone has equal rights over everything else.
*)....(this post is not directly related to "the puurpose of life" topic but i thought it wud b alright to post it in here coz it includes somethings bout ethics in its own terms)...n cud anyone around here please teach me how to use this quote option in the quick reply box.

[darynthe]

Purpose of life? I live for those priceless mastercard moments. Seriously.

[John F Kennedy]

The purpose of life is to enjoy this cup of tea I'm drinking.

[MortenM]

I have two mottoes:

Enjoy it and relax.

Do what's important.

That's basically my where prime level life goals. On the more specific level, I must and will learn strategy and tactics. It is my highest purpose in life. I am gonna work hard and I feel certain that I will become good at business and game strategy/tactics.

[yepunsarang]

The purpose of life is to find your purpose in life?

[Kreboz]

The search for a purpose in life is derived from a need for self-motivation,
it's all about coping with a specific task, in this case life itself.

If you have a purpose for a task you can self-motivate you to be able
to perform better during the task and to accomplish it. INTJ's have
high executive function meaninig that they have high self-motivation
as a group.

Austrian psychiatrist Viktor Frankl did many claims on that people who
have purpose / meaning in life will cope with life better and be more happy.
I think this statement is in line with the highest steps in 'Maslow's hierarchy of needs'
as a human need. Your life has to be pretty good before you have time to
think about this things.

To me the question of purpose of my own life comes from time to time
and I think I will have different answers to it during my life, it's all
about what motivates me at this moment to cope with my life better.

I think the question comes back when the old purpose is no longer useful
because my circumstances have changed and/or my knowledge has changed.

Because I am a skepticist (and not naive) I think that
absolute truth is not obtainable as a human being. Whatever motivates you
from science to religion it's still about self-motivation and it's about yourself.

I do not think people think about purpose of life in an ultimate sense, the question
is about what is the purpose of their life and their own subjective experience
and that question can only be answered by themself and the answer is
something that motivates them to continue on in life. I think is much like a
decision, that your choose how to direct your life forward

(Had the need for thinking (extroverted thinking) why this writing is very much
typed just for me to able to think this through)

[Quezacotl]

The purpose of life is to live.

[RBM]

There's no point in this question because in life the statement the "meaning of x", usually denotes the consequences of x, or the significance of x, or what is notable about x, et cetera, thus, when the meaning of life concept equals "x", in the statement the "meaning of x", the statement becomes recursive, and, therefore, nonsensical.

By property of existence, humans reflect their subjective perceptions onto objective criteria in an attempt to make sense of things. By asking "what is the meaning? what is the goal? what is the purpose?" we are simply mentally constructing a self-referential model in the search for truth. If you don't want people to apply meaning to what they conciously perceive in an attempt to understand, then what is the point of philosophy (the mother of science)? By the way, I do enjoy writing poetry.

The purpose(meaning) of life is a matter of relationships between variables, in addition to 'x', so recursion isn't an issue.

For example, in my view, the purpose of life is to grow spiritually(consciously). The growth is accomplished by allocentric behavior.

The above is that way because the Larger Consciousness System(everything physical, including matter)evolves(grows) through the lives of consciousnesses it contains.

I've read many a scientist or layman thinking as a scientist, who's dismissed their 'mother'. It seems that such individuals have an agenda that is other than truth.

[superflax]

I believe there is no inherent purpose to life but once you're living you might as well live and let live.

[ajrosales]

Perhaps: To master and define yourself. I think once you become complacent and discouraged in that regard you have stopped living.

[anticlimatic]

The purpose of the body is to survive/reproduce...

But the mind's meaning of life, is meaning itself-- identifying it, finding it, and holding onto it.

[Selene]

I understand the evolutionary imperative why one must ponder this important question.

I've thought long and deep about this and concur with Britney Spears...

I never wanted to go to Japan. Simply because I don’t like fish. And I know that’s very popular out there in Africa.

