Just sayin'. There has not been one permanent thing done by a human on this Earth, to Earth. Our lives revolve around the fact that we want to be happy and make a lot of money, but what is true happieness, and if we find it, it is pointless to another human who is still searching for their happieness and vica-versa.
Not trying to be a downer here, but I just want to know what you think about the futility of being a mortal with no real purpose other than to find a personal Utopia.
And why can't that be right? Why does everything need a purpose? It seems to me that humans just want to find a point to everything when there may not be one.
No one is saying there has to be one. However on a subjective scale there is. More arguably based on the intrinsic properties of things that can also be an objective purpose to things. Your argument that just because these purposes aren't eternal some how don't count is faulty. In the here and now it does count.
No one is saying there has to be one. However on a subjective scale there is. More arguably based on the intrinsic properties of things that can also be an objective purpose to things. Your argument that just because these purposes aren't eternal some how don't count is faulty. In the here and now it does count.
It might count in the here and now for some but a lot choose to look at a more objective purpose of which there is none. Do you agree?
I don't understand how a subjective purpose can outweigh an eternal objective purpose. Considering that the flicker of life is much briefer than an eternity of no life.
It might count in the here and now for some but a lot choose to look at a more objective purpose of which there is none. Do you agree?
Yes and no, I would say it's more likely people mistaking subjective purposes for objective ones.
I don't understand how a subjective purpose can outweigh an eternal objective purpose. Considering that the flicker of life is much briefer than an eternity of no life.
I'm not sure there are any eternal objective purposes to weight against.
I'm particularly interested in this line, could you elaborate on what you believe to be intrinsic properties of things?
Well as one example from the video life reproducing is an intrinsic property. Of course we can't say this for every individual life form as not all manage to do this, however collectively we can. Now I do disagree with the video that those who fail at this fail at life in this context because there are other properties that define what is alive. Another example some of the stars intrinsic properties would be to emit heat and light. They also generate strong gravitational pulls. In this sense we could say this is the stars purpose.
I'm not sure if I answered your question very well or not here. I also wouldn't fault anyone for not buying into this line of thinking, I'm still a little iffy on it myself, though I do think it makes for an interesting argument and an interesting way of looking at things.
I'm not sure there are any eternal objective purposes to weight against.
That's exactly the point... there is no purpose.
Because the purpose of life in your opinion is so brief and after that there is no purpose for a much, much longer time then wouldn't the majority win?
I would say it's more likely people mistaking subjective purposes for objective ones.
Well as one example from the video life reproducing is an intrinsic property.
Just for fun, I'll take a quote out of my most used text: the Oxford Handbook of Clinical Medicine.
If a thing is organic and converts nutrients into progeny it is alive. If it does not do this, it is either non-living, dead, dying, or male.
On the other hand, it then goes on to paraphrase a certain philosopher:
...Aristotle's dictum that the defining essence of life is that it has a plan for its own survival and continuity.
I think the issue you're encountering here is that it's difficult to define life in a necessary and sufficient set of parameters that clearly distinguish it from every other term. Thus it is difficult to define what is intrinsic to life/living beings.
However I'm actually in agreement with you, I think that on a few levels it's useful to reduce behaviour of living beings/organisms to their common denominator, in order to better understand our motivations not just in living, but also in convincing ourselves of the importance of living.
I said I wasn't sure of an eternal purpose not, no purpose.
Because the purpose of life in your opinion is so brief and after that there is no purpose for a much, much longer time then wouldn't the majority win?
No it doesn't the time span in which something holds purpose is meaning less to the fact that it does or did have purpose. Also if this argument of objective purpose holds then non life also has purpose. It would simply be a different purpose depending on the state it is in then when it was alive.
True. We are, however, wondering the point, the endgame, not the journey. I guess we could say that our purpose is clear, our point is not. I believe we are clutching at straws here tho.
True. We are, however, wondering the point, the endgame, not the journey.
I think this maybe the crux of the matter. The point is the finality which will be the end. By that time, life will have lost its point/purpose. Hence, pointless.
I still disagree. If anything we are in no position to say.
I would think that in the geological short term i.e. a few hundred thousand years, we all have a point. Those that came before benefit or hinder those that come after. This is especially obvious in the last few hundred years where large amounts of people still live in buildings and use ideas that were made by our previous generations. Their life may have come to its point i.e. death, but their life has a point for us. It has use. It also free's up space
So I would say your close to calling the crux. I rekon the real crux is... what timescale are we talking here.
Like I said before... when all ends and the universe collapses (theoretically speaking of course) all we have done will have had no effect (or will it?) on the next universe that (theoretically) expands afterwards.
We really are in no position to decide that kind of timescale. So for me, I will stick to the short end of the stick and say in the current times, every life and death has an effect of the world. We have a point in that short timescale, just not one that helps us personally in the end.