[lalalandscape]

The purpose of life is to turn on the sink. The purpose of life is to wash my hands. The purpose of life is to open the door. The purpose of life is to close the door. The purpose of life is walk to another room. The purpose of life is to decide what to wear. The purpose of life is to put on what you decide to wear. The purpose of life is to go on to the the INTJforum website. The purpose of life is to type what the purpose of life is in the INTJforum message box. The purpose of life is to submit reply.

[MysteriousGnome]

There's no single answer to this. For me part of the journey is finding a frame of mind that lets me accept the world and enjoy life. In the process of doing so the following idea popped into my mind that had a very calming effect, the sort of, yea, I could live with that.

Imagine immortal beings in an infinite timeless universe. They were bored. Then there was this one guy and he invented what he called a game of life. And he asked the others "Do you want to play?" And someone said "How does one win?" The guy replied "Well you can't really win, but you can do whatever you want within the rules of the game." And the other one said "But what are the rules?" And then the guy said "Oh, that's for you to find out."

[nowt]

A good death.

[Undead Bonzi]

Lets hear it.

Pull my finger.

[nowt]

That would be a bad, bad death.

Pull my finger.

[r Don]

42. (The answer from Monty Python's monstrous computer programmed to come up with the answer to: what is the meaning of the universe?)

Clinically, I suppose the purpose of life is the survival of some of earth's genetic material. Different species compete so that the most resilient carriers of genes will improve and survive. I think so long as at least something remains, the earth's not doing so badly for keeping the planetary gene pool going.

[Bisclavret]

It's whatever you want it to be.

[VagrantChord]

42. (The answer from Monty Python's monstrous computer programmed to come up with the answer to: what is the meaning of the universe?)

Clinically, I suppose the purpose of life is the survival of some of earth's genetic material. Different species compete so that the most resilient carriers of genes will improve and survive. I think so long as at least something remains, the earth's not doing so badly for keeping the planetary gene pool going.

42 was from The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.'s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy)

[Noelle]

There is no purpose. You get to make a purpose all on your own.

[AnotherAvatar]

Nothing like a forum full of existentialists to brighten my day. lol.

[Straynger]

Too many people rely on evolution to say "reproduction" or "passing on genes". This is madness.
Purpose and accident are mutually exclusive.
Something is an "accident" if it is not intended
'Passing on genes' is not intended. It just so happens, that due to random mutations, certain genes get passed on due to the coincidence of reduction in chances of death. All pure randomness. Nothing intended.
Therefore 'reproduction' or 'passing on genes' are all accidental per se (via nature that is)
'r' or 'pog' are not a purpose per se.

The only way r or pog are a persons purpose is if a person subjectively decides it to be so, thus, it can only be a purpose per accidens.

[RBM]

Imagine immortal beings in an infinite timeless universe. They were bored. Then there was this one guy and he invented what he called a game of life. And he asked the others "Do you want to play?" And someone said "How does one win?" The guy replied "Well you can't really win, but you can do whatever you want within the rules of the game." And the other one said "But what are the rules?" And then the guy said "Oh, that's for you to find out."

That perspective is actually real close (for this board's commentership, anyway) and is how reality actually works.

There's even a consciousness researcher who's written a theory of everything with a similar perspective. This written work goes into much detail and cutting edge quantum physics and digital physics for those details.

A major concept that is the glue to this perspective is that the biounit is all that dies, consciousness, itself, is essentially, immortal.

I've found out how more of how the 'rules' 'work' since reading and studying the work.

[MysteriousGnome]

There's even a consciousness researcher who's written a theory of everything with a similar perspective. This written work goes into much detail and cutting edge quantum physics and digital physics for those details.

Can you give me some pointers to this work? I'd like to read some more about it. If you're referring to LCS that I've seen you mention in some other posts then I might have to give it another look. I hit upon it once before, but it didn't quite click. It's possible it got lost in translation into ideas.

[Bunker Man]

Canned tuna. That is the one and supreme purpose of all life.

[Purgatid]

Purpose refers to utility - usefulness. So the question is really "what is the usefulness of life?" The question after that aught to be "to whom?"

From my perspective, the usefulness of life is that it allows me to experience things. How do I seperate things I want to experience, from those that I do not want to experience? The one makes me happy, and the other makes me unhappy.

Therefore; the only rational purpose I can have to my life, is to experience things that makes me happy. So, that is the purpose of my life - to cultivate happiness, to expand it, share it, and understand it anyway I can. Every other purpose is irrational.

What usefulness I can have to others is irrelevant, because I am not those others.

[rud28]

I personally don't believe there is an "ultimate" purpose for life. However, I find the idea that Cosmicism presents interesting.

It states that humans are either too small and insignificant or too unintelligent to comprehend the purpose even if there is one. Even if this is true though, it means that we won't realize it any time soon if at all.

So for practical purposes, I guess the purpose is that which you subjectively choose to give it.

[RBM]

Can you give me some pointers to this work? I'd like to read some more about it. If you're referring to LCS that I've seen you mention in some other posts then I might have to give it another look. I hit upon it once before, but it didn't quite click. It's possible it got lost in translation into ideas.

Here's the old INTJ thread (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) that was my initial exposure to the work. Post # 18 has links by the OP to the sources for his inspiration of the thread. I've since posted more links to Brian Whitworth's work on this board. Others have posted links to the TOE author in other threads. The written work laying out the LCS in context to the whole TOE can be read at Google Books.

[realitycheck]

There's no purpose. However, I think that laughing at life is exciting. Utilize irony and satire as much as possible, because in reality, everything is pointless and meaningless. The case of the human condition after all is denial and ignorance.

That's why we have such social constructs as God floating around.

[davai]

A transmitting device that serves the evolution of nature, including planets/planetary systems.

[Firebrand]

I'm a big fan of Richard Garriott's take on Ethical hedonism (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[Ananas]

For me? Achieving something big in my lifetime (or why not later), improving and helping mankind and would be great to leave my mark to history books.

For other people? There's no actual purpose, everyone can do what they want. Just don't disturb my plans.

[Virulent]

To understand life and amidst that understanding love and be loved.

[Backslash]

I don't think there is this fast food, one size fits all approach of the purpose of life. Your life is something so should live the way you want.
For me, it is to form a utopia even though this not realistic to accomplish this in one life time.

[Sorlaize]

'Passing on genes' is not intended. It just so happens, that due to random mutations, certain genes get passed on due to the coincidence of reduction in chances of death. All pure randomness. Nothing intended.
Therefore 'reproduction' or 'passing on genes' are all accidental per se (via nature that is)
'r' or 'pog' are not a purpose per se.
Was there ever a unified goal of humanity? Lol



Imagine immortal beings in an infinite timeless universe. They were bored. Then there was this one guy and he invented what he called a game of life. And he asked the others "Do you want to play?" And someone said "How does one win?" The guy replied "Well you can't really win, but you can do whatever you want within the rules of the game." And the other one said "But what are the rules?" And then the guy said "Oh, that's for you to find out."
That perspective is actually real close (for this board's commentership, anyway) and is how reality actually works.

There's even a consciousness researcher who's written a theory of everything with a similar perspective. This written work goes into much detail and cutting edge quantum physics and digital physics for those details.

A major concept that is the glue to this perspective is that the biounit is all that dies, consciousness, itself, is essentially, immortal.

I've found out how more of how the 'rules' 'work' since reading and studying the work.
Hmm, how do you know they have human goals for simulating life though? It's not as if playing games; experiencing.. *anything* should intrinsically be *the way our society is set up to function today*. It's very much malleable, in reality, and I mean, individualism itself isn't here for much longer potentially. Give it 200 years, and we will be accepting networked AIs into our world- AIs that think about philosophy and life and ethics non-stop.. immerse themselves in imaginary worlds far different from our human society.. and come up with brand new theories. These AI's will be simulating new, non-human models of life; existence.. that aren't suspiciously human- as have been all our theories about little green men and 'a creator' in a scientific sense (just saying)



The Purpose of Life
There's no human answer for what the universe is. People look for comfort, but truth knows no comfort. So it's a case of human (mass-) delusion.

Life / consciousness / individualist existence, protects us from the despair which is found seeing the true nature of the world- the vision of nihilism/absurdism. Distractions and biases protect us from all kinds of intellectually-based depression. "Ignorance is bliss." And it's this physical-reality falsehood which creates; which brings everything that is the human experience- beauty.. love.. need.. addiction.. and so on

I guess the big human question about life/existence though, is "what can I be happy with believing?"

[MayBee]

Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none.

[antipathy]

What is the purpose of jello?

[Kisai]

Was there ever a unified goal of humanity?

Continuation of the species.

[iele]

There is no meaning to life or the universe. Life is what you make of it.

[Done]

life is like getting an awesome christmas present, or winning the lottery. Do what you will with it, it's all yours.

[Vogon Poet]

Existentialism cannot function in the light of a universal purpose, which is an innate precept. Therefore I am a rationalist in philosophy, and empiricist in epistemology. Bridging from empiricism to rationalism is best accomplished by Karl Popper's falsificationism. It is amazingly consistent with all applications of causality.

The de-facto purpose is survival for all whose sapience can comprehend purpose. Sapience in fact creates this purpose, although the mechanism of survival exists without it. Survival is tautological.

Survival in living species serves to decrease universal entropy through progress. The universal trend is toward higher entropy, with energies and forces dispersing ever more homogenously. The purpose of life is to achieve a minimal universal entropy, with a final goal of 1.

This universe - or the universal machine of unity entropy, when complete, will have a self-defined purpose.

The decohesion of an existential collective is a cancer to progress in this direction. All sapience must act in cohesion; in harmony, as they primarily have in the United States and other free societies, for new knowledge to be acquired. This fact is empirically derived from a study of scientific advances in history.

The way to achieve this cohesion is best illustrated by the Christ, Jesus. Acceptance of science. Acceptance of governance. Acceptance of each-other. Acceptance of an eternal life. Working diligently toward the betterment of Mankind with your gifts. And love.

[Arthur Dent]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[ropeacowboy]

Oh that's easy. The purpose of life is to reproduce and continue on our existence because if we didn't then we wouldn't exist anymore... Is that a paradox?

[UltraIncredible]

To reach the final position a.k.a. the point of maximized control over the universe.

[Sorlaize]

life is like getting an awesome christmas present, or winning the lottery. Do what you will with it, it's all yours.

I have a problem with this statement: life is not given to you if you weren't there to take it. Rather, it is the illusion of a will or purpose (the illusion of free choice; the illusory bias of individualist existence itself) that facilitates human (continued) life/existence. But if you think about it, even our most prized individuals our society produced emerged from this paradox of value whereby they "overcame" a period of being "worth" nothing.. to be "worth" something.

Here's some of what I wrote about existence today on my blog;-


I also thought about experience today/yesterday. We can't even ask ourselves what it is about experience itself that's so valuable; we are each 'caught' in the here & now with sexual and emotional tendencies. None of this is logical; none of this emerged from wanting to survive, as a society. It emerged from finding that we had a lot of people who wanted vehemently, certain personal things. And so material possessions emerged, and so George Carlin emerged as a result, to comment on how sick of us it is to infest the moon with our bullshit.



All around people come up with 'new' outlooks on life which is "really just the psychological need for renewal playing out" ..

But all the complexity of society.. it's not something we can easily quantify, you know?

So to be able to answer that question- "what is the purpose of life", fully.. is impossible

[Bisclavret]

It's whatever you decide it to be.

[Studyking]

I believe the Westminster Catechism best explains it with this:


A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.

[INFTPJ]

Purpose of life is to live.

[ludius]

Which life, life on earth or life after death?

[Snowcrow]

There is no ultimate purpose to life. You exist because your parents were horny. The end.

[Sirdowski]

To reach the final position a.k.a. the point of maximized control over the universe.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.